Lineker's Left Foot Posted 2 March 2013 Share Posted 2 March 2013 Whenever I'm on here, Milan in the past has got IMO unjustly criticised. Ok he may have got rid of NP the first time around and we were relegated with him as the owner, but he came in at our hour of need. Also he sold to these owners too. It could have been Gaydamak Mk2 after all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Fatboyslow_ Posted 2 March 2013 Share Posted 2 March 2013 NO NO NO And just it case you didn't hear NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted 2 March 2013 Share Posted 2 March 2013 Not really. He bought us in our 'hour of need' as you said it for very cheap, yes he tied us over but over a very rocky period (Bought on alot of that rocky period by himself) and sold us for a big profit, he didn't care who he sold us to aslong as the money was right, luckily the people he sold to turn out to be good, honest people (So far, and I have no reason to think they will turn out to be bad, dishonest people.). That's how business works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zingari Posted 2 March 2013 Share Posted 2 March 2013 He doesn't look bad for his age and has a nice head of hair . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 2 March 2013 Share Posted 2 March 2013 All i shall remember about MM was that the club became something of a laughing stock during that time both on the pitch and off it. Players were arriving who I cannot imagine anyone on our staff had seriously looked at while others were way past their "sell-by" date for anyone with their eyes open. And, the merry-go-round of managers was a testimony, not to Mandaric's decisive ruthlessness but either his poor choice of staff in the first place or his inability or unwillingness to show the patience or humility necessary to get the best from them. But he did get a tidy return on his investment and I admire his business sense in doing that. It was there to be had by anyone with the means and nerve to take the job on but Who Dares Wins, and he dared. I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cc_star Posted 2 March 2013 Share Posted 2 March 2013 I don't think ill of Milan like it's fashionable to do. I don't think well of him either. I'm indifferent really. He bought us to make a profit as 99% of owners do, his fortunes were intrinsically linked to the fortunes on the pitch so everything he lived & breathed during his time here was to improve his wallet, which coincided with what fans wanted anyway. Don't be so sure it was Milan who gave NP no real choice but to quit, NP left the day after AFI was formed & the takeover moved on from exploratory talks to a real takeover. A marquee manager was in their plans & Sousa, then Sven fitted their bill, regardless of who's name was actually on the owners door at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MooseBreath Posted 2 March 2013 Share Posted 2 March 2013 Mandaric was alright. He does get unfairly criticised. He did some things wrong and some things right, but at the end if it all he left us in a stronger position than we were in when he bought us. I think people forget just who dire things were before he arrived. I wouldn't give him too much credit, but he doesn't deserve so much criticism either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MooseBreath Posted 2 March 2013 Share Posted 2 March 2013 A marquee manager was in their plans & Sousa, then Sven fitted their bill How do you know that? Did you get a copy of their plans? You might be right, but then again since mandaric left how trigger happy and prone to crap managerial appointments have our owners been? And how trigger happy and prone to crap managerial appointments was mandaric? And now with that in mind who do you think was most likely to be pulling the strings behind trigger happy crap managerial appointments when they were both here together? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alf Bentley Posted 2 March 2013 Share Posted 2 March 2013 All i shall remember about MM was that the club became something of a laughing stock during that time both on the pitch and off it. Players were arriving who I cannot imagine anyone on our staff had seriously looked at while others were way past their "sell-by" date for anyone with their eyes open. And, the merry-go-round of managers was a testimony, not to Mandaric's decisive ruthlessness but either his poor choice of staff in the first place or his inability or unwillingness to show the patience or humility necessary to get the best from them. Don't be so sure it was Milan who gave NP no real choice but to quit, NP left the day after AFI was formed & the takeover moved on from exploratory talks to a real takeover. A marquee manager was in their plans & Sousa, then Sven fitted their bill, regardless of who's name was actually on the owners door at the time. A couple of interesting posts, taken together... The procession of "players past their sell-by date" and merry-go-round of managers certainly continued for a while under the new regime (the Thais with Sousa & Sven)....and the "marquee managers" certainly didn't arrive under Mandaric, unless you count Martin Allen or Craig Levein as marquee managers.. I know that technically Mandaric was still in charge when Sousa was levered in, but it seems a bit coincidental that this happened, after years of low-profile managers, precisely at the moment when takeover negotiations were advancing. No proof either way, of course... Hopefully, this means that the current owners have learned from the errors they made early on, and are now taking a longer-term approach to building success at the club. NP's appointment and approach suggest that is the case. Of course, whatever we think of Pearson's ability or potential as a manager, he deserves some credit for this change of approach - whether it is crowned by success this season or not - but he is dependent on the owners to achieve that. The owners' long-term attitude is another matter. I'm encouraged that their business motive seems to be to use LCFC as a means of promoting King Power as a global brand, rather than as a money-making vehicle itself. I might not like what has become of modern football, but it's the reality. If it is in King Power's interests for LCFC to be successful, that's a good thing for us. I'm not naive, though. There may come a time when the club is costing KP too much, or when King Power has been promoted as far as it can be....then the owners might take a business decision that suits us less. Hopefully that's a long way off... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace Posted 2 March 2013 Share Posted 2 March 2013 What about we all try to raise some money for a statue of Milan? Would look great in the car park Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phillo Posted 2 March 2013 Share Posted 2 March 2013 Was milan a leicester fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flowwolf Posted 2 March 2013 Share Posted 2 March 2013 If nothing else he saved the club from going under we should be grateful for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bilo Posted 2 March 2013 Share Posted 2 March 2013 A lot of the good parts of Milan's regime were more luck than judgement. The managerial merry-go-round that saw us relegated to League One could have been a greater disaster, if Southampton had been in a position to keep NP on after he saved them from relegation. God knows who we'd have ended up with under those circumstances, we could've still been in League One if not for NP's appointment. Obviously Mandaric's financial support during those days was invaluable and saved the club from an extended monetary headache that could easily have seen us becoming the new Bradford, but most of us what we achieved was down to NP and the players. He still had a penchant for insanity even after NP had got the club well and truly back on its feet by forcing the bloke out, or at least allowing Lee Hoos to do so. Had Pearson been kept on when AFI first came in rather than the disaster that was Sousa and the spendfest that was the Eriksson reign, things could have been very different. In fact; I would argue that a full 10-11 season where we had Sousa and then Eriksson, followed by the huge budget afforded to Eriksson at the start of the 11-12 season under Pearson would see us as a Premiership team now. A mixed bag. Some things to thank him for, but his keenness to make the club more attractive to sellers by bringing in a more media friendly manager set us back a season or two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesmilner Posted 2 March 2013 Share Posted 2 March 2013 Didnt you watch the program where he tried to sell us to anyone for the right price ? what the fook you on about ? credit ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox92 Posted 2 March 2013 Share Posted 2 March 2013 We did change manager's constantly, and we were unstable, but we were in a difficult situation when he came in. People moaning about him trying to sell us for cheap or whatever. What do you expect? He is a businessman. They only look after number one, and their cash is (obviously) priority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 2 March 2013 Share Posted 2 March 2013 MM is a greedy self serving selfish man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.