Foxes Trust Urges Owners to Reject Overseas League Game Proposal

[Captain...]

Again, why? Why should teams who in the Champions League move their home games? There is no basis for your logic here whatsoever. And the sides in the CL are too powerful anyway, they wouldn't agree to it, they'll just force little fixtures for them like at home to Leicester to be played abroad so they can make more money.

 

 

One knockout game in Asia could be argued as better than playing 2 legs, less disruption on the domestic schedule, or even if it is the semi final, or final. The final has already been played on the Asian continent at least once, Istanbul*. Flying to the UAE or Qatar is not that much different to Moscow or Istanbul. 

 

But more importantly it is fair on both sides.

 

*Edit: My mistake the stadium is on the European side of Istanbul, but it was as near as dammit in Asia.

[Corky]

Sorry, here’s the dumbed-down version:

 

Where you’re born shouldn’t mean you don’t get the chance to experience some of the good things in life, like Premiership football.

 

I'm sorry but you have to put up with it. I'd love to watch England at cricket against the West Indies, Australia, India and other nations, but I can't afford to and I don't expect them to move it to Chelmsford and Northampton from Jamaica, Brisbane and Mumbai to suit me.

[AdamN]

Completely ignoring the "league football should be played in its own country" argument, from a purely competitive standpoint, how can anyone in their right mind find a decent argument for adding a 39th game?

 

To Fox Ulike and BigMicky, would you be so charitable towards our American/Asian friends if our 39th fixture was against Chelsea and say, QPR's was against West Brom? What if the points gained/lost in those matches were enough to send us down in favour of QPR? How in any way, shape or form would that be fair?

[Dan]

Completely ignoring the "league football should be played in its own country" argument, from a purely competitive standpoint, how can anyone in their right mind find a decent argument for adding a 39th game?

 

To Fox Ulike and BigMicky, would you be so charitable towards our American/Asian friends if our 39th fixture was against Chelsea and say, QPR's was against West Brom? What if the points gained/lost in those matches were enough to send us down in favour of QPR? How in any way, shape or form would that be fair?

 

Fvck fairness. As long as the next Nacer Chadli comes to the #EPL rather than the #SLL or #GBL

[Fox Ulike]

Again, why? Why should teams who in the Champions League move their home games? There is no basis for your logic here whatsoever. And the sides in the CL are too powerful anyway, they wouldn't agree to it, they'll just force little fixtures for them like at home to Leicester to be played abroad so they can make more money.

 

So you acknowledge we already can't compete and are far poorer than everyone else so we should go along with doing something that would annoy our fans, lose a home game, make it more difficult for us on the pitch and increase the gap in wealth away from us anyway?

 

Nope, you are not selling this idea to me at all. I'm out.

 

 

 

 

 

Least he's admitted he's on the wind up, Fox Ulike genuinely seems to support this.

 

That's because I really don't recognise the view that you're trying to attribute to me. If you're going to disagree with something I say it's better done if you actually "quote" my words rather than invent your own version of them. It's your own logic that you're de-bunking. Not mine.

 

And yes. I genuinely think it's a good idea. That doesn't mean I don't acknowledge some of the arguments against it. So there's no point repeating them.

 

Rather than keep explaining to me the negative ramifications for clubs at home, you need to try to break some of my preconceptions about the benefits that this could give to the countries involved who get the EPL.

[Fox Ulike]

Completely ignoring the "league football should be played in its own country" argument, from a purely competitive standpoint, how can anyone in their right mind find a decent argument for adding a 39th game?

 

To Fox Ulike and BigMicky, would you be so charitable towards our American/Asian friends if our 39th fixture was against Chelsea and say, QPR's was against West Brom? What if the points gained/lost in those matches were enough to send us down in favour of QPR? How in any way, shape or form would that be fair?

 

I've already said I'm against a 39th game. I'm in favour of playing one or two standard 38-game prem games abroad. As long as all teams get the same treatment.

[Captain...]

I've already said I'm against a 39th game. I'm in favour of playing one or two standard 38-game prem games abroad. As long as all teams get the same treatment.

 

Can you explain how you would ensure the same treatment?

[Fox Ulike]

Can you explain how you would ensure the same treatment?

 

Each team gives up one home and one away fixture and plays them abroad. Maybe the same fixture: So Leicester v Everton and Everton v Leicester are both played abroad for eg.

[Manwell Pablo]

That's because I really don't recognise the view that you're trying to attribute to me. If you're going to disagree with something I say it's better done if you actually "quote" my words rather than invent your own version of them. It's your own logic that you're de-bunking. Not mine.

 

And yes. I genuinely think it's a good idea. That doesn't mean I don't acknowledge some of the arguments against it. So there's no point repeating them.

 

Rather than keep explaining to me the negative ramifications for clubs at home, you need to try to break some of my preconceptions about the benefits that this could give to the countries involved who get the EPL.

 

I say again, and what benefits are they.

 

All it's going to do is hurt the domestic leagues of the country's hosting the games by robbing them of spectators. 

[Smudge]

For those that are comparing it to American sports, there isn't the same home advantage in NFL or NBA, they aren't teams they are franchises they don't really have partizan crowds. The reason why the premier league is more popular than NFL and NBA is partly due to the crowds, and the atmosphere, by taking it to another country we are losing a key USP.

 

Do you remember the atmosphere when we played Everton in Thailand? It was horrendous. After a few games of being fleeced for a lackluster game with no atmosphere and tired players in unfamiliar conditions playing risk free damage limitation football, with no atmosphere to motivate the players, interest will soon wane.

 

The atmosphere from the United match was clear through the TV, and that drives the players on to perform above and beyond.

Oh come on Shrap, first sentence, you're brighter than that. No home advantage? There are some grounds so noisy the opposition quarter back has problem calling the plays. Miami playing in Buffalo in December?

I lIve near Foxborough, sell out every game, ticket cost on average $400+ parking $40. Every bar in Massachusetts is crammed, let alone the couch gating that goes on in millions of homes. Pats supporters like the beloved Red Socks adore their team. The same goes for many teams

[Fox Ulike]

I say again, and what benefits are they.

 

All it's going to do is hurt the domestic leagues of the country's hosting the games by robbing them of spectators. 

 

Well. Not if they play it at a time when there aren't any domestic league games on. Durrrr! (And I'm the one with two brain cells?).

 

You want me to explain Benefits? Seriously?  I can see that 'culture' has generally passed you by, but surely you're not disputing the fact that Thailand, for example, would benefit from having an EPL fixture in the same way that South Korea enjoyed the World Cup?

 

People who normally would not get the chance, are able to experience Domestic football at its best, and see the best players in the World. This is a social benefit. Please say you can see this.

 

The towns in which the games are staged will experience media interest and increased tourism. This is an economic benefit.

 

Didn't you do Geography at school?

 

The benefits are not really in question it's whether you believe that the negatives outweigh them or not.

[Manwell Pablo]

Well. Not if they play it at a time when there aren't any domestic league games on. Durrrr! (And I'm the one with two brain cells?).

 

You want me to explain Benefits? Seriously?  I can see that 'culture' has generally passed you by, but surely you're not disputing the fact that Thailand, for example, would benefit from having an EPL fixture in the same way that South Korea enjoyed the World Cup?

 

People who normally would not get the chance, are able to experience Domestic football at its best, and see the best players in the World. This is a social benefit. Please say you can see this.

 

The towns in which the games are staged will experience media interest and increased tourism. This is an economic benefit.

 

Didn't you do Geography at school?

 

The benefits are not really in question it's whether you believe that the negatives outweigh them or not.

 

Naivety personified.

 

You clearly do have two brain cells, as you've not factored in the fact a high percentage of the crowd will probably forgo a domestic game (or more, as the prices will probably be higher) in order to finance seeing an EPL game, that is if they play is at a time when it will impact on no other game in that country, which is highly doubtful.

 

How exactly did South Korea benefit from having the World Cup besides having the profile of the game raised and now having Stadia they cannot fill? The profile of football in Asia is already high so it's doesn't need raising by doing this, and no Stadiums will be built to host Prem games.......so I'm struggling to see what benefits the country is going to see.

 

Are the Spanish going over as well then?? In all seriousness you are correct I'm sure they'd love it but this is all at the expense of the English fan lets not forget and that is not right.

 

There be negligible Economic benefit, most of the income will get hoovered up by the Premier League (this is why they want to do it in the first place)

 

There will be benefits, for the sponsors, for the Premeir League, and a few foreign fans, lets not pretend this is going to bring great benefits to struggling countrys that's not what this is about.

 

The people who lose out are the people who made football great in the first place. 

[RonnieTodger]

I'm sure a lot of them already do both of these things.

 

I think if you're a basketball of NFL fan then you'll really appreciate the gesture of their teams coming to London ocassionally to play. It's just a nice thing to do when you have a global fan base, and I think the EPL should follow suit.

 

I think the friendlies over there are plenty enough. The States and South-East Asia sees plenty of Premier League players, and let's be realistic...the only ones they're interested in. Stoke, Palace and Burnley won't be touring over there any time soon.

 

I doubt this idea will help bring the best players in the world over here either. Let's face it, the Premier League's best is hand-picked by the El Classico 2. I might be right in saying 3/5 of the last PFA Players of the Year are now playing for Barca or Madrid. 

 

Your idea about equality (Leicester v Everton reciprocal fixtures) didn't really do it for me either. What if Burnley's equivalent was against Man United? Be very harsh on their fans to not get to see that.

[Manwell Pablo]

I think the friendlies over there are plenty enough. The States and South-East Asia sees plenty of Premier League players, and let's be realistic...the only ones they're interested in. Stoke, Palace and Burnley won't be touring over there any time soon.

 

I doubt this idea will help bring the best players in the world over here either. Let's face it, the Premier League's best is hand-picked by the El Classico 2. I might be right in saying 3/5 of the last PFA Players of the Year are now playing for Barca or Madrid. 

 

Your idea about equality (Leicester v Everton reciprocal fixtures) didn't really do it for me either. What if Burnley's equivalent was against Man United? Be very harsh on their fans to not get to see that.

 

Imagine if that 5-3 had taken place abroad , livid. 

[Webbo]

Obviously playing a league game abroad is a bad idea but maybe some of the later stages of the league cup (except the final) wouldn't be that bad. The extra money would make clubs take it more seriously.

[Voll Blau]

Fvck's sake. I have a top day and then come home to this thread. Life's a cvnt.

 

Keep The City In The City.

[Strokes]

We need to just let this European super league happen, so us normal folk can get back to watching football on the terraces at 3pm every Saturday.

This plan is because people want to see Man U, Liverpool, arsenal and Chelsea. Not Leicester and stoke. Let these clubs sell their souls so we can be free.

[Captain...]

Oh come on Shrap, first sentence, you're brighter than that. No home advantage? There are some grounds so noisy the opposition quarter back has problem calling the plays. Miami playing in Buffalo in December?

I lIve near Foxborough, sell out every game, ticket cost on average $400+ parking $40. Every bar in Massachusetts is crammed, let alone the couch gating that goes on in millions of homes. Pats supporters like the beloved Red Socks adore their team. The same goes for many teams

I'm not saying they're not well supported and don't make a lot of noise, and I may be wrong, but my limited experience of American sports it isn't the same sort of crowd, and the franchises, drafts and nature of the sports, I just don't see it as creating a beneficial atmosphere, but I will bow to your greater knowledge.

[Captain...]

Each team gives up one home and one away fixture and plays them abroad. Maybe the same fixture: So Leicester v Everton and Everton v Leicester are both played abroad for eg.

Ok so what would you predict for Leicester v Everton at The King Power? Goodson? Neutral venue?

I would predict us to get something at home a point or even a win, lose away, and lose at a neutral venue, because Everton are a better team, but home advantage gives us an edge.

If we play Everton twice at a neutral venue we will get no points, whereas if we play them home and away we would get a point.

Even if you assume 2 equal teams, where you would expect them to win the home games, if you played the games at a neutral venue it would be a draw. So instead of 3 points each from the 2 games they have 2 points each.

[Dom_Harborough Fox]

Statement we have issued re the proposal to play one game overseas

http://foxestrust.co.uk/3313/foxes-t...osal#more-3313

Links to statements made by several other Trusts and the FSF

http://foxestrust.co.uk/3311/fans-co...rseas-proposal

http://www.qpr1st.com/news/proposal-game-abroad

Leicester Mercury's Rob Tanner related piece

http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Ro...ail/story.html

 

Getting back to the reason this thread was started, fair play to the Foxes Trust. In terms of the message carried by the statement, I completely agree. Good to see the Trust reacting quickly to this proposal and making their own stance clear. Kudos to you for being proactive! To anybody else who feels the same way, why not contact the Club, FA, Premier League or any of the football authorities directly to let them know. If you feel passionately about it and you've got time to post on here, you've got time to do something that might actually make a difference!

 

 

hate the idea but it will happen.

dont the nhl american footy play games at wembley???

 

Bit defeatist. If you hate it, why not do your bit to try and stop it? The 'Game 39' proposal was rejected why can't this be?

 

 

I've given up fighting it to be honest, it's gonna happen. Even though I'm sure a strongly worded letter from such a strongly politically power entity like the Foxes Trust will make everyone think twice.  

 

See above. No-one's saying a statement from the Foxes Trust is going to be a game-changer but fair fvcks to them for using what influence they do have as a Supporters Trust to oppose this. Won't find me knocking anyone who's willing to put a bit of effort into something they feel strongly about. Shame more people can't find a few minutes to put down a couple of hundred words and use them more productively than wasting them on here by sending them off to the football authorities.

 

 

I’ve still no idea who the Foxes Trust are, or who they represent.

 

Can you let me know how many members you have, and what consultation process you have gone through to arrive at this view?

 

Otherwise, for all we know, you're just one bloke with a web building package.

 

 

I think playing one game abroad is a good idea. Share the Love and all that...

 

Nothing to do with the Foxes Trust myself but here's a link to their website to help answer some of your questions: http://foxestrust.co.uk/

 

If you're still struggling, this page gives you the means to contact their board members to get direct answers.

[Harry - LCFC]

EDIT: Scrap that. I've seen the rest of his posts and there really is no point responding.

 

But yeah, to anyone defending the idea of playing abroad, we already have an example of what happens when a club moves away from it's real home. It gets disowned.

 

Fvck me I hope this doesn't happen. Make it illegal Mr Cameron, I'm begging you.

[Filbert_Ross]

Like myself right now, I don't know why some of you have bothered replying to the posts In this thread.

[Corky]

You really are naive, way too many holes in your "proud to be English" stance. I doubt you have ventured to asia to understand levels of support. How do you know folk haven't been supporting LCFC for 50 years in China? You clearly don't. There will be people around the world that know far more about leicester than you, they will be far more passionate and will have spent far more money than you. Let that sink in super fan. The game is funded by everything overseas, the English involvement is becoming less and less relevant. When will you realise they don't care about you anymore, if you want it like the good old days head on down to Hinckley for a game, if not stop being greedy and share.

 

They know where to find us on home matchdays. If they can get to a game then brilliant, all for it. if they can't then that's unfortunate. But you know what, there's things we all can't get to and want to see, we don't expect them to move closer to us.

 

Stop being greedy and share? Yeah, it's terrible he wants Leicester City to play their home matches in Leicester. How ridiculous a notion is that? Super fan he isn't, he just wants to keep Leicester in Leicester. Did you support Coventry moving away? I mean, they might have loads of fans in Northampton who love their club more than the Coventry based mob, so it's right they have games on their doorstep. Don't want them being greedy and having home games in their city all to themselves.

 

Maybe he's not obsessed with being part of the brand, maybe Dan wants to watch us, like most supporters. Not the opposition. He went in the Championship last year, he probably went to a lot of League One games. He'd probably just want to watch his club play in it's home stadium and not support a travelling band offering itself to the highest bidder each week, which is what could happen if this idea gets off the ground.

[Leicester_Numan]

I'm against the idea for reasons already stated, league games are 19 home and 19 away. That's the whole point of a league, everyone plays everyone else, home and away so no-one has an advantage or disadvantage. That is as level a playing field as a league will ever be and shouldn't be messed with.

I'm also against a 39th game counting towards the league. Who decides who plays whom and where? I wouldn't want an extra game against Chelsea while Burnley are playing QPR for instance. It's not right and it's not fair.

If we're going to take games abroad it has to be in the form of pre or post-season friendlies or tournaments

[ozleicester]