1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

To be, or not to be? The Shakespeare thread.

Discussion in 'Leicester City' started by pork pie fox, Sep 18, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. popillius

    popillius Well-Known Member

    Excellent post. Be prepared for the fall out....
    Blue Maniac likes this.
  2. SwedeFox

    SwedeFox Well-Known Member

    That's not my recollection at all, especially after the Spurs result. The reactions in this thread weren't exactly overwhelming (except for yours which was, as you say, quite positive): https://www.talkingballs.uk/index.php?threads/shakespeare-given-three-year-contract.38966/
  3. Lako42

    Lako42 Well-Known Member


    I was absolutely against him being given the job.

    I watched with my own eyes the pathetic performances and lack of ideas after the initial honeymoon spell ended.

    The owners took the easy decision, the unambitious decision.

    It was a very important appointment considering we still had some attraction in the bank after achieving the greatest thing in football only a season before.
    City Fan likes this.
  4. Redditch Fox

    Redditch Fox Well-Known Member

    Very disappointing indeed. I doubt if anyone at the time would have been ready to compare us with Crystal Palace(as Popillius cheeringly these days suggests) but a succession of awful management/ recruitment failures have reduced us to that sort of level now.

    In my opinion there was no 'initial honeymoon spell' at least none directly of Shakespeare's doing. Player power got rid of Ranieri and the players achieved the initial results necessary. The owners then took a very soft option and appointed a good bloke, decent coach and but a duffer as a manager. Not much mere fans can do about it ....it will have to play itself help, hopefully sooner rather than later.
  5. Mike - True Blue Tinter

    Mike - True Blue Tinter Well-Known Member

    Maybe the delayed appointment of Shakey was simply because the owners failed to attract anybody significantly better.
    I still contend that that failure was partly due to the way in which Ranieri was dismissed.
  6. Redditch Fox

    Redditch Fox Well-Known Member

    The demonstration of player power almost certainly made it very difficult to recruit from outside the club and if so made the owners' position very difficult. Unfortunately, it feels like the need for harder and better choices has only been deferred.
    bocadillo and fitz like this.
  7. Moose

    Moose Active Member

    Apologies for the link to that other forum but


    Only 24% against and that's on a forum full of people who think Jesus himself would take the job if only we approached him.

    Fans 'IRL' in my experience tend to be a lot more positive/realistic
  8. soundman

    soundman Active Member

    Noe but neither had Shakey
  9. Skitzo

    Skitzo Well-Known Member

    or maybe the owners wanted Shakey kept on again and the people they interviewed weren't up for that
  10. give_us_a_wave

    give_us_a_wave Well-Known Member

    The sad & awful truth is most likely that the bollocks delivered last season was down to the players refusal/inability (delete as appropriate) to respond to whatever Ranieri was trying to do,tactically or otherwise,to progress the team & the club. My impression was that they weren't fucking interested in anything but having an easy time & winning the league turned them all into Billy Big Bollocks arrogant cunts. If that's the case then you can bet that it's common knowledge within the game. Therefore no decent manager would go near us with a borrowed bargepole. Having met a fair few footballers down the years I can vouch for the fact that being a self important twatbucket pretty much comes with the territory...& thats even if they're a benchwarmer for Sheffield United. So the sort of attitude a shock title win imbues you with can only be imagined.
    When genuinely top class sportsmen win a trophy the very next thing they want to do is win it again. I guess if you win one as a surprise you just think "job done" & put your fucking feet up to enjoy your stonking great bonus & wallow in some media attention. Or flog your crap t-shirts.
  11. Redditch Fox

    Redditch Fox Well-Known Member

    I suspect that we are wasting our time moaning that Shakespeare isn't much cop as a manager just the same as allocating the blame for the Silva fiasco. We have immensely rich owners who are more or less absent land lords. They are immune from our comments. Died in the wool Leicester supporters just have to live with it - the less passionate won't be that bothered.
  12. Jeff

    Jeff Administrator Staff Member

    What about dyed in the wool supporters?
  13. camberwell fox

    camberwell fox Well-Known Member

    They’re wet.
  14. Blaarev

    Blaarev Well-Known Member

    But alive
    fitz and Blue Maniac like this.
  15. Mike - True Blue Tinter

    Mike - True Blue Tinter Well-Known Member

    I thought they were around the club and training ground a lot? Certainly far more than many overseas owners are. Do they literally fly in for matches only?
  16. Redditch Fox

    Redditch Fox Well-Known Member

    Owners have been incredibly beneficial for the club but I see them as immune from fans' moans about how the club is run - and I think you can see issues regarding treatment of supporters by the club at various different levels in day to day administrative as well as football management levels. The sooner they make some changes in key personnel the better - but I don't think that people should hold their breath.
  17. Brown Nose

    Brown Nose Well-Known Member

    If I were the manager of LCFC and I had to deal with things like the owners appearing in the changing room whenever they like, or helicoptering onto the training ground to interrupt training, I'd need to be extremely confident in my authority. Anything less than that and it's very dangerous and undermining. Several of the players and owners have a personal relationship that makes being our manager much more difficult than it should be.
  18. The Old Fox

    The Old Fox Well-Known Member

    Our owners have shown that they will not rush to remove a manager who has lost the support of the supporters, but, I wonder if Craig Shakespeare's reluctance to use our new signings might not turn out to be his eventual downfall.

    I am amazed that Hamer is still seen as 2nd choice keeper rather than Jakupovic, Iheanacho is an expensive peripheral and Dragovic similarly failing to pull up trees. Either these are not Shakespeare's choices and he's digging in his heels, or they are poor signings; either way, I would expect the owners to be far from pleased.
  19. Miles Away

    Miles Away Well-Known Member

    That sacked Sven relatively suddenly by my recollection.

    Shakey is on a short leash.
  20. tedfoxxx

    tedfoxxx Well-Known Member

    What I find worrying and frustrating about his reluctance to use different players in the league is that I don't think it's Pearsonesque stubbornness, I think it's that he genuinely doesn't know what to do with players like Slimani, Amartey and Iheanacho. He hasn't seen someone else use them to the best of their abilities so he doesn't know how to get performances out of them or play in a way that benefits anyone other that his buddies.... not that that's even working at the minute.
    LudlowFox and Redditch Fox like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page