Foxes Trust Urges Owners to Reject Overseas League Game Proposal

Log in to stop seeing adverts

Status
Not open for further replies.
As long as the additional game in is a media hotbed like North Korea then I'm fine with it.
 
Jeff said:
But when you do that it's not "your" club any more.

What happens if this 39th game thing happens, and is financially successful?
Will they then decide to play some of the other 38 games in various parts of the world? What is the limit, 5 games, 10 games, 38 games? Before we know it we'll just be a franchise in the world premier league, and the owners can move the club to where they'll make the most money. And it won't be Leicester.

The 39th game could just be the tip of the iceberg, and it needs to be stopped before it can start.
Click to expand...

That scenario seems inevitable to me.

Most of us will be dead by then though. And all that will be left is my poor American Daughter saddled with an awful Leicester allegiance built on nothing but parental influence.
 
Last edited:
Jeff said:
But when you do that it's not "your" club any more.

What happens if this 39th game thing happens, and is financially successful?
Will they then decide to play some of the other 38 games in various parts of the world? What is the limit, 5 games, 10 games, 38 games? Before we know it we'll just be a franchise in the world premier league, and the owners can move the club to where they'll make the most money. And it won't be Leicester.

The 39th game could just be the tip of the iceberg, and it needs to be stopped before it can start.
Click to expand...

It all depends how melodramatic you want to be about it all. In the terms people are using in this thread, I'd question whether the club has ever been ours. Very few clubs have fans owning or running them. When we were floated on the stock exchange, I bought shares and so owned a piece of the club but the halfwits that really owned the club systematically erased my stake through incompetence and greed. Then Mad Mandy erased my claim entirely.

Our club has been owned and run by local businessmen using it as an ego trip or hospitality/business opportunity, via some weird nonsense involving people as disparate as Gary Lineker and Mad Mandy, onto now a foreign business who use it as an ego trip or hospitality/business opportunity. At what point have we had any kind of genuine input?

As fans, we can shout and sing for or against owners and managers and that's about it. We're just a bunch of largely gullible consumers and your football supporting life is a lot less troubled if you just accept this.

The problem I have with discontent about this proposal is that you want your cake and to eat it too. If you accept the club's ownership, investment, wage bill, transfer fees paid, stadium development, and so on, you have to pay for it somehow. We pay for it largely through Sky subscribers and Thai airport passengers. Both of those groups are perfectly entitled to demand something back in return. So our fixture list is moved about for tv and we trot off to play fake matches in Bangkok.

The Premier League isn't daft. It isn't going to undermine its product by detaching clubs from the very thing that so many foreign football fans love. But in terms of developing brands and building supporter attachment, playing the occasional match abroad makes perfect sense. It will never become more than that, rather I expect the development of new international club competitions if the proposed experiment succeeds.

It's all good. More exposure, more satisfied punters, more money rolling in. I've no doubt that if we're still in the Premier League in five years time, we will be paying players £100k a week. The biggest clubs will be paying players £1m a week. It's just going that way and the growth of the game in this country over the last twenty years has been because these opportunities have been embraced, not rejected. If you don't like all this, hope we get relegated and the owners feck off.
 
Matt_B said:
Also, we'd need to replace our current supporters trust wit one that is fit and proper.
Click to expand...

Given we that we are a registered IPS, are democratic, have our accounts independently verified, retain minutes of every Trust board meeting held and maintain a series of documents that are available on our website, we would pass the fit and proper test should we be ran through that process.

However presume your comment did not relate to any element of the actual test, however if you want to elaborate...
 
Foxes_Trust said:
Given we that we are a registered IPS, are democratic, have our accounts independently verified, retain minutes of every Trust board meeting held and maintain a series of documents that are available on our website, we would pass the fit and proper test should we be ran through that process.

However presume your comment did not relate to any element of the actual test, however if you want to elaborate...
Click to expand...
I imagine a fit and proper trust would be more transparent in its dealings, including membership numbers.
 
Matt_B said:
I imagine a fit and proper trust would be more transparent in its dealings, including membership numbers.
Click to expand...

That old chestnut.... a Fit & Proper test would not have a need to post membership numbers on message boards. Our annual report always details membership numbers and a copy is given to any member attending our AGM, so it is a disclosed figure.
 
Foxes_Trust said:
That old chestnut.... a Fit & Proper test would not have a need to post membership numbers on message boards. Our annual report always details membership numbers and a copy is given to any member attending our AGM, so it is a disclosed figure.
Click to expand...

In which case why can you not disclose it now? No harm done, surely?
 
Last edited:
Foxes_Trust said:
That old chestnut.... a Fit & Proper test would not have a need to post membership numbers on message boards. Our annual report always details membership numbers and a copy is given to any member attending our AGM, so it is a disclosed figure.
Click to expand...

LeeCovFox said:
In which case why can you not disclose it now? No harm done, surely?
Click to expand...

We can only conclude therefore that the only reason you won't divulge the number is because it is very small and would call into question the fact that you claim to represent the fans?
 
As things stand I have as much chance of being able to attend a match in Singapore as I do at the KP.Just saying like.

Of course this will all change if we get relegated & 10000 people suddenly can't be arsed,then they'll ****ing beg me to come back.Then **** me off if we get promoted again.Top flight football is like one of those laughable "VIP" nightclubs for people like me.I'm not needed or wanted thanks very much.Overpriced & overvalued like pretty much everything else in this ridiculous country.
 
camberwell fox said:
We can only conclude therefore that the only reason you won't divulge the number is because it is very small and would call into question the fact that you claim to represent the fans?
Click to expand...

Would you claim that we don't represent the fans views when calling for any attempt to have a League game played overseas to be rejected ?

Looking through the threads on various message boards the vast majority seem to back our stance
 
Foxes_Trust said:
Would you claim that we don't represent the fans views when calling for any attempt to have a League game played overseas to be rejected ?

Looking through the threads on various message boards the vast majority seem to back our stance
Click to expand...

Yes I would based on the fact that only a very small percentage, and perhaps only the most 'extreme' fans post on football message boards.
 
camberwell fox said:
Yes I would based on the fact that only a very small percentage, and perhaps only the most 'extreme' fans post on football message boards.
Click to expand...
That doesn't make an awful lot of sense Cambertron.
I have no idea which meaning of "extreme" you are using here but, I think it's fair to say that even if there's only a very small proportion of fans that post on message boards, they would still be a representative sample.
Are you seriously saying that you think that most fans would welcome games being played abroad?
 
Macky said:
That doesn't make an awful lot of sense Cambertron.
I have no idea which meaning of "extreme" you are using here but, I think it's fair to say that even if there's only a very small proportion of fans that post on message boards, they would still be a representative sample.
Are you seriously saying that you think that most fans would welcome games being played abroad?
Click to expand...

Mackywacky,

Extreme was a poor choice of words (perhaps not in your case though :) ), more perhaps select.

The bigger the sample taken the more accurate the results. What I was trying to say (badly) was that people who post on a football message board are more likely to be 'extreme' in their love of LCFC rather that someone who doesn't.
 
camberwell fox said:
Mackywacky,

Extreme was a poor choice of words (perhaps not in your case though :) ), more perhaps select.

The bigger the sample taken the more accurate the results. What I was trying to say (badly) was that people who post on a football message board are more likely to be 'extreme' in their love of LCFC rather that someone who doesn't.
Click to expand...

I'm far from extreme in my love for LCFC :icon_bigg
 
Not sure I understand the resentment of the FT if I'm honest. What is it built on?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Log in to stop seeing adverts

P Pld Pts
1Liverpool1128
2Manchester C  1123
3Chelsea1119
4Arsenal1119
5Nottm F1119
6Brighton1119
7Fulham1118
8Newcastle1118
9Aston Villa1118
10Tottenham 1116
11Brentford1116
12Bournemouth1115
13Manchester U1115
14West Ham1112
15Leicester1110
16Everton1110
17Ipswich118
18Palace117
19Wolves116
20Southampton114

Latest posts

Back
Top