Let's say whoever comes in for Leicester goes on a winning run and avoids relegation. Maybe builds on that the following season and has them finishing in the top 7 or 8. Who knows, they might even do the unthinkable and win the CL with Leicester.
If any of this does happen, is that same consensus of mainly opposition fans, still going to be able to justify the decision to get rid of Ranieri as the wrong one?
Ranieri did a fantastic job last season and is for a large part a victim of his own success. In an ideal world he'd be shown much more loyalty, but in that same ideal world the PL champions would not be staring relegation in the face the season after. Whether he's a lot to blame for that, partly to blame for that, or takes no blame at all, the club simply wants to avoid relegation, when the last time it did so they spent 11 years out of the Premiership. Wolves, Blackburn and Bolton got relegated 5 years ago. The former 2 are down near the bottom of the Championship and the latter is in League One.
I don't want to seem like I'm giving the owners credit for getting rid or that I'm on their side but from their point of view, is it fair that they don't consider sacking Ranieri as an option in order to keep them up? Should they not consider everything they can?
Depends what you believe is more important I guess - showing loyalty, or going down and be out of the PL for an unforeseen amount of time, as they must have thought would happen had they continued with Ranieri. If this causes a turnaround in form and they stay up, who are we to argue that it wasn't a good decision? Just saying.
If The New Leicester Manager Does Well
posted on 26/2/17
comment by Spurtle2 (U1608)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by TobyJanKaneobi (U15068)
posted 3 minutes ago
Your all missing the point. It's football. No one is definitively right or wrong. It's simply a multitude of opinions. My opinion is Leicester football club have conducted themselves in a poor manner. No amount of aggressive cajoling is going to back me into a corner.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well if their remit is to stay in the league and the form under the new manager is a stark contrast to the form shown under Ranieri and they escape relegation, then surely it's objectively proven to be the right decision?
Not morally the right decision. Again not listening to my point. I am not claiming to be right or wrong in regard to how they perform from here on in. That's another point. However as I previously stated I am talking from a point of view, of how you treat the lost successful manager in your history by sacking them several months after doing the impossible. What a legacy to leave on that folklore.
posted on 26/2/17
comment by TobyJanKaneobi (U15068)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 10 minutes ago
What was your opinion on us sacking Ramos, 8 games in to a season after he won us our last trophy?
Redknapp directly after another top 4 finish?
AVB shortly after guiding us to our most ever points?
Sherwood after an amazing points-per-game record?
I assume you were against every one of these, and thought we acted in a poor way.
Reply | Add Comment | Complain | Share
Some of the mangers mentioned I believe to be treated wrongly. Perhaps the one you didn't mention in Jol more so than any other perhaps. However none achieved for Spurs what Ranieri done for Leicester.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, add Jol to that - consecutive 5th place finishes and sacked.
Only some treated harshly?
Which ones were not?
Reply | Add Comment | Complain | Share
Ramos because let's face it throughout his tenure no one ever felt he was right for Spurs. He didn't even attempt to learn the language.
Redknapp because he had his eyes elsewhere.
Sherwood because the way in which he would talk about the club to anyone that would listen. His inexperience at management on any level.
Jol, AVB weren't backed correctly and were wrongly treated by Spurs. Albeit they never challenged at the top of the table on a decent budget. Still wrongfully sacked.
posted on 26/2/17
Ramos only had 8 games, and had won a trophy prior to it.
Redknapp had lost the England job by then. Nobody has bettered his 2 top four placings.
Sherwood got more points on the board per game than any other coach has.
On prior seasons results alone, all were harsh sackings
I agreed with all of them by the way, just pointing out there is hypocrisy in attacking one club, when you agree with harsh decisions made by your own club
posted on 26/2/17
I re-iterate NONE won the EPL. That would've been the equilvent to Jol taking over, when we were no were near a top 6 club. Winning the league and sacking him the following season. Wrong on any level. I simply don't care how bad the following season is. Quite simply you don't treat someone that has delivered the previously widely regarded 'impossible' feat by sacks my them the following. Zero loyalty. Zero compassion. Zero class. In my eyes.
posted on 26/2/17
comment by TobyJanKaneobi (U15068)
posted 27 minutes ago
comment by Spurtle2 (U1608)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by TobyJanKaneobi (U15068)
posted 3 minutes ago
Your all missing the point. It's football. No one is definitively right or wrong. It's simply a multitude of opinions. My opinion is Leicester football club have conducted themselves in a poor manner. No amount of aggressive cajoling is going to back me into a corner.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well if their remit is to stay in the league and the form under the new manager is a stark contrast to the form shown under Ranieri and they escape relegation, then surely it's objectively proven to be the right decision?
Not morally the right decision. Again not listening to my point. I am not claiming to be right or wrong in regard to how they perform from here on in. That's another point. However as I previously stated I am talking from a point of view, of how you treat the lost successful manager in your history by sacking them several months after doing the impossible. What a legacy to leave on that folklore.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Morality as far as showing loyalty to managers in football isn't there I agree. The whole climate has changed now. As I said in the OP, in an ideal world he would be shown loyalty, and personally I'd love to see a rule come in that means managers can't be sacked after a certain period. Unfortunately this doesn't exist.
Owners do what they think is right for their club (most of the time), and in Leicester's case, they believe it will give them a better chance of staying in the league. As virtuous as loyalty is as a trait, it can work for or against you.
Morally, Redknapp should have been kept on at Spurs after what he did IMO. We have moved on since and are in many ways a better team with a better manager.
posted on 26/2/17
None won the league, no. That was then
Redknapp punched above our weight in all three full seasons though, and you were happy to sack him - Ranieri has guided Leicester to the relegation zone, as one of the most out of form teams in the country and this is harsh.
Weird logic
I suppose you think Chelsea were wrong to sack Mourinho too then?
posted on 26/2/17
Redknapp had a team with King, Woodgate, Modric, Bale and VDV. Without mentioning Keane, Defoe, crouch etc. Top 4 was where we should've been, with the tools at his disposal.
No one expected Leicester to win the league. Morinho was widely expected to win silverware with the tools and resources at his disposal. Chalk and cheese. Still believe though Chelsea were wrong to sack him.
posted on 26/2/17
Redknapp barely had Woodgate at all. In fact I do not think he played any significant part from 2009/10 onwards.
Did other teams not have good players in that period? Chelsea, Liverpool, City - the clubs we finished above?
posted on 26/2/17
Apples and oranges.
posted on 26/2/17
The people who should judge if it is the right decision are those that watch that side week in week out.
It is patronising to tell a other club what is right when you are not the ones in the bottom three, as if they should be happy to be there at all.
It is hypocritical when you have thought getting rid of managers was right for us when we were in much better positions