comment by 98 Problems (and promotion ain’t one) (U12353)
posted 4 hours, 23 minutes ago
Of course the other huge part of the logic you’ve always ignored is this. If Top was going to sack Rudkin at all - he’d have probably done it by now. You might feel Rudkin is the culprit in all of this but if I run a business and allow a senior director to turn it from running a profit to running a loss - letting him stay there for year after year while it gets worse - then ultimately who really is to blame?
You’ve always ignored the fact that Top is Rudkins enabler. Rudkin is his right hand man. He’s involved in more than just Leicester City football club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree entirely with this. If Top does not remove Rudkin he’s culpable.
Thanks Nuneaton, Mersey. A healthy debate which is what we like!
To be super clear - a change of ownership isn’t going to fix anything. Not anytime soon. But that’s not a reason to keep with the status quo. The purpose of calling for the KP group to move on is because many of us no longer trust Top to be able to get the senior footballing people in place to implement a clear philosophy and vision
It’s a bit like Rudkin. He’s proven to be completely ineffective. If Top sacks him another DoF has to come in and work within the same constraints (PSR etc). Is that a reason not to sack Rudkin though? Absolutely not - the idea behind Rudkin moving on is because he’s shown he can’t implement clear footballing leadership. You don’t stick with him because another DoF would have to operate in a really tight transfer market with no budgets as well.
Top has had 4 years to clean the front of the house - to act decisively and stop the rot. He should have binned off Rudkin when we were relegated. He didn’t. He tasked him with leading a review into what went wrong ffs.
So it’s not a question of “if Top fails to sack Rudkin he is culpable” - rather it’s because Top has and continues to fail to do this that he is culpable
City v fulham live
Page 3 of 3
posted on 19/1/25
comment by 98 Problems (and promotion ain’t one) (U12353)
posted 4 hours, 23 minutes ago
Of course the other huge part of the logic you’ve always ignored is this. If Top was going to sack Rudkin at all - he’d have probably done it by now. You might feel Rudkin is the culprit in all of this but if I run a business and allow a senior director to turn it from running a profit to running a loss - letting him stay there for year after year while it gets worse - then ultimately who really is to blame?
You’ve always ignored the fact that Top is Rudkins enabler. Rudkin is his right hand man. He’s involved in more than just Leicester City football club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree entirely with this. If Top does not remove Rudkin he’s culpable.
posted on 19/1/25
Thanks Nuneaton, Mersey. A healthy debate which is what we like!
To be super clear - a change of ownership isn’t going to fix anything. Not anytime soon. But that’s not a reason to keep with the status quo. The purpose of calling for the KP group to move on is because many of us no longer trust Top to be able to get the senior footballing people in place to implement a clear philosophy and vision
It’s a bit like Rudkin. He’s proven to be completely ineffective. If Top sacks him another DoF has to come in and work within the same constraints (PSR etc). Is that a reason not to sack Rudkin though? Absolutely not - the idea behind Rudkin moving on is because he’s shown he can’t implement clear footballing leadership. You don’t stick with him because another DoF would have to operate in a really tight transfer market with no budgets as well.
Top has had 4 years to clean the front of the house - to act decisively and stop the rot. He should have binned off Rudkin when we were relegated. He didn’t. He tasked him with leading a review into what went wrong ffs.
So it’s not a question of “if Top fails to sack Rudkin he is culpable” - rather it’s because Top has and continues to fail to do this that he is culpable
Page 3 of 3