Another good article by Jonathan Northcroft this time. Him and John Percy from the Guardian seem to be the fairest and most well informed where Leicester are concerned and Northcroft's book is a good read that shows his knowledge by going far further back than last season showing he is not a bandwagon jumper. I think it fills a lot of holes in the hate story the majority of the media are trying to brainwash people with
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/a-long-way-to-fall-for-ranieri-zs7xdb96w
The article, which is far more balanced and fair than the majority in full. The link only allows you to read par of it unless you subscribe.
A long way to fall for Claudio Ranieri
Sacking of Ranieri was brutal but owners put interests of their club first
The satellite trucks and foreign television crews were back, Friday lunchtime, for a manager’s press conference at King Power stadium but not for dilly dongs, rather the death knell of a manager — and, some would have it, nothing less than sporting romance itself.
Leicester: the club that changed the world’s view of modern football only to trick us and change in a way that merely re-emphasised the game’s deep treachery. That picture may stick. On Friday evening, poor Claudio Ranieri was outside his house in Stoneygate, smilingly accepting hugs from a mournful female fan and, from a bloke, a bottle of red wine in a Leicester City plastic bag.
He issued a statement about his dream dying. That had been “to stay with Leicester City, the club I love, for always”. Jose Mourinho faced the media wearing the initials “CR” on his tracksuit. Via Twitter, Gary Lineker let it be known his tears were jerked.
Leicester: a year ago, this was a land of miracles. Tomorrow is the anniversary of Leonardo Ulloa scoring against Norwich and the King Power’s celebrations causing a small local earthquake. Last time Liverpool visited, Jamie Vardy bagged goal of the season in front of a Hollywood producer who decided to turn his life story into a film. After, a fan got 5,000 signatories on a petition to make his girlfriend name their baby daughter “Vardy”.
Now? “Disgrace!” concluded a message sent through official lines to the club after Ranieri’s sacking was made public at 8pm on Thursday. The sender was a foreign journalist. “INGLESI INGRATI” thundered La Gazzetta Dello Sport, who said: “Leicester, the club who, with Ranieri, became a prince, courted by the world’s media, return to being a normal frog.”
It’s a great line. And they are right. And, don’t worry, Leicester know it. But while they have opened commercial offices in London and toured Los Angeles on the back of winning last season’s Premier League title, the club, an official said, had to think “of the 200 people who work here, and the core supporters” — not new fans or neutrals with a romantic, fleeting interest. Owners Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha and his son, Aiyawatt, are duty-free magnates but this was a decision taken for the natives not the tourists.
Guus Hiddink, who could play a firefighting role, is the subject of speculation
Lineker’s tears will dry and Mourinho will wear a different top today; for the Srivaddhanaprabhas it has to be about lasting issues, like top-flight survival. Under Ranieri, Leicester had won one and lost seven of their past 10 Premier League games, failing to score in the league in 2017, despite £80m spent to reinforce a title-winning squad, and they kick off against Liverpool down among the relegation contenders. The owners did what romantics will not: forget last season and just look at this.
The absence, on social media, of goodwill messages for Ranieri from players was picked up on and significant. As was the nuance in how Craig Shakespeare described he and Ranieri’s farewell chat on Thursday: “A brief phone call where we exchanged views. But at the end we did thank each other.”
A well-sourced reporter had “close friends” of Ranieri saying “the vast majority” of players were behind him, furthering the torrent of media blame towards an “ungrateful” squad for his demise. Another, who knows Ranieri well, pointed towards discord with Shakespeare in his analysis. There are always two sides. Stay “for always” at Leicester? Come on. Cuddly as Claudio can be, can he only be taken at face value? Last season, wasn’t that his rivals’ mistake?
Players felt Shakespeare was isolated by Ranieri this season. Some also felt that Ranieri did little to keep Steve Walsh, who departed for Everton in summer. Walsh and Shakespeare were the assistants Ranieri inherited when he replaced Nigel Pearson — and the Pearson-Walsh-Shakespeare triumvirate built most of the squad, not just in terms of personnel but culture.
Despite Pearson’s alpha male image, his way was to empower players and staff, encourage opinions, even defer to them on key issues like training schedules — hence the unusually “light” regime when Leicester, making the fewest changes, suffering the fewest injuries, won the title. They did full training just two days a week. and were just back from a week’s holiday a year ago.
Ranieri had wanted to change things when he arrived but part of his genius was recognising he’d inherited a club where much already worked — Leicester survived under Pearson with seven wins from nine games. He listened to Shakespeare regarding training, and Walsh on recruitment: to replace Esteban Cambiasso, Ranieri signed Gokhan Inler but allowed Walsh his own candidate, N’Golo Kante. This season the collegiate style of management, lauded by the World Economic Forum last season, seemed gone.
Players felt he communicated less. His habit — in contrast to Pearson’s workaholic culture — of leaving the training ground by 1.30pm began grating. Days off were cancelled and the training load increased — there was even a session on the morning of an FA Cup tie against Derby.
As results declined, he transmitted suspicion (particularly unfounded in one case) about players’ off-field activities, causing umbrage. There were threats to hole them up in a hotel if they didn’t win games — “you don’t see your wife.”
A constant changing of formation, line-up and tactics baffled. Shinji Okazaki said the team never lost spirit but became “confused what to do with it” and how to play without Kante. The January transfer window, and further outlay on Wilfred Ndidi, was supposed to bring clarity but in consecutive defeats against Manchester United and Swansea, Ranieri had to make two half-time substitutions in tacit admission his selection was wrong; changes at the interval or early in the second half were becoming common.
Players felt they were going on field with too many instructions; all such a shame, because Ranieri’s use of Pearson’s template with only a sprinkling of “Italian tactics, my little tactics” seemed so clever last year.
His preference for Ahmed Musa over Demarai Gray became a bone of contention. Gray is highly rated by the squad’s old lags not just for his ability but mentality, while Musa was struggling to adapt to English football. The away goal, in Wednesday’s 2-1 defeat in Seville, that gives Leicester a fighting chance of reaching the Champions League quarter- finals came after Gray replaced Musa and changed the game: teammates thought not starting Gray in the first place was “bizarre”.
Dismissing Ranieri was decided before Seville — in the wake of a 2-0 defeat at Swansea, where the owners did not get the “bounce” hoped for from a bonding meal with players and now-sorry-looking vote of confidence in Ranieri. The club suggests that if Khun Vichai spoke to a couple of players on Thursday it was to inform them about a decision already taken, not to seek opinion.
Player sources scotch the notion of a meeting where the squad sought Ranieri’s head. What is likely is the owners knew the dressing room concerns about their former manager. If “player power” was at work then that term, with relation to Leicester, needs to be properly understood.
The title, remember, was won by a group deliberately empowered, whose strength of mind was their greatest asset, and the Srivaddhanaprabhas have close bonds with the significant number who have been there for four, five or more years. They are owners who stage social events for their squad and look after them on personal levels: they have an understanding what players are thinking without needing meetings.
Their Thai-Buddhist background make them prize loyalty and generosity. On one level they deserted these principles by showing Ranieri none, on another they stuck to them by going with their older employees, the player group, and their perceived needs.
What do the players want now? For many, Pearson back. It’s believed Leicester have gone a little way to exploring that option but that the reality is difficult to envisage, because of the emotive circumstances behind Pearson’s departure in summer 2015.
Martin O’Neill has many friends, including director Jon Rudkin, still at the club from his time as manager. Roberto Mancini’s representatives have a line into Eduardo Macia, who replaced Walsh as recruitment head, but Mancini is eyeing the Milan job and Macia himself might now be under pressure: a Ranieri appointment and family friend, he and Rudkin presided over the frustrating January transfer window.
Guus Hiddink, in another firefighter role, is the intriguing subject of Dutch speculation. Chelsea exploits may particularly impress the Srivaddhanaprabhas, who had a box at Stamford Bridge before owning Leicester. An extended stint for Shakespeare would be the next-best-thing to Pearson for players — and is a real possibility.
“In selecting the next manager they should look at what made them good. Togetherness. Mentality. Happiness. The English style. Leicester is a very ordinary club without all that,” said a source with a strong handle on the thoughts of the dressing room.
The fans loved Ranieri but also love their old players and respect the ownership, and bet on unity rather than rancour at the King Power tomorrow night. As Mourinho said, “you can never press delete” on what Ranieri did but he himself is part of the odd statistic that tells us four of the past seven Premier League champions sacked their manager within a year. It’s why Sir Alex Ferguson was the strangest, fiercest beast: achieving success, and knowing what to do after it, are such different things.
