The collapse of Stefano Sensi’s move to Leicester on Thursday night reopened all the old wounds about the Foxes’ transfer business over the last couple of years.


In the absence of any communication from Leicester’s recruitment team, and given Enzo Maresca’s furious silence on the issue, we’re left to speculate on the causes of the latest embarrassment. Perhaps someone changed their minds, perhaps the medical turned up a problem that it was better for all parties to cover up, perhaps Jon Rudkin forgot to press send on an email.

The most common guess as to what happened is that financial pressure intervened. For the last eighteen months Leicester have been operating a one-in, one-out policy, like a student nightclub at happy hour. Managers complaining about being blindsided about these restrictions has become a familiar refrain since the summer of 2022.

Faced with this reality, our main focus has been on how unsuccessful Leicester have been at selling off their spare parts. The list of unwanted players who Leicester have frozen out, loaned out, or tried to sell even in the past year or so is a long one.

Caglar Soyuncu, Ryan Bertrand, Jannik Vestergaard, Nampalys Mendy, Marc Albrighton, Dennis Praet, Luke Thomas, Victor Kristiansen, Harry Souttar, Daniel Iversen, Danny Ward, Patson Daka. You can probably think of even more.

To some extent, the criticism might be a little unfair. Lots of English teams struggle to sell players because they pay higher wages than everyone else. The problem has become more acute as the financial disparity between English football and everywhere else has grown. Premier League teams attract players by paying a lot and offering long deals.

Another of Leicester’s problems, though, is specific to them. A longstanding policy of rewarding players who don’t deserve it with long term contracts.

Rewarding mediocrity

On Friday, January 19th, Hamza Choudhury was arrested late at night for driving under the influence and refusing to take a breathalyser test. He has been bailed until a court date on February 23rd, which happens to be the day Leicester take on Leeds in one of the biggest games left on the schedule.

A few months ago, on a random Wednesday in September, Leicester gave Choudhury a long-term contract extension. This was largely met with positivity; Hamza is a local lad, he’s been around the club for a long time, and he’s also an important symbolic figure as one of the few players from an Asian background who play at the highest levels in England.

There’s no doubt that this kind of thing matters to Top, and it mattered to his father as well. They have poured resources into fostering close links to the fanbase and the community as a whole, whether that’s through charitable donations, free doughnuts, or clappers and ‘honesty flags’.

The problem is that too often this has meant we give out contracts based on taking care of our friends rather than the best interests of the football club. Handing out new deals based on sentimental value has been one of the main issues with the Leicester leadership for a long time.

Locking Hamza at the club on – allegedly – £50,000 a week until 2027(!), or paying Marc Albrighton a similar amount for the occasional cameo, is cut from the same cloth as giving Matty James a contract extension in 2017 after he failed to play a single game in the title winning season and was then loaned out the following year.

It is true, to a lesser extent, of giving Wanya Marcal a new contract in December despite the fact he’s barely even a fifth-choice winger in the Championship. The decision to extend Jamie Vardy’s contract for another two years was probably a poor one when viewed through a purely footballing lens. It’s poorer now when he’s the highest paid player in the Championship and not even the first-choice forward.

The footballing argument against rewarding Hamza with a new contract is even more stark. Ignore the fact that he’s a Leicester lad. Last season, he was out of the picture entirely, on loan at Watford. He’s 26 years old and the most league starts he’s ever made in a single campaign for Leicester is 10. Even this season, off the back of a new contract, he starts about a third of the games in total.

He’s not a regular in the Championship, he’s never been a regular in a Premier League side, and he’s unlikely to suddenly become one now. If Leicester get promoted, we’re going to be in the same situation with him as we have been with so many players over the past few years: holding a player we don’t need on wages we can’t shift.

And all that is before you get to the question of whether his conduct merits the loyalty Leicester have shown him. The drink-driving situation is not the first time he’s let the club down. Remember a couple of years ago, when James Maddison was dropped for a critical game at West Ham because he broke COVID protocols by having a party? Two other players were dropped for that game as well. One was Ayoze Perez, the other was Hamza Choudhury.

Here we d’oh

In the modern game, which has bound 86 of the 92 clubs into strict financial limitations, these decisions have repercussions further down the line. When every penny counts for Financial Fair Play, and where Leicester are evidently right up against its limits, keeping fringe players – and, worse, rewarding them with – big contracts directly impacts whether or not you can improve the first team.

The January window has been a perfect example of what happens when you keep making little mistakes. Eventually, they grow into a serious problem. The month began with the now classic Leicester move of suddenly springing a nasty surprise on a manager and a fanbase eagerly awaiting new arrivals. We’ve all heard the words ‘sell to buy’ so often that it now just rings in your ears when you’re laying in bed at night.

All we’ve had to dig our teeth into for a month is an interminable back-and-forth over Sensi, played out live on Fabrizio Romano’s Twitter account. That ended in farce on deadline day. Leicester ultimately ended up, improbably, with a weaker squad coming out of January than what they started with.

Where there have been legitimate talents available this month, the teams around Leicester have snapped them up: Jeremy Sarmiento to Ipswich, Fabio Carvalho and Anass Zaroury to Hull, David Brooks to Southampton. The Foxes have been stuck in neutral, again running the risk of a transfer window spent watching rivals overtake them.

At the same time, Leicester’s own resources have been dwindling. Wilfred Ndidi is out long term, Cesare Casadei has gone back to Chelsea. Abdul Fatawu’s suspension highlighted the fact that in every position bar the central striker Leicester are dangerously thin. The panic that set in when Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall was linked to Brighton was in part because there are essentially no alternatives with any pedigree to play in his position for the rest of the season.

For KDH, read Stephy Mavididi and Harry Winks as well. Leicester’s record without Ndidi is bang average, but if any of those were to be absent for a period there would be a serious problem. Ipswich, for one example, realised they were short up front with George Hirst injured, and promptly signed two strikers in January.

Not learning lessons

One of the most frustrating things about modern football is a reliance on the transfer market as a panacea for every problem. Every manager wants new players, all the time. But Leicester’s mismanagement of their playing staff has created needless problems, making it much more difficult to compete in a world where constant spending is the norm.

The relegation came about partly because other teams effectively cheated to spend more on players than they could afford, but it also happened because Leicester forced themselves into a corner by paying so much money to players they didn’t want. Choudhury’s new contract, like the Sensi debacle, shows how few lessons have been learned.

With a number of contracts expiring in the summer that will finally wipe the worst excesses off the wage bill, this might be the final window where Leicester suffer from self-imposed restrictions like this. The reality is, though, that unless you understand why that happened you won’t avoid making the exact same mistake again in the future.

We’ve spent a lot of time on this site joking about the infamous internal review in the summer that never saw the light of day. But it speaks to a serious problem, which is a failure to properly self-scout and genuinely reflect the success of your own decisions.

This problem isn’t purely down to Hamza Choudhury, but he is a perfect symptom of a wider issue. Rewarding mediocrity is dangerous when you have financial limitations. And it’s hard to shake the feeling that nothing’s going to change until there’s a different decision-maker at the top.

document.getElementById(‘newsnowlogo’).onclick=function(){ window.open(‘https://www.newsnow.co.uk/h/Sport/Football/Premier+League/Leicester+City’,’newsnow’); }; document.getElementById(‘newsnowlogo’).style.cursor=’pointer’; document.getElementById(‘newsnowlogo_a’).style.textDecoration=’none’; document.getElementById(‘newsnowlogo_a’).style.borderBottom=’0 none’;

13 responses to “Money for nothing: Leicester’s transfer trouble is part of a deeper problem”

  1. Nothing changes until we get rid of the manegement at the clubTotal shambles

    Like

  2. Broadstonefox needs to be specific about the comment, because only an imbecile would call for “getting rid” of Top or Enzo. Let’s be ecstatic we have completed English football in the last 20 years. Let’s enjoy that we are never boring. Mid table is not our thing. Let’s take a reality check and be proud we are trying to play by the rules. Not cheating like Man City, Chelsea, Everton, Forest etc. Forest could be bankrupt in 6 months if they go down and have 30 players they can’t sell.

    Like

  3. Decent article. I’ve been arguing for a long time on various platforms, the owner led model is no longer fit for purpose. The Chairman should appoint a ‘non-exec’ board that has oversight of all aspects club operations and finances.

    Best example of getting that bit right, Brighton!

    Like

  4. Good article and identifies the problem of rewarding mediocre players. I also think there is a competency issue. Recruitment ie. Identifying the right players has been good recently, actually doing the right contractual negotiation seems to be the issue and the timeliness of negotiation Problems started with Silva – 14 seconds. Each deadline day we always seemed to be chasing or on the back foot. In this one, If we couldn’t sign a player because of money (player sales) that situation didn’t change so why bother flying Sensi to Leicester which just made us look like idiots.

    Like

  5. Normally a fan of this site, but this is a really poor read – knee jerk, paranoid agenda-led speculation.I’d rather trust the explanation that Rob Tanner provided, that the sensi deal was abandoned due to time constraints over legal clarification of the term sheets – hardly a cause for embarrassment.

    Maresca has not been ‘blindsided’, it was clear from day one that we needed to sell to buy, and even then, they were close to manipulating the sensi deal to by-pass this necessity.

    The suggestion that we have been slack compared to our rivals ignores the 40M+ Euros we used on players in the summer – the wafer thin argument that we are ‘weaker’ losing the mediocre Casadei hardly reinforces this argument.

    Critics of this club happily bang on about the large contracts our players are on, but forget that many of these were given during the period where we were playing in europe and settled in the PL top 6, they were the going rate for players in that position – and then you are surprised that, in the championship, these players are difficult to offload. No one expected us to have dropped down a league, and to have to have dealt with the financial repercussions associated with such a fall – but that is the reality for this club – and, personally, i think they have managed it extraordinarily well: to have made such a turnaround in our fortunes since then without resorting to breaching FFP rules or going into administration is really nothing short of miraculous.

    And, finally, i’ll grant you that Hamza isn’t a world class player and that he isn’t exactly first name on the team sheet, but his back up role, and i trust Maresca on this, is one that we had no one else to fill.

    To be sat top of the championship, after the debacle of last season, and to read such negative and petty opinion is, frankly, embarrassing.

    Like

    1. Anthony Bennett Avatar
      Anthony Bennett

      I think this is a great read and I think your post is arguing something different. It’s about rewarding mediocrity which is a constant failure. As the article states, go back to Matty James and you can see the trend. Albrighton, as much as I love him is another. Praet back from injury has probably been the saving grace numbers wise but is he good enough. What we’ve seen from Ipswich and Southampton is improvement, for us we are unbalanced in certain areas and no stronger, a couple of injuries away from a huge problem which I hope doesn’t come to bite us. And the biggest issue for me is again not communicating with the manager, just as BR was famously told he couldn’t rebuild. It’s poor, and I agree with a comment below about a non-exec board.

      Like

    2. This whole post was a fantastic example of totally missing the point. Virtually nothing you’ve put here addresses anything in the article – which is totally correct.

      Like

  6. You’re either on the limit of or beyond FFP IMO.

    Like

  7. Really well written article. Really highlights how poorly we have behaved over the last few years believing that top 5 was inevitable for ever. The big question is who is sanctioning the purchases? Rodgers never seemed to want them.

    Like

  8. Locking Hamza at the club on – allegedly – £50,000 a week until 2027.That’s crazy.It would be foolish to pay such a huge fixed fee to a player of his level.He is a player of such value that Watford did not even exercise the 5 million £ purchase option, but no team will pay this salary and also pay the transfer fee, which means that unnecessary funds will not be cut until 2027.

    Like

  9. Para 2 – since 2022, surely?

    Like

    1. Edited, cheers!

      Like

  10. Another good article!

    Like

Leave a reply to Hitesh Cancel reply

viewpoint