Marti Cifuentes reacts amid a statement which has been issued explaining Leicester fans’ boycott protest for the West Brom fixture.
On boycott, he told BBC Radio Leicester Sport: “First of all, I would say to the fans who came that I appreciate it because it was a very cold night and to come here hopefully they got the reward in the last minute goal and they can go home happy.”
“But I have just full respect for all the fans and hopefully we can produce much better performances and better results so they feel encouraged to come.”
King Power Out (@Top_sell_up) tweeted before the game: “A CALL TO BOYCOTT the West Bromwich Albion game later this evening for Leicester City fans. #kingpowerout”
Genuine boycott from the Leicester fans!#wba pic.twitter.com/Wbc4k7V2M3
— Chris Hall (@CJHall83) January 5, 2026
REASONS TO BOYCOTT vs West Brom
A growing number of fans believe the club is being poorly run, that supporter concerns are routinely ignored and that meaningful change only comes when pressure becomes impossible to dismiss. Attendance has been treated as a given, not a sign of confidence.
This is about standards, accountability, and the long-term health of Leicester City.
A single match boycott won’t fix structural problems, but a visibly reduced crowd cannot be dismissed. For many supporters, the West Brom game is the moment to send a message.
The financial record
Leicester City’s published accounts show losses of £92.5M in 2021-22 and £89.7 million in 2022-23 — more than £180M across two seasons — despite major player sales in the same period, including Wesley Fofana and James Maddison.
Under Premier League PSR rules, clubs are permitted losses of ÂŁ105M across a three-year cycle. Leicester exceeded that threshold and were charged, with the case later dismissed on jurisdictional grounds.
The club pointed to the absence of European football, revealing a deeper problem: European qualification had been treated as an expectation within financial planning.
These figures reflect years of decisions, not a single mistake.
Leadership and accountability
Aiyawatt Srivaddhanaprabha has been involved with Leicester City since 2010 and was a director during the period when the club was run under his father, Vichai, witnessing first-hand how strong leadership, clear delegation and effective challenge at board level delivered sustained success.
Given that experience, the current situation cannot be explained by unfamiliarity with football or with this club. Senior executives have remained in place despite repeated failures in financial control, recruitment, and long-term planning, while the owner is rarely present and has not put in place a strong, independent leadership structure to operate in his absence.
Decision-making has become slow, reactive and insular, pointing to a breakdown in oversight at the top of the club.
Vichai’s era and the current chairmanship
Our rise and greatest achievements came under Vichai as owner and chairman, when standards were clearly set, challenge was welcomed, and governance was tighter.
Since 2018-19, with Aiyawatt as chairman in his own right, the record has deteriorated sharply. This includes record financial losses, PSR breaches, two relegations, declining recruitment outcomes, nearly ÂŁ200 million in losses across two seasons and a growing disconnect with supporters.
If a new owner, without legacy goodwill, had overseen this, scrutiny would have been immediate and severe.
Respect for the past should not prevent honest judgment of the present.
As empty as the King Power has been in a while.
Leicester fans have boycotted the game tonight in protest of how the club has been run in recent years.
Sure the cold may have impacted a few as well.
📸: @dsj_itv pic.twitter.com/aI6Va8YwCq
— Second Tier podcast (@secondtierpod) January 5, 2026
View from the Away End at the King Power Stadium last night for the hit and run that was Leicester City(A)#WBA pic.twitter.com/vZ6hs8afPR
— AllAlbionFans (@AllAlbionFans) January 6, 2026
Treatment of supporters
Operational decisions have increasingly been taken with limited regard for supporter feedback. The introduction of digital-only ticketing is the clearest example, pushed through despite surveys showing strong opposition and concerns over access, reliability, and flexibility.
Away ticket procedures remain poorly designed despite being described as under review for years, while ticket prices and membership costs continue to rise.
At the same time, the matchday experience, retail operation, and catering compare poorly with similar clubs.
This is an attractive club for a new owner
Calls for change are often met with warnings about how hard Leicester City would be to sell, but recent evidence suggests otherwise.
Sheffield Wednesday, with no recent Premier League football and weaker infrastructure, reportedly attracted over 50 expressions of interest when put up for sale.
Leicester City is a far stronger proposition, with a Category One academy, modern training ground, established and expandable stadium, and the advantage of being a one-club city. Its global profile was permanently altered in 2016, and it retains one of the largest social media followings outside the traditional big six.
For a smart, well-capitalised buyer, Leicester City represents opportunity, not risk.
The “careful what you wish for” argument
Another common response is that things could always be worse. That argument is increasingly hard to sustain.
Leicester City has already suffered relegation, record losses, repeated PSR issues, and prolonged governance failure, and remains under financial scrutiny with the real risk of future sanctions. A points deduction would place the club in serious danger of sliding towards League One.
This is not hypothetical but the direction of travel if current trends continue, and the greater risk now lies in carrying on as we are.
The owner is already absent
There is an uncomfortable truth that needs acknowledging: Aiyawatt Srivaddhanaprabha is rarely present at Leicester City matches and, despite promises to be closer to the club and its supporters, has attended only a handful of games and is not a visible presence around the stadium, training ground or local football community.
Presence signals priority and absence signals detachment. While supporters are repeatedly asked for loyalty, patience and money, the owner has normalised his own absence from the club.
In that context, fans choosing to stay away are not withdrawing something unusual, but reflecting the reality already set at the top.
Enough is enough. Change is needed.
