The club, currently three points clear at the top of the world’s most watched football league, are owned by Thai duty-free magnate Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha, whose King Power brand is emblazoned on the club shirt.
Their rise is one of the biggest David vs Goliath sporting narratives in recent memory – and a success story for Thailand, where they are dubbed the Siamese Foxes.
Advantage Leicester as Spurs, Arsenal, Manchester City lose
The Thai Leicester City fans’ Facebook page boasts 445,000 likes, a new-found popularity that is translating into increased shirt sales.
But Leicester’s players are still not household names in the football-mad Southeast Asian kingdom and on match days the club’s deep blue colours are largely absent from Bangkok’s bars.
Observers say that is in part down to publicity-shy Vichai, who has averred the usual fanfare of a PR campaign associated with foreign ownership of Premier League clubs.
But it is also because traditional footballing giants such as Liverpool and Manchester United still draw the loyalty of most Thai fans.
Huth fires fairytale Leicester six points clear
Waiting to play during a casual game in central Bangkok on a recent afternoon, Kittideht Jirawattanakan said he was astonished by the Foxes’ rise.
But when quizzed on the team, he admitted to being a little unprepared. “I don’t really know much about them,” he said. “[I know]) the team has Thai owners — they play aggressively and they’re on fire at the moment.”
The club was bought by retail mogul Vichai in 2010. After a few false starts, the team gained promotion to the Premier League, piquing interest among Thais in a previously unfashionable outfit.
Vichai’s boardroom has won praise for its unflustered approach to running the club and shrewd appointments of players and managers.
Published in The Express Tribune, March 5th, 2016.
Like Sports on Facebook, follow @ETribuneSports on Twitter to stay informed and join in the conversation.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ