LEICESTER City’s title chase continues today with Claudio Ranieri’s team hosting Southampton. There has been an evolution in the Foxes’ narrative, from whether they could sustain the run, to whether they could finish in the top four, to whether they can win the title.

And now, since it seems plausible that they can do it, the question with some is whether they can build on it, or at least retain their stars, above all Riyad Mahrez and N’Golo Kante, their two most saleable assets.

Ranieri addressed this on Friday, following reports that Kante would not, for the time being, commit to a new contract. (And nor should he: he arrived in the summer with a four-year deal, there is no reason for him to put pen to paper now.)

“He should stay here,” the Leicester manager said. “But if some big teams arrive who offer a lot of money, maybe we can think about it. Especially if he is no longer happy here and wants to go ... I don’t want sad people here.”

Ranieri, of course, is merely stating the obvious. Everybody has his price and everybody, understandably, wants the opportunity to move up the food chain. Leicester have the leverage of having him and Mahrez locked up through to 2019, but all that means is that they can charge a full transfer fee.

Yet, at the same time, compared to some managers who refuse to discuss any individuals, let alone any individual contracts or situations, Ranieri’s bluntness isn’t just refreshing, it takes the heat off the players in one of the most stressful moments of the season.

Look at it from Kante’s perspective. He’s been a runaway success in his first season in the Premier League, he’s earning real money after a career in the French Second Division and he has won his first caps for France on the eve of the European Championship. Think his head might be spinning just a little?

Moments like these serve as reminders of how Ranieri has grown in the past 15 years. The bundle of nerves who preceded Jose Mourinho at Chelsea seems a long way away.

PERCEPTION matters. Often as much as reality. When Gary Neville accepted the Valencia job, gallons of ink, actual and digital, were devoted to outlining the perils of the decision.

He had zero experience as a manager. He had zero experience in Spain and did not speak the language. He had only ever worked at one club, under one manager. Valencia were an underachieving club with a restless fan base and unpopular owner, who happened to be not just Neville’s self-described “friend” but his business partner as well.

He was going to try to combine it with his gig as Roy Hodgson’s assistant in the England set-up.

He didn’t help himself either when he talked about what a great experience it was going to be and how much he was going to learn. No set of fans wants their club used as a “finishing school”, certainly not one like Valencia.

So the fact he was sacked last Wednesday inevitably threw up a raft of “I told you so-s”, most of them justified. The question is what happens next and what could possibly have prompted him to take the Valencia job in the first place?

Were it anybody else, you would chalk it up to stupidity or arrogance. Neville is not stupid; in fact, he’s one of the brightest, most thoughtful men in English football. He’s not arrogant, either: talk to him and you find a guy who is humble and asks plenty of questions.

So what prompted him to move to the Mestalla? Probably a combination of self-belief – which some see as a flip-side of arrogance, but, in fact, is a quality most top footballers share – and listening to the wrong people giving wrong advice.

As much as any knowledge he gained on the pitch or on the training ground, that may be the most significant lesson to be learned here.

LAST week’s other sacking was a classic “when, not if”. Remi Garde won three out of 23 games as Aston Villa manager. Unless you own the club or are participating in some type of sociological study analysing the effects of footballing free-fall, you will get the boot.

There was always something of the “too-clever-for-their-own-good” about his appointment. He had played for Arsene Wenger, he had spent seven years as an assistant coach, he had directed one of the best academies in France and he had three years managing a big club in Lyon.

Of course, you could also poke holes in all of those qualities. Paul Merson also played for Wenger, yet he would not be an obvious choice to manage a nightclub, let alone a football club. All that time as an assistant raises the question of why nobody spotted his fine managerial mind sooner. Lyon do have a great academy, but he only spent one year there, so he can’t really take credit for churning out an assembly line of talent. And the fact of the matter is that the guy who replaced him at Lyon finished second with a far higher points total than he managed.

The weird thing about Garde’s appointment, other than the notion that he would instantly levitate Aston Villa out of the relegation zone, is that he was given a three-and-a-half year deal. It was further confirmation that clubs still don’t understand the basic concept of supply and demand, and that there are many more managers looking for jobs than there are clubs needing managers. How he managed to leverage their interest into a deal through 2019 when even the likes of Pep Guardiola only get three-year contracts, is a mystery.

As for Villa, maybe things aren’t as bleak as they seem. Relegation beckons, but the tools are there to bounce straight back. And there is a legitimate clutch of talented young players at the club, though whether they go for a quick fix of veterans for an immediate return remains to be seen.

What is not in dispute, you would hope, is that the next Villa boss will not be getting a three-and-a-half year deal.