Match Report and MOM v Leicester

Tinpot Club said:
While the handball at Burnley was extremely harsh, I’ve noticed compared to other players he takes a few more risks in not hiding his arms and allowing the ref to make a decision.
Click to expand...

Not saying you're wrong, but in his defence, the freekick he took to the chest/stomach against Spurs was a brave one. Could have easily but his arms up, or turned away, but took it full on.
 
Neil Dawson said:
There are two key differences. It’s the first time I’ve seen us play wing backs that were wing backs not full backs. It’s also the first time we have done that and played a genuine number ten to link it all together.
Click to expand...

so we still only had 2 in central midfield in the second half (billing and lerma) albeit brooks was playing centrally and advanced making it sort of a three?
 
Unfortunately rico seems to have a disaster pass in him most games, the one to lerma in the box last night, again lucky to get away with it.
 
that's what we were missing badly in the first half (and probably for the whole season)
felt sorry for gosling, often receiving the ball on the half turn, closely marked and with no out-ball
pretty sure when he gave the ball away for their goal he was looking for brooks who was stood on the far touchline 40 yards away
 
Neil Dawson said:
You are correct. We did have a game at Chelsea where we left the wing backs up the pitch. I had forgotten that one.

In the vast majority of cases though our wing backs are full backs and we can’t get out.
Click to expand...
More than once actually.......in fact the week following the Chelsea game we played the same formation with Wee man as RwB and got thrashed 4-1.....i think you said that playing a winger like Wee man in the position was a massive mistake by Eddie and Adam Smith should be playing there........but hey...we all change our minds.
 
I
Topfarrier said:
More than once actually.......in fact the week following the Chelsea game we played the same formation with Wee man as RwB and got thrashed 4-1.....i think you said that playing a winger like Wee man in the position was a massive mistake by Eddie and Adam Smith should be playing there........but hey...we all change our minds.
Click to expand...
It’s less about the player and more about the position on the pitch they play.... and I’ve not changed my mind...Smith is a much better wing back than Fraser ever would be. It’s an intelligent players position to be played with head up and not head down and run like Weeman. That’s why Stan did it well.
 
Neil Dawson said:
I

It’s less about the player and more about the position on the pitch they play.... and I’ve not changed my mind...Smith is a much better wing back than Fraser ever would be. It’s an intelligent players position to be played with head up and not head down and run like Weeman. That’s why Stan did it well.
Click to expand...
Oh I'm sorry Neil....when you said you didn't want our full backs playing wing back I thought Smithy would fall into that category of err...full back playing wing back?....my mistake.
I agree btw ....its always been about the players rather than the system.....nice to see you"ve finally come around to my way of thinking!....(y)
 
Topfarrier said:
Oh I'm sorry Neil....when you said you didn't want our full backs playing wing back I thought Smithy would fall into that category of err...full back playing wing back?....my mistake.
I agree btw ....its always been about the players rather than the system.....nice to see you"ve finally come around to my way of thinking!....(y)
Click to expand...
Very amusing. Where on the pitch they play is the system. The advantage of wingers playing there is they will be naturally more attacking but anybody can be coached.
 
As is so often pointed out - there are small margins in football. For the first ten minutes of that second half, we had certainly looked more threatening.. but, in contrast, we were less compact as a defensive unit and leaving Leicester with lots of open space. We could just as easily come a cropper. Afterwards Brendan alluded to this as he said they just needed to weather the storm for 10 minutes (and instead, Kasper ballsed up). The Leicester goal and Vardy’s effort blocked from Ake each came from individual errors at a time when our defence was “open” (because we had possession). I’m not saying we are amazing as a compact defensive unit but I also don’t believe there’s some magical formula where we start the game in an open formation involving wing backs and a midfielder “in the hole”. Doing that presents the opposition with space between our midfield and back 3. It makes for a more open / tipsy-turvy game and suits an opposition prepared to counter-attack, which is most of the league at present. Playing a formation allowing for a tight, compact defence enables us (per Eddie’s words) to “stay in the game”. We either grab a goal ourselves (and then the opposition opens up and we get more) or we concede first, despite all that defending (this has sadly been the more normal outcome) and we then switch to a more attacking formation (and accept the associated counterattack risk) later in the game. Playing an open, attacking formation from the start is perhaps viewed by Eddie as less likely to generate results because, in a game of so few margins, we are playing to the strengths of most teams in the league outside the top 6. And even against the top 6... we can’t play open as we’ll nearly always lose. The sad thing is that, the tight, compact shape has delivered relatively okay results against the top 6... but we’ve suffered against everyone else.
 
Brian Hutchings said:
I don't get the criticism of Smith.....I think he is one of the key reasons we stayed for so long in this Div....he always seems up for it, animated, often angry and menacing.. ..
buggered if I can see that with Wilson or L.Cook.
Click to expand...

He’s been very inconsistent for a period of time now. However he has been out of position the majority of the time. Stacey is the future
 
Neil Dawson said:
Very amusing. Where on the pitch they play is the system. The advantage of wingers playing there is they will be naturally more attacking but anybody can be coached.
Click to expand...
I'm not disagreeing Neil........Eddie is not adverse to coaching wingers to play anywhere....we used to have a team full of them!
 
Standent said:
As is so often pointed out - there are small margins in football. For the first ten minutes of that second half, we had certainly looked more threatening.. but, in contrast, we were less compact as a defensive unit and leaving Leicester with lots of open space. We could just as easily come a cropper. Afterwards Brendan alluded to this as he said they just needed to weather the storm for 10 minutes (and instead, Kasper ballsed up). The Leicester goal and Vardy’s effort blocked from Ake each came from individual errors at a time when our defence was “open” (because we had possession). I’m not saying we are amazing as a compact defensive unit but I also don’t believe there’s some magical formula where we start the game in an open formation involving wing backs and a midfielder “in the hole”. Doing that presents the opposition with space between our midfield and back 3. It makes for a more open / tipsy-turvy game and suits an opposition prepared to counter-attack, which is most of the league at present. Playing a formation allowing for a tight, compact defence enables us (per Eddie’s words) to “stay in the game”. We either grab a goal ourselves (and then the opposition opens up and we get more) or we concede first, despite all that defending (this has sadly been the more normal outcome) and we then switch to a more attacking formation (and accept the associated counterattack risk) later in the game. Playing an open, attacking formation from the start is perhaps viewed by Eddie as less likely to generate results because, in a game of so few margins, we are playing to the strengths of most teams in the league outside the top 6. And even against the top 6... we can’t play open as we’ll nearly always lose. The sad thing is that, the tight, compact shape has delivered relatively okay results against the top 6... but we’ve suffered against everyone else.
Click to expand...
You say that we looked less compact as a defensive unit in the second half, but in the first half Leicester looked like they were going to score every time they went forward anyway. So what have we got to lose?
 
Personally I don't think we were that great against Leicester and this talk of magic formations is overstating it a bit. We got a massive slice of luck with all four goals and with them getting a man sent off for stupid reasons.

We were definately due some luck though because we've not been that **************** in some of the games we've got nothing from this season too.
 
Standent said:
As is so often pointed out - there are small margins in football. For the first ten minutes of that second half, we had certainly looked more threatening.. but, in contrast, we were less compact as a defensive unit and leaving Leicester with lots of open space. We could just as easily come a cropper. Afterwards Brendan alluded to this as he said they just needed to weather the storm for 10 minutes (and instead, Kasper ballsed up). The Leicester goal and Vardy’s effort blocked from Ake each came from individual errors at a time when our defence was “open” (because we had possession). I’m not saying we are amazing as a compact defensive unit but I also don’t believe there’s some magical formula where we start the game in an open formation involving wing backs and a midfielder “in the hole”. Doing that presents the opposition with space between our midfield and back 3. It makes for a more open / tipsy-turvy game and suits an opposition prepared to counter-attack, which is most of the league at present. Playing a formation allowing for a tight, compact defence enables us (per Eddie’s words) to “stay in the game”. We either grab a goal ourselves (and then the opposition opens up and we get more) or we concede first, despite all that defending (this has sadly been the more normal outcome) and we then switch to a more attacking formation (and accept the associated counterattack risk) later in the game. Playing an open, attacking formation from the start is perhaps viewed by Eddie as less likely to generate results because, in a game of so few margins, we are playing to the strengths of most teams in the league outside the top 6. And even against the top 6... we can’t play open as we’ll nearly always lose. The sad thing is that, the tight, compact shape has delivered relatively okay results against the top 6... but we’ve suffered against everyone else.
Click to expand...
This is spot on. Thats the point I was referencing when I said it’s going to be intriguing to see how he deals with this. His old way of playing on the break has stopped working... beyond all doubt. His new way of playing in desperation isn’t a starting formation you are correct. That leaves either a hybrid to be developed quickly or go back to the old way. My view on Eddie’s recent conservatism is he will go back to the latter and hope new found confidence will help it. Shame as he at least should keep the number ten element of it.
 
See for us we need to play a genuine footballer at number 10. With this they need vision and craft .
A lot of teams don’t always need this as they have midfield players who can pass the ball well . We don’t.
We rely on Lerma who really has a 5 yard pass in him, gosling isn’t that player and cook the manger clearly doesn’t really trust .
For me if only we could have had Arter back .
 
SlowDownDerek said:
Personally I don't think we were that great against Leicester and this talk of magic formations is overstating it a bit. We got a massive slice of luck with all four goals and with them getting a man sent off for stupid reasons.
Click to expand...

The luck and the first goal gave the players a lift with belief and confidence and that can never be overstated in a players performance.

The same tactics with players that lack beliefs and confidence will see slow, turgid passing, no movement, no pressing, no creation and no risks.

With belief and confidence you get the players gaining a yard of pace, moving the ball quicker, movement off the ball, an organised press as the team “click”, players willing to take risks and chances.

If Stanislas doesn’t have the belief to cut inside and shoot and instead plays the easy five yard pass sideways, he doesn’t get the deflection and the third goal to seal the victory.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;