NaijaFox

Full-time. Slim had a hand in all of Monaco’s four goals as they ran away 4-1 winners at Brest.

Adrien Silva, on the other hand, appears to have lost his starting role and has now been used as a second-half sub in the last couple of games.

Make that a hat-trick of assists. He assisted on the 4th goal as well in time added on.

Slimani scores yet again! Penalty-kick this time, but still. Keep it up Slim, we need to recoup our layout.

Carroll is doubtful for EVERY game until at least the New Year!

Care to share your thoughts on this weekend's Lotto numbers?

Agreed. Not even you.

Win or a draw...

But it’s rather irrelevant what I (or you) “want to believe” since we DID get something out of the game. The sole bone of contention is whether or not we were “lucky” to have done so, and thus far read nothing to rationally conclude that we were. Sure, they created and screwed some chances, but so did we (while overwhelmingly controlling possession, shots, passes, etc).

I believe he’s merely saying don’t play BOTH Ndidi and Hamza.

Depends on what you call "chances". Apart from the Jota chance, there was arguably another when Jimenez dithered on the ball instead of taking a quick shot and was dispossessed. We definitely had BETTER chances to beat Chelsea at Stamford Bridge than Wolves had to beat us. But you seem to exaggerate every "chance" against us while diminishing ours.

Absolute howlers?! Jota disposed Ricardo at the end of the first half and got his feet tangled up as he tried to shoot. At best ONE "howler" if you can in fact earnestly classify it thus. Meanwhile, literally less than 10 minutes earlier, Vardy had whiffed on a virtually tap-in, while Boly had to dig out a virtual goal-line clearance in the 2d minute of time added on.

Why were we "lucky" to draw? Because VAR did its job and disallowed their "goal" according to the rules of the game? Other than that, I find no rational reason to consider the draw "lucky" after we out-possessed, out-passed, and out-shot them (albeit we were mostly shooting blanks). Frankly, apart from the spell between the start of the second-half and their disallowed "goal", they mostly parked the bus while looking for the quick ball over the top. An average outing by us but hardly poor. Much the same can be said about the Sheffield United game. Apart from the period from the start of the second-half up to their equalizer, they were just content not to concede. There was only ever going to be one winner in that game. Meanwhile, if we were "lucky" to draw against Wolves, then we were similarly "unlucky" not to have beaten Chelsea or drawn with Manure.

Excerpted from the full article... https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/brendan-rodgers-take-playing-james-3328605

Makes far more sense...

We've been more average than good, but (apart from the first 20 minutes at Chelsea) hardly poor. I realize expectations are sky-high this season, but frankly could not think of any game that I sat there thinking we would be lucky or glad to escape defeat. The prevailing sentiment during each game this season for the most part has been why are we not doing more to win it.

Personally, I do NOT share in the mass pessimism pervading these pages. Despite the setback at Old Trafford, we have actually started quite well and have successfully navigated the types of games that would normally be troublesome just last season (Bournemouth and even Sheffield United). Unfortunately, the international break came just when it seemed we were getting into a consistent stride (cue the Bournemouth game). Nonetheless, this game (more so than the Yanited game) is the first reality-check game that would best provide a much better indication of whether our Top 6 ambitions are realistic or delusional. If we cannot get points off an inconsistent Spurs team on our own HOME patch, the latter may be well better describe said Top 6 aspirations. Of course this is still only September. There’s a long way to go, and a lot of ‘known unknowns’ and ‘unknown unknowns’ to navigate, but I will stick my narrow neck out and boldly look forward to a point or three on Saturday.

Totally agree! Our defense has been more than decent and we’ve won the midfield tussle in all 5 league games thus far. Our biggest issue thus far has been in the final third where we repeatedly play what the Americans would term “one-on-one” football almost always unsuccessfully. We thus have not created enough chances commensurate with our territorial dominance and often leave Vardy looking stranded alone. Spacing and movement in the final third has been subpar thus far, and even when we manage to get to the byline, there’s often not enough blue shirts inside the opposition box. The one time Tielemans ventured into the box, he scored.

We’ve been INCONSISTENT but we have played very well in large patches - the Bournemouth game, last 70 minutes at Chelsea, and first-half at Sheffield United. The international break arguably came at the worst possible time for us - before we really strung our good performances together and right before two tricky fixtures.

You don’t really need both Praet and Tielemans in the same starting lineup (except for specific games and/or situations), just as we didn’t really need both Hamza and Ndidi in the starting lineup yesterday, and personally I will opt for Tielemans over Praet until further notice or evidence. If we have Maddison playing more centrally (where he has shown a zillion times that he is most effective) rather than wide left, but closer to Vardy (who yesterday was again stranded desperately alone by our starting formation), then have Tielemans (or Praet) in a slightly deeper role behind him, we can easily afford to have Ndidi keep sitting as deep as he does doing what he does better than most in the EPL.

With Evans, Soyuncu, and Maddison (in the second-half), one of the few who acquitted himself well today.

All of our players appear to need more than one touch - except Gray who simply gives it away. Chilwell,, for instance, dwells and dwells on the ball until he finally plays it backwards or sideways, or if he is feeling adventurous plays it forwards for Maddison to chase or simply crosses it to no one in particular or out of touch. Tielemans can pick a pass (particularly if he has all the time in the world) but routinely takes numerous touches. Frankly only Ricardo seems to grasp the concept of the quick give and go, but he often gives and not get (albeit not today when he put in a largely pedestrian performance with much of the rest of the team). The notion that we effortlessly knock the ball in triangles around the park until it gets to Ndidi (or the DMs, as someone else muted elsewhere on FT) is a fallacy. To be brutally honest, the reality is that (particularly in the Wolves game and at OT yesterday), we enjoy loads of possession shuffling the ball back and forth between defense and midfield but then seem to run out of ideas in the final third.

that transparent?

The holding midfield position is hardly our biggest problem. We actually have 2 very good ones in Ndidi and Hamza, and 2 other midfielders "that can actually move the ball" in Maddison and Tielemans - if we play the former in the middle and use wide players to unleash the creative talent of the latter. What we need are players who can actually do SOMETHING (anything useful at all) in the final third (apart from Vard, that is).

OK, got it. Grew up with "5" as average.