deep blue

I'd go for that, and Thomas at LB. Something I'd never have contemplated before his injury, but I'd have Riccardo on the bench. He doesn't look his usual self at RB yet - seems to be coming back very slowly from his long lay-off, and looks like a fish out of water in a wing-back role. Castagne looks more effective at RB than Ricky at the mo, and I'd stick with Thomas at LB, then we have both CBs on their natural foot. I think one of the problems we have had is to do with playing some of our lads out of position, disrupting the team balance and preventing them from playing to thei

Worryingly, the same mistake re formation was made v Man C the previous week - allowing our midfield to be swamped and rendering Tielemans ineffective. I just hope Rodgers doesn't make it 3 in a row on Sunday.

Sorry I have to disagree with you. The "sanctimonious" posts are generally from people who have obeyed the rules against all the odds and see privileged players blithely ignoring the rules and putting others in danger, as well as letting down the club, the supporters and their teammates. No wonder they are annoyed.

For what it's worth, I think this assessment is spot on.

Good luck with it. Hope you get over it very quickly.

I suggested 4-4-2 or something similar. If 4-4-2 then I agree we have limited winger option, but there is Under (you never know ...) or the Malaysian-named youngster who was on the bench today. Or could try a similar formation that didn't demand wingers, such as 4-3-3 or 4-3-1-2.

4-4-2, or something similar?

I really think he should be dropped. He's providing nothing, and has even started mis-timing his runs and getting caught offside. He's really not on it at all.

I see that too. For me, we played the football in the first half and got into their box on numerous occasions but lacked the will to turn those threatening moments into goals. There's not enough determination to get that ball into the net at all costs. It's as if it's enough to play pretty football to get into good positions in their box and there's no need to put in effort to convert. I find it hard to explain, but all I know is that it frustrates the **** out of me. We are capable of so much more and with Iheanacho's re-found potency when a chance comes his way there's no reason we shoul

Absolutely. Too many square pegs in round holes to accommodate his 3 at the back. And his whole approach is so timid. The players must be losing confidence in themselves and their teammates. They are playing without self-belief or conviction. I've rarely seen Vardy so ineffective, and you know when you see the fed-up expression on his face that you're in trouble. If Rodgers doesn't turn this mentality around I really am beginning to see a repeat of last season's demise. I hope not, though.

Yes, our capitulation attitude against Man C was hard to take. Hopefully we won't see that again this season .

This is so true. It's as if our management regarded this match as a "free hit" i.e. it didn't matter if we lost, we expected to lose anyway. But every point in every match is important and should be fought for if we are aiming for Europe and to be considered a top team. We played with 3 forward-going players and a sparse midfield which had no way of feeding them given that they (and our defenders) were strangled by Man City's press. It gave us no chance of winning. Given that Brendan had been outgunned with regard to the formation he should have made adjustments at halftime at

As long as it's better than his one for the Man C capitulation

I'm surprised Thomas has been dropped like a hot potato. I think he's pretty adept defensively, and can think of only one game where his defensive ability was taxed, but he will only learn and improve (and probably very quickly) from that. He's the most natural LB option we have at the moment and his delivery with left foot makes him potentially more potent than other options when supporting the attack. It is true, though, that he was at his most effective supporting the attack when in tandem with Barnes - they had developed a great understanding - and that option is not available at the mome

Am I the only person who had to Google "colloidal" but is none the wiser?