Guest Col city fan Posted 25 October 2015 Posted 25 October 2015 Yet we're conceding far more goals this season than last. Around this time last year you were attributing virtually every goal we conceded to Cambiasso failing to track runners from midfield. So what's going on this year?I'd have thought that was obvious. We're playing in a more expansive and adventurous way. Pearson last season set us up for about half a season (not the start and clearly not the end) to play in a defensive way, trying to not concede goals whilst not offering much going forward either. The problem was, of course, that whilst we weren't scoring, we WERE conceding. And lots of goals. Just after Christmas, we had one of the worst goal differences across all four divisions. If Ranieri set us up with three in the midfield, let's say King and Drinkwater playing just in front of Kante, we'd probably not concede as many..but at the cost of not getting forward as quickly and not scoring as many.The point, for me, is that Drinkwater and Kante are suited to playing a 4-4-2. Sure, we'll concede, but they have the energy to win the ball back and to get us forward quickly too. Cambiasso wasn't suited to the 4-4-2. For the final time, we only got the best out of Cambiasso when we changed the formation. If my memory serves me right, this started in the 2nd half against West Brom. For me, this was the catalyst for all that came after. King came on, did the defensive duty in the middle and we went from there. Until just about that time, we were pants and were going down. When we had the extra man defending (such that Cambiasso didn't have to nearly as much), he shone. Before that, we saw glimpses of greatness, but only glimpses. And if you recall, I'd advocated playing Cambiasso playing further forward, supported by an extra midfielder, for months. I'd take this midfield pair in the quick pace of the Premiership, playing in a 4-4-2 any day of the week. I'm not bothered to be honest if people don't agree. They didn't agree last season either. But I'm not posting any more on this subject or I'll get banned. Ridiculous yes. But it'll happen.
desertfox2 Posted 25 October 2015 Posted 25 October 2015 He is the anti-venom to counter attacks. He's a 10 out of 10 at breaking up play, getting the ball back and reading danger. Definitely no way I would swap with cambiasso. Just a shame that we didn't get the chance to see them play together!
st albans fox Posted 25 October 2015 Posted 25 October 2015 Our GD was never dreadful and we did play well at times in the oct/March period. the formation change was great timing given our run in fixtures this doesn't change the fact that our midfield 2 is more mobile than last seasons. We can compete better 2 v 3 and retain the width that the diamond denied us.
Guest ttfn Posted 25 October 2015 Posted 25 October 2015 I'd have thought that was obvious. We're playing in a more expansive and adventurous way. Pearson last season set us up for about half a season (not the start and clearly not the end) to play in a defensive way, trying to not concede goals whilst not offering much going forward either. The problem was, of course, that whilst we weren't scoring, we WERE conceding. And lots of goals. Just after Christmas, we had one of the worst goal differences across all four divisions. If Ranieri set us up with three in the midfield, let's say King and Drinkwater playing just in front of Kante, we'd probably not concede as many..but at the cost of not getting forward as quickly and not scoring as many. The point, for me, is that Drinkwater and Kante are suited to playing a 4-4-2. Sure, we'll concede, but they have the energy to win the ball back and to get us forward quickly too. Cambiasso wasn't suited to the 4-4-2. For the final time, we only got the best out of Cambiasso when we changed the formation. If my memory serves me right, this started in the 2nd half against West Brom. For me, this was the catalyst for all that came after. King came on, did the defensive duty in the middle and we went from there. Until just about that time, we were pants and were going down. I think there's a lot of good points in there about the expansive style of the team, but I can't recall you being so forgiving of a certain midfielder on the rare occasions we did have a go (Man United at home, QPR away spring to mind immediately). We've still got the same failings before in a 4-4-2 but for me the big differences are that Kante is a big upgrade on James, we've signed a proper full back (we've conceded one goal from open play since Fuchs has come in) and we've got two forwards who have been given licence to play their own game in Vardy and Mahrez. Last season the issue was never the defence, it was the stifled nature of our attacking play.
Captain... Posted 25 October 2015 Posted 25 October 2015 How often did we play 442? At the start we did out of necessity, but Man U was a 433, then we had the diamond then some weird combinations was it 424 against Swansea? A few 451s playing the loan striker, until we signed Huth and went 5 at the back, but that was 2 months of 541 with nothing going forwards until Pearson found the winning formula. Saying Cambiasso was poor in a 442 means nothing when we didn't play 442 very much and when we did Cambiasso wasn't always in midfield, there are less than 10 games where Cambiasso started in a 442. This is partly because Pearson tried to accommodate him by playing more in midfield, but it was when we finally had a settled team and formation for a run of games that we saw the best of Cambiasso, but not only Esteban but Vardy, James, Morgan, Albrighton, Mahrez, Schlupp, Schmeichel, James, Nugent, Ulloa, Wasilewski, Drinkwater... Saying Cambiasso couldn't play in a 442 is just typical revisionism from those that still refuse to accept he is one of the most influential players to ever play for us.
Guest Posted 25 October 2015 Posted 25 October 2015 I'm glad I didn't create this thread. Glad to see everyone agrees. We are a lucky set of fans. Saying Cambiasso couldn't play in a 442 is just typical revisionism from those that still refuse to accept he is one of the most influential players to ever play for us. But lost his legs.
Fox92 Posted 25 October 2015 Posted 25 October 2015 Can we just let the whole Cambiasso thing go now. He's left. Would I swap Kante for Cambiasso? No. Kante is marvelous and vital in our midfield. People banging on as if we've lost Izzet or Lennon, they were bigger losses.
Charl91 Posted 25 October 2015 Posted 25 October 2015 Why, would you? Possibly, possibly not, however I'm pretty sure you'd probably trade Cambiasso for Wellens or Matt Oakley, such is your low opinion of him.
Guest Col city fan Posted 25 October 2015 Posted 25 October 2015 Possibly, possibly not, however I'm pretty sure you'd probably trade Cambiasso for Wellens or Matt Oakley, such is your low opinion of him. No comment..
katieakita Posted 25 October 2015 Posted 25 October 2015 EC was a class act last season and will go down as a football great in Leicester history. One of the other skills of a great is knowing when to go. EC read the game as good a anyone I can remember and maybe realized he had nothing left to prove here. The PL is played at an unforgiving pace and doubt even with all his class EC would have the same impact as last year as our energy levels and tempo have gone up a couple of notches.
iancognito Posted 25 October 2015 Posted 25 October 2015 Two different types of players, it's like saying would you swap Neil Lennon for Garry Parker Heskey for Claridge. Kante gets the ball back and gives it to a blue shirt, Cambiasso was a holding midfielder but had incredible vision with his passing.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.