Sionnach gorm Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 I watched the game again, and hindsight, being twenty twenty, I can see how he was upset with himself and how many here are too. I believe his choices were not that bad. I could also see why he would take a usually strong player out. It is not uncommon for a weaker player to score in these conditions since he comes often under the radar. Ultimately it was a poor choice. Yet revisiting the game, the biggest surprise I saw was that it took 40 minutes for Arsenal to score the winning goal. The other surprise was how really bad they looked playing ten men. Cheer up all, still two points ahead and we still looked pretty good...you too Claudio. http://www.football365.com/news/ranieri-very-angry-with-himself-and-referee
GaelicFox Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 my Gaelic friend Really this can be in any number of threads and the the title suggests something new from The Emperor
AKCJ Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 I watched the game again, and hindsight, being twenty twenty, I can see how he was upset with himself and how many here are too. I believe his choices were not that bad. I could also see why he would take a usually strong player out. It is not uncommon for a weaker player to score in these conditions since he comes often under the radar. Ultimately it was a poor choice. Yet revisiting the game, the biggest surprise I saw was that it took 40 minutes for Arsenal to score the winning goal. The other surprise was how really bad they looked playing ten men. Cheer up all, still two points ahead and we still looked pretty good...you too Claudio. http://www.football365.com/news/ranieri-very-angry-with-himself-and-referee There wasn't much Ranieri could do. Wasilewski's attempted murder of Monreal and Simpson's second booking cost us the points. Onwards and upwards, not much point worrying about what happened.
Grewks Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 Their two goals came from individual mistakes. Tactically we were sound.
jammie82uk Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 I don't think he was angry with himself as such, yeah he might want to do things slightly different now knowing the result The Anger is definitely with the ref and he's right by saying he was severe with Simpson koscielny on Kante in the build up for the penalty was every definition of a red card in my opinion it was cynical late aggressive dangerous play but because he played advantage only a yellow can be given im not saying every tackle/foul has to be a yellow but based on the game Why wasn't monreal also booked for giving the penalty away What about Coquelin handbags with Mahrez when subbed How did the ref not think drinkwaters tackle on Ramsey was not a foul it was definitely a yellow with a strong possibility of a red Anyway But as been stated it was personal mistakes for the goals Also just to add Even though with the saves kasper did I thought he could have helped out more with his kicking instead of going straight down the middle to Mertesacker or their keeper I though he could play for the touch lines give them throws let our back line push up and give a small rest break
Guest CityFan 06 Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 I don't mind too much about the decisions, I mean his tactics and substitutions have been spot on for the most part of this season. He gets it right a lot of the time.
LCCFox96 Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 Agree with Grewks. An individual error and a rash decision from Wasilewski cost us. We were also matching them all over the pitch until the red card. Other than that I thought the performance was executed fine. A few key defensive errors and bad tackles caused an unfixable rot in the result for us.
leicesterseddon Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 I thought he did the best he could in the circumstances. If we'd only have held out another 20 seconds we'd be calling him a tactical genius. Taking Mahrez off and keeping Albrighton on was a sound decision in the context - Albrighton is much better defensively. At the end of the day, any side would have struggled with 10 men away at Arsenal...it was encouraging how well they did to hold on.
filbertway Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 The other surprise was how really bad they looked playing ten men. I'd probably watch it again if you think they were poor when we went down to 10. They created plenty of chances that various players squandered/Schmeichel saved. We didn't create anything like the amount that Arsenal did against us when we played a 10 man Bournemouth.
Guest MattP Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 It was a bit strange to hindsight to end up with Gray as the luxury player off Vardy rather than Mahrez, King and Wasyl on for Okazaki and Mahrez was probably the way to go if we were giving up on attack and intending to try and see it out. That said Claudio has probably had two bad games this season, this and Villa, which is an incredible success rate.
lgfualol Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 Ranieri did no wrong. We would have come away with a point had it not been for Wasyl deciding it was a good idea to give away a freekick in the 95th minute.
inckley fox Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 I don't think it's worth being upset about. We should be positive that it required a bit of suddenly-stringent refereeing in a game where the refereeing was otherwise not-so-stringent to give Arsenal their win. If we can pull ourselves together and win the next three, which we would have had to anyway if we were serious about the league, or wished to cement a top three place, then we're guaranteed to extend our lead over at least one of our rivals. I always felt that it would be awful to gain three points over Arsenal but stumble against Norwich, so perhaps we'll use that sense of injustice (even though the red card, in isolation, seemed justifiable) to out-battle a Norwich side who will throw all they've got at us. And even if we won the league, we would almost certainly drop points in 3-5 games along the way, and the manner of dropping them on Sunday may lead to us growing in belief, rather than losing it. The performance level, if it can be maintained against weaker opposition, suggested that - at anything approaching full strength - we could take the points in the bulk of our remaining games. If we win seven we will almost certainly make the Champions League groups, and may even be in with a shout at the title. Of course we draw to Norwich, or Brom, and find ourselves panicking. But if that had happened we'd have panicked regardless of the Arsenal result.
Witch Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 Ranieri did no wrong. We would have come away with a point had it not been for Wasyl deciding it was a good idea to give away a freekick in the 95th minute. Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought we are supposed to defend freekicks. The blame is not only on Marcin (and I still cannot figure out what actually he wanted to do in that moment), but also on these players who failed to do their job, defending that freekick.
st albans fox Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought we are supposed to defend freekicks. The blame is not only on Marcin (and I still cannot figure out what actually he wanted to do in that moment), but also on these players who failed to do their job, defending that freekick. it would be useful if we could accept this. it wasn't a pen. it wasn't a direct free kick curled into the top corner. it was a chipped floated cross into our box and every single one of us would have taken that scenario before the game in order to claim a point. against arsenal. not stoke or palace. arsenal. we were guilty of switching off at the most crucial time. marcin was foolish but we should have defended the set piece. Claudio must have gone beserk afterwards.
Thracian Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 Ranieri did no wrong. We would have come away with a point had it not been for Wasyl deciding it was a good idea to give away a freekick in the 95th minute. We invited constant pressure. That goal might have come late but we did nothing to take pressure off ourselves. I'm glad Ranieri's reflected on his decisions. No manager is going to get it right all the time and there's no guarantees we'd have succeeded with any other approach. But I thought and said we could have done more to keep at least some of the pressure off our penalty area and some small threat to their area but it's gone now. The only positive now is to try to learn from what happened (in various ways) and become better as a result. Top or bottom of the table we should always be looking to improve any aspect of our play that we can. And there really are lots of things that can be better. But far better to be fine tuning from the top of the league than anywhere else. It really is a reflection of the standards we're setting and intend to set in future. I'm sure the players will be as self critical as the manager. It's part of what gives me such faith in them. Success is never an opportunity to get complacent but to examine every opportunity to reach new peaks. It's what winners are all about.
lcfcbobby Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 End of the day it was all down the sending off that changed the game. Ranieri's substitutions were questionable for me should have took Okasaki off for Wasileski rather then Mahrez when Simpson got sent off. but end of the day its what Ranieri thought was the best thing to do at the time
Deucalion Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 Ranieri brought Sunday's loss upon the side. In his interview pre-game, he stated that while with most teams, you can be playing against 7, 8, or 9 players, against Leicester you always face 11 players. Clearly tempted fate !!
possiblygeorge Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 Ranieri brought Sunday's loss upon the side. In his interview pre-game, he stated that while with most teams, you can be playing against 7, 8, or 9 players, against Leicester you always face 11 players. Clearly tempted fate !! Saw the interview when watching the replay, instant facepalm haha
ramboacdc Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 no one going to mention that when this is the last replied topic it reads "ranieri upset about his poo" on the front page?
jammie82uk Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 no one going to mention that when this is the last replied topic it reads "ranieri upset about his poo" on the front page? They did this morning http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/topic/104739-ranieri-upset-about-his-poor-decisions/?p=3761776
ThaiFox Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 For me, his big mistake was taking Mahrez off after the Simpson sending off. Firstly, why did he not put Albrighton at right back and see how we went before bringing Wasyl on? Secondly, why then bring Gray on later? I thought this crazy at the time, to put on an inexperienced, lightweight, luxury player in a critical and very important match, when we were fighting hard to stay in it. Why not Ulloa? who is stronger, heads the ball well which surely would have been a help to our defense, plus another target should we actually have achieved a corner or free kick. King was also another strange substitution. I cannot understand why Ranieri put him on. I know Albrighton was knackered, but so were many of the team and he had been awesome all match. Wasyl actually played his heart out and although he had a stupid crazy moment, as has been correctly pointed out on this thread, we should have defended that floated free kick a lot better. On the positive side, Arse'nal were clearly frightened of us, hence their constant school girl playground moaning and in yer face tactics which clearly influenced a poor and weak referee. They constantly moaned at the ref over every challenge and at every opportunity, and I can't remember one instance where he told them to back off. Whereas when Drinkwater had a go at him he was immediately called over and warned about his comments. All this should fire up the side big time and they should be ready and focused for the run in. Ranieri now has to earn his money, otherwise the questions will be asked if he had the bottle and tactical skill to take us to the title.
inckley fox Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 For me, his big mistake was taking Mahrez off after the Simpson sending off. Firstly, why did he not put Albrighton at right back and see how we went before bringing Wasyl on? Secondly, why then bring Gray on later? I thought this crazy at the time, to put on an inexperienced, lightweight, luxury player in a critical and very important match, when we were fighting hard to stay in it. Why not Ulloa? who is stronger, heads the ball well which surely would have been a help to our defense, plus another target should we actually have achieved a corner or free kick. King was also another strange substitution. I cannot understand why Ranieri put him on. I know Albrighton was knackered, but so were many of the team and he had been awesome all match. Wasyl actually played his heart out and although he had a stupid crazy moment, as has been correctly pointed out on this thread, we should have defended that floated free kick a lot better. On the positive side, Arse'nal were clearly frightened of us, hence their constant school girl playground moaning and in yer face tactics which clearly influenced a poor and weak referee. They constantly moaned at the ref over every challenge and at every opportunity, and I can't remember one instance where he told them to back off. Whereas when Drinkwater had a go at him he was immediately called over and warned about his comments. All this should fire up the side big time and they should be ready and focused for the run in. Ranieri now has to earn his money, otherwise the questions will be asked if he had the bottle and tactical skill to take us to the title. You make some good points. I've often thought that King is an exceptionally poor defensive midfielder at this level, especially as a sub when he doesn't seem to put his greater energy reserves to good use by closing down opponents and trying to avoid the side getting driven too deep. I also agree that the Gray-Mahrez (eventual) switch was an odd one, but Gray showed plenty of promising defensive attributes which are sometimes absent from Riyad's game. He denied them at least one clear goalscoring chance. As for Wasilewski, well, had we not loaned out De Laet we could have made an easy like-for-like change, bringing in a guy more accustomed to that role and not requiring midfielders to cover for his lack of pace, which played a big part in us being driven deep. Neither would I rule out Albrighton as a good makeshift right back. But all of this is, as I say, with the benefit of hindsight. Mahrez, De Laet - it's not hard to imagine their questionable defensive attributes having a negative effect - so if we're looking for a reason for our loss, I'd be more inclined to point towards Arsenal being a good side who were clearly up for a big game, suddenly finding themselves with a major advantage, and with 40+ minutes of time remaining. Whatever changes Ranieri made, it was going to be hard to hold out for a result. So I'm still blaming the ref, basically! As childish as that might be, and as much as it flies in the face of almost every sports reporter in the country's opinion.
taffyfox Posted 17 February 2016 Posted 17 February 2016 Going 4-4-1 is often the go to formation when down to 10 but often plays into the 11 man team advantage. Arsenal were always likely to break us down with just vards and no other attacking threat. Me being the tactical genius that I am...... I would have gone to a 3-5-1 or even a 3-4-1-1 so that we still had a chance on the break and getting a little more support up top. No to plan my starting XI for the dog and duck, training went well tonight, few selection headaches.......
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.