willy37 Posted 17 September 2005 Posted 17 September 2005 cl was interviewed before the game commenting about teams visiting the walkers and defending all game, and said he was using this tactic today. is anyone else annoyed about paying £27 + travel for the manager to come out and say that we wernt going to try and win the game!
Mark Posted 17 September 2005 Posted 17 September 2005 Except teams usually go on to score when they play against us at home, with two up front. De Vries is useless as a striker, nevermind a lone one. It was dire today. His negative attitude towards games stinks. Wolves were just as bad but i suppose our tactics worked in that aspect, horrible horrible to watch, worse than a home game
Hitesh Posted 17 September 2005 Posted 17 September 2005 Except teams usually go on to score when they play against us at home, with two up front. De Vries is useless as a striker, nevermind a lone one.It was dire today. His negative attitude towards games stinks. Wolves were just as bad but i suppose our tactics worked in that aspect, horrible horrible to watch, worse than a home game woah, cant have been good to watch then.
cisono Posted 17 September 2005 Posted 17 September 2005 woah, cant have been good to watch then. I'd say not... at least last week the first 20 minutes were good
Frenzied Posted 17 September 2005 Posted 17 September 2005 Before we start criticising Levein for playing defensively maybe we should try and remember that was a tactic employed by O'Neill on numerous occasions. Defensive displays can have their own intrinsic beauty. I remember us getting absolutely slated by the whole footballing fraternity when we went to Arsenal for a 0-0 in the FA cup then brought back to Filbert Street and won on penalties. No Leicester fans were complaining then about our negative attitude.
FNQ Posted 17 September 2005 Posted 17 September 2005 Dire game. 0-0 draw. I suppose we shold be pleased. This is as good as it will get away from home with Levein.
Thracian Posted 17 September 2005 Posted 17 September 2005 Before we start criticising Levein for playing defensively maybe we should try and remember that was a tactic employed by O'Neill on numerous occasions. Defensive displays can have their own intrinsic beauty. I remember us getting absolutely slated by the whole footballing fraternity when we went to Arsenal for a 0-0 in the FA cup then brought back to Filbert Street and won on penalties. No Leicester fans were complaining then about our negative attitude. I've given it a few minutes but you're gonna have to tell me... What's the connection, football wise, between Arsenal and a much-weakened Wolverhampton Wanderers?
Libertine Posted 17 September 2005 Posted 17 September 2005 Dire game. 0-0 draw. I suppose we shold be pleased. This is as good as it will get away from home with Levein. :w00t:
cisono Posted 17 September 2005 Posted 17 September 2005 I am very pleased about the point. I am even more pleased that I didn't pay 27 pounds (plus travel costs) to watch the game
Frenzied Posted 17 September 2005 Posted 17 September 2005 I've given it a few minutes but you're gonna have to tell me... What's the connection, football wise, between Arsenal and a much-weakened Wolverhampton Wanderers? A much-weakened Leicester City Plus it wasn't only the Arsenal game that we played negatively - that was just the most high-profile example. I think Wenger described our tactics as being something other than football. We were often negative at home too; nicking one nils was practically our bread and butter.
Rugby Fox Posted 17 September 2005 Posted 17 September 2005 Maybe defending would have been okay if Wolves were playing well, but they were as bad if not worst than us, which is why most that went were disapointed with the point.
Thracian Posted 17 September 2005 Posted 17 September 2005 A much-weakened Leicester City Plus it wasn't only the Arsenal game that we played negatively - that was just the most high-profile example. I think Wenger described our tactics as being something other than football. We were often negative at home too; nicking one nils was practically our bread and butter. Good answer But, from my recollection we were genuinely up against it under MON and the 1-0's we fought out were full of incident and character. City aren't up against it today. They're every bit as good as everyone else in this League. We just don't believe it and we just don't set out to show it. The team also seems to lack the characters of MON's time, the Walsh's, the Marshall's, the Cottee's etc. With MON it wasn't negativity it was survival. With Levein it is his inbred and immovable instinct to be cagey and to defend.
cisono Posted 17 September 2005 Posted 17 September 2005 Maybe defending would have been okay if Wolves were playing well, but they were as bad if not worst than us, which is why most that went were disapointed with the point. Levein was obviously expecting a much stronger side. He might have had a nightmare last night in which a goal was scored against us (sounds familiar). He likely exaggerated on the side of caution today, but that's easily said afterwards. In his position, I think I too might have "played conservatively" (at least a little bit) after Tuesday's game... (hmm but then I am not a football manager - thank God, probably )
Louise Posted 17 September 2005 Posted 17 September 2005 Good answer But, from my recollection we were genuinely up against it under MON and the 1-0's we fought out were full of incident and character. City aren't up against it today. They're every bit as good as everyone else in this League. We just don't believe it and we just don't set out to show it. The team also seems to lack the characters of MON's time, the Walsh's, the Marshall's, the Cottee's etc. With MON it wasn't negativity it was survival. With Levein it is his inbred and immovable instinct to be cagey and to defend. I would argue to that that character can be built up with confidence, we've been inconsistent all season and last season, we've just come off the back of a defeat and we have a young side for which these things are harder to overcome. I don't particularly like the 4-5-1 approach, but if (and that's the key thing as we've had many opportunities before and never taken them) we can build on this clean sheet away from home with a couple of good results at home then the players will be flying high and then the 'character' will come out.
Libertine Posted 17 September 2005 Posted 17 September 2005 Good answer But, from my recollection we were genuinely up against it under MON and the 1-0's we fought out were full of incident and character. City aren't up against it today. They're every bit as good as everyone else in this League. We just don't believe it and we just don't set out to show it. The team also seems to lack the characters of MON's time, the Walsh's, the Marshall's, the Cottee's etc. With MON it wasn't negativity it was survival. With Levein it is his inbred and immovable instinct to be cagey and to defend. Too right!
Scow Posted 17 September 2005 Posted 17 September 2005 Wolves were there for the taking. - They're not playing well and looking shaky. - They lost against the bottom side in midweek. - They were missing a number of key players. So with that in mind, we adopt an ultra-cautious 4-5-1 formation, consisting of 2 holding midfielders, setting our stall out for the point. It was an ugly game, with very few chances, which served up some of the most dire football I've seen in a long while. Hearts fans did warn us about Levein's negativity, and it seems this is coming out now. The reason we've been conceding goals was because of our vunerability from defending set pieces, not from open play, so why bother with 4-5-1? It doesn't mean we defend set pieces any differently. It just means we're less likely to score, so Levein got it wrong again. I've read posts commending today's point, I don't think it's anything to praise. You have to be there to understand how frustrating that game was to watch.
Jonbluefox9 Posted 17 September 2005 Posted 17 September 2005 cl was interviewed before the game commenting about teams visiting the walkers and defending all game, and said he was using this tactic today. is anyone else annoyed about paying £27 + travel for the manager to come out and say that we wernt going to try and win the game! Is that exactly what Levein said? No. He said something along the lines of "I'm sick and tired of teams coming to the Walkers Stadium and frustrating us for 90 minutes so today we're going to try and frustrate Wolves for the first 20-30 minutes and then play the rest of the game by ear." That's not exact but what he said was more like that than "we're not going to try and win this game". I can't see what's wrong with a manager saying something like "we're going to try and keep it tight for the first 30 minutes and then see what options to use". Personally I think it was refreshing to hear a manager be honest and tell the Leicester fans listening at home how he was approaching the game. As Louise was sort of saying, a draw away from home isn't too bad aslong as we build on it and get a bit of consistency in our results. If we lose at home to QPR then this draw is not so good.
Anish Posted 18 September 2005 Posted 18 September 2005 Wolves were there for the taking. - They're not playing well and looking shaky. - They lost against the bottom side in midweek. - They were missing a number of key players. So with that in mind, we adopt an ultra-cautious 4-5-1 formation, consisting of 2 holding midfielders, setting our stall out for the point. It was an ugly game, with very few chances, which served up some of the most dire football I've seen in a long while. Hearts fans did warn us about Levein's negativity, and it seems this is coming out now. The reason we've been conceding goals was because of our vunerability from defending set pieces, not from open play, so why bother with 4-5-1? It doesn't mean we defend set pieces any differently. It just means we're less likely to score, so Levein got it wrong again. I've read posts commending today's point, I don't think it's anything to praise. You have to be there to understand how frustrating that game was to watch. Great post again Scowy. We have to reconcile the fact that a draw is a good point, but also look at the bigger picture about how we approached the game and how we set our stall out to get a result. That latter part is what worries me. Sure normally a point against Wolves away is a good point, but when they are playing just as bad as us and have just lost to the worst team in the league then you have to try and cause them problems. We aren't going to win any away games playing 4-5-1 with 2 holding midfielders and De Vries as the lone striker. Levein's mentality at the moment is a major cause of frustration. It is far too defensive minded and it really makes the game a dire spectacle for the paying customer.
Babylon Posted 18 September 2005 Posted 18 September 2005 A much-weakened Leicester City Plus it wasn't only the Arsenal game that we played negatively - that was just the most high-profile example. I think Wenger described our tactics as being something other than football. We were often negative at home too; nicking one nils was practically our bread and butter. We man marked Juninho against a struggling boro side several times I seem to remember. I know what your saying, if your winning matches people forgive lots of things though. Perfect example under Adams in the promotion season the long ball never really got critisised. When we came back down and we weren't winning suddenly it was the greastest sin ever committed.
Solihullfox Posted 18 September 2005 Posted 18 September 2005 Unreal ! On the back of the rebuilding of our team, which is not an overnight fix, and with some indifferent results over the past few weeks, we go to Wolves who are a team that can seriously hurt you if you allow them the time and space to play expansive football. The formation didn't enable Wolves to play the football they wanted to and we looked pretty safe with the odd chance of sneaking a goal. Wolves looked toothless because of our system not because they are crap. To all you deluded types out there, Leicester are not Brazil, Arsenal or even the team we WERE under MON and confidence comes from both winning and not losing - that is why CL set out to avoid getting beaten and possibly getting well beaten. Most of the bleaters are the one's who were posting along the theme of us getting nothing out of this game, well because of how we played we managed to get a point. PS. I was there and saw how hard the team worked to close down space as they were instructed by CL and I for one believe we approached the game in exactly the right manner.
Babylon Posted 18 September 2005 Posted 18 September 2005 Unreal ! On the back of the rebuilding of our team, which is not an overnight fix, and with some indifferent results over the past few weeks, we go to Wolves who are a team that can seriously hurt you if you allow them the time and space to play expansive football. The formation didn't enable Wolves to play the football they wanted to and we looked pretty safe with the odd chance of sneaking a goal. Wolves looked toothless because of our system not because they are crap. To all you deluded types out there, Leicester are not Brazil, Arsenal or even the team we WERE under MON and confidence comes from both winning and not losing - that is why CL set out to avoid getting beaten and possibly getting well beaten. Most of the bleaters are the one's who were posting along the theme of us getting nothing out of this game, well because of how we played we managed to get a point. PS. I was there and saw how hard the team worked to close down space as they were instructed by CL and I for one believe we approached the game in exactly the right manner. WE have played well before and got nothing out of games, people then moan that we should of got more. This time we didn't play great football but got a point.. and we are still moaning. I feel for Levein... he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. What chance has the poor guy got.
The People's Hero Posted 18 September 2005 Posted 18 September 2005 I feel for Levein... he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. What chance has the poor guy got. He's got the chance to wake himself a hero here, a legend. He just has to take that chance, his destiny is in his hands. No one is forcing him to take a shedload of money and be our manager. He took the job, he knew what was required. He knew the drill. Time HIS team (because it is now) started producing the goods and playing some interesting stuff while they're at it. Bo ll ocks to accepting mediocrity and under performance... I'm a passionnate, and yes fickle supporter and I make no apologies for that. I'll give Levein time but let's just please stop pretending that our performances at the moment are ok!
Babylon Posted 18 September 2005 Posted 18 September 2005 Yes his team that's been together for 9 games... **** idiots they should be top by now. I don't know what their problem is. Why don't the just play like brazil, not conceed a goal, score 5 a game we'd be top by now. Levein Out he's shit. Bring back Micky Adams, I want to see his long balls again. Oh and him buying players like blake and gemmil. Now that's how to manage a team.
Babylon Posted 18 September 2005 Posted 18 September 2005 I mean jesus, why didn't we go to the home of the team that was the favourite for promotion this season and beat them 3-0. Getting a poxy point against them is pathetic. Levein Out.
Gené and Tonic Posted 18 September 2005 Posted 18 September 2005 I agree with Babylon here, give him time and hopefully he will deliver
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.