Match Ratings : Leicester City 2-0 Stoke City - Vote Now

[AKCJ]

Schmeichel - 7

Simpson - 8

Huth - 8

Benny - 7

Fuchs - 7

Mahrez - 7

Drinkwater - 6

Ndidi - 9

Gray - 8

Okazaki - 9 (MOTM)

Vardy - 8

 

Amartey - 6

Slimani - 5

Chilwell - N/A

 

Stoke - 3. Grant had an excellent game but how can players like Whelan and Walters consistently get top half finishes? It properly baffles me. We should be miles above them.

 

Ref - 5 - Geneally had a good game but bottled the Shawcross tackle. Was good to see that our players let him make the decision though, no crowding.

 

 

[biggs]

On 2017-04-02 at 07:15, WigstonWanderer said:

Each of the subs seemed logical enough at the time, but the overall effect seemed to be to put us on the back foot. He needs to sort out the "last half hour syndrome" that has affected us in most of the matches recently. Doing a fantastic job though.

Agree....said to my son....I was enjoying that and now we're sitting back giving them a go. Crouch had a couple close ones. Midfield was doing the job all game....Amartey IMO changed the dynamic which had us more on our back foot than required. Yes we got the clean sheet but we lost our edge.

[Melbourne Fuchs]

16 minutes ago, biggs said:

Agree....said to my son....I was enjoying that and now we're sitting back giving them a go. Crouch had a couple close ones. Midfield was doing the job all game....Amartey IMO changed the dynamic which had us more on our back foot than required. Yes we got the clean sheet but we lost our edge.

 

I actually don't mind the changed dynamic for the last few minutes, we've been doing it for the entirety of this season (and for long before this season) and I think it is part of the reason why we are yet to drop points from a winning position. Yes, it can be nervous and a bit frustrating when we're playing well and suddenly drop deep, but it gets the job done.

[iancognito]

On 02/04/2017 at 13:08, foxinsox said:

Shakey 7 subs didnt help. 

 

Agree with that. We lost the initiative against Liverpool, Hull and Stoke with the subs made. Shakey's doing a great job but as soon as the subs come on we stop pressing from the front. Amartey for Shinji was bizarre because it isolated Vardy and let Stoke put an extra man in attack. We could have been on for 3 or 4 but sat back. Maybe it's to conserve energy but it's the only thing he's done so far I don't agree with or understand.

[WigstonWanderer]

3 hours ago, Melbourne Fuchs said:

 

I actually don't mind the changed dynamic for the last few minutes, we've been doing it for the entirety of this season (and for long before this season) and I think it is part of the reason why we are yet to drop points from a winning position. Yes, it can be nervous and a bit frustrating when we're playing well and suddenly drop deep, but it gets the job done.

Problem is it nearly didn't get the job done. If Crouch had been more on his game it could easily have ended in a draw or even a loss without Kasper's heroics at the end. We are so much better on the front foot. For me that's the difference between Claudio's way and Craig's. Having said that I understand that it's hard to keep up for an entire match.

 

 

[brucey]

1 hour ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Problem is it nearly didn't get the job done. If Crouch had been more on his game it could easily have ended in a draw or even a loss without Kasper's heroics at the end. We are so much better on the front foot. For me that's the difference between Claudio's way and Craig's. Having said that I understand that it's hard to keep up for an entire match.

 

 

But Stoke's goal (which should have stood) happened prior to us making any subs....

In fact Shakey reacted immediately to 'conceding' by bringing on Amartey as our first sub.

After the subs, we had just as many good chances as them. If Riyad had been more on his game (aiming better/passing to Vardy) or without their keeper's heroics at the end (fingertip save from Gray) it could easily have ended 4-0.

I thought the subs were dodgy in the West Ham game, but didn't think they were too bad here. Ref had a mare though.

[Thracian]

The arguments put forward on the subject are all well-considered and a part of what set's Foxestalk apart as a football forum.

 

And for all that we came through the game with the three points we deserved the issue still raises a question that needs to be solved which is how to maintain our effect when Shinji starts to wilt and the team starts thinking in terms of playing out time.

 

As Wigston says we're much more comfortable being positive and it's absolutely true that we could and should have been three or four in front by the time Couchy came on.

 

But our performance in the last 15 minutes or so still showed an Achilles heel both in terms of our defensive failings (to combat the crosses and/or restrict Crouch's movement) but also to provide a positive, worthwhile outlet when the ball was won.

 

If there's no attacking movement or intent, the ball just gets won back in midfield and quickly returned towards our penalty box with all the atttendant risks such as the goal that cost us in the last minute 1-0 defeat at Burnley.

 

 Slimani is a good attacker but he doesn't do Shinji's job and that's what's needed when we're winning . Another player with the energy to get on the ball and help us keep providing a threat, and some lasting relief. Slimani's really a finisher and front third player. Shinji's active all over the place.              

 

 

[the fox]

11 minutes ago, Thracian said:

The arguments put forward on the subject are all well-considered and a part of what set's Foxestalk apart as a football forum.

 

And for all that we came through the game with the three points we deserved the issue still raises a question that needs to be solved which is how to maintain our effect when Shinji starts to wilt and the team starts thinking in terms of playing out time.

 

As Wigston says we're much more comfortable being positive and it's absolutely true that we could and should have been three or four in front by the time Couchy came on.

 

But our performance in the last 15 minutes or so still showed an Achilles heel both in terms of our defensive failings (to combat the crosses and/or restrict Crouch's movement) but also to provide a positive, worthwhile outlet when the ball was won.

 

If there's no attacking movement or intent, the ball just gets won back in midfield and quickly returned towards our penalty box with all the atttendant risks such as the goal that cost us in the last minute 1-0 defeat at Burnley.

 

 Slimani is a good attacker but he doesn't do Shinji's job and that's what's needed when we're winning . Another player with the energy to get on the ball and help us keep providing a threat, and some lasting relief. Slimani's really a finisher and front third player. Shinji's active all over the place.              

 

 

Its just a theory but, I think the problem lies in drinky, he is so passive on offence that its frustrating to watch, he doesn't push upfield when we have the ball and he is standing on the same line as n'didi, we are so flat its actually mind boggling, and that's why we look good when oka is playing, he fills the gap that drinky is leaving, I know it doesn't sound as the greatest idea but I would like to see king or Mendy with a proper DM like n'didi.

[deccers]

Just now, Thracian said:

The arguments put forward on the subject are all well-considered and a part of what set's Foxestalk apart as a football forum.

 

And for all that we came through the game with the three points we deserved the issue still raises a question that needs to be solved which is how to maintain our effect when Shinji starts to wilt and the team starts thinking in terms of playing out time.

 

As Wigston says we're much more comfortable being positive and it's absolutely true that we could and should have been three or four in front by the time Couchy came on.

 

But our performance in the last 15 minutes or so still showed an Achilles heel both in terms of our defensive failings (to combat the crosses and/or restrict Crouch's movement) but also to provide a positive, worthwhile outlet when the ball was won.

 

If there's no attacking movement or intent, the ball just gets won back in midfield and quickly returned towards our penalty box with all the atttendant risks such as the goal that cost us in the last minute 1-0 defeat at Burnley.

 

 Slimani is a good attacker but he doesn't do Shinji's job and that's what's needed when we're winning . Another player with the energy to get on the ball and help us keep providing a threat, and some lasting relief. Slimani's really a finisher and front third player. Shinji's active all over the place.              

 

 

As we've seen in the first 2/3rds of the season, our game overall suffers when we lose work-rate in the middle third of the pitch, whether that be through the lack of Kante early on, and then no Okazaki. I think there's roles for both Amartey and Albrighton in our late game tactics, potentially with Ndidi sitting as the deeper man in a midfield 3 of Amartey, Drinky and him. I can see the forward two screening effectively to their left and right and Ndidi protecting the CBs. Albrighton can easily apply himself on either wing to defensive duties as well as giving Slimani something to work with if he came on too.

 

I reckon though that some of these issues will (hopefully..) be resolved in the summer's recruitment if we square centre back away. I think you can almost tell sometimes in late game that Huth/Morgan are running on empty, and if they require an extra 10% of effort each from other players, this will have it's own knock on effect. 

[deccers]

3 minutes ago, the fox said:

Its just a theory but, I think the problem lies in drinky, he is so passive on offence that its frustrating to watch, he doesn't push upfield when we have the ball and he is standing on the same line as n'didi, we are so flat its actually mind boggling, and that's why we look good when oka is playing, he fills the gap that drinky is leaving, I know it doesn't sound as the greatest idea but I would like to see king or Mendy with a proper DM like n'didi.

Agree with this too. If we sign Adrien Silva I think this issue will resolve itself. We do lack a 'quarterback' to carry the ball forward, and Shinji hasn't got the centre of gravity to even attempt this role.

[the fox]

7 minutes ago, deccers said:

Agree with this too. If we sign Adrien Silva I think this issue will resolve itself. We do lack a 'quarterback' to carry the ball forward, and Shinji hasn't got the centre of gravity to even attempt this role.

I think that there are cheaper options than Silva on the market, and don't you mean a "running back" rather than "quarterback"?, but I still believe in drinky, if hendo can push himself to the next level, so can drinky, but I would like a box to box CM in the summer.

[Thracian]

1 minute ago, the fox said:

Its just a theory but, I think the problem lies in drinky, he is so passive on offence that its frustrating to watch, he doesn't push upfield when we have the ball and he is standing on the same line as n'didi, we are so flat its actually mind boggling, and that's why we look good when oka is playing, he fills the gap that drinky is leaving, I know it doesn't sound as the greatest idea but I would like to see king or Mendy with a proper DM like n'didi.

Yes, hence my comment about Shinji giving us 2.5 midfield players and l.5 strikers although i didn't equate it to Drinkwater's reluctance to support us going forward when we're winning and looking to close the match down.

 

Nothing i've seen suggests Mendy's the answer and King seems to be slipping back into oblivion after our Millwall non-performance which may be a pity but more likely an opportunity to get a genuinely exciting alternative.

 

I've never been quite as sold on Drinkwater on here as many others because I don't think he's a significant threat either as a potential goalscorer or creator.

 

But he does have qualities as a competitor and motivator. What frustrates me most is that he could score and create more. But as a marksman he's not ruthless and as a passer perhaps not quite quick enough, deft enough or selective enough in his decision making.

 

Don't get me wrong, He's a 6.5 to 7/10 player for us whenever we play well but he's still short of what we need and what he perhaps could be if he demanded it off himself week in, week out.

 

There's no way the fans would see Drinky replaced by Kingy or Mendy generally, although I too would have used King at the end against Stoke, and against West Ham when, again, we were steamrollered at the end.

 

 Again though, I wonder if Shaky's looking to the future by going with the likes of Amartey and Chilwell and to the past with his continued faith in Drinky who, when all is said and done, has played a big part in so much of success in recent years and is seen as more combative than King.            

[the fox]

21 minutes ago, Thracian said:

Yes, hence my comment about Shinji giving us 2.5 midfield players and l.5 strikers although i didn't equate it to Drinkwater's reluctance to support us going forward when we're winning and looking to close the match down.

 

Nothing i've seen suggests Mendy's the answer and King seems to be slipping back into oblivion after our Millwall non-performance which may be a pity but more likely an opportunity to get a genuinely exciting alternative.

 

I've never been quite as sold on Drinkwater on here as many others because I don't think he's a significant threat either as a potential goalscorer or creator.

 

But he does have qualities as a competitor and motivator. What frustrates me most is that he could score and create more. But as a marksman he's not ruthless and as a passer perhaps not quite quick enough, deft enough or selective enough in his decision making.

 

Don't get me wrong, He's a 6.5 to 7/10 player for us whenever we play well but he's still short of what we need and what he perhaps could be if he demanded it off himself week in, week out.

 

There's no way the fans would see Drinky replaced by Kingy or Mendy generally, although I too would have used King at the end against Stoke, and against West Ham when, again, we were steamrollered at the end.

 

 Again though, I wonder if Shaky's looking to the future by going with the likes of Amartey and Chilwell and to the past with his continued faith in Drinky who, when all is said and done, has played a big part in so much of success in recent years and is seen as more combative than King.            

For me, in order to be a game changing CM you have to be one of two, even a anchor/destroyer or a box to box, and drinky is stuck in between. He should look to hendo as a role model, he managed to up his game and actuly dictates matches, drinky has the ability and that's what makes it so frustrating to watch, he can be a vidal-lite if he really puts his mind to it.

[Thracian]

48 minutes ago, deccers said:

As we've seen in the first 2/3rds of the season, our game overall suffers when we lose work-rate in the middle third of the pitch, whether that be through the lack of Kante early on, and then no Okazaki. I think there's roles for both Amartey and Albrighton in our late game tactics, potentially with Ndidi sitting as the deeper man in a midfield 3 of Amartey, Drinky and him. I can see the forward two screening effectively to their left and right and Ndidi protecting the CBs. Albrighton can easily apply himself on either wing to defensive duties as well as giving Slimani something to work with if he came on too.

 

I reckon though that some of these issues will (hopefully..) be resolved in the summer's recruitment if we square centre back away. I think you can almost tell sometimes in late game that Huth/Morgan are running on empty, and if they require an extra 10% of effort each from other players, this will have it's own knock on effect. 

 

I don't see Ndidi (deep), Drinky, Amartey as being the late-game solution. There's no-one  to give and go, no-one to relieve the pressure more than temporarily, no-one running off each other.

 

Morgan/Huth aren't so much shattered as suddenly facing passages of almost constant pressure because the fetchers in midfield have no carriers or passers available to maintain momentum.

 

The opposition realise that, push up, close down our purely spoiling midfielders and have no need to cover anything happening behind them because it's all stopped. There needs to be a busy link player and, yes, we will presumably try to get one in the close season..    

 

But for now there doesn't seem to be an obvious answer, with King presumably out of the picture so we remain combative and offer something to the players coming through.

 

        

[Melbourne Fuchs]

Hasn't Drinky been carrying a knock for some time? He was our best player for the first few weeks of this season.

[WigstonWanderer]

Someone suggested using Albrighton as an alternative to Shinji. Perhaps starting Gray and Mahrez, and replacing Shinji with Albrighton at the usual 60 mins might work. He's the only other tireless worker we have IMO. Obviously this is only an option for some matches depending on the opposition, and whether home or away.

[UPinCarolina]

5 hours ago, the fox said:

I think that there are cheaper options than Silva on the market, and don't you mean a "running back" rather than "quarterback"?, but I still believe in drinky, if hendo can push himself to the next level, so can drinky, but I would like a box to box CM in the summer.

I do believe that 'quarterback' is the better term here, given that the QB is the player in American Football who communicates the plays, makes the pre-play adjustments to the offensive formation based on how the defense is lined up, etc. 

In other words, we need an experienced shot caller on the field to help organize our attack and push us forward from the midfield.