2nd Leg Centre Back replacement

[Realist Guy In The Room]

Any **** can play CB at the AFCON. It means nothing.

[yorkie1999]

7 minutes ago, Realist Guy In The Room said:

Any **** can play CB at the AFCON. It means nothing.

Jamie vardy can't 

[Clever Fox]

I'd go with 3 at the back and bring Amartey into the team to shadow Greizman. They if under pressure fall back to help Benny.

I think they will set up to defend what they have believing they can stop us scoring. This means we can play 4 in midfield and grab control there. If we can do that then we don't need 4 at the back.

We're not going to get Vardy in behind them as they demonstrated last night so we need to play with Width. To do this we need to play with 2 wingers Gray and Mahrez. Using their skill to commit defenders and create space for others, As well getting a few shots away. Then if that doesn't work bring on Ulloa as he has more guile than Slim or bring both on and just drop loads of Balls in on top of them.

It's going to need everyone to raise their game to the level against Liverpool including us Fans to get the result.

[weller54]

54 minutes ago, Realist Guy In The Room said:

Any **** can play CB at the AFCON. It means nothing.

Nigeria proved this! 

[Thracian]

I'd be wondering how good Ulloa might be at centre-back. Surely the club would have have chance to play him there in training just to assess the possibility.

 

It was the opposite way around, but I can remember Steve Walsh showing himself well able to adapt to being a centre-forward in MON's day.

 

Ulloa is one of our tallest players if not the tallest and there's no questioning his strength and combativeness. It's would be a risk, no question, but one I'd expect the club to have studied and there'd be more attacking benefit at set-pieces to come from Ulloa's presence than ever there would Amartey's.

 

My concern would be his fitness over 90 minutes and his manouverability but then neither Morgan nor Huth are exactly the most mobile of centre-backs.

 

It's just a thought. Only the coaching staff would be able to assess the viability of the idea. But we will need height and strength, no question.  

 

   

   

[STUHILL]

16 minutes ago, Clever Fox said:

I'd go with 3 at the back and bring Amartey into the team to shadow Greizman. They if under pressure fall back to help Benny.

I think they will set up to defend what they have believing they can stop us scoring. This means we can play 4 in midfield and grab control there. If we can do that then we don't need 4 at the back.

We're not going to get Vardy in behind them as they demonstrated last night so we need to play with Width. To do this we need to play with 2 wingers Gray and Mahrez. Using their skill to commit defenders and create space for others, As well getting a few shots away. Then if that doesn't work bring on Ulloa as he has more guile than Slim or bring both on and just drop loads of Balls in on top of them.

It's going to need everyone to raise their game to the level against Liverpool including us Fans to get the result.

I think changing the system for such a huge game would be too big a risk, especially seeing how poorly the player's reacted last time to a change, albeit during Claudio's time.

 

I think sticking with the 4-4-1-1 and try to have as little change as possible to the normal tried and tested set-up, and so if Wes is fit he comes in for Huth at CB or Amartey slots in there if not. 

 

I'm all for experimenting with formations and trying to tweak things but I think a big change to a back 3 for such a huge game, would be too much for our players and think we should stick to what we know. 

[STUHILL]

4 minutes ago, Thracian said:

I'd be wondering how good Ulloa might be at centre-back. Surely the club would have have chance to play him there in training just to assess the possibility.

 

It was the opposite way around, but I can remember Steve Walsh showing himself well able to adapt to being a centre-forward in MON's day.

 

Ulloa is one of our tallest players if not the tallest and there's no questioning his strength and combativeness. It's would be a risk, no question, but one I'd expect the club to have studied and there'd be more attacking benefit at set-pieces to come from Ulloa's presence than ever there would Amartey's.

 

My concern would be his fitness over 90 minutes and his manouverability but then neither Morgan nor Huth are exactly the most mobile of centre-backs.

 

It's just a thought. Only the coaching staff would be able to assess the viability of the idea. But we will need height and strength, no question.  

 

   

   

Playing Ulloa at CB who has never played there in his career for the Champions League quarter finals? Madness, especially when we have a guy who played there Internationally and got in the team of the tournament. Amartey > Ulloa at CB... can't believe I just wrote that  

 

I actually think Wes will make it back anyway 

[Thracian]

4 minutes ago, STUHILL said:

Playing Ulloa at CB who has never played there in his career for the Champions League quarter finals? Madness, especially when we have a guy who played there Internationally and got in the team of the tournament. Amartey > Ulloa at CB... can't believe I just wrote that  

 

I actually think Wes will make it back anyway 

 

4 minutes ago, STUHILL said:

Playing Ulloa at CB who has never played there in his career for the Champions League quarter finals? Madness, especially when we have a guy who played there Internationally and got in the team of the tournament. Amartey > Ulloa at CB... can't believe I just wrote that  

 

I actually think Wes will make it back anyway 

Quite how you could assess it as being "madness" while, presumably,  never seeing whether Ulloa might or might not be quite an accomplished centre-back, amazes me.

 

Managers have had to make all sorts of emergency decisions over the years and there's been many an occasion when someone has surprised supporters at how brilliantly they've been able to play in an unfamiliar position.

 

Indeed a fairly widespread policy within clubs nowadays is to use training sessions to get all players familiar with different positional roles.

 

Adaptability makes players more valuable to a team as well as giving them a greater understanding of the game generally. Schlupp's adapted well enough to being a full-back instead of a winger.

 

I'll be absolutely amazed if Ulloa's not been used as a centre-back in training sessions going back years.

 

He's a mature footballer - and I cannot imagine why he'd be particularly fazed being asked to play the role in a Champions League match any more than any other fixture or than Amartey being pitched into a centre-back role.

 

      

[STUHILL]

1 minute ago, Thracian said:

 

Quite how you could assess it as being "madness" while, presumably,  never seeing whether Ulloa might or might not be quite an accomplished centre-back, amazes me.

 

Managers have had to make all sorts of emergency decisions over the years and there's been many an occasion when someone has surprised supporters at how brilliantly they've been able to play in an unfamiliar position.

 

Indeed a fairly widespread policy within clubs nowadays is to use training sessions to get all players familiar with different positional roles.

 

Adaptability makes players more valuable to a team as well as giving them a greater understanding of the game generally. Schlupp's adapted well enough to being a full-back instead of a winger.

 

I'll be absolutely amazed if Ulloa's not been used as a centre-back in training sessions going back years.

 

He's a mature footballer - and I cannot imagine why he'd be particularly fazed being asked to play the role in a Champions League match any more than any other fixture or than Amartey being pitched into a centre-back role.

 

      

I think it is madness to play a striker at CB who has never played there before, when you consider we have a player who actually is a CB at international level in the squad.

 

As for comparing Schlupp's switch from LW to LB, a role he has switched between his whole career, to Ulloa switching from striker to CB.. 

 

It's not going to happen anyway. Shakey would consider Amartey or even moving Fuchs there before ever he considered Ulloa.

 

By the way, being good in the air, doesn't make you a decent defender at this level. Defending involves much more than that.

 

Steve Walsh and Matt Elliot were sent up as strikers late on in games, to win headers. That's it. It's very different to compare that to a striker having to do all the defensive duties of a proper CB, especially over 90+ minutes and against such quality opposition.

[Koke]

8 hours ago, Moksky said:

Huth is our left sided defender because his is left footed, so it could be Fuchs and Chilwell to step in at LB.

 

I honestly didn't know Huth was left footed. 2 and a half years of watching this guy hoof the ball and I don't know what his dominant foot is.

[Clever Fox]

6 minutes ago, STUHILL said:

I think changing the system for such a huge game would be too big a risk, especially seeing how poorly the player's reacted last time to a change, albeit during Claudio's time.

 

I think sticking with the 4-4-1-1 and try to have as little change as possible to the normal tried and tested set-up, and so if Wes is fit he comes in for Huth at CB or Amartey slots in there if not. 

 

I'm all for experimenting with formations and trying to tweak things but I think a big change to a back 3 for such a huge game, would be too much for our players and think we should stick to what we know. 

Normally I'd agree with you, small changes at a time. But this is no ordinary game and they are no ordinary team.

Their probably the best defensive team in the world. Their record proves that.

If we couldn't get to them last night when they were coming at us then we not going to do it when they only need to sit compact and defend. Which is why I feel we need to upset their thinking by us having a different approach. for instance they will set up to stop Mahrez on the right. If he plays on the left or Greizman isn't getting a kick of the Ball then they have to question whats happening. Also if we can stop them higher up the pitch then we don't need 4 at the back.

Do I think any of this will happen, unlikely for the reasons you've stated. But I do believe we need a different approach as they are so good.  Everyone one of their players where so comfortable on the Ball you had to admire them.

I don't think more of the same will cut it come Tuesday.

[Thracian]

21 minutes ago, STUHILL said:

I think it is madness to play a striker at CB who has never played there before, when you consider we have a player who actually is a CB at international level in the squad.

 

As for comparing Schlupp's switch from LW to LB, a role he has switched between his whole career, to Ulloa switching from striker to CB.. 

 

It's not going to happen anyway. Shakey would consider Amartey or even moving Fuchs there before ever he considered Ulloa.

 

By the way, being good in the air, doesn't make you a decent defender at this level. Defending involves much more than that.

 

Steve Walsh and Matt Elliot were sent up as strikers late on in games, to win headers. That's it. It's very different to compare that to a striker having to do all the defensive duties of a proper CB, especially over 90+ minutes and against such quality opposition.

 

Amartey is still evolving and, as yet, convinces me of nothing other than that he's willing enough and promising enough. 

 

And I'm quite aware of the footballing requirements of a centre-back thanks, having lived virtually next door to Ian King at one time and even played against one or two who were half-decent in the role.

 

As for Shaky I can't see why he'd make two changes (by moving Fuchs) when one might be disturbing enough and he may well consider using Amartey is the (theoretically) safer option given that he will surely know Ulloa's capabilities in the role one way or the other. 

 

I can't judge Amartey as a centre-back because I've not seen him play there but as I don't feel especially convinced of him either as a central midfielder or as a full-back as yet, then I'd hardly imagine him being better in what may well be his third choice position, but I'll happily be convinced otherwise.

 

There's some optimism about Morgan returning but you'd have to question even his match fitness so, for me, the whole question remains uncertain and, once again, Shakespeare will be put to the test as both a manager and coach.

 

 

 

        .

 

   

[frany104]

24 minutes ago, Koke said:

 

I honestly didn't know Huth was left footed. 2 and a half years of watching this guy hoof the ball and I don't know what his dominant foot is.

Definitely right footed. He's useless with his left foot.

[STUHILL]

6 minutes ago, Thracian said:

 

Amartey is still evolving and, as yet, convinces me of nothing other than that he's willing enough and promising enough. 

 

And I'm quite aware of the footballing requirements of a centre-back thanks, having lived virtually next door to Ian King at one time and even played against one or two who were half-decent in the role.

 

As for Shaky I can't see why he'd make two changes (by moving Fuchs) when one might be disturbing enough and he may well consider using Amartey is the (theoretically) safer option given that he will surely know Ulloa's capabilities in the role one way or the other. 

 

I can't judge Amartey as a centre-back because I've not seen him play there but as I don't feel especially convinced of him either as a central midfielder or as a full-back as yet, then I'd hardly imagine him being better in what may well be his third choice position, but I'll happily be convinced otherwise.

 

There's some optimism about Morgan returning but you'd have to question even his match fitness so, for me, the whole question remains uncertain and, once again, Shakespeare will be put to the test as both a manager and coach.

 

.

 

        .

 

   

I agree on there being too much disruption if he were to move Fuchs to CB, but I still think it is something he would consider before putting Ulloa as CB. 

 

I guess you can't also judge Ulloa either as a CB as never seen him there, but the difference being, Amartey has played at CB professionally and Internationally and even drawn plaudits for his performances there and selected in the team of an international tournament. That in my opinion suggests he would be a better option than a striker who has not once played at CB in their career. 

 

Just my opinion anyway, and surprised you suggested it, but I don't think it will have even entered any of our management's thinking, especially with options like Amartey and Fuchs or a switch to a back 3 all available. 

[Vardinio'sCat]

 

Struggling to find 2 CB's we can trust?

 

I know, lets play three of em!  Sorted for Shakey, lets write an open letter...

 

 

[foxes_rule1978]

Benny and Amartey the new centre halfs for us I feel... 

[Melbourne Fuchs]

6 hours ago, Realist Guy In The Room said:

Any **** can play CB at the AFCON. It means nothing.

Nigerians can't 

[Beachyboy]

21 hours ago, LcFc_Smiv said:

The suggestion from Shakespeare seemed to be that if Morgan wasnt fit the formation would change rather that finding a replacement?

3-5-2 could actually be a positive anyway, as there were gaping wholes in the middle of the park 1st half, an it allows us to play 2 up top an score the goals to win this, I like it as prior to this thought 4-5-1 may be the way to go to stay in the game. If 4-5-1 (an no morgan)

 

Schmeichel

Simpson benny amartey Fuchs

Mahrez king ndidi drinks albrighton

Vardy

 

3-5-2

 

Schmeichel

Simpson benny fuchs

Mahrez king ndidi drinks albrighton

Slim Vardy 

 

I would say start with 4-5-1 an sub Amartey for Slim at HT, if Amartey isn't up to it just start with 3-5-2 an that team, that team looks our most reliable team without Morgan or Huth available.

 

 

 

 

[FoxonMaui]

I like the idea of starting with 442 with Armartey alongside Benny. It would then be possible to go 352 easily if we needed to press more, with Armartey taking a slightly more advanced role to free up Ndidi or Danny to push forward. At some point on Tuesday we will need to take risks to get players forward into Athletico's box. We are going to need to score two or three goals to win this unless we end at 1-0 and then penalties. Shakey has another tough decision on whether to start with Okazaki or Slimani. My guess is Okazaki will start but we may need Slimani at half time as he is a much better goal threat. Let's hope Gamiero is still not fit as he will greatly strengthen Athletico's attack.

Was very impressed with Shakeys tactical move at half time in Madrid. Sitting Kingy in front of Greizman to cut off his supply worked perfectly. Hopefully he can get the right balance on Tuesday. We have to play to our obvious strengths whilst hedging against theirs. Tricky. Anyone suggesting benching Riyad and playing Gray on Tuesday is either delusional or has no understanding of football at this level. Riyad worked his tail off defensively on Wednesday and Gray is a total liability when we do not have the ball. 

 

[Redouane]

Maybe play 3 at the back and 4 or 5 at the middle?

[Beachyboy]

16 minutes ago, FoxonMaui said:

I like the idea of starting with 442 with Armartey alongside Benny. It would then be possible to go 352 easily if we needed to press more, with Armartey taking a slightly more advanced role to free up Ndidi or Danny to push forward. At some point on Tuesday we will need to take risks to get players forward into Athletico's box. We are going to need to score two or three goals to win this unless we end at 1-0 and then penalties. Shakey has another tough decision on whether to start with Okazaki or Slimani. My guess is Okazaki will start but we may need Slimani at half time as he is a much better goal threat. Let's hope Gamiero is still not fit as he will greatly strengthen Athletico's attack.

Was very impressed with Shakeys tactical move at half time in Madrid. Sitting Kingy in front of Greizman to cut off his supply worked perfectly. Hopefully he can get the right balance on Tuesday. We have to play to our obvious strengths whilst hedging against theirs. Tricky. Anyone suggesting benching Riyad and playing Gray on Tuesday is either delusional or has no understanding of football at this level. Riyad worked his tail off defensively on Wednesday and Gray is a total liability when we do not have the ball. 

 

Aside from that Riyad is also more likely to create something when we do have the ball, I don't think people watch the game sometimes I thought, with what he had to work with Mahrez had a good game.

[FireFox]

                  Kasper

          Amartey - Benny

 Albrighton - Ndidi - Fuchs

                   Drinky

Vardy/Gray - King - Mahrez

                  Slimani

 

If no Morgan: Ndidi as a CDM, slotting in at CB when needed. Albrighton and Fuchs as wingbacks, Mahrez and Vardy or Gray as natural wingers - put crosses onto Slimani's head.

[Col city fan]

Completely agree that if we are going to play Amartey at CB against Madrid, he needs to play there tomorrow against Palace. We need to see how he looks in a tough, competitive fixture before we play him in an even tougher, competitive fixture.

[Collymore]

http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/spieler/vertragslosespieler/statistik/1/ausrichtung/Abwehr/spielerposition_id/3/land_id/alle/wettbewerb_id/alle/seit/alle/yt0/Show/plus//galerie/0/sort/marktwert.desc

 

List of free agent CBs

[burleighfox]

Everyone is keen to talk up Amartey's capabilities as a centre half but how many have seen him play there? And more to the point, he hasn't to my knowledge played a single game in that position for us. However, I know we're in a catch twenty-two and I for one don't really know what our best option is; as much as I've always loved having big Was in the side, I wouldn't really want to risk putting him in at this late stage of the season.