The "do they mean us?" thread pt 2

[The People's Hero]

3 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

First thought: he says we have a negative goal difference. Not in the PL we dont so he must be including cup games..?

Wonder what Shakespeare's gd was in the pl, with Mahrez aswell

He can see in to the future.

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

On 08/01/2019 at 20:29, Blue ROI said:

http://that1980ssportsblog.blogspot.com/2019/01/1983-84-leicester-v-southampton-match-abandoned.html

 

As Leicester prepared to meet Southampton at Filbert Street on October 15, 1983, there would have been vastly different expectations for anyone associated with both clubs. Rooted to the bottom of the table, Leicester were winless in their eight league matches. In contrast, Southampton were sitting pretty.

 

 

Second in Division One, Lawrie McMenemy’s Southampton knew a win, coupled with a Liverpool victory at West Ham, would see the Saints hit the summit. With Leicester’s abysmal record at the start of the season, there was a strong chance that come the conclusion of the match, Southampton would be looking down on the rest of the league.

 

It didn’t quite turn out like that. In fact, both teams would end up leaving empty handed after the match was abandoned with just 22 minutes played. Heavy rainfall left the playing surface resembling a paddy field in places, as players and officials struggled to cope with the conditions.

 

Captured on Match of the Day, the fixture started off relatively sedately. But with the rain lashing down, and the wind picking up, soon the action started to take on a comedic slant. With the ball beginning to stick in the puddles forming on the pitch, playing football became a challenge.

 

A torrential downpour during the match proved too much for the already saturated surface, as the mere task of dribbling and passing turned into a farce. Referee Robert Nixon halted proceedings at one point to discuss the situation with his senior linesman, before deciding to carry on regardless.

 

Cheers could be heard amongst the crowd of less than 9,000 at Filbert Street, as play restarted, yet with John Motson describing the pitch as “virtually unplayable”, chances of the match finishing looked slim.

 

 

Players attempted to take the pitch out of the equation by going aerial, although Kevin MacDonald’s back pass to keeper Mark Wallington was thumped so hard that it almost went out for a corner. MacDonald would later find himself struggling to dribble the ball through the shallow end, before releasing Gary Lineker to take on Mark Wright.

 

Both future England internationals ended up sliding towards the advertising boards like tobogganists, as every slip, mistake, failed pass and dribble, and splash was furiously “waheyed” by the amused spectators.

 

The high point of the comedy was undoubtedly Steve Lynex performing the breaststroke after being fouled by Steve Moran. “A little swimming gesture by Steve Lynex as he fell, as if to indicate that’s the only way to get through,” Motson noted. “It’s all something of a lottery,” he added, as the show continued.

 

All good things have to come to an end, though. After Lineker twice failed to take the ball with him in quick succession, and players thrashed around at the ball hopelessly, Nixon had seen enough. “The referee has had to bring it to an end, and frankly I’m not surprised,” said Motson.

 

Nixon, Milne, and McMenemy would later appear on the pitch, discussing the prospect of resuming the match. But with rain continuing to fall, the outlook seemed bleak. Ground staff prodded forks into the surface in a desperate attempt to drain some of the water. It was a fairly pointless act.

 

Milne looked far from happy as he left the pitch, and let out his frustration after the abandonment. “We could have cleared the ground given time,” he complained, although the Express’ David Emery didn’t share this optimism.

 

“If he really can find sweepers of that calibre, Milne should snap them up...perhaps then Leicester would not have conceded 12 goals at home this season already,” Emery noted, also describing Filbert Street as a duck pond.

 

Milne was not the only dissenting voice, with groundsman Steve Welch adamant that Nixon had made a mistake, stating that the playing surface was fit by 3.55pm. Maybe Milne and Welch were sensing the chance of a rare Leicester win on a pitch that certainly levelled the playing field.

 

The Mirror’s David Moore also felt Nixon had made an error, but at least match official had one supporter in Jimmy Hill. “It was clear there was no alternative other than to abandon the game,” the presenter said on Match of the Day.

 

Leicester would win the rematch at the end of November, part of a sixteen match run that saw them lose only two league matches, and eventually they avoided relegation. Southampton finished the season as runners-up to Liverpool, but suffered the agony of an FA Cup semi-final defeat against Everton.

 

In total, Southampton would play 51 matches during the 1983/84 campaign. But it is those 22 minutes at Filbert Street in October 1983 that stick in my memory, making for entertaining viewing, and reducing professional footballers to the level of the paying spectators and the television audience.

 

Sometimes football can be a bit too serious, and there is not enough room for a few “waheys” and levity in the crowd. Assuming you had not paid good money to watch just 22 minutes of football, Leicester City v Southampton proved that football could occasionally provide a refreshing break from the norm.

I Was there that day, a young lad stood in the members stand, the most rain I’ve ever seen at a football match

[davieG]

It's hard to play counter attacking football when the opposition have set up to do the same that's why it's only happening against the better teams.

 

I think the fact that against Southampton we included 6 players aged 22 or under - technically if we'd had one more player in that age group, the squad would have been eligible to play in PL2 should be taken into consideration when considering progress.

[Babylon]

This view that counter attacking is the way forward is just baffling. 

 

It didn't work often ENOUGH, that's why two managers lost their jobs. That's why the end of the title season we were scraping through games. That's why we've been bottom three twice paying that way. 

 

It'll work when teams attack and that's when we've won games. But the notion that trying to add another way of playing isn't the right one I can't agree with.

 

Has Puel found us another way... well we aren't bottom three, but it's clunky and fails too often. But even if it's another manager, it's still the way to go.

 

[ScouseFox]

11 hours ago, Babylon said:

This view that counter attacking is the way forward is just baffling. 

 

It didn't work often ENOUGH, that's why two managers lost their jobs. That's why the end of the title season we were scraping through games. That's why we've been bottom three twice paying that way. 

 

It'll work when teams attack and that's when we've won games. But the notion that trying to add another way of playing isn't the right one I can't agree with.

 

Has Puel found us another way... well we aren't bottom three, but it's clunky and fails too often. But even if it's another manager, it's still the way to go.

 

i think everyone is aware that we can’t play “on the counter” in every game, but for a man specifically tasked and continually telling us that he’s employed by the club so that we have another way of playing, the fact that nearly all our points since he was hired have come from playing counter attacking football is remarkably concerning. 

[Finnegan]

That Guardian article is pretty much 99% bang on.

 

And it doesn't say we should stick to counter attacking it says counter attacking is our "best chance of picking up points" which it is, we all know that. 

 

They're not we should always stick to that, they're commenting on the fact we've gotten no better at winning games when we have the majority possession. 

[CosbehFox]

I disagree to a point that the Guardian article is bang on. There’s no acknowledgement that someone of this is created by having a squad so young. The fact about the crossing from last Saturday is large under the control of the players - who thick as shit continuously cross aerially, surprise surprise the first time we hit it low goal. Similarly the counter attacking. 

 

Stuart James the writer is in part as well trying to justify the three previously published articles where he’s said Claude is leaving 

[BKLFox]

52 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

That Guardian article is pretty much 99% bang on.

 

And it doesn't say we should stick to counter attacking it says counter attacking is our "best chance of picking up points" which it is, we all know that. 

 

They're not we should always stick to that, they're commenting on the fact we've gotten no better at winning games when we have the majority possession. 

I wouldn't say Counter attacking is our best chance of picking up points because counter attacking is opportunistic, it has to present itself in order for a team to do it.

There is more chance of achieving against the footballing sides so top 6 and maybe 1 or 2 from the rest meaning against 11-12 other teams the chances of hitting on a break are reduced.

 

This is where the boring side to side backwards stuff comes in as we try to draw the opposition out, again only works if we can do this slickly which currently we can't but it could just take that 1 new player to trigger this or unlike me with algebra it just clicks 1 day and it becomes second nature.

 

It is also very risky to rely on this as your only option due to the fact that in order to achieve this the opposition will be in and around our own box which would obviously lead to more shots on our goal, currently I believe we score quite highly in least shots against, won't put my house on that statement as I've already mentioned not great with all things maths.

 

[Ashley]

9 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

I disagree to a point that the Guardian article is bang on. There’s no acknowledgement that someone of this is created by having a squad so young. The fact about the crossing from last Saturday is large under the control of the players - who thick as shit continuously cross aerially, surprise surprise the first time we hit it low goal. Similarly the counter attacking. 

 

Stuart James the writer is in part as well trying to justify the three previously published articles where he’s said Claude is leaving 

 

Love this. CF. 

 

Reminds me of how we used to always cross high to Vardy thrn bring Slimani on and cross low. Don't get me wrong Vards is half decent in the air but he's no target man. 

[Captain...]

1 minute ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

I disagree to a point that the Guardian article is bang on. There’s no acknowledgement that someone of this is created by having a squad so young. The fact about the crossing from last Saturday is large under the control of the players - who thick as shit continuously cross aerially, surprise surprise the first time we hit it low goal. Similarly the counter attacking. 

 

Stuart James the writer is in part as well trying to justify the three previously published articles where he’s said Claude is leaving 

I get the argument that it is the players delivering the crosses not Puel, it is the players giving the ball away under no pressure, not Puel and it is the players making stupid tackles not Puel. It largely stems from the system we play with attacking full backs and over rely on them, the emphasis on overloading the flanks and using the over lap comes from Puel, but when they double up on the flanks it leaves just Vardy and Maddison in the middle and maybe the opposite wide player. The CMs don’t swarm into the box so we are really limited with what we can do. You spend a lot of time and energy getting some space on the flanks it is frustrating to them have to go backwards especially as it is to Ndidi who is sloppy in possession or Mendy who has zero attacking qualities.

 

You get in that position with full backs advanced and lose the ball thn you are screwed as there is a lot of space to counter. Put a big cross in you might get a corner or a scrappy chance but you will also give the full backs time to drop.

[The Doctor]

7 minutes ago, BKLFox said:

.It is also very risky to rely on this as your only option due to the fact that in order to achieve this the opposition will be in and around our own box which would obviously lead to more shots on our goal, currently I believe we score quite highly in least shots against, won't put my house on that statement as I've already mentioned not great with all things maths.

 

Correct on the stats - 11.7 shots per game from the opposition, 6th best in the league: https://www.whoscored.com/Regions/252/Tournaments/2/Seasons/7361/Stages/16368/TeamStatistics/England-Premier-League-2018-2019

 

But I'd disagree that that matters much, more shots allowed is fine if they're lower quality chances. Ideal world is offering up few chances and what few are offered up are low quality ones, but that isn't realistic over a 38 game season. Better to look at xGA: https://understat.com/league/EPL and for that we've got the 5th best defence, as we do in terms of real goals against. Can see across the two tables that Everton and Watford are offering up less shots to the opposition than us, but what they are offering up are in better positions than we do, and we're doing the same compared against Wolves. Really though any way you slice it, our defence is worthy of a challenge for European qualification. Just a shame that our attack is a very midtable one, which is dragging us down. 

[Finnegan]

22 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

I disagree to a point that the Guardian article is bang on. There’s no acknowledgement that someone of this is created by having a squad so young. The fact about the crossing from last Saturday is large under the control of the players - who thick as shit continuously cross aerially, surprise surprise the first time we hit it low goal. Similarly the counter attacking. 

 

Stuart James the writer is in part as well trying to justify the three previously published articles where he’s said Claude is leaving 

 

Sorry CF but it's the coach's responsibility to coach the players, teach them, show them how to break down a defensive side. The fact we throw everyone forward and just lose our shit pumping balls in the box tells me he hasn't done that. 

 

If I've said it once now I've said it a thousand times, Puel isn't a passing, possession coach. He's not a budget Guardiola, he's a budget Mourinho. Now there isn't necessarily anything wrong with that, Jose has won stacks of trophies being conservative, disciplined and unimaginative. 

 

But the style we play is Puel and how the players react to situations, as a group, twelve months later is Puel. 

 

Individual mistakes? That's on the players for sure. Half the team against Southampton had their worst games for the club. He can't necessarily help that. 

 

But that they don't know how to respond to a team being defensive? That he can. 

[BKLFox]

50 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

Correct on the stats - 11.7 shots per game from the opposition, 6th best in the league: https://www.whoscored.com/Regions/252/Tournaments/2/Seasons/7361/Stages/16368/TeamStatistics/England-Premier-League-2018-2019

 

But I'd disagree that that matters much, more shots allowed is fine if they're lower quality chances. Ideal world is offering up few chances and what few are offered up are low quality ones, but that isn't realistic over a 38 game season. Better to look at xGA: https://understat.com/league/EPL and for that we've got the 5th best defence, as we do in terms of real goals against. Can see across the two tables that Everton and Watford are offering up less shots to the opposition than us, but what they are offering up are in better positions than we do, and we're doing the same compared against Wolves. Really though any way you slice it, our defence is worthy of a challenge for European qualification. Just a shame that our attack is a very midtable one, which is dragging us down. 

Thanks for doing the leg work on the starts Doc I thought I’d seen this somewhere. 

Remember these are stats taken on current play, if we changed to just counter attack which is what some are suggesting those shots against figures would go up and something I can do, percentages for some reason, the quality of chance would probably go up.

we need to continue as is, but slicker and hopefully with Barnes in the side someone who’s not afraid to shoot can chip in to aid on the goals front.

[Babylon]

2 hours ago, Finnegan said:

That Guardian article is pretty much 99% bang on.

 

And it doesn't say we should stick to counter attacking it says counter attacking is our "best chance of picking up points" which it is, we all know that. 

 

They're not we should always stick to that, they're commenting on the fact we've gotten no better at winning games when we have the majority possession. 

Bit disingenuous of them to suggest that a game we have say 49% v 51% posession, is instantly a game won playing counter attacking football though isn't it?

[Mike Oxlong]

If you’re not going to try and play through the middle and instead rely on the attacking full/wing backs to create the chances then surely you need either an aerial threat or someone who attacks space in the box.

 

We don’t have the personnel up front to play the system and I don’t see that changing this window.

 

Going forward it’s like we have a two pieces of a jigsaw that don’t fit and won’t fit however hard you push them.

 

 

[Foxxed]

8 minutes ago, Mike Oxlong said:

If you’re not going to try and play through the middle and instead rely on the attacking full/wing backs to create the chances then surely you need either an aerial threat or someone who attacks space in the box.

 

We don’t have the personnel up front to play the system and I don’t see that changing this window.

 

Going forward it’s like we have a two pieces of a jigsaw that don’t fit and won’t fit however hard you push them.

 

 

In no way is it wise to place the dangerous weight of expectation on young developing shoulders, but Barnes will attack that space and everything will click and we're going on a European tour. It's a pity Vardy refuses to play with Slim. He would at least be able to get on the end of one of Sparky's crosses.

[Poznan34]

 

[MC Prussian]

18 minutes ago, Poznan34 said:

 

Jamie Carragher overlooks the fact that we are currently 8th and on a bad form as of late, I do wonder and many other fans do, as well: Where will we be at the end of the season?

Has Puel learnt from his previous mistakes from last season and his tenure at Southampton? Or will we witness another downward spiral?

 

Is 8th all we can aim for? Do we want to push for 7th? When will we take cup matches more serious? When will the system and the football on show change to something (somewhat) more attractive, proactive, attacking, fluid? When will we stop putting crosses into the box, with no one to feed off them? When will the constant sideways and backwards passing stop? When will our midfield become more dominant and more apt at controlling and dictating a game?

 

All questions mostly the manager has to answer for. Plus the club management.

[john ridley]

Would glad to be 8th after today's matches.

[Bunyip]

1 minute ago, john ridley said:

Would glad to be 8th after today's matches.

Yep, we are never going to finish anywhere near 8th with Puel in charge.

[don_danbury]

2 hours ago, Poznan34 said:

 

totally unprofessional in his work, spits on people and talks absolute drivel. he must be in dreamland to being paid for that tbh

[Babylon]

We are 1st...

[HesNotGudjonsonn2]

Can someone with a Guardian subscription copy and paste the article please? 

[Babylon]

The January transfer window is still open which means Premier League clubs have time to spend their many many millions on shiny new players. But won't someone think of the children? Please!

Some clubs are better than others at bringing through youngsters, some clubs can't afford to give playing time to inexperienced footballers and others heavily rely on the development of youth to take them places.

Which Premier League sides play the most Under-21 players? Here's a list, ranked in order of least likely to put trust in youth to the best facilitators of talented young players.

 

1. Leicester

 

Players aged 21 and under to play in Premier League 2018/19: six

 

Ben Chilwell (left-back) - Will very likely be England's first choice left-back for years to come. Fantastic at defending and attacking, loves to get forward and is excellent at linking passes under pressure. Just turned 22.

 

Wilfred Ndidi(ball-winning midfielder) - Nigerian central midfielder regularly at the top of the charts for interceptions, tackles and recoveries made. Another to just turn 22.

 

James Maddison (attacking midfielder) - On the fringes of the England squad, Maddison is a number 10 in the mould of Gylfi Sigurdsson, great at set pieces, able to score from long range and with that all-important ability to unlock a defence with a final pass. Yet another to turn 22 this season.

 

Hamza Choudhury (midfielder) - 21 year old English defensive minded midfielder great at cutting out danger and laying the short pass to a team-mate. 

 

Harvey Barnes (forward) - English 21 year old recalled from a loan spell at West Brom where he scored nine goals in 25 games before scoring against Wolves on his first Premier League game of the season back at Leicester. Great in transition, likes to run with the ball and move into space, turning up in good attacking areas to get in shots

 

Kelechi Iheanacho (striker) - High potential goalscorer who moved to Leicester after failing to cut it at Man City. Drifts in and out of games, has an uncanny ability to find goalscoring chances with his movement but finishing lets him down - only has four league goals in 40 appearances for Leicester but has scored eight in 22 for Nigeria. Turned 22 this season.

 

Future stars

 

Filip Benkovic (centre-back) - 21 year old centre-back on loan at Celtic where he has provided a classy touch and a lot of defensive steel. Comfortable passing the ball and carrying it out from the back, Benkovic is already a quality ball-playing defender, following in Virgil Van Dijk’s footsteps by gaining experience in Scotland.

 

 

 

[Babylon]

Chuck in Soyuncu as well... if these lads progress as we hope they will it's going to be great for the club.