Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
mo-rima

Hamza

By mo-rima, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

CityIsBlue

CityIsBlue

Posted
Posted

The unfortunate thing for Hamza is Wilf......Mainly the fact that Wilf performs much better without a partner.

As soon as Wilf came out West Ham actually got through the middle for the first time because Wilf's positioning in a two is often off.

 

For me though, there isn't anything wrong with any of of central midfield options, including Mendy too.

They're all very capable, all very different too which is great.

 

Until we get the quality out wide we need, we are probably better off pursuing Hamza at the expense of Maddison/Tielemans.

Teams recognise that Barnes/Albrighton/Gray/Perez are not threatening enough so that can push their full backs up, putting more pressure on Tielemans/Maddison in midfield.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ric Flair

Ric Flair

Posted
Posted

Superb today and a relief as I thought since the Liverpool game whenever he's had minutes he's not looked as commanding as he is capable of. Sadly, Ndidi has become an absolute beast under Rodgers but there still should be more game time given to Choudhury where possible, our form vs the better sides requires some improvement and I think Choudhury might be key to us doing that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hammo

Hammo

Posted
Posted

His physicality was badly missing against Man City and Liverpool.
 

Barnes, Perez and Maddison are all so lightweight in 50/50s.

 

As Rodgers himself admitted, we need to match the physical toughness of the really top sides. Hamza definitely provides that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nicolo Barella

Nicolo Barella

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, CityIsBlue said:

The unfortunate thing for Hamza is Wilf......Mainly the fact that Wilf performs much better without a partner.

As soon as Wilf came out West Ham actually got through the middle for the first time because Wilf's positioning in a two is often off.

 

For me though, there isn't anything wrong with any of of central midfield options, including Mendy too.

They're all very capable, all very different too which is great.

 

Until we get the quality out wide we need, we are probably better off pursuing Hamza at the expense of Maddison/Tielemans.

Teams recognise that Barnes/Albrighton/Gray/Perez are not threatening enough so that can push their full backs up, putting more pressure on Tielemans/Maddison in midfield.

Very pertinent point, we only started to control the game at the very end when Hamza pushed up almost at Maddison's level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tielemans63

Tielemans63

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, adam said:

He is definately far better than Declan rice. God knows how he gets in the england team. 

Ah but you see he's good mates with Mason Mount who plays for Chelsea so therefore gets an automatic pass into the England team. You're making the massive mistake of judging a player on his actual talent. That's not how we do things in England. Fancy judging a guy by his actual performances. God, whatever next.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Facecloth

Facecloth

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, adam said:

He is definately far better than Declan rice. God knows how he gets in the england team. 

I have absolutely no idea what Rice is meant to be. Can't pass, can't tackle. Positionally poor. Doesn't break into the box to score. Isn't great in the air. Isn't composed in possession. He's not a midfielder, he's not a centre back. No idea why there was such a rush to get him in the England team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CityIsBlue

CityIsBlue

Posted
Posted (edited)

Rodgers selection was wrong against Liverpool/Man City in a sense because we lack the threat out wide to get away with playing two 8's.....But it also demonstrated to the fans/Top etc that we need to address that lack of threat to get to the next level.

Guardiola only gets away with playing two 8's out of B.Silva/D.Silva/De Bruyne when he has both a solid back 4, and a threatening front 3.

Without Laporte, a Rodri which isn't fully adapted to the pace of the league and Fernandinho taken out of the back 5 and into the back 4 they don't have the stability that we have, in my honest opinion. But what they do have is quality out wide in Sterling, which just goes to show how much more threatening we would be with a quality option there.

 

Even West Ham/Everton gave us problems in the League simply because in that position, with Anderson/Richarlison respectively, they are better than any of our wide options. It only took either to have one moment in the game to either upon us up as Anderson did, or offer a physical goalscoring threat that Richarlison did.

 

For me that Richarlison type would take us to that next level.

I think you would get the most out of Perez/Tielemans/Maddison too. 

Right now, teams just put the two center backs on Vardy and have no concerns about our threat from out wide. Because we don't have one.

 

Didn't Felipe Anderson/Richarlison cost around a combined £85 million?

If the board are serious about wanting to challenge, that's what they need to do next, two players of similar quality.

Jarrod Bowen is being linked, but he is who we should be looking to replace albrighton.....Not become a key player right away.

 

Interestingly I think those two would've worked great in the same side, but we can't afford the £150-200 million they would cost now.

 

Richarlison......Vardy......Anderson

 

Imagine the time on the ball that Tielemans/Maddison would get if teams actually feared us out wide.

Edited by CityIsBlue
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...