Post Match: City 0 - 1 Cardiff

[Foxaholic ME]

40 minutes ago, Corky said:

Isn't this a case of winning the "wrong" game? If we'd lost to Man City and won today, I think the reaction (including my own) would be different. Obviously you want to win them all but it's been a trait for years- we put in a great show against a good side then lose to a struggler and the frustration grows.

Exactly but  people expected it up to recently and loved the good performances and shrugged off the poor  but with about 12000 new recent supporters you  will get moaning and of course in the old days also much cheaper

[Raw Dykes]

8 minutes ago, foxfanazer said:

It's frustrating of course but it's not like we didn't create decent chances. It's hard to criticise Puel for us not taking those chances or missing a penalty. There have been games where it's totally justifiable to be negative about his playing style but I don't think today was one of those games

True. On another day, we win that easily. It's just that Puel doesn't have much credit in the bank when it comes to home games against weaker sides.

 

All things considered, I'm pretty happy. We're top half, got a good, young squad of players who will only improve, looking forward to seeing how more wisely we can spend the wages wasted on Slimani, Benny, Silva, etc. It's just that I was a bit fed up of seeing us not beat the relegation fodder at home as it was, and so to see us not only fail to win, but actually lose, against a club I particularly dislike, who until today had only picked up 2 points away from home was a tad hard to take.

 

I'm sure I'd be a bit more upbeat if it had been Fulham or Huddersfield or anyone else.

[katieakita]

A couple of months ago we had the biggest set back in the clubs history, maybe without the tragedy Puel would have been gone by now but is the club really in the right place to change managers now. Do not think anyone thinks this side is the finished article but we are in a far better place now than when Puel took over. Younger players have come in and some older players have moved on. We had more than enough chances to win today but fell for a sucker punch. People also seem to forget we have a backroom who monitor the players and some were leggy and out on their legs. we are still a few players short of pushing for a top 6/7 place. For his knockers Puel has inherited some players who are surplus and have been costly but has increased the value of plenty of the squad in the likes of Chilwell, Maguire, Hamza, Ricardo, Madders, Barnes and Benkovich. Very poor day at the office today but do not think the knives should be out just yet. If it is time to change managers we need to make sure we make the right decision and not sure who is out there to step in

[foxfanazer]

1 minute ago, Raw Dykes said:

True. On another day, we win that easily. It's just that Puel doesn't have much credit in the bank when it comes to home games against weaker sides.

 

All things considered, I'm pretty happy. We're top half, got a good, young squad of players who will only improve, looking forward to seeing how more wisely we can spend the wages wasted on Slimani, Benny, Silva, etc. It's just that I was a bit fed up of seeing us not beat the relegation fodder at home as it was, and so to see us not only fail to win, but actually lose, against a club I particularly dislike, who until today had only picked up 2 points away from home was a tad hard to take.

 

I'm sure I'd be a bit more upbeat if it had been Fulham or Huddersfield or anyone else.

Yeah it's done him no favours at all with his critics. I understand the disappointment and agree with some of the criticism directed at Puel but everything on here seems to be one extreme or the other. As you say there's plenty to be positive about but some wish to ignore it and focus solely on the negatives

 

I do feel he's lost the loud section of the fans and whatever he does he won't win them back. Even seen one poster say they don't want us to win as it buys him more rime. Baffling!

[inckley fox]

27 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

You use a lot of words to say absolutely nothing of value.

 

Is supply good enough? No, absolutely not, although that's not the full story - let's be clear, Vardy has missed 10 big chances already this season, he missed 12 in the previous 2 seasons combined. He can't hide behind bad service and pretend there's no issue with his own showing.

 

But, let's assume that it's all service and nothing to do with consistently poor finishing from him - does that absolve Vardy from being unable to control a bag of cement, from being a yard slower than normal, from missing yet another 1v1. No. We both know if Iheanacho put in the performance Vardy did, there'd be a 20 page long thread demanding his blood and a petition to have him deported.

 

He's probably the best striker we've had in half a century (Mancini, Lineker, Heskey all had their best years away from the club) but he was abysmal today. That's not on anyone else, poor control and bad movement is on him and people need to stop making excuses for his poor form. I could easily be convinced it's that he's still carrying an injury and isn't firing on all cylinders - in which case he needs to be rested, which would be helped if it didn't coincidentally leak to the press before every game if he is

There are indeed a lot of words in one post, but then I quickly discovered that there were nowhere near as many as you've managed to post over the past few months. Not in this message, nor in all of my messages in the past year have I even come close to your contribution. So I feel no need to apologise for your inability to pick out the sense in my post.

 

Vardy wasn't abysmal today, or at least not in a way which stood out above Gray, Maddison, Ndidi, and the subs when they came on. He wasn't good (a point I've made plenty of times, in many posts), but he wasn't the most evident problem, which is what you indicated. Especially considering the other strikers we've played since Puel came to the club have been far more impotent than he was, just as the strikers who played under Puel at Southampton were impotent. And considering that, today, the game was lost after he left the pitch. If he'd stayed on, our chances statistically of converting a penalty would have been much better.

 

I understand, however, that saying he was abysmal, and stand-out abysmal, suits an agenda which several Puel-Inners (and I'm a 'Puel In Man' too, by the way) have pursued of late. Namely, that Puel's issues have more to do with the 'old guard' and people who have uttered concerns in the press, than it does with (a) normal circumstances which affect normal teams, like not being fantastically consistent, especially against sides that set out to frustrate them and (b) Puel's own, and totally obvious, shortcomings.

 

Our major issue today was not Vardy, and neither has it been over the course of Puel's reign. The fact that he's not continued the superhuman form he displayed in front of goal last season, and which kept Puel in his job, should not be ammunition for an argument that he, now, is the root of our problems in games like today's. Is the problem (1) Puel's style of play, which has - after a few months at two different clubs - led to a severe lack of goals, (2) a five man midfield at home, with two defensive midfielders, which has failed to create many goals regardless of who is up front or (3) the guy who played up front today, who has up to now been a complete life-saver for his manager?

 

No, today he wasn't great, but that's not the origin of our problems, it's a symptom of a wider problem. To claim that this isn't the case, and that the real issue is whoever's up front for whichever side Puel is managing, is as obvious a non-starter as I've ever seen.

[worthosoriginals]

2 hours ago, Lionheart10 said:

Yes the booing was for the decision to take him off not at either player.

are you referring to your reasons for booing, or the results of a comprehensive survey in the ground you did whilst the booing took place?

also did you explain this result to the players? so that they did not get too offended.

[EnderbyFox]

Praying we sign some attacking reinforcements in January, so depressing when our options off the bench are Okazaki, Iheanacho & Ghezzal 

[The Doctor]

1 minute ago, inckley fox said:

There are indeed a lot of words in one post, but then I quickly discovered that there were nowhere near as many as you've managed to post over the past few months. Not in this message, nor in all of my messages in the past year have I even come close to your contribution. So I feel no need to apologise for your inability to pick out the sense in my post.

 

Vardy wasn't abysmal today, or at least not in a way which stood out above Gray, Maddison, Ndidi, and the subs when they came on. He wasn't good (a point I've made plenty of times, in many posts), but he wasn't the most evident problem, which is what you indicated. Especially considering the other strikers we've played since Puel came to the club have been far more impotent than he was, just as the strikers who played under Puel at Southampton were impotent. And considering that, today, the game was lost after he left the pitch. If he'd stayed on, our chances statistically of converting a penalty would have been much better.

 

I understand, however, that saying he was abysmal, and stand-out abysmal, suits an agenda which several Puel-Inners (and I'm a 'Puel In Man' too, by the way) have pursued of late. Namely, that Puel's issues have more to do with the 'old guard' and people who have uttered concerns in the press, than it does with (a) normal circumstances which affect normal teams, like not being fantastically consistent, especially against sides that set out to frustrate them and (b) Puel's own, and totally obvious, shortcomings.

 

Our major issue today was not Vardy, and neither has it been over the course of Puel's reign. The fact that he's not continued the superhuman form he displayed in front of goal last season, and which kept Puel in his job, should not be ammunition for an argument that he, now, is the root of our problems in games like today's. Is the problem (1) Puel's style of play, which has - after a few months at two different clubs - led to a severe lack of goals, (2) a five man midfield at home, with two defensive midfielders, which has failed to create many goals regardless of who is up front or (3) the guy who played up front today, who has up to now been a complete life-saver for his manager?

 

No, today he wasn't great, but that's not the origin of our problems, it's a symptom of a wider problem. To claim that this isn't the case, and that the real issue is whoever's up front for whichever side Puel is managing, is as obvious a non-starter as I've ever seen.

This is rather blinkered defence of him, Vardy was very poor today, and you could argue has been all season. It's not about continuing superhuman form, it's about underperforming now according to the average striker. Look at his xG tally. After today it's 8.79: https://understat.com/team/Leicester/2018, he's scored 6. This is underperforming based on what you'd expect the average striker to finish. His big chances missed tally is at 10, compared to six in each of the past two seasons - although there is an alternative argument, that missing more big chances is an artefact of having more big chances and it's conversion rate that matters, one that'd be bore out looking at who's up there with him - Aubameyang and Salah - and the 22 he missed in 15/16. But, that relies on the notion that actually he's getting more service than before (which can be defended as an argument, with more shots per game and a higher xG per 90 than recent seasons). Frankly, it's really stretching to see him miss another 1v1, to see another game where he's underperforming and blame it on Gray and Maddison. Neither were great, Maddison struggled against Gunnarson, Gray didn't get involved, but neither stood out as much as Vardy did. That performance was shocking and frankly you've put more work into defending it than he did in producing it. 

[jim5000]

I can't understand why he changed away from the team that beat Chelsea and Man City? We have been pretty Meh all season, lost 1-0 to Palace, and finally, finally, he changes the system up a bit. As a result we beat the last two Premier League Champions back to back.

 

So what does Puel do? He reverts to the team that lost 1-0 to Palace?

 

Everyone at the ground knew that today would be tough. We'd beat the best in the country, but could we beat relegation fodder? Keep the same line-up, confidence coursing through their veins, but just ask Choudry to push up and show what he can do, the boy is 19 and just beat the best two teams in the country.

 

I can't understand why Puel changed away from a winning system back to a losing system, for weaker opposition? It's like he doesn't know what he is doing, and despite clear evidence to the contrary, is determined to stick to the lesser system that he believes is 'right'.

[mad biker]

7 hours ago, 5waller5 said:

Terrible against a terrible side.

 

Clueless going forward. The terrible game plan of lofting ball after ball into the box to literally nobody attacking it is sunday league standard.

 

Sorry Claude but I've had enough of this sh*te.

Luckily for you being based in Quorn you can piss off and support the tricky trees or the sheep shaggers, seeeeeya !!

[jim5000]

3 hours ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

I get to play the "were you actually at the game" card today 

 

Were you? Because Albrighton was done long before he was subbed off. He could barely run. Was completely knackered.

 

Same as Vardy. Maguire and Mendy and Ndidi, Chilwell, Ricardo, all seemed to have that bit less in them today

 

It affected us as the game went on and we paid for it.

 

I actually criticse Puel today for not changing enough

 

Yeah, and Cardiff didn't play the same number of games as us over the festive period.......

[jim5000]

2 hours ago, Mike Oxlong said:

To break a set defence we need either a fox in the box or an aerial threat 

 

We have neither of those which is why we remain most effective with getting the ball forward at speed 

 

There were times today where we could have broke quickly but failed to do so

 

I’d be more reassured if Puel had been urging the team to do that from the technical box but today he appeared passive and satisfied with our approach play

 

Not good enough by a long way today

 

Ian Nacho is a fox in the box (he's not much else) but we never get the ball in there. We sold one of our aerial threats and loaned the other one out after he got fed up with not getting in the team behind Vardy.

 

How bad must Silva be for Claude to try every player bar him while we keep losing to relegation chaff?

[Tom12345]

6 hours ago, Nod.E said:

Easy.

 

Change to 433.

 

Pereira Maguire Soy Chilwell

 

Mendy Maddison Iborra

 

Gray Vardy Albrighton

 

Next question?

Dude, it is easy to see but hence the frustration. Game after game after game. Months went by. We can see the problem. But Puel does not. It is really frustrating.

 

To be honest, I like Puel and what he has done in terms of the possession based element of the game that he brought to the team and also development of hound players. But his insistence on using Ndidi and the problem he does not see with the lack of creativity in CM is extremely frustrating. 

 

After the Chelsea and Man City wins, I thought he saw the light. But his reversion back to his old ways against Cardiff tells me that he didn’t see the light. It was a fluke against Chelsea and Man City in terms of his team selection.

 

Why the particular frustration? Because it was also those two games that showed that the players we have really are very good and are capable of beating any team. We should be doing much better than we are. As the commentators kept repeating during the Cardiff game too, Leicester has much more quality in them than they have shown. Yes I fully agree.

 

If we can get the players playing more consistently at the Chelsea/Man City game levels and not play with such defensive formation, leaving Vardy alone up front particularly against lower teams, we would be much higher in the table. We did win the league and I truly believe we can do better as we still have very good players.

[ozvaldo]

He shouldn’t have dropped Hamza.  He’s 21 FFS (so not overly tired) and offers more of a complete midfielder role than N’Didi and Papy.

 

Having those two in a 4231 isn’t working. He should have learnt by now.  

 

 

[lgfualol]

12 minutes ago, jim5000 said:

I can't understand why Puel changed away from a winning system back to a losing system, for weaker opposition? It's like he doesn't know what he is doing, and despite clear evidence to the contrary, is determined to stick to the lesser system that he believes is 'right'.

3 cdms against a team that barely attacks? Puel is getting ripped for playing 2 cdms..

 

He only changed one player by choice, an attacking change and we should have won comfortably but somehow didnt. It happens.

[Ian Nacho]

1 hour ago, Raw Dykes said:

I'm finding today's defeat pretty hard to take. A part of me could see it coming a mile off. Beat 2 of the big 6 in a row, so what other possible outcome against one of the worst sides in the league than a home loss? But still, I thought maybe, just maybe, we'd turned a corner and might enjoy a comfortable, straightforward win when it was expected.

 

I feel like people will think I'm spoilt. We're top half and we've just beaten Chelsea away and Man City. Maybe they're right, but it's so frustrating to keep failing to break weak teams down at home time and time again. Puel has to sort this out soon, or the crowd will turn to the point where his job is untenable, no matter how many shock wins we get over the big names.

 

Honestly, though, I think I'd be in a much better mood if it wasn't fuching Cardiff we lost to. I can't stand them. I wouldn't mind a result like this so much against anyone else in the league. It was bad enough to lose to them, but then I heard it was their first away win of the season. That wasn't nice to hear. Then I heard they'd only got 2 points on the road before today. Sickening. Can't remember Bombscare Bamba ever playing half that well for us.

Couldn't have worded it better myself. 

[jim5000]

2 minutes ago, lgfualol said:

3 cdms against a team that barely attacks? Puel is getting ripped for playing 2 cdms..

 

He only changed one player by choice, an attacking change and we should have won comfortably but somehow didnt. It happens.

 

Because Gray is terrible, and Chamza gave us something extra in the middle of the park to help develop the play. I see Puel's logic, but results suggest it was wrong. We changed from a team that just beat the last two Premier League Champions back to one that lost against Palace 1-0, and lo and behold, we lost 0-1 against relegation strugglers.

 

If they are good enough to beat Man City and Chelsea, then send them out again against Cardiff and keep the extra attacking subs on the bench in case you need them.

[foxfanazer]

Just now, jim5000 said:

 

Because Gray is terrible, and Chamza gave us something extra in the middle of the park to help develop the play. I see Puel's logic, but results suggest it was wrong. We changed from a team that just beat the last two Premier League Champions back to one that lost against Palace 1-0, and lo and behold, we lost 0-1 against relegation strugglers.

 

If they are good enough to beat Man City and Chelsea, then send them out again against Cardiff and keep the extra attacking subs on the bench in case you need them.

Simplistic nonsense

[jim5000]

5 minutes ago, foxfanazer said:

Simplistic nonsense

Results suggest otherwise

[foxfanazer]

Just now, jim5000 said:

Results suggest otherwise

So you think we should have the same formation, lineup and gameplan no matter who the opposition is?

[MPH]

1 hour ago, katieakita said:

A couple of months ago we had the biggest set back in the clubs history, maybe without the tragedy Puel would have been gone by now but is the club really in the right place to change managers now. Do not think anyone thinks this side is the finished article but we are in a far better place now than when Puel took over. Younger players have come in and some older players have moved on. We had more than enough chances to win today but fell for a sucker punch. People also seem to forget we have a backroom who monitor the players and some were leggy and out on their legs. we are still a few players short of pushing for a top 6/7 place. For his knockers Puel has inherited some players who are surplus and have been costly but has increased the value of plenty of the squad in the likes of Chilwell, Maguire, Hamza, Ricardo, Madders, Barnes and Benkovich. Very poor day at the office today but do not think the knives should be out just yet. If it is time to change managers we need to make sure we make the right decision and not sure who is out there to step in

i would argue right at the beginning of the transfer window would be the best time to get a new manager- it would give him a chance to bring a couple of players in.

 

i actually think new leadership would help motivate the players - i think they need a new father figure at the club. 

[jim5000]

8 minutes ago, foxfanazer said:

So you think we should have the same formation, lineup and gameplan no matter who the opposition is?

 

Consistency is one of the things Puel is looking for. We have been up and down but the one thing everyone in the ground and everyone on this forum knows is that the current system isn't working, it is completely hit and miss, we struggle to break down teams at all.

 

Puel stumbled upon a new system that somehow beat Chelsea and Man City, and yet instead of seeing if they could break down a lesser team, reverted back to the old system. It's not a science, its a sport, and he changed a winning lineup.

 

He's becoming the tinkerman. We've had the 3rd most changes to the starting lineup in the league. And yet when he finds the formula, he changes away from it. 3 'CDM's might seem weird against Cardiff, but the system just beat Chelsea and Man City so why not at least give it a half to see what happens? If it doesn't work, then bring on Gray.

Edited 30 December 2018 by jim5000

[foxfanazer]

1 minute ago, MPH said:

i would argue right at the beginning of the transfer window would be the best time to get a new manager- it would give him a chance to bring a couple of players in.

 

i actually think new leadership would help motivate the players - i think they need a new father figure at the club. 

Or an old one 

[foxfanazer]

Just now, jim5000 said:

 

Consistency is one of the things Puel is looking for. We have been up and down but the one thing everyone in the ground and everyone on this forum knows is that the current system isn't working, it is completely hit and miss, we struggle to break down teams at all.

 

Puel stumbled upon a new system that somehow beat Chelsea and Man City, and yet instead of seeing if they could break down a lesser team, reverted back to the old system. It's not a science, its a sport, and he changed a winning lineup.

 

He's becoming the tinkerman. We've had the 3rd most changes to the starting lineup in the league. And yet when he finds the formula, he changes away from it. 3 'CDM's might seem weird against Cardiff, but the just beat Chelsea and Man City so why not at least give the system a half to see what happens? If it doesn't work, then bring on Gray.

It worked because neither Chelsea or Man City had 9 men camped in their own box. Also we created enough chances to win the game and if Maddison converts the penalty we're talking about a different result. I agree that we need to find a way to make these types of games easier to win but playing the way we did against Chelsea and Man city isn't viable against the likes of Cardiff etc

[Nod.E]

1 hour ago, turtmcfly said:

But you want to actually sack him. You would actually sack him. The grim chutzpah of a rank footballing no mark deciding that based on his amateur hour theories someone should get the sack is somewhere between laughable and disgusting. 

 

Plus, c'mon... that latest post is the work of a undersexed, over-rubbed 15 year old. All it needed was 'I rest my case' to complete it. 

Yes I would sack him, because he, like you, can't seem to see what many else do. This isn't about my tactical ability, it's about his lack of it. My suggestions are just that, and an effort to illustrate how the game might have been treated alternatively. I don't claim to be a tactical masterclass but one thing I am confident of is that there HAD to be a better solution in that game than continuing with that formation and Mendy and N'didi staying put in the middle of the park.

 

I'm not the type to get involved with 'X manager out' narrative, and I've been late to the party on this latest witch hunt. I don't revel in it as many do, nor do I bend every argument to a manager in/out debate. I will, however, reluctantly suggest that we'd be better off with a more tactically astute manager when the evidence suggests that that's the case. Is that disgusting? 

 

You're yet to present an argument against my tactical suggestions and have instead resorted to personal insults. It's a shame you're not prepared to enter a debate on the matter, really. You're as guilty as the Puel Out witch hunters in that your view is your view and anything other than your view is disgusting. It's that attitude which got us to Brexit and look how well that's going. Too many folk like you about.