Vardy at RW vs. low block?

[vanity]

I have been thinking about how easily Wolves and others have been able to take Vards out of the game, effectively stifling our attack the last two seasons.

 

Could occasionally moving Vardy to the wing be a positive response worth considering?

 

In particular I am thinking vs. a low block, what I would call a bunker defense. A defense that sets up deep in order to stay compact and prevent through-balls and attacks through the center.

 

Why it might make sense: against a low block, Vardy is too often isolated and unable to get service. On the wing:

 

- Vardy should see less defensive attention, giving him more space to work, and if the defense does elect to shade towards him, it will unclog the middle and the left;

 

- Ricardo will see gobs of space on his overlapping runs if the defense shades toward Vardy, and with Vardy moving without the ball, he can continue to clear space by being such a dangerous outlet for RP (think Ricardo overlapping, Vards passes the ball to him and then takes off towards a dangerous part of the pitch, he will almost always suck defensive resources with him in a way our other wings won't);

 

- it is easier to get the ball to our wings than to our striker when the defense is bunkered up centrally, which means more time with the ball at Vards' feet;

 

- his speed should allow him to turn the corner more often than our other wings, allowing him to attack horizontally with Perez in the middle, which is a better option than Perez attacking horizontally with Jamie in the middle;

 

- obviously he can still cut inside at times, and he is a good enough passer to find players like Perez and Barnes, though I think late-arriving runs from Maddison and Tielemans at the top of the box would be VERY MUCH in play with Ayoze demanding attn centrally and Jamie attacking (also effective when Jamie attacks horizontally after turning the corner); 

 

- Vardy on the wing should also force the defense to maintain proper spacing, which Wolves did not need to against us on Sunday bc of how narrow our 433 was (even with Barnes out there we remained fairly narrow due to Barnes' preference for cutting inside vs. turning the corner on the outside);

 

- Perez is more effective when positioned centrally and doesn't rely so heavily on speed and space behind defenders to be effective, clearly has more size for headers;

 

- we can go to this without changing personnel on the field, and it has the potential to confuse and disrupt the defense, even if only used occasionally. 

 

The downside: we may be taking Jamie off his best position, and even when he is stifled, he only needs to catch you napping once to score. Also Leicester fans might go into open revolt. Indeed, I suspect me even posting this will make many think me too thick to post on Foxestalk. I am sure there are other disadvantages that I am overlooking. 

 

It may be worth noting this idea isn't without precedent. In the past, I know it was speculated Arsene wanted him to play on the wing at Arsenal, and he played on the wing occasionally for Hodgson as an international. 

 

Anyone have any thoughts? On this idea or re how to beat the low block in general? This crap where Vardy is starved for service and cannot get a sniff of the ball needs to stop. 

[Stadt]

Vardy missed an absolute sitter against Wolves, if he was playing on the right he wouldn't be in that position. He's scored 75 goals in 143 games from 15/16 onwards up front.

[StriderHiryu]

@vanity yes in theory something like that could work. In 15/16 Vardy often drifted to the left wing so it’s not like he hasn’t done it before. Perez has a good striking record so we’d still have someone in the box who could finish. 

 

However, it’s notable that Vardy stayed as the focal point in all of our preseason games and against Wolves so it seems like Rodgers has no interest in trying it. Not yet at least!

 

Regarding breaking down a low block, well that’s been our issue since winning the title. Against Wolves our front 5 players were far too static. That Ricardo was our most progressive players says it all really! The crisp one touch passing and interchange in preseason was missing. 

 

There are many ways a low block can be breached but regardless of the system used until passing and moving is of a superior quality then we won’t get anywhere. The other alternative would be to go direct or revert to a counter attack ourselves but we only tend to counter versus the top 6 and it won’t work versus the Burnley’s of this world. 

 

Really we we could do with a true Mahrez replacement- a player who is prepared to take his man on, can play the one touch passing game and can finish. But that’s the reason why Pep happily splashed out 60m on the guy. Such players are hard to find!

[Hollyfox]

Vardy is no winger although he hits a lovely low ball across the face of the goal when he gets in those positions. 

 

Much better at laying off and spinning into the gaps. 

 

Surely this is where Tielemans comes in for a few killer balls. 

 

Can't actually remember Vardy taking someone on with the ball and coming out on top. 

 

Keep him doing what he's best at👍

[murphy]

Vardy has been getting almost a goal a game since Rogers arrived.  @vanity, aren't you trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist? 

 

I remember the thread you started at least a year ago declaring the demise of JV.   He'll get 20 again this year.

[Cecchini1976]

Against teams that don’t defend so deep Vardy is lethal, but his game is not suited against teams that defend deep. I think moving him out wide for 10 mins spells against deep defensive teams could make the defenders think. It’s not like he would be playing as a traditional winger when out wide, he would play like we are trying to under Rodgers and that’s the wide men getting in to the box to score and the full backs to provide width. What we need against deep defences is a forward that can come and get the ball and move out wide and in turn that will move the defence and create space for other players to run in to, a little

like Augero does for city and Firmino for Liverpool. I think Vardy can be a menace out wide against teams. But Rodgers sees them every day in training and knows what works best. We just move the ball to slow and I think that’s because the front 3 don’t move the defence around, and that in turn leaves no space to move the ball forward. The only other answer is to have a player that can beat a few men to force the defence to come out.

 

i trust Rodgers will find the answer, it will just be frustrating until he does. At least Chelsea won’t defend deep on Sunday, so I think Vardy will grab a goal or 2

[Cecchini1976]

Just now, murphy said:

Vardy has been getting almost a goal a game since Rogers arrived.  @vanity, aren't you trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist? 

 

I remember the thread you started at least a year ago declaring the demise of JV.   He'll get 20 again this year.

Agreed Vardys record is good under Rodgers, but we have only played 2 teams that have defended the box against us and that was Newcastle that we lost and Wolves last Sunday. It’s difficult for any forward playing against teams defending that deep.

[oxford blue]

Interesting thoughts but Vardy was isolated because of the way City were set up. There was no width in the attacks for the majority of the game so the Wolves defence were not stretched. It didn't help that Chilwell had a poor game, but we need to consider how to break down teams. Loads of possession, yes, but it was so slow that Wolves had too many behind the ball for Vardy to be really effective. In retrospect, I wonder if Rdgers would have started with Albrighton: ok he did little when he came on but it is always ahrder for late substitutes to make an impact: at least he would have added width creating more room for Vardy

 

 

 

 

 

 

[murphy]

10 minutes ago, Cecchini1976 said:

Agreed Vardys record is good under Rodgers, but we have only played 2 teams that have defended the box against us and that was Newcastle that we lost and Wolves last Sunday. It’s difficult for any forward playing against teams defending that deep.

Brighton, Huddersfield, Burnley... 

 

I'm not sure what you mean by 'defended the box' but if it is only 2 teams in 14 games, then I say again we are solving a problem that doesn't exist.

[Cecchini1976]

18 minutes ago, murphy said:

Brighton, Huddersfield, Burnley... 

 

I'm not sure what you mean by 'defended the box' but if it is only 2 teams in 14 games, then I say again we are solving a problem that doesn't exist.

He wasn’t  in charge vs Brighton and they didn’t defend deep against us, they actually played some good stuff against us. Away games are slightly different, Huddersfield were down and Burnley didn’t defend deep, we did as we had 10 men for most of the game .

 

its the same problem we had under Puel, we couldn’t beat teams that defended deep. 

[Arriba Los Zorros]

Hmmmm a good idea but not too sure it would benefit us, really we need someone like Vardy whose movement in the box and clinical finishing can help snap up chances against teams that defend deep in a low block. He might not be as effective in running onto through balls but he's good at attacking pull backs and low crosses (if not so much crosses in the air).

 

Also, Vardy can help improve his performances against these sort of teams a bit by dropping back and holding up the ball when he can, IMO.

[kyleolly]

I think Vardy going out wide can be effective and he was out wide a couple of times vs wolves but it’s pretty pointless as there’s nobody in the area to finish the chances he’d create

Edited 13 August 2019 by kyleolly

[HybridFox]

Could work on paper but the reality would be very different. England played him out of position time and time again and it was frustrating to watch.

Edited 13 August 2019 by TK95

[Apollo]

I remember Vardy as the occasional winger in 14/15 - really don't want to see it again

[murphy]

1 hour ago, Cecchini1976 said:

He wasn’t  in charge vs Brighton and they didn’t defend deep against us, they actually played some good stuff against us. Away games are slightly different, Huddersfield were down and Burnley didn’t defend deep, we did as we had 10 men for most of the game .

 

its the same problem we had under Puel, we couldn’t beat teams that defended deep. 

Fair enough.

 

On second reading, it seems I have misunderstood @vanity's original idea and your posts.  Happens sometimes when I've been online too long.

 

 

[sacreblueits442]

1 hour ago, Cecchini1976 said:

Against teams that don’t defend so deep Vardy is lethal, but his game is not suited against teams that defend deep. I think moving him out wide for 10 mins spells against deep defensive teams could make the defenders think. It’s not like he would be playing as a traditional winger when out wide, he would play like we are trying to under Rodgers and that’s the wide men getting in to the box to score and the full backs to provide width. What we need against deep defences is a forward that can come and get the ball and move out wide and in turn that will move the defence and create space for other players to run in to, a little

like Augero does for city and Firmino for Liverpool. I think Vardy can be a menace out wide against teams. But Rodgers sees them every day in training and knows what works best. We just move the ball to slow and I think that’s because the front 3 don’t move the defence around, and that in turn leaves no space to move the ball forward. The only other answer is to have a player that can beat a few men to force the defence to come out.

 

i trust Rodgers will find the answer, it will just be frustrating until he does. At least Chelsea won’t defend deep on Sunday, so I think Vardy will grab a goal or 2

...where have we heard this before!!!!

  We have suffered this last season, Brendan came in and injected more spirit and intensity within the squad but it began to tail off towards the end of the season. I did not foresee this becoming an issue this season, as I believed the problem had been identified, and some sort of plan would have been in place, to recognise, when to adjust in order to negate a drop in or intensity

   We became static upfront which meant options were at a premium, moving Vardy wide left was an option but I felt him dropping a bit deeper would have served us better and the focal point was then to play in Perez in the box or just on the edge.

  With Perezs' quick feet, and ability to spin in the box, it would cause their defence to either dive in or attempt to block. Taking a leaf from the Stoke game, Perez was receiving balls played on the floor for him to get on to, Vardy hung back on the edge of the box centrally available to pick up anything loose.

  There was a readjustment to be made, without change of personnel, and it was an option that we had played before.

[Rasmic123]

[shailen]

He's a centre forward and one of the best in the world in that position. What we should be working on is getting our wingers and midfielders to create more for him, as we know he will put them away.

 

That tielemans ball across was the only chance he had on Sunday and was feeding off scraps and very isolated.

[Leeds Fox]

Playing this way would compromise us defensively as I’d have to assume for it to be effective, Vardy wouldn’t be expected to carry out defensive duties. 

 

It worked with Mahrez because we had Kante and we wanted teams to attack us. We especially wanted these attacks out wide as we could deal with the crosses and launch a counter attack. 

 

Playing him out wide wouldn’t work. Allowing him and Perez (assuming he’s going to be on the wing) some fluidity could create openings. After a few games, teams would likely click onto this and nullify it. 

[Vardinio'sCat]

No

[vanity]

21 hours ago, Stadt said:

 

 

21 hours ago, murphy said:

Vardy has been getting almost a goal a game since Rogers arrived.  @vanity, aren't you trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist? 

 

I remember the thread you started at least a year ago declaring the demise of JV.   He'll get 20 again this year.

I was delighted to see Vards catch fire under Rodgers. But the Wolves game reminded many of us of the problems we have when teams bunker down against us. We both know we have seen this be a problem consistently the last couple years. You are suggesting that problem is resolved, but watching the Wolves match, I am dubious. It may well still be a problem. But I really hope you are right, not me. 

 

The idea is not to play Vardy at RW in general, but when we are being thoroughly smothered and struggling to get him involved. A change up that gives the defense a different look 

 

There's no way I said Vardy was done last season. IDK the precise thread you are referencing, but it likely had to do with either (1) the need to bring in another striker who is actual competition for Vardy bc if he went down we'd be absolutely f'd (Perez addresses this concern), or more likely (2) discussing the need for a different striker who could come back to the ball, was skilled in hold up play, and participated in build-up play in the style Diego Costa. But that was when we were playing Puel's system, and that was a proposed solution to our inability to score goals against the lesser lights of the league. 

 

I absolutely agree Vardy scores 20+ this season if he stays healthy. I don't want him replaced, either on the team or as our striker. Again, this would be a different look we could turn to when struggling. I concede it may be a bad idea, that was why I asked y'all what you thought.

[vanity]

22 hours ago, Stadt said:

Vardy missed an absolute sitter against Wolves, if he was playing on the right he wouldn't be in that position. He's scored 75 goals in 143 games from 15/16 onwards up front.

True, though Perez might've been. Though if it is the ball I am thinking of, if Vardy couldn't get there, no chance Perez gets it.

 

Def do not want Vardy off striker duty in general. This is more an attacking wrinkle to actually get Vardy more involved when he is not getting service up top and the other side is playing deep. 

[EastAnglianFox]

The next time I'm at a game and Vards gets nullified by a deep sitting defender I'm going to stand up, look around and shout "low block" akin to how Peter Griffin says "Roadhouse" on Family Guy 

[Mint23]

Our problem certainly isn’t Vardy, he’s the greatest striker on our clubs history. Our problem can be the lack of a plan B, since Ulloa left we’ve not had a “target man” to mix things up. I’m not saying we need a big old fashioned lump up front to come on but I would like us to have another option when it comes to breaking stubborn defences down.

[vanity]

21 hours ago, StriderHiryu said:

Really we we could do with a true Mahrez replacement- a player who is prepared to take his man on, can play the one touch passing game and can finish. But that’s the reason why Pep happily splashed out 60m on the guy. Such players are hard to find!

Great analysis overall, definitely we miss Mahrez specifically. Last season I really wanted to see us spend big on a goal-scoring wing, someone like Mahrez who could not only take on and beat defenders, but had the gravity to pull 2 or 3 towards him so as to open up the box a bit. If we buy someone world class, I'd like to see someone with a similar skill set to Mahrez who can also defend, that would be worth most of the Harry Maguire money IMO. That is what we are missing, that 1-on-1, make defenders miss in dangerous parts of the pitch wing.