Why do we always struggle in the big games?

[Dan]

After today I am convinced it actually stems from Rodgers. He's a coward.

[foxes_rule1978]

Wouldn’t say we are bottlers we have achieved a lot, and have a piece of silverware too, the PL title. Over the last few years we can be proud even with today’s massive set back 

[Legend_in_blue]

We haven't started our big games yet.  

 

They start with Thursday night.

 

 

[MattFox]

Rodgers record in big games was always pretty poor at Liverpool and Celtic

[Guest Mickyblueeyes]

Mentality. From the coaching staff to the players. They gave up today. Gave up. They’ve struggled mentally for months. The fear overtook them. That’s a number of things. The group of players, the captain, the manager the back room staff etc. We don’t have the mental strength nor the voices to coach and guide us through difficult times.

[Sampson]

As a squad we're too reliant on young, talented but inconsistent and mentally weak players really.

[Gevans_97]

I think it is a Rodgers problem. I remember at the start of the season, we were flying, United were nowhere, we go to Old Trafford and play completely into their hands. Maddison on the wing, we didn’t press with the intensity we usually did, we let them play and they beat us. 

 

At that point we were 2nd in the league, playing a certain way because we were scared of a team in mid table. Same with tonight with his half time change. Completely played into Bournemouth’s hands, let them play, they gained confidence, and we lose the game. 

 

Liverpool and Man City don’t try and shut up shop after 45 mins when they’re 1 up. They go in for the kill. We should have too.

 

i hate to mention Puel, and I’m not trying to suggest he’s better than Brendan or anything like that, but his record in games against the “big 6” was fantastic. With mainly the same squad. We used to be giant killers, like Wolves were last year. So the players are there. Brendan just gives our opposition too much respect. 

[yag101]

Just need to look at history for this one.

 

Liverpool under Rodgers - flat track bullies, very weak in the big games, not capable of 'getting the job done' when it really counts. 

 

Leicester under everyone bar Rodgers - excellent in the big games, can sometimes struggle to break down solid - yet weaker - teams (e.g. Pulis's West Brom in the title winning season). 

 

Leicester under Rodgers - same as his Liverpool side, but with less quality. 

 

To conclude I'd like to say that Rodgers is probably among the best we can get, but his arrogance is going to frustrate us all. He has not been good against the top teams (Liverpool, Man City) because he expects us to play them at their own game (and inevitably lose due to the gulf in quality and arrogance - see Arsene Wenger) and bemoans the team when we can't do it. 

 

I will also add _when any team is defeated 4-0, as we were in the second half - it's often a tactical defeat. It's a team sport - with the right tactics, even an inferior team can hold their own. But it's rare for every single individual to underperform on an individual level to that extent if the tactics are absolutely spot on and the intentions are right. 

[Sunbury Fox]

In the second half of the season we've pretty much struggled to win any game, let alone big games. If, as is certainly possible, we lose the last 3 games we'll have amassed only 14 points from the last 17 games. That's the same points per game as Bournemouth have managed this season up to today. Just let that sink in. 

[ozleicester]

youth

[sacreblueits442]

3 hours ago, Ian Nacho said:

We never seem to turn up in the big games. Liverpool (h), Man Utd, Chelsea (cup), Villa (cup, both legs), and now today, just to name a few. I know there's some quality sides in there but we always never seem to perform as we can in these games.  

..I have said this time and time again!!!

Absolutely no idea what he says to the players before going out on the pitch but whatever it is, I wish he would keep his thoughts to himself.

[sacreblueits442]

2 hours ago, shailen said:

I don't think we have an issue as such. In our recent history, we've won a Premier league and got to the champions league QF. We've had a rough time this season, as I think we aren't tactically as well drilled as other big teams and we rely on morale and momentum. I wouldn't put BR in those managers you would call a tactical genius, but a manager who keeps morale high and looks to unite the squad to try and get results through the "there is no I in team" manner. 

..I am really not sure what you have been watching!!!

  I must admit sometimes I think your post are just to wind people up, the problem is I always get suckered in.

[sacreblueits442]

2 hours ago, foxes_rule1978 said:

Wouldn’t say we are bottlers we have achieved a lot, and have a piece of silverware too, the PL title. Over the last few years we can be proud even with today’s massive set back 

..not too sure you have understood the gist of the topic!!!

 Our performance since December is equal to the run in of Spurs in our Premiership winning season. The fact that we refer to them as "bottlers" is a fair assessment.

  Our achievements prior have nothing to do with what we are talking about.

[twister]

I do want to make a point

 

the team beat spurs and arsenal at home earlier in the season and showed great spirit, at liverpool away only lost in injury time.

 

I am convinced something has happened mid season in the dressing room, you don't go from the sort of football the team were showing pre christmas to post christmas without something going on. 

 

Maybe when Kasper writes a book one day it will be revealed, we shall see.

 

 

[sacreblueits442]

39 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

youth

..I think that is a cop out!!!

Rodgers has gone through his whole career with this lack of tactical flexibility.

Just listening to him being interviewed and you feel he is not trustworthy.

   He is inherently flawed, if you are unable to see your shortcomings then you don't know you have a problem.

 

[Leicester_Loyal]

44 minutes ago, Gevans_97 said:

I think it is a Rodgers problem. I remember at the start of the season, we were flying, United were nowhere, we go to Old Trafford and play completely into their hands. Maddison on the wing, we didn’t press with the intensity we usually did, we let them play and they beat us. 

 

At that point we were 2nd in the league, playing a certain way because we were scared of a team in mid table. Same with tonight with his half time change. Completely played into Bournemouth’s hands, let them play, they gained confidence, and we lose the game. 

 

Liverpool and Man City don’t try and shut up shop after 45 mins when they’re 1 up. They go in for the kill. We should have too.

 

i hate to mention Puel, and I’m not trying to suggest he’s better than Brendan or anything like that, but his record in games against the “big 6” was fantastic. With mainly the same squad. We used to be giant killers, like Wolves were last year. So the players are there. Brendan just gives our opposition too much respect. 

I've just been thinking back to Maddison on the wing I've spoke about it a bit tonight but I've just looked at the early season games.

 

We started Maddison on the wing against Wolves, first game of the season, 0-0, probably lucky not to lose it due to the new handball rule. Next up Chelsea, Maddison on the wing again, 1-0 down, playing poor, he puts him into the centre in the middle of the 2nd half and we get an equaliser. Next up Sheff Utd away, again Maddison on the wing, it's 1-1, he puts Maddison back into the centre, brings barnes on for Praet, puts Barnes on the wing and we score 5 minutes later and win 2-1.

 

Next game Bournemouth at home, he starts Maddison in the centre 4141, we win 3-1, easy. Next we go to United away, 4141 again, he's put Maddison on the left wing, we play poor for the whole 90 minutes and get nothing out of it. Spurs at home next, I can't remember where Maddison played for this one, I thought it was on the wing and then he was swapped into the centre before scoring the winner, but I'm not 100% sure.

 

Newcastle at home next, Maddison injured, we win 5-0. Next up Liverpool away, he starts Maddison on the wing once again in a 4141, we pretty much get bossed the whole game, which was expected it's Liverpool. After this he starts Maddison in the centre at home to Burnley, and we go on our winning run.

 

To me and many others on here, we kept saying why isn't he persisting with Maddison in the centre? It seemed like such an obvious thing to do, but everytime he reverted back. Even against Liverpool at home he reverted back to it, it's like he's trying to be tactically smart, but it's just ruining us. For me the substitution of Iheanacho today was exactly the same, it was obvious to us all that we should have kept the same team and formation for the start of the second half, but he changed it and it absolutely ruined any chance we had of winning.

 

I remember someone saying dropping the point or three points in the early games of the season will be worth it if Rodgers learns from his mistakes, but he just doesn't seem to be doing that. Every two or three games he seems to make a questionable substitution, formation change , general instruction, something needs to change or we're on a very slippery slope and might well be fighting a relegation battle next season.

[Jordan]

When I've been thinking about Leicester City post-restart, I've thought often about how Brendan Rodgers had his squad watch "The Last Dance" during lockdown. 

 

For those of you unfamiliar with this series, it's a 10-part documentary about Michael Jordan's last season with the Chicago Bulls, and his career in general.

(some spoilers below for those that may want to see it, and if you've watched it, you can probably also skip ahead).

---------

MJ was probably the most ruthless competitor in pro team sports history, having a will to win that was far stronger than any of his rivals. Not only that, but MJ supplemented his competitive drive with an absolutely extraordinary pettiness. Just about every episode in that series features a moment where MJ was facing a challenge, took personal offense to something someone else said or did, and used that spite as motivation to crush his opponent (even forming vendettas from the most benign perceived slights, such as an opposing coach not saying hello to him in a restaurant, or a player on another team having the nerve to simply play well in a season or even in just one game).

 

MJ's competitiveness was also so extreme that he wouldn't tolerate any teammate sharing nothing less than 100% commitment to winning. He was probably often a miserable person to be around, but his competitiveness was the driving force behind a 6x-championship dynasty that ranks as perhaps the greatest team in American sports history.

 

Dennis Rodman was prone to bouts of mayhem and wild escapades, but the vast majority of time on court, he was an absolute animal when it came to rebounding and defense. Rodman paid closer attention to his opponents' tendencies and how the ball bounced off of the rim than any other player in the league. He knew what his opponent was going to do before his opponent even thought it. Pundits thought Rodman would never mesh with Jordan, but Rodman's single-mindedness when it came to the dirty work in basketball wound up being a perfect fit.

 

Once, during a particularly intense practice, Jordan got so incensed by physical play from bench player Steve Kerr that he punched Kerr in the face and was kicked out of practice. As that story gets told in "The Last Dance," that moment wound up being the catalyst that forged respect between Jordan and Kerr (because he showed MJ he was not one to back down, not even from the best player in the world). Like, Michael Jordan actually assaulted a teammate and that was the moment that wound up bringing them closer together. Yes, that is so absurd that I had to type it out again. At the end of that season, it was Kerr that made the game winning shot to win the 1997 NBA Finals. Even a substitute player like Kerr--a player that never started a single game in 5 seasons with the Bulls--had to have the same mentality as the greatest player in basketball history.

 

The list of big games and big moments where MJ and the Bulls rose to the occasion stretches for miles.

 

This attitude isn't something that lends itself to motivational slogans or posters in business office break rooms. MJ's mentality teetered on the edge of psychosis. I can't fully wrap my mind around this kind of level of competitiveness..

------------

Apparently, Leicester City's players were supposed to watch this and learn what it takes to be a winner.

 

So, now that we know about "The Last Dance," I'll rhetorically ask: is there anything about City's play since restart that resembles Jordan and the 1997-98 Bulls in any way?

 

There were maybe some aspects similar to this before Rodgers signed his contract extension (such as showing no mercy to any team that fell to 10 men, or Jamie Vardy going on a huge scoring streak that was fueled entirely by spite). But even before lockdown, City failed to win the big games they had, and around Christmas and on through the new year, that lack of ability to rise to big occasions became something more significant.

 

One would perhaps wonder if anything would maybe be different about City as they approached big games after lockdown, and after watching "The Last Dance." Clearly, that is not the case.

 

That kind of stuff just isn't going to work with the personalities we have on this team. The only player really like a 1990s Chicago Bull on our team is Vardy, who is a complete one-of-a-kind player. When a manager has players that are little unsure of themselves, get anxious in stressful situations, and maybe even have a little bit of impostor syndrome, he's got to approach things a different way.

 

For better or worse, we were never gonna hear Ben Chilwell talking shit to the Chelsea bench, Youri Tielemans saying he was insulted that Frank Lampard thought he could start Billy Gilmour against him at the King Power Stadium and come away with a win, or Dennis Praet calling out the media for suggesting Chelsea would surpass City in both the league and the cup.

 

Sure, the players will watch "The Last Dance," think it's cool, and maybe dream for a night of being like Mike. But if they try to emulate that without the borderline evilness it takes to actually crush anyone that stands in the way of you winning a sports game, they'll find out that's not within them at exactly the wrong moments, and either freeze up or make glaring individual errors--which they have.

 

Rodgers has to speak to and about his players to make them believe that they are not only good, but better than they think they are. That means not talking with an I'm good tone. They're good.

He's got to encourage his players to trust themselves to make assertive decisions on the pitch, and to believe in themselves to make plays instead of fearing things are going to go bad. In a lot of big games, Rodgers seems to be setting up his teams to not fail instead of to succeed, and his substitution patters are also in line with this.

 

Rodgers was at City for less than a year before signing a new contract that beats anything any player has. That's a very unusual situation for Leicester City, and something that can lead to friction in the dressing room if he's not an adroit man-manager. So, if he's going to overmanage like he did today and change a system at halftime that was clearly working, players are going to think, "what is this guy doing?" and "why is this guy getting paid so much money to do this?"

 

And when you're the third-highest-paid manager in the Premier League and you do make a mistake, you admit it, because nobody is going to hold themselves or their teammates accountable for their effort if the leader doesn't have the same standard for himself. You say something like, "I thought we started getting a little careless with the ball towards the end of the first half and gave Bournemouth a glimmer of hope to get back into the game. I wanted to snuff that out right away, so I brought on Dennis to shore up the midfield. Looking at how the second half played out, I may have jumped the gun on that change, so I'll hold my hands up. Next time we're in that situation, I'm going to encourage my team to continue pressing and to fight to regain the upper hand."

 

You don't talk about your complete tactical miscalculation as if it were a brilliant plan, and you sure as shit don't do something like throw a guy that thrives or struggles based on his confidence like Kelechi Iheanacho under the bus for how the team defended on the wings (I mean, seriously, Brendan?!).

[deanolegend1989]

3 hours ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

I've just been thinking back to Maddison on the wing I've spoke about it a bit tonight but I've just looked at the early season games.

 

We started Maddison on the wing against Wolves, first game of the season, 0-0, probably lucky not to lose it due to the new handball rule. Next up Chelsea, Maddison on the wing again, 1-0 down, playing poor, he puts him into the centre in the middle of the 2nd half and we get an equaliser. Next up Sheff Utd away, again Maddison on the wing, it's 1-1, he puts Maddison back into the centre, brings barnes on for Praet, puts Barnes on the wing and we score 5 minutes later and win 2-1.

 

Next game Bournemouth at home, he starts Maddison in the centre 4141, we win 3-1, easy. Next we go to United away, 4141 again, he's put Maddison on the left wing, we play poor for the whole 90 minutes and get nothing out of it. Spurs at home next, I can't remember where Maddison played for this one, I thought it was on the wing and then he was swapped into the centre before scoring the winner, but I'm not 100% sure.

 

Newcastle at home next, Maddison injured, we win 5-0. Next up Liverpool away, he starts Maddison on the wing once again in a 4141, we pretty much get bossed the whole game, which was expected it's Liverpool. After this he starts Maddison in the centre at home to Burnley, and we go on our winning run.

 

To me and many others on here, we kept saying why isn't he persisting with Maddison in the centre? It seemed like such an obvious thing to do, but everytime he reverted back. Even against Liverpool at home he reverted back to it, it's like he's trying to be tactically smart, but it's just ruining us. For me the substitution of Iheanacho today was exactly the same, it was obvious to us all that we should have kept the same team and formation for the start of the second half, but he changed it and it absolutely ruined any chance we had of winning.

 

I remember someone saying dropping the point or three points in the early games of the season will be worth it if Rodgers learns from his mistakes, but he just doesn't seem to be doing that. Every two or three games he seems to make a questionable substitution, formation change , general instruction, something needs to change or we're on a very slippery slope and might well be fighting a relegation battle next season.

Great post. Spot on. Mendy and Ndidi against low block Brighton and having a fully fit Tielemens on the bench is up there with mental illlness too.

I wonder what you do vs a team you need to open up? play a creative midfielder or play 2 DMs and protect?

If your playing well and in control of a game vs a team  low on confidence and can’t defend, what should you do? Stick attacking and pressuring or go all defensive and invite them on?

Obvious answers right Brendan? Oh right maybe not.

[st albans fox]

But we did turn up ......we were controlling the game .....did anyone who watched that first half see any outcome apart from a Lcfc win ???

[CosbehFox]

Weak mentality - strongest voice is in goal. 
 

At 1-1, we should have just regrouped. Instead the most intense players lost their heads but we were playing within ourselves from half time. 
 

We have a complacency streak combined with little belief we can challenge the top teams 

[Nalis]

Every team has an off day so you can forgive one off poor performances or defeats against lower league opposition.

 

What is unforgivable is only getting a total of four points from the aways at Brighton, Watford, Bournemouth and Norwich. 6pts returned would have been a poor return from them and even that would have had us ahead of  Chelsea with a better goal difference.

 

Fear that not making the champions league will spark an exodus.

[Cadno'r Cymoedd]

9 hours ago, foxfanazer said:

Lack of leaders, lack of direction, poor substitutions, poor tactics, acceptance of being little old Leicester 

I have not got any rep left but this is much of it.

 

It's been clear we've lacked a real outfield leader since before Christmas. When the heat is on, we needed someone to step up and get stuck in.

 

Having a little book and pencil on the sidelines doesn't make you a tactical genius. Quite the opposite as we've seen. So many poor changes in formation - the Maddison post above is a perfect example as is the treatment of Iheanacho after he's had good games - and personnel between and in games. Last night summed it up. 

 

That mentality of 5th or 6th will be good enough for the likes of Leicester that even some on here share. We were 2nd and playing brilliantly in November. That is what is so soul destroying. We blew this and saying 5th or 6th is great doesn't wash. 

[st albans fox]

2 minutes ago, Nalis said:

Every team has an off day so you can forgive one off poor performances or defeats against lower league opposition.

 

What is unforgivable is only getting a total of two points from the aways at Brighton, Watford, Bournemouth and Norwich. 6pts returned would have been a poor return from them and even that would have had us 3pts ahead of  Chelsea with a better goal difference.

 

Fear that not making the champions league will spark an exodus.

We got four ?

[Ian Nacho]

It’s always going to be difficult to get into the Champions League when you don’t beat the teams in and around you. I know we collapsed against someone lower down the table yesterday, but the team highest in the table we’ve beat is Sheff Utd in 7th. That has to be of concern. 4 points out of 9 games against teams in the top 6 currently isn’t good enough if we want to be pushing for those Champions League places. 

[Hammo]

There are far too many players in the team that you want to grab by the shoulders and shake and remind them in no uncertain terms how much they and the team mean to so many people.
 

This sadly is a team full of cowards, buck-passers and bottlers. They lack the stomach for the fight. That’s why they keep letting us down in the most important matches.