Jump to content

Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, volpeazzurro said:

Nobody has said play him on the left wing, you really don't have to play with wingers. Someone suggested play him on the left of a 433 which is something quite different and a role he's very capable of. 

Of course he is 👍

4-3-3 doesn’t have to mean play as an orthodox winger does it ffs

lol

He’d do no more running coming in from the left than he’d do ordinarily anyway, and we know Vardy likes to run the channels

West Ham are a good side, but weren’t fielding their best side. Their two best players were absent.

We set up like lambs to the slaughter

This isn’t hindsight. 
We could have a. Gone for it and b. not had to play Amartey 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Col city fan said:

I think there’s lots of ways we could have played? Albrighton out wide from the start? Praet can come in from the flanks?

To be honest we could have even started with a 4-3-3 with Albrighton on the right and Vardy coming in from the left side. 
There were other options surely?

Unfortunately we ‘defended’ using an extra defender, thus basically losing the midfield. Tielemans as we all surely know by now is better when he has time on the ball. Our midfield set up gave us no time and we were swamped in that area 

Worryingly, the same mistake re formation was made v Man C the previous week - allowing our midfield to be swamped and rendering Tielemans ineffective.  I just hope Rodgers doesn't make it 3 in a row on Sunday.

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, TJB-fox said:

I’ve seen this volpeazzuro pipe up every time we get beat saying we should’ve done this and should’ve done that. Yet never seen him say anything before the game that is tactically useful or comes to fruition. 

I think majority of fans aren’t the biggest supporters of the 352 system but it’s clearly being used to get all our best players on the pitch. Plus, we have **** all wide options. 
 

Coming on here after games we’ve lost saying 352 is shit doesn’t make anyone look particularly tactically aware I’ll be honest. 

Wasn’t there a long running moan about 352 or 532 being our best formation?  I lose track. 
 

whatever the circumstances Brendan set up badly against West Ham. He has done it a number of times. It’s never about getting your best players on the pitch, but getting your best TEAM on the pitch. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ARM1968 said:

Wasn’t there a long running moan about 352 or 532 being our best formation?  I lose track. 
 

whatever the circumstances Brendan set up badly against West Ham. He has done it a number of times. It’s never about getting your best players on the pitch, but getting your best TEAM on the pitch. 

I can’t disagree with what you’ve said there to be fair pal. I’m not blaming BR for Sunday though I think these lads have got more than enough about them to stop WH running through us like they did. Can’t blame Brendan for the defending for the goals. Absolutely horrendous. 
 

My personal disappointment came about because all the years I’ve been watching us, If were cautious or passive were shite. For Leicester city (in recent years) to do well we have to be aggressive and attacking, so for us to turn up and be ponderous and relaxed was so disappointing. Found ourselves 3 down without really knowing what had happened. 
but anyway, onto the next. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

Of course he is 👍

4-3-3 doesn’t have to mean play as an orthodox winger does it ffs

lol

He’d do no more running coming in from the left than he’d do ordinarily anyway, and we know Vardy likes to run the channels

West Ham are a good side, but weren’t fielding their best side. Their two best players were absent.

We set up like lambs to the slaughter

This isn’t hindsight. 
We could have a. Gone for it and b. not had to play Amartey 

 

So who covers Castagne or whoever is playing left back? Or you think he should just be left isolated on his own?

 

Running the channels is a hell of a lot different to having to help out and cover the left back

 

Do you really think we should have easily brushed West Ham aside whilst also missing some of our best players? Have you seen what the Premier League is like this season? You can never realistically call the result of a match before its played, especially when most squads are having to be chopped and changed every week

 

Are you sure you don’t like Amartey? I think you might have some secret love for him :thumbup:

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, deep blue said:

Worryingly, the same mistake re formation was made v Man C the previous week - allowing our midfield to be swamped and rendering Tielemans ineffective.  I just hope Rodgers doesn't make it 3 in a row on Sunday.

In the Premier League you literally can’t set up having a situation whereby you leave yourselves swamped in the midfield. I’ve long said that this is the area where so many games are won and lost. I don’t mean in terms of midfielders scoring goals or making assists particularly, instead it’s the area where most games are ‘controlled’

Knowing that West Ham have a physically strong side who can bully, but who aren’t particularly ‘creative’, setting up to not give Tielemans sufficient time on the ball was a big mistake. We were swamped and really the game was over in essence, by half time 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, moore_94 said:

So who covers Castagne or whoever is playing left back? Or you think he should just be left isolated on his own?

 

Running the channels is a hell of a lot different to having to help out and cover the left back

 

Do you really think we should have easily brushed West Ham aside whilst also missing some of our best players? Have you seen what the Premier League is like this season? You can never realistically call the result of a match before its played, especially when most squads are having to be chopped and changed every week

 

Are you sure you don’t like Amartey? I think you might have some secret love for him :thumbup:

One of the midfield three moves across to cover? You don’t have to leave your full backs isolated in a 4-3-3?

You attack as a unit and defend as a unit, but your forward 3 keep further up to attack quickly when you win the ball back 

Very simplistically, for the last two fixtures, Rodgers, knowing that we’d be pressed, has opted to play a defensive formation by chucking in another ‘defender’ (the third CB). 
You don’t have to do it this way. You can ‘defend’ from the midfield. Eg. Play a Mendy rather than an Amartey. 
Having 3 CB’s in the last two games hasn’t worked exactly because we’ve completely lost the midfield. Too much pressure in the middle will result in our CB’s dropping too deep and we will concede. Like we did do

 

Edited by Col city fan
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

One of the midfield three moves across to cover? You don’t have to leave your full backs isolated in a 4-3-3?

You attack as a unit and defend as a unit, but your forward 3 keep further up to attack quickly when you win the ball back 

 

But you made a big deal about how we needed to control the midfield more? So if we move one of our midfield 3 out wide to help the left back (who in most cases would most likely be Ndidi) you are then having to use Youri and Praet in the middle against Soucek and Noble and then also Lingard who now has a lot more space in the middle to work with and be effective in?

 

Are we playing a deep or high line with a back 4? Play deep and you leave massive gaps between the midfield and defence for their creative players to exploit especially if you play with your forwards sitting high, play a high line and their quick players can take advantage of the space in behind

 

You can’t just leave your front 3 further up waiting for the chance to counter, as then you have to take other players away from their own positions to help cover in other areas, leaving their original areas weaker and susceptible, it’s not as easy an issue to solve as you seem to think it is, and is also why Brendan Rodgers is the manager of a Top 3 Premier League club, I imagine he has a bit more tactical nous than you do and probably knows a fair bit more about the issues he has with his squad and how to deal with them against good opposition.

Edited by moore_94
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Babylon said:

Who's doing his tracking back then? He'd last about 15 minutes in that position at the age of 34. 

Why would he be tracking back anymore than he is now? There would be three midfielders behind him and a fullback on either side. He already quite often peels out to the left at the moment, he's hardly been static in the centre has he. The three at front doesn't mean the outer two are wingers. We'd have Ricardo and Castagne in their best positions attacking from deep when appropriate with an extra midfielder. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, moore_94 said:

So basically have our left side full back completely isolated with no cover ahead of him, making him an easy target for the opposition?

No you have an extra midfielder. How on earth do teams cope without 3 centre halves, which is still hardly extensively used by the better teams across Europe. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

Of course he is 👍

4-3-3 doesn’t have to mean play as an orthodox winger does it ffs

lol

He’d do no more running coming in from the left than he’d do ordinarily anyway, and we know Vardy likes to run the channels

West Ham are a good side, but weren’t fielding their best side. Their two best players were absent.

We set up like lambs to the slaughter

This isn’t hindsight. 
We could have a. Gone for it and b. not had to play Amartey 

 

Spot on. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, volpeazzurro said:

No you have an extra midfielder. How on earth do teams cope without 3 centre halves, which is still hardly extensively used by the better teams across Europe. 

So you move your extra midfielder out wide to help cover the full backs (likely Ndidi in our case), leaving our 2 in midfield against the oppositions midfield 2 or 3 as well as also possibly a forward who drops back to pick up the ball in space (Lingard) so now you are outnumbered in midfield?

 

By having wingers that drop back to help out the full backs? Can’t just leave Vardy as a winger stood on the half way line whilst the opposition attack, makes the chances of the defensive set up becoming unbalanced and leaving more space for the opposition as players have to shift over to cover the space where someone like Barnes would have dropped back to cover

 

It’s not as simple as you think dealing with tactics and managing the opposition, shown by the fact that even some of the worlds best tactical managers (Klopp, Guardiola, Bielsa) get it wrong

Edited by moore_94
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, volpeazzurro said:

Why would he be tracking back anymore than he is now? There would be three midfielders behind him and a fullback on either side. He already quite often peels out to the left at the moment, he's hardly been static in the centre has he. The three at front doesn't mean the outer two are wingers. We'd have Ricardo and Castagne in their best positions attacking from deep when appropriate with an extra midfielder. 

Because the full back will be outnumbered, and if you just rely on 3 cm's to cover, the second one of them drifts over to help cover the full back you're exposed in the middle. So they need to drop back more than Vardy is now. 

 

Nobody is playing 3 forwards that don't have to drop back any further than the half way line. Which is currently where Vardy's involvement ends. You need a Liverpool like superfit front line to get close to doing it, and they drop back into their own half plenty. 

 

 

 

 

 

Screenshot 2021-04-14 at 10.39.59.png

Screenshot 2021-04-14 at 10.43.21.png

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, moore_94 said:

So you move your extra midfielder out wide to help cover the full backs (likely Ndidi in our case), leaving our 2 in midfield against the oppositions midfield 2 or 3 as well as also possibly a forward who drops back to pick up the ball in space (Lingard) so now you are outnumbered in midfield?

 

By having wingers that drop back to help out the full backs? Can’t just leave Vardy as a winger stood on the half way line whilst the opposition attack, makes the chances of the defensive set up becoming unbalanced and leaving more space for the opposition as players have to shift over to cover the space where someone like Barnes would have dropped back to cover

 

It’s not as simple as you think dealing with tactics and managing the opposition, shown by the fact that even some of the worlds best tactical managers (Klopp, Guardiola, Bielsa) get it wrong

There are plenty of teams that don't play wingers to protect their full backs as you describe it. Think of Liverpool's front 3 for want of an example. In a front 3 of Mane, Fermino and Salah, neither Mane or Salah, whilst neither are afraid to play on the flanks, neither would you describe as a winger either. When all fit, with two solid centre halves, Alexander Arnold and Roberston in a back four manage to attack without the assistance of 'protective wingers' yet still keep plenty of clean sheets but, at the same time, give the opposition something to think about and less opportunity to attack them by their overall threatening style and not just sitting back with 3 ponderous centre halves in an attack versus defence like training routine. I would argue that a back 4 of Ricardo, Fofana, Evans and Castagne are not unsimilar in ability to Liverpool's first choice defence. Currently, I just personally don't think we're getting the best out of Ricardo and Castagne in the way that they are being employed. 

As for the 33 part of the equation, IF you have a choice of 8 players for 6 positions in Ndidi, Tielemans, Mendy, Praet, Maddison, Albrighton, Iheanacho and Vardy, I think there's plenty of talent there to do a job. With Soyuncu, Thomas and Perez in reserve (Barnes obviously not even in the equation), I think we could be giving oppositions like Burnley, Fulham and West Ham far more to think about than we have been by slavishly following a poor initial set up that invariably has to be changed on 68 minutes to get somethingout of a game. If you don't atrack or threaten an opposition then don't be surprised if you find them camped in your half of the pitch.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Babylon said:

Because the full back will be outnumbered, and if you just rely on 3 cm's to cover, the second one of them drifts over to help cover the full back you're exposed in the middle. So they need to drop back more than Vardy is now. 

 

Nobody is playing 3 forwards that don't have to drop back any further than the half way line. Which is currently where Vardy's involvement ends. You need a Liverpool like superfit front line to get close to doing it, and they drop back into their own half plenty. 

 

 

 

 

 

Screenshot 2021-04-14 at 10.39.59.png

Screenshot 2021-04-14 at 10.43.21.png

Funnily enough, as your notification came through I just posted Liverpool as an example 🤣. There are fitness issues in their style of play but you don't have to be a Liverpool, just in my opinion, to effect a better style of play. Just my opinion because I genuinely always appreciate yours and even if we disagree, I still respect yours. Perhaps there's a happy medium? 😁

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, moore_94 said:

But you made a big deal about how we needed to control the midfield more? So if we move one of our midfield 3 out wide to help the left back (who in most cases would most likely be Ndidi) you are then having to use Youri and Praet in the middle against Soucek and Noble and then also Lingard who now has a lot more space in the middle to work with and be effective in?

 

Are we playing a deep or high line with a back 4? Play deep and you leave massive gaps between the midfield and defence for their creative players to exploit especially if you play with your forwards sitting high, play a high line and their quick players can take advantage of the space in behind

 

You can’t just leave your front 3 further up waiting for the chance to counter, as then you have to take other players away from their own positions to help cover in other areas, leaving their original areas weaker and susceptible, it’s not as easy an issue to solve as you seem to think it is, and is also why Brendan Rodgers is the manager of a Top 3 Premier League club, I imagine he has a bit more tactical nous than you do and probably knows a fair bit more about the issues he has with his squad and how to deal with them against good opposition.

What on earth is the point of the final sentence? Of course he’s a football manager and I’m not, but this is a football forum is it not (designed to be able to express opinion and to share ideas)? 
Are you saying that only football experts can post on here? 
🤷‍♂️

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

What on earth is the point of the final sentence? Of course he’s a football manager and I’m not, but this is a football forum is it not (designed to be able to express opinion and to share ideas)? 
Are you saying that only football experts can post on here? 
🤷‍♂️

Of course not.

 

But someone such as yourself seems to post A LOT trying to prove a point which is sometimes not needed or actively looking to point out the negatives of the club (especially when it comes to Rodgers and Amartey)

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, volpeazzurro said:

Funnily enough, as your notification came through I just posted Liverpool as an example 🤣. There are fitness issues in their style of play but you don't have to be a Liverpool, just in my opinion, to effect a better style of play. Just my opinion because I genuinely always appreciate yours and even if we disagree, I still respect yours. Perhaps there's a happy medium? 😁

There is certainly a happy medium to be found with how the team sets up, just certainly a lot harder to try and find it when there are injury and squad depth issues like ours 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, moore_94 said:

Of course not.

 

But someone such as yourself seems to post A LOT trying to prove a point which is sometimes not needed or actively looking to point out the negatives of the club (especially when it comes to Rodgers and Amartey)

Utter nonsense

Look back through the multitude of threads and you’ll see I’ve been very positive about Rodgers tenure at the club and expressed only recently that this is probably the best squad we’ve ever had.

So take that back

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, volpeazzurro said:

Nobody has said play him on the left wing, you really don't have to play with wingers. Someone suggested play him on the left of a 433 which is something quite different and a role he's very capable of. 

The left of a 433 is practically left wing come on lad, bare in mind Pearson tried him there a few times first year in the prem and he was hopeless, snd that was when he actually had legs.

Edited by TJB-fox
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, volpeazzurro said:

Funnily enough, as your notification came through I just posted Liverpool as an example 🤣. There are fitness issues in their style of play but you don't have to be a Liverpool, just in my opinion, to effect a better style of play. Just my opinion because I genuinely always appreciate yours and even if we disagree, I still respect yours. Perhaps there's a happy medium? 😁

I don't like the three at the back, but I get it. 

 

I don't think Ricardo worked on the wing, so I think that experiment got forgotten quite quickly. And I think with the form Nacho was in, I understand him not wanting to mess with how well its worked for him in two up top. 

 

Losing your two top scorers from open play is going to cause any team massive issues. I can't really see any formation where there isn't a compromise or two at the moment. 

 

Personally I'm more concerned with how slow we come out of the blocks, we play at a high tempo and we've got enough to trouble anyone still. 

Edited by Babylon
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

Utter nonsense

Look back through the multitude of threads and you’ll see I’ve been very positive about Rodgers tenure at the club and expressed only recently that this is probably the best squad we’ve ever had.

So take that back

As a school yard child would say... make me lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, TJB-fox said:

The left of a 433 is practically left wing come on lad, bare in mind Pearson tried him there a few times first year in the prem and he was hopeless, snd that was when he actually had legs.

Regardless of the subject, I'm just made up you called me lad. Today will be much sweeter now 👍🏻

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, ARM1968 said:

Not having any negativity about Big Dan. The guy is versatile, honest, gives 100%, loves the club and we are lucky, I say LUCKY to have him. 
 

 

Also seems happy to be a realistically 5th choice centre back for us, not many players of better quality than him would come sit on our bench and be lucky to play at most 5 games a season

Link to post
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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...