Arsenal 0 Amazing Foxes 1 post match

[Lesta2014]

5 hours ago, jim5000 said:

We weren’t terrible, it might have seemed that while watching, but the players executed Rodgers’ plan to perfection. We offered nothing going forward, but their offside goal aside, although they had 11 shots, nothing really troubled Kasper.

 

Brendan and Vardy both stated after the game that that was the plan all along, as they knew Vardy couldn’t play 90 mins.

 

my only query that remains is why Barnes was the lone striker for the first 69 minutes when surely Nacho or Slim could have offered more in that role before being subbed for Vardy.

Rogers said in interview that kelechi likes to come short and he wanted them to be stretched which why Barnes was choosing over him, did say he didn’t get in as much as they hoped/liked too

[Guest Danny Clender]

For me the worse thing about last night was wincing every time one of our players went down from any type of awkward tackle, Fofana particularly. 

We seemed to come through unscathed.

 

Fair play and credit where it's due to the posters complaining about the play, they had every right to do so last night.

It wasn't so much the tactics, but the clumsy and awkward passing that was frustrating. 

Add in to that, seeing Barnes, Maddison, Praet, Castagne and Justin playing unorthodox styles of play and seemingly not playing football, it wasn't easy at times. 

 

It's not our "traditional" style of play, but if the players are prepared to play it, then we as fans need to adapt to it as well. 

It got us 3 points. 

The masterclass tactics?, fair enough, but absolute respect to the players that were able to implement them so well. 

 

Whilst everybody had their part to play, Evans, Fofana, Fuchs, Tielemans and Mendy made it happen. They were so disciplined and their positional play was exceptional. There was a lot of instruction and communication between players happening on that pitch from us, most I've seen in a long time. 

Schmeichel's excellent save from Bellerin seemed to be under played, that was so important. 

 

The goal was vintage Leicester, as the pundits like to say, lovely move and perfectly executed, Under made the right choice. 

 

My only disappointment was, I thought Vardy was going to unveil dreads, shame.

 

 

 

Edited 26 October 2020 by Danny Clender

[RowlattsFox]

Was great seeing the shot from the behind the goal and you saw every single player sprinting to celebrate with Vardy. 

 

Of course, Rodgers needs to find a way of being more attacking, especially at home. But we've found a decent way to play away, we get through the early stages and then come alive second half. 

 

We'll never know if we'd have got a result playing more advanced or not. Kasper had a great game last season to keep us in it first half, barely made a save this time around. 

[CosbehFox]

6 hours ago, HighPeakFox said:

Pace? 

Equally doubt Slim or Kelechi have the discipline to shield Partey like Barnes and block the passing lanes. 

[CosbehFox]

8 hours ago, StanSP said:

 

They're so used to blaming Xhaka for everything  

Artera will look to anyone and anything but what the **** was he doing playing Xhaka at left back? 

[ozleicester]

Its almost as if BR knows what he is doing

 

[bmt]

Cant believe people are saying the first half showing was intentional haha. We were bloody awful.

 

Second half (particularly last 25) was much much better and a great result.

[TrentFox]

Hard to comment with any insight as refuse to pay for PPV, but have just seen the goal. What a thing of beauty that is! Two astonishing away results in this crazy, mixed up season. Long may it continue. Loving the look of the top 8 😍

[duk3nuk3m]

Edited 26 October 2020 by duk3nuk3m
Reposted video

[CosbehFox]

Cant understand the media calls about their disallowed goal. Yes Kasper’s eyesight may not be interrupted but what’s he supposed to do?? Jump through Xhaka to make a save? 

[StanSP]

34 minutes ago, bmt said:

Cant believe people are saying the first half showing was intentional haha. We were bloody awful.

 

Second half (particularly last 25) was much much better and a great result.

Why wasn't it intentional? 

[turkish14]

10 hours ago, trabuch said:

We are better than that.

This! 
 

there are times when up against teams, pre game we would settle for a draw, possibly nick a win. There are times during games when players get sent off, and expectations change.

 

because we won yesterday and defensively were outstanding, I still feel we could have played better offensively.

 

poor passes at times, players not looking up, passing it backwards and sidewards.

 

I am obviously delighted, 3 points is 3 points! But the result peppers over areas of concern for me. 

[Guest Hansifüx]

9 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Cant understand the media calls about their disallowed goal. Yes Kasper’s eyesight may not be interrupted but what’s he supposed to do?? Jump through Xhaka to make a save? 

As I remember, even if Kasper was not interrupted, justin was, who might have also been able to react and kick the ball out. 

[Strokes]

10 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Cant understand the media calls about their disallowed goal. Yes Kasper’s eyesight may not be interrupted but what’s he supposed to do?? Jump through Xhaka to make a save? 

I think it’s 50/50, the rules around interfering are ambiguous. If you want Arsenal to win it’s a goal, Leicester to win its offside. Shows them up really.

[bmt]

12 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Why wasn't it intentional? 

Because they clearly should have been leading by half time in which case the tactics wouldn't have worked. We were just lucky. 

[bmt]

7 minutes ago, Strokes said:

I think it’s 50/50, the rules around interfering are ambiguous. If you want Arsenal to win it’s a goal, Leicester to win its offside. Shows them up really.

Whilst I agree it sets a ridiculous precedent for future decisions if the goal stands. That rule has needed changing/clarifying for years to protect the goalkeeper a bit more.

[StanSP]

1 minute ago, bmt said:

Because they clearly should have been leading by half time in which case the tactics wouldn't have worked. We were just lucky. 

It was quite clearly the plan to have a defensive outlook on until Vardy came on. Defend, soak up pressure. Yes we perhaps got a little lucky with the disallowed goal but how many other clear cut chances did they get? Not many because our defence and shape stopped it. It wasn't all luck. 

[bmt]

Just now, StanSP said:

It was quite clearly the plan to have a defensive outlook on until Vardy came on. Defend, soak up pressure. Yes we perhaps got a little lucky with the disallowed goal but how many other clear cut chances did they get? Not many because our defence and shape stopped it. It wasn't all luck. 

I agree but the lack of an outlet in the first half meant we allowed way too much pressure. I agree with the game plan but thought we executed it poorly in the first half and were very lucky. 

 

[StanSP]

1 minute ago, bmt said:

I agree but the lack of an outlet in the first half meant we allowed way too much pressure. I agree with the game plan but thought we executed it poorly in the first half and were very lucky. 

 

How did we execute poorly if we didn't concede and went on to score and get 3 points? The first half defensive performance set up the plan for the 2nd half. 

 

The lack of an outlet was frustrating don't get me wrong, but the plan was to defend and not concede. I don't think that was poor execution. 

[Strokes]

5 minutes ago, bmt said:

Whilst I agree it sets a ridiculous precedent for future decisions if the goal stands. That rule has needed changing/clarifying for years to protect the goalkeeper a bit more.

I don’t disagree at all, there should never be any ambiguity around laws in professional sport. I’d like to see the 6 yard area be off limits until the ball is in play, excluding the goalkeeper.

[Kevin Russell]

Can’t argue with the tactics that have seen us get 6 points from Etihad and Emirates. It’s fine as long as we can be more positive against some of the sides that will look to defend deep against us. 6 games in to be in the Top 4 with the injuries we’ve had is a fantastic position to be in. It’s not been all positive, but with the players coming back I’m excited to see what this side can achieve.

[Jimbo]

21 minutes ago, turkish14 said:

This! 
 

there are times when up against teams, pre game we would settle for a draw, possibly nick a win. There are times during games when players get sent off, and expectations change.

 

because we won yesterday and defensively were outstanding, I still feel we could have played better offensively.

 

poor passes at times, players not looking up, passing it backwards and sidewards.

 

I am obviously delighted, 3 points is 3 points! But the result peppers over areas of concern for me. 

If Vardy 100% fit and played the full 90 we possibly would have been better offensively, but as it was we played Barnes there and so the threat wasn't as much as it could have been. We executed a plan to near perfection, the only thing I think went wrong was that Barnes was as ineffective as he was, that got us into position to pull off the finishing move.

 

Regarding their disallowed goal, if a player who is in an offside position has to jump out of the way of the ball, especially when they're practically stood on the keepers toes a yard from the goal line, then they're offside. 

[bmt]

7 minutes ago, StanSP said:

How did we execute poorly if we didn't concede and went on to score and get 3 points? The first half defensive performance set up the plan for the 2nd half. 

 

The lack of an outlet was frustrating don't get me wrong, but the plan was to defend and not concede. I don't think that was poor execution. 

Because I thought the execution was more luck than judgement. Even denying them many clear cut chances they still had too many shots. Don't get me wrong though considering how little attacking threat we had we defended well.

 

 

Anyway, I'm buzzing with the three points and second half we were good. Just don't think the Barnes experiment worked.

[Babylon]

28 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Why wasn't it intentional? 

Nobody in the world sets out to be shit do they. The plan might have been to keep it tight and hit the on the counter, but we couldn't string 5 passes together, didn't really counter and were generally diabolical. 

 

 

[foxes_rule1978]

2 minutes ago, Jimbo said:

If Vardy 100% fit and played the full 90 we possibly would have been better offensively, but as it was we played Barnes there and so the threat wasn't as much as it could have been. We executed a plan to near perfection, the only thing I think went wrong was that Barnes was as ineffective as he was, that got us into position to pull off the finishing move.

 

Regarding their disallowed goal, if a player who is in an offside position has to jump out of the way of the ball, especially when they're practically stood on the keepers toes a yard from the goal line, then they're offside. 

Baffles me how anyone felt he isn’t interfering, he is clearly stopping any of are players from retrieving the ball. Not only that look at Aubameyang at the far post, he moves towards the ball too in an offside position. therefore active.