Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Mark

Five at the back

By Mark, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

Dahnsouff

Dahnsouff

Posted
Posted
Just now, HighPeakFox said:

You're aware that I was parodying a mindset...? 

I need a cheat sheet to recall what everyone's default position as to 5 at the back is, so do accept my sincerest apologies

Link to comment
Share on other sites
filbertway

filbertway

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

How on earth did you make that leap? 

I assumed you were taking the micky out of anyone who would say "yes, but it was West Brom"? If not, what did you mean by it? :D

 

Someone going back and saying "yes, but it was West Brom" is adding context. When discussing anything, I find it tends to help to look at the whole picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HighPeakFox

HighPeakFox

Posted
Posted
44 minutes ago, filbertway said:

I assumed you were taking the micky out of anyone who would say "yes, but it was West Brom"? If not, what did you mean by it? :D

 

Someone going back and saying "yes, but it was West Brom" is adding context. When discussing anything, I find it tends to help to look at the whole picture.

Ah OK. Almost, but not quite. It was more a parody of the type of person who can take a positive situation and find the negative interpretation, which has nothing to do with context, to my mind. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
filbertway

filbertway

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

Ah OK. Almost, but not quite. It was more a parody of the type of person who can take a positive situation and find the negative interpretation, which has nothing to do with context, to my mind. 

Haha ahh I see

 

Like playing a team who are absolutely awful and being worried about a possible negative result :D

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HighPeakFox

HighPeakFox

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, filbertway said:

Haha ahh I see

 

Like playing a team who are absolutely awful and being worried about a possible negative result :D

Bit unfair. They did beat Chelsea 2-5 within very recent memory, and it's not like I am repetitively negative either. 

 

Anyway, we're off topic. Good natured banter duly noted :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hammo

Hammo

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

Ah OK. Almost, but not quite. It was more a parody of the type of person who can take a positive situation and find the negative interpretation, which has nothing to do with context, to my mind. 

I just chanced on this somewhat nebulous exchange and would be interested to know, for the purposes of clarity, what you (or indeed your mate Geoff) made of Brendan’s post-match interview last night... in which he seemed eager to talk about the negatives of a first-half performance in which we scored three goals and conceded none.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
filbertway

filbertway

Posted
Posted
Just now, HighPeakFox said:

Bit unfair. They did beat Chelsea 2-5 within very recent memory, and it's not like I am repetitively negative either. 

 

Anyway, we're off topic. Good natured banter duly noted :P

Haha yeah, we can agree to leave it there, glad you took it for what it was :D

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HighPeakFox

HighPeakFox

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Hammo said:

I just chanced on this somewhat nebulous exchange and would be interested to know, for the purposes of clarity, what you (or indeed your mate Geoff) made of Brendan’s post-match interview last night... in which he seemed eager to talk about the negatives of a first-half performance in which we scored three goals and conceded none.

I'm able to separate what he said from what we were discussing, so I will respectfully avoid your attempt to somehow weaken my position. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hammo

Hammo

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

I'm able to separate what he said from what we were discussing, so I will respectfully avoid your attempt to somehow weaken my position. 

Just interested to hear what you thought, but no worries...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HighPeakFox

HighPeakFox

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Hammo said:

Just interested to hear what you thought, but no worries...

My apologies for being defensive for no reason. 

 

I posted my thoughts earlier or last night - it seems to me that what happened this time year made its mark, and I think his attitude was reflective of that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
deanolegend1989

deanolegend1989

Posted
Posted
On 11/04/2021 at 17:02, deanolegend1989 said:

It only works when we are against a team with such a weak midfield that Youri and Wilf can boss despite being 2 v 3.

Against anyone competent it’s a car crash and makes teams press us high up and we have no out ball. Nacho and Vards are so far away and we can’t break the lines.

With no Antonio or Rice today theres absolutey no excuse to give away the goals we did and be so passive.

I sympathise with BR a bit not having Barnes Madders and Perez as options but they didn’t have arguably there 2 best players. We should never ever play 5 atb again against any team with a decent midfield. We need bodies going forward.

We camped them in and the again and showed how weak they are. BR played right into Lingard Fonels and Bowen’s hands it was embarrassing.

That’s what I said post West Ham and nothings changed. West Brom were standing off all night which was embarrassing tactics but good for us. Castange over committing because he knew he had them on toast.

As said before 5 atb will always be a struggle against teams with a good midfield but vs teams who are pretty weak we can control the game. Vs teams with a more physical strong middle we need 4 atb and an extra man to help Wilf and Youri.

It also has to have those 3 CBs because Soyuncu and Fofana In particular can push out and push us higher up the pitch. When Amartys there with Evans, there’s no pace and we get pinned in and then we can’t get out and Youri drops deeper and is therefore too far away from the front 2 and he gets nullified and we can’t dictate the game.

 

I still have no idea why every manager who plays us doesn’t just play 3 in the middle and specifically target getting in Youris face. Big Sam plays 442 plays into our hands then changes when 3-0 down and gives up the game 🤣. Awful haha.

The 2nd half shows how we struggle if teams clog it up a bit more and don’t give us time on the ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kopfkino

Kopfkino

Posted
Posted (edited)

More often than not, it isn’t a 5, it’s either a 3 or a 4, idk why we’re still pretending it’s a 5. Defend mainly as a 4 and attack with a 3, the benefit of the 3 being that it allows Wilf to play much higher up to win the ball back when we lose it rather than being a Kante-style recoverer. We’re very good at getting a lot of bodies around the ball when we lose it because we have a fairly narrow, compact 3-2-3 in the middle of the park.

 

It makes a huge difference when it’s the main 3 playing it too. Evans never looks as good without Soyuncu in any system and with Amartey in it doesn’t work well, I think because he’s not aggressive enough.

Edited by Kopfkino
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LVFox

LVFox

Posted
Posted

Been really impressed with how we've actually switched to 4-4-2 when in a defensive shape, with Fofana going to RB, Castagne to RM and Maddison moving to LM. Combats the weakness down the wings really well. Takes a big shift though and better sides will move the ball quicker to exploit it.

 

I think when you have Fofana, Evans, Soyuncu with Ndidi & Tielemans in front, you have to play 3 at the back. Those 5 are a really superb base.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahnsouff

Dahnsouff

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Kopfkino said:

More often than not, it isn’t a 5, it’s either a 3 or a 4, idk why we’re still pretending it’s a 5. Defend mainly as a 4 and attack with a 3, the benefit of the 3 being that it allows Wilf to play much higher up to win the ball back when we lose it rather than being a Kante-style recoverer. We’re very good at getting a lot of bodies around the ball when we lose it because we have a fairly narrow, compact 3-2-3 in the middle of the park.

 

It makes a huge difference when it’s the main 3 playing it too. Evans never looks as good without Soyuncu in any system and with Amartey in it doesn’t work well, I think because he’s not aggressive enough.

Agree with all that, and this is why we need another decent CB, and with Europe there will be plenty of games. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark

Mark

Posted
  • Author
Posted
31 minutes ago, GorlestonFox said:

We've played 4 longer than we have 5 tonight?

Half at most but negative outset negative result, summed up by just having defenders providing the width all match.

 

Does it benefit any attacking player we have apart from Iheanacho?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...