Leeds H Post Match Thread

[Steve Earle]

11 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

I was waiting for this to happen. Soon enough, someone will blame Mendy for other players having a dreadful game. It is very easy to create a fixed opinion, and then post-fit the evidence to rationalise any argument. It's a bit like going in to an election and repeatedly shouting 'vote tampering' in case you lose, so that when you lose, you can then keep saying 'see?', despite all the evidence to the contrary. Doesn't make it true or wholly correct, but it does poison the well.

Quite right Peaky. And the anti-Mendy narrative conveniently ignores evidence in an almost Trumpian way.

 

Anyone remember the 5-2 at the Etihad? Anyone remember which of our midfield players had the pundits purring after that game?

 

Truth to tell we didn’t miss Wilf anywhere near as much as we thought we would. Great wins, comfortably top four, Mendy playing well in every game. When Wilf returned the difference between the two was immediate and obvious. But Mendy is a very sound PL DM, and we’re lucky to have him. It’s not like plugging a Kante sized hole with Andy King.

Edited 2 February 2021 by Steve Earle

[HighPeakFox]

1 minute ago, Steve Earle said:

Quite right Peaky. And the anti-Mendy narrative conveniently ignores evidence in an almost Trumpian way.

 

Anyone remember the 5-2 at the Etihad? Anyone remember which of our midfield players had the pundits purring after that game?

 

Truth to tell we didn’t miss Wilf anywhere near as much as we thought we would. Great wins, comfortably top four, Mendy playing well in every game. When Wilf returned the difference between the two was immediate and obvious. But Mendy is a very sound PL DM, and we’re lucky to have him. It’s not like plugging a Kante sized hole with Andy King.

It's just too simplistic. I tend to find we lose when enough players play poorly, regardless of who they are or what formation they're in. 

[AKCJ]

9 minutes ago, deanolegend1989 said:

I understand that and I agree I’m not expecting we can get a Wilf level back up. However for me he’s not ‘a perfectly suitable cover’ he’s a liability.

There is no way the stats should be that polarised due to 1 man, it’s incredible really.

Ndidi is fantastic, but if the difference is that huge it’s more than just 1 being better than the other.

Mendy is well off the pace. We can’t replace Ndidi, however if everyone was fully fit except Wilf we could have 5/6 options I’d have over Mendy.

1. Praet.

Praet and YT sitting with Madders in the front of the triangle would be perfectly fine as the cover(I’m aware Praet is out too but in general I mean).

2. Fofana. I believe a guy with this much physical attributes should be able to do a job there. He has everything.

3. Amarty. He’s big physical and although he isn’t the greatest, he’s far better than Mendy both physically and in the air.

4. Hamza. He’s not great but still better than Mendy imo. He breaks up play more and has a bit more presence.

 

We could do a lot better and that’s the sad thing.

 

Perez would get in:

Palace

Brighton

Newcastle

Fulham

Sheffield Utd

West Brom

Wolves

Burnley.

 

Name which Mendy would get in? A big fat 0. I doubt he’d get in a top Championship club.
 

Not many teams have as good of a CM in Tielemens to cover Mendys limitations.

That's an opinion solely formed on the last game.

 

Mendy was arguably our best player in the time Ndidi was originally injured.

[CosbehFox]

That first goal is diabolical firstly from Maddison and shambolic from Evans who appears to be worried about Luke Ayling doing him for pace, so he marks space. That gives Fofana and Castagne a right problem because they are overloaded in space and in numbers. 
 

Evans was poor on the second goal too. 
 

Stood by Jonny at times this season but he was very lazy on Sunday 

Edited 2 February 2021 by Cardiff_Fox

[Pliskin]

1 minute ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

That first goal is diabolical firstly from Maddison and shambolic from Evans who appears to be worried about Luke Ayling doing him for pace, so he marks space. That gives Fofana and Castagne a right problem because they are overloaded in space and in numbers. 
 

Evans was poor on the second goal too. 
 

Stood by Jonny at times this season but he was very lazy on Sunday 

Evans has been sliding in form for a while. Perhaps having Cags back along side him might help, a more established partnership. 

[BKLFox]

Why does there always have to be a scape goat when we lose.
What did for us was the lazy and telegraphed passing which when playing against an aggressive and energetic side coupled with our defensive high line made it simple for them to take the ball high in their area and within 2 passes bypass both our midfield and defence for them to run onto.

Mendy had no worse game than anyone else, fought hard but can’t cover the ground as quickly as Wilf but he has better feet and looks to link with attack he’s not reliant on Youri in that sense which Wilf is.

Injuries to our defence limited our attacking options if 1 of them had managed to stay on I’m sure we would have seen a change with Nacho coming on and who knows, he could have scored he usually comes up trumps when needed, he’s just not done anything when given 90mins as seems to lose focus but given 15minutes and when it’s all about go for goal which he seems to handle. (As in doesn’t have to think to manage a game)

[messerschmitt]

36 minutes ago, BKLFox said:

Why does there always have to be a scape goat when we lose.
What did for us was the lazy and telegraphed passing which when playing against an aggressive and energetic side coupled with our defensive high line made it simple for them to take the ball high in their area and within 2 passes bypass both our midfield and defence for them to run onto.

Mendy had no worse game than anyone else, fought hard but can’t cover the ground as quickly as Wilf but he has better feet and looks to link with attack he’s not reliant on Youri in that sense which Wilf is.

Injuries to our defence limited our attacking options if 1 of them had managed to stay on I’m sure we would have seen a change with Nacho coming on and who knows, he could have scored he usually comes up trumps when needed, he’s just not done anything when given 90mins as seems to lose focus but given 15minutes and when it’s all about go for goal which he seems to handle. (As in doesn’t have to think to manage a game)

I don't think its a case a finding a scape goat, you are spot on there were lazy and telegraphed passes and as you say they were aggressive and thats also why we couldn't compete. We aren't a very physical side and Perez and Mendy suffer when we play teams that are. Don't get me wrong Perez has great technique and ability and Mendy is probably better than Wilf in his passing but physical and agressive sides stop them playing.

The Leeds game would have been ideal for Wilf. I don't get with the Leeds love in, yes they were effective but as for the purists saying they play the beautiful game, I saw a team who did everthing possible to disrupt the flow of the game and stop us getting in our stride, persistent fouling and players going down to stop the game. Kavanagh didn't help and seemed to blow his whistle every 30 seconds. Effective but awful to watch.

[messerschmitt]

1 hour ago, Steve Earle said:

Quite right Peaky. And the anti-Mendy narrative conveniently ignores evidence in an almost Trumpian way.

 

Anyone remember the 5-2 at the Etihad? Anyone remember which of our midfield players had the pundits purring after that game?

 

Truth to tell we didn’t miss Wilf anywhere near as much as we thought we would. Great wins, comfortably top four, Mendy playing well in every game. When Wilf returned the difference between the two was immediate and obvious. But Mendy is a very sound PL DM, and we’re lucky to have him. It’s not like plugging a Kante sized hole with Andy King.

I was about to mention that at the begining of the season Mendy was probably the most consistent player we had, Man city play football and aren't worried about the opposition and Mendy was alowed to do his stuff brilliantly,  we were probably a better team with Mendy that day than we would have been with Wilf but some teams can't compete with us on a footballing level and dissrupt us with varoius tactics and thats were Wilf comes in to his own.

[coolhandfox]

For me, we are just to open, trying to be too progressive at time.

 

They amount of goals we conceded on the counter is an issue.

Edited 2 February 2021 by coolhandfox

[messerschmitt]

1 hour ago, HighPeakFox said:

It's just too simplistic. I tend to find we lose when enough players play poorly, regardless of who they are or what formation they're in. 

I agree with you there, we had too many players playing poorly but for me it's a question of why they play poorly.

I'm sure they don't meet up and all agree to have a bad game. Leeds stoped us playing using disruptive tactics and out muscling us and games like that are when we really miss Wilf.

[HighPeakFox]

34 minutes ago, messerschmitt said:

I agree with you there, we had too many players playing poorly but for me it's a question of why they play poorly.

I'm sure they don't meet up and all agree to have a bad game. Leeds stoped us playing using disruptive tactics and out muscling us and games like that are when we really miss Wilf.

They're human, goodness knows the circumstances, the headspace, the small knocks, the fatigue. And, of course, how could a team not miss Wilf? I cannot think of a single member who would disagree that losing a world-class midfielder will affect the team. However, If the other players are as good as we believe them to be, the loss of Ndidi should be something that can be coped with - they just happened not to this time around.

[majaco]

There are always fine margins.

 

I think Leeds first goal was pivotal.  I think Castagne was inhibited by injury.  

 

There were times we looked like we would win the game.

 

The goals we conceded seemed to be about concession of space because of lapses in concentration 

[HighPeakFox]

3 minutes ago, majaco said:

There are always fine margins.

 

I think Leeds first goal was pivotal.  I think Castagne was inhibited by injury.  

 

There were times we looked like we would win the game.

 

The goals we conceded seemed to be about concession of space because of lapses in concentration 

Exactly. I don't know if it has been said elsewhere, but MOTD were far less harsh on us (and Perez) than we were. I honestly think that some people are wired to find fault, as it gives a 100% chance of being able to say 'told you'. After all, that's how the tabloids operate - shout about their pathetic success rate, treat it as an aberration when they've been shown to be talking crap.

Edited 2 February 2021 by HighPeakFox

[majaco]

1 minute ago, HighPeakFox said:

Exactly. I don't know if it has been said elsewhere, but MOTD were far less harsh on us (and Perez) than we were. I honestly think that some people are wired to find fault, as it gives a 100% chance of being able to say 'told you'. After all, that's how the tabloids operate - shout about their pathetic success rate, treat it as an aberration when they've been shown to be talking crap.

This is an intriguing season.   I was lucky to grow up in Leicestershire and have City as a local club.  I think we have the best deal as fans with a genuine team doing well.  

 

For periods of the Leeds game, we showed quality.   At times we were outdone.  One area where Leeds were better was in being street wise.  When we got up on top I  the second half, they broke up the game as if they were coached by Guardiola or Arteta  (both devotees of Bielsa I believe)including by conceding a volume of tactical fouls.

 

Perez was frustrating.  On balance, he had too many poor moments.  However, there were times when his control was admirable and he was looking to create.  I don't think he was worth 30 million, I don't think he is on the level of more than ten other Leicester players.  

 

Some on the forum are in  meltdown again.  Maybe the same doom-mongers - doo  I tell you, doom- who were cert ai that we would be tanked by West Brom on the opening day.

 

There is jeopardy in the Fulham game - they have quality and our injuries are disruptive- but it is a game we should probably win if the players have the right self-belief and attitude.

 

Even with the injuries, we can start with Schmeichel, Perreira, Justin, Caglar, Evans, Tielemans,  Maddison, Barnes and Cenghis ( probably on the bench), players who could play in a y Premier League team.

[Foxhateram]

4 hours ago, messerschmitt said:

Unfortunatly the difference when we have Wilf and Mendy is really looking massive not just in results but performances, we look so much better with Wilf on front of a back four, I'm not sure five at the back works,we seem to leak even more goals, probably a case of too many cooks. Mendy is a fine footballer who moves the ball around well and links things but we lack physicallity in this team and Mendy and Perez were totally bullied by Leeds. These are two technically great footballers but will struggle against teams who know how to play us.

Can't argue with this. Without Wilf we have no physical presence in the middle of the park. Unfortunately Maddison, Mendy and Tielemans are all quite lightweight, excellent at what they do, but they don't have the attributes to play CDM. 

 

Closest we have to a CDM is Hamza, but we all know about his frailty on the ball. 

 

A CDM and a striker who can hold up play are priorities in the summer if we want to progress. 

Edited 2 February 2021 by Foxhateram

[messerschmitt]

1 hour ago, HighPeakFox said:

Exactly. I don't know if it has been said elsewhere, but MOTD were far less harsh on us (and Perez) than we were. I honestly think that some people are wired to find fault, as it gives a 100% chance of being able to say 'told you'. After all, that's how the tabloids operate - shout about their pathetic success rate, treat it as an aberration when they've been shown to be talking crap.

You're probably right but for me its a case of trying to understand why it went wrong. I know the players are not machines and there are fine margins but sometimes you can see it all unfolding. Thats why I like to read striderHiryu analysis.

Btw how do you copy others usernames into the post so they show up in light blue.

[HighPeakFox]

1 minute ago, messerschmitt said:

You're probably right but for me its a case of trying to understand why it went wrong. I know the players are not machines and there are fine margins but sometimes you can see it all unfolding. Thats why I like to read striderHiryu analysis.

Btw how do you copy others usernames into the post so they show up in light blue.

@messerschmittyou type @ then the name of the relevant poster. I agree about analysis, and @StriderHiryuis a friend of mine (even if he is a cockney w**ker)...  

[messerschmitt]

1 minute ago, HighPeakFox said:

@messerschmittyou type @ then the name of the relevant poster. I agree about analysis, and @StriderHiryuis a friend of mine (even if he is a cockney w**ker)...  

Thanks for that, ok everyone has at least one cockney mate, tell him thanks I appreciate his input, there are some good and knowledgeable posters on here if you know the ones to read.

[goose2010]

4 hours ago, deanolegend1989 said:

I understand that and I agree I’m not expecting we can get a Wilf level back up. However for me he’s not ‘a perfectly suitable cover’ he’s a liability.

There is no way the stats should be that polarised due to 1 man, it’s incredible really.

Ndidi is fantastic, but if the difference is that huge it’s more than just 1 being better than the other.

Mendy is well off the pace. We can’t replace Ndidi, however if everyone was fully fit except Wilf we could have 5/6 options I’d have over Mendy.

1. Praet.

Praet and YT sitting with Madders in the front of the triangle would be perfectly fine as the cover(I’m aware Praet is out too but in general I mean).

2. Fofana. I believe a guy with this much physical attributes should be able to do a job there. He has everything.

3. Amarty. He’s big physical and although he isn’t the greatest, he’s far better than Mendy both physically and in the air.

4. Hamza. He’s not great but still better than Mendy imo. He breaks up play more and has a bit more presence.

 

We could do a lot better and that’s the sad thing.

 

Perez would get in:

Palace

Brighton

Newcastle

Fulham

Sheffield Utd

West Brom

Wolves

Burnley.

 

Name which Mendy would get in? A big fat 0. I doubt he’d get in a top Championship club.
 

Not many teams have as good of a CM in Tielemens to cover Mendys limitations.

 behave. 

[Pub breath]

3 hours ago, messerschmitt said:

I don't think its a case a finding a scape goat, you are spot on there were lazy and telegraphed passes and as you say they were aggressive and thats also why we couldn't compete. We aren't a very physical side and Perez and Mendy suffer when we play teams that are. Don't get me wrong Perez has great technique and ability and Mendy is probably better than Wilf in his passing but physical and agressive sides stop them playing.

The Leeds game would have been ideal for Wilf. I don't get with the Leeds love in, yes they were effective but as for the purists saying they play the beautiful game, I saw a team who did everthing possible to disrupt the flow of the game and stop us getting in our stride, persistent fouling and players going down to stop the game. Kavanagh didn't help and seemed to blow his whistle every 30 seconds. Effective but awful to watch.

Awful to watch?  That puts you in the minority of....well....one person i've heard say that.  Even the most ardent and bitter Leeds United haters have said things like "God I hate Leeds but have to admit, they're just amazing to watch" dozens of them from all different clubs.  Every pundit without exception has lauded our style of play.  You can accuse us of being naïve, open, wasteful and other things but sorry, "awful to watch" is a ridiculous judgement.  The football is electric, many times beautiful and the collection of goals we have scored this season could fill two goal of the season top tens already.  Bielsa would simply not tolerate ugly football. 

Also, you are aware that Leicester won the foul count scoreline on Sunday, right?

[filbertway]

30 minutes ago, Pub breath said:

Awful to watch?  That puts you in the minority of....well....one person i've heard say that.  Even the most ardent and bitter Leeds United haters have said things like "God I hate Leeds but have to admit, they're just amazing to watch" dozens of them from all different clubs.  Every pundit without exception has lauded our style of play.  You can accuse us of being naïve, open, wasteful and other things but sorry, "awful to watch" is a ridiculous judgement.  The football is electric, many times beautiful and the collection of goals we have scored this season could fill two goal of the season top tens already.  Bielsa would simply not tolerate ugly football. 

Also, you are aware that Leicester won the foul count scoreline on Sunday, right?

To be fair to players like Liam Cooper, if he can lose possession and throw himself to the ground to win a free kick then of course he's going to do it. Just like we have Perez, Maddison, Under and Evans who will do down at the faintest touch

 

Blame the refs for that though, not the players, it's incredibly obvious when a player has gone down easily.

[messerschmitt]

I haven't said I hate Leeds or accused you of anything. I also have no problem of having an opinion of my own.

As for pundits, I wouldn't put much by what they say, most of them do no homework and if you questioned them, you'd probably be dissapointed at how little they knew of your team. I think they have a cheat sheet that someone has written for every team. Most of them still think we are a counter attacking team.

I have watched your team a few times this season and they have been a decent watch. The game I saw was pretty poor, no team could string more than a few passes together and it was constant stop start, and you won on the day, but lets not make out you're the new Brazil.

as for the foul count, we always win that with Kavanagh, if we'd of had a referee it would have been different.

[volpeazzurro]

5 hours ago, deanolegend1989 said:

I understand that and I agree I’m not expecting we can get a Wilf level back up. However for me he’s not ‘a perfectly suitable cover’ he’s a liability.

There is no way the stats should be that polarised due to 1 man, it’s incredible really.

Ndidi is fantastic, but if the difference is that huge it’s more than just 1 being better than the other.

Mendy is well off the pace. We can’t replace Ndidi, however if everyone was fully fit except Wilf we could have 5/6 options I’d have over Mendy.

1. Praet.

Praet and YT sitting with Madders in the front of the triangle would be perfectly fine as the cover(I’m aware Praet is out too but in general I mean).

2. Fofana. I believe a guy with this much physical attributes should be able to do a job there. He has everything.

3. Amarty. He’s big physical and although he isn’t the greatest, he’s far better than Mendy both physically and in the air.

4. Hamza. He’s not great but still better than Mendy imo. He breaks up play more and has a bit more presence.

 

We could do a lot better and that’s the sad thing.

 

Perez would get in:

Palace

Brighton

Newcastle

Fulham

Sheffield Utd

West Brom

Wolves

Burnley.

 

Name which Mendy would get in? A big fat 0. I doubt he’d get in a top Championship club.
 

Not many teams have as good of a CM in Tielemens to cover Mendys limitations.

None of those would want Perez in a month of Sundays, particularly those that want to scrap against relegation. If we sold him, my bet is that he'd move abroad where he would be possibly be more suited to their style of play. Mendy is a talented and reliable midfielder however, Ndidi he is not. Tielemans, for all his skill and attributes needs a particular midfielder alongside him to enable him to do what he does best ie an Ndidi or Kante style player. Without Ndidi, Tielemans can also start to look a little average also. Ndidi is the key here but unfortunately Mendy gets the stick. 

[Pub breath]

4 minutes ago, messerschmitt said:

I haven't said I hate Leeds or accused you of anything. I also have no problem of having an opinion of my own.

As for pundits, I wouldn't put much by what they say, most of them do no homework and if you questioned them, you'd probably be dissapointed at how little they knew of your team. I think they have a cheat sheet that someone has written for every team. Most of them still think we are a counter attacking team.

I have watched your team a few times this season and they have been a decent watch. The game I saw was pretty poor, no team could string more than a few passes together and it was constant stop start, and you won on the day, but lets not make out you're the new Brazil.

as for the foul count, we always win that with Kavanagh, if we'd of had a referee it would have been different.

There's a big delta between "the new Brazil" and "awful".  It's not just pundits, numerous players from other clubs have tweeted about how thrilling we are to watch.  Many managers have said the same after matches.  I can't see them all being wrong, can you?  You are obviously entitled to your opinion but when you're such a distant outlier, you're also likely to get questioned about it.

For further context about Leeds "dirty play", we are 8th in the fair play league, 3 places above Leicester.    Only 3 times in the last 11 games have we had a larger foul count than our opponents.  There is nothing at all that back up the idea that we're dirty.  We are physical though, there's absolutely no doubt about that.  We press hard, mostly fairly, sometimes not.  I absolutely love that physical edge we have as any fan would do if it's their players getting well and truly stuck in.

[StriderHiryu]

1 hour ago, messerschmitt said:

Thanks for that, ok everyone has at least one cockney mate, tell him thanks I appreciate his input, there are some good and knowledgeable posters on here if you know the ones to read.

First half we didn't control the game, despite scoring and taking the lead. In fact we probably should have been behind going into the break. We were uncharacteristically unable to beat the first press successfully, but also our inability to stretch the game. Perez always comes deep to link play, but that meant Leeds could press higher up the pitch, which they want to do. We did get in behind a few times, but here you see the Vardy effect in how even if he doesn't touch the ball, his movement and presence scares other teams. This for me was the key difference between this game and the one at Elland Road earlier in the season. We also struggled to connect midfield to attack, despite Perez coming deep to do this.

 

At the start of the second half, Rodgers changed to 343 with Soyuncu coming on for Albrighton, which for 15-20 minutes got us control of the game, and we looked like taking the lead with some good chances and controlled possession. The change meant our CBs had more options to play out of the first press, and we could better handle Leeds wide players. But as time went by, Leeds adjusted to the system without having to make any tactical substitutions, a testament to how well they are coached. That made the game more 50-50 and then they scored a brilliant goal after a mistake from us. That forced us to chase the game, leaving huge gaps in behind, making the counter attacking goal inevitable.

 

Why did we not capitalise on the control we got at the start of the second half? That one is harder to answer, but I'd suggest Leeds worked harder and wanted it more. We looked a bit heavy-legged and lethargic by comparison, but I feel that was because Leeds made us look that way. Overall our performance was probably only 6/10 to a man, and that's not enough against a team that play the way they do.

 

Anyway that's my take on it.