Leeds H Post Match Thread

[messerschmitt]

2 hours ago, Pub breath said:

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.

I didn't say Leeds "dirty play" so don't quote me, I don't care about how many times you've done what, I simple said it was in my opinion an awful watch. what are you hoping to acheive me changing my mind. If you thought that it was a good game thats up to you I didnt

[Pub breath]

4 minutes ago, messerschmitt said:

I didn't say Leeds "dirty play" so don't quote me, I don't care about how many times you've done what, I simple said it was in my opinion an awful watch. what are you hoping to acheive me changing my mind. If you thought that it was a good game thats up to you I didnt

I wasn't hoping to change you mind, just wanted to question the idea that we are awful to watch.  You didn't say it was an awful game you said Leeds are awful to watch.  The struck me as odd as you're the only person i've seen say anything close to that.  That was all.

As for the game, i'm afraid I disagree there also.  Thought it was a really decent game.  End to end, lots of chances, some brilliant goalkeeping, loads of goal mouth action, a lead that swung from one team to the other and 4 fantastic goals.  It was classic Premier League feeling match, high intensity and a serious pace with a little less technical ability on show than in the slower leagues.  Thought it was a thoroughly entertaining match and again, most pundits did too.

We're fine to disagree about that mind, shouldn't be an issue to.

[messerschmitt]

I actually meant that match and said in my second post, "I have watched your team a few times this season and they have been a decent watch".

 

I am watching from a Leicester perspective as this is a Leicester forum, it wasn't a boring game but having just seen us dominate the last few games and hardly concede to not being able to string three passes together and concede goals like we did, for me it was an awful watch.

[HoustonFox]

1 hour ago, StriderHiryu said:

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.

Good take fella - also looking at xG, we shaded it - unfortunately, our mistakes led to their goals and we couldn’t break them down after the first, which was wonderful.  Totally comes down to your last para which is that they wanted it more and outworked us - after we went 1-0 up you could see that our players thought “right, this is gonna be 4 something again” but their fast equalizer really rocked us.  

[messerschmitt]

1 hour ago, StriderHiryu said:

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.

Thanks for that, brilliant as usual, I've watched the game twice to try to make it clearer, we weren't as bad second time around I thought appart from not stretching the game Perez was unfortunatly getting in the way of Madison at times by dropping too deep. I also thought we were lacking the Ndidi muscle in the middle, we seem a lot more at risk of breakaway goals without him. Up until we scored I thought we were looking good and had controlled the game, it was only the first 13 minutes though, but they had hardly been in our half.

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, StriderHiryu said:

 

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.

We didn’t capitalise because we failed to score - had we made one of those openings into a clear cut chance and taken it we would have probably gone on to win the game. our change in formation gave us total control for that fifteen/twenty mins and Leeds looked lost. 
 

fine margins but the lack of self screening when we became too open and vards not stretching their back line proved our undoing in the end. But we really could have won that game. 

[Pub breath]

40 minutes ago, messerschmitt said:

I actually meant that match and said in my second post, "I have watched your team a few times this season and they have been a decent watch".

 

I am watching from a Leicester perspective as this is a Leicester forum, it wasn't a boring game but having just seen us dominate the last few games and hardly concede to not being able to string three passes together and concede goals like we did, for me it was an awful watch.

That's fair enough.

[UpTheLeagueFox]

19 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

We really could have won that game. 

Agreed.

18 shots, 8 on target

We'll play worse than that and sh*thouse a win sometime.

[Dahnsouff]

Would it have been a different game had we been savvy at buying cheap fouls from their intense pressing? Obviously that’s unknowable and I will not condone the approach, but hypothetically it may have been?

[HighPeakFox]

This thread has become more bearable now the result merchants have run out of steam.

[StriderHiryu]

45 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

We didn’t capitalise because we failed to score - had we made one of those openings into a clear cut chance and taken it we would have probably gone on to win the game. our change in formation gave us total control for that fifteen/twenty mins and Leeds looked lost. 
 

fine margins but the lack of self screening when we became too open and vards not stretching their back line proved our undoing in the end. But we really could have won that game. 

Yep I would agree with that, had we kept the lead for longer and or taken one of our chances we would have probably won. But then you have to say that in the first game against Leeds, Bamford missed seconds before Barnes did, and they had a tremendous effort come off the cross bar, so matches are often won and lost by a few key moments.

 

It's definitely the sort of game that if we miss out on a Champions League place by a few points we will regret, but sometimes you have to pay respect to the opposition! Went one down, badly beaten in the first game, they fought their way back in and won it convincingly in the end. No other team has beaten us when going behind to us before Leeds, which is impressive for a newly promoted team. Big test for us now against Fulham, bounce back and we can gloss over this result, drop points again and it's like the back end of last season all over again but earlier!

[messerschmitt]

31 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

Yep I would agree with that, had we kept the lead for longer and or taken one of our chances we would have probably won. But then you have to say that in the first game against Leeds, Bamford missed seconds before Barnes did, and they had a tremendous effort come off the cross bar, so matches are often won and lost by a few key moments.

 

It's definitely the sort of game that if we miss out on a Champions League place by a few points we will regret, but sometimes you have to pay respect to the opposition! Went one down, badly beaten in the first game, they fought their way back in and won it convincingly in the end. No other team has beaten us when going behind to us before Leeds, which is impressive for a newly promoted team. Big test for us now against Fulham, bounce back and we can gloss over this result, drop points again and it's like the back end of last season all over again but earlier!

Have you seen Fulham recently/ do you think we'll go with wingers, last time we went 5 at the back and there was no place for Barnes, he seeems the best goal threat we have at the moment and hopefully Under will start as Albrighton is understanderably looking tired. Mendy looks better against sides that play football and poor if its a physical opponent.