LCFC 4-0 Wolves - Post Match Thread

[suffolk fox]

Got to love stats and this xg rubbish.....be truthful the only stat that ever matters is what the score is at the end of any game, yes, you know the one in the top corner of the screen for those that watch on tv or a stream.

 

For those saying we shouldnt be facing 21 shots, lets look at those shots.  Wolves on Sunday had at best two shots during the whole game that troubled Ward he made a great save from one, tipping it over the bar and he dived to his right to save the other..  Apart from that shots that are attempted and blocked?  Does it really count, likewise shots that go over the bar or wide is anyone really bothered.

 

I for one, was pleased we put in a decent performance on Sunday.  We controlled the tempo of the game, used our subs very well, and were clinical, much like the Leicester of old.

 

As for the Brendan debate, I personally find it amusing.  Yes, we havent started well, people a lot on this board have very high expectations but quite honestly who else out there would want to come in and manage a side that wasnt backed in the Summer with any transfers at all apart from a freebie and Faes who wouldnt have been bought if Fofana had stayed.

 

On a side note, would people really want the likes of Sean Dyche, please forget Tunchel, Or Poch no way would they come to Leicester.

 

Supporting Leicester never has been easy for many a year we yo yoed between leagues, yet I have seen us win the league, win 2 League cups, win the charity shield and fa cups, and a campaign in Europe visiting some exceptional places, Seville, Madrid, Warsaw, Bruges, Rome, Rennes, Aarhus, Randers, Eindhoven.  I wouldnt swap it for the world.

 

Lets be patient, consolidate this season and go again next.  

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Death by Football]

7 minutes ago, suffolk fox said:

Got to love stats and this xg rubbish.....be truthful the only stat that ever matters is what the score is at the end of any game, yes, you know the one in the top corner of the screen for those that watch on tv or a stream.

 

For those saying we shouldnt be facing 21 shots, lets look at those shots.  Wolves on Sunday had at best two shots during the whole game that troubled Ward he made a great save from one, tipping it over the bar and he dived to his right to save the other..  Apart from that shots that are attempted and blocked?  Does it really count, likewise shots that go over the bar or wide is anyone really bothered.

 

I for one, was pleased we put in a decent performance on Sunday.  We controlled the tempo of the game, used our subs very well, and were clinical, much like the Leicester of old.

 

As for the Brendan debate, I personally find it amusing.  Yes, we havent started well, people a lot on this board have very high expectations but quite honestly who else out there would want to come in and manage a side that wasnt backed in the Summer with any transfers at all apart from a freebie and Faes who wouldnt have been bought if Fofana had stayed.

 

On a side note, would people really want the likes of Sean Dyche, please forget Tunchel, Or Poch no way would they come to Leicester.

 

Supporting Leicester never has been easy for many a year we yo yoed between leagues, yet I have seen us win the league, win 2 League cups, win the charity shield and fa cups, and a campaign in Europe visiting some exceptional places, Seville, Madrid, Warsaw, Bruges, Rome, Rennes, Aarhus, Randers, Eindhoven.  I wouldnt swap it for the world.

 

Lets be patient, consolidate this season and go again next.  

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree with most of what you say there.  I'm no fan of xG or any of the other metrics that are useful for coaching staff but essentially meaningless to the watching public.  We have been on an amazing wave for the last few years and most fans have enjoyed it and wouldn't argue.

The problem that ignites the Brendan debate is not the poor start to this season, it is the continuation of an ineffectual playing style that is unsuited to the personnel we have available and leaves us ludicrously fragile and easy to play against.  My beef with Rodgers has been his dogmatic insistence on playing the same way when it clearly hasn't been working for a long time.  That said, the last couple of games have shown some loosening of the handbrake on the players, allowing them to be more direct and not focusing solely on the amount of possession we can keep.  Possession stats being even worse than xG in analysing a game. If we can continue to be stronger at the back and allow our undoubted attacking talent to flourish, then maybe he can turn this around.  I'm not convinced but I live in hope.

 

[Big_Nige]

There’s a place in the game of xG, but it’s just another metric to use when analysing football and certainly shouldn’t be used to look at a game in isolation. I might be wrong but didn’t Amartey have our best pass completion % last season? Does that make him our best passer, of course not, he plays the ball square and safe the majority of the time.

 

Stats can be misleading but they can also be useful to paint a picture, I prefer to use my eyes when analysing a game of football. We were clinical on Sunday, on another day we might not be as clinical. That’s football and that’s why we love it so much, it’s unpredictable. 

Edited 25 October 2022 by Big_Nige

[Dusty]

6 minutes ago, Death by Football said:

I agree with most of what you say there.  I'm no fan of xG or any of the other metrics that are useful for coaching staff but essentially meaningless to the watching public.  We have been on an amazing wave for the last few years and most fans have enjoyed it and wouldn't argue.

The problem that ignites the Brendan debate is not the poor start to this season, it is the continuation of an ineffectual playing style that is unsuited to the personnel we have available and leaves us ludicrously fragile and easy to play against.  My beef with Rodgers has been his dogmatic insistence on playing the same way when it clearly hasn't been working for a long time.  That said, the last couple of games have shown some loosening of the handbrake on the players, allowing them to be more direct and not focusing solely on the amount of possession we can keep.  Possession stats being even worse than xG in analysing a game. If we can continue to be stronger at the back and allow our undoubted attacking talent to flourish, then maybe he can turn this around.  I'm not convinced but I live in hope.

 

I really don’t think the high level tactics and play style have really changed, more just the effectiveness of how they are being applied by the players on the pitch. 

The plan has always been to control possession, play it out from the back and where possible, win the ball back high up the pitch and quickly attack. 

 

I don’t believe that Brendan has all of a sudden told them to attack more or anything like that because that’s just not how managers work. For me, the thing that has clearly changed over the last few games is just the confidence of the players. We’ve got so much more energy when we’re confident, the players look sharper and quicker. Passes are being hit crisply and infront of players to run onto, defenders are winning one v one duels etc. 

 

I also think it’s worth calling out how effective the tactics have been over the last couple of games. We’ve nullified the opposition pretty well and made them look like bad teams. Dominic wells did a couple of threads on Twitter and it shows how much thought goes into this on a game to game basis and that Brendan has done well recently. That being said, these opposition haven’t been at their best either, we need to see a continuation of the clever tactics that are helping us win games.  

[Miquel The Work Geordie]

32 minutes ago, suffolk fox said:

Got to love stats and this xg rubbish.....be truthful the only stat that ever matters is what the score is at the end of any game, yes, you know the one in the top corner of the screen for those that watch on tv or a stream.

 

Didn't realise Richard Keys had an account on here

[Guest Kopfkino]

11 minutes ago, Big_Nige said:

There’s a place in the game of xG, but it’s just another metric to use when analysing football and certainly shouldn’t be used to look at a game in isolation. I might be wrong but didn’t Amartey have our best pass completion % last season? Does that make him our best passer, of course not, he plays the ball square and safe the majority of the time.

 

Stats can be misleading but they can also be useful to paint a picture, I prefer to use my eyes when analysing a game of football. We were clinical on Sunday, on another day we might not be as clinical. That’s football and that’s why we love it so much, it’s unpredictable. 

Quite right

The inability to contextualise data is quite impressive or is the reality people using whatever data fits their narrative. Many people are data illiterate but get numbers put into their hands they can’t really deal with - anyone posting those FBref graphics without comment as another example.

 

Youre 2-0 up after 19 minutes, you don’t need to create anything. 2-0 down at Chelsea against 10 men then you do. Wolves created two moments when they spent 70 minutes desperate for a goal. 

Same with Leeds, we created two cracking chances from superb tactical exploitation, one of which doesn’t go into xG cos it’s an own goal. 

 

I remember the flip happening last year against Arsenal, people giving us some slack for a poor performance because we had a higher xG than them. They were 2-0 up and cruising, we huffed and puffed, ended up with a higher xG but didn’t mean we deserved anything.

 

xG is a fine measure but that it’s so raw is a perennial problem. Maddison’s goal gets a lower xG than most of their chances. However give me Maddison in that position over anything they did aside from Costa’s chance at the back post (which should have been ruled out for Nunes push on Tielemans anyway). Kilman twice as likely to score his near post flicked header? Is he bollocks.
 

 

[Death by Football]

7 minutes ago, Dusty said:

I really don’t think the high level tactics and play style have really changed, more just the effectiveness of how they are being applied by the players on the pitch. 

The plan has always been to control possession, play it out from the back and where possible, win the ball back high up the pitch and quickly attack. 

 

I don’t believe that Brendan has all of a sudden told them to attack more or anything like that because that’s just not how managers work. For me, the thing that has clearly changed over the last few games is just the confidence of the players. We’ve got so much more energy when we’re confident, the players look sharper and quicker. Passes are being hit crisply and infront of players to run onto, defenders are winning one v one duels etc. 

 

I also think it’s worth calling out how effective the tactics have been over the last couple of games. We’ve nullified the opposition pretty well and made them look like bad teams. Dominic wells did a couple of threads on Twitter and it shows how much thought goes into this on a game to game basis and that Brendan has done well recently. That being said, these opposition haven’t been at their best either, we need to see a continuation of the clever tactics that are helping us win games.  

I would like to agree that a lot of thought goes into each game plan but in fairness our tactics aren't clever or adapted week to week.  We've seen the same slow, backward movement, allowing teams to press us on the edge of our area for a couple of seasons now.  There is a difference in the last couple of games in our aggression and attitude rather than our tactics. 

 

I agree that Brendan has not told them to attack more but he appears to be less insistent on just trying to control possession and is letting them be more adventurous.  We had 39% possession against Wolves and 47% against Leeds.  Normally Brendan would be fuming with this but it's clear that what we are doing with that possession is more effective and he is letting them play. 

 

I agree that confidence returning is a huge part of the recent upturn in form and a willingness to make quicker forward passes than previously.  Whether that's on the manager or just the players, I don't know.  What's clear is that when we win the ball back we're straight on the attack before the opposition can reset themselves whereas previously we had to play through their entire team.

[foxes_rule1978]

7 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

Quite right

The inability to contextualise data is quite impressive or is the reality people using whatever data fits their narrative. Many people are data illiterate but get numbers put into their hands they can’t really deal with - anyone posting those FBref graphics without comment as another example.

 

Youre 2-0 up after 19 minutes, you don’t need to create anything. 2-0 down at Chelsea against 10 men then you do. Wolves created two moments when they spent 70 minutes desperate for a goal. 

Same with Leeds, we created two cracking chances from superb tactical exploitation, one of which doesn’t go into xG cos it’s an own goal. 

 

I remember the flip happening last year against Arsenal, people giving us some slack for a poor performance because we had a higher xG than them. They were 2-0 up and cruising, we huffed and puffed, ended up with a higher xG but didn’t mean we deserved anything.

 

xG is a fine measure but that it’s so raw is a perennial problem. Maddison’s goal gets a lower xG than most of their chances. However give me Maddison in that position over anything they did aside from Costa’s chance at the back post (which should have been ruled out for Nunes push on Tielemans anyway). Kilman twice as likely to score his near post flicked header? Is he bollocks.
 

 

Exactly this, anyone who feels wolves deserved anything from that game didn’t watch it… like you said we were in control of the match and cruising after 20 mins so didn’t need to do much more 

[Dusty]

11 minutes ago, Death by Football said:

I would like to agree that a lot of thought goes into each game plan but in fairness our tactics aren't clever or adapted week to week.  We've seen the same slow, backward movement, allowing teams to press us on the edge of our area for a couple of seasons now.  There is a difference in the last couple of games in our aggression and attitude rather than our tactics. 

 

I agree that Brendan has not told them to attack more but he appears to be less insistent on just trying to control possession and is letting them be more adventurous.  We had 39% possession against Wolves and 47% against Leeds.  Normally Brendan would be fuming with this but it's clear that what we are doing with that possession is more effective and he is letting them play. 

 

I agree that confidence returning is a huge part of the recent upturn in form and a willingness to make quicker forward passes than previously.  Whether that's on the manager or just the players, I don't know.  What's clear is that when we win the ball back we're straight on the attack before the opposition can reset themselves whereas previously we had to play through their entire team.

Well whilst he wasn’t fuming he did say after the Leeds game that we need to work on not losing the ball so quickly after winning it back. I personally don’t think those possession stats are down to him saying the players can play more freely. I don’t know how that would even work, just tell them to hit it long? I think it’s down to the players just being more confident and looking to make a progressive pass rather than playing it safe. 
 

We can never know for sure, it’s all just opinions, but to me it’s still the same idea, just being executed differently. 

[Death by Football]

19 minutes ago, Dusty said:

Well whilst he wasn’t fuming he did say after the Leeds game that we need to work on not losing the ball so quickly after winning it back. I personally don’t think those possession stats are down to him saying the players can play more freely. I don’t know how that would even work, just tell them to hit it long? I think it’s down to the players just being more confident and looking to make a progressive pass rather than playing it safe. 
 

We can never know for sure, it’s all just opinions, but to me it’s still the same idea, just being executed differently. 

The possession stats drop as we don’t fanny around as much passing between our defenders. By moving the ball forward quicker we effectively cede possession to the opposition sooner by losing the ball higher up the pitch or putting it out for throw ins goal kicks etc. But it means we’re playing the game in their half of the pitch with our midfielders rather than on the edge of our box with our defenders. 

 

You're right though that we are executing better on existing tactics - that was kind of my point too. It’s attitude not tactical. 

[st albans fox]

2 hours ago, suffolk fox said:

Got to love stats and this xg rubbish.....be truthful the only stat that ever matters is what the score is at the end of any game, yes, you know the one in the top corner of the screen for those that watch on tv or a stream.

 

For those saying we shouldnt be facing 21 shots, lets look at those shots.  Wolves on Sunday had at best two shots during the whole game that troubled Ward he made a great save from one, tipping it over the bar and he dived to his right to save the other..  Apart from that shots that are attempted and blocked?  Does it really count, likewise shots that go over the bar or wide is anyone really bothered.

 

The one he tipped over ?  Not sure he actually got a touch on that and it wasn’t a difficult save in any case 

 

he made two saves that were not expected - the Podence drive from the left side of the box and the quick break they made early on down our left side which ended up one on one and he blocked with his legs. Earlier in the season that could easily have meant the half ended 2-2. (Add in the JJ block) 
 

 But second half I agree that despite them having some periods of pressure, I can’t recall any saves ward made which were unexpected 

 

their xg mounted up on the back of a lot of small opportunities 

 

we basically had two big chances which were barnes and Vards goals - hence our xg was suppressed. The second half played out in a certain way because we were 2-0 up away - xg becomes a bit redundant 

[HighPeakFox]

55 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

The one he tipped over ?  Not sure he actually got a touch on that and it wasn’t a difficult save in any case 

 

he made two saves that were not expected - the Podence drive from the left side of the box and the quick break they made early on down our left side which ended up one on one and he blocked with his legs. Earlier in the season that could easily have meant the half ended 2-2. (Add in the JJ block) 
 

 But second half I agree that despite them having some periods of pressure, I can’t recall any saves ward made which were unexpected 

 

their xg mounted up on the back of a lot of small opportunities 

 

we basically had two big chances which were barnes and Vards goals - hence our xg was suppressed. The second half played out in a certain way because we were 2-0 up away - xg becomes a bit redundant 

The one he tipped over actually came off Amartey, I think. 

[Dusty]

4 hours ago, Death by Football said:

The possession stats drop as we don’t fanny around as much passing between our defenders. By moving the ball forward quicker we effectively cede possession to the opposition sooner by losing the ball higher up the pitch or putting it out for throw ins goal kicks etc. But it means we’re playing the game in their half of the pitch with our midfielders rather than on the edge of our box with our defenders. 

 

You're right though that we are executing better on existing tactics - that was kind of my point too. It’s attitude not tactical. 

But I don’t believe the tactic was to ever just pass it between the centre backs because that’s not a tactic. Rodgers likes his teams to move the ball quickly because that’s how you find gaps in opposition press. To me it just seems that the players are more willing to take risks because they’re more confident they’re going to go well. Also Soumare being the deepest midfielder who is much more willing to get the ball from the centre backs and move it around, compared to Ndidi who is fairly limited in that field.