Style of play vs squad disconnect

[Chrysalis]

I have touched up on this a number of times in different threads.

 

But I feel this is more relevant now given our financial problems.

 

We know our ownership want a specific brand of football.

 

However its my opinion the players we have had access to in recent years have included some excellent counter attacking players.

 

Vardy

Ricardo

Barnes

KDH

Mavididi.

Maddison

Soyuncu

Fofana

Kasper

Cannon

 

Examples I can remember without looking at a list.  Everyone in this list except Cannon is/was a first team regular.

 

We know changing players is an expensive business, so has this been part of our problem, an insistence on a certain brand of football whilst not having the right players for it?

[Arriba Los Zorros]

Not to be unnecessarily nit picking here as your point is sound, but on what basis are Cannon, Soyuncu, Fofana, KDH and Ricardo and for that matter Maddison counter attacking players?

[Chrysalis]

Based on how they perform in quick attacking moves.  Its an opinion formed on observation.

Edited 28 March by Chrysalis

[Dahnsouff]

47 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

I have touched up on this a number of times in different threads.

 

But I feel this is more relevant now given our financial problems.

 

We know our ownership want a specific brand of football.

 

However its my opinion the players we have had access to in recent years have included some excellent counter attacking players.

 

Vardy

Ricardo

Barnes

KDH

Mavididi.

Maddison

Soyuncu

Fofana

Kasper

Cannon

 

Examples I can remember without looking at a list.  Everyone in this list except Cannon is/was a first team regular.

 

We know changing players is an expensive business, so has this been part of our problem, an insistence on a certain brand of football whilst not having the right players for it?

Counter attacking is best played when not expected to win, we have seen teams further back giving little opportunity to play that way.

[glenny_fox]

I'd argue pretty much every player on that list, barring Kasper, is completely able to play the current way we play.

 

Also, half of your list is no longer at the club so I don't see what point you are trying to make.

[Guest]

Being good in a counter-attacking team and good in a possession team are not mutually exclusive - nor are playing possession football and attacking on the counter. Everyone on that list, excepting Cannon who I've not seen enough of to judge, has done well and poorly in both styles.

 

Personally my big question about the squad and its suitability would be how we ended up with a manager who plays one up front (we had three strikers and signed another just in case), relies on the 8s for penetration and creativity (Enzo must be the only man on Earth who saw Wilf as a potential attacking midfielder, and to be fair he did actually make it happen somehow) and has no use for orthodox full backs (Ricardo, Justin, Kristiansen and Thomas made this arguably the strongest area of the squad together with the strikers).

[davieG]

We already counter attack when the opportunity arises.

 

If you want to set your team up to only play counter attacking you need to tell them all to sit back in their own half. We have players that are not right and to good to spend 90+ minutes waiting to counter attack.

[Chrysalis]

22 hours ago, glenny_fox said:

I'd argue pretty much every player on that list, barring Kasper, is completely able to play the current way we play.

 

Also, half of your list is no longer at the club so I don't see what point you are trying to make.

Sure I can explain it more, the club wants us to play a specific style, Rodgers and Enzo were employed for that reason.  Top wanted Rodgers for a long time, Enzo confirmed he was employed for the style of football.

 

Yet the managers then have to work with players who are awkward playing that way of football and it requires expensive players, whilst the club doesnt have the financial means and/or willpower to overhaul the squad for it, hence me calling it a disconnect.

 

When you say the players are able to completely play this way, why do we have threads after most games moaning about the performance of players, the odd time the team has been allowed to attack with pace, certain players have shined, but then when the team reverts to slow tippy tappy, those players who previously shined look lost, go missing etc.  That is because they are not playing in a way that suits them.  Of our current first 11, I would say only 5 players are comfortable with the style and one of them isnt an outfield player.

I also didnt say all the players on the list cant play this way, but I do think this isnt using those players to the best of their abilities.  A squad and style should be melded together in harmony, instead we have a mish mash.

It is clear to see every game this season and last, too much of the team simply isnt comfortable with it. 

Then ask yourself why Enzo is also not utilising more of his squad, subs etc.  It is because he has recognised those players cant handle the system.

Edited 29 March by Chrysalis

[Matt]

Never known such a disconnect or divisive nature since the shift towards possession based football. Not just Leicester (Mainly Leicester) but football in general.

 

Not many people I talk to enjoy it (Leicester fans and fans of other clubs), but that aside, of course there has always been discussion and arguments, but I've genuinely never known such toxicity, vitriol and infighting, yes I have an agenda against the style but the style is very much my only reasoning towards it. 

 

Edited 29 March by Matt

[Chrysalis]

22 hours ago, Guest said:

Being good in a counter-attacking team and good in a possession team are not mutually exclusive - nor are playing possession football and attacking on the counter. Everyone on that list, excepting Cannon who I've not seen enough of to judge, has done well and poorly in both styles.

 

Personally my big question about the squad and its suitability would be how we ended up with a manager who plays one up front (we had three strikers and signed another just in case), relies on the 8s for penetration and creativity (Enzo must be the only man on Earth who saw Wilf as a potential attacking midfielder, and to be fair he did actually make it happen somehow) and has no use for orthodox full backs (Ricardo, Justin, Kristiansen and Thomas made this arguably the strongest area of the squad together with the strikers).

Didnt say they were, but it is important to use the players you have in a way they are best at, So a player that excels at A but can also do B doesnt mean B is the way to go.

[Chrysalis]

3 minutes ago, Matt said:

Never known such a disconnect or divisive nature since the shift towards possession based football. Not just Leicester, football in general.

 

Not many people I talk to enjoy it, but that aside, of course there's been discussion and arguments but I've genuinely never known such toxicity and infighting, yes I have an agenda against the style but the style is very much my only reasoning towards it. 

There seems to be some kind of blind ideology towards it that some people cant see past, its very easy to see, they tend to blame individual mistakes when it doesnt go well, and think its players off form etc.   Instead of realising its imposing something on players they not comfortably doing.

[brownfox]

If we bottle it and don’t get automatic promotion then we are done. We ain’t got the courage or the bottle to play in play offs, the team don’t have the spine to show fight and looking at Enzo today, he makes no sense he has a huge bench which he doesn’t use and sticks with his favourites. Todays loss is solely on Enzo and for not seeing the plan was not working and not doing really anything to change it. The casual style of play is getting frustrating to watch, does he have that much power that he controls the style of play or do players not think sod this and go for it? How do you lead the championship and loose fans?

[Matt]

1 minute ago, Chrysalis said:

There seems to be some kind of blind ideology towards it that some people cant see past, its very easy to see, they tend to blame individual mistakes when it doesnt go well, and think its players off form etc.   Instead of realising its imposing something on players they not comfortably doing.

Hit the nail on the head.