A Vision - without the sunshades

[Thracian]

http://www.thebluearmy.co.uk/details.asp?k...532007398542131

Another Blanderson article that actually reveals nothing and is almost entirely nebulous.

What is this "vision" being talked about?

There is not a single word to explain it from what I can see.

Lots of us have had visions - I've been talking about my vision for Leicester City on here for 18 months and we have not moved one inch in that direction as far as I can see.

But so MM is in no doubt lets be clear what it is:

a) A return to the young and hungry policy which will be so healthy for us if developed properly.

b) An end to the signing of loanees who are no better than the players we already have. Loanees should only be signed if they are categorically better than the alternatives and will compliment the atmsophere within the squad.

c) A determination to sort our obvious problems quickly: attacking left-back, attacking midfield player, effective right winger and effective striker.

d) A determination that anyone chosen for a Leicester city side is fit and that our general level of fitness is as good and better than the opposition.

e) An end to negative tactics and the idea that somehow Leicester City might not be good enough to beat any side in what is a perfectly ordinary Championship.

f) An end to negative and pointless substitutions which have no logical purpose or even, on occasions, leave us in the ridiculous situation of having only 10 men.

g) An insistence that when we score goals or get in front we continue to press the game instead of going in some sort of coaches "have-what-we-hold" mode and losing the initiative.

h) Re-establishment of the reserves so that Academy players have a natural progression within the club.

i) A general determination and presumption that at least two Academy players will graduate to the first team each season giving the whole enterprise a definable purpose.

j) Insistence that there is a proper shadow player for every position thus avoiding the sort of nonsense we've had at left back when Nils was out and in other positions.

k) A general policy of being positive in everything we do. I am sick of excuses, excuses, excuses as to why we don't do this or that or why the time's not right to do the other.

l) A determination that our coaching will include:-

1) Greater efforts to get Henderson to throw the ball to a City shirt and set attacks in motion properly.

2) Proper attention to throw in so that players give themselves space, there is always movement and the ball is thrown accurately to feet.

3) Greater attention to the variety and execution of free-kicks, preferably by a couple of special free-kick takers one of whom should not be Kisnorbo.

4) Greater insistence on playing the ball to feet and moving in all situations and not just until the first sign of pressure.

m) Greater insistence on ensuring that our team is properly balanced at all times and in all situations with NOBODY playing out of position.

n) Increased focus on ensuring we have the means within our team to score at least 20 more goals per season.

o) Greater involvement of our fringe youth players in the first team squad and particular determination to provide opportunities when the chance arises instead of the ridiculous policy of last year when we just kept selecting the same old team with its same old problems while refusing to develop any of the fringe players.

p) Determination to ensure that no squad member is allowed to go so short of football that his fitness suffers as has happened so muich this season.

q) Recognition that Leicester City not only has a duty of responsibility to its own League status and position but also a responsibility to the game itself and to the public to play football properly and in a manner that might have a reasonable chance of providing acceptable entertainment.

Not everyone will agree with the above. Some will probably not agree with any of it the way they make excuses for our esteemed manager. But that is a vision. It is not a nebulous soundbite that can be taken to mean anything or nothing.

[Manwell Pablo]

I dunno which one of you is worse you or him

I agree with some of the points you've made. But then you've made so many it'd be impossible to agree/not agree with them all .

As I've already said to you Bill is now Mandarics bitch for better of for worse. I wouldn't expect to read a bad word about him in the Merc until he leaves.

[Sooper Steve's shin]

http://www.thebluearmy.co.uk/details.asp?k...532007398542131

I've been talking about my vision for Leicester City on hear from 18 months and we have not moved one inch in that direction as far as I can see.

Erm, is it just me or are you seriously off your trolley? Why on earth would the club have moved towards the vision of someone posting on an internet forum?

http://www.thebluearmy.co.uk/details.asp?k...532007398542131

But so MM is in no doubt lets be clear what is is:

etc

I am sure Mr Mandaric is grateful for your guidance in how to run a football club, what with him being new to this game and all...

By tomorrow morning, your post will be printed out and pasted around the internal corridors of the Walkers Stadium so that everyone know OUR VISION.

[Thracian]

I am sure Mr Mandaric is grateful for your guidance in how to run a football club, what with him being new to this game and all...

By tomorrow morning, your post will be printed out and pasted around the internal corridors of the Walkers Stadium so that everyone know OUR VISION.

My point was that in an article about a "vision" it would be nice to have some substance as to what that vision was. As is so often the case, there's a nice cherry headline on top of the cake but precious little substance to the filling underneath.

And you can have any vision you like and talk about any vision you like but it's not very inspiring if you don't know what the vision is and therefore cannot tell if any progress is being made towards it or not.

Finally, some of the points I've talked about have been mentioned by Kelly. Need to play people in position, the idea of what we do, rather than the opposition as being important. Subsciption to "young and hungry". Trouble is the actions haven't matched the words.

[The Reverend]

What Thracian has pointed out is a number of things what would make the club better/put the club in a better position.

Some of these points are very valid and i would be surprised if Kelly/The Board had'nt been thinking about a number of these points for a long long time.

At the end of the day i would assume that the majority of Board members are fans of the club aswel- therefore there is hardly going to be a massively different vision of how to get the club where it wants to be- in the Premiership. Its clear that a lot of these points would help that.

The point is Thracians just pointing out a load of things that we all know need doing to help us progress and is asking why these things havent yet been done

[Bloomer]

Young and hungry may take you so far, but at some stage you come up against experienced and skilled. For real success You need a mix of ages, but a consistently high level of commitment and skill. You then need succession plan to include replacing those who wear out or leave. The plan will involve buying in players and promoting from within if appropriate.

You can only promote from the Academy if they are good enough, assuming that 2 a year will be good enough mat be a little mbitious. The Academy can only work with what it can attract, if its a choice between us and a team in the Prem or even top half of this division, the best young players might not choose to come here. I know the Academy has done well results wise but thiat don't mean they can setp up and deal with all the sh1t that goes with first team games.

But yes, BA's article was thin and wispy. Simple reitteration of some MM throw away comments from the multitude of interviews done since he arrived.

My vision (tele) is for 42 inch Plasma please.

[PAULCFC]

Agree with most of the above comments from thac.Anyone hear the interview on radio 5 with the chairman of the premiership......Scudamore i think his name is.He was talking about why the premier clubs scrapped the reserve league for non premier clubs.Basicly said it was to do with the travelling involved.

[Lineker's Left Foot]

My point was that in an article about a "vision" it would be nice to have some substance as to what that vision was. As is so often the case, there's a nice cherry headline on top of the cake but precious little substance to the filling underneath.

And you can have any vision you like and talk about any vision you like but it's not very inspiring if you don't know what the vision is and therefore cannot tell if any progress is being made towards it or not.

Finally, some of the points I've talked about have been mentioned by Kelly. Need to play people in position, the idea of what we do, rather than the opposition as being important. Subsciption to "young and hungry". Trouble is the actions haven't matched the words.

I'm with you on this one Thracian as I found some of the article incomprehensible !!!

[De Vries The King]

so many contradictions in there!!!

[FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife]

b) An end to the signing of loanees who are no better than the players we already have. Loanees should only be signed if they are categorically better than the alternatives and will compliment the atmsophere within the squad

Correct me if i am wrong but have we not lost a game since the aformentioned loan players joined? Surely this proves thay are better than what we have!!!!

Please, please, please do not mention players from the academy who are no where near the first team!!!!

Point a.) I semi agree with on the proviso players are picked because they are good enough no because they are young enough! A situation like the Quota system in South Africa would be ludicrous!

I stopped reading your post after point b.) so cannot comment further!!

Thank you!

[Daggers]

Correct me if i am wrong but have we not lost a game since the aformentioned loan players joined? Surely this proves thay are better than what we have!!!!...

It isn't a tautological argument.

You have proposed that

a) players - loanees = losing streak

and

b) players + loanees = not-losing streak

to draw the conclusion that loanees > players

That would be fine if players were a constant...but as we (miserably) know ~ football players are anything but constant thus rendering the argument flawed.

I believe this is the first time on the forum that propositional calculus has been used in a thread. I claim 10 points.

[davieG]

It isn't a tautological argument.

You have proposed that

a) players - loanees = losing streak

and

b) players + loanees = not-losing streak

to draw the conclusion that loanees > players

That would be fine if players were a constant...but as we (miserably) know ~ football players are anything but constant thus rendering the argument flawed.

I believe this is the first time on the forum that propositional calculus has been used in a thread. I claim 10 points.

To add

Does 11 loanees = Champions League winners within years?

[FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife]

Ok so to imply the loanees where solely responsible for our upturn in form was ill judged!!!

But Stevie Wonder can see that Jarrett, Yeates and Horsfield have improved us!!!!!

[davieG]

Ok so to imply the loanees where solely responsible for our upturn in form was ill judged!!!

But Stevie Wonder can see that Jarrett, Yeates and Horsfield have improved us!!!!!

Wel for the last two away games at least Jarrett, Horsfiled and Yeates when he's been on the pitch have been totally anonymous and I would say we got results in spite of them not because of the them.

[STUHILL]

Yet again Thracian I agree with many of your points, I would find it hard not to as most are quite obvious!

I would like to bring you down to the real world for just a minute though by asking you a few questions on a few of your points.

Regard the loanees - Do you think the loan market at the moment considering we have already been rejected by two Prem players has many oppurtunities for us to find the higher quality we need but also the ability to get them? If so, could you name a few players?

RETURN to young and hungry policy - Do you not think we are continuing with this policy as we have such a low average age in our squad? Do you not believe adding more 'quality' experience (Not Andy Jonson quality) would be more beneficial considering our current squad? But also bare in mind experience doesn't have to mean 32+ has-beens!

Attacking LB, Attacking Midfield, Effective RW, Effective Striker - Could you suggest some players that in your opinion would be available to us in the summer?

Fitness Levels - Could you suggest a training sytem that allows our players to be fitter than the oppositions, without an overtraining issue?

Excuses, Excuses, Excuses - Do you not believe some of these 'excuses' are actual realistic hurdles Football Clubs must deal with? Such as a lack of Loanee availabilty, Lack of quality in the Squad, Lack of funds until now etc.

Finally, you have mentioned in another topic that all our team needs is 'fine tuning'. Could you say the 11 players you would play from our current squad, and the 'fine tuning' you would do to formation, tactics and style in order to have the kind of impact on results and performances you are suggesting would happen if Kelly were to make these changes?

Thanks, obviously you don't have to do any of that but it would help me discover that apart from stating the problems and what needs changing etc, which lets face it anyone can do, but you have also actually thought through each change, and with it, each hurdle, limitation, set-back, negative outcome etc.

[Phube]

TBH all good points; keep up the good work!

[Daggers]

Ok so to imply the loanees where solely responsible for our upturn in form was ill judged!!!

But Stevie Wonder can see that Jarrett, Yeates and Horsfield have improved us!!!!!

I'd say that the largest single factor in our improvement on the pitch is down to players wanting to widen their pockets with a new contract from MM, and to be part of a team that has clearly stated it wants to be in the Premiership and not just treading water to avoid relegation every season.

The Horse has given us some bite up front and knows where the goal is (unlike Hammond and Fyatt), Jarrett hasn't really offered an awful lot different to Hughes and Hughes seems to be preferred to Yeates now.

TO sum up - CHANGE was the biggest factor in altering the attitude to games, and loans were part of that but not its entirety.

[Thracian]

Correct me if i am wrong but have we not lost a game since the aformentioned loan players joined? Surely this proves thay are better than what we have!!!!

Please, please, please do not mention players from the academy who are no where near the first team!!!!

Point a.) I semi agree with on the proviso players are picked because they are good enough no because they are young enough! A situation like the Quota system in South Africa would be ludicrous!

I stopped reading your post after point b.) so cannot comment further!!

Thank you!

I don't think our run of results is down to the loanees especially. They might have made some contribution in certain games but they have simply stopped the squad being a bit thinner than Kelly would want, that's all.

We had already gone eight games without defeat in one spell this season so the latest run is nothing exception especially considering we were damned lucky at Burnley, probably a second or two from defeat against West Brom and were disappointing against Luton and Southend to the point of dropping four points unnecesarily.

[FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife]

Do you accept that to be successful you need to:

a.) Have a bit of luck and

b.) Play badly and win

Would you rather us have ripped burnley apart and lost?

All I was saying was that the I personally think we are stronger with the loan signings that we are without them!!

I would like so seee highr profile players playing eye catching football at the Mandaric Dome but short term I think they have done a good job!

[Thracian]

Yet again Thracian I agree with many of your points, I would find it hard not to as most are quite obvious!

I would like to bring you down to the real world for just a minute though by asking you a few questions on a few of your points.

Regard the loanees - Do you think the loan market at the moment considering we have already been rejected by two Prem players has many oppurtunities for us to find the higher quality we need but also the ability to get them? If so, could you name a few players?

RETURN to young and hungry policy - Do you not think we are continuing with this policy as we have such a low average age in our squad? Do you not believe adding more 'quality' experience (Not Andy Jonson quality) would be more beneficial considering our current squad? But also bare in mind experience doesn't have to mean 32+ has-beens!

Attacking LB, Attacking Midfield, Effective RW, Effective Striker - Could you suggest some players that in your opinion would be available to us in the summer?

Fitness Levels - Could you suggest a training sytem that allows our players to be fitter than the oppositions, without an overtraining issue?

Excuses, Excuses, Excuses - Do you not believe some of these 'excuses' are actual realistic hurdles Football Clubs must deal with? Such as a lack of Loanee availabilty, Lack of quality in the Squad, Lack of funds until now etc.

Finally, you have mentioned in another topic that all our team needs is 'fine tuning'. Could you say the 11 players you would play from our current squad, and the 'fine tuning' you would do to formation, tactics and style in order to have the kind of impact on results and performances you are suggesting would happen if Kelly were to make these changes?

Thanks, obviously you don't have to do any of that but it would help me discover that apart from stating the problems and what needs changing etc, which lets face it anyone can do, but you have also actually thought through each change, and with it, each hurdle, limitation, set-back, negative outcome etc.

You ask some good questions.

a) I have mentioned one or two players in passing as being the sort of loanees who might add something to our squad - Patrik Berger and Terry Sheringham - but I'm not privy to the circulated information on available loanees and, seeing I don't know what our payment parameters are or the basis on which we sign players, there is no way I can judge if we are likely to get them.

I am quite sure, however, that if I were privy to that information, or had contacts abroad, I would find alternatives for the positions we are weak in - indeed would have found alternatives long before now.

Meanwhile I'd have involved our fringe players much more so that they were ready to deputise when necessary. There is no way I'd sign anyone on loan who I didn't believe would categorically improve our team in his particular position.

b) You are quite right about the "quality" experience. I have never beeen against such people - and am surprised that Cadamarteri hasn't been used more because he does seem to have some quality and if Kelly doesn't think so then I'm at a loss to know why he's been signed. Berger, Sheringham, Lee Hendrie before he joined Stoke, are players who do have quality but they are not thesort who seem to be arriving at our club.

c) Again, without having a list of potentially available players and videos of their current level of performance you could speculate ad infinitum. Robert Earnshaw is a cracking striker, Freddy Eastwood's looked alert and dangerous when I've seen him, Campbell-Ryce looked far better than anyone we've had on the right wing, I've seen no-one better as an all-round attacking midfielder than Andy King and if neither Sheehan nor Mattock were good enough at left-back I am sure I could find someone aggressive, fast and mobile elsewhere, someone in the mould of Ben Thatcher but a bit younger. That is the type of player I'd want.

d) Fitness wise the first step forward would be to refuse to consider players who weren't fit and to impress that fact on everyone.

Fryatt didn't look fit at the start of the season but was still selected ahead of people like Dodds who had been scoring goals.

Johnson, Kenton, Tiatto, Welsh, Williams, Horsfield are among the others who have also been picked without being fully fit and I don't think we can afford to give ourselves handicaps of any sort.

It would be laborious to suggest a detailed fitness programme but I've have lots of experience in compiling such programmes and don't think anyone has ever doubted the fitness of sportsmen I've been involved with, either in football or as a professional squash player.

However, it is not the fitness work I doubt at Leicester it is players being selected who have missed some of the work for whatever reason.

e) You are right to a point but Kelly has had 12 months and a whole close season to find some decent alternatives and other people have managed. It might have meant selling someone you'd rather have kept but if you want something enough you find a way. We didn't.

f) Fine tuning from presently available squad (including formation/ tactics):

First I would accept that we don't have a natural right winger of championship quality and would therefore play a different system. All the players would be fit. mobile, natural suporting players and I would increase the number of potential scorers in such a way as two goals a game average would be a realistic expectation.

The players selected would be those I consider best capable of collectively passing and moving. Each for have a shadow player in the same mould. The team would always attempt to press the play, thus denying the opposition time and space. The higher they managed to do this the faster they could counter attack. To assist this policy players with speed would be essential.

So:

Henderson (Logan)

Stearman (Maybury), McAuley (Stearman), Kisnorbo (Nils) Sheehan (Mattock);

King (Porter), Hughes (Johnson) Porter (Tiatto);

Hume (Dodds)

Hammond (Cadamarteri), Horsfield (Fryatt).

I would also like to involve Gradel and Yeates in small bursts.

This is not a perfect scenario. But I believe this whole side is capable of passing, moving and supporting.

There are six or seven recognised potential sorers and everyone of the principal squad has a reasonable potential for scoring/creating. Far better than the five or six we have now.

Our lack of a right winger would be countered by Stearman/King/Hammond all being perfectly capable of making width effectively and providing cover for each other.

[Leonisco]

Blanderson's a worse journalist than Chris Kamara, and that's saying something. <_<

[STUHILL]

You ask some good questions.

a) I have mentioned one or two players in passing as being the sort of loanees who might add something to our squad - Patrik Berger and Terry Sheringham - but I'm not privy to the circulated information on available loanees and, seeing I don't know what our payment parameters are or the basis on which we sign players, there is no way I can judge if we are likely to get them.

I am quite sure, however, that if I were privy to that information, or had contacts abroad, I would find alternatives for the positions we are weak in - indeed would have found alternatives long before now.

Meanwhile I'd have involved our fringe players much more so that they were ready to deputise when necessary. There is no way I'd sign anyone on loan who I didn't believe would categorically improve our team in his particular position.

b) You are quite right about the "quality" experience. I have never beeen against such people - and am surprised that Cadamarteri hasn't been used more because he does seem to have some quality and if Kelly doesn't think so then I'm at a loss to know why he's been signed. Berger, Sheringham, Lee Hendrie before he joined Stoke, are players who do have quality but they are not thesort who seem to be arriving at our club.

c) Again, without having a list of potentially available players and videos of their current level of performance you could speculate ad infinitum. Robert Earnshaw is a cracking striker, Freddy Eastwood's looked alert and dangerous when I've seen him, Campbell-Ryce looked far better than anyone we've had on the right wing, I've seen no-one better as an all-round attacking midfielder than Andy King and if neither Sheehan nor Mattock were good enough at left-back I am sure I could find someone aggressive, fast and mobile elsewhere, someone in the mould of Ben Thatcher but a bit younger. That is the type of player I'd want.

d) Fitness wise the first step forward would be to refuse to consider players who weren't fit and to impress that fact on everyone.

Fryatt didn't look fit at the start of the season but was still selected ahead of people like Dodds who had been scoring goals.

Johnson, Kenton, Tiatto, Welsh, Williams, Horsfield are among the others who have also been picked without being fully fit and I don't think we can afford to give ourselves handicaps of any sort.

It would be laborious to suggest a detailed fitness programme but I've have lots of experience in compiling such programmes and don't think anyone has ever doubted the fitness of sportsmen I've been involved with, either in football or as a professional squash player.

However, it is not the fitness work I doubt at Leicester it is players being selected who have missed some of the work for whatever reason.

e) You are right to a point but Kelly has had 12 months and a whole close season to find some decent alternatives and other people have managed. It might have meant selling someone you'd rather have kept but if you want something enough you find a way. We didn't.

f) Fine tuning from presently available squad (including formation/ tactics):

First I would accept that we don't have a natural right winger of championship quality and would therefore play a different system. All the players would be fit. mobile, natural suporting players and I would increase the number of potential scorers in such a way as two goals a game average would be a realistic expectation.

The players selected would be those I consider best capable of collectively passing and moving. Each for have a shadow player in the same mould. The team would always attempt to press the play, thus denying the opposition time and space. The higher they managed to do this the faster they could counter attack. To assist this policy players with speed would be essential.

So:

Henderson (Logan)

Stearman (Maybury), McAuley (Stearman), Kisnorbo (Nils) Sheehan (Mattock);

King (Porter), Hughes (Johnson) Porter (Tiatto);

Hume (Dodds)

Hammond (Cadamarteri), Horsfield (Fryatt).

I would also like to involve Gradel and Yeates in small bursts.

This is not a perfect scenario. But I believe this whole side is capable of passing, moving and supporting.

There are six or seven recognised potential sorers and everyone of the principal squad has a reasonable potential for scoring/creating. Far better than the five or six we have now.

Our lack of a right winger would be countered by Stearman/King/Hammond all being perfectly capable of making width effectively and providing cover for each other.

How would this team cope defensively, as a man of your knowledge you cannot fail to miss that Defence is as important as Attack. With Kisnorbo, McAuley and perhaps Stearman being the only capable defensive players among the 11.

The midfield is packed with attacking players but how would they hold up on defensive duties?

This team may score more goals but would they concede more as a result?

[Thracian]

How would this team cope defensively, as a man of your knowledge you cannot fail to miss that Defence is as important as Attack. With Kisnorbo, McAuley and perhaps Stearman being the only capable defensive players among the 11.

The midfield is packed with attacking players but how would they hold up on defensive duties?

This team may score more goals but would they concede more as a result?

You asked what I do given the current squad now. I didn't suggest my team was perfect for what I'd like any more than the team we have played for 18 months will ever get the 70+ goals we need to be a realistic challenger.

As I see it we are virtually safe this season and have the perfect opportunity to change our emphasis, given that the previous approach has been seen to be flawed in that we don't score enough and have never challenged higher than halfway up the table.

I would play that team and see where the faults lie. I would also revert to 4-4-2 with two wingers on occasions.

a) I would find out once and for all whether Sheehan, Dodds and Gradel were capable of Championship football.

b) I would see to what level our pressing policy would be successful and where/why it broke down.

c) I would learn whether the scoring rate was high enough to be successful longer term.

d) I would see if an alternative system worked better than the flawed system we use at present.

e) I would see whether Stearman/King/Hammond genuinely combined to provide width.

f) I would see whether that side was consistently capable of playing pass and run football.

g) I would see how it affected our goals against column but believe the greater period retaining the ball and being in our attacking half would not be likely to result in a great many more goals being conceded. The opposition would have to careful of many things just as you seem to believe we would.

I don't accept we only have three defenders and a goalkeeper. Our first team didn't concede lots of goals when Sheehan played. Nil against Wednesday, one against Crewe, one or none against Bury etc.

Hughes is essentially a spoiling player. Not a vigorous tackler but a man who constantly harries people into losing possession. Porter is a far better defender than he's given credit for and, in my view a far more creative, reliable and accurate midfielder than Johnson or Jarrett.

King is no lazy bones defensively - and adds aerial assistance at defensive corners etc. Even Hume and Hammond aren't unwilling to chase back.

My biggest fear would be at left-back where I've gone with the attacking flair of Sheehan rather than the defensive reliability of Nils simply to do justice to the type of team I believe in playing.

I would not cease to involve Nils completely and might well use both Nils at Sheehan at left-back and Nils as a covering centre-back.

But what we get in return for my concern at left-back is at least four, sometimes five attackers potentially bursting into the box with attacking full-backs in support and our goalscoring centre-backs adding the extras.

We have never had that sort of attacking capability during either Kelly or Levein's time.

[Asha]

Blanderson's a worse journalist than Chris Kamara, and that's saying something. <_<

Chris Kamara's brilliant - if it weren't for ntl cutting my sky sports channels then i'd still be laughing at his witty jokes

[Sods]

Chris Kamara's brilliant - if it weren't for ntl cutting my sky sports channels then i'd still be laughing at his witty jokes

apart from his problem with leicester