Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Jimmy

Team against mattock's rent boys

By Jimmy, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

foxaholic

foxaholic

Posted
Posted
That's nonsense though isn't it. QPR are a also very good passing side as well, and we made them look ordinary. WBA are not Arsenal. Prior to their 5-0 bumming of Watford they had won 1 in 6. Coventry kept a clean sheet against them and Swansea beat them at the Hawthorns. Good side, yes, but hardly a team that we should fear.

Plus, We subconsciously hoof it up to Howard when he's playing. It's a psychological thing. And you never change a winning side. That's rule number 1 in the management book.

cant believe anybody is even thinking of Howard in the team after Fridays magnificent performance

MPH

MPH

Posted
Posted
I disagree. Howard would definitely be bombing around, he'd be seriously up for it having not played for a while.

well, yes he would but howard bombing around and Waghoron bombing around are absolutely different sights...

OLD norfox

OLD norfox

Posted
Posted
D J is way to lightweight and is always being caught offside. Waghorn is way way better.

Pace is great, you also need to have the brain to use it, its no good if you keep getting caught offside the amount of times he does.

Muffin.

Agree with you !!

D J hasn't shown us anything positive since august last year and I don't see how he can play a part , not even from the bench!!

Bring back Max

davieG

davieG

Posted
Posted
D J is way to lightweight and is always being caught offside. Waghorn is way way better.

Pace is great, you also need to have the brain to use it, its no good if you keep getting caught offside the amount of times he does.

Muffin.

Fryatt's not exactly off-side free but people tend to ignore this. :dunno:

Guest Bilo

Guest Bilo

Posted
Posted

It isn't broke so it doesn't need fixing. Changing the team, any part of it, would send out completely the wrong message in my opinion as each and every man earned his place for this one on Friday night.

Keep it 4-4-2, keep the ball on the floor and there's no reason why we can't do to a West Brom that blows hot and cold what we did to a QPR side that's actually in better form.

Identical line-up please Nigel.

Joe.

Joe.

Posted
Posted

It's be totally pointless changing the team after such a good result, and I have no concerns that Pearson will do so. Bit of a no-brainer really.

Sooper Steve's shin

Sooper Steve's shin

Posted
Posted

Our team against QPR worked because we picked the most suitable players - two busy strikers against big lumbering centre halves, three central midfielders against their strong creative midfield and N'Guessan having a go down the wing. I'm up for changing a winning team if it (a) keeps players on their toes and (b) there is a sound tactical reason for doing so. We shouldn't get too hung up on "not changing a winning team". Very few teams at any level can afford to pick a side without worrying about the opposition's lineup.

marbelladave

marbelladave

Posted
Posted
And why were Sky harping on so much about our "surprise" formation with two up front? How many times have we played this season with one up front?!

The "surprise" was that with N'Guessan given an attacking role we played with what was virtually a front three!

maddog

maddog

Posted
Posted

I hope Howards not played just because he got a hat-trick against these last time <_<

Substitutes

13 Logan, 03 McGivern, 04 Morrison, 11 Dyer, 09 Howard, 22 Kermorgant, 24 Gallagher (Bench against QPR)

The bench is the only thing that could possibly be changed. I want Dj on the bench, but who drops out :dunno:

Gallagher, Morrison, Logan are the only certainties.

The other 4 could be changed around for the likes of Dj and Adams.

And the Tunch will be back soon, wheres he going to fit in lol

Joe.

Joe.

Posted
Posted

Disregarding my previous post completely, moving N'Guessan out to the right could work wonders up against Mattock, who we all know is a vulnerability for them should he play.

Having said that, the left side would be a big problem. It would have to be Gallagher or Dyer, two suspect options, and it would also mean taking King out to accommodate Oakley in the middle. Whilst N'Guessan would be a useful weapon on the left I'm not sure it's worth changing the team for. Food for thought though I suppose...

Corky

Corky

Posted
Posted
I hope Howards not played just because he got a hat-trick against these last time <_<

Pearson wasn't at the club then.

And why would he be picked because of a match 20 months ago?

maddog

maddog

Posted
Posted
Pearson wasn't at the club then.

And why would he be picked because of a match 20 months ago?

I hope he's not :P

I want him on the bench though just incase we're behind, desperate, and need a bit of hoofball.

Koke

Koke

Posted
Posted
I don't get why we don't just have wingers who switch sides all the time

Because we got 3 CM's that needs to be accommodated. In an ideal world, Oakley would be dropped to the bench and we would play an orthodox 4-4-2 with Wellens-King in the middle and 2 wingers.

But we're not 4th in the league by accident, so what the fuck do I know about management? Pearson seems to know what he's doing. I'm just a fan.

marbelladave

marbelladave

Posted
Posted
Because we got 3 CM's that needs to be accommodated. In an ideal world, Oakley would be dropped to the bench and we would play an orthodox 4-4-2 with Wellens-King in the middle and 2 wingers.

But we're not 4th in the league by accident, so what the fuck do I know about management? Pearson seems to know what he's doing. I'm just a fan.

No.

When we play with only 2 central midfielders they are outnumbered and eventually over run. This is no reflection on whichever of Oakley, King and Wellens are playing, more a consequence of not having 'proper' wide midfield players contributing to the midfield battle.

Dyer, N'Guessan, Adams, and Gallagher, all primarily attacking players, have all been tried in the wide position but none of them are that good defensively so we remain lightweight in midfield. Furthermore their attacking potential is stifled by the amount of defensive work they are asked to do so we are short of options in attack too. The worst of all worlds.

We need all 3 of our central players to keep control and if Oakley can cover defensively from the 'inside right' position with Wellens doing a similar job on the left then we can play 2 pacey strikers to either side of Fryatt.

With N'Guessan playing quite well forward and with either Waghorn or Fryatt pulling out to the right occasionally, (as we did at QPR) then it looks like we are at last developing a system that suits the players we have.

The Doctor

The Doctor

Posted
Posted
I hope he's not :P

I want him on the bench though just incase we're behind, desperate, and need a bit of hoofball.

TBH from what i've seen of Howard and Kermorgant this season, kermo would be a better pick than Howard because he can not only hold the ball up as well as howard, he can also win headers without being penalised and seems a whole lot better with the ball at his feet than howard.

maddog

maddog

Posted
Posted
TBH from what i've seen of Howard and Kermorgant this season, kermo would be a better pick than Howard because he can not only hold the ball up as well as howard, he can also win headers without being penalised and seems a whole lot better with the ball at his feet than howard.

Yes i agree.

But for whatever reason, Kermo hasn't been given a serious chance yet. He started at Middlesbrough where we won, and played well at Coventry when he started, but he hasn't started since then, i'm not even sure he's played at all since the Coventry game.

Then he was dropped through no fault of his own for Howard for the Derby game.

Will Kermo be given a chance here :dunno:

His contract expires in January i think, so Pearson will surely play him more soon to see if it's worth extending his deal.

Cobbo

Cobbo

Posted
Posted

----------------------Weale

Neilson-----Morrison---Hobbs-----Berner

Brown-----Oakley----Wellens----Gallagher

Mattock

Howard

--------------------Fryatt

Braunyfox

Braunyfox

Posted
Posted

For me, Oakley needs to take a break, I would go with

Weale

Neilson Hobbs Brown Berner

Gallagher Adams Wellens Nguessan

Waghorn Fryatt

OLD norfox

OLD norfox

Posted
Posted
----------------------Weale

Neilson-----Morrison---Hobbs-----Berner

Brown-----Oakley----Wellens----Gallagher

Mattock

Howard

--------------------Fryatt

But Joe M will only last 5 min. What formation do you wan't to play afterwards ???? :giggle:

Caballero1707

Caballero1707

Posted
Posted

Hi guys,

Not a Leicester fan but I'm doing some research. If everyone is fit, what do you think the manager's first choice XI would be? And which are the most important players?

Cheers!

John

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...