Palace Post Match (2-0 Defeat)

[kingfox]

No credit goes to Kingfox for suggesting this. It can often be wise not to change a winning side and most of us, I think, thought the side looked very good pre match.

I think people will over analyse. We just got beat by the better side. It happens, dust yourself down and move on.

 

But fans got too ahead of themselves suggesting the same formation, it worked against Manchester United so it should work against a Crystal Palace side who are nothing special.

 

People said you can't drop Vardy back to the bench, just because he ran United's defence ragged; however what exactly did he do today? He could hardly breakthrough the Palace defence. 

 

Also leaving Bolasie & Puncheon up against De Laet & Konchesky, with absolutely no support in front of them was a crazy decision. Not only would the likes of Mahrez & Schlupp help out defensively, they could of well caused problems in a counter attacking sense as well, we know how much pace both those players posses, we basically won the game against Stoke through a counter attacking move, we have showed in other games like against Chelsea how well we can counter attack, with Mahrez & Schlupp in the team.

 

In the Premier League regardless if you get a cracking win one week, sometimes the next game it's best to change things depending on the opposition & that proved to be the case today. As I said leaving Bolasie & Puncheon to run at De Laet & Konchesky with no support was crying out danger.

 

4-3-3 may work at home better, but away from home it might not be the best formation to play. 4-4-1-1 has worked so far this season, so let's concentrate on going back to that, but if we come up against teams who we have a good chance of beating especially at home, go 4-4-2 with Vardy partnering Ulloa. While with 4-4-1-1 that could be the formation to play away from home, play the right central midfield combination with pacey wingers out wide, and Nugent or Powell supporting Ulloa, who will show energy & help out the midfield by dropping back then who knows what we will be capable of.

 

I'm really happy with the start we have made, but I think for the first time in a while, Nigel got it wrong today unfortunately. 

[Heart-Shaped Fox]

One of the reasons I hate it. Been once before, was near the top.

if I go again im phoning the TO up saying I'm not having anything after late 30s in rows. Otherwise you're buggered

[Guest Col city fan]

Not over-analysing it was the wrong formation.

So Pearson got it completely wrong and the players weren't any part of the poor performance? Fair enough if you believe that.

Did you hear Pearson's post match interview btw.. he gave the new reporter Hell.. (Radio Leicester)

[Freesolo]

I think that us getting off to a better start than we thought we would has made people think that we are going to somehow just cruise to a middle table finish, lets face the facts that we might have been overachieving in are first 5 games aand peoples ambitions have been way tto high We are are going to be in a battle to stay up this season like i always thought we would be, OK we didn't play well today palace made it hard for us to create any chances and we defended poorly against set pieces, but people are acting like its the end of the world. FFS  its one game and we are going to lose more than we win most likely this season 

 

It honestly sounds like people have lost ccomplete hope over 1 performance when 6 days ago we where the best ever Leicester squad that had been produced in 50 years and NP was the Messiah

[st albans fox]

Wharnock decided not to play both bolassie and zaha as he knew that would leave him light inside. we decided to play narrow. how many times did we pick up possession and look wide for an outlet ball ? alas, there was no one, most of the time.

RDL was subbed because he didn't recover from his knock in the first half. That put him at a disadvantage against bolassie who didn't need a second invitation anyway. It was judged that Simpson would do a better defensive job against bolassie but we were chasing the game by then and RDL is a better player going forward.

I think NP will be frustrated because he didn't give the team the best chance of gaining a result with the way he set us up. add to this that too many of the players were off the pace. DD misplaced too many easy passes today and he wasn't alone.

Another tough job next week against a team that will be determined to turn us over. It will not get any easier at this level. Shaky mentioned picking teams to suit the games you are playing. I didn't see that today.

[cjslcfc]

Poor performance. We looked comfortable really apart from set pieces. Couldn't see them scoring apart from that.

 

A few decent chances for us but they defended well and we just couldn't be creative today. This is one of the reasons I thought the midfield three and playing Hammond would be a mistake today. We didn't have the width to protect our fullbacks. The amount of balls Jedinak won in that hole was ridiculous and we never learned. I knew playing it up to Ulloa wouldn't work today. That stuff is absolute meat and drink to Delaney and Dann. We needed to run at them more, keep it on the ground more and battle a little bit more.

 

Bad day at the office but I hope we learn quickly.

 

I thought Vardy should have had a penalty but it wouldn't have altered the result (take note United fans).

 

Still looking forward to next week and hopefully we can be a bit more creative against, what will be, a stubborn and solid Burnley side. 

[Guest ttfn]

I think you're over-analysing. The formation has worked ok for us before, though I did think pre match that Nige would go for the 4-4-2. We just got beat, it happens.

Two things.. To say that KingFox got it right is a pants argument. Simply suggesting changing it up is too easy. Secondly, to blame the formation places the blame at the feet of Pearson and none at the players. It sounds like (I wasn't there) they just weren't up for it. This is as worrying as any tactical error.

Col, I'm not over-analysing, I'm trying to engage in a debate which goes beyond simplistic comments about "the formation worked ok for us before".

We have played that formation once, ever, under Pearson (aside from 45 minutes against Stoke, so, ok, twice). That was specifically designed to prevent a dual threat in midfield from United with Blind at the base and Rooney/Mata at the tip. It worked against United - as West Ham proved the previous night, as a "smaller" side the most effective way to combat a diamond is with one yourself.

 

Kingfox didn't just suggest changing it up. He suggested we played 4-4-1-1, went into great detail explaining why this formation and team selection was not right for this specific game and then got shot down by people who see "kingfox" in the post and automatically switch off. He was right, and the pattern of the game bore that out.

 

I really hope Pearson doesn't come away from this and think "sometimes you just get beaten", and he won't because he goes in for fancy dan things like analysis. The tactics were not right today. You're absolutely right that the application of the players, especially in the second half, was not right, but normally there is more than one reason for stuff happening. Today the formation was wrong, the set piece defending was absolutely atrocious, the players weren't up for it, the decision-making (especially hitting long balls) was not good enough and there were some really poor individual performances in there.

Given the standard of opposition, the lack of fight and the brainless tactics, this was the worst City performance I've seen probably since we lost at Doncaster this time last year.

 

That last sentence goes to show just how good we've had it, and how rare it is that we see a combination of poor tactics and poor performances, but there's no getting away from the fact that today (especially the second half) was really poor.

[Guest Col city fan]

I think that us getting off to a better start than we thought we would has made people think that we are going to somehow just cruise to a middle table finish, lets face the facts that we might have been overachieving in are first 5 games aand peoples ambitions have been way tto high We are are going to be in a battle to stay up this season like i always thought we would be, OK we didn't play well today palace made it hard for us to create any chances and we defended poorly against set pieces, but people are acting like its the end of the world. FFS its one game and we are going to lose more than we win most likely this season

It honestly sounds like people have lost ccomplete hope over 1 performance when 6 days ago we where the best ever Leicester squad that had been produced in 50 years

...surely not?

[ADK]

So Pearson got it completely wrong and the players weren't any part of the poor performance? Fair enough if you believe that.

Did you hear Pearson's post match interview btw.. he gave the new reporter Hell.. (Radio Leicester)

 

 

Only felt drinkwater's performance was poor. 99% of the problem was our formation.

[BlackburnClaret]

Just reading about formations, I haven't seen that much of you this season, what's with this 433, is that how you're playing every week? We have stuck with the 442 that served us both so well last season.

[fuchsntf]

We have just played 6 games.This game by all accounts ( I didnt see anything from todays game), we were never really in it, except for the 1 on 1 with Nugent. Most of the possesion but no control of the game.

So one real lousy game, taking points from 4...Now the next 7 fixtures take us until end of November, and will determin our potential, or lack of it, in holding our own in the PL.The 1st is Burnley and is already a game that some put down as must win.

Games:-

Burnley - h

Newcastle - a

Swansea - a

W.Brom - h

Soton - a

Sundlnd - h

QPR - a.

This is where the road to the truth begins.Probably now where our fans expectations will increase.

With autumn knocking on the door, where all squad players will be tested, including NPs selections and tactics will be scrutinised.These games above are the ones many will have picked out, where our players prove their PL capabilities.

7 games 4 away 3 home....thoughts on expected points??

[Freesolo]

...surely not?

What? im not a mind reader say what your thinking

[Guest]

How was Simpson in his 1st game ...sub 63rd min..???

Was even less impressive than RDL

[Guest ttfn]

Just reading about formations, I haven't seen that much of you this season, what's with this 433, is that how you're playing every week? We have stuck with the 442 that served us both so well last season.

We played 4-4-1-1 until half time at Stoke when we switched to a 4-3-3 and have played a diamond since.

Hopefully 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 next week

[Guest Col city fan]

Col, I'm not over-analysing, I'm trying to engage in a debate which goes beyond simplistic comments about "the formation worked ok for us before".

We have played that formation once, ever, under Pearson (aside from 45 minutes against Stoke, so, ok, twice). That was specifically designed to prevent a dual threat in midfield from United with Blind at the base and Rooney/Mata at the tip. It worked against United - as West Ham proved the previous night, as a "smaller" side the most effective way to combat a diamond is with one yourself.

Kingfox didn't just suggest changing it up. He suggested we played 4-4-1-1, went into great detail explaining why this formation and team selection was not right for this specific game and then got shot down by people who see "kingfox" in the post and automatically switch off. He was right, and the pattern of the game bore that out.

I really hope Pearson doesn't come away from this and think "sometimes you just get beaten", and he won't because he goes in for fancy dan things like analysis. The tactics were not right today. You're absolutely right that the application of the players, especially in the second half, was not right, but normally there is more than one reason for stuff happening. Today the formation was wrong, the set piece defending was absolutely atrocious, the players weren't up for it, the decision-making (especially hitting long balls) was not good enough and there were some really poor individual performances in there.

Given the standard of opposition, the lack of fight and the brainless tactics, this was the worst City performance I've seen probably since we lost at Doncaster this time last year.

That last sentence goes to show just how good we've had it, and how rare it is that we see a combination of poor tactics and poor performances, but there's no getting away from the fact that today (especially the second half) was really poor.

If you listened to Pearson's post match interview on Radio Leicester, he got pretty cross when it was suggested we went long ball. I've not seen the game buddy, but Nige suggested that we played some decent football in the middle, passing it around, with a view to bringing them onto us, opening them up and THEN getting the ball into the spaces behind. That was his game plan. To draw them on to us, and then exploit the flanks with the pace men.

It didn't work too well, but it sometimes doesn't TTFN. It may have been that the players became over confident after last week, they may have been not bothered today, or they may have just been beaten by a side who were just up for it?

I think you CAN over analyse tactically. As you say, there are a hundred and one things that can result in a team winning or losing a football match.

And finally, just because a poster proposes a 4-4-1-1 or whatever..big deal. You don't have to be a football expert to give such a view or to proclaim at you were right after a game.

We move on and hopefully havig learnt how unforgiving this division can be.

What? im not a mind reader say what your thinking

Your final sentence buddy.. Spot on!

[ADK]

If you listened to Pearson's post match interview on Radio Leicester, he got pretty cross when it was suggested we went long ball. I've not seen the game buddy, but Nige suggested that we played some decent football in the middle, passing it around, with a view to bringing them onto us, opening them up and THEN getting the ball into the spaces behind. That was his game plan. To draw them on to us, and then exploit the flanks with the pace men.

It didn't work too well, but it sometimes doesn't TTFN. It may have been that the players became over confident after last week, they may have been not bothered today, or they may have just been beaten by a side who were just up for it?

I think you CAN over analyse tactically. As you say, there are a hundred and one things that can result in a team winning or losing a football match.

And finally, just because a poster proposes a 4-4-1-1 or whatever..big deal. You don't have to be a football expert to give such a view or to proclaim at you were right after a game of football.

We move on and hopefully havig learnt how unforgiving to division can be.

Your final sentence buddy.. Spot on!

 

I like Pearson but he was wrong today, and if he got annoyed then that probably suggests he knows as much.

[blaser]

Palace took full advantage of their aerial superiority, they looked dangerous every time they got a corner. We dominated possession, but couldn't do much with it. They got back enough bodies to thwart all our advances in play. Not our day, Palace deserved the win.

[z-layrex]

Palace fan in Peace, just back from the game.

First half I thought you were well on top, playing some nice stuff, 2nd half though I thought we really got on top physically, we are a very big side, I cant remember Ulloa winning a header against our huge defenders who were fantastic today.

Think Pearson made a big mistake not doubling on our wide players, Bolasie ran riot 2nd halve.

To be fair I actually though it was Pen on Vardy albeit a soft one.

In what world were we ever on top?

[Grewks]

Col...

 

 

I watched the game on stream and the first half was a half of two halves in all honesty.

 

 

We had the first twenty, they had the last. It could've been 1-1 or 2-2, but it remained 0-0.

 

 

 

The second, palace came out strong, but the two set pieces killed it. Reminded me of leeds under Warnock at elland road....just didn't get anything going after the set pieces. It probably would have been a drab 0-0 but for the poor defending.

[Guest ttfn]

If you listened to Pearson's post match interview on Radio Leicester, he got pretty cross when it was suggested we went long ball. I've not seen the game buddy, but Nige suggested that we played some decent football in the middle, passing it around, with a view to bringing them onto us, opening them up and THEN getting the ball into the spaces behind. That was his game plan. To draw them on to us, and then exploit the flanks with the pace men.

It didn't work too well, but it sometimes doesn't TTFN. It may have been that the players became over confident after last week, they may have been not bothered today, or they may have just been beaten by a side who were just up for it?

I think you CAN over analyse tactically. As you say, there are a hundred and one things that can result in a team winning or losing a football match.

And finally, just because a poster proposes a 4-4-1-1 or whatever..big deal. You don't have to be a football expert to give such a view or to proclaim at you were right after a game.

We move on and hopefully havig learnt how unforgiving this division can be.

Your final sentence buddy.. Spot on!

I can't believe you're accusing me of over-analysing a game you haven't even seen. 

[Grewks]

In what world were we ever on top?

 

 

First 25 minutes....Vardy had two great chances.

 

It was very even until the set pieces.

[Carlos88LCFC]

We tried to create the space behind but obviously warnock told all his players to stand off of us which means we do a load of passing to pull them out, it don't work, we lose the ball and then it happens all over again

I think some people are being a little over critical. Could have easily been a draw. They are a very strong team and with that atmosphere and warnocks management they could be a decent side.

We didn't look that bad, we were miles away from the United performance but still could have got something from the game.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guest ttfn]

In what world were we ever on top?

We were on top for the first 25 minutes. After that Palace came back into it and had a 5 minute spell when they could have scored about 3 times.

 

Second half we were dreadful. 

[Guest ttfn]

We tried to create the space behind but obviously warnock told all his players to stand off of us which means we do a load of passing to pull them out, it don't work, we lose the ball and then it happens all over again

I think some people are being a little over critical. Could have easily been a draw. They are a very strong team and with that atmosphere and warnocks management they could be a decent side.

We didn't look that bad, we were miles away from the United performance but still could have got something from the game.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Palace are not a "very strong team". They're probably going to finish in the bottom 8, like us. Both us and them would have seen this as a winnable fixture and unfortunately we got our tactics wrong and generally played poorly.

 

I've got no idea what is going on with Knockaert but he is exactly the player we needed today.

[Grewks]

Palace are not a "very strong team". They're probably going to finish in the bottom 8, like us. Both us and them would have seen this as a winnable fixture and unfortunately we got our tactics wrong and generally played poorly.

 

I've got no idea what is going on with Knockaert but he is exactly the player we needed today.

 

 

Why would you have played knockaert?

 

 

For me there is not a single aspect of his game which is not inferior to mahrez...

 

 

Personally, I would have started albrighton in front of de laet...

 

 

.........................kasper

 

.Ritchie...morgan......moore.....konch

 

.......................Cambiasso

 

 

.albrighton.....drinky.....king......schlupp

 

............................ulloa