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
Hirsty The Blue 94

Team for Swansea?

By Hirsty The Blue 94, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

Col city fan

Col city fan

Posted
Posted

Speaks volumes that hardly any of us can agree on the best squad/formation/right back to play.

Not really chap. I suspect if you go back thru similar threads last season you'll find lots of different views on formations and best teams. I do agree though that this year seems even more so. The 4-4-2 doesnt appear to be the default formation anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest ttfn

Guest ttfn

Posted
Posted

Not really chap. I suspect if you go back thru similar threads last season you'll find lots of different views on formations and best teams. I do agree though that this year seems even more so. The 4-4-2 doesnt appear to be the default formation anymore.

I can't agree with this (sorry I'm trying to be nice to you at the moment).

Last year we had a settled XI for about 3 months straight, which is unprecedented in recent times and the side virtually picked itself.

Also we didn't have anywhere near as many options. I struggle to believe that we had any threads (for instance) calling for 2 players with 0 appearances even on the subs' bench to be in the first XI (Powell and Lawrence) or that there was a genuine split on who should play right back.

I've seen about 10 different permutations on who should play CM alone in this thread. Last year it was always Drinkwater/James by virtually unanimous consent. At most there were 4 permutations suggested for games when we weren't rotating the side, being King/James, Drinkwater/James, Drinkwater/King/James and Drinkwater/King.

We've got loads of options this year and frankly nobody has any idea what our best combination is yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Col city fan

Col city fan

Posted
Posted

I can't agree with this (sorry I'm trying to be nice to you at the moment).

Last year we had a settled XI for about 3 months straight, which is unprecedented in recent times and the side virtually picked itself.

Also we didn't have anywhere near as many options. I struggle to believe that we had any threads (for instance) calling for 2 players with 0 appearances even on the subs' bench to be in the first XI (Powell and Lawrence) or that there was a genuine split on who should play right back.

I've seen about 10 different permutations on who should play CM alone in this thread. Last year it was always Drinkwater/James by virtually unanimous consent. At most there were 4 permutations suggested for games when we weren't rotating the side, being King/James, Drinkwater/James, Drinkwater/King/James and Drinkwater/King.

We've got loads of options this year and frankly nobody has any idea what our best combination is yet.

Nn need to be nice to me, you have your view I have mine.

I think there WERE plenty of options last season. Were we playing Wasa or Moore? Would Jeff be left back, or Konch? Where did GTF fit in? Should Phillips start games? Was Wood good enough? Dyer or Mahrez? Etc...

I think you are right, there was a patch where we had a very settled side, but that was down as much to injury as anything else if I recollect. Eg. Schlupp came in for Konch and cemented his place for some time. Dyer got injured and Mahrez got his chance.

Where I think this season is different to last is mainly in the best formation. 4-4-2 was the recipe of the day, last year, and replacement players came in and slotted into that formation almost seamlessly. Now, I don't think Pearson knows his favourite formation. Or, he feels he needs to change it up to cope with the demands of the improved opposition. This, I think, is the biggest shame actually. Pearson needs to decide on his best formation and his best team and go out to impose OUR game onto the opposition. Instead, he seems to be referring to type (we've seen him do this before) and err on the side of defensive players and formations, giving too much emphasis to what the opposition might do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest ttfn

Guest ttfn

Posted
Posted

Nn need to be nice to me, you have your view I have mine.

I think there WERE plenty of options last season. Were we playing Wasa or Moore? Would Jeff be left back, or Konch? Where did GTF fit in? Should Phillips start games? Was Wood good enough? Dyer or Mahrez? Etc...

I think you are right, there was a patch where we had a very settled side, but that was down as much to injury as anything else if I recollect. Eg. Schlupp came in for Konch and cemented his place for some time. Dyer got injured and Mahrez got his chance.

Where I think this season is different to last is mainly in the best formation. 4-4-2 was the recipe of the day, last year, and replacement players came in and slotted into that formation almost seamlessly. Now, I don't think Pearson knows his favourite formation. Or, he feels he needs to change it up to cope with the demands of the improved opposition. This, I think, is the biggest shame actually. Pearson needs to decide on his best formation and his best team and go out to impose OUR game onto the opposition. Instead, he seems to be referring to type (we've seen him do this before) and err on the side of defensive players and formations, giving too much emphasis to what the opposition might do.

Again, I don't think that the 5 or 6 selection issues you've highlighted (and I don't think it extends beyond what you've written, it's pretty comprehensive) remotely compares to the fact that we've probably got 22-23 players in the squad who you could make a case for starting in any given game.

Already this season we've started 18 different players in the league (8 games), which is not far off our total for last season (46 games). It's assumed by many that Simpson will start on Saturday to make it 19.

I'm not sure that the size of our squad is a good thing. A close group was clearly an important cog in our success last year. Problem is we don't have the loan window to fall back on so a bigger squad is a necessity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Col city fan

Col city fan

Posted
Posted

Again, I don't think that the 5 or 6 selection issues you've highlighted (and I don't think it extends beyond what you've written, it's pretty comprehensive) remotely compares to the fact that we've probably got 22-23 players in the squad who you could make a case for starting in any given game.

Already this season we've started 18 different players in the league (8 games), which is not far off our total for last season (46 games). It's assumed by many that Simpson will start on Saturday to make it 19.

I'm not sure that the size of our squad is a good thing. A close group was clearly an important cog in our success last year. Problem is we don't have the loan window to fall back on so a bigger squad is a necessity.

The squad size needed increasing of course. And it's still early in the season. However, my concern is that we haven't strengthened with players who are clearly better than what we had. If we had, within reason, the first team would have picked itself. The chopping and changing, I think, is reflective of the players being all of pretty equal ability.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
easilee

easilee

Posted
Posted

King needs some match time. When he has featured he has shown liveliness and commitment.

 

He may not have had time to settle into the games he has featured in as well as he/we would have liked but it seems to me, he could do a really good job until James is 100%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Freesolo

Freesolo

Posted
Posted

Schmeichel

Simpson

Moore

Morgan

Schlupp

Cambiasso

James

Drinkwater

 

Mahrez

Vardy

 

Ulloa

This team has bags of pace, guile, steel and give us the best opportunity for victory today. I hope NP reads this message board.

 

 

 

Its a team i would love to see play - Schlupp but i doubt it will, Pearson will probably start r 4411 or god help us 451 again. but **** it everyone has wrote us of for the match (myself included) so why not go for it

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nick

Nick

Posted
Posted

So it seems we have to decide each week between a stable midfield of Drinks James and Cambiasso with three up front or King/Nugent at the top of a diamond and two up.

 

or

 

Play with width utilising wingers albrighton and Mahrez and sacrifice a man in the middle.

 

 

Is it that if we -play option 1, for it to work we need extremely pacy left/right back performances overlapping? Do we have the personnel for this? Schlupp & Simpson? *Unsure*

 

If we play option 2 we have to drop James or Cambiasso which seems a little insane - it's rubbish with five in midfield and one up front......

 

I really don't know what our best side is anymore - I'm as glad as you all are that I'm not the manager, I'm just not seeing the picture the jigsaw makes or if we have the correct pieces at the moment.

 

Pearson certainly has a Plan B and C though and we don't look out of our depth, just maybe not fulfilling our potential?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ronnup

ronnup

Posted
Posted

Going by Konchesky's insta there's no simpson. He commented "all the best lad".

Thankfully NP has seen sense there.

Regarding the team today, we have to get at a team that hasn't won in 5. They'll be scared and cagey. We can't expect to flood the midfield and Nick it because we don't currwntly have the quality from set pieces or finishing in general.

Love to set up to get into them early

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...