Pearson slams 'negative' critics

[Maybes]

Diamond formation needs binning. I can't imagine the players are enjoying playing it.

 

Drinky and James pick up the ball in the middle, look for a pass out wide....wait, there isn't one.

 

Don't buy into this being overrun in the middle of the park bollocks. We get nailed down the wings when we play this diamond formation providing our right and left backs with no cover whatsoever.

 

I think his problem on Saturday was that he wanted Vardy and Ulloa uptop together and wanted the 3 cms (Cambiasso, James, Drinkwater) together too. The only way he could get them in their favoured postions was to play narrow. 

 

Having said that I'm still firmly behind Pearson and the back room staff to turn it around. He deserves time.

[ImBlue]

The guy can't win.

Yeah.. That's the problem

[Dickov22]

Still behind him and believe he will sort it

[Fox Ulike]

I have to admit I find Pearson’s tactics a little baffling.

 

When you actually think about how many of our goals this season have come from wide positions. The first against Man United. Ulloa from Schlupp’s cross against Arsenal. Away at Stoke from Koncheskey’s cross. Two against Burnley from crosses (both actually scored by wingers). Mahrez created Woods’ equaliser against Everton by beating Barry out wide and putting in a cross.

 

So not counting the 2 penalties, and ulloa’s first against Everton from the corner. That’s 7 of our 8 goals scored from open play have been generated from wide positions.

 

The only time we looked like scoring @ Swansea was King’s header that Cambiasso then spooned onto the post. Again, from a cross. The closest we came against WBA was King's header...  from a deflected cross.

 

So. Why are we now playing without wide players?

[inckley fox]

I don't know if this is the case, but I'd have thought some of the negativity would come from those who were determined that Sven was the answer to our problems, and then discovered that he wasn't but, as it turns out, the supposedly rude, dull and second rate Nigel Pearson was.

 

But, then again, he has to be a little careful here. His position shouldn't be at risk because of a narrow, lacklustre defeat to Sunderland in a fortnight's time. But if the ground were to erupt (and it's more likely to if the fans neither like the position the club is in, nor the man in charge), and that defeat were to be a little heavier, then he could be in trouble. He has made mistakes and, while it's nice to hear his thinking behind them, the negativity seems to be more concentrated on the playing field right now than it does in the stands.

[ImBlue]

I don't know if this is the case, but I'd have thought some of the negativity would come from those who were determined that Sven was the answer to our problems, and then discovered that he wasn't but, as it turns out, the supposedly rude, dull and second rate Nigel Pearson was.

But, then again, he has to be a little careful here. His position shouldn't be at risk because of a narrow, lacklustre defeat to Sunderland in a fortnight's time. But if the ground were to erupt (and it's more likely to if the fans neither like the position the club is in, nor the man in charge), and that defeat were to be a little heavier, then he could be in trouble. He has made mistakes and, while it's nice to hear his thinking behind them, the negativity seems to be more concentrated on the playing field right now than it does in the stands.

Rubbish. Another negative performance and loss would be disastrous and not acceptable regardless of the shoreline.

I'd rather attack them and take positives from there.. At least then have something to build on.

[HitchinFox]

 

Could it possibly be a dig at Stringer, who we all know loves to stir up debate and, let's be honest, struggle and failure stoke up more emotion than serenity?

 

Don't think he cares enough about what Stringer thinks or does.

Managers sometimes use the comments they make in the media to stir up the dressing room. Maybe there's been some rumblings from players who feel they could make a difference but aren't getting a chance...

 

[Fatty Arbuckle]

Anybody else of the opinion that he's just over-thinking in terms of tactics and formations? seems to me he's doing a brilliant job at making football very complicated.

Absolutely. It made me laugh the other day when Pearson said people don't understand how hard the premier league is. I think we all know it's more difficult than the championship but he is currently making it seem impossible!

[cjslcfc]

Yeah.. That's the problem

 

 I what you did there...

[lgfualol]

Play wide players against Chelsea, Arsenal. Dont play them against West Brom at home.

Confusing.

[MooseBreath]

Well here's some more for you Captain......

From the OS to boot!

Leicester City manager Nigel Pearson believes his side must retain their identity throughout the entirety of the season in order to impose their style of play on opposition teams.

The Foxes boss has played a number of formations so far this season, most recently fielding Esteban Cambiasso, Matty James, Danny Drinkwater and Andy King in a midfield diamond in Saturday’s Barclays Premier League loss to Southampton.

City produced a defiant display and managed possession well on occasions as Pearson looked to exploit a side who are known for their ability to retain the ball.

Finally succumbing to a five-minute double from Shane Long, City returned to Leicester empty-handed, but will take plenty of positives from the game after facing a side that sit second in the league.

“You’ll find most teams play with an extra man in the middle of the park,” said Pearson. “Most good Premier League sides are passing teams. You need to have the ball enough. Key areas in midfield remain the central areas.

“We have players that are capable of performing well in wide areas but what you can’t do is set up in a way which concedes too much possession to sides who can potentially out-manoeuvre you.

“I always feel it is the same process – who is best suited to try and get a win in this game. People want to look at systems a lot but we played 4-4-2 a lot last season but played about five different systems.

“What is important is you retain your own identity in terms of the type of team that you are. Our game is all about a good, collective work ethic playing at a good tempo regardless of the system.

“I’ve been told we’ve played 4-4-2 sometimes this year and it’s not actually been that. It’s how you perceive it.

“If you’re the best side, generally speaking you can impose your system of play on other teams – the top teams in the Premier League do it. You could argue last season we did that. We have to be a bit more streetwise."

Read more at http://www.lcfc.com/news/article/111114-pearson-we-must-retain-our-identity-2076578.aspx#XgwHzrj77Y7j6RAT.99

If only he would practice what he preaches here. "If you're the best side you can impose your system on the opposition". Absolutely bang on. Why then are we setting up to cater to every team we play? Why are we never attempting to impose our system on any opposition?

[fuchsntf]

Sounds like it's not Pearson's tactics that are wrong then, they are spot on according to him. It's the players that aren't good enough!

who else..? ?? And he hasnt said once 'my tactics are spot on' so why try to make such statements..

[fuchsntf]

If only he would practice what he preaches here. "If you're the best side you can impose your system on the opposition". Absolutely bang on. Why then are we setting up to cater to every team we play? Why are we never attempting to impose our system on any opposition?

So easy aint it, Most likely they have tried but couldnt produce it.

We can all get any championside, put them in the PL and impose our system on these unaware top sides.

Dreams Dreams.

[MooseBreath]

So easy aint it, Most likely they have tried but couldnt produce it.

We can all get any championside, put them in the PL and impose our system on these unaware top sides.

Dreams Dreams.

I'm terms of formations, we have barely tried it, I know because I've watched every game. Pearson is basically saying "we'll play our own system and try to beat teams" but what he is actually doing is the exact opposite.

[ImBlue]

I'm terms of formations, we have barely tried it, I know because I've watched every game. Pearson is basically saying "we'll play our own system and try to beat teams" but what he is actually doing is the exact opposite.

At the minute we play according to opposition and trying not to be best. So can't disagree here..

[Fox Ulike]

I don't even know if our formation is actually that negative.

 

I mean, two attacking full-backs and two out-and-out strikers away from home @ Southampton is actually pretty adventurous.

 

I just have no idea how this is then supposed to work with four central midfielders!

 

The current team selection seems to be a mish-mash of two conflicting ideas. It's just confusing.

 

Despite the many different formations on offer they all basically amount to the same thing. Four defenders, three midfielders, two wide men and a lone striker.

 

It's just basic geography of the pitch! Whether this is then a defensive or attacking formation depends on the mind-set of the players involved - not where  they stand for goal-kicks.

 

I was at the WBA game but really couldn't tell you who was supposed to be playing where.

[foxinsocks]

is the idea to try and contain the opposition or to try and win a game?

I am a positive kind of guy so I would say we need to create the more chances to score - both away from home where we need to break and nick points, and, at home where we need to unlock teams who defend deep .

But maybe a more negative guy might be more cautious - problem is negativity is contagious... and when it doesn't work you get even more negative... (aka "the pearson spiral")

[roger the dodger]

Sounds like it's not Pearson's tactics that are wrong then, they are spot on according to him. It's the players that aren't good enough!

well he signed them

[st albans fox]

To me, it seems his desperation to prove we can keep a clean sheet in our recent games has overtaken any pragmatism re the formation.

It's as though he just wants a 0-0 and cares about nothing else. We could pinch a goal after all (a la Stoke)

What's wrong with playing 2 holding players with three in front and one up top? The diamond doesn't work as king is too far forward to be involved and we cannot secure decent possession in the opposition half because we have two up top and a lack of numbers in the middle to control the play. If king dropped back and made it 4-1-3-2 then it makes a bit more sense but we need 2 holding midfielders to give the full backs license to get forward more. At least that would be an out ball.

It seems whatever tactics he decides to play, his fear of conceding means we have no shape to go forward and retain any control of the ball and the situation away from our own half. That means the opposition can press us and if we don't go back to Kasper, we lose the ball, either in the tackle or by an aimless punt forward.

[Trav Le Bleu]

He's right that there are people who revel in negativity and have waited a while to really complain, but I don't think they are huge in number. A fair few admirers of the manager aren't happy either with what we are producing currently.

 

Could it possibly be a dig at Stringer, who we all know loves to stir up debate and, let's be honest, struggle and failure stoke up more emotion than serenity?

 

As soon as I saw the back page of the Mockery this was exactly what I thought.

[foxinsocks]

It's now time for us to use our home games to set the agenda - we should play with freedom and pace - with our best creative players on the pitch; and those who can't score left on the bench. The solution to all this negativity is to start to play with ambition and confidence… and positivity (if there is such a word). Away, we should be more solid - but we still need ulloa, mahrez and vardy to offer the opportunity to nick the points. Go on Nigel, slam the negative critics with a positive performance v Sunderland.

[dayday]

Correct me if I'm wrong didn't stringer mention something about Pearson during the Southampton match,is this curtains or summat

As for going all defensive whats the point,we leaked goals all last season against inferior teams,

He keeps telling us we have a talented team and more than capable of holding our own,then contradicts himself by playing in a negative way and that we are not good enough to play with width.

Confused or what,because I actually think he is damaging what he created.

[Guest Col city fan]

What 'inferior' teams?

[Jacnah]

None of us are revelling in the poor results - I am sure we all want to see LCFC back winning.  Fans are worried and unable to understand the management decisions - perhaps if he explained the logic he would get more support.  WE all agree the player are working hard - but we want to see more changes to score created.  Letting in two goals at Southampton or Swansea is hardly a shock - having just one shot on goal is a disappointment to fans

that's not true there are plenty of people of revel in negativity both on this forum and in life in general.

 

As a broad brush they tend to be self delusion non achievers with a chip on their shoulders

[Thracian]

Pearson doesn't often talk to a load of fans to gauge opinion, but to Stringer he does. So I would imagine that has an impact on his opinion. Follow Bourne or Stringer and the only questions they ever ask are negative at the minute.

 

 

100% agree with him... the problem is we aren't just setting up like this against top teams. If we were I could understand it, we're setting up like it against the teams we're meant to be around in the table as well.

 

My thought exactly after reading his comments.