Good and fair reviews as always Dunge

I keep repeating Paul Scholes from yesterday but it's the best quote I've heard when at half time he said -

'Why is Ranieri setting up Leicester like sitting ducks just waiting to be beaten?'

There's a difference between matching up against the opposition and setting your stall out to simply stifle them and nothing else

BS its exactly what he did last season.

Nev we actually attacked teams last season. You cannot say the last 2 games are the same tactics as last season because that clearly isn't the case.

comment by Nevsaysagoal2city (U5194)
posted 3 minutes ago
BS its exactly what he did last season.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh dear......

I rest my case

We set up for a counter attack based on the opposition having the majority of possession. This season we have been worked out and we haven't been able to do it.

But have it your way we should of gone all out attack against the best team in the League and put five past us the last time we played them.

I see i am your latest target for your sacastic patronism BS so i am bowing out of this debate, so it,like mine does not decend into vitriol.Hope i speelded that right

comment by Nevsaysagoal2city (U5194)
posted 34 seconds ago
We set up for a counter attack based on the opposition having the majority of possession. This season we have been worked out and we haven't been able to do it.

But have it your way we should of gone all out attack against the best team in the League and put five past us the last time we played them.

I see i am your latest target for your sacastic patronism BS so i am bowing out of this debate, so it,like mine does not decend into vitriol.Hope i speelded that right


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jesus Christ.....someone please help him because this is like having Sandy as a Leicester fan

Let me spell this out for you

We didn't set up to do anything last night except stop Chelsea. Do you honestly think we would have won the title last year with no one venturing past the half way line? We were so deep we were practically sitting in the stand with our fans

And before you say it's because Chelsea were amazing, we did the same against Boro. And we played blatantly for a point. Which we got

If you can't see the difference in Ranieris approach this season then you honestly need some sort of help

Sorry Dung
BS who the fuff do you think you are talking to did we play three at the back against M'boro?
It was an away match a point is good.


Dung what about the footballing masterclass from Chelsea both there wingbacks opening up the space and allowing the front three to interchange with superb one touch football.
But lets no see that just blame the Manager

'BS who the fuff do you think you are talking to'

At the minute I think I'm talking to a simpleton. It's nothing to do with playing 3 at the back. Listen to what people are saying.

You can play 4-3-3 and play it defensively. We set up to get a point against Boro and just about hung on. Do you honestly think we would have done that last season???

I wouldn't mind seeing 3-5-2 tried, it worked brilliantly to get us out of the mire the season before last. Not a good time to try and switch against the best team in the Division though! Quite happy with four at the back, it won us the league after all. I'm keener on making sure we don't get overrun in central midfield.

For the ratings, generally agree as usual except the 6 for Gray, he yet again created something (so credit to him) but took the glory shot wastefully when a pass would have been more dangerous - needs to learn about team play, then he'll be far more effective.

Interesting point about Chilwell MoM (which I don't disagree with), is Claudio now hamstrung in trying to find a way to play both Fuchs and Ben?

I still don't think chilwell is quite ready.

Deulofeu had his pants down on a couple of occasions and Fuchs was brought on to help him. He's technically excellent though and will be an excellent player.

Albrighton was my MOTM yesterday. The only player who understood his role and executed it.

Pearson made 3-5-2 work because he used it as an attacking formation. We cannot sit that deep and continue to play with 3 at the back. We need our wing backs to be bombing on providing width and crosses for it to work.

People know that I've been hugely frustrated with our performances against Boro Andy chelsea. I don't mind losing, but I hate not seeing us put up a fight.

I want to see us go out and attempt to get something from Liverpool and Utd. They may beat us, but at least we will have tried.

'Delofeu had his pants down on a couple of occasions'

And yet the ref did nothing. How is Chilwell supposed to defend naked??

Nev - I'm not sure I'd call all of Chelsea's play yesterday as a masterclass; I don't think they were necessarily at their best going forward and weren't exactly forcing save after save. What they did show however was a defensive masterclass, the exact right balance across the pitch meaning that their attack only needed to fire once or twice to bag them three points. I think the most pleasing thing for Conte will be that the match finished x-0.

love the picture of CR putting Kante into a head lock before the game. Konte looking on.
It was the wing backs that impressed me they where very well drilled and obviously confident they missed Costa. With three up front you can't play a back four against them even without Costa

"What they did show however was a defensive masterclass"

When was this exactly i dont remember us putting them under any kind of pressure what so ever?
Their wing backs spent almost the entire match in our half.

Presumably Chelsea's 3 at the back highlighted everything you DO like about the formation Dunge seeing as you described it as a defensive master class.

Not sure that Chilwell was my MOM, but as good a choice as anyone I suppose. Thought Morgan, Albrighton and Mendy did ok, but the rest all looked a bit confused. Harsh on Vardy as he was working on scraps.

I can't help thinking that until Slimani and Mahrez come back we should just play the 4-4-2 and attack. I know we've lost a fair few playing that way this season, but a lot of that time was with the absence of a central midfield with Drinkwater out, Mendy injured and Ndidi not yet purchased. I worry about 4-3-3 as I think we need more progressive full backs for that and maybe a more attacking central midfielder. I'm scratching my head at the moment and will probably go through 3 different options in my mind over the next two weeks. A bit like Ranieri really.

"I can't help thinking that until Slimani and Mahrez come back we should just play the 4-4-2 and attack. I know we've lost a fair few playing that way this season"

Did I miss the games where we 'attacked' other teams this season?

comment by True Blue (U9486)
posted 36 minutes ago
"I can't help thinking that until Slimani and Mahrez come back we should just play the 4-4-2 and attack. I know we've lost a fair few playing that way this season"

Did I miss the games where we 'attacked' other teams this season?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For attack read counter attack. I think we've tried to replicate what we did last season, but you won't do that with Amartey and King in midfield.

We've got potentially got 3 better midfielders now, but I'm not convinced that they should play in a 3 given the balance of the rest of the team. As I said I'm beginning to even confuse myself as to what I think is the best team and formation.

Joby - I'm not saying that 3-5-2 doesn't work. Both O'Neill and Pearson had success with it in this very league. But it usually takes a while for players to become familiar with it (in the Great Escape we played it for a few games against the bigger clubs before getting any results) and it's inflexible to adjustment. Some managers prefer to work this way, i.e. This is us and we won't change just for you. But Ranieri is an adjuster, a tinkerer. He showed that subtly on several occasions last season, even though we always started with a 4-4-1-1. With a 3-5-2 he wouldn't have the options available to him.

There are also other things I don't like much, but these are the main things.

I'm not sure it does take that much time Dunge. Pearson had almost instant success when he switched to it and a lot of the players who made that a success are still here.

It helps cover the lack of pace from our centre backs, and it allows 2 up top.

The problem with Saturday was that we didn't cross the halfway line with it. Spurs made it work against Chelsea as they forced their wing backs back. And Pearson made it work as we went at teams.

I don't think 3-5-2 should just be shelved now but I'm with Joby. Play 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 depending on the opposition for now.

I did comment on another thread about three at the back. Not sure why anyone would think you would have any joy with it with the central defenders you have available. Matching Chlesea's clever, fluid front three with two of the league's most cumbersome defenders will only end one way.

Huth and Morgan are back four players.

I think it could be a goer with better suited players in.the three, because Chilwell and Albrighton are made for the system.

Accidental push of the 'send' button (not for the first time).

Ledley - we had joy with it during the Great Escape a couple of seasons back with Morgan, Huth and Wasilewski in a back 3, so it can work. However, what people forget is that it was used for several weeks before it started working; during this time Pearson played Matt Upson, and if you think Huth and Morgan are slow then you'd think that Upson was actually stationary.

As such, I disagree with Mersey's statement that Pearson had instant success with it. It took a long time to register a clean sheet with it. Where I would agree with your (Ledley) statement is that the abilities and experience of the Spurs centre halves makes it easier for you to slip into on occasion. I also think that Spurs/Chelsea matches are a bit of a law unto themselves at the moment.

Couple of things I noticed that although we played a back 3 like the season before last they were all shunted along by playing Fuchs in there, as Was played on the right of a 3. We'd have been better playing Simpson to keep Morgan and Hugh in more natural positions. Think we needed to go 3 at the back but wished we'd matched Chelsea's formation losing a midfielder and playing either Okazaki or Gray to make a front 3. At least the midfield 3 should be getting to know each other for the next game, although drinky looks a little lost, he did when he played for England in a 3.

I think from memory the first game we tried it was away against Arsenal and they claimed we were the best team they'd played that season so from Mersey's point of view it could be called an instant success but from a winning/ not conceding point of view it wasn't.

After that game and until the great escape began Pearson made the mistake of using 352 purely defensively ( similar to Saturday ) and it was only when he got to his last ten game strategy and let the players off the leash it began to really be effective.

No reason 352 can't be the same now but it has to be used aggressively attacking wise, let them go for it and don't shackle them down is the answer.