Some high ratings for a toothless performance. On another day you would have lost 3-0
comment by RJC (U17308)
posted 3 minutes ago
Some high ratings for a toothless performance. On another day you would have lost 3-0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was indeed an awful display but let’s be honest Wolves were hardly on it either. I was at the match and launching a quick counter (which seldom worked) was really the only thing you had. Both teams looked pretty poor
the VAR was explained Dunge, any handball leading to a goal means the goal is ruled out, even if it was accidental.
Pleased to get a point and to see the players on we'd expect, no strange substitutions just a very good organised opposing team well set out with a couple of weeks extra match fitness to us, Europa or not.
I thought considering the pre-match comments against him that Soyuncu could have been MOTM.
RJC - Why were your players dressed like cows pre-match?
comment by The Artist formerly known as Black Starr (U12353)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by RJC (U17308)
posted 3 minutes ago
Some high ratings for a toothless performance. On another day you would have lost 3-0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was indeed an awful display but let’s be honest Wolves were hardly on it either. I was at the match and launching a quick counter (which seldom worked) was really the only thing you had. Both teams looked pretty poor
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed.
I think we were toothless, which was a bit worrying. I thought Wolves were equally uncreative. In the first half they were just happy to sit in and stop us, which was disappointing for a team with so much talent.
Neither team deserved to win as neither team did enough.
In terms of the scores I broadly agree. N’didi was everywhere and Chilwell was awful!
BS - I thought similarly to TB on this; I don’t think we were as bad as you suggest, more that Wolves were very solid and organised defensively. It’s true that they fluffed their lines in front of goal but generally I thought our play forced them back in the first half. Unfortunately it took us a while to get back out of the hutch after half-time and we lost control of the match. Something we’ll have to watch for.
Scrappy first game and neither sides had their shooting boots on.
Encouraging performance from Soyuncu, however Chilwell had a bad day at the office. (That’s being kind)
Onwards and upwards though. A clean sheet (thanks VAR lol) and our first point to get us off the mark
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 1 minute ago
BS - I thought similarly to TB on this; I don’t think we were as bad as you suggest, more that Wolves were very solid and organised defensively. It’s true that they fluffed their lines in front of goal but generally I thought our play forced them back in the first half. Unfortunately it took us a while to get back out of the hutch after half-time and we lost control of the match. Something we’ll have to watch for.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can see what TBs agenda is, I’m surprised you’ve not clocked it. Had that been a performance under Puel it would have been absolutely slaughtered. Now I’m a fan of Brendan and I’m glad we made the change, but I’m not going to start polishing a toothless turrd of a performance simply because Claude Puel is no longer on the touchline
It was a tepid display, wayward passing, no final ball, created absolutely nothing. Yes Wolves were solid defensively but so what? We put 5 goals past them in 2 fixtures last season...under guess who?
Söyüncü and Ndidi MOTM for me. Would maybe mark Chilwell down one as the stand out poor performer but otherwise about right.
Like Joby, my main concern is our lack of, we’ll, anything in the final 3rd! That can’t be right with Maddison, Tielemans and Pérez in the team. Worrying to see Vardy restricted again. We need another way of playing when teams sit see and look to defend.
BS - Agreed that I don’t want things to go on like that. But it is the first match of the season and I think we can progress.
And the massive difference between that and a Puel performance was that we were trying to press and win the ball back. Puelball meant dropping to the edge of our own area to start again.
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 15 minutes ago
BS - Agreed that I don’t want things to go on like that. But it is the first match of the season and I think we can progress.
And the massive difference between that and a Puel performance was that we were trying to press and win the ball back. Puelball meant dropping to the edge of our own area to start again.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed but the end result attacking wise was pretty much the same. Tepid and Vardy completely isolated. If that continues then you might as well have Puel sitting in the dugout, the end result is pretty much the same
One way it was reminiscent of Puelball was that we looked scared to taking risks in case we got hit on the counter, consequently we ran out of ideas, tightened up, lost the ball and got hit on the counter.
We also didn’t counter ourselves when we could have done and let them reset. But at this point, something to develop rather than a crisis. Puel never developed because that style was his endgame.
TB i agree with BS where you are going with this, but playing two CDM's at home used to be a lynching offence ,Vardy did not get the ball once for the first 40 minutes.
Soya beans made 72 passes so Dung how many of them where in our own half.
We had no width and could still be out there now and would not of scored but none of its the managers fault
That sounds like a Monday morning post Nev.
comment by True Blue (U9486)
posted 1 minute ago
That sounds like a Monday morning post Nev.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’d rather Nevs Monday morning posts than have to read through your repetitive agenda driven bile which goes down like a cup of cold sick with anyone who has learned to read. You hated Puel, we get it. Just stop facking banging on about it in every single rancid turrd slinging post you make. It was boring 2 years ago
Generally agree Dunge but I might have Soyuncu as MoM, which is good considering the worry about whether he'd step up following the loss of Maguire.
Not too fussed about the result as it's the first match, also against one of the better sides in the division who came to defend and with a new player in the front line.
Good ole VAR eh and some payback from Jon Moss!
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 15 minutes ago
One way it was reminiscent of Puelball was that we looked scared to taking risks in case we got hit on the counter, consequently we ran out of ideas, tightened up, lost the ball and got hit on the counter.
We also didn’t counter ourselves when we could have done and let them reset. But at this point, something to develop rather than a crisis. Puel never developed because that style was his endgame.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To a point, but it wasn’t the case when we outplayed Wolves under Puel and lost 4-3. I agree that Puel wasn’t right for us but far too much was laid at his door. I think we’ll begin to see this season that bringing in rodgers isn’t going to solve all of the problems Puel had - chiefly moving from one style of football with one set of players to a new style with a completely new set of players. And Vardy.
Let’s see how we are in a few weeks but this looks far from the top 6 side that has been paraded by some Leicester fans pre-season
How did we set up today?
The lineup doesn't really suggest anything of structure?
It's not a diamond or a 4-4-2...
Stringer said at one point Rogers was asking for width, but there was no natural width.
It's a disappointing start, but it looks like we've plumped for two holding a la Puel, but also two no.10's. So a square rather than a diamond, with 2 up front.
So on this match alone, it's one step forward, 2 back for me.. We added width in the 2nd half but it wasted. I hope Rogers can find some balance, we don't need drastic measures just tweaking.........hopefully
It was the first game of the season and we have to context it that way. Nobody wants to lose the first game and I think DM is spot on in saying we looked scared of taking any risks - but then so did Wolves. That’s why both teams just cancelled each other out.
As a single performance it was, for me, too reminiscent of that Newcastle home defeat last season. A team comes and just sits in and we lack the creativity to break it down. Without VAR it would have been the same result as well.
It would be good to retain this passing style, but also have the ability to break at pace when we have the opportunity. That is, after all, Vardy’s strength.
A few things for BRodgers to ponder and after a single 90 minutes it’s not a crisis. The obvious change might be to start Albrighton or Barnes in place of Choudhury for the next game to give us better balance.
Whatever he decides he will still have to find a way to get the team to move better and transition through midfield with pace and purpose. We also don’t yet know what Praet will bring. But I have to be honest and say that was too similar to what we saw at times last season - and there is evidence that we still haven’t fully evolved into our new style based on ball retention.
Let’s hope Brendan has the answers.
It looked a confusing mess from where I was. It was a formation that just raised more questions than answers - I didn’t understand what it was trying to achieve. Nev is right, 2 holding midfielders at home was a Puel failing - completely unnecessary at home to Wolves.
Perez looked totally lost, there was no point in having a striker at all and Maddison was completely lost amongst the Wolves defence.
I was just so surprised because I expected a leggy tired performance from Wolves if anything - it looked like we were the ones that had just landed from a 10000 mile round trip.
Brendan basically still has to solve the exact same puzzle Puel couldn’t - what the hell do I do with these players?
I think everyone is agreeing on an important point here. There was no balance or structure in the midfield.
That needs fixing and fast.
Think I agree with your player ratings from a TV view
Except Ricardo who made 4 major errors defending that I counted,,, I'd score him 5
comment by Merseysidefox (U4842)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
I think everyone is agreeing on an important point here. There was no balance or structure in the midfield.
That needs fixing and fast.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah. What we don't want now is all the gear and no idea.
That's where the gaffer will make his mark...
...please.lol
It was set up as a 4-3-3, although with a few tweaks here and there. It was difficult to identify two players with identical roles, except maybe for the centre backs. Choudhury sat in to cover Chilwell, except Chilwell looked really off (unwell?) and didn’t really get into the match. Maddison and Pérez were the wide players, but both swapped positions with each other at times and also wandered.
I would agree with the criticism of playing two defensive midfielders limiting us somewhat. Maddison should be in the midfield 3, although whether we’ll make that change for Chelsea away is another matter. I’d also agree that the wandering - particularly from Maddison - meant we lacked width. I think we had the right formation set up to play them, but didn’t manage to widen the pitch enough. We generally looked most dangerous when Boly was dragged out wide to deal with a Ricardo run.
Lots to analyse and sort out for the management team, and that’s before we start talking about defending set pieces...
Sign in if you want to comment
Player ratings vs. Wolves
Page 1 of 3
posted on 11/8/19
Some high ratings for a toothless performance. On another day you would have lost 3-0
posted on 11/8/19
comment by RJC (U17308)
posted 3 minutes ago
Some high ratings for a toothless performance. On another day you would have lost 3-0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was indeed an awful display but let’s be honest Wolves were hardly on it either. I was at the match and launching a quick counter (which seldom worked) was really the only thing you had. Both teams looked pretty poor
posted on 11/8/19
the VAR was explained Dunge, any handball leading to a goal means the goal is ruled out, even if it was accidental.
Pleased to get a point and to see the players on we'd expect, no strange substitutions just a very good organised opposing team well set out with a couple of weeks extra match fitness to us, Europa or not.
I thought considering the pre-match comments against him that Soyuncu could have been MOTM.
posted on 11/8/19
RJC - Why were your players dressed like cows pre-match?
posted on 11/8/19
comment by The Artist formerly known as Black Starr (U12353)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by RJC (U17308)
posted 3 minutes ago
Some high ratings for a toothless performance. On another day you would have lost 3-0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was indeed an awful display but let’s be honest Wolves were hardly on it either. I was at the match and launching a quick counter (which seldom worked) was really the only thing you had. Both teams looked pretty poor
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed.
I think we were toothless, which was a bit worrying. I thought Wolves were equally uncreative. In the first half they were just happy to sit in and stop us, which was disappointing for a team with so much talent.
Neither team deserved to win as neither team did enough.
In terms of the scores I broadly agree. N’didi was everywhere and Chilwell was awful!
posted on 11/8/19
BS - I thought similarly to TB on this; I don’t think we were as bad as you suggest, more that Wolves were very solid and organised defensively. It’s true that they fluffed their lines in front of goal but generally I thought our play forced them back in the first half. Unfortunately it took us a while to get back out of the hutch after half-time and we lost control of the match. Something we’ll have to watch for.
posted on 11/8/19
Scrappy first game and neither sides had their shooting boots on.
Encouraging performance from Soyuncu, however Chilwell had a bad day at the office. (That’s being kind)
Onwards and upwards though. A clean sheet (thanks VAR lol) and our first point to get us off the mark
posted on 11/8/19
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 1 minute ago
BS - I thought similarly to TB on this; I don’t think we were as bad as you suggest, more that Wolves were very solid and organised defensively. It’s true that they fluffed their lines in front of goal but generally I thought our play forced them back in the first half. Unfortunately it took us a while to get back out of the hutch after half-time and we lost control of the match. Something we’ll have to watch for.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can see what TBs agenda is, I’m surprised you’ve not clocked it. Had that been a performance under Puel it would have been absolutely slaughtered. Now I’m a fan of Brendan and I’m glad we made the change, but I’m not going to start polishing a toothless turrd of a performance simply because Claude Puel is no longer on the touchline
It was a tepid display, wayward passing, no final ball, created absolutely nothing. Yes Wolves were solid defensively but so what? We put 5 goals past them in 2 fixtures last season...under guess who?
posted on 11/8/19
Söyüncü and Ndidi MOTM for me. Would maybe mark Chilwell down one as the stand out poor performer but otherwise about right.
Like Joby, my main concern is our lack of, we’ll, anything in the final 3rd! That can’t be right with Maddison, Tielemans and Pérez in the team. Worrying to see Vardy restricted again. We need another way of playing when teams sit see and look to defend.
posted on 11/8/19
BS - Agreed that I don’t want things to go on like that. But it is the first match of the season and I think we can progress.
And the massive difference between that and a Puel performance was that we were trying to press and win the ball back. Puelball meant dropping to the edge of our own area to start again.
posted on 11/8/19
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 15 minutes ago
BS - Agreed that I don’t want things to go on like that. But it is the first match of the season and I think we can progress.
And the massive difference between that and a Puel performance was that we were trying to press and win the ball back. Puelball meant dropping to the edge of our own area to start again.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed but the end result attacking wise was pretty much the same. Tepid and Vardy completely isolated. If that continues then you might as well have Puel sitting in the dugout, the end result is pretty much the same
posted on 11/8/19
One way it was reminiscent of Puelball was that we looked scared to taking risks in case we got hit on the counter, consequently we ran out of ideas, tightened up, lost the ball and got hit on the counter.
We also didn’t counter ourselves when we could have done and let them reset. But at this point, something to develop rather than a crisis. Puel never developed because that style was his endgame.
posted on 11/8/19
TB i agree with BS where you are going with this, but playing two CDM's at home used to be a lynching offence ,Vardy did not get the ball once for the first 40 minutes.
Soya beans made 72 passes so Dung how many of them where in our own half.
We had no width and could still be out there now and would not of scored but none of its the managers fault
posted on 11/8/19
That sounds like a Monday morning post Nev.
posted on 11/8/19
comment by True Blue (U9486)
posted 1 minute ago
That sounds like a Monday morning post Nev.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’d rather Nevs Monday morning posts than have to read through your repetitive agenda driven bile which goes down like a cup of cold sick with anyone who has learned to read. You hated Puel, we get it. Just stop facking banging on about it in every single rancid turrd slinging post you make. It was boring 2 years ago
posted on 11/8/19
True peaked too soon
posted on 11/8/19
Generally agree Dunge but I might have Soyuncu as MoM, which is good considering the worry about whether he'd step up following the loss of Maguire.
Not too fussed about the result as it's the first match, also against one of the better sides in the division who came to defend and with a new player in the front line.
Good ole VAR eh and some payback from Jon Moss!
posted on 11/8/19
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 15 minutes ago
One way it was reminiscent of Puelball was that we looked scared to taking risks in case we got hit on the counter, consequently we ran out of ideas, tightened up, lost the ball and got hit on the counter.
We also didn’t counter ourselves when we could have done and let them reset. But at this point, something to develop rather than a crisis. Puel never developed because that style was his endgame.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To a point, but it wasn’t the case when we outplayed Wolves under Puel and lost 4-3. I agree that Puel wasn’t right for us but far too much was laid at his door. I think we’ll begin to see this season that bringing in rodgers isn’t going to solve all of the problems Puel had - chiefly moving from one style of football with one set of players to a new style with a completely new set of players. And Vardy.
Let’s see how we are in a few weeks but this looks far from the top 6 side that has been paraded by some Leicester fans pre-season
posted on 11/8/19
How did we set up today?
The lineup doesn't really suggest anything of structure?
It's not a diamond or a 4-4-2...
Stringer said at one point Rogers was asking for width, but there was no natural width.
It's a disappointing start, but it looks like we've plumped for two holding a la Puel, but also two no.10's. So a square rather than a diamond, with 2 up front.
So on this match alone, it's one step forward, 2 back for me.. We added width in the 2nd half but it wasted. I hope Rogers can find some balance, we don't need drastic measures just tweaking.........hopefully
posted on 11/8/19
It was the first game of the season and we have to context it that way. Nobody wants to lose the first game and I think DM is spot on in saying we looked scared of taking any risks - but then so did Wolves. That’s why both teams just cancelled each other out.
As a single performance it was, for me, too reminiscent of that Newcastle home defeat last season. A team comes and just sits in and we lack the creativity to break it down. Without VAR it would have been the same result as well.
It would be good to retain this passing style, but also have the ability to break at pace when we have the opportunity. That is, after all, Vardy’s strength.
A few things for BRodgers to ponder and after a single 90 minutes it’s not a crisis. The obvious change might be to start Albrighton or Barnes in place of Choudhury for the next game to give us better balance.
Whatever he decides he will still have to find a way to get the team to move better and transition through midfield with pace and purpose. We also don’t yet know what Praet will bring. But I have to be honest and say that was too similar to what we saw at times last season - and there is evidence that we still haven’t fully evolved into our new style based on ball retention.
Let’s hope Brendan has the answers.
posted on 11/8/19
It looked a confusing mess from where I was. It was a formation that just raised more questions than answers - I didn’t understand what it was trying to achieve. Nev is right, 2 holding midfielders at home was a Puel failing - completely unnecessary at home to Wolves.
Perez looked totally lost, there was no point in having a striker at all and Maddison was completely lost amongst the Wolves defence.
I was just so surprised because I expected a leggy tired performance from Wolves if anything - it looked like we were the ones that had just landed from a 10000 mile round trip.
Brendan basically still has to solve the exact same puzzle Puel couldn’t - what the hell do I do with these players?
posted on 11/8/19
I think everyone is agreeing on an important point here. There was no balance or structure in the midfield.
That needs fixing and fast.
posted on 11/8/19
Think I agree with your player ratings from a TV view
Except Ricardo who made 4 major errors defending that I counted,,, I'd score him 5
posted on 11/8/19
comment by Merseysidefox (U4842)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
I think everyone is agreeing on an important point here. There was no balance or structure in the midfield.
That needs fixing and fast.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah. What we don't want now is all the gear and no idea.
That's where the gaffer will make his mark...
...please.lol
posted on 11/8/19
It was set up as a 4-3-3, although with a few tweaks here and there. It was difficult to identify two players with identical roles, except maybe for the centre backs. Choudhury sat in to cover Chilwell, except Chilwell looked really off (unwell?) and didn’t really get into the match. Maddison and Pérez were the wide players, but both swapped positions with each other at times and also wandered.
I would agree with the criticism of playing two defensive midfielders limiting us somewhat. Maddison should be in the midfield 3, although whether we’ll make that change for Chelsea away is another matter. I’d also agree that the wandering - particularly from Maddison - meant we lacked width. I think we had the right formation set up to play them, but didn’t manage to widen the pitch enough. We generally looked most dangerous when Boly was dragged out wide to deal with a Ricardo run.
Lots to analyse and sort out for the management team, and that’s before we start talking about defending set pieces...
Page 1 of 3