• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

The case for the defence

Finney Is Back said:
I disagree here. Vardy is Romero's man in every sense of the word. Yet for some strange reason Romero chooses to ignore Vardy and then compounds his mistake by going and taking up a position in the centre of our box that isn't really defending against any threat, but worse still he takes up a position that is three yards deeper than our lovely straight defensive line, thus also playing onside their goalscorer. It was absolutely terrible defending that if somebody like Sanchez or Dier had done then our entire fan base would be apoplectic.
Click to expand...
I think Porro is sometimes suspect defensively (albeit he has improved in that respect since Ange arrived) but he is in no way responsible for the goal. It's all Romero. What he did was inexcusable for any Premier League centre back.

Had he just been ball watching and allowed Vardy to peel off him, that would have been bad enough. The fact he walked by him, by several yards, was a head scratcher. That he was not covering another player who was unmarked made it even worse if that's possible.

It was absolutely dreadful defending by Romero in every respect and I expect much, much better from a lad as good as he undoubtedly is.
 
Bishop said:
I don't think it's the number of chances more so the quality of them. Due to the way play they are often very, very high percentage chances like the 2nd one Vardy got. He really should have scored from that and it was only fantastic work from Vicario that stopped it.

It's something that is going to have to be addressed or we have to absolutely blow teams away when we have the ascendancy. It was the same last season, the attack needs to be more decisive.
Click to expand...

So one high percentage chance and one individual error that led to one? Still sounds pretty reasonable. Especially given Ange’s remit.
 
tommysvr said:
So one high percentage chance and one individual error that led to one? Still sounds pretty reasonable. Especially given Ange’s remit.
Click to expand...
I imagine the concern is the regularity of these type of chances. They happen every match and it's a bit of a reoccurring theme and they are very dangerous chances. We need to find a way wether that is through adaption of system, adaption of players or even changing the players themselves to stop these relatively easy chances.
 
Finney Is Back said:
I'd be fine with the opposition having 5 or 6 chances if they are low value ones, but the two chances I've highlighted were really high value chances and conceding two chances as good as that is poor, especially against one of the promoted teams who are extremely likely to go straight back down.

If we give two chances as good as those away each game then we'll be conceding one or two goals each game which will be a huge number of dropped points.
Click to expand...
The Xg for both sides was close because of those chances yet they created so little … that’s the worry
And they are all about player decisions, not tactics
 
tommysvr said:
So one high percentage chance and one individual error that led to one? Still sounds pretty reasonable. Especially given Ange’s remit.
Click to expand...
If that was all that was given away against a top team then maybe it's reasonable, but that was against a poor Leicester team. Top sides will create a lot more if we don't improve.
 
DubSpur said:
If that was all that was given away against a top team then maybe it's reasonable, but that was against a poor Leicester team. Top sides will create a lot more if we don't improve.
Click to expand...
It’s basics too
That wasn’t a chance if Romero does the basics of defending
 
Bedfordspurs said:
The Xg for both sides was close because of those chances yet they created so little … that’s the worry
And they are all about player decisions, not tactics
Click to expand...
It's a combination of both. Our system means we create a lot of possesion in and around the box without them neccesarily being clear cut decisive chances. It also opens us up for fast counters consistently which by their nature will be a chance of very high quality.

Player decisions are guided by the system and the instruction they've been given. One isn't divorced from the other.

It says there's something that's gone wrong with the system and setup when 10 chances equal the same xG as 2 chances.
 
Bishop said:
It's a combination of both. Our system means we create a lot of possesion in and around the box without them neccesarily being clear cut decisive chances. It also opens us up for fast counters consistently which by their nature will be a chance of very high quality.

Player decisions are guided by the system and the instruction they've been given. One isn't divorced from the other.

It says there's something that's gone wrong with the system and setup when 10 chances equal the same xG as 2 chances.
Click to expand...
Not IMO
They aren’t even chances of the defenders to the basics
And I don’t the tactics are leave your man easily and quickly like Romero did
That’s poor play and not the system
Anges instructions aren’t… walk past their only goal threat and leave him
 
DubSpur said:
If that was all that was given away against a top team then maybe it's reasonable, but that was against a poor Leicester team. Top sides will create a lot more if we don't improve.
Click to expand...

That’s insane. Your expectations are that teams around the bottom of league should create NO chances against? 2 chances is more than reasonable.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
But it wasn’t fast counter attacking or set pieces
Click to expand...
There was also the chance in the first half just after we scored where a simple long ball looked to have put Vardy in, with Vicario coming out and heading it straight to De Cordova-Reid who had a chance at a shot at an open goal from 15 yards or so inside our half but badly missed the opportunity.

Leicester's first goal came from a counter attack. A long ball forward from Winks into the channel saw Leicester with 4 v 4 in our half. We never got it clear from that initial attack and then Leicester exploited our well known weakness of a cross to the far post. Leicester had also played a good cross into the box just before that goal in the same move when their number 14 had got himself completely free in front of VDV but failed to connect with the ball.

The second chance from Leicester also came from a single long pass that beat our press. Leicester were then four on four with acres of space around all of their players and in behind. We are really badly organised in our defensive shape.
 
Last edited:
tommysvr said:
That’s insane. Your expectations are that teams around the bottom of league should create NO chances against? 2 chances is more than reasonable.
Click to expand...
They had more than 2 chances. They had 2 GOOD chances. Our expectation should absolutely be that teams around the bottom of the league do not have 2 GOOD chances against us. Otherwise we are going to be dropping a lot of points unless we score 2 or even 3 goals every game.
 
Finney Is Back said:
There was also the chance in the first half just after we scored where a simple long ball looked to have put Vardy in, with Vicario coming out and heading it straight to Decordoba Reid who had a chance at a shot at an open goal from 15 yards or so inside our half but badly missed the opportunity.

Leicester's first goal came from a counter attack. A long ball forward from Winks into the channel saw Leicester with 4 v 4 in our half. We never got it clear from that initial attack and then Leicester exploited our well known weakness of a cross to the far post. Leicester had also played a good cross into the box just before that goal in the same move when their number 14 had got himself completely free in front of VDV but failed to connect with the ball.

The second chance from Leicester also came from a single long pass that beat our press. Leicester were then four on four with acres of space around all of their players and in behind. We are really badly organised in our defensive shape.
Click to expand...
That’s not a counter then
It’s a second phase
The weakness was in Romeros head
 
Bedfordspurs said:
That’s not a counter then
It’s a second phase
The weakness was in Romeros head
Click to expand...
OK, second phase after a counter. If you're happy how easily the opposition can get possession in our half with even numbers attack v defence then you and I just have different opinions. Even before Romero's really bad moment, their number 14 had got himself well ahead of VDV for an opportunity to convert the first low cross into the box.
 
Finney Is Back said:
OK, second phase after a counter. If you're happy how easily the opposition can get possession in our half with even numbers attack v defence then you and I just have different opinions. Even before Romero's really bad moment, their number 14 had got himself well ahead of VDV for an opportunity to convert the first low cross into the box.
Click to expand...
Teams who are losing will attack you
They have too
But it wasn’t a smart attack to even a good move
We was in position to deal with it and failed.. because we conceded. We conceded because Romero was brick

14 hot last but didn’t even get a shot on target. That’s fine. Not even sure it registered as a shot TBH

Even numbers defence vs attack isn’t out of the ordinary. But letting your man stand behind you after you walk past him really is

Everything that happens after that was a consequence of that lack of action
 
Leicester were faffing with the ball for ages after Johnson coughed it up, enough time for everyone bar Solanke to have got back goal side.
 
tommysvr said:
That’s insane. Your expectations are that teams around the bottom of league should create NO chances against? 2 chances is more than reasonable.
Click to expand...
How is it insane? And where did I state that they should create no chances?
These were two gilt edged chances, it's not counting the lesser chances they had. If Leicester can create two chances like that then teams around the top 4 will create more and we will be shipping 2+ goals per game against them.

What is really insane is your refusal to admit that there are any issues with the team.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Teams who are losing will attack you
They have too
But it wasn’t a smart attack to even a good move
We was in position to deal with it and failed.. because we conceded. We conceded because Romero was brick

14 hot last but didn’t even get a shot on target. That’s fine. Not even sure it registered as a shot TBH

Even numbers defence vs attack isn’t out of the ordinary. But letting your man stand behind you after you walk past him really is

Everything that happens after that was a consequence of that lack of action
Click to expand...
The goal ended up being a consequence of Romero's bad decision but we easily could've conceded in the phase immediately before the goal when their number 14 waltzed into a couple of yards of space in front of VDV (who I think was poor with his positioning) but failed to connect with the cross that went across the 6 yard box. I let out a big *phew* after that only for it not to matter because Romero defended poorly immediately afterwards.

Even numbers defence v attack is definitely out of the ordinary. Those are the moments that teams that teams want to create as they quite often result in goals (the second Vardy chance was also a 4 on 4 after one single pass from their centre back) Of course better still is more attackers versus less defenders but those moments only tend to happen with counter attacks against teams who massively overcommit late on when chasing a game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back