Leicester 0-2 Arsenal post match

[Corky]

5 minutes ago, justfoxes said:

Listening to talk sport on the way into work this morning Tony Cascarino was saying yes we’ve got some and had some important players missing through injury, but he also feels that Brendan doesn’t really know what or who his best 11 players are ?

Makes you wonder if some pundits are saying what some are thinking on here also questioning his tactics, and yes agree regarding potter as watching how he instantly changed things in the cup game to compete with us and at times trouble is so much !

He knows who his best 11 players are but some aren't/ weren't available and the bulk of the team who started yesterday had contributed to 3 wins in a row in league and Europe and managed 10 goals.

 

I don't think the selection was particularly bad yesterday but the start to the game was. 

[Kevin Russell]

11 hours ago, sacreblueits442 said:

...Sako does have to create and score to have to be effective !!!

  Just dragging players out of position in order to create space for his team mates is an effective contribution.

  Barnes may have been running his defender but he wasn't pulling defenders out of their shape in order to create the space for our attackers.

I just don’t agree. Barnes was getting in behind them, should’ve scored and was a big factor in why we created so many more chances than they did. Im sorry attacking players have to get on the ball and make things happen, I thought Saka was pretty quiet after a lively first 5 mins. Barnes was relentless only thing missing (unfortunately a recurring theme) was his finishing.

 

I don’t even think Saka helped them create chances in open play. They scored one set piece and one goal mouth scramble. Yes they were by far the better team in the early stages, but I felt that was more winning the central midfield battle than anything else. After they scored their goals we were well on top and had numerous chances to score, it just wasn’t to be.

[Kevin Russell]

8 hours ago, Dan LCFC said:

I do think xG is a decent concept but it's flawed as it doesn't take into account the context of a game. Arsenal have no real need to rack up higher xG when they're gifted a two goal lead. That said we really should've scored.

There is a huge difference between sitting back and controlling the game (something we did to great effect at times when winning the league) and getting pegged back by a team that is creating lots of chances. Let’s be clear, we were playing around them and creating all sorts of chances when we changed our shape. Just poor finishing and a great goalkeeper stopped us.

[sacreblueits442]

8 hours ago, trabuch said:

I think that was Peter Schmeichel. Knows what he's talking about, but also a bit biased.

...I  can't agree with that, if anything being Arsenal he would be going the other way!!!

[urban fox]

Re the support in the ground. i was not there but friends who were said our support was decent. I watched on TV and either BT overdubbed crowd noises or were very biased in respect of where they placed their microphones. All i could hear for most of the game was chants of Arsenal, while at the same time, at one point when we were all over them the commentator remarked that the Leicester fans were urging the team on and if we scored the roof would come off. (at the same time time as he was saying this all i could hear was "arsenal, arsenal, arsenal".

I do think that many who comment on our atmosphere are going by what they hear on the TV, not what is actually happening in the ground. I have noticed on any number of occasions, especially against the "big 6" how such a few away fans can always seem to make far more noise than us, even when we are battering them on the pitch. Same against Man utd, the broadcasters chose to ensure that the majority of chanting on the soundtrack came from Man Utd end even though our end was in good voice as we ripped them apart.

[5waller5]

21 hours ago, MPH said:

 

Theres a reason Ramsdale has been voted man of the match..

Dude, if you think we played well that’s fine. 
 

I thought we were shambolic, lacked confidence, showed no attacking intent, and were really poor.

 

The really big worry for me, is that we seem to be playing how Brendan wants us to. The problems actually stem from our own tactics.

[5waller5]

57 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

Given our manager keeps telling everyone pressing, intensity and energy is our DNA - being rock bottom of the league on sprints is absolutely fvcking appalling. 

 

Like, he should be in Wheelan's office first thing Monday morning explaining himself levels of appalling. 

That’s an interesting fact, I’ve been watching our games recently and have been constantly saying we play at a training pace - never more than 80%.

 

Have you got a link to those stats please?

[RonnieTodger]

Defending for their second goal was laughably bad.

 

Thomas, Amartey and Soumare had woeful first halves. Maddison and Kelechi did alright

[Wymsey]

1 hour ago, Finnegan said:

Given our manager keeps telling everyone pressing, intensity and energy is our DNA - being rock bottom of the league on sprints is absolutely fvcking appalling. 

 

Like, he should be in Wheelan's office first thing Monday morning explaining himself levels of appalling. 

You've got a point, but too much pressing can lead to hamstring and similar injuries (I.e., when Barnes and Ndidi were out).

[5waller5]

5 hours ago, Matt said:

Been due something like this all season? It’s not the first time it’s happened West Ham (which was even more unacceptable than yesterday)? Brighton? Not to mention games we’ve scrapped draws and occasional wins when we’ve started scrappy and negative. Which going back to Corkys point results over performances, I love a shithouse win, but both must be looked at and when you’re getting neither there is nowhere to hide especially when it’s happening on a consistent basis.

 

Same. I had the inevitable feeling of disconnect and horrible feeling of ‘meh’, ‘don’t care’, or ‘whatever’ under Puel, it’s the same shite every week, I’ll still mention the glaring issues because they are still there and will remain to be there, nothings changing anytime soon but I’m past getting wound up about it now, you generally know what you’re gonna get before you even turn up at the stadium - very occasionally you might get a surprise. 
 

As I’ve said I don’t necessarily blame Rodgers for yesterday, I pin a lot of it on the players, they were sloppy, they started slow, they didn’t look interested but where have we seen that trait and trend in the past? 
 

The script was really predictable within 10seconds.

 

Arsenal kicked off, had 3 passes and played it very poorly into touch.

 

Instead of urgently taking the throw and going for the jugular we took an age to take the throw. It looked like a time wasting throw in the last minute!

 

We set the tone, and they couldn’t believe their luck

[MPH]

32 minutes ago, 5waller5 said:

Dude, if you think we played well that’s fine. 
 

I thought we were shambolic, lacked confidence, showed no attacking intent, and were really poor.

 

The really big worry for me, is that we seem to be playing how Brendan wants us to. The problems actually stem from our own tactics.

 

we did for the first 25 minutes. Unfortunately you’ve let that time taint your view of the whole game. 
 

Am I happy with the game as a whole? No I’m not. Of course not, but you’d have to be a bit of a doom and gloom merchant to not see that fir the rest of the game we outplayed an in form Arsenal team who now sit 6th after a disastrous start to the season. Their turnaround has been quite remarkable really.

Edited 31 October 2021 by MPH

[PAPA LAZAROU]

1 hour ago, Webbo said:

That would be a good argument if they'd held us at arms length after they went 2 up. We created enough chances after that to win. 

 

Im not pretending we should have won, but to pretend it was easy for Arsenal to sit back is not a fair reflection of what happened. 

Agreed. but there are posters on here who are stating we were the better side? I feel a bit of honesty is better than kidding oneself when trying to analysis what went wrong and why we lost. We were half a pace behind them right from the off and most of us could see their first goal coming and even the second. 

 

Second half Brendan did at least alter the formation which afforded us more attacking options, which begs the question was the initial set up wrong?  Also I would question some of our players attitudes. Maddison for instance . strolling around and slowly taking corners when we were already 2 behind beggars belief. We just don't seen to get motivated or pick up any pace until we are goals behind. One thing for sure Arsenal although lucky in the second half never had any motivational problems that we seem to suffer from.

[inckley fox]

5 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

we did for the first 25 minutes. Unfortunately you’ve let that time taint your view of the whole game. 
 

Am I happy with the game as a whole? No I’m not. Of course not, but you’d have to be a bit of a doom and gloom merchant to not see that fir the rest of the game we outplayed an in form Arsenal team who now sit 6th after a disastrous start to the season. They turnaround has been quite remarkable really.

It's another of those annoying football cliches, but it really is easier to look alright when you're two or three goals down. Arsenal might not have done the finest job of protecting their lead, in that we could well have got one or two, but that's what allowed us to pressure them more. We were poor for 25, and could have been more than two down, and gave up with 10 or 15 to go. They also had opportunities in that period where we were actually participating. So in terms of putting in a 90 minute shift, or deserving anything from the game, it was pretty damn poor.

[MPH]

5 minutes ago, inckley fox said:

It's another of those annoying football cliches, but it really is easier to look alright when you're two or three goals down. Arsenal might not have done the finest job of protecting their lead, in that we could well have got one or two, but that's what allowed us to pressure them more. We were poor for 25, and could have been more than two down, and gave up with 10 or 15 to go. They also had opportunities in that period where we were actually participating. So in terms of putting in a 90 minute shift, or deserving anything from the game, it was pretty damn poor.

 

im not saying we deserved anything from the game - the team that scores the most goals is really the only team that deserves to win.

 

 

Im simply saying we  played well for a large chunk of it.  We can’t just put it down to them sitting back either otherwise Ramsdale wouldn’t have been voted motm. If he hadn’t have played so well then what is now being called sitting back  or ‘ defending their lead’ would have been labeled as being outplayed.

Edited 31 October 2021 by MPH

[inckley fox]

13 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

im not saying we deserved anything from the game - the team that scores the most goals is really the only team that deserves to win.

 

 

Im simply saying we  played well for a large chunk of it.  We can’t just put it down to them sitting back either otherwise Ramsdale wouldn’t have been voted motm. If he hadn’t have played so well then what is now being called sitting back  or ‘ defending their lead’ would have been labeled as being outplayed.

I think we're agreeing. Credit is deserved for nearly pulling ourselves back into it. We did play well for patches against a good side.

 

My point is just a statement of the obvious, really. Conceding two goals so early led Arsenal to prioritise containment over doing damage, and that allowed us to look more cohesive. It certainly won't have been in their plan to give us so many opportunities, that's down to us. But a side looking better two goals down is what you tend to see when an away side gets a two goal lead.

 

I should also add that Kasper pulled off a save or two (though I doubt xG will reflect that...) and we could have conceded more in that early calamitous spell. On balance of the ninety minutes, we were fairly beaten.

[Hoopla10]

59 minutes ago, 5waller5 said:

lacked confidence, showed no attacking intent, and were really poor.

Nobody would argue that for the first 25min. But I'm curious how we had 16 shots and 8 on target with a team sitting deep to defend if we showed no attacking intent? It's all marginal, another day two or three go in and we'd be praising them for turning it around. It would be nice if we'd been more clinical but we weren't and their keeper had a good game.  

[5waller5]

39 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

we did for the first 25 minutes. Unfortunately you’ve let that time taint your view of the whole game. 
 

Am I happy with the game as a whole? No I’m not. Of course not, but you’d have to be a bit of a doom and gloom merchant to not see that fir the rest of the game we outplayed an in form Arsenal team who now sit 6th after a disastrous start to the season. Their turnaround has been quite remarkable really.

I didn’t see anything about that Arsenal side that’s better than Brighton / West Ham / Everton etc …. So 6-12th mid table side.

 

We didn’t outplay them for 70 minutes at all. We had possession, comfortable for the opposition possession - in our own half. That’s them controlling the game not us. 
 

in reality we should have scored 1 maybe 2, but so should they…. So maybe a fairer score line would have been 1-3. 

[5waller5]

2 minutes ago, Hoopla10 said:

Nobody would argue that for the first 25min. But I'm curious how we had 16 shots and 8 on target with a team sitting deep to defend if we showed no attacking intent? It's all marginal, another day two or three go in and we'd be praising them for turning it around. It would be nice if we'd been more clinical but we weren't and their keeper had a good game.  

Simple.

 

They sat deep, comfortably defended a 2-0 score line and restricted us to long range efforts.

 

Arsenal are a bang average mid table side that controlled the game. 
 

We played better second half, because the first half was so poor. 

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

2 hours ago, Finnegan said:

Given our manager keeps telling everyone pressing, intensity and energy is our DNA - being rock bottom of the league on sprints is absolutely fvcking appalling. 

 

Like, he should be in Wheelan's office first thing Monday morning explaining himself levels of appalling. 

Knee jerk reaction, and unfair to Brendan. The players were poor, especially in the first half. They let B R down.

[Hoopla10]

5 minutes ago, 5waller5 said:

Simple.

 

They sat deep, comfortably defended a 2-0 score line and restricted us to long range efforts.

 

Arsenal are a bang average mid table side that controlled the game. 
 

We played better second half, because the first half was so poor. 

So our build up play and our shots at goal and their keeper don't mean anything? It's still "no attacking intent"? 

 

Arsenal are on something like a 9 no-loss run and other than an early Brentford game (first game of the season) have only lost to ManC and Chelsea. I'm not arguing they're a top 4 side but like it or not Arteta has them in a groove with momentum. But they didn't control that second half. The pure number of chances and shots at goal proves that. Chelsea dominated NUFC 19 shots (3 more) and 6 on target (2 less). We just didn't have that luck or cutting edge. And that lack of clinical finishing might be something to criticize (not that I would because on another day they go in).  

 

 

[Guest Danny Clender]

1 hour ago, urban fox said:

Re the support in the ground. i was not there but friends who were said our support was decent. I watched on TV and either BT overdubbed crowd noises or were very biased in respect of where they placed their microphones. All i could hear for most of the game was chants of Arsenal, while at the same time, at one point when we were all over them the commentator remarked that the Leicester fans were urging the team on and if we scored the roof would come off. (at the same time time as he was saying this all i could hear was "arsenal, arsenal, arsenal".

I do think that many who comment on our atmosphere are going by what they hear on the TV, not what is actually happening in the ground. I have noticed on any number of occasions, especially against the "big 6" how such a few away fans can always seem to make far more noise than us, even when we are battering them on the pitch. Same against Man utd, the broadcasters chose to ensure that the majority of chanting on the soundtrack came from Man Utd end even though our end was in good voice as we ripped them apart.

Kinnel, imagine if they placed their microphones in the match day thread on here 

[StanSP]

1 hour ago, 5waller5 said:

Dude, if you think we played well that’s fine. 
 

I thought we were shambolic, lacked confidence, showed no attacking intent, and were really poor.

 

The really big worry for me, is that we seem to be playing how Brendan wants us to. The problems actually stem from our own tactics.

 

1 hour ago, MPH said:

 

we did for the first 25 minutes. Unfortunately you’ve let that time taint your view of the whole game. 
 

Am I happy with the game as a whole? No I’m not. Of course not, but you’d have to be a bit of a doom and gloom merchant to not see that fir the rest of the game we outplayed an in form Arsenal team who now sit 6th after a disastrous start to the season. Their turnaround has been quite remarkable really.

This!

 

The first 20 mins was dogshit.

 

Beyond that, even if Arsenal had settled and took their foot off the gas, we still responded and created some opportunities.

 

I dread what people would have said or how they would have reacted if we didn't do what we did in the 2nd half and attack to try and get back into it while Arsenal still sat back.

 

Can't have it both ways!

[weller54]

Hate to say this but Chilwell would have scored from that chance Thomas had!

[MPH]

1 hour ago, 5waller5 said:

I didn’t see anything about that Arsenal side that’s better than Brighton / West Ham / Everton etc …. So 6-12th mid table side.

 

We didn’t outplay them for 70 minutes at all. We had possession, comfortable for the opposition possession - in our own half. That’s them controlling the game not us. 
 

in reality we should have scored 1 maybe 2, but so should they…. So maybe a fairer score line would have been 1-3. 

we also had more shots than them and more shots on target than them, 

[5waller5]

19 minutes ago, MPH said:

we also had more shots than them and more shots on target than them, 

 

Brill. 

 

They should really donate their 3 points, we clearly deserved them