Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
justfoxes

Post Southampton 1-2

By justfoxes, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

Kitchandro

Kitchandro

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, UHDrive said:

It's only because I see us winning more matches playing 442. Our midfield in particular isn't supplying vardy nor is the fact we are lacking a RW and trying to fill that hole with maddison/perez/praet etc.

 

Can't blame BR totally because he's been crying out for a RW and ACM for the last few years and it appears he's being stonewalled by the top brass.

I can't believe people keep having to point this out but: Brendand Rodgers has been involved in the signing of Leicester City players as recently as last season. So he's not had the right to cry out for anything. He has overseen the signings of Soumare, Perez and Lookman, who were all dreadful midfielders. We have spent money under him, but we have largely spent it poorly. The good signings were generally made before he came or in the earlier part of his reign before he got his poisonous hooks into us.

 

44 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Didn't watch the game but sounded like (according to Darren Bent on SSN) that we were good value for our lead and we didn't really give Southampton a sniff. 

 

Then we shat ourselves when Southampton made subs and started to attack us. Seems like we have a real problem (amongst others) when teams ramp up the pressure and try to get back into the game - mentally we look shot at this stage and physically it sounds like we just run out of steam when pressure is piled on. Its like we lose all sense of getting basics right and that's coupled with making mistakes or losing concentration. 

 

43 minutes ago, taupe said:

Can someone clever about matters football please tell me wtf happened? I'm at a loss. How does a team control a game for such long periods of time, look utterly comfortable, deservedly get ahead and then forget entirely how to play the game and crumble. What happens to cause that?

 

Were Southampton simply sitting off us, packing their defence, letting us knock it about until they went behind and then they came at us? Did taking Perez off, and the resulting change of shape, really cause that much of a tactical difference?

 

We just cannot do the rough stuff. Any team that gets at us has got us beat. We fold all too easily. We can do knocking the ball about, we can look good with our movement and passing, but we lose belief so quickly and easily. I don't know why any team doesn't simply get at us from the word go (as Forest did) We've no idea how to respond to that type of game. It's been going on for years (that soft under belly) and it doesn't seem to be getting addressed.

 

I watched the game (against my better judgement) and we controlled nothing, except possession. We looked incapable of creating chances and did not deserve to score at all, apart from in the sense Maddison did due to the quality of his free kick. As soon as Southampton came out we were shown up for what we are: a soft, tired, demotivated and poorly organised team with no real ideas or plan.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
UHDrive

UHDrive

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, lcfcbluearmy said:

Can I ask why? Genuine question until very recently I was too but struggling to think of any positives any more

I just don't believe he's been given the big "star" players that he's asked for, for the last 2-3 years. He's been trying to build the LW/RW up but I can only assume that the club has either said a flat out no or that they don't have the cash. Having money now is an issue but it wasn't 2-3 years ago. 

 

A lot of people have complained on here about BR, but he did inherit some of those players. He has also always stated that he prefers lean/smaller squads since he started.

 

All of this leads me to question the recruitment strategy and who is managing the contracts/salary/salary lengths/bonuses etc. Someone in recruitment should have been able to add 1+1 together and realise 2 years ago that if we didn't do anything back then I.e. slimming down whilst strengthening the sqaud too, that the players we most despatetly need right now can't be afforded due to financial mishandling. 

 

If BR has actively pursued Bertrand/vestagaard then that's a separate issue because both of those players were bought in to cover long term wingback injurys. Thoughts?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest StevieLynex

Guest StevieLynex

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, UHDrive said:

A lot of people have complained on here about BR, but he did inherit some of those players. He has also always stated that he prefers lean/smaller squads since he started.

 

 

If that's the case then why did he sign players like Bertrand, Perez, Daka and Praet when we already had players for those positions. Once he signed them, he almost didn't want to play them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lcfcbluearmy

lcfcbluearmy

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, UHDrive said:

I just don't believe he's been given the big "star" players that he's asked for, for the last 2-3 years. He's been trying to build the LW/RW up but I can only assume that the club has either said a flat out no or that they don't have the cash. Having money now is an issue but it wasn't 2-3 years ago. 

 

A lot of people have complained on here about BR, but he did inherit some of those players. He has also always stated that he prefers lean/smaller squads since he started.

 

All of this leads me to question the recruitment strategy and who is managing the contracts/salary/salary lengths/bonuses etc. Someone in recruitment should have been able to add 1+1 together and realise 2 years ago that if we didn't do anything back then I.e. slimming down whilst strengthening the sqaud too, that the players we most despatetly need right now can't be afforded due to financial mishandling. 

 

If BR has actively pursued Bertrand/vestagaard then that's a separate issue because both of those players were bought in to cover long term wingback injurys. Thoughts?

That's reasonable and I agree with some of of it to a certain extent.  I would counter it with the fact that Rodgers brought conger ton with him from celtic who was our head of recruitment until recently.  

However I understand the recruitment problems are not completely his fault. 

 

The thing that has swayed me finally is the negative mentality that I have critisied him for having in press conferences for the last 12-18 months has now started to filter down to the players and destroyed there confidence.  I agree its a struggle without new signings but would argue he should be doing much better with the squad he's got

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
UHDrive

UHDrive

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Kitchandro said:

I can't believe people keep having to point this out but: Brendand Rodgers has been involved in the signing of Leicester City players as recently as last season. So he's not had the right to cry out for anything. He has overseen the signings of Soumare, Perez and Lookman, who were all dreadful midfielders. We have spent money under him, but we have largely spent it poorly. The good signings were generally made before he came or in the earlier part of his reign before he got his poisonous hooks into us.

 

 

I watched the game (against my better judgement) and we controlled nothing, except possession. We looked incapable of creating chances and did not deserve to score at all, apart from in the sense Maddison did due to the quality of his free kick. As soon as Southampton came out we were shown up for what we are: a soft, tired, demotivated and poorly organised team with no real ideas or plan.

ITK or heresay? It's a bold statement to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest StevieLynex

Guest StevieLynex

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, StevieLynex said:

If that's the case then why did he sign players like Bertrand, Perez, Daka and Praet when we already had players for those positions. Once he signed them, he almost didn't want to play them.

Forgot to add Soumare

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahnsouff

Dahnsouff

Posted
Posted
Just now, UHDrive said:

ITK or heresay? It's a bold statement to make.

If it’s true then fine, he is culpable and he should go, if not it’s just further childish venting which is extremely self indulgent. (He probably should go anyway for failing to inspire and motivate he team, the transfer bit feels a bit false, but maybe not?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
taupe

taupe

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Kitchandro said:

we controlled nothing, except possession. We looked incapable of creating chances and did not deserve to score at all, apart from in the sense Maddison did due to the quality of his free kick. As soon as Southampton came out we were shown up for what we are: a soft, tired, demotivated and poorly organised team with no real ideas or plan.

Well thanks for not answering my question!

 

We can quibble over what 'controlling a game' means but I'd like to know why Southampton allowed us to do whatever it was we did (even if only have the possession) if we are such an otherwise poor team. Why not come at us from minute 1? I mean, we must have been doing something right for 60 minutes to make Southampton sit back. And why, once they did go behind and come out, did we fold so easily? Imo, the game changed. It wasn't simply that Southampton had decided to let us have the game to that point even though we had those frailties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
foxinsocks

foxinsocks

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, Kitchandro said:

I can't believe people keep having to point this out but: Brendand Rodgers has been involved in the signing of Leicester City players as recently as last season. So he's not had the right to cry out for anything. He has overseen the signings of Soumare, Perez and Lookman, who were all dreadful midfielders. We have spent money under him, but we have largely spent it poorly. The good signings were generally made before he came or in the earlier part of his reign before he got his poisonous hooks into us.

 

 

I watched the game (against my better judgement) and we controlled nothing, except possession. We looked incapable of creating chances and did not deserve to score at all, apart from in the sense Maddison did due to the quality of his free kick. As soon as Southampton came out we were shown up for what we are: a soft, tired, demotivated and poorly organised team with no real ideas or plan.

Welcome to rodgersball

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Buzzell

Buzzell

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Kitchandro said:

I watched the game (against my better judgement) and we controlled nothing, except possession. We looked incapable of creating chances and did not deserve to score at all, apart from in the sense Maddison did due to the quality of his free kick. As soon as Southampton came out we were shown up for what we are: a soft, tired, demotivated and poorly organised team with no real ideas or plan.

Spot on Kitch. The only thing we’ve dominated in our first two home games is purely the possession whilst playing absolute dire football. No clear cut chances created and being unable to actually hit the target. It’s depressing to watch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
splinterdream

splinterdream

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, UHDrive said:

I just don't believe he's been given the big "star" players that he's asked for, for the last 2-3 years. He's been trying to build the LW/RW up but I can only assume that the club has either said a flat out no or that they don't have the cash. Having money now is an issue but it wasn't 2-3 years ago. 

 

A lot of people have complained on here about BR, but he did inherit some of those players. He has also always stated that he prefers lean/smaller squads since he started.

 

All of this leads me to question the recruitment strategy and who is managing the contracts/salary/salary lengths/bonuses etc. Someone in recruitment should have been able to add 1+1 together and realise 2 years ago that if we didn't do anything back then I.e. slimming down whilst strengthening the sqaud too, that the players we most despatetly need right now can't be afforded due to financial mishandling. 

 

If BR has actively pursued Bertrand/vestagaard then that's a separate issue because both of those players were bought in to cover long term wingback injurys. Thoughts?

Is Rudkin the real problem?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UHDrive

UHDrive

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, StevieLynex said:

If that's the case then why did he sign players like Bertrand, Perez, Daka and Praet when we already had players for those positions. Once he signed them, he almost didn't want to play them.

That's naive. Perez and Praet were already here!! Bertrand was drafted in to cover long term LB injuries I.e. JJ etc. Daka is currently in a team which keeps changes formations, 1 up top, two up top etc and is subbed practically every game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...