Tactics Under Maresca

[Lillehamring]

32 minutes ago, kyleolly said:

That was my point it’s far from dynamic because I don’t think our defenders and midfield are dynamic it’s rather ponderous and we make a hell of a lot of mistakes.

Perhaps you shouldn't be in this thread 

[sbfox]

40 minutes ago, cityfanlee23 said:

Plenty of people argue that it is, but the majority of games we have over controlled the game and struggled to lure the teams to press us, ending with our midfielders having 80% sideways and backwards passing. We did not play like we always do by any stretch, there have been countless times this season where we have a chance to hit teams on the break but we get outside the box and pass it backwards, today we pulled the trigger and were in their box within 2-3 passes, usually our counter attacks break themselves down due to overplaying. 
Today was fantastic, because we focused on less passes between our defence and their box. 

I just don't think this is true, but you clearly see our style entirely differently so I'm not going to argue. 

[Dickov22]

Difficult to name anyone who was below 7/10 for us today. Special mentions for Hamza, Mavidivi , Ndidi and  Fatuwu. Probably all 8/0 minimum. 

[HarryDee8]

1 minute ago, Dickov22 said:

Difficult to name anyone who was below 7/10 for us today. Special mentions for Hamza, Mavidivi , Ndidi and  Fatuwu. Probably all 8/0 minimum. 

Faes had a bad game, I'd give him a 6

[StriderHiryu]

8 minutes ago, foxfanazer said:

Wait....are we good again?

Allow me to give you the official FoxesTalk guide to “how good are Leicester?”

 

- Won by a large margin = better than 1970 Brazil

- Won by 2 goals = good

- Won by 1 goal = OK

- Draw = areas of concern

- Loss = Enzo out

 

 

So based on this we are currently better than Pele’s world beaters 

[Guppys Love Child]

3 hours ago, sbfox said:

Isn't this exactly what Enzoball is? Control possession, lure teams on and then strike quickly? We played just like we always do, but Plymouth were tactically naive and/or thought their system could dominate ours. 

Mmm. I'm not so sure. Today's match to me felt different somehow.

Certainly second half.

Yes Plymouth helped by pushing forward and leaving space and also by being one of the poorer teams to visit The King Power. 

 

Others have mentioned they feel that our patient methodical build up style contributes to allowing the opposition time to get organised and set the low block ( something I've agreed and moaned about  🤪 in the past) Today we were noticeably more aggressive in our attacking, the tempo was up for longer periods, we appeared to not adopt the backwards and reset option as often.

It wasn't a complete " Anti-Enzoball" set up as some have suggested, but it was a step or two away from Enzos preferred 'Possession and Control' mantra IMO, and I loved the fact we did it. I've b1tched and moaned about wanting to play something more like this and now want us to do  even more, because... guess what it seems to work, ( I won't go and far and to say I told you so, but..Who would have thought it)

and Yes I was the most entertained today than i have been all season.  More next match please Enzo. Let's not give Millwall time to settle and get organised..

Edited 9 December 2023 by Guppys Love Child

[sbfox]

2 minutes ago, Guppys Love Child said:

Mmm. I'm not so sure. Today's match to me felt different somehow.

Certainly second half.

Yes Plymouth helped by pushing forward and leaving space and also by being one of the poorer teams to visit The King Power. 

 

Others have mentioned they feel that our patient methodical build up style contributes to allowing the opposition time to get organised and set the low block ( something I've agreed and moaned about  🤪 in the past) Today we were noticeably more aggressive in our attacking, the tempo was up for longer periods, we appeared to not adopt the backwards and reset option as often.

It wasn't a complete " Anti-Enzoball" set up as some have suggested, but it was a step or two away from Enzos preferred 'Possession and Control' mantra IMO, and I loved the fact we did it. I've b1tched and moaned about wanting to play something more like this and now want us to do  even more, because... guess what it seems to work, ( I won't go and far and to say I told you so, but..Who would have thought it)

and Yes I was the most entertained today than i have been all season.  More next match please Enzo. Let's not give Millwall time to settle and get organised..

I mean, we were entertained because we put away our chances. It's that simple really. 

 

Take the second goal for example. Yes, it's a long ball, but watch the pass, spin and movement off the ball up the field. This is what we've seen in the past, the only difference being that the ball travels through the air. 

 

And I think we need to be a little careful about time to set the low block thing. Plymouth were terrible - yes, we sprung our trap more successfully than usual, but only because they allowed us to do so. Otherwise, it was more of the same controlled style which has seen us dominate most of the league. 

[Suzie the Fox]

1 hour ago, brucey said:

https://medium.com/@dominic.wells24/marescas-masterclass-in-practice-41cf3bda3248

Dom is my nephew and as always is spot on. If you like football tactics, especially LCFC I 100% recommend you have a read and follow him on X. 

[cityfanlee23]

30 minutes ago, Lillehamring said:

We haven't been unwilling to counter attack, by and large we've simply been starved of opportunities to do so by teams endlessly sitting deep - and when we have had the chance, it's been with mixed success.

Even today,  the goals weren't from counter attacks - a penalty, a route 1 hoof, the third goal was something of a counter but even then they had 6 players back, and winning the ball with a high press.

The most obvious counter attack, we føkked up.

When I say willingness to actually counter teams I should have said "willingness to see counter teams quickly" we have blown multiple counter attack chances in pretty much every game this season, as well as our obvious issues with wastefulness. As I said previously I think the forum is split into 2 groups at the moment. Some argue that teams sitting deep is what causes us to pass it around so much, but the other side (me included) argue that our often slow-paced passing is the reason teams sit back so much because they are happy for us to pass it sideways and backward for 60 passes and allow them to sit in a deep block knowing we struggle to attack it. 

One side thinks the often ultra high possession is a symptom of the deep block, the other thinks the deep block is a symptom of the possession. Leeds and Southampton's attacks are just as good as ours and they don't seem to run into this issue nearly as much as we do, so it's probably a mix of the two, some teams want to set up to be hard to beat, but we make that much easier given how much of the ball we hold and how we often slow play right down when we have it. I appreciate why we do it, it's just about tempo imo. 

Edited 9 December 2023 by cityfanlee23

[Matt]

Really enjoyed yesterday, a mix of style but we were definitely a lot more direct that usual! A sight to behold!

 

Plymouth did play into our hands and allowed us to play in that way, but the refreshing thing to see is that we didn't just play keep ball for the sake of it, we changed because we could and didn't read of script.

[Rossiter]

Getting an early goal made Plymouth comedy out of their shell a bit. If we can get more early goals it should make games more open. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ceebeefox]

9 hours ago, sbfox said:

I mean, we were entertained because we put away our chances. It's that simple really. 

 

Take the second goal for example. Yes, it's a long ball, but watch the pass, spin and movement off the ball up the field. This is what we've seen in the past, the only difference being that the ball travels through the air. 

 

And I think we need to be a little careful about time to set the low block thing. Plymouth were terrible - yes, we sprung our trap more successfully than usual, but only because they allowed us to do so. Otherwise, it was more of the same controlled style which has seen us dominate most of the league. 

Agree with most of this. The second goal was a move that was on against high pressing Leeds, time and time again, the difference and reason it was effective yesterday was Daka, he is the only one of our strikers who is quick over a 30 yard run imo. Vardy used to be ( and still is over 10 ), and Nacho isn’t. With Fatawa also it was another option but one I’ve been screaming after all season. Don’t get me wrong Daka was awful at times last season and back to goal he’s been poor but he should have been an option more often with teams that push up on us.

[StriderHiryu]

12 hours ago, brucey said:

https://medium.com/@dominic.wells24/marescas-masterclass-in-practice-41cf3bda3248

More eyes on this please! Best analysis of our entire system created so far. 
 

It’s quite complicated and a long read, but is super comprehensive, thorough and most importantly of all, factually correct. 
 

Thanks for sharing that. A pity the author isn’t on the forum. 

[Lillehamring]

19 hours ago, Guppys Love Child said:

Mmm. I'm not so sure. Today's match to me felt different somehow.

Certainly second half.

Yes Plymouth helped by pushing forward and leaving space and also by being one of the poorer teams to visit The King Power. 

 

Others have mentioned they feel that our patient methodical build up style contributes to allowing the opposition time to get organised and set the low block ( something I've agreed and moaned about  🤪 in the past) Today we were noticeably more aggressive in our attacking, the tempo was up for longer periods, we appeared to not adopt the backwards and reset option as often.

It wasn't a complete " Anti-Enzoball" set up as some have suggested, but it was a step or two away from Enzos preferred 'Possession and Control' mantra IMO, and I loved the fact we did it. I've b1tched and moaned about wanting to play something more like this and now want us to do  even more, because... guess what it seems to work, ( I won't go and far and to say I told you so, but..Who would have thought it)

and Yes I was the most entertained today than i have been all season.  More next match please Enzo. Let's not give Millwall time to settle and get organised..

I've noticed this come up in several posts - this assumption that it is maresca's wish for us to play slow, negative football or to only be interested in winning the possession - but i think the reality is simply that in most games that type of football for enzo is the most effective way to play, to break down a deep sitting team, today much like the blackburn game, that wasn't the case - it was clear from his post match that he really enjoyed the plymouth game and the way we played, i'm sure he'd like us to play the sort of football we played against plymouth rather than how we played against sheffield...

 

 

[Lillehamring]

19 hours ago, cityfanlee23 said:

When I say willingness to actually counter teams I should have said "willingness to see counter teams quickly" we have blown multiple counter attack chances in pretty much every game this season, as well as our obvious issues with wastefulness. As I said previously I think the forum is split into 2 groups at the moment. Some argue that teams sitting deep is what causes us to pass it around so much, but the other side (me included) argue that our often slow-paced passing is the reason teams sit back so much because they are happy for us to pass it sideways and backward for 60 passes and allow them to sit in a deep block knowing we struggle to attack it. 

One side thinks the often ultra high possession is a symptom of the deep block, the other thinks the deep block is a symptom of the possession. Leeds and Southampton's attacks are just as good as ours and they don't seem to run into this issue nearly as much as we do, so it's probably a mix of the two, some teams want to set up to be hard to beat, but we make that much easier given how much of the ball we hold and how we often slow play right down when we have it. I appreciate why we do it, it's just about tempo imo. 

The first answer to this is, regardless of the chicken and egg nature of these games, the slow steady approach has worked almost every time and the few times it hasn't was more to do with poor finishing than the pace of our play.

 

The second answer to this is - if it is a result of our negativity that teams sit deep, how come we haven't played this way in every game?  It also seems to be the go-to tactic against us to start briefly with a high press, sit deep for an hour, go all in for the last 20 minutes (with maybe the odd short burst of pressure when we switch off before/after half time) - that such an observable pattern exists suggests opposition teams are dictating the pace of games - it's no coincidence that our biggest wins and some of our best football has come against plymouth, blackburn and southampton - all of whom played with a high line.

[Chrysalis]

For me its getting the balance right.

 

I think passing out of danger (when its safe to do so) is better than random aimless clearances, so no issue with that, and I understand about trying to lure in the press as well.  We just need to get the balance right as over playing it is not a good thing (a lot of their chances came after we started over playing it at the back and they intercepted from defenders), it feels like in the last game, particularly second half we had a much better balance.

 

The pace of the ball movement needs to be fast, we need to treat every opponent with respect (I feel this has contributed to some recent training session level performances), and be prepared to go direct to mix it up.  If Enzo gets that balance right I think we could be going somewhere in the longer term.

Edited 10 December 2023 by Chrysalis

[davieG]

https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/what-leicester-city-players-mads-8965838?fbclid=IwAR3WbHPE72yqUEUiiKwklRqGqzAb7gSbmY1ASf7NnCpo5DDBirS1SsjMOqU

 

What Leicester City players did to Mads Hermansen as Enzo Maresca treated to parting gift
Analysis of Leicester City's 4-0 victory over Plymouth, looking at a rare route to victory, the goalkeeper as an attacker, Patson Daka's performance, important cameos, and the title race

 

ByJordan Blackwell
13:18, 10 DEC 2023

Finally, Leicester City have won comfortably. For a team whose points tally suggests they are making light work of the Championship, their season has been heavy on late drama. But here, they wrapped the win up so early that thousands of supporters left before the final whistle for a spot of Christmas shopping or traffic beating, knowing they would not be missing out.

This was City’s 16th victory in the Championship this season and just their second where they had at least a two-goal advantage going into the final half-hour of the match. The only other such game was at Southampton, where the Saints’ control of possession and territory meant the match wasn’t really over until Stephy Mavididi’s breakaway goal with 25 minutes to go.

Against Plymouth, a blitz of intensity at the start of the second half sealed the points. This is very unlike the City that has been seen all season, who have traditionally been slow out of gates for the second period, only kicking into gear as the clock hits the hour.

 

 

 

In fact, in their previous 19 Championship games, they had scored just one goal in the first 15 minutes of the second half, and even that one came 30 seconds before the hour mark. Here, they netted three times in that period.

 

Perhaps they were sparked into life by their ragged ending to the first half. City have now only conceded one goal from open play in their last 11 matches but they came extremely close to doing so during a rough 10-minute period where they gifted possession to the Pilgrims regularly and their defence was ripped apart.

So it wasn’t a total breeze. City have been more dominant in other matches and not had the goals to show for it. But they at least proved they don’t always rely on late drama. It’s not as exciting, but it is better for heart rates and less risky in the push for promotion.

 

How players reacted to Hermansen in response to 'not perfect' assessment
This was the best example so far of Enzo Maresca’s tactic of using the goalkeeper as an attacker. It’s an alien concept for those more comfortable seeing keepers use their gloves and nothing else, but it has been a success, as proven by City’s second goal.

Everybody around the Championship knows about Mads Hermansen by now. Plymouth boss Steven Schumacher spoke about him at length before the game, not only highlighting how good he is, but also recognising that he’s not perfect. In recent weeks, it has been the case that Hermansen has missed his mark and it has led to opposition attacks. That was something Schumacher wanted to exploit.

He said: “It was a huge signing for them and he's such a good player. He becomes an extra person in possession but I think we have seen over the course of the season so far he's also not perfect.

"He has given balls away and he has taken chances, which is the way they play; again, how their manager wants them to play and they can accept occasionally if they get it wrong. We have got to try if we can to find a way to force them to get it wrong and punish them when we turn the ball over, like a few teams have done so far and managed to do so. Hopefully we can do something the same.”

City responded by passing the ball back to Hermansen more times than in any other game this season, and the Dane responded by completing every single one of his 71 passes that were under 30 yards. Then occasionally he tried a long ball, and while they didn’t always come off, he does have the ability to drop a pass into a team-mate’s path half the pitch away, and it can lead to chances.

That was what happened at the start of the second half. So often a route one goal is an aimless lump to a speedy striker or to a big man, but this was tactically brilliant. Hermansen played a couple of short one-twos with team-mates, baiting Plymouth to come forward, only for Patson Daka and Abdul Fatawu to spin off their men, the goalkeeper floating a pass onto the latter’s toe, allowing him to set up an unmarked Daka for a big chance taken with composure.

It was the Zambian’s first goal for City since March, so naturally many City players when to celebrate with him. But the four defenders all turned around and went back to hug Hermansen, acknowledging his part in the goal.

It’s a cliche for a manager to say that their team attacks with 11 players and defends with 11 players. But City really do when they have a goalkeeper who can set up goals like that.

 

Daka's parting gift won't change striker hierarchy
For every single game this season, Jamie Vardy and Kelechi Iheanacho have been fit. Then they both succumb to injury and illness in the same week. Step forward Patson Daka.

He had played 27 minutes of club football before Saturday, and would surely have had more had he been playing in the red and black of AC Milan or the red and black of Bournemouth, the two clubs whose deadline-day deals for the Zambian fell through. But here he was being tasked to start for City after four months on the fringes.

It is testament to Daka professionalism that he was so energetic and enthusiastic in his display despite probably wishing he was elsewhere. And it’s a testament to his abilities as a striker that he was so calm when presented with his big opportunity at the start of the second half. He was also fortunate that Plymouth played into his hands, stepping up high and allowing Daka to use his pace to spin in behind.

But it does not feel like a renaissance. His goal is a parting gift, more than the start of a new era for Daka at the King Power Stadium. He may get a chance to impress again on Wednesday, but this feels like his final full month at the club.

Despite Vardy and Iheanacho’s occasional struggles this season, it does not feel like any amount of goals scored by Daka is going to convince Maresca that his striker hierarchy is incorrect. For the manager, leading the line for City in his style of play is more than just scoring goals. His striker will spend most of the game dropping deep, beyond the wingers and attacking midfielders. It’s ill-suited to Daka’s game.

While the manager would not discuss Daka’s future in depth, this feels like his final full month at the club before he moves on. At least he’s going out on a high.

 

Christmas cameos show squad depth
Wrapping up the game so early allowed for plenty of cameos, which bodes well for an “important” period, as described by Maresca. It’s a busy month of fixtures and Christmas provides a distraction, the boss has said, so to keep everyone fresh and on their toes, it’s best to have as many players available as possible.

Tom Cannon was able to make his long-awaited debut and showed a keenness for running off the shoulder, while Marc Albrighton made an impact during a rare outing, with Dennis Praet able to get his first minutes since August, the Belgian playing some tidy football. There was even a chance to reward Ben Nelson with a league debut for the club.

It’s not to say that City’s squad could not do with a sprinkling of fresh talent in the January transfer window, but there are certainly plenty of players for Maresca to choose from and to place faith in. For example, the last two home games have seen Hamza Choudhury replace Harry Winks and Ricardo Pereira, and yet it’s not had a negative impact on the performances. So many teams are seriously weakened by key absentees, but not only do City have a deep squad with plenty of quality, everybody is pulling in the same direction.

 

No off-days allowed despite impressive run
And that direction is up. But despite their incredible record, they’re not pulling away. It looks like whoever finishes third and ends up in the lottery of the play-offs will be the strongest side in Championship history not to win automatic promotion. On paper, Leeds and Ipswich had far tougher games than City did this weekend and they both came through them with three points.

For City, it should mean complacency never sets in. When the teams just behind them are winning every week, there’s no room to have an off-day. Maresca will be hammering that message home.

 

[jmono84]

On 07/12/2023 at 11:37, lcfcsnow said:

FAO Enzo

Match stats

	TEAM STATS
22	Shots	2
7	Shots on target	2
46%	Possession	54%
436	Passes	520

 

I guess they didn't find the right time to attack. 

I never seen this match but this is crazy from Villa. Gotta be up there as one as the worst performances by Man C.

[brucey]

 

 

[Nod.E]

On 09/12/2023 at 23:43, cityfanlee23 said:

When I say willingness to actually counter teams I should have said "willingness to see counter teams quickly" we have blown multiple counter attack chances in pretty much every game this season, as well as our obvious issues with wastefulness. As I said previously I think the forum is split into 2 groups at the moment. Some argue that teams sitting deep is what causes us to pass it around so much, but the other side (me included) argue that our often slow-paced passing is the reason teams sit back so much because they are happy for us to pass it sideways and backward for 60 passes and allow them to sit in a deep block knowing we struggle to attack it. 

One side thinks the often ultra high possession is a symptom of the deep block, the other thinks the deep block is a symptom of the possession. Leeds and Southampton's attacks are just as good as ours and they don't seem to run into this issue nearly as much as we do, so it's probably a mix of the two, some teams want to set up to be hard to beat, but we make that much easier given how much of the ball we hold and how we often slow play right down when we have it. I appreciate why we do it, it's just about tempo imo. 

If a team wants to sit back, all it has to do is stand still in a deep position. Choosing to counter or passing quickly doesn't change that.

 

You mentioned before that it's a chicken and egg situation but to honest I think it's pretty clear the chicken came first, and you have egg on your face. 

 

Sorry chap.

Edited 12 December 2023 by Nod.E

[Dan LCFC]

Said for a while I think if any team was going to get a hammering from us it would be Plymouth. They just attack regardless of their lack of quality. The one side who seem to genuinely stick to this in any situation. They were probably unlucky to be behind at half time but imploded afterwards. Enjoyable game.

[Chelmofox]

1 hour ago, Dan LCFC said:

Said for a while I think if any team was going to get a hammering from us it would be Plymouth. They just attack regardless of their lack of quality. The one side who seem to genuinely stick to this in any situation. They were probably unlucky to be behind at half time but imploded afterwards. Enjoyable game.

We missed two sitters and should have been 3 up at half time. They weren’t unlucky to be behind. 

[cityfanlee23]

12 hours ago, Nod.E said:

If a team wants to sit back, all it has to do is stand still in a deep position. Choosing to counter or passing quickly doesn't change that.

 

You mentioned before that it's a chicken and egg situation but to honest I think it's pretty clear the chicken came first, and you have egg on your face. 

 

Sorry chap.

Yet it only really happens consistently to us, teams with equal if not better attacks overall like Leeds don’t have this issue nearly as much. There are 5-6 other teams that within our goals tally that don’t run into this issue, we are the only one of them who on a consistent basis run into the low block. 
 

The evidence seems to suggest we do a great job at inviting the low block. There’s no inherent reason why teams only decide to sit in their own area against us with zero threat to their box, but not against teams with equal attacks or atleast equal goals scored/more offensive than us.
 

Edited 12 December 2023 by cityfanlee23

[Nod.E]

8 hours ago, cityfanlee23 said:

Yet it only really happens consistently to us, teams with equal if not better attacks overall like Leeds don’t have this issue nearly as much. There are 5-6 other teams that within our goals tally that don’t run into this issue, we are the only one of them who on a consistent basis run into the low block. 
 

The evidence seems to suggest we do a great job at inviting the low block. There’s no inherent reason why teams only decide to sit in their own area against us with zero threat to their box, but not against teams with equal attacks or atleast equal goals scored/more offensive than us.
 

We have scored more goals than Leeds. What's with the obsession? 

 

Perhaps teams give us more respect and sit in because they think we're the best team they'll face. Or that we'd have too much for them if they opened up. We have very fast wingers and quality strikers. Point stands, if teams want to sit in, regardless of their ability or that of their opponents, they can do to their heart's content. It requires no manoeuvring from the defensive side to persistently sit in. I don't know how I can make it any more obvious to you than to say 'sitting in' could be successfully achieved by standing still for 90 minutes. That could be achieved whether we choose to play slow, fast, wide, narrow etc etc. it is literally a case of setting two banks of four close to your box. I could get a team of 10 year olds to do that to any team.

 

Whether the tactic would be successful is another matter, but that's not what we're debating.

 

'Inviting the low block' is the most of nonsensical thing I've read on here from a tactical POV.

Edited 12 December 2023 by Nod.E
Predictive text fvkcing me over as per usual

[Nod.E]

The famous Leeds attack has scored 4 goals in its last 5 away games.

 

Bleat, bleat, bleat.

 

David Bleat.