Analysis from the weekend

[Skip 3]

https://totalfootballanalysis.com/match-analysis/epl-2019-20-leicester-city-vs-norwich-city-tactical-analysis-tactics?fbclid=IwAR10-mgLJacMfq8ArBsnFenthVBxXpHAw_s-iLI9bEBP3P1mr5qfJKgvVkE

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mutley 73]

This is excellent analysis - thanks for posting 

 

[ron obvious 1,501]

3 hours ago, Skip said:

https://totalfootballanalysis.com/match-analysis/epl-2019-20-leicester-city-vs-norwich-city-tactical-analysis-tactics?fbclid=IwAR10-mgLJacMfq8ArBsnFenthVBxXpHAw_s-iLI9bEBP3P1mr5qfJKgvVkE

 

 

 

 

 

 

Brilliant, totally absorbing Many thanks.

[Il Pirata 249]

A good read and confirmed my belief that Buendia was the best attacking player on the pitch. At times he was unplayable and hurt Leicester with ease. That's the second best team in England by the way. Well played Emi!

 

[Badger 2,405]

Thanks Skip - very interesting. 👍

[ZLF 271]

2 hours ago, Il Pirata said:

A good read and confirmed my belief that Buendia was the best attacking player on the pitch. At times he was unplayable and hurt Leicester with ease. That's the second best team in England by the way. Well played Emi!

 

How can the analysis ignore his attitude?? Drop him

[GenerationA47 750]

Very good, thanks for posting. When DF gets his tactics right, he gets it very right

[Petriix 2,834]

An interesting analysis. It would benefit from an editor's input to some of the sentence structure and phrasing, but the essence is fairly sound.

I'm quite a fan of the diamond formation, perhaps through nostalgia for our rise under Lambert. However, as the article highlights, Leicester had far too much space between their midfield four. What ultimately led to our goal was that their single defensive midfielder got ahead of our entire attacking unit leaving us 4 vs 4 with the Leicester defence. With no protection and no pressure on the ball, Buendia had all the time in the world to pick his pass. Those balls are far harder to execute when someone is closing you down.

It was almost as if Leicester were trying to play with wingers, a no 10 and two strikers. The diamond relies on having a narrow midfield while using the fullbacks to generate the width. I believe they were setup with far too much emphasis in attack and naively assumed they would tear us apart. Teams have much more success against us by sitting back, pressing our midfield and waiting for us to give the ball away before hitting us on the break.

[ron obvious 1,501]

I wonder why this pattern (generally) of performing better against higher placed clubs has emerged? I think there are 2 main possibilities:

1) Lower skill teams (e.g. Burnley) press us higher & more aggressively than ManC type teams. There is little room for our defenders to manoeuvre & find someone to play it out to. We don't want to take a risk (clever turn, pass or dribble) since we have a chance of winning the game, so it's safety first. Our only option then becomes the hoof, & we haven't got the players for that. So it keeps going back to the goalie, back & forth, until we make a mistake & they score.

3) The press from the top teams is no different, but we take risks to play our way out - we've nothing to lose since we're going to get beat anyway. We realise we have the ability to perform, there is nothing to fear & we have a great game.

There are obviously many other factors to consider, but I suspect the psychology of not wanting to throw it away against lesser teams vs. nothing-to-lose-so-go-for-it attitude against top teams goes some way to explaining our performances.

If we can hold our nerve against ALL opposition & play without fear (& the defence doesn't get totally crocked again) then we're in with a shout.

 

[Ian 1,129]

5 minutes ago, ron obvious said:

I wonder why this pattern (generally) of performing better against higher placed clubs has emerged? I think there are 2 main possibilities:

1) Lower skill teams (e.g. Burnley) press us higher & more aggressively than ManC type teams. There is little room for our defenders to manoeuvre & find someone to play it out to. We don't want to take a risk (clever turn, pass or dribble) since we have a chance of winning the game, so it's safety first. Our only option then becomes the hoof, & we haven't got the players for that. So it keeps going back to the goalie, back & forth, until we make a mistake & they score.

3) The press from the top teams is no different, but we take risks to play our way out - we've nothing to lose since we're going to get beat anyway. We realise we have the ability to perform, there is nothing to fear & we have a great game.

There are obviously many other factors to consider, but I suspect the psychology of not wanting to throw it away against lesser teams vs. nothing-to-lose-so-go-for-it attitude against top teams goes some way to explaining our performances.

If we can hold our nerve against ALL opposition & play without fear (& the defence doesn't get totally crocked again) then we're in with a shout.

 

I think it is a combination of there being less pressure on the team when playing the better sides (whatever people say we have a relatively young and inexperienced squad at this level), and that we are also physically not a big side. Teams that rely on that physicality tend to simply out muscle us, which was even more obvious when we didn't have Zimbo and Tettey in the side.

[cornish sam 948]

51 minutes ago, Ian said:

I think it is a combination of there being less pressure on the team when playing the better sides (whatever people say we have a relatively young and inexperienced squad at this level), and that we are also physically not a big side. Teams that rely on that physicality tend to simply out muscle us, which was even more obvious when we didn't have Zimbo and Tettey in the side.

I think the biggest difference is that the top teams play their way and assume that we will change to counteract them, whereas the teams we struggle against set themselves up to thwart us (if that makes sense).

Edited December 17, 2019 by cornish sam