Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Quite a lot of clubs have gone for a physical approach to their football, some clubs - like Watford - have mostly six foot plus players and it's been said we are not physical enough.  We can - at our best - do well against physical teams, but we have not been at our best all season, which we needed to be. Even last season, physical teams could bully us - Reading and Wigan for instance - but we were firing on all cylinders last season and played better football to negate that (and we had enough fit cb's).

Maybe it's only a question of balance - in last night's team, only two outfield players were over 6 foot - Klose and Vrancic, several are 1.72/1.78 (5'6"- 5'8"), whereas Watford players - most of them six foot one or more, a clear physical advantage - and a lot of lower placed teams are similar in stature.  

So teams can physically dominate us......but on the other hand, we have farkeball, which at it's best is brilliant to watch. So do we want a team of 6'2" plus players that physically dominate - or do we want a team that plays beautiful football?   Looking at Liverpool's squad, they have quite a few players who are 6' or under in their squad and they don't do so bad.............

I know what I want - play the beautiful game, a combination of skill, artistry and great athleticism. So many clubs are going down the physical route, but as Liverpool have shown, you don't need to dominate matches purely relying on physicality - you do it by playing better football - which is what Farkeball is all about too. 

Edited by lake district canary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very solid defence, lethal on the counter attack would be the perfect combination 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why can't we have a team of physically strong and powerful players that can also play a decent pass? Great City squads I've seen had a good mix of skillful, technical players and strong, uncompromising players around them who could defend and physically restrict the opposition. Farkeball, which relies too heavily on an entire team of skillful players who in our case are smaller and less physical, may be great to watch but has seen us crucified at EPL level.

What we need is a team full of Kevin De Bruyne's, strong, fast and technically brilliant. But these players are highly sought-after and expensive, so we need to compromise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Liverpool play a mix of styles. They are actually very direct and often totally bypass midfield with long raking passes to Robertson and Alexander-Arnold. We currently don't have that variation unless we play Vrancic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

Looking at Liverpool's squad, they have quite a few players who are 6' or under in their squad and they don't do so bad.............

I know what I want - play the beautiful game, a combination of skill, artistry and great athleticism. So many clubs are going down the physical route, but as Liverpool have shown, you don't need to dominate matches purely relying on physicality - you do it by playing better football - which is what Farkeball is all about too. 

Yes I think we all want this but it helps if you have world class players to make it work.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think to compare us to Liverpool or ManC is wrong. We will never be at that level.

I think many supporters who see us as a semi permanent EPL team are now saying to achieve this we have to recruit differently. In other words, Farke ball will not survive the EPL.

Once again we are debating what we want from our club. And I don't think many will have changed heir minds.

In its current format, I despise the EPL. The coaches, the owners and the players are insincere chancers.

And there are a few like that in the Championship. 

I do not want to see us getting beat up game after game. But I also don't want hoofball.

Its a dilemma.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's about having the right size players in the right positions.

The keeper needs to be commanding and tall, the ideal centre half pairing is 2 that are good in the air, comfortable with the ball at their feet and have some pace, ours are certainly lacking in the air generally and struggle on the deck for the standard we are currently playing, although they were comfortable in the championship.

In midfield you need a big ball winner and up top we need a big centre forward to win headers and also to get on the end of crosses.

Not every player in the starting 11 needs to be big, just enough in the right positions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, cambridgeshire canary said:

To be a boring yet stable midtable Premier Leauge side.

 

Is it too much to ask?

For me, Yes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We definitely need some more physical players in the middle of the field. So many times this season we lose the ball in the midfield. We cannot compete in a 50/50 aerial challenge. Obviously a strong CDM is vital to bring in (or make this Godfrey's position). 

We also should stop calling it Farkeball and start calling it Predictiball. We are so one dimensional it pains me every game. To compete in the PL we need multiple strategies and a more dynamic team. This year we have been unbalanced and need to recruit some extra avenues. And a couple of experienced players to guide the team. (a decent experienced CB that's 6'+ would be a great addition that could coach the defence on how to defend). 

I would just like us to get these changes done quickly and start to prepare for the Champs. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Uncle Fred said:

Very solid defence, lethal on the counter attack would be the perfect combination 

More pace required to counterattack well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WD40 said:

More pace required to counterattack well

I don't think our attacking player need more pace, they just need to play the ball quicker and more decisively on the counter attack 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would prefer 3 centre backs with just 1 defensive midfielder. 

Wing backs would give us more options in midfield. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

I think to compare us to Liverpool or ManC is wrong. We will never be at that level.

I disagree. The ultimate beautiful game is what I want our club to aim for - and under Farke, that has been the ambition.  Liverpool and Man City are the shining examples and they should be the benchmark.  Why should we not aim for the top?

A lot of sport has gone down the route of more physical being better......tennis now has basketball sized players, football is heading that way too - but does that make it better?  Not imo - and as I said, Liverpool who have been by far the best footballing team have several key players well under 6 foot. 

Aim for PL mid-table mediocrity and that is what you will get - physically strong, no nonsense football, but never really having the chance of getting anywhere near the top. Leicester managed to get to the top - by playing brilliant football, not by physical domination.  That is what I want - the kind of football that Stringer/Willams/Walker played to get us to the top of the PL in 92/93 - and the kind of football we saw with us last season and in spells, this season. 

Aim for the top.

Edited by lake district canary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

I disagree. The ultimate beautiful game is what I want our club to aim for - and under Farke, that has been the ambition.  Liverpool and Man City are the shining examples and they should be the benchmark.  Why should we not aim for the top?

A lot of sport has gone down the route of more physical being better......tennis now has basketball sized players, football is heading that way too - but does that make it better?  Not imo - and as I said, Liverpool who have been by far the best footballing team have several key players well under 6 foot. 

Aim for PL mid-table mediocrity and that is what you will get - physically strong, no nonsense football, but never really having the chance of getting anywhere near the top. Leicester managed to get to the top - by playing brilliant football, not by physical domination.  That is what I want - the kind of football that Stringer/Willams/Walker played to get us to the top of the PL in 92/93 - and the kind of football we saw with us last season and in spells, this season. 

Aim for the top.

Sorry Lakey, Leicester's football was not 'brilliant' in the way you're implying. The only way they managed to pull off that remarkable title victory was sitting extremely deep and hitting long channel balls to Vardy and Mahrez, with the most remarkable DM in Kanté to cover more ground and make more tackles/interceptions than any other player in PL history.

Don't get me wrong, if we had won the PL in similar circumstances it would have been the most incredible and wonderful experience, but the style of football that won them the title is a million miles away from the kind of football that Man City/Liverpool play (and, indeed, the kind of football that we are trying to play).

That 5,000-1 title victory happened precisely by negating the kind of football you admire, rather than embracing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need some height and muscle to help the small skillful players. Unfortunately we are not Barcelona.

wes was great with Holt and vice versa. A team full of Wes’ would be terrible. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Sorry Lakey, Leicester's football was not 'brilliant' in the way you're implying. The only way they managed to pull off that remarkable title victory was sitting extremely deep and hitting long channel balls to Vardy and Mahrez, with the most remarkable DM in Kanté to cover more ground and make more tackles/interceptions than any other player in PL history.

Don't get me wrong, if we had won the PL in similar circumstances it would have been the most incredible and wonderful experience, but the style of football that won them the title is a million miles away from the kind of football that Man City/Liverpool play (and, indeed, the kind of football that we are trying to play).

That 5,000-1 title victory happened precisely by negating the kind of football you admire, rather than embracing it.

No time for Leicester City but I don’t think the way they won the league by 10 points was that simplistic. They played some great football at times and could mix it up with the best. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a team like us should try and play the way Leicester played. quick on the counter attack to punish teams when we win possession.

Need a good DM and more pace in midfield to achieve that. Duda and Rupp the exact opposite to what we'd need to sign to pull that off.

Shame as it would suit Pukki to play the Vardy role trying to beat the offside trap, instead of having to drop deep or drift wide all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't compare us to Liverpool or Man City because they can spend £50m+ on the best 'Farkeball' players in the world. Within our budget, the best 'Farkeball' players we can afford are nowhere near the level of De Bruyne, Silva, Salah etc.

Can we sign big, physical players who can also play 'Farkeball' to a high level? I don't think so, because these players are out of our price range and will be signed by bigger clubs.

We need to find a balance. We'd all love to see a team of 'Farkeballers' who can do it well, but unfortunately we can't quite assemble a team entirely made up of 'Farkeball' players within our budget that can compete on a regular basis with the bigger clubs. We can pick up the odd result here and there, but ultimately we'll come up short. 

The best option is to build a mostly 'Farkeball' squad with a couple of physical units to do the dirty work, which gives the 'Farkeball' the platform to play on and not get bullied like poor Jamal Lewis against Watford.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Midlands Yellow said:

No time for Leicester City but I don’t think the way they won the league by 10 points was that simplistic. They played some great football at times and could mix it up with the best. 

Sure, there was more to it than that Midlands. I've just finished reading 'The Mixer' by Michael Cox, a brilliant analysis of the history of PL tactics, and there's an entire chapter on Leicester's title success. The main plan, though, was to totally concede possession (most 'top' sides played possession football with a high press when out of possession), and hit with lightning speed on the counter. In that season, Leicester had the third-lowest average possession in the entire league (behind only Pulis's West Brom and Allardyce's Sunderland). It was exhilarating to watch precisely because they were upsetting the accepted wisdom of how 'top' clubs should play, but it certainly wasn't in any way comparable to the kind of football that Lakey (and Farke, and me, for the record!) is advocating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

I disagree. The ultimate beautiful game is what I want our club to aim for - and under Farke, that has been the ambition.  Liverpool and Man City are the shining examples and they should be the benchmark.  Why should we not aim for the top?

A lot of sport has gone down the route of more physical being better......tennis now has basketball sized players, football is heading that way too - but does that make it better?  Not imo - and as I said, Liverpool who have been by far the best footballing team have several key players well under 6 foot. 

Aim for PL mid-table mediocrity and that is what you will get - physically strong, no nonsense football, but never really having the chance of getting anywhere near the top. Leicester managed to get to the top - by playing brilliant football, not by physical domination.  That is what I want - the kind of football that Stringer/Willams/Walker played to get us to the top of the PL in 92/93 - and the kind of football we saw with us last season and in spells, this season. 

Aim for the top.

Would “mid table PL mediocrity” be worse than this? Strange 

ps stringer etc. was the chase years. Terrible times 😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Sure, there was more to it than that Midlands. I've just finished reading 'The Mixer' by Michael Cox, a brilliant analysis of the history of PL tactics, and there's an entire chapter on Leicester's title success. The main plan, though, was to totally concede possession (most 'top' sides played possession football with a high press when out of possession), and hit with lightning speed on the counter. In that season, Leicester had the third-lowest average possession in the entire league (behind only Pulis's West Brom and Allardyce's Sunderland). It was exhilarating to watch precisely because they were upsetting the accepted wisdom of how 'top' clubs should play, but it certainly wasn't in any way comparable to the kind of football that Lakey (and Farke, and me, for the record!) is advocating.

Who do they give the most credit to for the achievement? Their form in the latter part of the previous season was carried over in the title winning one. A lot round here believe Pearson should take a lot of credit for what happened next. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Midlands Yellow said:

Who do they give the most credit to for the achievement? Their form in the latter part of the previous season was carried over in the title winning one. A lot round here believe Pearson should take a lot of credit for what happened next. 

Pearson is actually a good manager.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Who do they give the most credit to for the achievement? Their form in the latter part of the previous season was carried over in the title winning one. A lot round here believe Pearson should take a lot of credit for what happened next. 

Ranieri gets the most credit for the changes he made to Pearson's existing system, but Pearson gets some credit too. They also point out the importance of Ranieri retaining Pearson's assistants, Steve Walsh and Craig Shakespeare.

However, their form at the end of the previous season (seven wins in nine) came after Pearson switched to a back three, whereas obviously Raineri switched back to a deep 4-4-2. There are also similarities drawn between Leicester and Diego Simeone's Atletico Madrid, who used similar tactics the previous year to win La Liga at odds of 100/1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Ranieri gets the most credit for the changes he made to Pearson's existing system, but Pearson gets some credit too. They also point out the importance of Ranieri retaining Pearson's assistants, Steve Walsh and Craig Shakespeare.

However, their form at the end of the previous season (seven wins in nine) came after Pearson switched to a back three, whereas obviously Raineri switched back to a deep 4-4-2. There are also similarities drawn between Leicester and Diego Simeone's Atletico Madrid, who used similar tactics the previous year to win La Liga at odds of 100/1.

A good comparison with Athletico. I guess the owners were given credit too, during and since that title win (had to get that one in 😀)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Midlands Yellow said:

A good comparison with Athletico. I guess the owners were given credit too, during and since that title win (had to get that one in 😀)

Absolutely - I don't think anyone is denying that Khun Vichai's legacy has been brilliant for the team, the club and the city. It's a brilliant example of how external investment can work beautifully. At the King Power this season one of the Leicester fans gave me one of his mince pies (the owners had bought them for every fan as it was their last home game before Christmas).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Feedthewolf said:

Absolutely - I don't think anyone is denying that Khun Vichai's legacy has been brilliant for the team, the club and the city. It's a brilliant example of how external investment can work beautifully. At the King Power this season one of the Leicester fans gave me one of his mince pies (the owners had bought them for every fan as it was their last home game before Christmas).

That’s the norm there. Free bacon rolls for fans on supporters coaches going to away matches. T shirts and hats under your seat and always a free pint at the end of the season. My brother in law has a box at the KingPower but I always politely decline when offered a seat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Sure, there was more to it than that Midlands. I've just finished reading 'The Mixer' by Michael Cox, a brilliant analysis of the history of PL tactics, and there's an entire chapter on Leicester's title success. The main plan, though, was to totally concede possession (most 'top' sides played possession football with a high press when out of possession), and hit with lightning speed on the counter. In that season, Leicester had the third-lowest average possession in the entire league (behind only Pulis's West Brom and Allardyce's Sunderland). It was exhilarating to watch precisely because they were upsetting the accepted wisdom of how 'top' clubs should play, but it certainly wasn't in any way comparable to the kind of football that Lakey (and Farke, and me, for the record!) is advocating.

I don’t know what I want, but that is most definitely what I do not want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...