Andy

We are so open, the defending is actually schoolboy stuff. We've spent the entire season saying "it'll be better when Longstaff is back, it'll be better when Willock is back, it'll be better when Joelinton is back, it'll be better when Botman is back, it'll be better when Pope is back (probably more truth to this one than the others)", but there is an underlying structural issue there, we are not playing as a unit, we look like a bunch of individuals which has been the main difference this season, pretty much all season - especially away from home. We are incoherent going forward and even more incoherent going backwards. We're relying on luck in defence, and "a bit of magic" up front; a dangerous combo. No idea what the solution is but we are a shadow of last season's "team".

It's a weird one with Neto. Whenever I watch him I feel like he could legitimately be one of the best players in europe if he could stay fit. His injury record is probably the only reason we'd have a realistic chance of signing him without being in the CL next year, but it's also obviously something we've been burned badly by this season. I'd still be tempted to take a punt tbh.

I'm not sure it is. If you've got Alan Shearer or Ronaldo up front you can probably win games consistently with less than 2xG. If your forwards are shit, you can probably fail to win games consistently with more than 2xG. I'm not sure if the model has changed in recent years, but it used to be the case that 1xG for Messi would be the same as 1xG for Almiron, this is obviously a big flaw.

Its overuse is my biggest problem with it. In isolation it's a decent stat, like shots, possession etc, but it often becomes a lazy way of analysing a game. It's also generally misused. Particularly hate the phrase "they're over-performing their xG" as if it's a negative trait, when an alternative way of phrasing that would be "they have signed players that are clinical in front of goal" (and the opposite for "underperforming xG"). It's a decent way of identifying how creative a team is, but fails to reflect some of the most important aspects of the game (errors from the opponents, wonder goals, individual quality etc).

I reckon even Luuk De Jong circa 2013 scores it 9 times out of 10.

It's probably done his confidence the world of good seeing how much the midfield has missed him tbh, was playing today like he believed he was the missing piece

Pace combined with elite torso deception. Unstoppable combo.

Makes a huge difference having someone in midfield who can drive with the ball. Really missed his athleticism.

Eh? He's a premier league winger who's started consistently for Leicester since 2019, he's not an unknown quantity. Everyone knows what kind of player he is.

Do you want to take my words any more out of context? I said if you take away the element of the game that we signed him for - pure end product - he doesn't offer much else and can look poor. My point (which I've clarified for you and you are still completely missing) is that the people who are being critical of him as a player need to understand that when he is off form in front of goal he WILL look like a poor player. We have signed him for that clinical edge in the final third that we were missing at times last season. I don't think it's that hard to grasp tbh, but hit me up if you need me to rephrase it for the 4th time.

One goal doesn't change the fact that in recent weeks he's missed some pretty good chances in general like, including in open play and from the spot yesterday. I'm sure he'd admit himself that he's not on his best form, considering at Leicester he had a reputation for being clinical for a winger. You've either deliberately or inadvertently mistook my comment as criticism for him as a player, when in fact I'm saying his bar for end product is usually extremely high. We bought him for that reason alone. I literally compared him to a wide version of Inzaghi, which is hardly a criticism. His game is almost entirely based around his movement and finishing, so when that is missing and his confidence in front of goal is low, which it certainly looked yesterday, he looks like a poor player as he doesn't offer a great deal else.

If that's in response to my post, is it incorrect? He's a pure output player, he doesn't offer much else. If he's off form, he'll look terrible and receive criticism as we've seen today. If he's on form, he'll win games for you.

Hasn't been as clinical as you'd expect in the last few matches, and that is basically his entire game and why we signed him. If he isn't clinical, he's borderline useless, as brutal as it sounds. He's the wing equivalent of an Inzaghi.

We need to find a way to fit him into the team regularly without dropping Trippier. He is clearly one of our best footballers.

We have absolutely no "x factor" at the minute, just look like a bunch of plodders. I really miss ASM's unpredictability at times, especially during games like this where the opposition are getting back into shape quickly. Much as I like Gordon he's really predictable most of the time.

Only problem I have with Bruno in that role is his lack of positional discipline. He's literally everywhere, which isn't always what you want from a "6" and contributes to (but isn't the only cause of) the huge gaps we have between the lines IMO. Last season we had Willock and Joelinton bombing about everywhere to plug the gaps, and we had a generally higher defensive line, which made it less noticeable than it has been this season.

Where has this gone this season? No yellow cards against Arsenal at the weekend, only six fouls against us in the entire match. Last season we would have broken the play up with niggly fouls, wasted time early on... it feels like that cynical element has gone missing from our game. I'm sure this is mainly personell based (and because Bruno is on 9 yellows), but I do think it's been the case all season that we've generally been "nicer" - Villa (a) and Arsenal (h) spring to mind as the only real exceptions. Last season we were uncomfortable to play against, annoying, got under teams' skins. It became a big part of our "us against the world" identity. Surely it isn't all just down to Joelinton's absence?

I wondered if you're both talking about different games? Milan away was definitely backs to wall and was indicative early on of what our away performances would generally look like this season. Milan at home we definitely had a go, arguably naively so at times.

He's a player that relies solely on his engine. Unfortunately he's clearly knackered at the moment, so he has very little left to offer apart from the occasional late arrival into the box. On the ball and off it, he's always two yards slower than everyone else. Watching him is like when you haven't played five a side for ages and you have to readjust to basic things like controlling the ball, and you take two extra touches before passing, except that's Longstaff every week, scaled up to PL level.

Agree with this, at least as far as FFP allows us. There needs to be no sentiment this summer. There are a lot of players kicking around who have "done a job" but are either past their past (Wilson, Ritchie, Dummett), or are younger but were never really all that consistently good to begin with and have reverted to type (Longstaff, Targett, Almiron, Murphy, maybe even Lascelles I'd include here too). Maybe keep one or two around as squad players, but we shouldn't be seeing these players starting games next season unless it is dire circumstances.

The point re: Burn was in reference to the posts above praising him for the clearance. There's a weird situation formed where you're unable to criticise Burn without it being framed as a pile-on. He's been one of our poorer players recently, it's acceptable to call him out on errors and he did make another one yesterday in the build up to that incident. He also did well for the goal yesterday, as I pointed out, which you decided to omit from your quote. His general performance when coming on was as mixed as every other player, and definitely not enough to make me feel all that differently about the left back situation. Edit: also, RE the first goal, Livramento did try to clear it? Botman's leg rises after his initial whiffed clearance and his knee blocks the ball. It's 100% Sven's error.

I'd have Livramento down as being responsible for Saka's goal (arguably should still have been blocked like and came from Botman's poor error initially), which other one would you say he was to blame for? The first OG was definitely Botman's error, completely missed his initial clearance. Second goal is Botman/Trippier not being switched on. Fourth is Miley turning his back on the cross and poor reactions from Karius.

Did well for the goal, but was the cause of the one he cleared off the line with a very poor bit of play in the lead up to it, so I'd be hesitant to give him credit for that particular incident. I thought Tino was okay last night, should've done better for Saka's goal, but I thought our other three defenders were worse than him both on the ball and off it. I'd prefer to see Livramento start going forward as I think he can offer more in general, especially against weaker teams where we have more control and need to offer a more dynamic threat going forward. One assist doesn't really change the fact that Burn has often been very limited going the other way, that cross last night was an anomaly.

@Nobody in the mud

First half was minging. Second was at least not an embarrassment. Until we have Pope back and midfield reinforcements, it's difficult to be too harsh, but the lack of appetite in the first half was annoying, it was like we were surprised that Lego Head had them fired up after what happened at SJP.