The College Dropout Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 This Leicester side is defensively better. Certainly than SBR's side which was soft down the middle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 This Leicester side is defensively better. Certainly than SBR's side which was soft down the middle. You keep saying this bollocks but we had Woodgate, Speed and Shearer through the spine. Soft? Nah. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufc4eva Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 This Leicester side is defensively better. Certainly than SBR's side which was soft down the middle. Their defence is no nonsense, makes a big difference having aggressive, strong centre halves that want to win the ball. Huth and Morgan both dominate in air while we have weak and soft defenders with no idea how to clear their lines or win it back and yet our defence will have cost a lot more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallsendmag Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 This Leicester side is defensively better. Certainly than SBR's side which was soft down the middle. You keep saying this bollocks but we had Woodgate, Speed and Shearer through the spine. Soft? Nah. They are defensively better though. The amount of clean sheets and 1-0 wins they've racked up is what will win them the title. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 This Leicester side is defensively better. Certainly than SBR's side which was soft down the middle. You keep saying this bollocks but we had Woodgate, Speed and Shearer through the spine. Soft? Nah. Correct but invariably we played 2 out of Dabizas, O'Brien and Bramble Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 This Leicester side is defensively better. Certainly than SBR's side which was soft down the middle. You keep saying this bollocks but we had Woodgate, Speed and Shearer through the spine. Soft? Nah. Correct but invariably we played 2 out of Dabizas, O'Brien and Bramble You wouldn't call OB soft either, nor Nick the Greek tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 This Leicester side is defensively better. Certainly than SBR's side which was soft down the middle. You keep saying this bollocks but we had Woodgate, Speed and Shearer through the spine. Soft? Nah. Correct but invariably we played 2 out of Dabizas, O'Brien and Bramble You wouldn't call OB soft either, nor Nick the Greek tbh. Woodgate rarely played. Gary Speed was such a tactically smart footballer but a central midfield of himself and Dyer didn't give the defence tremendous amount of protection. Our CB's weren't the best and would get exposed. We were also wedded to a more expansive game. Leicester have had 14 clean sheets already. If they win the league they will probably get 16-17. Another issue was a lot of our best players down the spine were injury prone. Woodgate, Dyer & Bellamy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Crooks Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 The difference is Leicester are absolutely no nonsense beasts as the back with a well balanced and creative midfield in front, with an absolute viper leading the line. Such a great balance of talent, explosive power and physicality. We have done talented players occupying 20% of the positions available, the rest are just mediocre or shit. There's no comparison to be made beyond that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozy Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 He's comparing the Leicester side of today with our 2003 ish side under SBR. Different era's and styles aside, I think this Leicester team would have finished hgiher in the league than that 2003 team. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 Leicester do play really good football as well. Yes they are set up defensively but they pass the ball really well with quick one twos. They never seem to lose the ball under pressure like we do. I said in another thread that they remind me a bit of Liverpool under Rafa. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanji Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 Regarding 2001-2002 team...Had Bellamy and Dyer stayed fit that season we probably would have been higher up the table come year-end but let's be honest with ourselves here, we beat Arsenal at Highbury and went top of the table, and they turn that around with never losing again that season and out of 20 matches, won something like all but 2 or 3. Looking a the 2002-2003 team...same difference, injuries destroyed us but when we had a bit of steam and momentum (just beat Chelsea at home) we followed it up by losing to Boro and then going on a 3 match loss streak to Everton, Fulham and Man Utd 6-2 at home. Leicester's been fucking so lucky with injuries this year and the Arsenal and Man Utd and Newcastle of those years would have beaten this Leicester side IMO. Those CBs of Leceister would have not have been able to handle Henry, Shearer or Van Nistelrooy IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 It's mighty impressive the way Leicester have changed their game. They couldn't stop scoring until Christmas, and they'd usually concede too. The amount of goals in their games was as high as anyone in Europe's major leagues for a long while. Then when they've needed to, when it became apparent that they might actually do it, they've been able to turn into a formidable defensive unit and start winning narrowly to nil every single week. We tried to do the same in '96 late on but messed it up at Blackburn and Forest. They've been doing this for months now with barely a hitch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 It's mighty impressive the way Leicester have changed their game. They couldn't stop scoring until Christmas, and they'd usually concede too. The amount of goals in their games was as high as anyone in Europe's major leagues for a long while. Then when they've needed to, when it became apparent that they might actually do it, they've been able to turn into a formidable defensive unit and start winning narrowly to nil every single week. We tried to do the same in '96 late on but messed it up at Blackburn and Forest. They've been doing this for months now with barely a hitch. The two ways they beat us were chalk and cheese. Blitzed us at home with waves of attacking and did the bare minimum at the KP. They're the archetypal old style Italian team now. Get 1 up, defend well and pick off without risking the lead as the game becomes stretched. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 Even more laughable that people try to credit Nigel Pearson with their charge for the title. He deserves some credit for getting these players but it's ludicrous to think he could have got them playing the slick stuff they are playing now. They've got better and better as the season has gone on and that's got to be down to the coaching. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 Even more laughable that people try to credit Nigel Pearson with their charge for the title. He deserves some credit for getting these players but it's ludicrous to think he could have got them playing the slick stuff they are playing now. They've got better and better as the season has gone on and that's got to be down to the coaching. I spoke to a fair few Leicester fans last week down there and nearly all of them claimed he laid the foundations though. He didn't have much part in this season but I think he instilled the right attitude and discipline in them from what I can tell. Ranieri has simply worked wonders since though. Proven that he's still a top manager. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hakka Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 It's mighty impressive the way Leicester have changed their game. They couldn't stop scoring until Christmas, and they'd usually concede too. The amount of goals in their games was as high as anyone in Europe's major leagues for a long while. Then when they've needed to, when it became apparent that they might actually do it, they've been able to turn into a formidable defensive unit and start winning narrowly to nil every single week. We tried to do the same in '96 late on but messed it up at Blackburn and Forest. They've been doing this for months now with barely a hitch. Very well put. And they've also done it with the added pressure of leaving it late in some games, and also bringing on subs who have rescued the points too. It's a fantastic display of tactics, organisation and man management to achieve what they have done. I can't see them faltering now either. They are in a rhythm and they will see it through. The mad thing is that next season I wouldn't be surprised if they lost all the momentum and struggled. Mostly because they have to juggle Champions League games and I'm certain they will lose Kante, Mahrez etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Impossibly Daft Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 Even more laughable that people try to credit Nigel Pearson with their charge for the title. He deserves some credit for getting these players but it's ludicrous to think he could have got them playing the slick stuff they are playing now. They've got better and better as the season has gone on and that's got to be down to the coaching. The run in at the end of last season was some really good stuff too, though Ranieri's been the difference between being able to get results in a bunch of different ways. If Pearson had still been around, it'd have been the kind of season that teams like Southampton and so on have been doing; a brief run into the Top 4 then a slide down to about 6th-8th - not quite the lightning-in-a-bottle thing it's turned out to be, but none too shabby. All the behind-the-scenes stuff was put in place by Pearson & co as well - medical team, etc. He'd do a good job at something like turning Villa into an Everton. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 The owners deserve credit too. You end up with the shambles with us and Villa from the very top. Leicester owners have invested in the club without going the QPR route. They're no more wealthy than Ashley or Lerner but have a better attitude, focus and ability to run the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brummie Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 The owners deserve credit too. You end up with the shambles with us and Villa from the very top. Leicester owners have invested in the club without going the QPR route. They're no more wealthy than Ashley or Lerner but have a better attitude, focus and ability to run the club. The bit Leicester understand that you and us don't is that it's not just about throwing money at it, it's about getting maximum value from it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozy Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 And further to that, those who decide 'value' are experienced football people rather than glorified accountants or marketing students. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 Are they "experienced football people"? The CEO Susan Whelan was not in football prior to joining the club. The Thai ownership are the Chairmen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozy Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 That's my point, I doubt those people make the major decisions with who to sign or how much to pay. No doubt they sign it off but they listen to those who know and trust their judgement, be that Pearson, Ranieri or the scout who found Mahrez. Whereas everyone making those decisions at NUFC (and probably Villa too) has been fixated on signing every player based on one thing, sell on value. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 An MD/Chief Exec is going to decide who they sign and how much. Same for any company. They've been given the remit to make decisions that befit the club in terms of league position as a priority. Not sell-on fee or balance sheet. But in a sustainable manner. Even the likes of Sullivan and Parish - go shites who interfere with transfers above the manager still have the clubs best interests at heart. There's nobody at our club with real power who cares and is trying. IF we do stay up. It looks like Rafa might wield more power than any manager in the league save for Wenger. That is so exciting it's not worth thinking about. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Crooks Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 Ashley seems to of the belief that giving money to dickheads and stepping back like pontius Pilate is acceptable and absolves him. It's just as negligent as him being overbearing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astroblack Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 It's not rumored anywhere but would you give this guy an England call up? I would tbh. He seems to be a character and leader in the dressing room. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now