You got the heat maps for our 3-0 win away at Swansea? Or our 3-2 away win at Everton? Or our 2-1 away win at West Ham? Or our Bet they're all very similar.
You'd have to ask the BBC for them. You do play the same way against everyone though, so I suspect they'd be similar. Being effective isn't being exciting or attacking, though. Watching a side stick everyone behind the ball for 90 minutes and try to nick it on the break isn't for everyone. The league would be very dull if this was the standard tactic in the division, as the Italians found out to their detriment. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to see sides use different systems and switch things around to suit their squads. It makes it all more unpredictable and avoids the parades that are so often the case in La Liga, where the likes of Barca and Real batter teams every week. If you opened up and tried to play a more open game, then your results would suffer. Why would a manager do that?
I think you're doing us a disservice. We're certainly not dull and many people who have seen us play a decent number of games this season think we're the most entertaining side in the division. Slightly biased, but I think we might be too. Only Everton would come close in my eyes. I'm sorry, but I can't stand football games played in the centre circle. Give me the blood and thunder, end to end football that we play every single day of the week. Suggesting that we play like an Italian side and don't play an open game is incredibly wide of the mark.
Some opposition teams end up playing in the centre-circle against you because of the way that you set up. You stick everyone behind the ball and stay compact, forcing them to play in front of you and try to draw you out. There simply isn't any other option when a team does that.
Scored two goals. Obviously. You scored with your only real chance in the game and had to rely on the referee's incompetence to get an equaliser.
Some opposition teams play in the centre circle because they have seen footage of what happens to sides that attack us. We've scored 28 away goals this season, the majority of which were against sides that wanted to attack us. We simply pinch the ball back, go up the other end and score. I would argue that if anybody set up to attempt to frustrate the opponent, it was the team in white.
Yep. Dyer had no idea where the ball was and certainly never looked straight at it. please log in to view this image
And you'd be utterly, totally wrong. We were trying to frustrate you by attacking you all the time? What? How does that even work? What a bizarre view of the game.
Other than the 2 gifts from the Spurs defense, Leicester created very little and relied mainly on set pieces, as their players regularly fell over to win cheap free kicks. The second Leicester goal was a comedy of errors from Spurs, and a fortunate rebound shinned in off the post, on another day Leicester don`t get a free header at a corner and the rebound goes safe, Vorm had very little to do otherwise.
Did you attack though? Or did you have the posession nothing areas of the pitch. We set up games waiting for sides to attack us in numbers and it didn't happen. You "attacked" us with one or two players, keeping a back 3 (Rose did his best to inject some urgency into your play to be fair to him) and two holding midfielders on the halfway line. The Beeb kept plugging the match as "a great cup tie" when actually, there were few goal chances. We let you have the ball in the middle of the pitch and you didn't pose a threat whatsoever. Surely that must frustrate you considering the amount of goals we've shipped this season?
Not saying you aren't good to watch in some games. Just that against us this season it's all been very defensive. Same with Palace, they put on a good show against sides in the bottom half when they're more inclined to attack. Just don't be surprised that people will say you park the bus against the bigger sides. Nothing wrong with it, in my view, it's a great leveller for those that can't afford to pay the kind of wages to get you a big squad full of talent, and retain them. It's far worse when you see Chelsea doing it under Mourinho as there's no reason why they can't be a more adventurous side with the money they have available. Personally I like seeing sides like Swansea(when they came up) and Bournemouth that will really try and take the game to every side they face. Leicester are certainly the story of the season and have made it a lot more interesting at the top, even if I'd prefer you to be a couple of places lower
And you shipped 2 against us. The only factor that was against the norm this season was that the best defence in the PL gifted you with 2 goals.
We attacked constantly, we just lacked a focal point for those attacks, as we didn't start with an actual striker. Rose beat his man all day long, Trippier was playing as a winger for most of the game and virtually all of the play was in front of your box. We simply don't have anyone to fill in adequately for Kane though, so most of our attacks came to nothing. The idea that we were somehow defensive and Leicester were the attacking side is ludicrous, frankly. How anyone can watch that and come to that conclusion is beyond me. Effective? Yes. Attacking? Really?
I'm sorry, but you've clearly not been watching us. 28 away goals this season and you don't think we've taken the game to every side we've faced? Come off it.
Leicester are organised and generally play counterattacking football. It can be very exciting when they're in full flow. We try and do the same but are aggressive in trying to win the ball back whereas Leicester are more happy than us to sit back, although they do press high up at times too. Poch could learn a few lessons from their willingness to sit back, we press too hard sometimes and box teams in, if we let them out to play a bit we'd open up space to attack rather than boxing them in and constantly having to recycle the ball round the back 4 around the halfway line which does get very dull at times. We still play too slowly a lot when we turn the ball over, Chadli was particularly guilty of this and Carroll too also took a touch too many too often. I thought our width was better though. I thought we had a few good chances, Son looked threatening in the first half and we looked to use width better than I've seen us recently, like in the Watford game where we had Trippier as a wing back. To me the pen looked a pen, I was sat almost in direct eyeline of it and you just can't have your hands that near the ball in those situations. If the ball had been blasted into him in a crossing situation from a foot away I'd have sympathy, but you can't have your arms waving about like that in the area, intentional or not it is poor body position from the lad and he got caught making a mistake. I kind of feel for you because although the stats look good for us we were turgid for so much of the game. We had a fair share of good chances but never asked any truly serious questions of your defence or keeper for much of the match and that wasn't really good enough. As for your noise about us leaving players back when we attacked, well of course we did. Teams have Leicester worked out as your tactics are exactly as you say they are and everybody knows that. You are however very good at playing that game and fair play to you. Teams may start allowing you a little more possession and space to draw you out now though, and that may prove your undoing. We shall see.
No idea either, I certainly didn't say that. I said that you attempted to frustrate us and pull us out of defence when you had plenty of cover. You didn't play into our hands and pile forward, thus frustrating us. 46 goals this season and you don't think we're an attacking side? That is ludicrous, frankly.
