Will Still OUT

Why did you bring that up?

 

Agree with all of this. For me, I really just think we need rid of pretty much all players who played for us last season. We are making the same mistakes we were 4 managers ago & last season just seems to have infected the confidence of the group to the extent that it’s now affecting new players we’ve signed (you could even argue that something wasn’t right with integration of our signings last summer too maybe?). So many of our players just seems incapable of learning from their mishaps and I’d be happy to see the following moved on:

• Stephens
• THB
• Downes
• Manning
• Aribo
• Edozie
• Wood

I know Wood had been playing well recently but I just think it runs deeper than a few decent games. The mentality of these players is totally shot to bits & id honestly rather us have two 30 something year old seasoned CBs / CMs right now over any of the crap we’ve had past 2 seasons. We need players that can organise the group & demand better on the pitch from the good young talent we have

 

I had to look up 'emetic', but yes.

 

I was going to say the same about how he looked. Forlorn is the word I think you said it better than I could

 

He just has to show he’s better than Martin. It’s ironic really. Two managers associated with Saints go to Rangers

 

Brendan Rodgers sacked

 

BBC reporting that he resigned

 

It was the irresistible lure of St Mary’s and Sport Republic…

 

Uh ho

 

Back to Leicester

 

Shout actually.

 

The three worst things that have happened this season (apart from not signing a striker) are the Hull and Liverpool games because they have shaped Still's negative thinking and Ross Stewart getting injured because we are stuck with a striker that doesn't fit the system Still is wedded to and another who is not ready.
The Hull game with the 4-2-3-1 was just a poor defensive display with different CBs
and the Liverpool game with the switch to the 3 CBs was encouraging but a very different opponent than we are playing in the league and was still a defeat in a nothing to lose match.

 

It really shouldn’t matter about the formation that much though. A decent coach would have us playing much better no matter what.

The fans act like it’s night and day having 3 or 4 at the back, but it just isn’t that significant.

He employs so many other, less obvious, negative tactics that nullify us as an attacking unit.

 

To my mind we are too light in midfield with the 3 CBs. We should have 2 DM/CMs and Azaz playing in front of them as a 10 feeding Archer and Adarma on the deck.
He is selecting too many defensive players and it's affecting the balance of the team. You yourself made a comment about the workload that Charles had on Saturday.

 

The formation is just part of the managers system/way of playing but certain formations lend themselves more to different ways of playing.

I think when fans criticise formation it's a simplified way of just saying the entire tactical system needs to change.

Of course if Still was just change formation but ask his players to do exactly the same things, then nothing would change. But the hope would be that with a new formation, would come a different tactical approach entirely.

 

My argument around the formation mostly boils down to player selection and mindset as opposed to team instructions

Based on this season / players we have:
We will play 2 CB's in any formation
We will play Charles and Jander (or Downes)
We will play a LW/RW or LWB/LWB and these have been from our "wide players" in fellows, jelert, mads, manning, wellington, scienza and some are more defence minded than others.
We will play a striker
We will play another attacker somewhere

so that with the GK is 9 of the 11

go with a 5 at the back you'll move the WB's back a bit on the pitch and add another CB (as you're not going put Azaz there) and the overall mindset of the team becomes inherently more defence biased (regardless of the order to play further up) as the players are all naturally defenders / defensive players.

go with a 4 and you add another attacking minded player (as you're not going to be putting Wood upfront) somewhere in front of the 2 DM's so overall you make the team naturally more offence minded.

So it really summarises, at least for me, that 5 at the back ends up with 8 players with "defensive" mindsets (GK, 3xCB, 2xWB and 2xDM) and a 4 at the back ends up with 7 (GK, 2CB, LB, RB, 2xDM).

I'd always take the extra attacker personally.

Though if WS does end up putting Azaz at RWB or Wood as a 9 then all that stuff above is moot....

 

And of course you must consider your attack, if they are all minions like now then it makes more sense to provide them service with the AM and less so from wide areas..

 

True but for some reasons we also seem to have lost the ability to kick the round thing into the big net bag..

 

I don't think that is the only problem. We have scored first in 5 games this season... we have won 0 of those games.

 

I agree with all that. But I don't think it's necessarily playing two in midfield that makes us light. I'd say, for starters, that we play too deep, particularly in games when we have taken the lead. Also, Charles very often has to approach our defenders to get the ball, as opposed to the CBs bringing the ball out themselves. And the main one - having no target man who can hold the ball up, means that basically our two CMs are running back and forth far too much, because the ball is being pumped up and down the pitch by both sides. That's just a few things off the top of my head, but I don't think changing to a back four will change much at all.