I'm sorry, but bringing on Andy King and taking Cambiasso off when protecting a one goal lead is absolute madness
Felt worse than some of our defeats, that one. Still manage to score an own goal despite defending much better today. Cambiasso was an absolute beast in that and shouldn't have come off!
Just one more questionable substitution with minutes to go.... TBF, it had been coming all second half, we were lucky Lukaku was having a shocking day in front of the posts but taking off Cambiasso and unsettling an already nervous and pretty desperate defence so close to closing out the match? I hope Pearson is giving himself a good kicking! Gutted that we drew after coming so close, even though we were poor for long periods we nearly mugged them. I hope the team can pick themselves up ready for Man City cos they ain't going to be so lenient in front of goal..
I'd have taken a point before the game, and at half time too. But when you're a goal up with 10 minutes to go, do you seriously take your best midfielder off and replace him with Andy King? Again I thought our defensive qualities were poor. Just because you get 10 men behind the ball doesn't mean you're defending well if nobody actually challenges the man with the ball! I think some of our players have glass feet. They should be closing down, making tackles and forcing the opposition back, not standing 5 yards away and giving them time to look up and pick a pass. How many times did we allow their midfield to look up and play their strikers in? It's a good job Lukaku couldn't have hit a cow's arse with a double bass today never mind a banjo. If that had been Man City and Aguero we would have lost by a cricket score. I wouldn't have taken Schlupp off. He was one of the few who was actually making challenges and he provided good cover for Konch, but Mahrez is perhaps the biggest wimp we've had in the side when it comes to defending. Oh for the return of the likes of Lennon, Izzet and Savage in midfield with big Steve Walsh, Spencer Prior and Elliot behind them. Now they could certainly teach today's lot a bit about defending.
If that's right then Lesta, with 5 minutes to go, defending a 1 goal lead, surely you put Was on, not Kingy......
It's neither here nor there. We didn't concede because of the substitution. We conceded because we defended too deep in the last 15 minutes. As soon as we went to 2-2, we were on the front foot again, and a bit more composure from Kramaric and it would have been 3-2. I'll never understand with Leicester why we only play with urgency after we concede - and it's not a Pearson thing as we've done it for years. All in all though, not a bad result, just frustrating because we were so close to winning and we remain adrift with Man City away to come. Glad to see a much improved (but still flawed) performance by Morgan who seemed to be tracking Lakaku around the pitch and, certainly in the first half, had him under control. Not impressed with our fullbacks though, particularly Konchesky who time and again allowed the same diagonal ball to be played behind him, causing no end of problems. Great to see Nuge and Vardy have such an impact, as I must confess I groaned when they both came on ahead of Ulloa. Vardy had a hand in both goals; great pace for the first goal and a composed pass for the second. Cambiasso was poor in the first half, playing far too many over-the-top balls to nobody, but grew into the game as we became more positive to the point that everyone was surprised to see him go off. Let's hope this injury won't see him miss any match time. So positives and negatives to take from today - I certainly think we have more about us as a attacking force than a defence unit, which is probably why Pearson is going for strength in numbers at the back and relying on the ability of a select few in attack. Still, I would like us to go to 4-4-2 when this run of away games is over. Won't happen at Man City though - if this weekend's performances are anything to go by, we may play an 8-1-1 against them!
Been said before but cheering on the red team against the blues took a bit of getting used to. Had to remind myself more than once which was which
Not often we agree but the 'wing backs' are our achilles heel at the moment .. Konch and Simpson are, quite simply, bloody awful ... I'd definitely go with Schlupp and de Laet with that formation - Seamus Coleman shows that you can still get forward and be a major threat from that position (so whilst it would be slightly more difficult for Jeff to make thse surging runs it would not be impossible) ... but my biggest frustration is how poor both Konch and Simpson are in possession ... Simpson is even worse than Konch - he seems incapable of finding a team mate and hoofs it out of play needlessly on many occasions ... their first goal yesterday came from a needless throw he conceded - the ball was running out for a goal kick before he decided to welly it into touch ... they took the throw quickly and Naismith, whilst quite fortunate, did the rest ... to paraphrase a Brian Clough 'requisite' for his players ... "they must be able to control a footballer and pass it to someone in the same shirt" .. neither Konch or Simpson can do that and they continually get caught out positionally to boot ... fix this Nigel and you just never know - other areas are starting to click.. Vardy yesterday - superb. Might be we need to play him in such an impact role.
Yep Lesta, we've always done it, defended too deep and lose goals in the dying minutes to either draw or lose. I do disagree that Cambiasso's substitution didnt contribute to the outcome though, I think his presence in front of defence makes a massive difference, his organisation and influence is almost tangible and that is something Kingy doesn't offer unfortunately. Had Hammond been on the bench then he would have been the obvious choice to come on I feel, but then I don't believe that Pearson ever imagined that we would be defending a lead with 3 mins of normal time left on the clock so no Hammond on the subs bench.
If you are defending a lead, backs to the wall, and need to make a midfield substitution .................... where the **** is Dean Hammond? Is he still injured? If not, why wasnt he on the bench? All in all, a decent performance and a very good point (though Lukaku should have buried us). Man of the match I personally would have to give to Vardy with his 2 assists.
... agreed - turned the game - similar to others, my heart dropped when I saw him and Nuge warming up but it worked a treat ... just a shame that chance right at the death fell to Nuge and not to Kramaric, otherwise we might still have nicked it ...
I'd also prefer a 4-4-2 as it gives more options. The trouble with us playing 3 in the middle of the back (and it looks like Nigel has decided which 3 it should be) is that there isn't much pace between them and they all get taken out by a simple ball played behind them. On top of that yesterday we didn't have the quality in our wing backs to supplement the shortfall in midfield, although maybe the "plan" wasn't for them to get forward. I'd have to agree with the suggestion to play De Laet and Schlupp in those wide positions if we are going to persist with this formation. The problem for me wasn't necessarily the back 3, it was the fact that we allowed their midfield to pick the pass of their choice by not pressing and defending properly in midfield. It isn't that difficult! It makes you wonder what they actually do on the training ground all week.
I was watching, saw the pass to Nugent, jumped up thinking "he's through on goal here!", it hit is knee, and Howard comfortably picked it up... I sat back down, thinking "That one is really going to annoy Fosse!"
... he's just not really a finisher ... I do think he might have a more 'withdrawn' role - linking play etc - because he is quite a clever player ...
Ive no problem with Simpson tbh, im not seeing the things others are, he seems more solid than DeLaet defensively, Konchesky though was having rings run around him by Lennon.
