Foxes of Leicester comprehensively analyses Brendan Rodgers’ season with Leicester City, to see how the Northern Irishman is doing.
Brendan Rodgers substitutions have earned Leicester City 19 points, and have been instrumental in losing 7 points. That’s a net positive of 12 points.That calculation shows what the Foxes could have been missing at this stage of the season, which would theoretically place them in eleventh Premier League place – without a murmur of Champions League football.
There’s an unquestionable inevitability that goals will be scored in the dying embers of a match regardless of whether or not a manager makes a substitution, however, the lion’s share of these goals have gone in the Foxes favour – which can be accredited to Rodgers’ management.
After a tactical substitution has been made this season – which refers to a substitution that isn’t enforced because of an injury and involves a player that wouldn’t be considered a “like-for-like” replacement – Leicester City have scored 29 goals. Obviously, the Foxes have built quite the reputation for scoring late goals, as 31 of their 65 goals this season (47.7%) have come after the 60th minute.
However, of these 29 goals, 16 have directly involved – either as a goal or as an assist – a substitute (55.1%). This doesn’t take into account the overall attacking sequence, therefore substitutes could’ve contributed to more of the 29 goals, as this is just accrediting the direct involvements.
The two top performers from the bench are striker Kelechi Iheanacho and winger Demarai Gray, who have both contributed to four goals after being used as a substitute – Gray has two goals and two assists, while Iheanacho has four goals. This shows that, most of the time, Rodgers understands which of his personnel are the right fit for the scenario.
So, when does the Northern Irishman get his substitutions wrong? That’s obviously quite a broad question, as contextually fans may agree or disagree with any substitution made, but what about a certainty all fans can agree on – when tactical changes caused Leicester City to lose points – that’s objectively negative.
Looking at this seasons fixtures chronologically, the first match to see a Rodgers change negatively impact the game was Southampton at home, on the 11th January this year. The game was level (1-1), but Rodgers’ substitutions provided attacking intent that accidentally opened up the defence to allow Danny Ings a goal in the 81st minute. In defence of Rodgers, the fixture should’ve been seen as a win, so making attacking changes whilst level in the game shouldn’t be looked upon negatively, even if the result ended up as a loss.
The following match was away at Burnley, where the same thing happened again. Rodgers tried to win the game by switching Kelechi Iheanacho and Youri Tielemans for Ayoze Pérez and Dennis Praet. The change was ultimately the correct one, the Foxes had twelve touches in Burnley’s penalty area post substitutions to the Clarets two – it was the finishing in the final third that cost Leicester. The game ended 2-1 in Burnley’s favour, but the xG (expected goals) for the game was in the Foxes’ – 1.3 – 2.2.
These two changes ended up costing Leicester City two points – as they turned a draw into a loss, but I’d personally argue that they were the correct decisions given the context of the situation. Fans would be appalled if Rodgers didn’t try and get wins against either of those two opponents. The individual substitutions and the instructions that came with the selected personnel can be dissected as to whether they were correct or incorrect, but that’s a latitudinous debate.
Manchester City at home was another game that the Foxes squandered points after Rodgers made a couple of substitutions. Harvey Barnes replaced Kelechi Iheanacho at half time, and with that Leicester City implement a 3-5-1-1 formation for the remainder of the game. This is another example of a decision I agree with, even though the game eventually finished 1-0 in Manchester City’s favour – so, for me, still no glaring errors from Rodgers.
The following match was at Carrow Road, versus Norwich. Leicester were missing a couple of key men in their starting XI – most notably, Wilfred Ndidi and Youri Tielemans. Rodgers decided to bring on the former in the 67th minute, replacing Hamza Choudhury. Post substitutions, Leicester managed to have 75% possession with 9 touches in the Canaries penalty area. It was through unfortunate circumstances that Jamal Lewis found the back of the net – an excellent strike that he’s not reproduced since – therefore, outlining the substitutions as being the issue would once again, be harsh.
Lastly, there’s the Bournemouth game. Which is fundamentally Rodgers’ responsibility. But, for the extreme Foxes’ fans to exclaim they want him sacked or replaced because of this is totally absurd. Hopefully, Rodgers will learn from this mishap, and no longer scrutinise the insignificant issues in his teams performances – the defensive weakness in the wings – and look at the overwhelming positives.
Out of 35 Premier League games this season, Rodgers has been punished five times for his substitutions, despite this, I only put the blame on him for the Bournemouth match. However, there’s a pattern in his tactical changes that I do disagree with.
When Leicester City have small, one-goal margins, Rodgers seems to sacrifice any attacking intent to close the games out. Not only is this incredibly dangerous, it’s intrinsically negative, especially when considering the opposition the Foxes are facing.
So far this season, I’ve counted that Rodgers has neutralised Leicester City’s attacking qualities by replacing an advanced player for a defender seven times. This substitution has always included Wes Morgan, and results in a change in the Foxes system, often reverting to a transitional back five.
This invites unnecessary pressure for the closing stages of a game, rather than trying to strengthen the lead. It’s also worth noting that in these games, 71.4% (5) of the time, Leicester have been controlling the game and the momentum has been completely shifted post substitution.
Rodgers implemented this change against; Sheffield United (A), Bournemouth (H), Burnley (H), Crystal Palace (A), Watford (H), Liverpool (H), and Bournemouth (A). The two games out of the seven that the Foxes didn’t have complete control are versus Sheffield United and Liverpool. The theme running through these opponents is staggering – aside from Liverpool, they all reside in the lower positions of the Premier League. So, why does Rodgers do this against teams Leicester City should be beating?
Personally, I think he’s scared of losing against these teams rather than trying to win. Once the Foxes have established a lead, he doesn’t want them to lose to an inferior team and thus makes negative changes to ensure this doesn’t happen. The Liverpool game was also 3-0 in the Reds’ favour when Rodgers turned to the bench and brought on Hamza Choudhury for James Maddison, a little bit of damage limitation, but also an anomaly in this data.
This is the bigger issue, Rodgers made defensive changes in both games against Eddie Howe’s Bournemouth, so was he ready for the half time switch? I’d argue not, it was more of a capitulation on the East Midlanders’ front, but it does show the fragile nature of making that sort of change with only a one-goal lead, and it finally got the better of Rodgers.