Leicester City’s perfect UEFA Europa League record came to an end in Portugal. The Foxes travelled to Braga and it took a 95th minute equaliser to rescue a point for Brendan Rodgers’ men.
The footballing world was surprised by the ease in which Leicester City beat SC Braga in the first game between the clubs, it turned out to be a 4-0 victory at The King Power Stadium. However, this time out, the Portuguese-side proved to be a much harder outfit to beat.
In the Foxes home leg, SC Braga had few key players absent from Carlos Carvahal’s starting XI and none had more impact on their return than creative forward, Ricardo Horta – who troubled the defensive line all game and was rewarded with an assist for the second goal. With a “full strength” squad to choose from, and Leicester City continuing to rotate peripheral players back into the side – it was quite clearly going to be a difficult fixture.
I’ve said on numerous Twitter threads, and in a couple of articles, that Brendan Rodgers would rarely – if ever – play Cengiz Under and Harvey Barnes in the same front three, but, to my surprise they both accompanied Kelechi Iheanacho in the starting XI.
Firstly, my reasoning for always excluding one of the two is that their roles/profiles are fairly similar, whereas Rodgers has outlined a preference for balance. Essentially, both players thrive when playing on-the-shoulder (because of their abundance of pace), and enjoy carrying the ball at their feet. This makes the front three one-dimensional if they’re both in the side, however, playing Iheanacho did allow Rodgers to experiment, and here’s why..
With Jamie Vardy as the focal point, you’ve got another “on-the-shoulder” forward who utilises the space behind the oppositions defensive line – whereas Iheanacho wants to drop into the “number 10” role and orchestrate play. Ordinarily, Barnes accompanies Vardy and it’s one of James Maddison or Dennis Praet on the opposing wing – so you get two runners (Barnes/Vardy) and one creator – achieving a balance.
In the game versus Braga, Iheanacho was utilised as the “creative player” while the wingers were the runners. I’m still a firm believer that they (Barnes/Under) shouldn’t start together, because throughout the first-half you saw how one-dimensional Leicester City were. There was no connective play through the midfield, and because of the natural movements of the wingers (behind the defensive line), the Foxes defenders kept playing hopeful long-balls into space and turning over possession.
In contrast, the second-half – which saw Youri Tielemans replace Praet in the Leicester City double pivot and, eventually, James Maddison replace Barnes/Under – seemed much more fluid. Initially, you’ve got a progressive passer in the pivot (Tielemans) and you’ve got a player who operates in the half-spaces and between the lines (Maddison) to enable different transitions of the ball, not just linear long-balls.
It’s no surprise that Maddison was an integral part of the second and third goal, with Tielemans dictating the tempo of the game as soon as he arrived on the pitch. The “experimental” front-line didn’t work for Rodgers, for the reasons I’ve already mentioned but also because of the frequent turnovers of possession.
In the defensive structure, Iheanacho was tasked with juggling two of the three centre-backs for SC Braga. This meant that whenever there was a quick turnover in possession and the Foxes transitioned into their attacking structure, Iheanacho would be on the defensive line – not dropping into the number 10 role and creating attacks. With Under and Barnes naturally playing very advanced, a lot of the positive turnovers for Leicester City actually ended up being turned over themselves because they lacked a linking player.
When Vardy plays, it’s not his job to shift from pressing the centre-backs to connecting the play from midfield to attack, so if there’s a quick turnover he can make an instinctive run behind the defenders and launch a counterattack. Instead, he’s got Maddison or Praet drifting into the half-space to help progress the ball – without a winger of this profile the Foxes really struggled to build anything. For instance, the first goal was more of a mistake from SC Braga, rather than an excellent piece of build-up – it was a very well taken opportunity by Barnes.
The other issue for Leicester City was the double pivot, which I’ve already briefly mentioned. Initially, it started with a partnership of Hamza Choudhury and Dennis Praet – who have never played together as a two, and Choudhury has only just started being implemented in the role (a position I think he’s good in). As for Praet, he’s shown his qualities in the right-wing position and looked sheepish alongside Choudhury during the first-half.
When playing the 3-4-3 formation, the two central-midfielders are the only “central” players in the structure. For this reason, they’ve got to show for the ball and demand possession – this wasn’t the case during the first-half, but when Tielemans entered proceedings, the control of the game entirely changed.
He became a consistent option to receive the ball from the defence, and demanded the ball as a catalyst of progression. I think the starters could both play in a double pivot, but together it wasn’t a good balance. If you want to play Choudhury, you need a player like Mendy or Tielemans alongside him – as they’ll dictate the tempo of the game and allow him to shuttle around in the middle. It’s the same with Praet.
Once Rodgers got the balance right, Leicester City started to tick. I don’t blame him for dropping certain players to facilitate some rest, and I think he tweaked the side well to earn a point. It’s now time to see how he balances the squad for the fixture on Monday night, an away trip to Fulham.