As the first-half closed, Leicester City seemed destined to lose their third game in a row in all competitions – this time at the hands of Brighton & Hove Albion, but an inspired second-half, with tactical alterations, pushed the Foxes into a 1-2 comeback.
Brendan Rodgers opted for the same system that rewarded Leicester City with a point at Turf Moor, the 3-5-2. The key components of the formation being; two strikers, two attacking wing-backs, and three central defenders in transition. It’s undisputed that the Foxes are fielding this structure due to injuries, but Rodgers’ shift to a 4-3-3 formation at the start of the second-half resulted in a much better display. Why?
Firstly, I wouldn’t suggest the first-half performance was entirely a structure problem. In my opinion, the 3-5-2 formation relied heavily on the involvements of both No.8s – Youri Tielemans and starting debutant Sidnei Tavares, in both sides of the game. In attack, their positional play would aid the progressive nature of Leicester City – by playing high and wide (close proximity to the advancing wing-backs) or in a vertical diagonal to the two forwards – Jamie Vardy and Kelechi Iheanacho.
In defence, they were tasked with tracking the advancing runners from Graham Potter’s unorthodox 4-4-2 system. Brighton & Hove Albion play fluid football, look to combine with quick passes (often first-time) – with players making advancing runs from all over the pitch. This bombardment of movement felt like a stark contrast to that of the Foxes’ first-half, where the predominant passing sequences remained with the centre-backs after little options were forming further forwards.
I’m not attempting to pin this subpar performance on the two No.8s either, that would also be unfair, but their struggle to understand when to sit, or push, caused a lot of issues in the first-half – particularly in transition. The goal wasn’t a fault of either though, in fact, it was very poor defending from the three centre-backs – who all played their part by not recognising the danger.
The goal stemmed from one of the centre-backs committing to a challenge on a forward with their back to goal. It’s well documented that Neal Maupay connects the attacking sequences for The Seagulls by offering wall passes, but there Foxes’ overcommitment to neutralise this actually caused bigger problems. Instead, they vacated dangerous areas by pushing to challenge and a quick pass around the corner unlocked the defence – as shown by Adam Lallana’s early goal, but also the offside goal for Maupay. The similarities between the two “goals” was concerning for Leicester City.
At half-time, there was only one manager looking for solutions and that was Rodgers. His answer was to neglect the defensive three and resort to the 4-3-3 formation. This was made possible by Daniel Amartey shifting to right-back – with Ricardo Pereira advancing into the right-wing position. The central midfield remained in the same composition, Wilfred Ndidi at the base with two roaming No.8s, although this time they were influential. For me, that was the major influence on the result – ensuring the two “playmaking” midfielders actually dictated the game for Leicester City and Youri Tielemans definitely did that.
I’d also suggest the passive press, that took up the entirety of the first-half, became aggressive and actually looked like an effective counter-press. It was through this intensity that the Foxes won the ball high-up, before off-loading to Tielemans in the centre. An exquisite pass through the lines into Kelechi Iheanancho was enough for Leicester City to make it 1-1, but the quality of the combination, the finish, and the overall sequence was excellent. In the absence of Vardy’s goals, Iheanancho is starting to become an essential part of the Foxes front line.
I feel it’s important to highlight Vardy’s performance last night, which was great. Recent games have seen the striker struggle to impose himself on the game with the limited amount of possession he’s granted. It’s mentioned often how little of the ball Vardy will see in a game, but his impact has been non-existent (in those few touches) – but, yesterday was the epitome of a Vardy performance. Little ball action, but good connections, pressed with intensity and looked threatening. This bodes well for the coming fixtures.
Perhaps the weirdest substitution was the arrival of Marc Albrighton, who replaced Tavares in the 72nd minute. The structure had already switched to a 4-3-3 formation, there was a vacancy at left-wing (as Iheanancho had been drifting their prior to the substitution) but his involvements seemed exclusively down the centre – in a similar position to the player he replaced. I think, Rodgers played Albrighton as a makeshift #8 for the last 20 minutes purely due to his energy – both in transition and the press. Regardless, his corner in the 88th minute was exactly what Leicester City needed to eventually take the lead in the tie – a very smart header from Daniel Amartey.
The result, after the alteration from Rodgers, has caused the Foxes faithful to lambast the idea of the 3-5-2, when the 4-3-3 was so successful, but, is that actually fair? Well, one of the facilitators of the transition was Amartey – who is absolutely better as the right-centre-back in a three (instead of as a wing-back). One of the others was Iheanacho, who’s partnership with Vardy enabled a lot of Leicester’s best moments – again, not viable in the 4-3-3. In fact, to allow those two freedom in the 4-3-3, Rodgers added Albrighton in the centre.
I’m not disputing the result and it’s absolutely a by-product of the tactical alterations – but I think more emphasis needs to be placed on the improvement in the No.8s, and perhaps not the entire structure. Again, the structure did help the midfielders – they received the ball in depth easier and thus aided progression of possession, but I also felt the 3-5-2 formation was a solid enough building structure. The Foxes just underperformed.
The victory has helped aspirations of the UEFA Champions League, as Leicester are now seven points ahead of fifth – and Everton (5th) face Chelsea (4th) today. Both can’t pick up maximum points, which should allow a bigger gap to form between Rodgers’ side and either club. Perhaps the biggest positive though is the week-long break, as the game against Sheffield United isn’t until Sunday. If the Foxes can play with the intensity and mental resilience that they showed at the Amex Stadium with next-to-no break, I can only imagine the performance after a recuperated break.