Leicester City player Timothy Castagne has commented on the winning tactics used by Brendan Rodgers against Manchester United. Here is what he said.
Tactics are about more than just the shape and personnel, it is also about the way each player carries out their roles as well as their understanding of their role in relation to each other. This is why teams which get major injures fall off so drastically.
So, when Leicester marched onto the King Power pitch against United, they used different tactics entirely to those which were used prior to the international break: personnel and their roles were changed.
Let’s run through what our usual tactics are and how the King Power side adapted according to the Belgian international defender.
Leicester City’s usual self
For the most part, Rodgers sets the Foxes in some variant of a 4-3-3 formation. There is often a triangle in midfield with a holding defensive midfielder, a more progressive midfielder, and a creative midfielder.
Upfront, the gaffer tends to prefer the pace and explosiveness of Jamie Vardy and Harvey Barnes, with the right-wing slot often filled by a more in-field and creative player like Ayoze Perez over – say – Ademola Lookman. Please click for the next page.
In the defensive line, a strong tackler/progressive centre-back is preferred alongside the composure of Jonny Evans. The fullbacks have to be good dribblers able to push forward swiftly to create overlaps on the wings.
Typically, this formation and tactical set up will create a plethora of chances on goal, but also maintain a defensive solidity about the team. However, due to a misunderstanding in roles, Youri Tielemans has stayed further back, James Maddison has not regained his form, and no left-back has managed to match the versatility of James Justin.
It is also no coincidence that when Wilfred Ndidi picked up an injury, that this setup would no longer work. Boubakary Soumare, Hamza Choudhury, and even Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall just simply cannot replace the defensive work rate of Ndidi; without which the understanding of each other’s roles goes down: Tielemans expects an Ndidi but gets someone else.
The best thing to do in this context – when out of form anyway – is to change the setup. So, let’s look at what Castagne believes to be the difference between the losing Leicester and winning Foxes. Please click below again to move onto the reveal page of Castagne’s insight.
Timo Castagne reveals all
There were a couple of key differences between the draws to Crystal Palace and Burnley and the victory over Manchester reds. There was of course the formational change: a 3-4-1-2 with two strikers and wingbacks instead of wingers.
Castagne believes the most important change was not in the formation, but in the way they were playing. As per LeicestershireLive:
"“Today was the first game of the season where we actually tried to play from the back”"
Playing out from the back is the primary style of play preferred by Rodgers. This is because it should offer the team a greater degree of control over the ball through possession – the easiest and most effective way to control the movement of the ball.
By having that extra player further back and both progressive wingbacks playing, Leicester could more effectively play out from the back and control the game. This was particularly helped by the return of the composer Evans.
The East Midlands outfit played much better, with better passing and superior speed of that passing from the back. This gave Leicester plenty of the ball and plenty of space to control the movement of the ball and thus the game.
Though Castagne stresses the playing out from the back, I think the switch to Soumare + Tielemans was a massive part of our victory. Two progressive and possessive midfielders helping to cut through lines and retain the ball when necessary really helped control the game in our favour.
Do we need to see more of the same or should the Foxes revert to a 4-3-3 of some form in the near future, what do you think? Let Foxes of Leicester know on our social media channels.