A trip to Old Trafford, it’s not quite the same magnitude of fixture as it used to be! Yes, there’s intimidation of playing in front of thousands upon thousands of fans, but the Manchester United squad isn’t performing to the expectations set of them this season. Saying that, neither are the Leicester City.
For the majority of the game, the Foxes were the better side. I’d suggest that the control of the fixture – not purely the possession statistic, but more a reference to the comfort in playing the different phases (such as attacking, defending, and both sides of the transition) – was with the East Midlands outfit. There’s no tangible statistic for this, it’s more just a feeling you get from the eye test, supported by the chances created (quality vs. quantity), the control of the ball. Not to mention how easily the defensive side of the game is, or at least appears to be.
When in possession, there was a wide array of building processes used by Brendan Rodgers’ side, all providing different variations of how to find players in the width channels (or slightly more central in the half-spaces). Please now click the below link to be taken directly to the next page of Dominic’s match analysis.
An initial style of dropping Nampalys Mendy between the centre-backs was designed to spread the pitch in the depth for the East Midlands team. In addition, it also opens up passing lanes for the likes of Jonny Evans and Wesley Fofana to utilise in possession — whilst also having the security central of Mendy.
An alternate version of this was having Mendy and Youri Tielemans offer for possession like a defensive-midfield pivot. Both players would look to receive on either the right or left, side of the midfield and provide a platform for the full-backs to advance their positioning. By having a wide starting position, turnovers wouldn’t be exploited by the Red Devils, as the “pivot” could plug the vacated space of the full-backs.
Lastly, the more traditional usage of the structure was keeping the majority of players in their “starting positions”. This involved the full-backs holding positions inside the defensive four, and the box-to-box midfielders (Tielemans and Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall) would split into the half-spaces providing a close option to the wingers. The platform of the back-four enabled more risk-taking in regards to positioning from the midfield. Outside of just these processes to build play from Kasper Schmeichel, Leicester City circulated possession with a modicum of comfort.
A lot of the play was between the defence and deep midfielders, but there was always a safety net option to pass into. After a fairly reserved first-half, Rodgers instructed the team to place themselves closer to the United goal, and thus squeezed the pitch to ensure more control.
After conceding, directly after scoring, LCFC dominated the game by placing Mendy as a sweeping collector of clearances — denying transitions and circulating the ball to restart attacks. The recovery pace in defence, with players like Fofana and James Justin (back in the side after long periods out with injuries), enabled these high defensive lines, as long passes or transitions that beat the original setup wouldn’t bypass the quick recoveries of the defence.
Inside the attacks, there was a couple of good chances, but mainly a lot of sustained pressure. Without a remarkable save by David De Gea from a Fofana header, and a few rushed shots on the United goal, an unquestionable lead for City to hold onto would have transpired. There was of course the disallowed James Maddison goal, although it was a foul from Kelechi Iheanacho in the build-up, without his unfair challenge, the Nigerian wouldn’t have found the space to pass into Maddison.
A lot of LCFC’s downfalls were self-inflicted, at times they’d rush passes out of defence and concede possession. These turnovers netted Manchester United their best chances; with the goal coming from this sort of situation. A sequence of wrong decisions, such as Daniel Amartey’s bad back pass, Iheanacho not contesting the aerial ball with Raphaël Varane, and the centre-backs over committing to a potential Bruno Fernandes shot from range, all played a role in the equaliser.
It was a similar scenario in the first-half, Fofana’s attempted vertical pass was intercepted by Fred, ending in another effort for Bruno Fernandes — this time the save from Schmeichel was strong enough to remove rebound options. But, the shot creation for Ralf Rangnick’s side was identical, capitalise on an error rather than utilising static possession themselves. In all honesty, United created very few shooting opportunities during the game — which is a credit to the defensive shape Rodgers’ utilised, a 4–4–2 defensive block that could adjust into a high-block or a low one.
For all of these reasons, Leicester can be credited with “control” of the match against Manchester United. On another day, one of the speculative first-half efforts (from Iheanacho or Harvey Barnes) would’ve supported the single goal they scored this weekend, and the trip back to the East Midlands would be with three points. Instead, it’s a good performance and only a draw. Given the struggles to find a performance this season, I would hesitantly suggest that could be regarded as a win for the Foxes.