Leicester City v Aston Villa - Pre Match Thread

[oswald funkletrumpet]

I'm not a fan of 352 but it could suit our players. Bacuna would be the right back surely?

But not today. Lescott only just arrived, Clark Amavi and Sanchez only just back from international duty so no real chance to practice the shape.

Funnily enough, Leicester's old fashioned 442 is tailor made on paper to pay 352 against.

bacuna is the obvious choice but for me he isnt up to it defensively

[JUAN PABLO]

Think he meant Parker and Draper ran the show for Leicester.

Wasn't it that crap player lowe who got their last few goals

[Matt Collins]

Surely Bacuna as a wing back tho is not too bad defensively? There's more cover.

Anyway I don't really want to see us play that way too often

[Clark W Griswold]

Surely Bacuna as a wing back tho is not too bad defensively? There's more cover.

Anyway I don't really want to see us play that way too often

Exactly, with 3 centre backs, as long as the 2 wing backs are passable as defenders it should be enough. Bacuna would be excellent as a wing back, as would Amavi (who despite looking like one hell of a footballer hasn't been water tight specifically as a defender). It's what they would offer going forwards as part of attacks which would be brilliant. Whether this would suit our other good players is another thing, so not sure whether it would be a wise move.

[pav]

Looks like a no for gana or adama or kozak,  sky just showing players arriving,  I didn't spot them.

[Hillbilly]

Spent the afternoon at the MCG watching Richmond fall at the first hurdle in the Aussie rules preliminary final play-offs. Again. Off to bed now, so if the Villa could just thrash Leicester, that would be tickety boo.

[Steve R]

If we go into this game playing three at the back then we're in trouble. We can match them up with a 4-42 of our own or more advisedly play our usual variations of 4-3-3 and we should do well. We have the better set of players we don't need to hand them points on a plate.

[Archie]

In the 90% of the cases three in defense means five  as the two wingers are actually right and left backs.

[Lastfootstamper]

In the 90% of the cases three in defense means five  as the two wingers are actually right and left backs.

Always ends up that way. I can't recall ever seeing a side in this country pick that formation that wasn't thus. Just say 5-3-2, and stop trying to kid people.

[Matt Collins]

So grealish Gil and Sinclair behind gabby . .

Attacking! Westwood and Sanchez will have to do a sturdy job sitting in there.

I was in favour of this sort of line up but now I'm nervous!

[TheTimVilla]

So grealish Gil and Sinclair behind gabby . .

Attacking! Westwood and Sanchez will have to do a sturdy job sitting in there.

I was in favour of this sort of line up but now I'm nervous!

Seems harsh on Clark, as well.

[Percy McCarthy]

In the 90% of the cases three in defense means five  as the two wingers are actually right and left backs.

Always ends up that way. I can't recall ever seeing a side in this country pick that formation that wasn't thus. Just say 5-3-2, and stop trying to kid people.

I can. Sir Brian's 95/96 team.

[Mister E]

In the 90% of the cases three in defense means five  as the two wingers are actually right and left backs.

Always ends up that way. I can't recall ever seeing a side in this country pick that formation that wasn't thus. Just say 5-3-2, and stop trying to kid people.

It doesn't have to though!

[Duncan Shaw]

So grealish Gil and Sinclair behind gabby . .

Attacking! Westwood and Sanchez will have to do a sturdy job sitting in there.

I was in favour of this sort of line up but now I'm nervous!

Seems harsh on Clark, as well.

Maybe, but he needs to cut the mistakes out, cost us Sunderlands equaliser last time out......

[Percy McCarthy]

If people know the team can they share?