Does no one understand football?

I warned against complacency before the match, and I was really concerned when I heard Wood was missing - with good reason as it turned out. I think the match turned when Vardy was put 1 on 1 with the goalie and did not score. At 2-0 I'd expect us to go on to win comfortably.

Both Vardy and Waghorn look totally devoid of confidence.

Next issue which no-one seems to have picked up on is that Keane's inexperience is causing problems. Don't get me wrong, he looks a fine prospect, but yesterday his mistake cost us the equaliser. I can see SSL back in the side shortly.

In any event, we're still second (somehow!), so let's hope this is just a blip and we'll get a better result against Charlton.

Nun fox i don't see that keane can be blamed for either goal and in fact stop a third with his quick reactions clearing off the line.

What i dont understand is why NP picks players who we all know are not good enough for this league.
...
Why wont he play Futacs?

----------------


Sorry Thorney, but I'm with Nigel on that one.

Waghorn's shown a lot more than both of them this year, but he's back to being terribly off-form at the moment. Perhaps if Pearson gave up on playing Vardy and gave Waghorn more game time we might see him improve.

Waghorn was really unlucky with the timing of his apendix op because he was playing really well at that point. He's got to be the 3rd striker for now.

I'm not going to savage Vardy because he's trying hard and has something to offer but we can not afford to carry him for the run-in, his role now should be as a sub.

With Futacs simply not getting a look-in, Vardy struggling and Waghorn's inconsistent form, if Wood is going to be out for a while surely Schlupp should be brought back?

There's a reason Shlupp is at United. Does anyone think that Waghorn could score 10 goals in the second half of the season!
Playing one up front won't work with Nugent maybe morgan can do a walshy or Elliot?

The situation with Schlupp gets more confusing by the day. He's been at Man Utd on trial for three weeks now. Does anyone genuinely know why? (I can speculate with the best of them but I don't know.) Is he there as a striker, a left back or just for general experience? Who is allowing him to be there - he is still under contract to us after all, so is this a clause in his contract? Are the owners driving this to court favour with United? Does Nigel Pearson have a say in it?

I thought originally that he was there almost as a favour to us from United, to give the kid a bit of experience training with top quality players, perhaps to see if he has what it takes. Nigel hinted during week 1 that he could well come back and then go out on loan somewhere, if it was appropriate. But as times goes on, that somehow feels less likely, or at least that there's more to it than that.

Puzzling.


Nev - Granted that Nugent is better in a 2 than playing up front on his own; however if we don't have a partner either good enough or in-form enough to make it worthwhile we'd need to come up with a different solution, and at least 3 advanced midfielders (Knckaert/King/Marshall) would potentially give Nugent quick support.

Shlupp's up there being looked at as a left back i have that from two separate sources. NP is coy about his relationship with Fergie so don't expect any info
.
We tried Nug up front on his own and it did not work maybe Futac one his own with Nugent in the hole.
but if NP has not played him yet he can't have much faith in him!

Would rather see Vardy in than Waggy right now to be honest, i think Vardy puts his self about more and gets in better positions, however neither of them can apply a finish at the moment.

Agree with someone on here that says we should look at playing 5 in midfield and playing Nuge up top on his own, certainly whilst wood is out anyway.
I did say to my mate at the game yesterday I couldn't understand why when we were 1-0 up Pearson didn't bring James on in midfield for Vardy rather than a Vardy straight swap with Waggy as at that stage Posh were pressing us intensely and it was only a matter of time that they got the equaliser, however my mate thought i was being negativ! i think maybe we would have gone on and won the game had we have shored up the midfield at that stage.

"if NP has not played him yet he can't have much faith in him!"

----------------

My thoughts exactly, Nev.

However, we have played Nugent up front on his own earlier in the season with some success: After the back 4, the team read (as a 4-2-3-1)

King/Drinkwater
Dyer/Knockaert/Vardy
Nugent

And we played some very good stuff with that formation, Knockaert being granted something of a free role. It might be worth a go playing something like this again while Wood's out, because I think other teams are getting a grip on our 4-4-2 as things stand.

I just dont understand the "savaging" of vardy.

Despite his work rate he lacks the quality and experience at this level, not a fault of his but a problem for us.

He's not the reason we lost either - Worth noting we were still 1-0 up when he went off.

Waghorns miss at the end however.Terrible. I actually think vardy would of scored that