Claudio Ranieri Admits Leicester Were 'Not Focused in the Box' in 3-0 Loss to Chelsea

Published on: 14 January 2017

"?Claudio Ranieri refused to accept that Leicester had given anything but a 'good performance' in their 3-0 loss at home to Chelsea.


A Marcos Alonso double either side of half time was followed by a Pedro header, but for all of Chelsea's excellent attacking moves, the champions made it far too easy for them. All three goals were marked by questionable defending.

PICTURED: Claudio Ranieri greets compatriot Antonio Conte in the King Power Stadium tunnel. ????? #LeiChe pic.twitter.com/wuF5hY5t75

"The performance was good, but when you concede three goals against a team it's difficult to analyse." Ranieri explained to "?BBC Sport


"We tried to do our best - we closed all the space, but they found two goals at the beginning of each half and that was difficult for us."

Leicester were blunt and failed to take the game to Chelsea, who were happy to keep them firmly at arm's length and dealt with their long balls effectively. Ranieri, however, did not believe that his players lacked fight.


"We played face-to-face, we tried to press high." the Italian said, which did not appear accurate at all. "We did well. I am satisfied for the performance."

Schmeichel senior laying into Ranieri's tactics on Star Sports. Like one of those nightmare dads in the U10s. But on TV and with replays

"If you are not focused enough in the box, they can score a goal."


Another interesting tactical point was Ranieri's decision to play three at the back. The Italian cited the second half in the last meeting between the sides (another 3-0 win for Chelsea) as the reason for a decision which seemed fairly odd given the nature of his defenders.

"In the first match at Stamford Bridge, they scored two goals, they made everything. In the second half, when I changed the shape, we played better."


"I said, we will play with the same shape and try to do our best. We played to our strength, and we concede the goals, but the performance was good."


Comments