Yahoo Sport 
Why Harry Winks pounded the turf in fury as Steve Cooper set task by blunt Leicester City chant
This was a unique Leicester City performance. For the first time, there were no especially poor spells where they were conceding big chance after big chance, but neither were there any redeeming periods of play where they piled the pressure on, doing enough to earn a result.
This was their first 90-minute performance of the season. It just so happened to be 90 minutes of nothingness that ended in their heaviest defeat of the campaign so far.
City are yet to marry solid defence and potent attack and so it proved again at Old Trafford. This time, it was the opposite combination to usual.
READ MORE:Steve Cooper responds to Leicester City boos as Manchester United defeat sees chant brought back
READ MORE:Ricardo Pereira and Jamie Vardy injury return dates as huge Leicester City blow revealed
It may be hard to believe given they conceded three goals but the underlying statistics showed this was City’s most resolute defensive display of the season. Manchester United’s expected goals tally of 0.7 is the lowest figure City have given up in a Premier League game this term. Their six shots inside the box is the fewest City have conceded, considerably below their average of 14. United had just one Opta-defined ‘big chance’, again the fewest City have given up.
The quality of Bruno Fernandes and Alejandro Garnacho’s long-range strikes, the misfortune of the own goal and the lack of heroics from Mads Hermansen led to three goals being conceded. But, maybe for the first time this season, their defensive structure around their box was sound.
That’s not to say there were no mistakes in the build-up to each of the goals. There were. But City were not torn apart. Their defensive organisation was better. If they restrict teams to the chances United had every week, their record at the back will improve.
The concern would be that United let their foot off the gas, that they didn’t create big chances because they didn’t have to. There was no real need for them to push for a third goal because City offered no threat.
For the first time this season, City lost both halves of the match. Usually, when they go into the break trailing, they come out fighting, producing a comeback or at least threatening one. At Old Trafford, they had just one shot in the second half.
Their attack was blunt. Reaching the final third was not a problem, but breaking into the penalty area proved tough. They had just 10 touches in the United box, their second-lowest amount, despite their 123 touches in the final third ranking sixth of their 11 fixtures. They completed 15 carries into the final third, the most they've managed in a game this season, but failed to complete a single carry into the box for the first time.
It’s the first time this season that City have failed to score in a Premier League game and it was the limp second-half response that is the most disappointing aspect of the performance. The defining positive feature of City’s first 10 games was their never-say-die attitude, and it was a characteristic to grip onto as fans look for reasons to believe this team can stay up. Sadly, that attribute was not on show at Old Trafford.
Winks rages as poor decisions and lapses in awareness cost City
So if City defended more solidly, why did they concede three goals? For all three, there was a failure to put pressure on the ball. Maybe it could be attributed to City’s keenness to defend the 18-yard box. But, more likely, there was a lack of awareness and alertness that cost them.
City did not at all switch on from the throw-in that led to the first goal, Boubakary Soumare standing well off Amad Diallo to allow him to back-heel to Fernandes. For the second, James Justin didn’t get out to Noussair Mazraoui quickly enough to block the cross. For the third, there were a number of players that could have done more, not least Wout Faes, who gave Garnacho the space to shape himself and curl into the top corner.
Ultimately, every mistake that leads to a goal falls on the manager’s shoulders, but there were poor player decisions involved throughout. For example, Victor Kristiansen inexplicably let a high ball bounce in his own half, Amad capitalising and winning the throw that led to the first goal.
Even on the ball, players made bad decisions. For the third time this season, Abdul Fatawu tried to score from his own half, in turn wasting a chance to counter-attack. Captain Harry Winks vented his fury at the winger, slamming his hands in the ground. Only 20 seconds earlier, he’d done the same when Facundo Buonanotte tried to dribble around two men to escape his own box.
It is difficult to know where the buck stops when there are poor decisions like these. Are they the players’ fault, or are they the manager’s problem for not coaching those poor decisions out of them? City are never going to go through a match mistake-free, but they certainly can’t afford as many as they’re making.
City must adapt as reliance on Vardy evident
Jamie Vardy doesn’t start a league game for the first time this season and City fail to score for the first time this season. It’s probably not a coincidence.
It’s not that City are always a consistent threat when their number nine is on the pitch, but his penalty-box nous, and his reputation for sniffing out chances and goals, does keep defenders on their toes. Rarely will an opposition centre-back dare help their full-back against a City winger and leave Vardy unattended.
But with Jordan Ayew leading the line, they could do that. The Ghanaian just isn’t the same threat in the penalty area. He is better at ghosting into good positions when others are attracting attention, rather than being the main man.
Plus, he naturally drops deeper to receive the ball to feet and to connect with the attacking midfielders. In turn, he’s not then in the box to cause problems. Put a cross into a dangerous area and Vardy might sneak around his man to get touch on it. Ayew doesn’t do that.
City’s reliance on Vardy is an age-old problem, but it seems to be getting worse, even as he enters his late 30s. Vardy has already played six lots of 90 minutes, as many as he did in the relegation campaign when he was two years younger. He was never going to be able to play as many minutes as he was doing and remain fit all season.
He may be back for Chelsea, but it doesn’t change the fact that City need to learn to play without him. He won’t be able to play every minute until the end of May.
Ayew is a different type of focal point. He needs runners going beyond him, rather than through balls to chase onto. The one time he got that, from Wilfred Ndidi, City created their best chance of the match. But otherwise, they didn’t adjust to the new man up front.
Soumare needs to be swashbuckling to be a success
After two impressive outings, Boubakary Soumare had indeed done enough to earn himself a first Premier League start of the season. But he didn’t show off the skills that made those two previous appearances so good.
On the ball, he wasn’t bad, especially first half. He was tidy in possession and mostly played sensible passes. But he wasn’t adventurous.
And he’s only effective when he’s swashbuckling. He needs to rush forward with the ball and power past opposition midfielders. He needs to have runners to pick out with first-time forward passes.
Perhaps the gameplan didn’t afford him the freedom to do that, but he didn’t produce those qualities at Old Trafford. And when he doesn’t, the downsides to his game become more noticeable.
He was perhaps guiltiest of switching off for United’s first goal while he ambled back too languidly for the third. It’s not game over for Soumare yet, but more may have been required for him to keep his spot for the next outing.
Blunt chant sets Cooper task ahead of big opportunity
Even amid the United cheers, the City boos were loud. This was the most beatable United side in decades and City barely laid a glove on them. As mentioned, the valiant comeback attempt that has been a theme of the campaign was not reproduced. So supporters were justifiably disappointed with their day trip to Manchester.
Cooper, as usual, did not shy away from the reaction. His sympathy for supporters, especially those that may have made three away trips in 11 days, seemed genuine.
But it still feels like he was some way to go to convince a large section of supporters that he’s the right man and that the club are on the right track. Once again, chants of “Cooper, sort it out!” were heard. It’s a direct call to action. Fans feel the manager is responsible for City not delivering what they want to see.
Cooper now has two weeks to “sort it out” and prepare for what is a big opportunity. If he can mastermind a victory over Chelsea and returning manager Enzo Maresca, it will be an extremely satisfying result and will generate lots of goodwill. But if City flounder again, it may be difficult to avoid another round of boos.
