Ruud van Nistelrooy implies Leicester City strategy failure as loud cheer reveals big problem

Ruud van Nistelrooy has now lost more league games 4-0 than he has won as Leicester City manager, and after the latest capitulation he dropped some bombshells.

“With the squad we have,” he said, “it’s a huge mountain to climb to stay in this league.” He added: “We have to accept that we are in a position where every week we face a better team.”

Those comments suggested he believes the squad isn’t good enough to stay in the Premier League. When that was put to him directly, he denied it.

Maybe he was just trying to lower expectations so as to take pressure off the players, but nobody believes that City are serious contenders for a mid-table spot. Everybody was already aware City would struggle and that it would be a battle to stay in the division.

Maybe the manager thought that any kind of positive take on the game would be deemed to be glossing over another disastrous evening, but why undermine his squad to that extent?

So maybe it was also just a burst of raw honesty, van Nistelrooy letting out his true feelings after another damaging night.

“It’s not fair to have certain expectations,” he said. “You cannot live up to them. You can only be the best you can be. We’ll see at the end if it’s enough or not.”

In short, even if they play at their maximum, City might not be good enough to survive. And who’s to blame for that? In a subtle dig, van Nistelrooy suggested it was the club and their recruitment strategy.

Without prompting, he praised the way Brentford had built their squad, buying players for a particular style and with the characteristics needed to succeed in the top flight.

“The gap between them and us was very big in quality,” he said. “A team that is together for such a long time, that has been built in an idea of play, with the profiles physically, tactically and technically there.

“They’ve had quite a few years in this league and gradually built into a squad we are far off.”

He didn’t explicitly say it, but Van Nistelrooy left the dots there to be connected. By laying out what Brentford had done well, he seemed to be implying City had got it wrong, that their approach to signing players was scattergun and that those brought into the club were not of the required quality.

It’s not an assessment that many on the outside would disagree with, but to come from the manager of the team was eye-opening. It felt like a defeatist approach from van Nistelrooy.

It may have been his honest, emotional thoughts in the wake of another heavy defeat, but it also stunk of self-preservation, a kind of shoulder-shrugging ‘what do you expect me to do with this lot?’ approach.

Perhaps that is a harsh interpretation, and it would seem out of character for van Nistelrooy to be so self-centred, but it did feel like a pre-emptive attempt to absolve himself of blame from the inevitable relegation three months ahead of time.

Van Nistelrooy took the job knowing the players at his disposal. Maybe he really did expect that he would be able to overhaul the squad in January.

Maybe, once again, the club have pulled the rug from under a manager and have over-promised and under-delivered in a transfer window.

But, having said the squad was good enough to stay up at the conclusion of the winter window just a few weeks ago, maybe this is just van Nistelrooy changing his tune so as to protect his reputation.

Either way, it doesn’t reflect well on the club, the manager, nor the team’s chances of staying in the Premier League.

Comments will further damage belief

Where do they go from here? Suggesting the squad isn’t good enough feels detrimental to making them play better, even if it was an attempt to relieve pressure.

Perhaps the sense that they cannot compete in the division is why they keep collapsing. There’s been a few examples under van Nistelrooy now where they’ve been fine, or even played well, but then fallen apart upon letting in the first goal.

On Friday, they looked totally panic-stricken in defence in the first half and didn’t calm down again until the game was beyond them. No player took responsibility.

But there’s still 12 games to save themselves. The situation may be “alarming”, according to van Nistelrooy, but it’s still not as dire as it was in 2014/15 and City survived then.

Yes, there needs to be self-reflection and analysis, but players need to have belief in themselves and in each other, and it doesn’t feel like van Nistelrooy’s words will inspire that.

Do City find another manager who has greater faith in keeping this squad up? It would cost them to do so, both financially and in their reputation. Do managers really want to join a club where bosses don’t even last 15 games?

From this whole debacle, it’s the fans who suffer most. They’ve already sat through what is now the worst home run in the history of the English top flight and now they’ve heard that their manager is running out of faith in their squad.

What hope are they to have? Why should they shell out to attend games? It’s a mess.

Buonanotte cheers show why RvN words won't cut through

It’s difficult to ascertain quite how the fanbase feel about van Nistelrooy as much of the anger from the crowd is still directed at Jon Rudkin and the board. But support for the Dutchman does appear to be dwindling.

His assessment over the squad and his possible dig at the club’s recruitment policy would have backers in the fanbase if they thought he was picking the best 11 himself. It’s clear they do not think he is.

The biggest cheer in 540 goalless minutes of Premier League football at the King Power Stadium came when Jordan Ayew was substituted for Facundo Buonanotte.

Ayew, perhaps unfairly, has become the symbol of what is wrong at City, in both recruitment and selection. He was signed, aged 33, for a few million quid despite being in the final year of his contract, and he’s now started six straight games without providing a goal or an assist.

He was one of City’s better performers against Arsenal, but when you’re an attacking player who is not delivering at the top end, you really have to do well to justify your selection.

Van Nistelrooy explained Ayew and Bobby De Cordova-Reid’s continued inclusion is because they make the team more “solid”. But that has to be justified on the pitch.

Ayew was fine on the ball but totally lacked energy and urgency to help out his defenders, ambling back when City weren’t in possession. His performance was in direct contradiction to van Nistelrooy’s explanation.

In the fans’ eyes, he’s never done enough to justify keeping his spot over Buonanotte, even if the Argentinian has lacked impact in his recent substitute outings.

There were effectively celebrations in the stands when Buonanotte came on and he responded by attacking with intent. His quality was there to see. It was his best showing in a while.

Van Nistelrooy is only going to have support from the stands if he is deemed to be picking his best available 11 or, if he’s not, to have the players he does choose justify their inclusion.

With the lack of goals over recent weeks, and now given the performances of Ayew and De Cordova-Reid, that support from the stands simply won’t be there unless he starts Buonanotte at West Ham on Thursday.

Player arguments show passion, but they're rarely good news

Harsh words were clearly uttered between Boubakary Soumare and Mads Hermansen after Brentford’s fourth went in, and while it didn’t seem like they would come to blows, team-mates still got between them to ensure it wouldn’t happen.

Van Nistelrooy was not concerned. In fact, he was pleased they were showing “passion”.

Maybe it does show an element of care, and that’s certainly preferable to the opposite. Especially as there were multiple moments in the second half where Wout Faes appeared not to give a hoot, including for the fourth goal, when he stood on the line and seemed to accept that City would concede again.

But it certainly suggests things aren’t harmonious. An argument between two City players that exhibited such a level of anger has not been seen since the thrashing by Brighton in the previous relegation season.

It’s not a good sign. City want players who care, but they need to care as a team. If the odds are as stacked against City as van Nistelrooy suggests they are, the bonds between players have to be tight. That argument suggested they’re not.

What hope is there to cling on to?

After such a performance, such a poor run, and after such comments from the manager, it feels irrational to try to find positives. But why bother with the whole sport if not to try to have hope? So here’s a few nuggets.

As mentioned above, City have saved themselves from worse situations. There are four poor teams at the bottom and there’s plenty of time yet for City to show they are the best of a bad bunch.

They have, in the past, shrugged off such desperate displays and managed to produce decent performances in the aftermath. Losing 4-0 is not a new phenomenon for them.

They did, before Brentford’s first, create a few good chances. The game could have been different had either Woyo Coulibaly or Jamie Vardy’s efforts beaten Mark Flekken.

By the nature of the game, their luck will change. A bounce will go their way. They’ve had 64 shots, 20 on target, in home league matches without finding the net. If they keep averaging more than 10 shots a match, goals will come.

Their defence may be wobbly but they have a midfield duo in Wilfred Ndidi and Boubakary Soumare that can protect them, as long as they’re not playing as openly as they did on Friday.

There are good players in the attack. Buonanotte and Bilal El Khannouss can produce moments of magic and Vardy looked sharp on Friday, even in spite of the problems behind him.

There’s not a lot to clutch at, but there’s enough there for fans not to feel the next three months are destined to be miserable, even if it may seem like it right now.

Was van Nistelrooy right to say what he did? Click HERE to have your say