Maddison told why he shouldn’t have ‘the audacity’ to slam Leicester teammates for lack of ‘hunger’

Simon Jordan has criticised James Maddison after the Leicester star had a go at his teammates for their lack of hunger against Fulham on Monday.

In a crucial clash for the Foxes, they conceded five at Craven Cottage to leave them in the relegation zone, two points from safety.

Following the game, Maddison – who will almost certainly be leaving Leicester whether they remain in the Premier League or drop down to the Championship – made an eye-opening admission.

He told Match of the Day: “Hurting. Big game for us and we were not at it.

“We didn’t start the game well enough. We were not hungry enough to want to win the game. We need to do the basics well.”

“Conceded five goals, what do you think?” He said when asked if defence is a concern. We have players who can score goals, we have threat and creativity, we scored three goals today.

“We can’t defend like we did, that is why we are where we are but it is not just the defence, it is the team. You defend as a team. The team needs to be watertight and that comes from the front too.

“We were not aggressive enough. They played through us. They scored three goals in the first half and it left too much to do.”

The 26-year-old later offered an explanation on his comments which he says were “taken out of context.”

But Jordan believes that explanation has not changed the meaning behind what he said and doesn’t think Maddison is in a position to criticise his teammates.

Jordan told talkSPORT: “We’re talking about appetite and hunger, if you’re not prepared to win your first battles and your win the duels and be on the front foot then your not playing for the shirt the way you should because those are the default settings.

“Ability and adversity and challengers and mistakes, those are things that happen and you can’t legislate for. But the one thing in life you can control is your own reaction to things in your mind and their approach to the game.

“Talk about the hunger side of things which has been extrapolated up to a lack of desire and then he turns around and says ‘what I actually meant was we weren’t competitive enough in our duels, we did not win our battles,’ well that’s the same thing. It’s the same thing just dressed up in a more palatable perspective.

“Hunger gets extrapolated up to there’s no desire but the desire that is required to meet the expectations of putting your best foot forward, it’s the same thing just in a different guise. So he does…