Jump to content

inckley fox

  • Post count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


inckley fox last won the day on 31 January 2015

inckley fox had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,601 Excellent

About inckley fox

  • Rank
    Key Player
  • Birthday 04/09/1979

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. You're using one particular stat against him in reference to the 8 goals / 'most big missed chances', but ignoring it when you mention the 20 goals goals last season when his goals to expected goals stat was exceptional, and he probably should have ended up with a good few less according to xG. Over the course of the 18 months you're referring to, he's done well to score that many goals and remains the only striker out of many, and for two different clubs, who's achieved success under Puel in the EPL. I don't think we can brush that under the carpet. As for Maguire, it depends on the price. I hope it doesn't develop into a situation where he rates himself highly enough to play for a top side, wants to leave but doesn't believe they should pay big side prices (it normally does!). I do, however, think he might be error prone in a two man CB partnership with advanced full backs, and if you look at the goals we've conceded with and without him in the side (it's 0.8 without him, 1.4 with him in the side), we may well be able to deal with the loss. I still think in a back three he'd be a serious asset. I am a bit surprised if a young-ish player is so keen to leave a side which can seriously evolve over the next season or two. He's getting plenty of game time, and the clubs he wants to move to won't necessarily offer that. If you look at others who've angled for a move to a top club then it worked out fantastically in that regard for Kante, less so (so far) for Mahrez, and dreadfully for Drinkwater. If you look at a wider sample from other clubs, then you'd have to say - especially for mid-table players in mid-table form - it might be better to work on your game at a club where you're doing well. That said, I can't blame players wanting trophies and being ambitious. And if that's the case then I won't be at all bitter, I'll wish him the best, but neither would I be surprised if it worked out better for us than it did for him.
  2. But they're not the same person! My mother had another kid at the school where I taught and had all sorts of opinions about the place which weren't informed by whatever I told her. Nobody ever once came up to me and said 'oi, what's your mum been saying about the school?' and I never felt the need to tell her not to pipe up, even if I didn't agree. She had her views based on what she understood to be the case, and voiced them. I never felt the need to clarify to anyone that we were actually different people. If we judged players on what their relatives' opinions were of their employers were then Albrighton wouldn't have played much in the Great Escape because of his girlfriend's tweets about NP. We'd have thrown everything Becky Vardy's said about football for the past few years back at Jamie. How many other brothers of players, or kids, parents, best mates have voiced opinions down the years, retweeting tweets, saying something we've hoped isn't a reflection on what the player in question thinks? And if Kasper doesn't like Puel, so what? Unless he's leading a revolt, in which case that'd be serious, or planning to leave, which would be a shame, then I don't care. Ultimately the performances are all that count and, while he's obviously not perfect, he's remained largely solid and committed on the field. So when the evidence of him serving the manager well is that he continues to be committed and competitive on the field, and the evidence of him being an absolute traitor is that his dad said 'that manager's a bit ropey, isn't he?', it seems odd to me that so many intelligent people go for the latter of the two.
  3. I agree that his distribution has always been questionable. A few years ago commentators routinely told us how outstanding it was and, well, it wasn't. However it isn't exceptionally poor. It keeps sailing over Chilwell's head because he almost always tries to pick out Chilwell, possibly because we believe that's the best place to send the ball to from goal kicks. Even at 5ft10, we still only have one player (two CBs excepted) who's any taller than him. If you're constantly aiming for the same target, and it's not a very big target, then you're going to get it wrong from time to time. In Kasper's case, he was mainly needed for his long ball distribution in the past, but I think he's adapted reasonably well to the change in style. His pass completion is 64%, better than De Gea, a tad below Cech, well above Fabianski, Begovic, Pickford, Patricio, Dubravka, and despite having played more long balls than many of them. I agree that it's not a great strength of his, and it frustrates me too at times, but it's not a reason to single him out as being especially poor. For pretty much every goal where you might question his role you'd have to single out 1-3 other individuals first. It seems, much like with Vardy, that people are highlighting him for criticism because they perceive that he's at odds with the manager. Well, I haven't seen much evidence of that on the pitch, and I do wish that people who (like me) support the manager wouldn't paint everything as a Him against Them situation. They don't have to like the manager (I know for a fact that some of our club legends couldn't stand O'Neill either), but I see no reason to believe that they're spearheading a revolt against him. Whether that's got anything to do with it or not, the singling out of Kasper seems a very odd observation to me - poorly supported by the evidence, and a total distraction from the real issues affecting the side. And - with respect to a few of the other posts on this thread - we must have very short memories if we start kidding ourselves that players as good as Schmeichel, shortlisted for FIFA Keeper of the Year last time round, are easily replaceable for a club like ours.
  4. I hope it pans out like that but if we struggle over the next game or two and find ourselves 10 games from the end of the season and 5-6 points off the relegation zone then I doubt very much we'll be willing to wait and see where we end up, simply because the danger of sleepwalking into a relegation battle could be immense by that stage. I know people think that it's arrogant of us to believe that we deserve better than Puel (and I pretty much agree), but the ultimate arrogance might well be thinking that we're immune to the consequences of huge collapses in form before the points are on the table. It's highly unlikely that we'll land ourselves in a scrap this year because we have 32 points and should pick up a good few more, but of course 32 won't be enough for survival and if our form over the past 6 matches continues for much longer we'll naturally get embroiled.
  5. We weren't hard done by. We got the rub of the green as regards refereeing decisions and simply didn't take our chances - three for Barnes, a penalty, headers for Maguire, Gray, Chilwell. Then there were the usual self-inflicted wounds. Maguire defended poorly for one goal, Pereira had a shocker for another, Chilwell's distribution - at the death - was the difference between a final chance for us and the icing on the cake for Spurs. So you can have no complaints, not unless you also want to strip ourselves of credit for grinding out points in games like Man City or Everton, when the opposition had more of the play. As for the bigger picture, we can't beat good or bad sides, or even fourth tier sides right now, home or away, and are on our worst run in four years, so the grumbles are understandable. But all that aside, I thought there was massive promise in that performance. Ndidi looked transformed with the pressure to spread play taken off him, Tielemanns was very effective. It was brilliant to see us ticking over properly in midfield, and encouraging to see such a young side look like a match for title-chasers. It reaffirmed my feeling that something is very close to clicking beautifully into place. On the critical side, the foraging full backs still leave us hugely exposed. It's very exciting to watch them burst forward but they've surrendered a lot of possession in useful areas over the past few games and struggled to be in a position to deal with the consequences. Maguire continues to have a couple of lapses in him per game, and in terms of shape, it still looks as if we could surrender one of our three attacking midfielders (how often have we seen two of them, let alone three providing much of a creative threat in a game?) in favour of a back three. I'm not sure you can have a solid defence and play such advanced full backs unless there's ample cover. I also felt Ghezzal struggled to make an impact, and Barnes - while doing well to get in the right positions - should obviously have buried one of his chances. Gray continues to be one of Puel's less justifiable eyebrow-raisers at centre forward. Overall, though, I'd be positive. And I agree wholeheartedly with the commentator who said that, watching Leicester recently, there's scant evidence on the pitch of them not playing for their manager.
  6. It wouldn't startle me if Vardy, Simpson and Morgan - when you saw them all muttering to each other on the sideline - were conniving against Puel. It wouldn't surprise me if Kasper didn't like him. It wouldn't surprise me if the old guard and their misconceptions about how great a side we could have been had caused problems for Ranieri, Shakespeare and Puel. It wouldn't surprise me if Vardy hated Puel, all his wife's tweets accurately reflected this, and it created a whole set of problems behind the scenes. But I have no evidence whatsoever for any of this. Vardy has done more than anyone to keep Puel in a job, as a player. Kasper isn't far off. For a good part of this season, Morgan has defied the years. None of them have ever publicly defied him in the way some players have at some clubs. Most respected ITKs have indicated that dressing room discontent against Puel didn't originate with the 'old guard', and nearly all of them agreed that the 'old guard' were firmly behind the previous manager too, before we start accusing them of getting all of our past three bosses fired. Above all, those players have done enough for us, over the years, to deserve not to be utterly condemned and derided as traitors by their own fans, until there's something solid for us to go on. And Peter Schmeichel - I'd expect him to do his job as a pundit. He's certainly not a mouthpiece for his son, and never has been as far as I'm aware.
  7. I'm not going to highlight anyone, but some ITKs are less ITK than people who literally never make any predictions whatsoever. One day someone is going to say 'He's going to be fired tonight' and, lo and behold, he'll be fired that night. I just hope people look at their past record and how many times they've said they'll be fired tonight before they hail them a prophet.
  8. You know, I want Puel to stay. I honestly believe it's leading to something and - like you, I suspect - I didn't get that feeling in Shaky's last few games. I feel there's a great chance that, regardless of whether we fire him today, in two weeks' time, in the summer, or never, we'll look on Puel as a great thing for this club. I'd stick with him, I really would. But we have to see the argument against him too, and it's growing in strength. If he were fired today, I'd see why. And if we lost to Palace, it'd make even more sense to me. It would go against my instinct for what's best, but I'd get it, because the form is terrible against weak and strong, the chance of it leading to greater catastrophe (next season, if not this season) is swelling and the progress is, in terms of outcomes, increasingly hard to pinpoint.
  9. If you're slating Kasper for his father's opinions, you're a disgrace in my opinion. I'd expect any media pundit with a vested interest to have his/her independent views and for people not to imagine that they reflect their friends' / families' views. You should base your assessments on solid evidence, not wild speculation. The solid evidence is that he's been one of our greatest ever players. Loyalty goes both ways - it's not all about backing the manager, or the club line. There's loyalty to players too, especially when we've got no concrete reason to doubt them. Schmeichel has not been an obvious scapegoat, nor anywhere near, for our recent poor form. He's done well for Puel, and when talk of dressing room discontent first surfaced in April 2017 Percy, the guy we consider to be most ITK, said that it had nothing to do with the old guard. Is he ambitious? He should be! He was one of three FIFA Keeper of the Year nominees last year, has been targeted by several major sides, won a league 2.5 years ago, he's 30+ years old and if Leicester are looking at a longer-term picture we certainly shouldn't resent him wishing to pick up more trophies in his career. It would be miserably bitter of us to think otherwise. And if he's voiced concerns about our direction then, so long as his own commitment is unwavering - and we have literally no evidence to suggest that it isn't - I'd be grateful that people are standing up to be counted. If people are imagining that he's pulling the rug from under Puel's feet in any way, then it's a spectacular case of joining dots in a way that suits your own agenda.
  10. It's not healthy that everyone is 'Puel Out' or 'Puel In', with their colours nailed to the mast - some balance is needed. Based on expectations at the start of the season, I'd understand if we fired the manager. We're in our worst form since in four years, his ppg average is worse than Shakespeare's, we know how results like Wycombe/Newport can lead to a collapse from our own history (having nearly ceased to be a club as a result of not heeding warnings in 2001), we're only marginally better off in the league than we were than Puel took charge, there's discontent on the terraces, in the dressing room (from the players who've been most crucial to the success Puel has enjoyed so far). If we lose to Palace, we'll be getting dragged towards a relegation battle, in our worst form since being newly promoted. You can't brush that off so matter-of-factly. On the other hand, I saw a side with bags of potential today. They should have won. And we've competed admirably against top sides recently. Something is painfully close to clicking into place. If we fire Puel and things pan out nicely over the next year or so, we'll look on him as the architect for this success. If it goes wrong, we'll wonder whether that fine performance today, and last game, and the game before that, might have soon translated into results against weaker sides. Personally, I see his tenure as being on a knife's edge - and his greatest advocates, myself included, have to accept that he either delivers soon, or we move on.
  11. I'm still 'Puel In' after that performance but we have to be careful that we don't undermine our own argument with lines like 'what a superb job he is doing' / 'a fine manager' or slating Shakespeare (who has a better ppg average) in comparison to Puel. Regardless of where we feel progress might have been made, if we say things like this it just won't stand to reason. Why? Well, we have a draw from our last six games in all comps - something which never happened under Ranieri or Shakespeare - regardless of whether we're playing good, weak or fourth tier sides. There's discontent in the dressing room and on the terraces. We're only slightly better off than when we appointed Puel, in terms of league position, and we're in our worst form for years without yet having the points to be safe. We knew, after the Newport game, that the cup shock could be the catalyst for an absolute disaster and we're still on track for that disaster. If our form continues to collapse in the way it did post-Wycombe, as it has so far, then we'll end up relegated THIS season. That's not hysterical, it's just a fact, even though I don't for a second believe we will be relegated. So we can't go around saying that he's doing a fantastic job. What we can say is that you see the potential for it to click into place and that it's worth giving him the time to show that performances like today's can translate to victories against weaker sides. But no, he isn't doing 'a superb job'. Plus, of course, there's no such thing as saying it'll 'pay dividends over the next couple of seasons'. Not only will the experienced players who've tasted success want out because we're not targeting short term success (and, like it or not, Puel would long since have been fired were it not for Vardy's super-human goals-per-chance ratio last season, or his winners against Everton and Cardiff recently - so we massively depend on those players), but the young players will also look for the quicker fix. I don't for a second believe that Maddison, Maguire, Chilwell et al. will stick with the Puel project any longer than Vardy and Schmeichel (and Mahrez) unless there's the hope of competing for accolades. By all means point out that this is the reality of life as a mid-table side. I agree. But it swings both ways.
  12. We'd be on a run of one point from our last five league games, a sole draw from our last six matches in all competitions, one win from our last eight, just eight points above the drop zone with 12 to go and among the most of out of form sides in the division. We'd be a mere place or two above where we were when he took over. There'd be discontent in the dressing room, unprecedented discontent (in the KP era) on the terraces, as well as miserable form on the pitch, unable to beat any side no matter how big or small they are, or even what division they're in. if we were in that situation, you could understand any board acting. We haven't lost yet, though.
  13. Totally agree on the first point. As for the second, I've found the post and the line of yours that I'm referring to was 'Yeah it's nothing to do with playing one of the biggest clubs in the country who've spent billions more than us. It's down to the preparation we didn't win. Utterly delusional.' To me that implies that you're saying 'don't blame Puel or his preparation for the slow start on this occasion' (that was what the poster you were responding to had said), but rather the quality of the opposition. If that's not what you meant, then I'm sorry for putting words in your mouth. If it was then my point stands that we're talking about multiple poor starts, rather than one in isolation, and not always against the biggest clubs. So, while I don't want to see Puel fired I still think that represents a wider problem. And, as with the other point about negative passing, Puel has acknowledged it as something he wants to address. So I'm merely agreeing with the manager that you, and myself, are sticking up for!
  14. I didn't say it was worthless at all, and I'm sure Aguero's goals today have boosted his stats no end too - before that they weren't so hot. Aubameyang and Firmino are still in negative figures. And, as I said, the xG had Vardy down as one of the world's best strikers last season, so if we're slating him now we also have to counterbalance that with credit. And these figures have to be taken in context, because if they weren't and we only went by xG ratings then Richarlison, Lacazette and Pedro would be better than Salah, Aguero and, in two of those cases, Kane. My point was that there are other statistical measurements in which Vardy isn't doing so badly. And my point was that he isn't receiving ample supply, and no self-respecting expert under the sun would argue otherwise. Furthermore, that no striker - other than Vardy - has ever performed so much as passably under Puel in the EPL, across two different clubs. Puel's sides don't score many goals regardless of the personnel. That's a fact, as things stand. The daftest stance you could adopt when critiquing one of his teams is to fret yourself over whether the centre forward is the problem, especially when you know the centre forward in question has pedigree. Vardy kept Puel in a job last season and the last two games that he won for us are keeping Puel in a job as we speak. He lived off scraps today, worked his socks off, picked up the ball more than any of our other attacking players, could have scored a belter entirely of his own making and - in the 87th minute - also, sadly, missed a reasonable chance, though by no means a sitter,. But if we're looking for reasons for our defeat he'd be a way down the list. What frustrates me is that so many people - and I'm not saying you're one of them - seem to feel that the scapegoating of Vardy, the wondering whether he's betraying the boss, or causing problems, or losing his legs, or past his best, is a good first port of call in their defence of Puel. As someone who'd like to see Puel stay here and do well, and who believes that he can, I think that making this point repeatedly undermines our own argument. In the end the guy pummeling his chest and primally bellowing 'Puel Out' makes more sense than we do.
  15. Interestingly, one of Puel's main criticisms post-match was that we weren't 'passing the ball forward'. He said we kept going sideways, backwards, laterally and passed with no forward purpose. And I saw plenty of occasions when there was a forward option but a player copped out and went backwards. Mendy, Ndidi and Pereira did it repeatedly, and it noticeably slowed the momentum. I thought some of the attacking players, specifically Barnes and Vardy, looked quite mobile. As regards your earlier comment about Puel not being to blame for our slow starts (sorry, can't find it now!) because the opposition today are of such superior quality, I think the point is that we're talking about multiple 'starts', rather than a single 'start.' We have one of the worst records in the league for conceding against the good, the bad and everything in between, so at some point a manager has to take responsibility for that. Other than that, I agree with your general sentiment that the booing for Maddison's withdrawal, and at the final whistle, and the general antipathy towards Puel is absurd. He may have to pick up results against good sides over the next couple of games to avoid this slump becoming a full-on crisis, but I don't see it as a full-on crisis yet. I'd hope for a bit more patience and thought there were a lot of positives in our display today.
  • Create New...