Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Stevosevic

Claude Puel - Contender

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, ZeGuy said:

Not really. Puel is certainly not my first choice but it doesn't look like we have many options

 

Full agree on that.

 

That'd be a great start to build something. He's bit more tactically astute than Nigel Pearson and won a bit more than him, so there's that.

 

We indeed have a good squad and a good morale but hell if I know which style we actually have.

 

The success story is over and that ship has sailed. Everything went down the drain after the transfer window in summer 2016. We're not attractive anymore, the good coaches and players won't touch us with a barge pole, our best ones are either gone or want to go and we have to rebuild from the ground.

 

So was Ranieri. Most of the managers are. They believe in what they do. When it doesn't pay off they get the sack.

 

Then give me a name.

FYI, the style we play is 4411. With Okasaki linking midfield and attack. We rely on counter-attacking, and the pace of Vardy with ball-over-the-top and into the channels. We play a high press aiming to force a turnover in the opposition's half. We play two wide players, but defensive full-backs. Defensively, we try and force the opposition down the flanks, and then use big centre-halfs to clear their crosses. You should get yourself down to a few games. :P

 

I wouldn't have sacked Shakespeare in the first place. Right now, I'd probably admit the whole thing has been a fiasco, sack Rudkin, and reappoint Shakespeare.

 

Other than that, I can't "give you a name"! I can't research the whole managerial fraternity of Europe to come up with a candidate that would be a good fit for LCFC right now. The club actually employ somebody to do that. He's called Jon Rudkin.

 

All I can do is research the candidates that he comes up with and PASS JUDGEMENT on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, ALWAYS_SFC said:

Saints fan here - seems like were about to have more than Big Nige and Dany N'guessan in common (only counting recent years).

 

Won’t repeat what others have said - just to say that our home and away play was extremely schizophrenic. We were often boring as **** at home, though we continued to create and waste plenty of chances, if you believe the stats. On the other hand. we played some scintillating stuff away from home, combining quick counterattacking play with nice crisp passing. Our performance against united in the cup final which many felt we deserved to win was Puel’s philosophy at its peak.

 

Another factor to consider is that we had to juggle the league season, European football and progress in the cups - Puel rotated aggressively which made it difficult to build cohesion and understanding in the side. You can debate the pros and cons of rotation (I think he overdid things); what you can’t debate is that the season was a grind and effectively over after the cup final.

 

Puel had a reputation for being stubborn -and rumours are that he literally came to blows with some of the senior pros like Fonte and Bertrand. Language and communication were also a struggle. His dour appearance, on the other hand, masked quite a competitive and passionate side in training.

 

Moreover, he should be credited for bringing through some of our youngsters, in particular, Jack Stephens, a centre back who, up to that point, had been an afterthought and part of an Academy that’s going through a barren spell in producing talent. Throwing him into the second leg of a semi-final at Anfield (after a dirty, sneaky challenge by Vardy ended Van Dijk’s season ;) ) took courage and Stephens repaid that faith for the rest of the season with some polished performances.

 

The arrival of Pellegrino has put Puel’s spell in perspective. If anything we look even more pedestrian under the new manager which begs the question whether the issue is the squad rather than the management. The reality is that we have very one-dimensional players in midfield, though Lemina is a breath of fresh air. Redmond is basically the same raw player he was at Norwich; Tadic has a tendency to sulk and go missing; Davis is in the twilight of his career; Boufal remains a x-factor but doesn’t have the manager’s trust; Gabbiadni is class but all too often isolated; Shane Long is a decent athlete but is stealing a living as a footballer; and Charlie Austin, when he’s not injured, offers little in terms of overall play.

 

All which to say is that goals are not in our DNA. In many respects, you have superior options up top which would give Puel more to work with.  The big unknown is how far his more technical style would transfer to your more direct style. My understanding is that one of the reasons for Ranieri’s failure in his second season is that he tried to introduce a similar change...

Very interesting and well thought out post. I think you guys have more footballers who are more technical and comfortable on the ball across the park than we have, which is more suited to how Puel was trying to play, but one thing that we do have in our favour, which it feels like Southampton lack is firepower. In Vardy, Mahrez, Iheanacho, Slimani etc. we have players who we know can score goals at this level. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, EnglishOxide said:

I'm not really into a Southampton reject.

Good job Mad Mandy didn't think that or we might still be in league one. Although I know what you're saying.

 

Some of the stuff I hear worries me like fook, some of the other stuff sounds quite promising. My biggest worry is him coming to blows with senior players. Because him and Vardy are going to have issues IMO, two abrasive characters don't mix well.

 

Be nice to see someone embrace youth players for once though, far too often overlooked here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, EarlBeaumont said:

 

Well, I just can't say if some tactic is valid or not for the team, as I don't know too well Leicester team.

What I can tell you is that he knows how to play quite nicely with a 4-4-2 diamond formation, and that if players buy in, it can be very nice. If Leicester players can't, however, it is an error to appoint him. However, I guess this has been discussed over and over with the owners and that they hire him in full knowing of this.

 

I'm not sur he'll treat them like kids, he knows how to inspire people. Hell, he resuscitated from the dead to make him the most brilliant player I've seen in Nice since my birth. He certainly is a stern guy with high expectations, but nothing inhuman. A bit like a father with high expectations for his sons from back in the days, appearing cold and harsh, but with a genuine love for them and a source of inspiration.

 

I really can't say how he'll be doing. I'll just give him a chance as it can be real good.

OK well that's good to hear at least.

 

The tactics is going to be a problem though. We don't like too much possession, we counter-attack. We play with two out-and-out wingers. There's only one midfielder who I think would work well in a diamond and that's Iborra. The rest would probably struggle. A diamond also wouldn't suit Vardy's style-of-play. He needs, quick, over-the-top balls to latch on to, not a slow possession game. You need good attacking full-backs with a diamond but both our first choice full-backs are defensively-minded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

FYI, the style we play is 4411. With Okasaki linking midfield and attack. We rely on counter-attacking, and the pace of Vardy with ball-over-the-top and into the channels. We play a high press aiming to force a turnover in the opposition's half. We play two wide players, but defensive full-backs. Defensively, we try and force the opposition down the flanks, and then use big centre-halfs to clear their crosses. You should get yourself down to a few games. :P

 

I wouldn't have sacked Shakespeare in the first place. Right now, I'd probably admit the whole thing has been a fiasco, sack Rudkin, and reappoint Shakespeare.

 

Other than that, I can't "give you a name"! I can't research the whole managerial fraternity of Europe to come up with a candidate that would be a good fit for LCFC right now. The club actually employ somebody to do that. He's called Jon Rudkin.

 

All I can do is research the candidates that he comes up with and PASS JUDGEMENT on them.

Yeah, well it doesn't work anymore. Like since Kanté left.

 

Hell, no. He should have stayed the great nr. 2 he was. Completely out of his depth as PL manager.

 

So Dyche or Puel?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Good job Mad Mandy didn't think that or we might still be in league one. Although I know what you're saying.

 

Some of the stuff I hear worries me like fook, some of the other stuff sounds quite promising. My biggest worry is him coming to blows with senior players. Because him and Vardy are going to have issues IMO, two abrasive characters don't mix well.

 

Be nice to see someone embrace youth players for once though, far too often overlooked here.

This is my biggest reservation about him as well. This can badly backfire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ZeGuy said:

Yeah, well it doesn't work anymore. Like since Kanté left.

 

Hell, no. He should have stayed the great nr. 2 he was. Completely out of his depth as PL manager.

 

So Dyche or Puel?

 

Yes it does. Unless you think we're gonna win the League again?? It's not as good without Kante, but nothing in life is!

 

To digress, all the problems with the formation seem to come whenever we drop Okasaki.

 

I'd go Dyche over Puel. I'd go Coleman over Puel. 

 

In fact, I'd go Harry Redknapp over Puel *

 

I've actually not got a problem with Puel I just think the current problems with the side just need tweaking, not ripping up. I just don't think Puel is the man for that particular task.

 

Whatever your perception of the team's current problems, do you really think that a diamond formation is going to improve things?

 

* This is a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

FYI, the style we play is 4411. With Okasaki linking midfield and attack. We rely on counter-attacking, and the pace of Vardy with ball-over-the-top and into the channels. We USED TO play a high press aiming to force a turnover in the opposition's half. We play two wide players, but defensive full-backs. Defensively, we try and force the opposition down the flanks, and then use big centre-halfs to clear their crosses. You should get yourself down to a few games. :P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

OK well that's good to hear at least.

 

The tactics is going to be a problem though. We don't like too much possession, we counter-attack. We play with two out-and-out wingers. There's only one midfielder who I think would work well in a diamond and that's Iborra. The rest would probably struggle. A diamond also wouldn't suit Vardy's style-of-play. He needs, quick, over-the-top balls to latch on to, not a slow possession game. You need good attacking full-backs with a diamond but both our first choice full-backs are defensively-minded.

But isn't that the issue that Leicester have had since the title win.  How many teams defend against us with a high line.  They recognise the ball over the top threat to Vardy and defend deeper.

 

Claudio was correct that the team style needed to evolve and be capable of playing in more than one way.  We certainly have some talented technical players on the books who with the right coaching will be capable of playing less direct and more fluid quick passing.  We have seen glimpses this season.

 

Small point as it doesn't often happen, but look at the West Brom game, we were devoid of ideas as to how to break down a team who packed 11 players behind the ball.  If Puel can instill more options for us going forward then that's a good thing.

 

He wouldn't have been my first choice, but the more I think about it and look at his track record, I hope he can be really good for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since winning the league, there has been this conflict between keeping what worked and evolving the club. 

 

Ranieri in his second season tried to move things on and came unstuck.

 

Shakespeare went back to tried and tested, which worked for a while, but eventually looked none too impressive.

 

It is clear now that we need someone to come in, take the club by the scruff of the neck, and make it his.  Even if this upsets some long-term players.

 

Pearson, Ranieri and Shakespeare are all long gone and the future, not the past, is what counts now. 

 

Give the bloke a chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the tune of ‘The First Noel’

 

Puel, Puel

He’s rubbish they say

Defensive and boring down Filbert Way

Puel, Puel, Puuuel, Puel,

At least he’s not Coleman or Louis Van Gaal

 

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Because of what we have been used to under the previous two managers his style of play was just a little bit dull at times and it was pretty boring to watch, I've got to be honest.

"It was pretty defensive-minded. As a manager, you can be a little bit flexible and perhaps he felt with the personnel we had at the football club that was the best way for us to play. If he goes into Leicester where he has a slightly different make-up of a squad, he might play a different way. You never know. But I would be a little surprised if he did that.

"If I was Leicester fan asking a Southampton fan for his opinion, you probably wouldn't get a good report."


- Le Tissear on Puel. 

Make of it what you will. What I would say is that we've not exactly been great to watch for the most part of the last sixteen months or so. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Deucalion said:

Since winning the league, there has been this conflict between keeping what worked and evolving the club. 

 

Ranieri in his second season tried to move things on and came unstuck.

 

Shakespeare went back to tried and tested, which worked for a while, but eventually looked none too impressive.

 

It is clear now that we need someone to come in, take the club by the scruff of the neck, and make it his.  Even if this upsets some long-term players.

 

Pearson, Ranieri and Shakespeare are all long gone and the future, not the past, is what counts now. 

 

Give the bloke a chance.

Personally, I think he probably tried to change things too quickly rather than actually evolve.

 

We do need to somehow break the hold the long-term players seem to have on the dressing room, which I have read affects how well newer players settle and perform. A brand-new manager, with no connections to the club can do this, and can make changes faster than CR would have been able to. The club need to put a foot down with the players too, including the owners not consulting them like they have been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, daverollo said:

But isn't that the issue that Leicester have had since the title win.  How many teams defend against us with a high line.  They recognise the ball over the top threat to Vardy and defend deeper.

 

Claudio was correct that the team style needed to evolve and be capable of playing in more than one way.  We certainly have some talented technical players on the books who with the right coaching will be capable of playing less direct and more fluid quick passing.  We have seen glimpses this season.

 

Small point as it doesn't often happen, but look at the West Brom game, we were devoid of ideas as to how to break down a team who packed 11 players behind the ball.  If Puel can instill more options for us going forward then that's a good thing.

 

He wouldn't have been my first choice, but the more I think about it and look at his track record, I hope he can be really good for us.

Teams started doing that to us immediately after we beat Man City. It didn't stop us. You look at a lot of the first goals we scored after that: Newcastle, Palace, Nowich, Watford - etc - all against a deeper defence.

 

Dropping deeper isn't a good tactic. In 2016 this gave players like Mahrez and Drinky more time and space on the ball. Plus it makes it harder for opposition to break against us if they are constantly set deeper.

 

West Brom at home isn't a good example. Most teams struggle to break them down. If Mahrez doesn't miss that sitter then we win and Shakey is still in charge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, BenTheFox said:

"Because of what we have been used to under the previous two managers his style of play was just a little bit dull at times and it was pretty boring to watch, I've got to be honest.

"It was pretty defensive-minded. As a manager, you can be a little bit flexible and perhaps he felt with the personnel we had at the football club that was the best way for us to play. If he goes into Leicester where he has a slightly different make-up of a squad, he might play a different way. You never know. But I would be a little surprised if he did that.

"If I was Leicester fan asking a Southampton fan for his opinion, you probably wouldn't get a good report."


- Le Tissear on Puel. 

Make of it what you will. What I would say is that we've not exactly been great to watch for the most part of the last sixteen months or so. 

Bear in mind that Le Tiss has never been a manager and, if he was, he'd play 11 Matt Le Tissiers, entertain the feck out of the fans, every goal would be blinding but his team would lose all 38 games scoring 104 goals in the process while conceding 266 goals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...