Puel-come to the future

[Farrington fox]

Some valid points there. 

[Finn Claw II]

We are still very much in the mix for 7th spot or the FA cup or at least a trip to Wembley.

 

Dragovic, Chillwell, James, Armarty all given game time.

 

shipped out a fair few of the ones we wanted shipping out and brought in a good prospect.

 

I’d like to see what Silva has to offer (Iborra seems to have disappeared also).

 

at the very least he warrants a summer and next season.

 

Are we really any better than a team chasing a Europa league spot and a good cup run? 

[volpeazzurro]

1 hour ago, foxinsocks said:

I watch wenger continue to stick to his vision..... he is so sure of it that he has let go all the players he thinks he doesn't need... so now he cant change anything... he's like a golfer with a bag of identical clubs.

Imo many managers stick to their vision even when its not working... they seem convinced it will turn round ...until they get sacked.  Eg claudio..shakey... mourinho at chelski.  

Someone made the point that puel got all his decisions wrong this week.... how to play...who to play... thinking they would heed his ht talk: even when they just carried like the first half he waited 25 min before subbing.

To prevent this sort of mistake...ie being prone to repeating poor decisions. ... then it is essential all managers should get a mentor and record their decisions and the associated  expectations before each game and then review how things panned out after. They need to understand the patterns in their mistakes and miss expectations.... and avoid in future.  Otherwise they will continue to dilude themselves and get sacked.

 

I worry puel wants to change the way we play. ... but he is being thwarted or that someplayers aren't doing what he wants  ( eg grey at no 10).    Worse when things arent working he doesnt change tactics or personnel on the fieldquick enough.... he seems to wait hoping his words will sink in!

 

Whilst at times as supporters we may not be privy to all a manager is, ie which players are carrying an injury, who's tired, whose got personal problems, this is a well thought out post and I've also thought this for quite a while. 

 

For example, we know that our Premiership title win was largely achieved with a particular style of play, however, arguably two of the main catalysts for this were Kante and Drinkwater. So why when they'd gone did Shakespeare think that by merely slavishly repeating the style of play was going to be successful. Barcelona were hugely successful with their particular brand of a passing game but, it was significant that they had Xavi, Iniesta, Busquets and Messi etc. There surely has to be the correct mix of system and appropriate players to carry it out usually for it to be successful. Anyone remember Sousa at Leicester, he tried to play champagne and oysters football with beer and mushy peas players!

 

Puel had to change things yet to some extent, through poorly thought out signings  (not necessarily poor players), he's been left with a hotch potch squad of players which is in dire need of being sorted out. I think he's still unsure of who he wants and who he doesnt want! This is what happens as I see it when someone other than the manager,  who should know what he needs to build a TEAM, is just given a bunch of players and told get them to play well together. As everyone on here appears to acknowledge,  this summer promises to be a long, interesting and frustrating one. We have to trust Puel as I see it as he's just really got here and inherited a problem  (like Pearson), he has a decent pedigree and, if we got rid of him, who on earth would want to come to such an unforgiving club for a manager?

[sacreblueits442]

8 hours ago, psychonaut said:

"Usual suspects are starting to pull the strings again. 'Coaches' and a few other 'squad members' actively want to play a different style to that of Puels possession game. Certain players are isolated within the squad if they do not fit the mould. Both Iborra and Silva fall into this category. This is an ongoing concearn within the squad and happens routinely with some of the new recruits. Pressure to revert to what the players feel comfortable with as soon as result faulter"

 

This is not from me but what I have been told by a source very close to the ground within the club of course it could be bullsh1t. I'm only passing it along.

Sounds about right to me!

  It seems strange that after the initial performances in his earlier games, we are now playing in the fashion of post Ranieri and Shakespeare. There must be a reason why this is happening and the common denominator  is the existing players who seem to have a great influence on the direction the club takes and style of play.

  It appears they have a vision  of how we should play but only certain managers (ie David Wagner) would be suitable for the style they want and this reversion to type will not be something that can be resolved unless the "Ring Leaders" are banished for good. The easier option is to sack the manager as opposed to selling half the first team and once again the owners are going to have to make a big decision!!

  Personally I would like a 3-5-2 set up or  back to 4-4-1-1 with a high tempo. We need to bring Silva in as a 10 and Puel's reluctance to put him in the team suggetst there is a fracture in the squad and Ibbora's views on the "Band of Brothers" appears to be a pointer to the potential demise of the squad and any subsequent ideas of playing in Europe next season.

  We need a strong manager, someone who dictates who we buy in and play the style he wants, the only problem is the "tools" at his disposal.

[Beechey]

39 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

Sounds about right to me!

  It seems strange that after the initial performances in his earlier games, we are now playing in the fashion of post Ranieri and Shakespeare. There must be a reason why this is happening and the common denominator  is the existing players who seem to have a great influence on the direction the club takes and style of play.

  It appears they have a vision  of how we should play but only certain managers (ie David Wagner) would be suitable for the style they want and this reversion to type will not be something that can be resolved unless the "Ring Leaders" are banished for good. The easier option is to sack the manager as opposed to selling half the first team and once again the owners are going to have to make a big decision!!

  Personally I would like a 3-5-2 set up or  back to 4-4-1-1 with a high tempo. We need to bring Silva in as a 10 and Puel's reluctance to put him in the team suggetst there is a fracture in the squad and Ibbora's views on the "Band of Brothers" appears to be a pointer to the potential demise of the squad and any subsequent ideas of playing in Europe next season.

  We need a strong manager, someone who dictates who we buy in and play the style he wants, the only problem is the "tools" at his disposal.

Or maybe he doesn't rate Silva as a 10? We don't see them training every day, he does.

[WigstonWanderer]

12 hours ago, Wymeswold fox said:

I know I may get slated for saying this, considering he's doing alright and any move would appear unlikely, but if Wenger leaves Arsenal (which it seems likely he will) - would Puel be tempted to go there if Arsenal had him on their list of targets?..

I thought this a couple of months ago when he was doing well, now, not so much.

 

I think we have to stick with him though. Can’t see anyone better coming in, but I am concerned about our prospects for survival next season.

[richardsfoxes]

How can people be so judgmental of Puel this early, we're in the best position we've been in since Ranieri won the league, he hasn't even had a summer window to get the signings he wants... 

[HighPeakFox]

If it did turn out that the players are the domineering force as rumoured above, I'd find that profoundly depressing.

[foxinsocks]

10 hours ago, volpeazzurro said:

Whilst at times as supporters we may not be privy to all a manager is, ie which players are carrying an injury, who's tired, whose got personal problems, this is a well thought out post and I've also thought this for quite a while. 

 

For example, we know that our Premiership title win was largely achieved with a particular style of play, however, arguably two of the main catalysts for this were Kante and Drinkwater. So why when they'd gone did Shakespeare think that by merely slavishly repeating the style of play was going to be successful. Barcelona were hugely successful with their particular brand of a passing game but, it was significant that they had Xavi, Iniesta, Busquets and Messi etc. There surely has to be the correct mix of system and appropriate players to carry it out usually for it to be successful. Anyone remember Sousa at Leicester, he tried to play champagne and oysters football with beer and mushy peas players!

 

Puel had to change things yet to some extent, through poorly thought out signings  (not necessarily poor players), he's been left with a hotch potch squad of players which is in dire need of being sorted out. I think he's still unsure of who he wants and who he doesnt want! This is what happens as I see it when someone other than the manager,  who should know what he needs to build a TEAM, is just given a bunch of players and told get them to play well together. As everyone on here appears to acknowledge,  this summer promises to be a long, interesting and frustrating one. We have to trust Puel as I see it as he's just really got here and inherited a problem  (like Pearson), he has a decent pedigree and, if we got rid of him, who on earth would want to come to such an unforgiving club for a manager?

NO, we don't know all that the manager knows - but I would like a manager to have a system in place to review his own decision making (were his assumptions right... were his expectations (re the impact of his decisions) met?).  He would do this privately with the goal of gaining insight in to his biases and propensity to certain types of errors or miss expectations - this would enable him to avoid such problems in the future.  IMO We are all destined to repeat all our errors unless we learnt from them and determine to avoid such mistake in the future.... marry the wrong girl... get divorced and find one just like the first etc...

Strange thing is... I never heard of a manager doing this. 

IN my working life I often reviewed things that turned out well or badly to see if their were biases that lead to such results... or signs that I could have picked up on earlier that might have made me wary of particular courses of actions.  Why aren't football managers implementing such a formal learning/development process?  (rather than stick to their guns until they are sacked).

 

Puel is a good guy - i hope he is able to have insight into his own decision make - it will make him a better guy

[Gerard]

14 hours ago, m4DD0gg said:

Wouldn't surprise me.

 

Even with Puel being whack it would seem the Leicester job is somewhat of a poison chalice these days.

 

No wonder it's a poison chalice when 8th and getting to at least the QF's of both cup competitions is a sackable offence in the eyes of a significant percentage of the fans.

[Babylon]

21 hours ago, NotTheMarketLeader said:

I’m not saying sack him but being better than the really piss poor manager that Shakespeare was, I don’t think is enough and I don’t have confidence in where we are going at present at all.

 

He’s making poor decisions and  being a good manager is all about making the right ones.

 

There’s no intensity in our play and that won’t wash in this division.

 

We were set up very negatively on Saturday to the point where I suspect Lambert could not believe his luck.

 

The last few weeks we have seen the dour and boring Puel some of us feared we were getting.

 

Very uninspiring to watch at the moment.

Were we really set up negatively?

 

66% possession to 34%. 19 shots to 6 shots, 13 corners to 1. 

 

Stoke were set up negatively with two defensive cm's tasked with sitting in front of the back line and not moving. It forced us wide and we ended up having to cross a lot, which we don't have the strikers for against their brutes.

 

We could and should have still won the the chances we created, despite not creating anywhere near enough considering our dominance and the fantastic positions we got into.

 

If we were negative God knows what their fans thought they were.

[NotTheMarketLeader]

10 hours ago, sacreblueits442 said:

Sounds about right to me!

  It seems strange that after the initial performances in his earlier games, we are now playing in the fashion of post Ranieri and Shakespeare. There must be a reason why this is happening and the common denominator  is the existing players who seem to have a great influence on the direction the club takes and style of play.

  It appears they have a vision  of how we should play but only certain managers (ie David Wagner) would be suitable for the style they want and this reversion to type will not be something that can be resolved unless the "Ring Leaders" are banished for good. The easier option is to sack the manager as opposed to selling half the first team and once again the owners are going to have to make a big decision!!

  Personally I would like a 3-5-2 set up or  back to 4-4-1-1 with a high tempo. We need to bring Silva in as a 10 and Puel's reluctance to put him in the team suggetst there is a fracture in the squad and Ibbora's views on the "Band of Brothers" appears to be a pointer to the potential demise of the squad and any subsequent ideas of playing in Europe next season.

  We need a strong manager, someone who dictates who we buy in and play the style he wants, the only problem is the "tools" at his disposal.

What are you on about?

 

We are playing nothing like the style we played with Shakespeare or anytime with Ranieri.

 

We are passing the ball to no effect with high % possession figures under Puel.

 

Chalk and cheese.

[NotTheMarketLeader]

9 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Were we really set up negatively?

 

66% possession to 34%. 19 shots to 6 shots, 13 corners to 1. 

 

Stoke were set up negatively with two defensive cm's tasked with sitting in front of the back line and not moving. It forced us wide and we ended up having to cross a lot, which we don't have the strikers for against their brutes.

 

We could and should have still won the the chances we created, despite not creating anywhere near enough considering our dominance and the fantastic positions we got into.

 

If we were negative God knows what their fans thought they were.

Yes one up front, no midfielders willing to get into the box, passing for passings sake in our own half; to me that’s negative football.

 

No press, no intensity whatsoever until we go a goal down.

 

The play we saw on Saturday in the first half may not have been Shakey’s defending the edge of the box all game negative tactics, but another version.

 

The wolf in sheeps clothing of negative play I believe.

 

Very boring to watch; I want to be entertained. As soon as the tempo was upped it was a different story. It’s either negative tactics or sheer stupidity to only act in a postitive manner once a goal has been conceded.

 

 

 

Edited 27 February 2018 by NotTheMarketLeader

[Babylon]

2 minutes ago, NotTheMarketLeader said:

What are you on about?

 

We are playing nothing like the style we played with Shakespeare or anytime with Ranieri.

 

We are passing the ball to no effect with high % possession figures under Puel.

 

Chalk and cheese.

We aren't far off where we need to be, we just need to be more clinical and have some better final ball when in good positions to create more unmissable chances.

 

Against Swansea and Stoke combined, the shot stats are:

 

Leicester: 32 shots, 14 on target

Opposition: 9 shots  3 on target

 

3 shots on target against and 2 goals conceded is shite. Whilst we've peppered their goal and not really got what we should have done. 

 

 

[Jack1993]

It's absolutely ridiculous for anybody to say that we should sack Puel, he's stuck between a rock and a hard place;

 

A) Play to the strengths of his current (inherited) squad, maybe pick up a couple of extra points in games similar to Saturday but probably concede a lot more and therefore drop points elsewhere. Even if we do pick up a few extra points now, we wouldn't start next season nearly as well as we could do with the correct prep... but guess what, if that happened a load of you would be calling for his head 5 games in to next season. 

 

B) Install his own philosophy, try to get the spine of the squad playing in "his way" replace the players that aren't very good at it in the summer and start next season with (in his mind) the best preparation possible to do as well as we can. 

 

Football owners get bad press for sacking managers too quickly but a lot of the time supporters are just as bad. If you think he's got time to play to our strengths now, ship half the team out, buy players in the summer, integrate them into the squad and get them all playing a new style of football before the season starts in a World Cup year then you're deluded. Everybody wants instant success or a sacking ffs 

[Babylon]

3 minutes ago, NotTheMarketLeader said:

Yes one up front, no midfielders willing to get into the box, passing for passings sake in our own half; to me that’s negative football.

 

No press, no intensity whatsoever until we go a goal down.

 

The play we saw on Saturday in the first half may not have been Shakey’s defending the edge of the box all game negative tactics, but another version.

 

The wolf in sheeps clothing of negative play I believe.

 

Very boring to watch; I want to be entertained.

You talk like we didn't have a shot... we had 19. We aren't applying the finishing touch at the moment, but I'm not sure how dominating teams and getting 4 x as many chances can be equated as negative. The opposition have been negative, we might not have thrown caution to the wind when perhaps there was a time to do so, but I can't call it negative when I witness the shit teams like Stoke serve up week in week out down here.

[NotTheMarketLeader]

32 minutes ago, Babylon said:

You talk like we didn't have a shot... we had 19. We aren't applying the finishing touch at the moment, but I'm not sure how dominating teams and getting 4 x as many chances can be equated as negative. The opposition have been negative, we might not have thrown caution to the wind when perhaps there was a time to do so, but I can't call it negative when I witness the shit teams like Stoke serve up week in week out down here.

We obviously have a different way of looking at these things. 

 

To my mind at home, against a relegation candidate of a team we should be taking the game to them from the off, putting them under pressure and gaining momentum. 

 

We are too passive it seems to me to our own detriment; being reactive and not proactive is never going to be better in a football match than the other way around. It’s not only in practical terms but mentally it makes a massive difference.

 

I would think the vast majority of attempts on goal were in the second half when ‘hang on lads we need to score. We need to be more postitive, get the ball forward quicker and have more intensity about our play’ was presumably spouted by Claude at half time.

 

That proves the point.

 

Attitude and mentality were totally different, but too little too late. 

 

And yes Stoke are shit, which makes it even more galling we are not grinding them into the dirt given we have I believe a talented squad.!

Edited 27 February 2018 by NotTheMarketLeader

[HighPeakFox]

1 hour ago, Gerard said:

 

No wonder it's a poison chalice when 8th and getting to at least the QF's of both cup competitions is a sackable offence in the eyes of a significant percentage of the fans.

By fans, can I read that as 'online malcontents?' 

[tiredclimb]

I think the Summer will bring a lot of changes. Even if we don't make Europe. Puel will see it as a chance to put his stamp on things and clear out any bad influences. 

[m4DD0gg]

1 hour ago, Gerard said:

 

No wonder it's a poison chalice when 8th and getting to at least the QF's of both cup competitions is a sackable offence in the eyes of a significant percentage of the fans.

Yeh 2 wins in 11 is doing great but that makes the average Leicester fan happy.

 

Chelsea will embarrass us if we play like we have done against Swansea and Stoke especially with that pathetic starting 11 which i feel is motivated by player power.

[Gerard]

Just now, m4DD0gg said:

Yeh 2 wins in 11 is doing great but that makes the average Leicester fan happy.

 

Chelsea will embarrass us if we play like we have done against Swansea and Stoke especially with that pathetic starting 11 which i feel is motivated by player power.

 

What do you suggest? Sack Puel and make Morgan player manager?

 

If the tail is really wagging the dog Puel should have full support in shipping these who are involved in the alleged player power out.

 

You've cherry picked that we have only 2 wins and 10pts from our last 11 league games but conveniently disregard we won our previous four league games prior to that run which would give us a far more respectable 22pts over our last 15 games.

 

I'm extremely happy with Puel. I believe he's a top quality manager who has a long term plan and a vision rather than just being a reactive to every little situation. I was impressed that he never felt he needed to spend huge amounts of money in the January window and would rather keep his tinder dry when he has more knowledge of who he wants in and out of the club. Lesser managers just want more players in regardless of cost and long term planning which is one of the reasons we've bought so poorly in recent windows when we couldn't spend our money quickly enough.

 

Sacking Puel now would just put us back to square one again and we'd look as ridiculous as Southampton did. We'd struggle to get a decent manager as after Ranieri was sacked after winning the title and Shakespeare was sacked a couple of months into the job despite not losing to a side outside the top six. I agreed with both these sackings but the perception was we were too trigger happy and sacking Puel probably means any manager with decent options wouldn't touch us.

 

If you want to sack the manager after every disappointing run we'll get nowhere. 10pts from 11 games and three FA cup winning ties isn't that bad anyway. 

[Tringfox]

Puel needs to get 3 points from our next game and it shuts everyone up!!

I think he is the right man to take us forward once he gets the players he requires, in the meantime he needs to pick the best players to suit the style of football, no more square pegs and round holes!

Edited 27 February 2018 by Tringfox

[Gerard]

10 minutes ago, Tringfox said:

Puel needs to get 3 points from our next game and it shuts everyone up!!

I think he is the right man to take us forward once he gets the players he requires, in the meantime he needs to pick the best players to suit the style of football, no more square pegs and round holes!

 

I don't agree.

 

He's giving the squad a chance to prove they can play the way he wants them to. Anyone who is incapable or reluctant to do so will be attempted to be shipped out in the summer. We can't have the players dictating to the manager how we should be playing.

[norwichfox]

25 minutes ago, Gerard said:

 

I don't agree.

 

He's giving the squad a chance to prove they can play the way he wants them to. Anyone who is incapable or reluctant to do so will be attempted to be shipped out in the summer. We can't have the players dictating to the manager how we should be playing.

That makes good sense imo, and would (sort of) confirm that he's written this season off as far as high achievement in the premier league is concerned to sort out his requirements for next season.

[NotTheMarketLeader]

1 hour ago, Gerard said:

 

What do you suggest? Sack Puel and make Morgan player manager?

 

If the tail is really wagging the dog Puel should have full support in shipping these who are involved in the alleged player power out.

 

You've cherry picked that we have only 2 wins and 10pts from our last 11 league games but conveniently disregard we won our previous four league games prior to that run which would give us a far more respectable 22pts over our last 15 games.

 

I'm extremely happy with Puel. I believe he's a top quality manager who has a long term plan and a vision rather than just being a reactive to every little situation. I was impressed that he never felt he needed to spend huge amounts of money in the January window and would rather keep his tinder dry when he has more knowledge of who he wants in and out of the club. Lesser managers just want more players in regardless of cost and long term planning which is one of the reasons we've bought so poorly in recent windows when we couldn't spend our money quickly enough.

 

Sacking Puel now would just put us back to square one again and we'd look as ridiculous as Southampton did. We'd struggle to get a decent manager as after Ranieri was sacked after winning the title and Shakespeare was sacked a couple of months into the job despite not losing to a side outside the top six. I agreed with both these sackings but the perception was we were too trigger happy and sacking Puel probably means any manager with decent options wouldn't touch us.

 

If you want to sack the manager after every disappointing run we'll get nowhere. 10pts from 11 games and three FA cup winning ties isn't that bad anyway. 

I’m not advocating sacking the manager, let’s get that clear.

 

However, I don’t see why we can’t question the bloke given;

at best questionable selections,

and poor recent form.

 

Lets not bring the FA Cup run into the equation please. It’s been lower league opposition all the way, losing any of those games would have had Puel on the ****ing back foot! 

 

Seeing as he is held in such high esteem by your good self,

please explain the wisdom of the following over the last few weeks;  in terms of squad cohesion / well being / unity and picking players on merit rather than reputation, whilst also considering the manager wants to play a passing game from the back.

 

1. Mahrez goes missing / on strike for 10 days yet his punishment is to be sat on the bench for 45

mins.

 

2. Dragovic and Amartey are dropped while the agricultural style of Morgan and Simpson return to the team, despite the formers games clearly being more suited to the game the manager wants to play.

 

I dont see any of these situations being sensible decisions, in fact they are downright concerning.

Edited 27 February 2018 by NotTheMarketLeader