Puel-come to the future

[m4DD0gg]

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. 

Fair enough.

 

I and lots of others dont agree. He should never have got the job in the first place.

[Beechey]

25 minutes ago, m4DD0gg said:

Fair enough.

 

I and lots of others dont agree. He should never have got the job in the first place.

Yeah, the alternatives were much better.

[Tringfox]

1 hour 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 doesn’t make sense and is a very dangerous thing to do as a manager. If puel keeps giving the likes of Danny Simpson a more offensive role and we keep performing as poorly as we did last Saturday Puel might find he will be the person being shipped out in the Summer!

Edited 27 February 2018 by Tringfox

[ZeGuy]

1 hour ago, m4DD0gg said:

Fair enough.

 

I and lots of others dont agree. He should never have got the job in the first place.

And who would have come? Ancelotti? Mancini? Guardiola?

 

Spare us the "I and lots of others". You and lots others judged him only based about what Soton's fans said about him and none of you did even bother to look after what he achieved elsewhere. You didn't have a clue and your argument is as convincing as Musa playing wide.

Edited 27 February 2018 by ZeGuy

[NotTheMarketLeader]

4 hours ago, Babylon said:

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. 

 

 

I can see your perspective with these figures tbf. 

[reynard]

5 hours 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.

Statistics can be deceptive though. I don't know the answer to these questions but if someone could provide them I would be interested.

1 Where was our possession ie was most of our possession in defensive postions or in the final third of the pitch

2 When did those 19 shots occur. I reckon on around 8-10 in the last 12 minutes and 2 or 3 in the first 4. If so the other 74 mins were a bit bereft.

 

This quote from the Guardian sums it up for me.

Stoke have conceded more goals than any other team in the Premier League this season but for most of this match their defence was not in peril. That was partly because of the protection provided by a sturdy midfield trio of Allen, Badou Ndiaye and Geoff Cameron, but also because of the failings of Leicester, who did not test a back four in which Kostas Stafylidis was making his first start since his arrival from Augsburg in January and Bruno Martins Indi was returning from a long injury lay-off and had to hobble off again before the end.

 

Yes we could have won but one striker up front against a team with the worst defensive record in the league? Also how many players do we commit to attack? how many players do we get in the box. There were times when we had 0 or 1 players in their box when attacking. Our whole approach is passive and our build up play slow and this is is getting more passive and slower with each passing game.

Stoke were there for the taking. But as you correctly say we lost the midfield battle and from that stemmed the problems but for some reason our manager chose to do nothing about it. As the home side we should be looking to be more assertive, more on the front foot but we weren't and haven't been at home for a few games now. I can only assume that this stems from the manager's approach.

[sacreblueits442]

14 hours ago, Beechey said:

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

Listened to Radio Leicester on Monday night and a Portuguese journalist confirmed that Silva was loaned out to another Portuguese club (Academia) of which Silva played at number 10. Academia went on to win the Taca de Portugal (Portugese F.A. cup) beating Sporting in the final. Sporting was so impressed by Silva that they immediately had him back.

 Not too sure what Puel is seeing in training but having seen the team he is picking to play I can only surmise that he must be on something. Honestly what was your first reaction when the team was announced for the Stoke game, because no one in their right mind would chose that team unless half the players were incapacitated in some form or other!!!

[KingKoala]

I like Puel and what he is trying to do with the change of tactics from previous manager, but just curious what happened since Palace game.

It looked all good until Saints away match and then our form went down..

I think we have enough quality in our squad to challenge Europe..

I know he needs players that suits his style but I think we already have most of that.

[yorkie1999]

If one of those chances at the end of the stoke match had gone in, no-one would be questioning Puel now.

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, reynard said:

Statistics can be deceptive though. I don't know the answer to these questions but if someone could provide them I would be interested.

1 Where was our possession ie was most of our possession in defensive postions or in the final third of the pitch

2 When did those 19 shots occur. I reckon on around 8-10 in the last 12 minutes and 2 or 3 in the first 4. If so the other 74 mins were a bit bereft.

 

This quote from the Guardian sums it up for me.

Stoke have conceded more goals than any other team in the Premier League this season but for most of this match their defence was not in peril. That was partly because of the protection provided by a sturdy midfield trio of Allen, Badou Ndiaye and Geoff Cameron, but also because of the failings of Leicester, who did not test a back four in which Kostas Stafylidis was making his first start since his arrival from Augsburg in January and Bruno Martins Indi was returning from a long injury lay-off and had to hobble off again before the end.

 

Yes we could have won but one striker up front against a team with the worst defensive record in the league? Also how many players do we commit to attack? how many players do we get in the box. There were times when we had 0 or 1 players in their box when attacking. Our whole approach is passive and our build up play slow and this is is getting more passive and slower with each passing game.

Stoke were there for the taking. But as you correctly say we lost the midfield battle and from that stemmed the problems but for some reason our manager chose to do nothing about it. As the home side we should be looking to be more assertive, more on the front foot but we weren't and haven't been at home for a few games now. I can only assume that this stems from the manager's approach.

I don't think we were negative, we're just not great against teams he just sit deep and want to spend the game defending.

 

The last few months that's all we seem to have faced at home and we've struggled, no matter who we played. We've not played two upfront very often in the last few years, nor sure why it's a crime now, Gray was probably more advanced than Okazaki often is, he's just light weight and can't play there.

 

My issue isn't that we were negative, I felt like we were working ourselves into good positions all game, but that was mostly out wide and we just kept crossing it. It became clear early on that it wasn't working and we should have changed it so we could try and go through the middle . That's my biggest gripe.

[mozartfox]

17 minutes ago, KingKoala said:

I like Puel and what he is trying to do with the change of tactics from previous manager, but just curious what happened since Palace game.

It looked all good until Saints away match and then our form went down..

I think we have enough quality in our squad to challenge Europe..

I know he needs players that suits his style but I think we already have most of that.

Or play the ‘best’ team instead of recalling players based on past historical results. Dissing Armatey and Drago for doing nothing wrong is baffling.

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, NotTheMarketLeader said:

I can see your perspective with these figures tbf. 

There are plenty of issues, but I don't think we're honestly a million miles away. A few tweaks in how we play and personnel and you cut out giving them one glorious chance a game and we put away a couple more of our own.

[Babylon]

8 minutes ago, mozartfox said:

Or play the ‘best’ team instead of recalling players based on past historical results. Dissing Armatey and Drago for doing nothing wrong is baffling.

So what she the best team? Simpson and Morgan were both regulars in the teams that got us to 8th, a position we've not exactly improved upon since they were out. 

 

Fact is results didnt improve particularly with them out, these players I'm guessing you'd have in your "best" team haven't improved the team when playing either as performances have continued to be up and down no matter who plays.

[mozartfox]

If you think the team that was chosen last Saturday is our best 11, then keep taking the tablets.

[m4DD0gg]

3 hours ago, ZeGuy said:

And who would have come? Ancelotti? Mancini? Guardiola?

 

Spare us the "I and lots of others". You and lots others judged him only based about what Soton's fans said about him and none of you did even bother to look after what he achieved elsewhere. You didn't have a clue and your argument is as convincing as Musa playing wide.

 are you on crack?

 

Based on your location i assume you dont go to many games........which in the last 11 you should be glad you didnt.

 

PS i dont give two shits what southampton fans say, i make my own mind.

Edited 27 February 2018 by m4DD0gg

[Suzie the Fox]

5 hours 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.

Totally agree and sometimes his bizarre choices have worked (Southampton if i recall was one of them) and some have not, Stoke for example - which we still finished with 1 point.)

 

I'm more than happy with Puel, and if we finish this season in the top half and a cup semi/final it will be a great year. 

 

He does need to bring in his own players and i think it unfair to judge him based on what he adopted when he arrived. 

 

My only bug bear, and its been said on this thread and many others, IF he wants to change the way things are and to test the waters ... Wasnt Saturday the perfect opportunity to bring on either Silva or Iborra? To every man and his dog (and my cat) MF wasn't working, N'diddi was no where near his best and although i didnt think James had a bad game, we did need to change something. 

 

 

[Suzie the Fox]

13 minutes ago, m4DD0gg said:

 are you on crack?

 

Based on your location i assume you dont go to many games........which in the last 11 you should be glad you didnt.

 

PS i dont give two shits what southampton fans say, i make my own mind.

[ZeGuy]

9 minutes ago, m4DD0gg said:

 are you on crack?

 

Based on your location i assume you dont go to many games........which in the last 11 you should be glad you didnt.

 

PS i dont give two shits what southampton fans say, i make my own mind.

 

 

No I don't go to many games indeed. But I've seen enough to know that even if we're misfiring a bit and the Stoke match was a headache, we're still miles away from the turgid games under Shakespeare or Ranieri (season II). We actually play something called football and building a team takes time. 

 

You might don't give a shit about what others say, but you never liked him from the get go without any valid argument to support that. Not that you're the only one, mind you. You lot have 0 patience and your expectations are not realistic one bit. I'm wondering who's actually on crack. The actual results fit your narrative, but I'm curious as soon to hear what you say as soon we'll start to win games again.

 

And you still didn't answer the question as to who would've come?

[Blue ROI]

Talk of Claude being sacked after Saturday is absurd. We'd only need to consider that if we're in relegation trouble a la Ranieri/shakey.

 

His selection though against Stoke I reckon is fair game. I've good time for Morgan but to pick him over Dragovic was daft. It smacked of not looking at the bigger picture.

 

If we're going to be aiming for Europe next season this was a game for a new face like the Dragon to put his stamp on things.

 

We get there next year and surely Wes won't be the main man anymore. Should we qualify a ready made partnership a la Maguire and Drago would go a long way. Throw Wes in against the next big things of central europe and he could struggle.

 

The champions league as much as anything was a just reward for the 3 years of growth as a squad before it but that time has now passed. Another journey will depend on some new blood coming through. We keep going back to the old reliables which could be our undoing in the long term.

[Beechey]

9 hours ago, sacreblueits442 said:

Listened to Radio Leicester on Monday night and a Portuguese journalist confirmed that Silva was loaned out to another Portuguese club (Academia) of which Silva played at number 10. Academia went on to win the Taca de Portugal (Portugese F.A. cup) beating Sporting in the final. Sporting was so impressed by Silva that they immediately had him back.

 Not too sure what Puel is seeing in training but having seen the team he is picking to play I can only surmise that he must be on something. Honestly what was your first reaction when the team was announced for the Stoke game, because no one in their right mind would chose that team unless half the players were incapacitated in some form or other!!!

Look at the match thread, my post is the first opinion comment. Didn't like Morgan or James, but I'm not a manager.

 

In my opinion, of the entire XI, I think Simpson, Gray and Albrighton (before he went to RB) had the worst games. Morgan wasn't bad at all, a few shaky moments but he's probably just still rusty.

Edited 28 February 2018 by Beechey

[Beechey]

6 hours ago, m4DD0gg said:

 are you on crack?

 

Based on your location i assume you dont go to many games........which in the last 11 you should be glad you didnt.

 

PS i dont give two shits what southampton fans say, i make my own mind.

Oh you're one of those "fans can't be fans unless they live here" or "you can't have an opinion unless you go to every game" people.

 

Why not answer his question? Which other manager would you have preferred? Those available were effectively Puel, Pardew, Allardyce, Moyes and Coleman (Tuchel, Mancini and Ancelotti all ruled out). I'm very happy with our appointment looking at that list.

 

You an Allardyce kinda guy? Like a bit of Pardew do you?

[Gerard]

4 hours ago, Blue ROI said:

Talk of Claude being sacked after Saturday is absurd. We'd only need to consider that if we're in relegation trouble a la Ranieri/shakey.

 

His selection though against Stoke I reckon is fair game. I've good time for Morgan but to pick him over Dragovic was daft. It smacked of not looking at the bigger picture.

 

If we're going to be aiming for Europe next season this was a game for a new face like the Dragon to put his stamp on things.

 

We get there next year and surely Wes won't be the main man anymore. Should we qualify a ready made partnership a la Maguire and Drago would go a long way. Throw Wes in against the next big things of central europe and he could struggle.

 

The champions league as much as anything was a just reward for the 3 years of growth as a squad before it but that time has now passed. Another journey will depend on some new blood coming through. We keep going back to the old reliables which could be our undoing in the long term.

 

Perhaps Puel sees no long term future for Dragovic as he doesn't believe he's worth the €20m we would have to pay?

 

Also IMO who is the better centre half between Morgan and Dragovic is apples and oranges. I can see why Morgan was favoured as he's better physically to deal with a big strong Stoke team than Dragovic.

[themightyfin]

It takes time for any manager to build his own team.

He wants to change the way we play and has had only one transfer window meaning he’s probably forced into picking certain players in certain positions that dont really fit with what he wants to do.

He also need time to assess EXATLY what he has here to then make a fair judgement on players to see they can fit in his style he want to achieve hence looking like he does but know his best team. 

Give him time...let him stamp his own authority on the team and build his own team here before passing judgment. 

What I do know is the quick counter ball over the top system does not work anymore we were sussed out as it showed when we struggled last season so something has to change in the way we play. 

Hes come in without his own players and taken us up 10 places or so in the table while also trying out different players and trying to completely change the way we play. That for me is impressive.

[1972 Fox]

2 hours ago, themightyfin said:

It takes time for any manager to build his own team.

He wants to change the way we play and has had only one transfer window meaning he’s probably forced into picking certain players in certain positions that dont really fit with what he wants to do.

He also need time to assess EXATLY what he has here to then make a fair judgement on players to see they can fit in his style he want to achieve hence looking like he does but know his best team. 

Give him time...let him stamp his own authority on the team and build his own team here before passing judgment. 

What I do know is the quick counter ball over the top system does not work anymore we were sussed out as it showed when we struggled last season so something has to change in the way we play. 

Hes come in without his own players and taken us up 10 places or so in the table while also trying out different players and trying to completely change the way we play. That for me is impressive.

Good use of upper case letters to highlight the misspelling of exactly! 

 

Agree with you that he needs time which unfortunately is a rare commodity for Premier League managers these days.

[m4DD0gg]

6 hours ago, Beechey said:

Oh you're one of those "fans can't be fans unless they live here" or "you can't have an opinion unless you go to every game" people.

 

Why not answer his question? Which other manager would you have preferred? Those available were effectively Puel, Pardew, Allardyce, Moyes and Coleman (Tuchel, Mancini and Ancelotti all ruled out). I'm very happy with our appointment looking at that list.

 

You an Allardyce kinda guy? Like a bit of Pardew do you?

Have a day off moron.