Puel-come to the future

[NotTheMarketLeader]

On 27/02/2018 at 14:43, 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.

Thank you Reynard. 

 

All week Ive been attempting to explain on here that we produced a very negative display in that first half despite the personnel selected.

 

I think you’ve done a better job in getting my point across with this post.

[Foxxed]

Pearson

Ranieri

Shakespeare

Puel

 

I do not want to add a fifth to the list in such short a time. 

 

The only thing that concerns me is using James to break down a defence.

 

I was excited to see the Ndidi, Silva, Gray, Barnes, Diabate, Ian attacking line up. And he does want to see the youngsters thrive. And I don't think he's a massive Morgan and James fan tbh.

 

I want to give him time.

 

But please God a better performance against Bournemouth.

[Beechey]

1 minute ago, Foxxed said:

Pearson

Ranieri

Shakespeare

Puel

 

I do not want to add a fifth to the list in such short a time. 

 

The only thing that concerns me is using James to break down a defence.

 

I was excited to see the Ndidi, Silva, Gray, Barnes, Diabate, Ian attacking line up. And he does want to see the youngsters thrive. And I don't think he's a massive Morgan and James fan tbh.

 

I want to give him time.

 

But please God a better performance against Bournemouth.

James was behind 3 attacking players, it's not his job to break a defence down, it's theirs. Albrighton, Gray and Mahrez did nothing for 75 minutes.

[Foxxed]

25 minutes ago, Beechey said:

James was behind 3 attacking players, it's not his job to break a defence down, it's theirs. Albrighton, Gray and Mahrez did nothing for 75 minutes.

James is certainly not our main defensive midfielder. And it was fairly obvious that Stoke weren't going to attack, attack, attack (unless you believed their pre match lie) so he hardly needed to be a holding midfielder. So what was his role, if not to try to break them down and create chances?

 

(Off point, but Mahrez was sadly our only creative outlet, and hardly 'did nothing')

Edited 1 March 2018 by Foxxed

[Beechey]

8 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

James is certainly not our main defensive midfielder. And it was fairly obvious that Stoke weren't going to attack, attack, attack (unless you believed their pre match lie) so he hardly needed to be a holding midfielder. So what was his role, if not to try to break them down and create chances?

 

(Off point, but Mahrez was sadly our only creative outlet, and hardly 'did nothing')

Mahrez didn't manage much at all of note until nearing the end, although his run where he went 1v1 was nice, amazing tackle to deny him the goal. Personally, I feel like Gray was the main culprit in the front 3 of midfield, he didn't play to his strengths at all. Albrighton a close second, with his aimless balls over the top.

 

It's definitely not up to the midfield 2 to create all of our chances when we have another 4 completely attacking minded players on the pitch. Levelling the blame solely at James is worse than unfair.

[ZeGuy]

31 minutes ago, Beechey said:

James was behind 3 attacking players, it's not his job to break a defence down, it's theirs. Albrighton, Gray and Mahrez did nothing for 75 minutes.

How was Mahrez supposed to do something against a team parking the bus while being doubled up and abandoned by the midfield as as well as his FB? Even like this he created a couple of chances, glorioulsly released Albrighton for his "goal" and his shot in the second half forced Butland to make a world class save. Albrighton was an absolute waste of crosses and free kicks but at least got one of them in, with the help of the GK that is.

But the biggest failure was Gray as 10, absolutely nothing came from him. This game reminded of the shit period under Ranieri and Shakespeare.

 

 

 

[Beechey]

1 minute ago, ZeGuy said:

How was Mahrez supposed to do something against a team parking the bus while being doubled up and abandoned by the midfield as as well as his FB? Even like this he created a couple of chances, glorioulsly released Albrighton for his "goal" and his shot in the second half forced Butland to make a world class save. Albrighton was an absolute waste of crosses and free kicks but at least got one of them in, with the help of the GK that is.

But the biggest failure was Gray as 10, absolutely nothing came from him. This game reminded of the shit period under Ranieri and Shakespeare.

 

 

 

Who said Mahrez alone was the one that should do something? I clearly put a lot of the fault on Gray and Albrighton. I hope Gray doesn't start next game, I'd much rather see Diabate.

Edited 1 March 2018 by Beechey

[Tuna]

2 hours ago, HighPeakFox said:

Rather than start a thread, I'll ponder here now as to whether the old guard needs breaking up sooner rather than later. If, and it's a big if, the rumours of the clique 'running the show' are true, then we have a bit of a malignant melanoma within the club, and it needs cutting out.

 

I don't like saying it, I don't even like thinking it, but maybe the only way forward is to break the champions right up and allow some new 'champions' to have their day.

Personally I think that some of our players are on the verge of falling off a cliff metaphorically speaking. Fergie always knew when to replace players - Butt, Phil Neville, Roy Keane, van Nistelrooy even Beckham - and always brought new players in to replace them and Man United never stagnated. We need to look to the future and rebuild the team with players that fit into the style of play Puel wants us to adopt, provided Puel gets the time to do this of course.

 

I was dismayed that Dragovic and Amartey were immediately sidelined for Morgan and Simpson.

[HighPeakFox]

1 hour ago, Tuna said:

 

I was dismayed that Dragovic and Amartey were immediately sidelined for Morgan and Simpson.

Totally, even though I have nothing against them as players - it sent a terrible message to 'outsiders'. It's almost as though evidence is ignored in favour of mates.

[foxinsocks]

2 hours ago, ZeGuy said:

How was Mahrez supposed to do something against a team parking the bus while being doubled up and abandoned by the midfield as as well as his FB? Even like this he created a couple of chances, glorioulsly released Albrighton for his "goal" and his shot in the second half forced Butland to make a world class save. Albrighton was an absolute waste of crosses and free kicks but at least got one of them in, with the help of the GK that is.

But the biggest failure was Gray as 10, absolutely nothing came from him. This game reminded of the shit period under Ranieri and Shakespeare.

 

 

 

Yes gray is no number 10.  Play silva at 10... this is the answer

[ZeGuy]

Just now, foxinsocks said:

Yes gray is no number 10.  Play silva at 10... this is the answer

That I'd like to know. Never saw him play in this position.

[foxinsocks]

1 hour ago, Tuna said:

...We need to look to the future and rebuild the team with players that fit into the style of play Puel wants us to adopt, provided Puel gets the time to do this of course.

 

...

But then we will have a skewed squad when puel goes.  Maybe scouting should aim for a bakanced squad of high quality so we have options 

[foxinsocks]

1 minute ago, ZeGuy said:

That I'd like to know. Never saw him play in this position.

He looks good on the ball and may be able to tap a pass thru  . or do a 1 2

[Babylon]

3 hours ago, Beechey said:

James was behind 3 attacking players, it's not his job to break a defence down, it's theirs. Albrighton, Gray and Mahrez did nothing for 75 minutes.

Stoke's whole plan was to congest the middle, force us wide and deal with crosses. They had two DM's sat in front of the defence and they barely moved, Vardy was outnumbered and Gray did his very best to hide for every minute he was on the pitch (Diabate's movement showed him up when he came on). Expecting any CM to create in those circumstances is hard, especially when we are and pretty much always have been a team that goes through it's wingers and not it's CM's for creativity. We had huge amounts of possession in the final third out wide but failed to make anything of it.

 

No matter what CM we put in there, they need help from everyone else to make any chances through the centre. If as a CM you look up and your options are out wide, or into a congested area where your two attackers are marked or blocked and not making runs to receive a pass, what chance you got? You're going wide every time.

[lgfualol]

Mahrez would have done a lot more with a right back that can play football. Even though I dont think he is a right back, Albrighton at RB making a run into the box and Mahrez laying off the ball got us the goal. Simpson wouldnt be able to do that without falling over the ball or booting it row z in a panic.

 

Shame we will never get to see current Mahrez with an attacking full back. 

Edited 1 March 2018 by lgfualol

[Rob1742]

I can’t see Puel lasting. In this day and age where the players decide their bosses future, I can see this all unravelling quite quickly.

 

You speak to the older players under O’Neill, and they used to say O’Neill would make you feel like a million dollars. This Puel bloke is probably boring them to death.

 

I can’t see the players wanting to back this chap.

 

Personally I previously said his personality wouldn’t bother me. But it now does. I can no longer listen to his interviews, they are just so dull. And unfortunately this dullness seems to be translating to the pitch, and I just don’t see any real inspiration out there, we seem to be playing like Puels personality, which is very dull. 

 

James instead of Silva, moving on both our big number 9’s, playing Gray number 10 have all been his decisions that have sent us backwards and made us a more predictable and dull team.

 

 

Edited 1 March 2018 by Rob1742

[Rob1742]

2 minutes ago, Rob1742 said:

 

 

 

Edited 1 March 2018 by Rob1742

[UpTheLeagueFox]

21 minutes ago, Rob1742 said:

I can no longer listen to his interviews, they are just so dull. And unfortunately this dullness seems to be translating to the pitch, and I just don’t see any real inspiration out there, we seem to be playing like Puels personality, which is very dull. 

 

He's not easy to interview. I asked him two questions after the Stoke game and he gave two minute answers to both. Wasn't really sure afterwards what he'd said and I was right next to him. I appreciate of course that English isn't his first language so that has to be taken into consideration. We have become a fairly dull side to watch, aside from frantic periods of play, which is frustrating. Saturday might be better against Bournemouth as they're unlikely to park the bus so it might suit us going forward. Swansea, SheffU and Stoke all put men behind the ball and we struggled with that.

 

As others have said, baffled that Iborra and Silva haven't featured more. Also, feel for Dragovic who - the odd game apart - seemed to be growing in stature.

[Rob1742]

2 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

He's not easy to interview. I asked him two questions after the Stoke game and he gave two minute answers to both. Wasn't really sure afterwards what he'd said and I was right next to him. I appreciate of course that English isn't his first language so that has to be taken into consideration. We have become a fairly dull side to watch, aside from frantic periods of play, which is frustrating. Saturday might be better against Bournemouth as they're unlikely to park the bus so it might suit us going forward. Swansea, SheffU and Stoke all put men behind the ball and we struggled with that.

 

As others have said, baffled that Iborra and Silva haven't featured more. Also, feel for Dragovic who - the odd game apart - seemed to be growing in stature.

Bournemouth is a key game, if we don’t get a result from this one, I think questions will then be asked.

 

Dragovic was another puzzler, one of many puzzlers that have made me think he is making weird decisions. Maybe he has to ensure he has the influential Morgan on his side? I think not having Morgan onboard would see the inevitable divide between the players and manager start to unfold and I think he may know that. 

[jumbo747]

5 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

He's not easy to interview. I asked him two questions after the Stoke game and he gave two minute answers to both. Wasn't really sure afterwards what he'd said and I was right next to him. I appreciate of course that English isn't his first language so that has to be taken into consideration. We have become a fairly dull side to watch, aside from frantic periods of play, which is frustrating. Saturday might be better against Bournemouth as they're unlikely to park the bus so it might suit us going forward. Swansea, SheffU and Stoke all put men behind the ball and we struggled with that.

 

As others have said, baffled that Iborra and Silva haven't featured more. Also, feel for Dragovic who - the odd game apart - seemed to be growing in stature.

A bit perhaps, but not much. If he can't communicate effectively to the team first-hand, he's got to be in trouble. Also, I can just about guarantee that English isn't the first language for Guardiola, Mourinho, Wenger and others, and it wasn't even Alec Ferguson's, but they worked to communicate and make themselves understood and collectively they haven't done too bad have they ? 

[Babylon]

33 minutes ago, Rob1742 said:

Bournemouth is a key game, if we don’t get a result from this one, I think questions will then be asked.

We've got a good run of games, absolutely no point in having melt downs a game at a time. See where we are come the end of the season and what happens with selections etc. 

 

None of us know what his brief is from the owners now, it would have been to keep us up and finish mid table. Having fulfilled that brief pretty much he perhaps thinks he's got the right to take a look at all the players and what they offer. 

 

I'd be disappointed if he plays Simpson and Morgan and James in every game. Because I'm not sure what we'll learn that we don't already know. I'd prefer a bit more experimentation. Not because I know the other options are better, frankly they haven't proved that yet. But we're likely to learn more about the squad and what it needs by sharing game time between all of them. 

[Richard]

I’d guess we expected stoke to get the ball into box a lot towards Diouf hence Morgan for his superior aerial ability and a Simpson for his back post defending. James and a N’didi to sit and protect against the counter hoping gray/Mahrez/albrighton/Vardy to create something. 

 

With hindsight it’s clear there wasn’t enough creativity in that side and were desperate for a proper no.10 who can get on the ball and create further up the pitch. That would be my attempt at rationalising our setup. 

 

Also credit where it’s due stoke set up well and did their jobs perfectly. They could have won if it wasn’t for a goalkeeping clanger. Lambert’s them well organised and working hard, they’re a different prospect to Stoke under Hughes

[ZeGuy]

2 hours ago, Rob1742 said:

I can’t see Puel lasting. In this day and age where the players decide their bosses future, I can see this all unravelling quite quickly.

 

You speak to the older players under O’Neill, and they used to say O’Neill would make you feel like a million dollars. This Puel bloke is probably boring them to death.

 

I can’t see the players wanting to back this chap.

 

Personally I previously said his personality wouldn’t bother me. But it now does. I can no longer listen to his interviews, they are just so dull. And unfortunately this dullness seems to be translating to the pitch, and I just don’t see any real inspiration out there, we seem to be playing like Puels personality, which is very dull. 

 

James instead of Silva, moving on both our big number 9’s, playing Gray number 10 have all been his decisions that have sent us backwards and made us a more predictable and dull team.

 

 

Really impressed with the accuracy of your depiction. It's as if you knew Puel personally and you were right there in the dressing room.

Edited 1 March 2018 by ZeGuy

[Wymsey]

Can imagine it, at times, being difficult for him to try to let what he is trying to say in training etc be understood by the players with his somewhat limited English language.

[Gazza M]

Gray for me has slipped backwards. I think he thought job done after a few decent games when Puel arrived. If his attitude doesn't improve, he won't play in my opinion. I'm not sure he is even that good.