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
davieG

Claude Puel lays out his vision for Leicester City

Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said:

Me too. After Burnley I actually felt a bit of a "right, this season's done, lets let him build for next year, lets see what he can do".

 

For 20 minutes, I thought yes, I was right.

 

By full time, I feel like we can't win. I feel like it's a big risk keeping him and backing him, and a big risk sacking him and rolling the dice once again. There are only so many times you can do it before it becomes a real issue and we're dangerously close to that territory.

 

And I'd be lying if I said I had faith in us to get it right. Maybe it's my natural cynicism but there's no consistency to our appointments what so ever, which screams to me regular shots in the dark.

I'm still on the side of keep at the moment, as some point we need to give a manager a chance to implement what they want.

 

Plus we've already seen that the club has little grand plan or vision in place for their manager recruitment. It's likely to be another uninspiring choice, then followed by 8 months of the manager getting to know all his players again to see who he likes and who fits his vision in terms of style of play. Not to mention that 8 or 9 months of recruitment planning quite possibly goes out the window, as all the players we have lined up no longer fit in the new guys plans.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Happy Fox said:

Remember this?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/27387616

 

Under the Thais anything is possible at least they are willing to make us compete, finishing in the Top 6 was there aim that has been achieved, obviously the sustainability to be in the Top 5 not yet, with a stadium expansion to 50,000 rumoured and a new training ground i feel we could compete at that level. I think the signs are positive, the question is what can you judge a manager on?, is it past honours philosophy?, when we appointed Ranieri for example, his win ratio was very good in the premier league so I expected him to bring us a Top 10 finish, we exceeded that by a great margin. Puel has his plus points, but I think we can do better personally whether we are able to bring in someone better remains to be seen.

You keep believing that but it's not something that i see happening, the best I can see us achieving with any regularity is 5/6 we do not have the pedigree or the 'star' attraction of a club that will attract a team full of players that you need to sustain a top 4 position on a regular basis. It's still a case of Leicester 'who' despite us winning the league, the football world sees that as freak event.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bunyip said:

Makes no difference who we suggest does it ? But we are supposedly a very rich club, so pay a top manager top money and give him the reported 150 million to bring in his own players. Its basic logic really.

Who is a top manager? Why can they do something with this club that Puel can't?

 

It's not about throwing money at "big" names if they fail.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Arriba Los Zorros said:

Sorry, but Im sick of hearing this argument.

 

We have Riyad frickin Mahrez, Diabite, Demarai Gray, Adrien Silva (a creative CM), Albrighton's crossing, and very good forward options in Vardy and Kelechi.

 

We have the personnel, what we don't have is a manager that knows how to set them up to be effective.

Diabate has no fear, when he came on (and in other games) he takes people on. Gray, also does that in parts and i'm OK with him. Mahrez of course, but he's hardly involved in a game these days.

 

Albrighton and Chilwell when on the wings just seem to stop when a defender turns up in front of them. They rarely try to beat the man (probably knowing they will lose the battle). And Albrighton's crossing is hardly lethal.

 

Most of the last few games, we have got into crossing positions and either hit the first man or it's cleared or goes over everyone. Only about 10% of our crosses reach the target men and that isn't necessarily a goalscoring chance. This is something we really need to work on.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MC Prussian said:

The manager is partly to blame, and in times of crisis the first one to walk. That's the way it is and always will be. He doesn't do himself any favours by persisting with some of his darlings when they're putting in half-hearted performances on a regular basis (Mahrez) or come up with some of the most unexpected blunders (Morgan), others like Ndidi, Chilwell or Gray are just frustrating to watch.

 

You don't chop and change formations that regularly during an ongoing season, if you want to experiment do it in pre-season - unless you never really cared about the end of the season and challenging Burnley for 7th spot, and simply played for safety in the league (which we've achieved a week ago). And you allude to that yourself, calling it "competitive per-season friendlies". So, you see it too!

I understand he's had some troubles with regards to injuries and suspensions (Ndidi, Morgan (well...), Iborra, Amartey, James), but then loans out our two tallest strikers (!) in January and starts putting emphasis on Chilwell, Albrighton and Mahrez to put crosses into our box! Week in, week out, we've seen the team come out of the tunnel half-asleep, throwing first halves away, only giving it a go after falling behind. Seriously, at some point that needs to be addressed and is the manager's responsibility. Yesterday was the first time in months he's tried something slightly different, and although it was encouraging in parts (at the start), it soon turned into a "who doesn't want to score first" competition. 

 

He's been in England for two years and still needs a translator, and comes across as dull and disinterested during interviews. Not that it matters much, it just adds to the overall negative experience.

Can't disagree with that comment. I guess he's even boring in French, so translator or not will make little difference, just his personality unfortunately. Not everyone can have a Klopp or Claudio.

 

Apart from that you do make good points, managers are always first in line these days and I think that's wrong. As someone else mentioned, Ranieri got the chop. Look at Conte - last season he was a hero and this season, with the same team he is struggling (for Chelsea standards).

 

I think Puel always came in with the mentality to try different players/formations. Can't remember naming an unchanged team once this season. He maybe hoped we could push for Europe but maybe he had no targets but to build for the future. It would be harsh to not give him a summer to bring in his players and set up how he wants next season. Guardiola was average in City's first season, look what happened once he established himself. And he's had two full pre-season periods.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still torn. Whilst I think we need continuity and stability after a couple of years of chopping and changing, I just can't see how we're going to be successful playing with that system and mentality. Even if we get a bit of extra quality up top, there's just no aggression or killer instinct.

 

Look at Newcastle- a very limited group of players, but got in our faces and played us off the park. It's what we did in our great escape and title season. I'm not saying that we go back to the out-and-out counter-attacking style, but surely you can play possession football and not be so passive? 

 

We played some cracking stuff when Puel first came, so we do have the capability. The football we are playing at home is horrid though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Doctor said:

It's alright to admit you don't understand stats kid. Look at xG since the watford home game (since thats where the complaints seem to have been). xGA 10.22 (round to 10); actual goals against 15. 

XG 15.09 (round to 15), actual goals for 13 

 

What does that tell us? We're underperforming in defence, conceding 5 more than you'd expect for the quality of chances faced, and underperforming in attack, scoring 2 less than you'd expect for the quality of chances created. In other words our results are underperforming to what the performances warrant, and deviations from the statistical averages tend to correct themselves. 

 

Thanks mate. I understand this stat .

18 points in 17 games. I know it might be a bit complicated for you but try and take it on board and then forecast what sort of position we will be in come November time if this long term poor form continues in the same vein.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Doctor said:

And yet Puel caught up on it easily and has us in eighth. :whistle: (Ok, technically it was 9 games not 10 before he came in but...)

New manager bounce plus it was before he started tinkering with his own brand of boring football.:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, davieG said:

The average to poor ones yes, but the ones that people want are those that can win trophies and they go to clubs that have a decent chance of winning prestigious trophies or in the Champions League to show off their achievements enabling them to move to a bigger club, the best we can realistically hope for is 6th and KO cups unless we get a 2nd miracle so the chance of getting someone like that are next to slim.

 

Even on the rare occasions we've had someone like that, MON, O'Farrell they've been enticed away.

To be fair though Davie if at the time we had owners like we have now O'Neil and O'Farrel would have been given the money to stay and make us a top club. Surely there must be an up and coming manager who would relish the kind of owners we have the kind of facilities we have and the kind of money available and the stability to progress further than 9th or as I suspect even lower this season. Puel is not the answer to the progression of this club and last night game with him introducing two subs in extra time which showed to me desperation, not inspiration. We need someone with real vision who knows that he can produce the goods and knows that if he can do that the worlds his oyster as far as the owners are concerned when it comes to financial backing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, davieG said:

You keep believing that but it's not something that i see happening, the best I can see us achieving with any regularity is 5/6 we do not have the pedigree or the 'star' attraction of a club that will attract a team full of players that you need to sustain a top 4 position on a regular basis. It's still a case of Leicester 'who' despite us winning the league, the football world sees that as freak event.

I remember Man city fitting that bill exactly before their new owners, always the poor cousin of man united and also rans, But they prove money talks and so does your reputation with it.

Edited by Bunyip
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, KrefelderFox666 said:

Can't disagree with that comment. I guess he's even boring in French, so translator or not will make little difference, just his personality unfortunately. Not everyone can have a Klopp or Claudio.

 

Apart from that you do make good points, managers are always first in line these days and I think that's wrong. As someone else mentioned, Ranieri got the chop. Look at Conte - last season he was a hero and this season, with the same team he is struggling (for Chelsea standards).

 

I think Puel always came in with the mentality to try different players/formations. Can't remember naming an unchanged team once this season. He maybe hoped we could push for Europe but maybe he had no targets but to build for the future. It would be harsh to not give him a summer to bring in his players and set up how he wants next season. Guardiola was average in City's first season, look what happened once he established himself. And he's had two full pre-season periods.

It would be harsh on us all if they did give him next season and all that money. Another Peter Taylor and no mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Bunyip said:

To be fair though Davie if at the time we had owners like we have now O'Neil and O'Farrel would have been given the money to stay and make us a top club. Surely there must be an up and coming manager who would relish the kind of owners we have the kind of facilities we have and the kind of money available and the stability to progress further than 9th or as I suspect even lower this season. Puel is not the answer to the progression of this club and last night game with him introducing two subs in extra time which showed to me desperation, not inspiration. We need someone with real vision who knows that he can produce the goods and knows that if he can do that the worlds his oyster as far as the owners are concerned when it comes to financial backing.

Money wouldn't have stopped MON going to Celtic or O'Farrell going to Man Utd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Bunyip said:

I remember Man city fitting that bill exactly before their new owners, always the poor cousin of man united and also rans, But they prove money talks and so does your reputation with it.

Or it proves Manchester is bigger internationally known City and Leicester isn't that's also why the best players want to go to London teams, players are paid so much now that it's become less significant than playing for a 'big ' club in a big city even more so if those big city clubs have a recent history of winning trophies.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Babylon said:

I'm still on the side of keep at the moment, as some point we need to give a manager a chance to implement what they want.

 

Plus we've already seen that the club has little grand plan or vision in place for their manager recruitment. It's likely to be another uninspiring choice, then followed by 8 months of the manager getting to know all his players again to see who he likes and who fits his vision in terms of style of play. Not to mention that 8 or 9 months of recruitment planning quite possibly goes out the window, as all the players we have lined up no longer fit in the new guys plans.

I'm still on the side of keep, but in hope now rather than expectation, and like I said, the alternative is our third sacking in 14 months which exposes us as being a bit of a bomb scare club.

 

I feel like we're well in that cycle now. I expect him to be sacked. I can't see the owners tolerating displays like that last night, but not just that - more the fact Puel seemed to think it was good.

 

I feel like banging my head against a wall watching us. I'm trying to defend Puel, stop making it so hard for me to do so!

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, davieG said:

Or it proves Manchester is bigger internationally known City and Leicester isn't that's also why the best players want to go to London teams, players are paid so much now that it's become less significant than playing for a 'big ' club in a big city even more so if those big city clubs have a recent history of winning trophies.

Well Blackburn 

 

27 minutes ago, davieG said:

Money wouldn't have stopped MON going to Celtic or O'Farrell going to Man Utd.

Well,I  beg to differ. we will never know but as it turned out O'Farrell turned out to be a duff and I still think if O'Neil had owners like we have he would have stopped and done

what Clough did at Forest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Bunyip said:

Well Blackburn 

 

Well,I  beg to differ. we will never know but as it turned out O'Farrell turned out to be a duff and I still think if O'Neil had owners like we have he would have stopped and done

what Clough did at Forest.

Blackburn was before the influx of foreign players.

 

We'll have to disagree then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ian S said:

Thanks mate. I understand this stat .

18 points in 17 games. I know it might be a bit complicated for you but try and take it on board and then forecast what sort of position we will be in come November time if this long term poor form continues in the same vein.

So, you don't understand how results form alone can be misleading. Shithouse three undeserved wins on the bounce or pick up three draws where you created enough to win 2 matches in each but didn't take the chances - which bodes better going forward?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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