**New** Puel In or Out - A simple Poll Mk 2

[The Doctor]

8 minutes ago, Happy Fox said:

https://www.fansonline.net/leicestercity/mb/view.php?id=1106058

 

Does anyone know if this bnet chap is speaking shite or truth?

Hopefully shit. Dyche can **** off before he's even arrived.

[st albans fox]

20 minutes ago, Happy Fox said:

If the players cannot understand him that’s a problem, say your boss uses a translator it would be a bit of a joke wouldn’t it? Can understand the players perspective.

Have always thought this but poch did ok at Soton and Ranieri’s english has never been so good and he has done ok ! 

[fazzyfox]

You heard it here first, he won't be here in September but not because of the reason you think. Arsene Wenger is going to reccomend him as his replacement to the Arsenal board. The passing for the sake of it, not allowing players to play off the cuff and improvise, trying to create the perfect chance and walk it into the net, tick, tick, tick. I'm off to see what odds I can get on it.

[MC Prussian]

2 hours ago, The Doctor said:

Because we created some excellent chances we just didn't take and then made some sloppy mistakes in defence. Take Stoke and Bournemouth at home if you like, Mahrez missed a 1v1 in both, James and Maguire both hit the post v Stoke, Morgan and Iheanacho both fluffed their lines v Bournemouth. Expected goals in those was 1.12 to 0.17 (Stoke), 2.98 to 1.40 (Bournemouth) - on the basis of chances created vs chances allowed we should have won both but didn't take our chances.

 

If you want to cite Swansea home and Watford away, 1.48 to 0.57 (Swansea), 1.55 to 1.43 (Watford). Closer games, but if you round those it's a 1-1 draw and a 2-1 win - 3 points more than we achieved. Similarly Burnley away - xG to us 2.00, to Burnley: 1.06. Should have won 2-1 on the balance of chances but conceded sloppy and fluffed our lines.

 

Fair Brightons xG was 1.60 to our 1.27, although that is skewed up by their dubious penalty.

That mostly after going behind, without really threatening up until we were forced to. Or we took the lead and let it slide. Football is a game of two halves, our football in the past five months or so has been one of one half only.

 

It's a great numbers game, but if you don't take your chances, no matter how far and few there are in between, you're not going to win matches, let alone amass points along the way.

The Expected Goals stats are just another way of making football look more like American Football or Baseball and it's slowly crept into the sport for whatever reason. Food for the stats-savvy, I guess. But beyond that? Nothing tangible about using stats, is there? Apart from a bit of a morale boost, xG can only take a look back and tell you what has happened, not what will happen. Also doesn't tell you the whole truth about each single game passed, because it's an overall number and doesn't go into more detail when or where these goals could've been scored or how and when the chances were created.

 

Our mediocre to poor run since mid-December must be down to one of the worst conversion rates among all Premier League teams.

Edited 22 April 2018 by MC Prussian

[lgfualol]

Christ I dont want Dyche here. Although he will get a bit more fighting spirit back, we'll be back to aimless twatting of the ball.

[cropstonfox]

Is he a team wrecker like frank mclintock or worse peter taylor? Or is a builder like brian little martin oneil orBig nige.No he is the modern day Gordon milne..Safe pair of handsGet ready for the Most underwhelmi g period for years.Step off the rollercoaster.!!!

[The Doctor]

35 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

That mostly after going behind, without really threatening up until we were forced to.

 

It's a great numbers game, but if you don't take your chances, no matter how far and few there are in between, you're not going to win matches, let alone amass points along the way.

The Expected Goals stats are just another way of making football look more like American Football and it's slowly crept into the sport for whatever reason, food for the stats-savvy, I guess. But beyond that? Nothing tangible about using stats, is there?

Stats don't equal results, fair enough, but they do tell you whether a side is on the right track and unlucky or whether it's riding its luck. Complaining about the use of stats is frankly ridiculous, I'd expect better of you - stats are of massive importance, hell Walshs scouting network relied heavily on stats for the initial identification of possible targets

[HighPeakFox]

16 hours ago, Wymeswold fox said:

You're ok, but why do you have to be politically correct on here most of the time?

It's as if you try and get other people to agree with your points and believe their original ones you don't agree with are wrong.

Politically correct? Don't talk such Bollocks. 

[MC Prussian]

2 hours ago, The Doctor said:

Stats don't equal results, fair enough, but they do tell you whether a side is on the right track and unlucky or whether it's riding its luck. Complaining about the use of stats is frankly ridiculous, I'd expect better of you - stats are of massive importance, hell Walshs scouting network relied heavily on stats for the initial identification of possible targets

I was referring to the hype around „expected goals“ in particular (and other team-related stats), which I find to be nonsense.

 

And I would never doubt scouting relying on stats (goals, assists, minutes played, key passes, etc.). There, it‘s a given.

[The Doctor]

3 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

I was referring to the hype around „expected goals“ in particular (and other team-related stats), which I find to be nonsense.

 

And I would never doubt scouting relying on stats (goals, assists, minutes played, key passes, etc.). There, it‘s a given.

You considering it to be nonsense is a world away from it actually being nonsense. xG and xGA tells us a couple of things: a) how good are the chances we're creating - far better than judging on shot count when that can be overstated by players shooting every time they're within 45 yards of goal. b) How well are we restricting good chances. Building from that it tells us whether our strikers are doing better than they should or worse (the answer is Vardy better - scored 17 from chances that would typically return 14 - the rest worse) and how well the keeper in particular is doing, is he conceding goals he really shouldn't be (answer is yes). They're useful measures of performance.

[Webbo]

7 hours ago, st albans fox said:

Question to some of the vehement ‘puel outers’

 

if we were pushing for sixth (which based on performances is actually feasible), would you still be of the same mindset? 

 

is it the overall style of possession based play which irks you rather than the results being achieved? 

Which performances are you thinking about when you say that's feasible? Palace,Bornemouth,Newcastle?

 

if we'd won more games would we still want him gone? Obviously not.

[st albans fox]

5 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Which performances are you thinking about when you say that's feasible? Palace,Bornemouth,Newcastle?

 

if we'd won more games would we still want him gone? Obviously not.

We could have nicked a win against Bournemouth but clearly we should have beaten swansea and we had opportunities to get the winner v Stoke. You have seen Burnley come from behind and take 3 points on more than one occasion this season. we have not. poor finishing in general responsible. 

 

And im not convinced that your last statement is true for plenty 

Edited 22 April 2018 by st albans fox

[Sharpe's Fox]

7 minutes ago, Webbo said:

if we'd won more games would we still want him gone? Obviously not.

[Webbo]

5 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

We could have nicked a win against Bournemouth but clearly we should have beaten swansea and we had opportunities to get the winner v Stoke. You have seen Burnley come from behind and take 3 points on more than one occasion this season. we have not. poor finishing in general responsible. 

Could've, would've, should've have. We didn't. You say poor finishing, I say they took so long to get the ball into the box there was 10 defenders there in front of the goal.

[NotTheMarketLeader]

8 hours ago, The Doctor said:

Well no. Under Shakespeare we were getting better results than our performances deserved (come on, we made Huddersfield and Bournemouth look like 2009-vintage Barcelona; Bournemouth had the chances to be 3-0 up inside 10 minutes), under Puel we've not be been getting the results we deserve. Games under him where we've genuinely been the worse side: Man City (H), Spurs (H), Crystal Palace (H), Liverpool (A), Man City (A). Maybe Newcastle at home but I missed that game for a conference so can't say.

 

In general we've been the better side for a chunk of the match without managing to put it in, occasionally due to fantastic keeping performances (Pope at Burnley, Butland v Stoke in both games), and sabotaged ourselves in the other teams brief period of dominance with some genuinely abysmal play (both CMs going walkabouts at home to Stoke, Fuchs and Maguire pulling apart to let in Shaqiri at Stoke, Chilwells passing at Everton, the entirety of the first ten minutes at Burnley, pretty much everything Morgan has done since coming back in for Dragovic). Results are infuriating but let's not pretend that we're consistently the worst side on the pitch, because that's simply not true.

I was answering your statement (I’ll paraphrase as can’t be arsed to look back) that Shakey was no good and after the first 5 or 6 games we fell of a cliff; which is all correct and I agree.

 

The technicalities and excuses aside; the fact remains that results after Puel’s first 5 or 6 games are no better than Shakespeare’s were; they have fell off a cliff.

 

He has constantly made mistakes in man management 

ie the Mahrez affair - dropping him for half a game, when the other players were pissed off with his antics; dropping Dragovic for Wes etc.

 

Our defence has been a weak link, but now we can’t score goals either and the team look disinterested or demotivated. 

 

Possession the way he has us playing (slowly) is a defensive system in disguise, which doubles up to blunt our attacking prowess. He’s doing the opposing manager’s jobs for them.

 

All these areas are in his remit to get right now, not keep talking about some 5 year plan or pipe dream.

 

Not to mention, fans are now staying away as predicted weeks ago, due the lack of excitement from his brand of football. 

 

Imo it can only be wishful thinking that leads one to the idea that he’s doing a good job and should be kept on next season.

Edited 22 April 2018 by NotTheMarketLeader

[st albans fox]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

Could've, would've, should've have. We didn't. You say poor finishing, I say they took so long to get the ball into the box there was 10 defenders there in front of the goal.

the xg numbers say we created enough good opportunities to win against stoke (though they were just hanging onto what they had for much of the second period)  and we should have been out of sight of swansea by half time. Just lumping the ball down the channels and shouting run is a style I’m fed up with. 

[Webbo]

1 minute ago, st albans fox said:

the xg numbers say we created enough good opportunities to win against stoke (though they were just hanging onto what they had for much of the second period)  and we should have been out of sight of swansea by half time. Just lumping the ball down the channels and shouting run is a style I’m fed up with. 

We'll put up with boring football if it's successful. Atm we're boring and struggling against teams we should be dominating.

[foxinsocks]

6 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Could've, would've, should've have. We didn't. You say poor finishing, I say they took so long to get the ball into the box there was 10 defenders there in front of the goal.

This was certainly the case v southampton.  We were sooo laboured coming fwd they had 11 in the box...by the tine chilwell took it to the byline and crossed to no one in particular 

[Beechey]

4 minutes ago, NotTheMarketLeader said:

I was answering your statement (I’ll paraphrase as can’t be arsed to look back) that Shakey was no good and after the first 5 or 6 games we fell of a cliff; which is all correct and I agree.

 

The technicalities and excuses aside; the fact remains that results after Puel’s first 5 or 6 games are no better than Shakespeare’s were; they have fell off a cliff.

 

He has constantly made mistakes in man management 

ie the Mahrez affair - dropping him for half a game, when the other players were pissed off with his antics; dropping Dragovic for Wes etc.

 

Our defence has been a weak link, but now we can’t score goals either and the team look disinterested or demotivated. 

 

Possession the way he has us playing (slowly) is a defensive system in disguise, which doubles up to blunt our attacking prowess. He’s doing the opposing manager’s jobs for them.

 

All these areas are in his remit to get right now, not keep talking about some 5 year plan or pipe dream.

 

Not to mention, fans are now staying away as predicted weeks ago, due the lack of excitement from his brand of football. 

 

Imo it can only be wishful thinking that leads one to the idea that he’s doing a good job and should be kept on next season.

Some people keep pulling out this attendance thing. We had 1 game where we had "lacklustre" attendance, and even then we still filled 96.5% of the stadium, with it almost selling out, on a midweek game. 

[Matt]

8 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

the xg numbers say we created enough good opportunities to win against stoke (though they were just hanging onto what they had for much of the second period)  and we should have been out of sight of swansea by half time. Just lumping the ball down the channels and shouting run is a style I’m fed up with. 

That's good to hear, how do we claim/redeem the points then?

[st albans fox]

11 minutes ago, Matt said:

That's good to hear, how do we claim/redeem the points then?

Ask arry Kane’s agent .......

 

seriously, if you keep making chances then eventually you will get your reward. The nothing games at the arse end of the season aren’t going to tell us anything. we have no idea what the club have said to the manager and vice versa. How do we know if they had a meeting in late March and decided they didn’t want to have to pre qualify for the Europa league in July. And before anyone tells me what players and manager have said, they aren’t going to publically state anything different. 

 

i suspect all isnt wonderful in the dressign room and maybe if the owners think they can get someone who will manage the players better whilst still making the transition in styles then puel may still walk sooner rather than later. I’m just not a fan of making a change without a proper plan in place. 

[CosbehFox]

2 hours ago, Webbo said:

We'll put up with boring football if it's successful. Atm we're boring and struggling against teams we should be dominating.

But we are dominating. It’s the killer instinct and ability to punish missing. Alongside our pattern for making absolute calamities. 

 

You can argue if that works or works against Puel. 

[CosbehFox]

18 hours ago, daddylonglegs said:

Am I the only one that thinks if Puel was English he'd be given more of a chance? 

Yes because for example, Dyche and Howe are held as potential replacement. Dyche’s team score a goal a game and Howe preaches a similar style to Puel.

[MC Prussian]

2 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

But we are dominating. It’s the killer instinct and ability to punish missing. Alongside our pattern for making absolute calamities. 

 

You can argue if that works or works against Puel. 

When and how?

 

You make it sound absolute, which it isn't. Our "domination" is mostly reactionary and partial, because for us to force ourselves onto the opposition, more than one half needs to pass by, we usually get going for the last 30 minutes or so (a few times for the first 30 minutes), with our efforts going astray for large parts.

 

It works against the players, it works against the fans, it works against the club (with regards to the results).

So, in essence, I do think Puel continues to shoot himself in the foot since mid-December 2017.

[MC Prussian]

2 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Yes because for example, Dyche and Howe are held as potential replacement. Dyche’s team score a goal a game and Howe preaches a similar style to Puel.

Burnley can count on an extremely well-organized side and a very good back four (and goalkeeper). Only the two Manchester clubs and Spurs have conceded less goals than them.

 

Howe may deploy a similar style to Puel, that with a squad half the worth of ours and with arguably the fewer talented players. Like many "smaller" teams, he's made them hard to break down.