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

[Callabinho]

Through all of the bullshit points and needless arguing has anyone stopped to look at the players? Because when I sit and watch the games there’s literally a hand full worth keeping.

 

Maguire

Chillwell (although I’m not sold he’s young and has time to improve)

N’didi

Silva (despite and unsettled start he’s still a classy operator) 

Mahrez

Albrighton 

Diabate

Iborra

Vardy

Okazaki (as more of a squad player)

 

The rest to me, are shit and can all be binned. A massive overhaul is really needed, and I’d much rather see the owners give Puel a chance, because sacking him before he’s had a chance to clear the shit out will only take us backwards, as the new manager will come in, have no time to make any major adjustments to the squad, and we will be back to square one.

[NotTheMarketLeader]

9 hours ago, Donut said:

Youre talking absolute bollocks, so its best you be quiet i think.

 

Youre literally talking shit.

An excellently argued point

[oldbluefox]

1 hour ago, Callabinho said:

Through all of the bullshit points and needless arguing has anyone stopped to look at the players? Because when I sit and watch the games there’s literally a hand full worth keeping.

 

Maguire

Chillwell (although I’m not sold he’s young and has time to improve)

N’didi

Silva (despite and unsettled start he’s still a classy operator) 

Mahrez

Albrighton 

Diabate

Iborra

Vardy

Okazaki (as more of a squad player)

 

The rest to me, are shit and can all be binned. A massive overhaul is really needed, and I’d much rather see the owners give Puel a chance, because sacking him before he’s had a chance to clear the shit out will only take us backwards, as the new manager will come in, have no time to make any major adjustments to the squad, and we will be back to square one.

I agree with this although I would probably include Iheanacho as opposed to Okazaki. Iheanacho is still young and has shown enough to convince me he will get better, has a better touch than Okazaki and doesn't keep falling over!!!

Similarly Puel needs time to improve an average squad. Bear in mind how long it took Ferguson to produce the goods at Manu. For two or three seasons they were pretty dire and on several occasions he was on the verge of being sacked . It pays to be patient. 

Edited 23 April 2018 by oldbluefox

[MC Prussian]

17 hours ago, The Doctor said:

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.

Expected goals and expected goals against are merely a toy for the stat geeks, a pasttime for the bored, because the xG and xGa numbers - like all stats - focus on results from the past.

 

They can‘t predict future results, are by no means a clear and reliable indicator and aren‘t able to paint the full picture regarding a team‘s performance.

 

Regardless of how great your chances are, you have to put them away.

No matter how hard you try, if the opposition scores a freak goal by accident, puts ten men behind the ball and you fail to even equalize despite all the great opportunities, you lose. It‘s as simple as that.

[st albans fox]

4 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Expected goals and expected goals against are merely a toy for the stat geeks, a pasttime for the bored, because the xG and xGa numbers - like all stats - focus on results from the past.

 

They can‘t predict future results, are by no means a clear and reliable indicator and aren‘t able to paint the full picture regarding a team‘s performance.

 

Regardless of how great your chances are, you have to put them away.

No matter how hard you try, if the opposition scores a freak goal by accident, puts ten men behind the ball and you fail to even equalize despite all the great opportunities, you lose. It‘s as simple as that.

 

That post reads as a support for the xg posts that have gone before. No one can account for bad luck. 

 

[Donut]

23 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Expected goals and expected goals against are merely a toy for the stat geeks, a pasttime for the bored, because the xG and xGa numbers - like all stats - focus on results from the past.

 

They can‘t predict future results, are by no means a clear and reliable indicator and aren‘t able to paint the full picture regarding a team‘s performance.

 

Regardless of how great your chances are, you have to put them away.

No matter how hard you try, if the opposition scores a freak goal by accident, puts ten men behind the ball and you fail to even equalize despite all the great opportunities, you lose. It‘s as simple as that.

No tactical strategy on earth can prevent losing games to a freak goal and an opposition team defending their nuts off for 90 mins. This will happen sometimes.

 

Some people on here talk as if making this kind of approach to games is one we should aspire to, sit deep, defend and soak it up constantly, and nick a goal from somewhere.

 

Of course expected goals is a useful stat to use, because over a large sample size, ie not one individual game, as is already explained to you it tells you the quality of the chances we are creating, and the quality of the chances we are conceding.

 

Its funny how stats are utterly meaningless when you dont like a manager and will just turn a blind eye to all of them.

 

Of course they have some merit when analysed and interpreted correctly.

[Donut]

1 hour ago, NotTheMarketLeader said:

An excellently argued point

You do realise he was arguing that a team with the least clean sheets in the league all season was "hard to break down" right?

 

Its a comment so utterly silly, it could have come straight from your repertoire

[MC Prussian]

11 minutes ago, Donut said:

No tactical strategy on earth can prevent losing games to a freak goal and an opposition team defending their nuts off for 90 mins. This will happen sometimes.

 

Some people on here talk as if making this kind of approach to games is one we should aspire to, sit deep, defend and soak it up constantly, and nick a goal from somewhere.

 

Of course expected goals is a useful stat to use, because over a large sample size, ie not one individual game, as is already explained to you it tells you the quality of the chances we are creating, and the quality of the chances we are conceding.

 

Its funny how stats are utterly meaningless when you dont like a manager and will just turn a blind eye to all of them.

 

Of course they have some merit when analysed and interpreted correctly.

When was anyone on here seriously using Expected Goals or Expected Goals against as an argument or case in point against Shakespeare, Ranieri, Pearson or the ones that came before?

Certainly not me.

 

I'd like to like Puel, but as already mentioned many, many times, he's making it very hard himself to like him at present, as he keeps shooting himself in the foot repeatedly. After a bright start, he and the team have begun a downward trajectory, and I personally fear for the worst right now. He failed to connect at Southampton and now he continues to fail to connect at his next Premier League club.

That doesn't mean the players are excempt from criticism, but at the end, it all boils down to managerial decisions.

 

One can talk as much about what one would expect from a game with regards to goals scored or goals conceded, the reality is a different theme altogether.

Edited 23 April 2018 by MC Prussian

[MC Prussian]

32 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

 

That post reads as a support for the xg posts that have gone before. No one can account for bad luck. 

 

Well, yeah. Because we're talking about football and the beauty/tragedy of football here. The game is based on so many different variations, no stat can realistically alter your success or misfortune.

 

Luck or bad fortune are big deciders, can't rule out the human factor.

Edited 23 April 2018 by MC Prussian

[goose2010]

Well i am glad the majority are still behind the man in charge it restores my faith a little.

[MC Prussian]

7 hours ago, Donut said:

There seems to be a really dangerous train of thought going around on this forum that suggests if we just started kicking it into the channels and going over the top to Vardy, all the problems in the club would magically disappear. We would become a bona fide 7th placed side pushing Arsenal for 6th and we would start to see brilliant home form and loads of dominating performances.

 

We know this simply isnt the case. If it was, Ranieri would never have been sacked. Shakespeare would have never been appointed let alone sacked as well, and both of them managed to produce displays where we were constantly being pummelled.

 

This job is not an attractive one.

 

A new manager IF Puel was to go, has to come into a team that is almost certainly going to lose arguably its best player, a team whos main centre back pairing includes an over the hill captain with tons of influence within the dressing room, a dressing room of players that more and more evidence is gathering that are very mercurial and can turn quickly when they dont like things, a fan base that are impatient and over expectant, and a board that have shown they will sack you quickly without you having a chance to do much.

 

So thats not an attractive scenario to walk into, and it encourages a boom and bust culture of keeping people happy and planning in the very very short term rather than having a clear path to go down.

 

If you go down that path, youre more or less hoping you stumble upon a good manager who can bring some stability and planning, because the bust scenario is the more likely one. Take Swansea as an example. Carvalhal will probably keep them up by the skin of their teeth.....will they go forward next season? unlikely when you consider Laudrup, Monk, Guidolin, Bradley, Clement ALL met the same fate within a few recent seasons. And theyre still keeping their head above water with desperation.

 

If you dont think that could be Leicester, youd be showing blind faith. That could easily be Leicester in a season or two.

 

It needs one man right now to build. Unless the situation is so dire that there is no alternative, it needs one mans direction and players to fit that, rather than a succession of randomers working with a squad thats getting worse and worse, older and older.

 

We should take a leaf out of Bournemouths book. there has always been a clear structure of whats going on at the club led by Eddie Howe. Even in periods of short term failure, the faith in the structure has given stability and no one has panicked or become irrational, demanding everything be ripped up just so a new man can have 6 weeks worth of bounce and then watch it all go flat.

Ah, an angry rant. But admit it, you're trying to defend Puel by painting a less rosy picture of our past under Shakespeare and Ranieri...

 

Either we play a game suited to our players, or we don't. Whether that means keeping it on the ground and going for a more pass-oriented style (which works well with keeping possession) or using big guys up front and feed them with crosses, you adapt accordingly and play to your players' strengths.

At the moment, we're doing neither one of these things.

Our passing game ends near the opposition's box, because we don't know what to do for the final few yards and for crosses to be converted, we've managed to magically loan out our two tallest strikers in January. Our only hope in that department is Vicente Iborra, who's now out injured for the rest of the season, and when have either Maguire or Morgan last scored from a header?

 

This season, we've blown a wonderful chance of finishing in 7th (although the possibility still exists, albeit a slim one). No one realistically expects or ever expected us to become a regular Top Six or Top Seven team.

 

We weren't "constantly pummeled" under neither Ranieri nor Shakespeare, apart from Ranieri's five-game losing spell that got him the axe.

Any job in the Premier League with a team being able to hold division is an attractive one, especially ours.

Any manager in football is aware nowadays that patience wears thin when results go the other way; that's not our prerogative, it affects pretty much all clubs in this league.

 

You call our fanbase "impatient" and "over-expectant" - who the hell are you to come up with these claims? Spare me the guessing game. I can see why the league title has skewed the general view of our club, but how many fans are seriously expecting us to repeat that feat or finishing in the Top Six, Seven on a regular basis?

The football on the pitch is what matters, loving to go to games, enjoying the atmosphere.

Even if it were the case, was it ever different? All these years in the Championship, hoping for promotion back to the Promised Land?

The League One campaign was one of the best experiences of my life, because despite relegation, it brought people together.

I've said this in another thread - what if it's failure we need more than anything? A really healthy kick up the arse, so to speak?

 

As far as the summer transfer window is concerned, a change in the dressing room is/was always inevitable, and I can but assume our management is fully aware of it, as are the affected players. It's how you deal with that change of the old guard that matters. Personally, I think we've failed to bring in "new blood" on a more organic basis in order to support this change more naturally, especially the summer of 2016 looks like one big random hoarder attack now. I'd put the blame there on Ranieri and the management on the whole, but who'd have realistically known we'd have to do that on the back of winning the Premier League title?

 

Bournemouth have shown faith in Howe, because he knows the club inside out and the club are unlikely ever to play in Europe, he gives them what they can realistically aim for. More than that is pretty much not feasible, not with that stadium and that squad, after all, they're still a "small" club. They're happy enough just to stay in the Premier League for now, as long as it's 17th or above. They also still manage to live off their first-ever PL promotion in 2015. Another aspect in which we've somewhat failed - use the good spirit and atmosphere after the league title win.

 

In the end, it's the owners who decide whether they give Puel more credit and time or not, not me. They sacked Shakespeare for three wins out of 16, and that with a tougher schedule than under Puel, who is now on four in 17. We were in 15th spot under Ranieri in 2016-17 with five wins, six draws and nine defeats after 20 matches and the season following our unexpected title win, which is hard to follow up for any no-name team, until that horrendous five-game losing streak cost him his job. I want Puel to be a success here, but recent results and performances have left a sour aftertaste (still do) and should he fail to win at least one out of the remaining four league fixures this season, why should the club be more patient with him?

Edited 23 April 2018 by MC Prussian

[ZeGuy]

20 minutes ago, goose2010 said:

Well i am glad the majority are still behind the man in charge it restores my faith a little.

Just wait for the last match match ratings and manager confidence.

[ZeGuy]

45 minutes ago, Gerbold said:

You surprise me - your first poll has been locked and now, with two weeks gone, you're yet again seeking confirmation from the forum for your individual view.

You've had your answer once - now you're beginning to resemble a 'remoaner' (which I am, incidentally - but the margin for Brexit was far tighter than the result you got!).

It doesn't really matter what your individual response is to Puel is -  Srivaddhanaprabha's has the reins in his hand. As far as I'm concerned (and the majority of others on here) the jury is still out.

Personally i prefer the understated Puel to the more yawpy types. You state he has no "presence" yet I doubt you've yet been in his presence.

If there's a precedence for 'spunking' the transfer budget, as you so charmingly phrase it, "up the wall" then he has a good example from his predecessor. So far, as far as I can judge, the only money spent on players since he's been at City has been on Diabate -  who looks a fabulous performer already.

I think you're barking up the wrong tree with these polls of yours. I suspect there were plenty in agreement with you the first time around - but lots more not! Why not try one more in another two weeks - after all, three's a trick?

Great, well formulated post but why not simply say that's a meaningless shit poll?

[Donut]

19 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Ah, an angry rant. But admit it, you're trying to defend Puel by painting a less rosy picture of our past under Shakespeare and Ranieri...

 

Either we play a game suited to our players, or we don't. Whether that means keeping it on the ground and going for a more pass-oriented style (which works well with keeping possession) or using big guys up front and feed them with crosses, you adapt accordingly and play to your players' strengths.

At the moment, we're doing neither one of these things.

Our passing game ends near the opposition's box, because we don't know what to do for the final few yards and for crosses to be converted, we've managed to magically loan out our two tallest strikers in January. Our only hope in that department is Vicente Iborra, who's now out injured for the rest of the season, and when have either Maguire or Morgan last scored from a header?

 

This season, we've blown a wonderful chance of finishing in 7th (although the possibility still exists, albeit a slim one). No one realistically expects or ever expected us to become a regular Top Six or Top Seven team.

 

We weren't "constantly pummeled" under neither Ranieri nor Shakespeare, apart from Ranieri's five-game losing spell that got him the axe.

Any job in the Premier League with a team being able to hold division is an attractive one, especially ours.

Any manager in football is aware nowadays that patience wears thin when results go the other way; that's not our prerogative, it affects pretty much all clubs in this league.

 

You call our fanbase "impatient" and "over-expectant" - who the hell are you to come up with these claims? Spare me the guessing game. I can see why the league title has skewed the general view of our club, but how many fans are seriously expecting us to repeat that feat or finishing in the Top Six, Seven on a regular basis?

The football on the pitch is what matters, loving to go to games, enjoying the atmosphere.

Even if it were the case, was it ever different? All these years in the Championship, hoping for promotion back to the Promised Land?

The League One campaign was one of the best experiences of my life, because despite relegation, it brought people together.

I've said this in another thread - what if it's failure we need more than anything? A really healthy kick up the arse, so to speak?

 

As far as the summer transfer window is concerned, a change in the dressing room is/was always inevitable, and I can but assume our management is fully aware of it, as are the affected players. It's how you deal with that change of the old guard that matters. Personally, I think we've failed to bring in "new blood" on a more organic basis in order to support this change more naturally, especially the summer of 2016 looks like one big random hoarder attack now. I'd put the blame there on Ranieri and the management on the whole, but who'd have realistically known we'd have to do that on the back of winning the Premier League title?

 

Bournemouth have shown faith in Howe, because he knows the club inside out and the club are unlikely ever to play in Europe, he gives them what they can realistically aim for. More than that is pretty much not feasible, not with that stadium and that squad, after all, they're still a "small" club. They're happy enough just to stay in the Premier League for now, as long as it's 17th or above. They also still manage to live off their first-ever PL promotion in 2015. Another aspect in which we've somewhat failed - use the good spirit and atmosphere after the league title win.

 

In the end, it's the owners who decide whether they give Puel more credit and time or not, not me. They sacked Shakespeare for three wins out of 16, and that with a tougher schedule than under Puel, who is now on four in 17. We were in 15th spot under Ranieri in 2016-17 with five wins, six draws and nine defeats after 20 matches and the season following our unexpected title win, which is hard to follow up for any no-name team, until that horrendous five-game losing streak cost him his job. I want Puel to be a success here, but recent results and performances have left a sour aftertaste (still do) and should he fail to win at least one out of the remaining four league fixures this season, why should the club be more patient with him?

I literally don't know where to begin with this post and answering it all might take me time I don't have at work.

 

 

[MC Prussian]

Just now, Donut said:

I literally don't know where to begin with this post and answering it all might take me time I don't have at work.

 

 

No worries - see you around at lunch time. 

[daddylonglegs]

On ‎4‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 00:16, daddylonglegs said:

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

Yeah this was a loaded question because the answer is emphatically yes.

 

If we were playing this football under a 50 year old Englishman who showed some pashun in interviews & throttled opposition players then the poll would be very different. 

 

 

[ZeGuy]

55 minutes ago, daddylonglegs said:

Yeah this was a loaded question because the answer is emphatically yes.

 

If we were playing this football under a 50 year old Englishman who showed some pashun in interviews & throttled opposition players then the poll would be very different. 

 

 

Not that I disagree with you but do you often reply to your own posts?

Edited 23 April 2018 by ZeGuy

[HighPeakFox]

It's interesting seeing 2 posters I like, @Donutand @MC Prussian, making a pretty decent debate. I think dismissing a well thought out post as an angry rant is rude, though. You're better than that MC. 

[lee7]

1 hour ago, daddylonglegs said:

Yeah this was a loaded question because the answer is emphatically yes.

 

If we were playing this football under a 50 year old Englishman who showed some pashun in interviews & throttled opposition players then the poll would be very different. 

 

 

I still think the answer is no! If we were playing this way under Pardew or Allardyce or even Dyche then we would still be moaning. 

Whatever way you look at it 4 wins from 17 games is sh*t irrespective of who the manager is. 

[daddylonglegs]

1 hour ago, ZeGuy said:

Not that I disagree with you but do you often reply to your own posts?

Haha there was a couple of replies and couldn't be bothered to quote all of them so just quoted myself. Wont do it again my apologies.

[MC Prussian]

1 hour ago, HighPeakFox said:

It's interesting seeing 2 posters I like, @Donutand @MC Prussian, making a pretty decent debate. I think dismissing a well thought out post as an angry rant is rude, though. You're better than that MC. 

Well, it came across as „angry“ to me.

Btw, I didn’t mean to come across as rude toward @Donut and I mean no disrespect to whomever I‘m quoting, no matter how far apart in opinion we are.

 

I think in the end, it‘s a classic „two sides of the same coin“ debate.

Whereas some may see it from a glass-half-full perspective, wanting to give Puel more time in spite of our results since mid-December 2017, I‘m currently on the other side. Among others, his persistence with possession-based football, talk about his „vision“ for the club on the back of four wins in 17, plus a type of attacking play lacking two major figures up front, make for a (very) frustrating past few months.

[HighPeakFox]

9 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Well, it came across as „angry“ to me.

Btw, I didn’t mean to come across as rude toward @Donut and I mean no disrespect to whomever I‘m quoting, no matter how far apart in opinion we are.

 

I think in the end, it‘s a classic „two sides of the same coin“ debate.

Whereas some may see it from a glass-half-full perspective, wanting to give Puel more time in spite of our results since mid-December 2017, I‘m currently on the other side. Among others, his persistence with possession-based football, talk about his „vision“ for the club on the back of four wins in 17, plus a type of attacking play lacking two major figures up front, make for a (very) frustrating past few months.

All understood. Don't agree with you mainly, but respect your style and learn from reading you. 

[AjcW]

I've been staunchly Puel in throughout, and I think there's a couple of important things to consider.

 

1) We have a number of players who are well aware they are leaving of their own accord or otherwise and have begun to shut down performance wise and this hasn't helped our current situation.

 

2) Puel has a reputation for coming into clubs and playing with a system that he feels suits the team he has in front of him. At Southampton he did that for a season but wasn't given the chance to expand on that with more of his own signings after the saints fire sale.

 

What I do believe will happen is we will see with his first few signings what formation/style we will be playing next season. For all we know he could be desperate to join a lot of the league in playing 3-4-3, but he currently doesn't have the resources to do that.

 

Personally i'm looking forward to him having the chance to shape his own team. We actually haven't had anyone bring real change to this club in a long time, and for me it's needed. Those players we have stuck by have reached their expiry date for me and personally i'm pleased it's Puel at the helm, rather than one of the British merry-go-round coaches who would probably stick with the old until they can't physically play anymore. 

[st albans fox]

You could argue that Puel played a formation and style to suit the players initially but once we had accumulated the points to be relatively secure he has embarked on a different approach which definitely does not suit. This is where the problem lies  - some of us can see the point and possibilities this will lead to and some cannot.  As ever, no one is right and no one is wrong 

[Chester Dontlie]

I'm still undecided. A 'padded fence' option is sorely needed

Edited 23 April 2018 by Chester Dontlie