When did it all go wrong under Puel?

[Tuna]

The Man City quarter final when he picked a weakened side.

 

 

Edited 28 April 2018 by Tuna

[ZeGuy]

Mahrez circus. We never recovered from it.

Edited 28 April 2018 by ZeGuy

[Corky]

8 minutes ago, brucey said:

From the start. He didn't even have that much of a new manager bounce.

17 points from the first 8 games is an impressive start. 

 

Palace at home originally then the Mahrez incident have both knocked us off course.

[foxile5]

Mahrez did him no favours.

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

Dead man walking 

[Bozman]

All this will  happen again if we don't clear out the old players, who are looking after their own interests and not the clubs... namely Morgan , Simpson, Allbrighten, Smeichael, Mahrez, Huth...

[lee7]

When we was winning yet he was still insisting that we needed to change our style and pass it more. 

He had the perfect blend at the start. Quick passing football plenty of movement and counter attacking still. Now we lack all of that. Everything is too slow. 

[lgfualol]

We actually played really well I thought during his early games here. Had the right balance between counter and possession.

 

Think the way he handled certain situations and the players having a big untouchable attitude led to the downfall. Plus general bad form by some of them and injuries.

[hejammy]

13 minutes ago, Matt said:

How about he grew some bollocks and dropped them then?

 

Unless you mean "Not having any bollocks to stand up to player power".

I agree he should have, however look and Ranieri, Shakey and now Puel, all had players not play and down tools. A disgrace! Players are as much to blame as the manager 

[Matt]

Just now, hejammy said:

I agree he should have, however look and Ranieri, Shakey and now Puel, all had players not play and down tools. A disgrace! Players are as much to blame as the manager 

They should have all grew some bollocks.

 

Ranieri was his own downfall, we needed to change I agree but it was too much, too soon.

Shakespeare I don't believe they stopped playing for him or they downed tools - He was simply out of his depth and not a manager.

Puel - I do believe they've stopped playing and downed tools under him but I can't argue with them really under the boring and ineffective management, I also feel he is out of his depth, ultimately stand up to the players.

[LestaAl]

He tried to get the players to change their style too quickly and before he could bring in his own players.

 

He could not get his message across to the fans and presumably it was the same with the team.

 

time to go now

[The Wizard]

The day he took the job... Shazam !

[Guest Kopfkino]

I'm not sure it was that great in the first place tbh, he had largely a fortunate run of fixtures to start

[Kitchandro]

It never went right as far as i’m concerned. He got lucky early on as he was being compared to Shakespeare, the players were trying to impress him, and fans just ignored the negative signs.

 

The truth is we’ve had probably one good full match since he got here. The league is worse this year than I can ever remember and the fact we’ve got better players than most other teams has carried us.

 

It was inevitable we would get worse and worse as the players would stop caring and his tactics would be shown for what they are. He’s never even done the basics like picking a consistent 11 or deciding what he wants his full backs to do.

[MC Prussian]

Where did it all go wrong for Puel?

 

• Trying to implement his passing style DURING the season. We played really well until Southampton away, went pear-shaped since then.
• The Mahrez Situation in January, Riyad destroyed a LOT of goodwill in a matter of days. That didn't help Puel, however...
• ... Puel handling Mahrez straight after, deary me - giving him immediate match time as a substitute.
• Preferring Morgan over Dragovic, wasting a defender who's clearly not good enough anymore due to his age and wasting another who's pissed off for not getting deserved match practice.
• Talking about a "vision" for the club on the back of four wins in 17 matches and no home win since late January.
• Giving odd post-match interviews and praising his team for a lacklustre performance
• Preferring Hamza Choudhoury over Silva (but I'm sure Puel will be getting praise for "promoting youth players" by some still)

I would like to add that the management has come under big scrutiny also - Rudkin and the recruitment team show signs of failing to deal with our title winning season and its aftermath. Have we intentionally and seriously and considerably been building for the future since then?

Edited 28 April 2018 by MC Prussian

[weller54]

Goes back to.. 

2nd September 1961!

[dayday]

When he first took over we actually looked alright, but rather than slowly implementing his ideas, he did it to quickly.

 

He should of took a leaf out of Ranieris book, play to the strengths of the players.

 

Why play a possession based game when your midfield, right back and CBs are to slow, no wonder the players lost interest.

[ithuriel]

3 minutes ago, dayday said:

When he first took over we actually looked alright, but rather than slowly implementing his ideas, he did it to quickly.

 

He should of took a leaf out of Ranieris book, play to the strengths of the players.

 

Why play a possession based game when your midfield, right back and CBs are to slow, no wonder the players lost interest.

Have to agree, basically got himself the sack and yes, he has not been sacked yet but its undoubtedly coming.

[vanity]

Mahrez quitting on the team. We have been awful ever since.

[RowlattsFox]

Mahrez incident was a catalyst for us losing momentum from what I can remember. Squad hasn’t seen the same since, whether that is annoyed that Mahrez wasn’t sold, annoyed that Mahrez walked straight back in or could just be coincidence. 

 

Morgan returning from injury as well. 

[daddylonglegs]

This is now the point where you have to say enough is enough and begin the process of trying to rebuild properly.

 

Lots of people wanted Puel out unfairly because he doesn't show passion & they didn't like his brand of football. 

 

I was very much Puel in. I am totally in favour of a rebrand because I didn't want to go on paying money to watch Simpson play balls into the channels aimlessly & so on & so on. 

 

After however many games now I can categorically say he's not the man for the job, and I'd love to hear the argument for giving him a chance next season. 

 

[Bunyip]

Getting through the interview for the job without the slightest idea of how to implement the ideas you just sold the owners. It was downhill from there.

[Monsell1976]

He shouldn’t have changed the players and the system at the same time, and left it the end of the season,  to much to soon for a bang average squad.

 The little tweaks he made around the Southampton game was enough for this bunch of tactically inept bunch of snakes.

 Once he tried to get to technical, instead of the hit and hope most of these players are limited to, I think they knew their time was up here, so the snakes do what snakes do, they downed tools, and we are where we are, new manager comes in, the players keep their power.

 Not stating this as ITK, just the way I see it.

Edited 28 April 2018 by Monsell1976

[l444ry]

When he stopped listening to the players and probably Appleton too, which many on here misguidedly call player power.

[ZeGuy]

37 minutes ago, Monsell1976 said:

He should have changed the players and the system at the same until the end of the system, to much to soon for a bang average squad.

 The little tweaks he made around the Southampton game was enough for this bunch of tactically inept bunch of snakes.

 Once he tried to get to technical, instead of the hit and hope most of these players are limited to, I think they knew their time was up here, so the snakes do what snakes do, they downed tools, and we are where we are, new manager comes in, the players keep their power.

 Not stating this as ITK, just the way I see it.

That's actually the best description of this team. Can I use it?