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
 Share
Tuna

Should Claude Puel be sacked or backed? Poll

By Tuna, in Leicester City Forum

Should Claude Puel be sacked?  

772 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Claude Puel be sacked or backed?

    • Sack.
      486
    • Keep him and back him in the transfer window.
      282

Recommended Posts

Attywolf

Attywolf

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, elvisfmcfly said:

I know why we bought them mate ffs! What I’m saying is 45 million would be better spent on players who are deemed ready for the first team now not as back up but to literally push out first teamers and improve the first team not the squad the first team first team 

One is pushing the first team players. But you want new players in the first team but fans complain when Simpson, vardy, Evans, Fuchs  or albrighton don't play. Plus it's called future planning you know spending less on potential stars and training them instead of spending more on players that might work but could be a flop for us when their at their peak

Edited by Attywolf
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Babylon

Babylon

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
1 hour ago, elvisfmcfly said:

I know why we bought them mate ffs! What I’m saying is 45 million would be better spent on players who are deemed ready for the first team now not as back up but to literally push out first teamers and improve the first team not the squad the first team first team 

The issue with the CB's wasn't a massive one this summer, if all the shit with Maguire hadn't happened we wouldn't have even bought one of them. Benkovic pretty much said that himself when he said that he knew he be going on loan when Maguire didn't leave. The issue with CB's WAS a massive issue looming on the horizon though.

 

People slag off the club for not forward planning, but what they've done is very sensible. We bought them this summer so that we could bed them in and give them game time ready for next season. When, quite feasibly we could have only have Evans on the books. Wes and Benny are out of contract and Maguire is likely to go. Imagine trying to bed in two, three maybe four new centre backs at the same time. Now that would have been something worth moaning about.

 

The clubs MO is now investing in young talented players. This doesn't just come from Puel, that comes form the top. Unless you are a top team like Man City or Barca, that generally means they might not be first team ready straight the way, because you're buying them form lower divisions or other countries meaning there are no guarantees. We can't go out and buy a youngster ripping it up in the premier league, who are obviously already ready for the premier league for the budget we have.

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
foxinsocks

foxinsocks

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, UniFox21 said:

 

Striker wasn't our main issue, with the ones above taking priority. A striker will probably come next. 

A stiker was always our issue... with 31yearokd vardy doing his best... and a clearly poor nacho.   It was well discussed on ft with many useful suggestions.

You are right to say probably. .. coz none of us has confidence in what puel is likely to do

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Doctor

The Doctor

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, lcfceaves said:

It’s the managers fault we start slow every single week and turn out utter dross for large parts. And did we practice penalties in training for this eventuality? Didn’t look like it... manager at fault as much as the players

Right, so ignore that Fuchs, Maddison and Soyuncu have all already scored penalties this season, they missed (as can happen) so training must be a doss around lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
whoareyaaa

whoareyaaa

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Sublime_Coatsworth said:

But he can be blamed for selecting a weakened team in what was our only realistic chance of silverware/Europe. Again.

its was hardly weakened, the team that played at Palace didn't exactly cover there self in glory, I think the team is fairly balanced no matter who plays playing 1 forward isn't helping the situation though and that is down the to the manager to an extent.

Edited by whoareyaaa
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolhandfox

coolhandfox

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, Sublime_Coatsworth said:

But he can be blamed for selecting a weakened team in what was our only realistic chance of silverware/Europe. Again.

 

I agree with you, however to be subjective, no one on here know what objectives Puel was set by the owner on appointment or at the start of the season.

 

For all we know they may have said the priority is building for the future and fight in the upper reaches of the league.

 

Their lowest priority could have been the League cup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark - Reading

Mark - Reading

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, Sublime_Coatsworth said:

But he can be blamed for selecting a weakened team in what was our only realistic chance of silverware/Europe. Again.

DeJa Vous! Bristol City and a poor Arsenal side last season and now Burton because again he rests his team for that all important mid table scrap! Sack him now, he will be gone in the summer so allow someone new to work with the players between now and the end of the season to give it a good go next year. 

 

Burnley Bournemouth West Ham Brighton Everton Fulham and Palace all teams

we have failed to beat or even compete with for large period of the game. His style does not work against poor/average sides and he will not have a plan B for it add those lost points above and we sit 3rd!

 

It bores me every week watching this crap and I travel 120 miles each way for the privilege everyone asks why I do it and it’s getting harder believe me but it’s a drug you hope the next fix will make it better 

 

Merry Christmas Everyone and have a great new year 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hanan96

Hanan96

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, elvisfmcfly said:

I know why we bought them mate ffs! What I’m saying is 45 million would be better spent on players who are deemed ready for the first team now not as back up but to literally push out first teamers and improve the first team not the squad the first team first team 

That's what we have done for the past 2 years. We brought 29 years old slimani, Iborra, 28 years old Silva, 24 years old musa, maguire, failed bid for 27 years old sigurdson, also some more like Benalouane, wague,zieler etc with only few youth like amartey, kaputska, nacho, and ndidi. 

 

The first 6 names are mean to be first team asap, take big chunk in our transfer fees and wage bills, while the younger didn't have a real plan to integrate except nacho. Amartey it's rather a force for our cm problem. 

 

Result? Our long term problem in rb, cb, lb, amc aren't solved while money is running old already. And now slimani, iborra, and silva is reaching their 30s. We can continue buying such player, and we will end up with bunch of 30 years old both from title wins squad and new signing with still old problem. 

 

It's easy for you to say hey spend money for first teamers, we need change! New cm! New cb! They didn't come for peanuts. The likes Kante vardy mahrez didn't come so often like once a year! 

Edited by Hanan96
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sublime_Coatsworth

Sublime_Coatsworth

Posted
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

 

I agree with you, however to be subjective, no one on here know what objectives Puel was set by the owner on appointment or at the start of the season.

 

For all we know they may have said the priority is building for the future and fight in the upper reaches of the league.

 

Their lowest priority could have been the League cup.

But that’s not really being subjective as us 'not knowing his objectives' could be used to counter just about any decision the manager makes.

 

Bottom line is we’ve now lost the only real chance of any silverwear this year and a Euro spot. However you look at the club from a strategic perspective, that was poor decisioning.

Edited by Sublime_Coatsworth
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolhandfox

coolhandfox

Posted
Posted

For me most of the fan base doesn't accept our squad was in a mess, lacking quality and aging. 

 

Yes I know, the majority of the squad helped us win the league, however that was over two season ago. 

 

However they have aged and are on nice big contacts, I fairly sure one of Puel objectives set by the owners was to reduce the age and cost of the squad.

 

You only have to look at the ages of the majority of our signing, mostly early twenties, compared to the previous years of bring in players in their late twenties.

 

The squad need major work, players need to be move on and have been. Musa, Slim, Ulloa, and will followed by  King, Simpson, Benny, Silva, Oki.

 

The club prioritized all of the problem areas, replacing aging CB, RB and finding a number 10 that we have need for years. I personally don't think there was enough in the pot to cover attacking areas and this will be done in the summer.

 

As for strikers, were are a little like spurs with Harry Kane, if he's fit, he plays, the same goes for Vardy. We have had a strike force of Ulloa, Slim, Musa, all sitting on there arses counting money for 2 and a bit seasons watching Vardy. 

 

Unfortunately the is the one season Vardy had struggled with fitness.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolhandfox

coolhandfox

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Sublime_Coatsworth said:

But that’s not really being subjective as us 'not knowing his objectives' could be used to counter just about any decision the manager makes.

 

Bottom line is we’ve now lost the only real chance of any silverwear this year and a Euro spot. However you look at the club from a strategic perspective, that was poor decisioning.

I'm just saying it not black and white as people make out, sometimes shot term pain can lead to long term gain.

 

 

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
elvisfmcfly

elvisfmcfly

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, Hanan96 said:

That's what we have done for the past 2 years. We brought 29 years old slimani, Iborra, 28 years old Silva, 24 years old musa, maguire, failed bid for 27 years old sigurdson, also some more like Benalouane, wague,zieler etc with only few youth like amartey, kaputska, nacho, and ndidi. 

 

The first 6 names are mean to be first team asap, take big chunk in our transfer fees and wage bills, while the younger didn't have a real plan to integrate except nacho. Amartey it's rather a force for our cm problem. 

 

Result? Our long term problem in rb, cb, lb, amc aren't solved while money is running old already. And now slimani, iborra, and silva is reaching their 30s. We can continue buying such player, and we will end up with bunch of 30 years old both from title wins squad and new signing with still old problem. 

 

It's easy for you to say hey spend money for first teamers, we need change! New cm! New cb! They didn't come for peanuts. The likes Kante vardy mahrez didn't come so often like once a year! 

Yes obviously there as been a problem with recruitment, but age doesn't make a transfer any less risky they could still be crap. 45 Million is a huge slice of budget for them not to be involved now in the first team, thats all im saying if people can stop stating the obvious back at me it would be great,TIA!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Attywolf

Attywolf

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, elvisfmcfly said:

Yes obviously there as been a problem with recruitment, but age doesn't make a transfer any less risky they could still be crap. 45 Million is a huge slice of budget for them not to be involved now in the first team, thats all im saying if people can stop stating the obvious back at me it would be great,TIA!

I get what you mean. But if we want a spot in Europe it's the sort of money that needs to be spent.  Also though it's still risky to buy younger players it means that they hold their value better so that if it does go wrong we can sell them and not lose as much( like Iheanacho that can still be sold for around 25 million. So we can still break even with him)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hanan96

Hanan96

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, elvisfmcfly said:

Yes obviously there as been a problem with recruitment, but age doesn't make a transfer any less risky they could still be crap. 45 Million is a huge slice of budget for them not to be involved now in the first team, thats all im saying if people can stop stating the obvious back at me it would be great,TIA!

Alright. Who should be brought for 45 mills? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
elvisfmcfly

elvisfmcfly

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Attywolf said:

I get what you mean. But if we want a spot in Europe it's the sort of money that needs to be spent.  Also though it's still risky to buy younger players it means that they hold their value better so that if it does go wrong we can sell them and not lose as much( like Iheanacho that can still be sold for around 25 million. So we can still break even with him)

I don’t know what to suggest now if you are serious about getting 25 million back for iheanacho! Crazy talk!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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