Puel 'Facing the sack' - reports

[whoareyaaa]

I think Puel has shown over the last 2 games that he can learn and adapt when things are not working as well as they should, has a lot of potential to work with although another striker is needed although two results don't make a season this will give him till the end of it at least.

 

Now he needs to see what has worked and move with it not chopping and changing week in week out.

 

Obviously playing teams like Chelsea and Man City as they like to attack and be on the front foot the game opens up for us abit more where as Cardiff will be a different challenge but the players should have the confidence now after these two massive wins and performances to go and get the first goal and while keeping it tight at the back.

[SpacedX]

9 hours ago, trabuch said:

If only you were our manager! We might have won 5-0 - Optimism is a powerful thing. I do declare. If we have a confident team with ALL the fans behind it - we will win the ****ing league (AGAIN)!. 

 

We won the league. We are Leicester - we gave all the losers hope - we are beautiful. Please don't let us become one of those self entitled teams that people hate (like spurs - 1961 aside and the savage snot league cup).

??? Jesus Christ lighten up. What had you been drinking?

 

It was nothing more than a rhetorical observation for which I was hoping for an answer. More an appeal to incredulity than appeal to authority on my part.

 

Possibly one of the most bizarre replies of the year. Unreal. 

[Crinklyfox]

There have been a lot of reactionary posts, especially in the match threads.  City lose, Puel out, City win, Puel in.  It's understandable but there is a bigger picture.

 

Puel's abilities as a manager may be reflected by results but there are other factors including the quality of our players on the pitch, the quality of the opposition, their manager and their tactics.  However we can ask:

 

1.  Does Puel have the support of the players (it's difficult, though not impossible, to manage effectively without the support of the players - anyone remember Jock Wallace and his training methods in our promotion season?)

2.  Does Puel pick the right team for each match?

3.  Does Puel set the team up in the best formation for each match?

4.  Does Puel make personnel and tactical changes correctly to deal with changing circumstances during the matches?

 

If the owners are satisfied that Puel is doing a good job in respect of these factors most of the time then IMO they should retain him, regardless of individual results; similarly, if he is failing in too many of these aspects but the players are winning despite him, they should consider replacing him.

 

As has been said before, we are a team in transition.  In my view we have the capability to maintain our place in the PL.  The players have had to adapt to a different style of play to that to which they have been used to, and as in many cases with change, things get worse before they gets better.  We do seem to have discovered a successful blend of the passing and counterattacking game now and IMO it would not be productive to abandon that and start again with another manager.

[HighPeakFox]

To my mind, nobody has successfully helped the team, and club fully come to terms with 15/16 - where could the club go from there, knowing that doing it again (even once) was just not realistic? - and maybe, just maybe, those players who have had to stay motivated, despite the inevitable come down and understandable feeling of 'after the lord mayor's show' since the title/Europe, are starting to see possibilities once again....maybe, Puel is a part of that.

 

If they're able to raise themselves again, and achieve new levels of success that aren't the title, but surpassing all other previous efforts, then I think that would be immense, psychologically. I suggested some time ago that everyone was probably in shock, and unsure what to do next. Maybe, it's starting to happen.

 

Maybe.

Edited 27 December 2018 by HighPeakFox

[siraaj_lcfc]

Those who still want Puel out after the past couple of results are Turds the size of Disneyland Paris.

[murphy]

14 hours ago, Freeman's Wharfer said:

The irony of this Puel In/Puel Out debate (which is the most divisive I've ever seen during my time supporting Leicester) is that those who are Puel Out have reached an opinion based on 40+ games yet off the back of one or two performances/good results those who are Puel In will hold that up as proof they were always right.

 

The truth is, no one's right and no one's wrong. And it's possible to hold one opinion at one time and revise that at another based upon what you're seeing.

 

I was (and probably still am) Puel Out. But that's because I feel results haven't been good enough at times and the style has been uninspiring - both of which can be transient.

 

My personal opinion is that Puel was brought in to change us into a team that could dominate possession and beat the bottom 10-12 teams in the Premier League. We've beaten two of the top six with minimal possession - so I don't think this actually tells us much about his progress against the job with which he was tasked.

 

What these results do earn him (rightfully) is time. Let's see where we are at in 6 games' time. And let's remember that this is not about "I told you so".

This is very true on both sides of the debate.  The outers will appear en masse after every bad result and some with glee and a dab of bloodlust.

 

 

[murphy]

13 hours ago, Anglodanglo said:

I think I've figured it out.

 

Martin O'Neill's Leicester side hovered around 7th-11th for seasons. 

 

However, he had a better accent and jumped really REALLY high when we scored.

 

I hereby proclaim all that stands between Mr Puel and greatness is Elocution & Squats. 

Hey!  O'Neill took us up with a play off win at Wembley, had three league cup finals, winning two, our first silverware in living memory, played exciting football and he had to shop for players at the likes of Oxford (Elliott), Crewe (Lennon and Savage) and Port Vale (Guppy).  He finished 8th and 9th twice and his net spend was probably about £3.50

 

Not only that, but I was a young buck, music was better and life was good. 

 

Don't have a go at the ninet.... I mean O'Neill.

[RumbleFox]

There are some really odd mental gymnastics, revisionist statements and delusions going on on this thread.  Sometimes I get really confused by FT.

 

As a paid up "Puel In" poster I must admit to reading things on this thread which I just don't agree with.  Quite a lot of people claiming that people expressing Puel in sentiments are some how fickle or impulsive or somehow "as bad as the Puel out lot".  From what I can see, no one blindly stated "puel is amazing, anyone criticising him is a doofus and I knew from the start he was the saviour".  It seems to me is that all that happened was some people slagged Puel off and others said "let's give him time, I can see progress, I can appreciate he is changing a system, has a young team and there are bound to be inconsistent performances".  Even if I take off my Puel In specs and be as objective as possible I cannot see anyway that the following two statements are not true:

 

1 - Puel has been treated more unfairly than previous managers.

 

2 - Things are not as bad as some people have made out.

 

That is it, that is pretty much all that the so called "staunch" Puel In people have said.  Nothing fickle, no blind faith and any posts they may have made that seems OTT are always a REACTION to over the top, unfounded criticism of Puel rather than unprompted, statements of blind stupid optimism.  It seems to me the Puel in/out series of events went thus:

 

Out - Puel is shit and boring and French and tippy tappy.

 

In - He isn;t THAT bad and results have been OK.

 

Out - You are a Puel Inner, he is shit.

 

In - We are getting there, we need time.

 

Out - He is shit, get rid.

 

In - We have played some good football recently, maybe we were right in not judging him too early?

 

Out - You fickle bstards.

 

Despite what many of the "out" folk claim no one thinks Puel should be allowed to do as he wishes, survive relegation or be worshipped as the second coming.  We just think he has been treated harshly and is not as bad as some claim.  There is no fickleness, no impulsive mind changing based on one or two results.  Just support for a manager.

 

He may or may not work out but talk of the sack and the criticism he has received seems to me to be objectively foolish.

 

X

 

 

 

Edited 27 December 2018 by RumbleFox

[Bunyip]

2 hours ago, siraaj_lcfc said:

Those who still want Puel out after the past couple of results are Turds the size of Disneyland Paris.

And those who lose all sense of perspective after two wins are a stain on the underpants of football.

[RumbleFox]

3 minutes ago, Bunyip said:

And those who lose all sense of perspective after two wins are a stain on the underpants of football.

Please see ramble above. X 

[volpeazzurro]

3 hours ago, whoareyaaa said:

I think Puel has shown over the last 2 games that he can learn and adapt when things are not working as well as they should, has a lot of potential to work with although another striker is needed although two results don't make a season this will give him till the end of it at least.

 

Now he needs to see what has worked and move with it not chopping and changing week in week out.

 

Obviously playing teams like Chelsea and Man City as they like to attack and be on the front foot the game opens up for us abit more where as Cardiff will be a different challenge but the players should have the confidence now after these two massive wins and performances to go and get the first goal and while keeping it tight at the back.

1. I hardly think that he's learned over the last two games, he's been a decent  manager for many years with bundles of manager and player experience behind him. Just because he doesn't do what a few armchair pundits on here agree with, and many of those are totally different ideas to each other, doesn't mean he's wrong.

2. He's had to chop and change his team to evaluate what he's got. Monitoring what he sees every day in training to performance in an actual match. Klopp and Guadiola did it also. Plus Puel had the added disadvantages of having a small group of expensively bought ill fitting individuals to cope with. It is also common sense to change your team for tactical and fitness or reasons, the latter two we're never always going to be privy to the reasons why.

3. I agree with you mostly on this but essentially we'll be the Man City or Chelsea this time so it wouldn't be beyond the realms to make changes. Neither will we be fully aware of all injury, fitness and fatigue issues.

 

This is in no way pointed at you but it does make me smile at times at the sometimes emphatic demands on here regarding team selections and formations when none of us really know the full facts before making those judgments and, as there can be a dozen differing views,  who's right?

Edited 27 December 2018 by volpeazzurro

[Bunyip]

4 minutes ago, RumbleFox said:

Please see ramble above. X 

Yes, but I did it in a nutshell.

[norwichfox]

2 hours ago, murphy said:

Hey!  O'Neill took us up with a play off win at Wembley, had three league cup finals, winning two, our first silverware in living memory, played exciting football and he had to shop for players at the likes of Oxford (Elliott), Crewe (Lennon and Savage) and Port Vale (Guppy).  He finished 8th and 9th twice and his net spend was probably about £3.50

 

Not only that, but I was a young buck, music was better and life was good. 

 

Don't have a go at the ninet.... I mean O'Neill.

Oh fcuk...am I dead....has 1964, Stringfellow, Gibson, Riley & Matt Gilles been eradicated from living memory?

[C.J]

For anyone who thinks Puel is clueless when is comes to tactics, then watch this (it must have hurt Danny Murphy to say something nice about Leicester btw):

https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/a9zev5/match_of_the_day_analysis_on_puels_tactical/

[SheppyFox]

A lot of draws could easily have been wins if Vards was firing on all cylinders earlier in the season too. Managers can’t control split second decisions, they can’t control whether the striker takes the chance.

 

Puel has made some confusing substitutions at times, that I’ll happily admit, he hasn’t always got the team selection correct, but generally we look like we are going the right way. We couldn’t play our way out from the back as effectively as we can now, which is a big plus for me, before Puel we couldn’t string easy on the eye passes together, even Morgan is better on the ball now  

[Anglodanglo]

7 hours ago, Col city fan said:

All joking aside, I assume you aren’t old enough to have followed City under O’Neill?

He took us up, involving possibly the most exciting ending to a play off final ever.

He made us stable in the Premiership

He won cups, at Wembley, giving us heady days each time.

AND he jumped really high when we scored.

We loved him at the club..don’t minimise the huge impact he had with LCFC.

You assume wrong my serious friend, I worked there during his time with the club and hold him as the legend he is.

An attempt to be light hearted rather than minimising any of his achievements? but you can't please everyone

The only thing you should assume is I'm damn sexy

Love you

Edited 27 December 2018 by Anglodanglo

[SheppyFox]

2 minutes ago, Anglodanglo said:

You assume wrong my serious friend, I even worked there during his time with the club and hold him as the legend he is.

An attempt to be light hearted rather than minimising any of his achievements?

If you were working in the 90s, I’d assume you’re atleast 50! ?

[Anglodanglo]

5 minutes ago, SheppyFox said:

If you were working in the 90s, I’d assume you’re atleast 50! ?

Assume 40 mate and you'd be correct

Edited 27 December 2018 by Anglodanglo

[SheppyFox]

4 minutes ago, Anglodanglo said:

Assume 40 mate and you'd be correct

Are you a former player? ? 

[Anglodanglo]

Just now, SheppyFox said:

Are you a former player? ? 

Ha definetly not I would have made Gary Coatsworth look like Leo Messi

I worked in the belvoir suite as a waiter while at Charles Keene College and a Programme Seller outside the Kop 

[SheppyFox]

9 minutes ago, Anglodanglo said:

Ha definetly not I would have made Gary Coatsworth look like Leo Messi

I worked in the belvoir suite as a waiter while at Charles Keene College and a Programme Seller outside the Kop 

Ah ok ? thought I’d ask  you never know who comes on here you know ?

[Bunyip]

4 hours ago, Anglodanglo said:

Ha definetly not I would have made Gary Coatsworth look like Leo Messi

I worked in the belvoir suite as a waiter while at Charles Keene College and a Programme Seller outside the Kop 

You're not fooling me, all the ex-players say that.

[biggs]

Lose to Cardiff.....Puel out....'The Tide Changes'......new soap opera from FoxesTalk

[Anglodanglo]

1 hour ago, Bunyip said:

You're not fooling me, all the ex-players say that.

Nah, the actual players made Gary Coatsworth look like Gary Coatsworth

Edited 27 December 2018 by Anglodanglo

[TonyN11]

20 hours ago, TheLittleBigMan said:

Provided he keeps winning I reckon he'll be ok. But if that tw*t EVER puts a foot wrong he needs to go. I've been saying this the whole time. If he wins more than he loses i'll stick with him, i'll even stick with him if he wins and draws more than he loses, but by god, if he loses more than he wins, and he loses more than he draws and wins - there will be bloody trouble I can tell you. 

So he's allowed to stay if he wins and draws more than he loses; so if he wins 2 and draws 8 = 10 and only loses 9 then that's OK. BTW does * = i or a?