Puel 'Facing the sack' - reports

[UpTheLeagueFox]

3 hours ago, shailen said:

This is exactly why the possession game will never work. We looked most dangerous when we got the ball early to our forwards and were more direct.

Play direct with energy and dynamism suits us best. That doesn't mean playing constant long balls but some are very useful.

 

2 hours ago, harpendenfox said:

Etheridge made 6 decent saves. 

He made one or two decent saves and lots of routine ones you'd expect most keepers to stop.

 

2 hours ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

Should have started Nacho. Cant believe we booed him on. But fair play to him his touch was still good

What? Nacho should not have started. He should not have been booed on. His touch was STILL good? Really?

 

2 hours ago, 5waller5 said:

He cannot motivate, he cannot get us playing with any intensity with or without the ball.

Players should be self motivated. However, a good manager can add to the motivation. The players are not getting that extra motivation, sadly.

 

1 hour ago, Mr Weller said:

Puel is humourless and long winded in his interviews so people can’t warm to him.

He does seem to have a good long term vision but lacks the guile of a master tactician.

It's hard to warm to him for various reasons as a fan and journalist. The players struggle too.

 

1 hour ago, TK95 said:

I am quite mad at the fact he dropped Choudhury for "tactical reasons". Arguably our best player over the last 3 games it's a baffling decision!

Agreed. I don't think Puel helped himself with that one.

 

18 minutes ago, Ian Nacho said:

The only reason I saw for it is that if he played today, he would have played 4 games in a week and a half. 

Maguire has played in five games in 14 days - and he was coming back from an injury.

Ndidi has played in all five, too.

 

Tuesday - Saturday - Wednesday - Saturday should not have been a massive struggle for a 21 year old, especially one buzzing from his recent impressive performances.

[Gazza M]

He deserves to mark his stamp on the side further in Jan and see how we progress. If we fall of the edge of a cliff again like the run at the end of last season then get rid. 

[lifted*fox]

56 minutes ago, themightyfin said:

Unfortunately fit most posters here he ain't going anywhere soon and there will not be much movement in terms of players coming in in January.

So...Get with the program and get behind the manager and your club it's always been a long term plan not a quick fix. 

We have such a young squad  and young players are inconsistent.

We are building from the bottom up, the future is bright. 

 

Oh man, it's great to have someone a little in the know confirm that the club isn't paying attention to the baying for Puel's blood. 

 

You'd hope people would just shut up and get behind the man but I fear we're going to have many more weeks of this rediculous bahviour. 

 

More rep points for me, I guess. 

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

2 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

Play direct with energy and dynamism suits us best. That doesn't mean playing constant long balls but some are very useful.

 

He made one or two decent saves and lots of routine ones you'd expect most keepers to stop.

 

What? Nacho should not have started. He should not have been booed on. His touch was STILL good? Really?

 

Players should be self motivated. However, a good manager can add to the motivation. The players are not getting that extra motivation, sadly.

 

It's hard to warm to him for various reasons as a fan and journalist. The players struggle too.

 

Agreed. I don't think Puel helped himself with that one.

 

Maguire has played in five games in 14 days - and he was coming back from an injury.

Ndidi has played in all five, too.

 

Tuesday - Saturday - Wednesday - Saturday should not have been a massive struggle for a 21 year old, especially one buzzing from his recent impressive performances.

He should have started. If he had started and played like Vardy did today he'd have been slated.

 

Nacho looked far more suited to the game today than Vardy

 

And I meant even though he got booed on he didnt let it get to him and still played well (impressive as his mentality has seemed a bit questionable recently) with a great touch and clever play. You probably wouldnt notice that though

Edited 29 December 2018 by AlloverthefloorYesNdidi

[funkyrobot]

17 minutes ago, Mehrez said:

If this is your ‘biggest failing’ then it’s aimed at the wrong person, blame with regards to transfers should be on the recruitment team and head of recruitment, the manager has his wish list but doesn’t take charge of recruitment 

Puel would’ve surely had some input into the transfers. Ghezzal was a Puel choice. One of the main problems with the squad is a lack of alternative quality striker to Vardy, a lack of a creative midfielder and the loss of our best player in Mahrez. Ultimately if Puel gets the sack, this lack of squad depth and balance will be one of the key factors. Even if that isn’t in anyway his responsibility, despite occurring during his tenure, it won’t change that fact that the book (and the sack) will always rest with the manager. 

[UpTheLeagueFox]

2 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

Even though he got booed on he still played well with a great touch and clever play. You probably wouldnt notice that though

It's true I didn't notice it. Probably because there wasn't much to notice.

[5waller5]

1 minute ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

He should have started. If he had started and played like Vardy did today he'd have been slated.

 

Nacho looked far more suited to the game today than Vardy

 

And I meant even though he got booed on he still played well with a great touch and clever play. You probably wouldnt notice that though

I definitely didn't notice that (and I'd love him to do well)

[FilbertFrog]

I can’t defend him tonight , no one can 

 

shocked at his selection today 

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

2 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

It's true I didn't notice it. Probably because there wasn't much to notice.

That seems like the product of a biased viewpoint to me. Anyone questioning Vardy getting subbed off did not see the game correctly. Puel's subs were right. His starting line up I think was wrong

Edited 29 December 2018 by AlloverthefloorYesNdidi

[Freeman's Wharfer]

2 hours ago, lifted*fox said:

 

 

This is one of the funnier comments that a few people have started pushing since we beat those teams. THE REAL TEST IS THE MIGHTY CARDIFF. 

 

I think you'll find his job role and remit is to beat whatever the **** is put in front of us whether it's Cardiff or Barcelona m8. 

 

But yeah, just another stick for those who've already made their mind up to beat him with. 

 

If I had to choose where I got 18 points on the board from (because remember, points are points, no matter who you get them against - they're all worth the same!) then give me the excitement of beating Man United, Arsenal, Man City, Liverpool, Chelsea and Spurs ANY DAY OF THE WEEK. 

Nonsense. We play the top 6 12 times a season and and the rest 26 times.

 

We'd found a style that allowed us to take points off the top 6 (and others) long before Puel came in.

 

The fact is that since he came in we haven't been beating those sides that we should really be beating based on squads and resources.

 

 

[UniFox21]

1 minute ago, FilbertFrog said:

I can’t defend him tonight , no one can 

 

shocked at his selection today 

*Hold my beer*

[Mehrez]

1 minute ago, funkyrobot said:

Puel would’ve surely had some input into the transfers. Ghezzal was a Puel choice. One of the main problems with the squad is a lack of alternative quality striker to Vardy, a lack of a creative midfielder and the loss of our best player in Mahrez. Ultimately if Puel gets the sack, this lack of squad depth and balance will be one of the key factors. Even if that isn’t in anyway his responsibility, despite occurring during his tenure, it won’t change that fact that the book (and the sack) will always rest with the manager. 

Don’t disagree with this at all, just that Puel shouldn’t be blamed for what we do with regards to transfers, I’d imagine Ghezzal was on Puels list but it seemed he was last resort after we’d failed on multiple signings in that position in the summer window, the recruitment team didn’t deal with the Mahrez departure at all well - that is coming back to bite us now 

[lanefox]

If we were 14th-17th I’d understand the criticism but were top half and that’s where we should be , some of you need to realise were not a top 4 club 

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

1 minute ago, 5waller5 said:

I definitely didn't notice that (and I'd love him to do well)

I think he looked livelier than the others and had good movement. 

[UpTheLeagueFox]

2 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

That seems like the product of a biased viewpoint to me. Anyone questioning Vardy getting subbed off did not see the game correctly. Puel's subs were right. His starting line up I think was wrong

I didn't question the substitution. I questioned what Iheanacho did (or didn't do) when he was on.

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

Just now, UpTheLeagueFox said:

I didn't question the substitution. I questioned what Iheanacho did (or didn't do) when he was on.

He looked better in the short time he had than Vardy. But maybe we'll have to agree to disagree on that

[whoareyaaa]

The reality is we are doing OK could/should maybe have more points on the board but you only have to look at Man Utd to see what a tough league it is and results that happen weekly.

 

Everton losing and Wolves winning today shows teams in our bracket don't win every game.

 

Lots to improve but as long as the players are on side I don't think we could be any better off with another manager this season.

Edited 29 December 2018 by whoareyaaa

[funkyrobot]

4 minutes ago, Mehrez said:

Don’t disagree with this at all, just that Puel shouldn’t be blamed for what we do with regards to transfers, I’d imagine Ghezzal was on Puels list but it seemed he was last resort after we’d failed on multiple signings in that position in the summer window, the recruitment team didn’t deal with the Mahrez departure at all well - that is coming back to bite us now 

The Manager always gets the blame. It’s a fact of (football) life. 

[Freeman's Wharfer]

2 hours ago, ttfn said:

This is a perfectly reasonable criticism, but the question is then:

1) Is the “new style” wrong?

2) If no, is the man implementing it the right man?

 

Question 1 is a no brainer. You cannot play on the counter attack against teams

that want to sit in and get a point. Unfortunately that will be the case in at least 10 home games for us this season. We need “different solutions” as Puel puts it. 

 

Question 2 is open to debate. @Finnegan‘s post in the Post Match thread rightly cites a lack of movement as the main problem - I don’t agree with him that it’s all Puel’s fault that the players don’t move off the ball but it’s hard to argue with the point that a top quality coach should be able to get more movement out of the players after 14 months in the job.

 

I’m pretty ambivalent about Puel as a person but I am a strong advocate for what he says he wants to do with the club:

Young players

Comfortable in possession

Variety of styles of play

 

My fear is that a change of manager results in these principles being binned in favour of short-term crowd-pleasing solutions that are built on paper-thin foundations.

Good post with the key questions.

 

My take is a 'yes' but with question two still being absolutely pertinent:

 

1) The style (being comfortable in possession) is the right one. We couldn't continue as we were as we had been 'figured out' - although I'm not sure we were any less effective with the counter attack against teams who sat in and defended deep against us than we are now with the possession for possession's sake 

 

2) The man implementing the change in style is doing it in such an overly-cautious way that it's handicapping us completely. His refusal to throw caution to the wind or relinquish his back four plus two defensive midfielders is leaving our attacking players isolated and giving us possession where the bodies are (in our own final third or middle third) which is meaning we struggle to create.

 

The key message from me is this: Claude Puel is not the only manager in world football who can bring through young players and also play a possession-based style of football. He's done a decent job in transitioning in terms of style of play and personnel but he has serious flaws that have shown consistently throughout his time here and elsewhere (mainly an overly-cautious/defensive mentality) which mean we'll never become the finished article under him.

 

This is not a keep Puel or go back to counter attack option. There's no reason someone can't come in and build on what he's done thus far.

[Nickfosse]

11 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

I didn't question the substitution. I questioned what Iheanacho did (or didn't do) when he was on.

T be fair to Kelechi his touch was better than Vardy’s today. 

[Corky]

2 hours ago, Kitchandro said:

Funny because I'm sick of a large section of our fanbase lauding Puel at every opportunity yet constantly having digs at Ranieri, the bloke who actually did something worthwhile at our club and have us something to believe in. Explain that one.

 

Those are the people who really need to do one. Imagine disrespecting the man that made us dream and loving the bloke who has delivered us the most depressing style of football I can ever remember watching. Obviously those people don't like football or our club.

 

At least some other poor Leicester managers had the excuse of having shite players, this one has no such argument.

I don't think it is the Puel-in crowd that have digs at Ranieri, plenty want to give the credit to Pearson and they appear to be unhappy with Puel.

[UpTheLeagueFox]

9 minutes ago, Freeman's Wharfer said:

Claude Puel is not the only manager in world football who can bring through young players and also play a possession-based style of football. He's done a decent job in transitioning in terms of style of play and personnel but he has serious flaws that have shown consistently throughout his time here and elsewhere (mainly an overly-cautious/defensive mentality) which mean we'll never become the finished article under him.

That's a good summing up.

[Collo73]

for the final time.. No one booed nacho.. The booing was for the sub from the manager... OK if u believe nacho was better suited for this game then start him.. But at 0-0 don't take off your main man, at the very least play two up top

[harpendenfox]

20 minutes ago, FilbertFrog said:

I can’t defend him tonight , no one can 

 

shocked at his selection today 

Really? Ok so I might have started Iborra instead of Wilf or Mendy, but that’s about it. I’m far from convinced that would have made a huge difference, although Vincente can make that killer pass. But we could and probably should have scored 3 goals.

[UniFox21]

4 minutes ago, Collo73 said:

for the final time.. No one booed nacho.. The booing was for the sub from the manager... OK if u believe nacho was better suited for this game then start him.. But at 0-0 don't take off your main man, at the very least play two up top

So you speak for the entire crowd now?

Booing the sub is booing the guy coming on, i.e Nacho.

 

If you're gonna boo, boo at the end, not when the team needs support.