Puel Gone - Official

[HankMarvin]

1 hour ago, The Doctor said:

Except that's a perfectly good argument - it might have been completely accidental on account of him being a winger typically (well, it almost certainly was) but he moved their defence around far more than Vardy has all season, and it created plenty of space for Barnes in particular. He definitely did move well, the argument is whether that's just by mistake.

He played everywhere except where he was meant to, for 45 mins.

what you gain on one hand hand you lose on another 

[Ian S]

3 hours ago, ThaiFox said:

What a shock!

 

Puel's outburst at Nacho for doing his usual standing on the half way line, pointing the finger for others to chase and hassle opponents, whilst on the pitch for his usual 15 minute cameo!

 

Poor little thing, so upset as he pocketed yet another 40K in his pocket for his 15 minute weekly walk on the pitch.

 

Sorry, if this upsets any Nacho fans, but if anyone deserves a rocket up his ass it's Nacho. Stealing a living as a footballer.

 

Thrilled to read this morning that David Moyes has put his hat in the ring. Ye gods, what is happening to our club?

 

 

Yes ,Moyes’s record is not a patch on Puels in the Premier League.!

I am not saying he is my first choice but be fair he could not do worse.

 

[HankMarvin]

12 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

 

Let me explain the difference between "source" and "sources".

Fans who claim to be ITK will I suspect have one source - their brother's mate knows one of the groundstaff etc.

There was a feeling on here (and social media) that I had one source (and that Percy, Whitwell etc also only had one source).

And that single source was going to be a player who wasn't playing so had a specific axe to grind.

Journalists use multiple sources. I was getting info over the past year from probably 8-10 people (from players, coaching staff, other club employees, agents etc).

When you hear so many people, independently, saying the same kind of stuff, you sit up and listen.

I tried to convey those messages, without naming names or even what their job was because journalists don't do that.

Some of you here just wouldn't have it. It was one source. It was an agenda. Blah blah.

I didn't post here from 4th January until yesterday because it just went round and round in circles and I needed a break from the madness.

Ultimately it doesn't really matter whether people believe what I (or other newspaper journalists) said or not. But this is to give you an idea of how it works.

As for the next manager, let's hope we make the right decision and we unite in love for our amazing club. Onwards and upwards x

Don’t know why certain people get so defensive over people that have information, I think it’s a form of jealousy.

It’s a bit strange really.

[Ian S]

2 hours ago, walkerleeds said:

 

Good shout. We should review the manager's position every 5 games and see where we end up.

Ok how about since the turn of the year, is that long enough.?

Or maybe we should just continue getting beaten by mediocre teams until you are satisfied it is time to review the managers position.

[Ric Flair]

49 minutes ago, Babylon said:

What worries me massively and this comes from Huth basically saying the same, is that the players thought everything was fine as it was. It really wasn't, how high tempo, in your face and aggressive were we when we tamely slid down the table under Ranieri, or for Shakey when we were just as drab and ineffective against the lower teams, like we were at Huddersfield and at home to West Brom.

 

If they all disagreed that things needed to change, then there are big big issues. I can't shake the feeling that like so many fans, many player are totally hung up on what won the league and think that all we need to do is go back to that and all will be fine.

Thankfully the legacy from Puel will be that he has tried to change this and has broken up the declining old guard so eventually there is no resistance to returning to the old days. The current issues are though that for all the signings Puel made and the signings Shakespeare made, we still don't seem that comfortable blending possession based football with purposeful and effective football. If we do take the lions share of the ball, we usually shoot ourselves in the foot and we seem to have even less ability to defend or show any form of aggression. Our best football tends to be when we are allowed to counter, but that's only because it's usually the only occasions we've scored goals this season. The patient build up play has been synonymous with zero end product or somehow managing to rack up 20+ shots in matches but barely create a single meaningful chance. I don't know what the answer is, it's not all Puel's fault but i'm not so sure it's the resistance from the remaining title winners that is responsible for failing to move forward.

 

We just seem an uncomfortable team, but football changes quickly and perhaps a new man can make small changes that reap large rewards, whatever happens we have to be more incisive as a team in the final third. Our movement has been a disgrace all season and Tielemans will help us to get the ball forward more positively. It would also help if we could still defend properly when we venture forward as well, I dare say bar the Wolves game Morgan has been our best centre half this season and I can't believe i'm saying it but should he come back in?

[Babylon]

2 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

 

Let me explain the difference between "source" and "sources".

Fans who claim to be ITK will I suspect have one source - their brother's mate knows one of the groundstaff etc.

There was a feeling on here (and social media) that I had one source (and that Percy, Whitwell etc also only had one source).

And that single source was going to be a player who wasn't playing so had a specific axe to grind.

Journalists use multiple sources. I was getting info over the past year from probably 8-10 people (from players, coaching staff, other club employees, agents etc).

When you hear so many people, independently, saying the same kind of stuff, you sit up and listen.

I tried to convey those messages, without naming names or even what their job was because journalists don't do that.

Some of you here just wouldn't have it. It was one source. It was an agenda. Blah blah.

I didn't post here from 4th January until yesterday because it just went round and round in circles and I needed a break from the madness.

Ultimately it doesn't really matter whether people believe what I (or other newspaper journalists) said or not. But this is to give you an idea of how it works.

As for the next manager, let's hope we make the right decision and we unite in love for our amazing club. Onwards and upwards x

Thanks for explaining plural, the post you chopped the end off clearly stated it could be more than one person. But that still doesn't take away from the point, if the people moaning are Simpson, King, Fuchs and Mike Stowell then it gives a totally different perspective over it being others. Considering the transition he was making in the squad, who it was saying these things matters, because there isn't a single manager out there who can try and change things to the extent we were on course to without treading on some toes. That's why the who mattered to people.

 

In terms of agenda, you didn't help yourself with that one with the Vardy "dropping" stuff as I said at the time. It felt like personal opinion had crept in.

 

Anyway, it's done and he's gone and I'm not sure many can complain about that.

[Babylon]

14 minutes ago, rachhere said:

Nah, for me this is saying that the players were frustrated that the manager didn't want to play to their strengths. There's got to be a bit of a middle ground between the way we were playing before and Puel's approach. 

But that team was old and needing breaking up, we chose to go another direction and the players need to accept that rather than getting the hump about it. It comes across like as people feared, a load of players wanting to protect their positions.

[Babylon]

5 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Thankfully the legacy from Puel will be that he has tried to change this and has broken up the declining old guard so eventually there is no resistance to returning to the old days. The current issues are though that for all the signings Puel made and the signings Shakespeare made, we still don't seem that comfortable blending possession based football with purposeful and effective football. If we do take the lions share of the ball, we usually shoot ourselves in the foot and we seem to have even less ability to defend or show any form of aggression. Our best football tends to be when we are allowed to counter, but that's only because it's usually the only occasions we've scored goals this season. The patient build up play has been synonymous with zero end product or somehow managing to rack up 20+ shots in matches but barely create a single meaningful chance. I don't know what the answer is, it's not all Puel's fault but i'm not so sure it's the resistance from the remaining title winners that is responsible for failing to move forward.

 

We just seem an uncomfortable team, but football changes quickly and perhaps a new man can make small changes that reap large rewards, whatever happens we have to be more incisive as a team in the final third. Our movement has been a disgrace all season and Tielemans will help us to get the ball forward more positively. It would also help if we could still defend properly when we venture forward as well, I dare say bar the Wolves game Morgan has been our best centre half this season and I can't believe i'm saying it but should he come back in?

I'm not suggesting they are to blame, at the end of the day Puel has just never got it together here. But I do appreciate how difficult the task is that he was set, I don't think anyone could have done that without backlash behind the scenes.

 

Come the summer the squad will have a totally different look about it and most of the mucky work will have completed, so I don't think his time here has been a waste.

[Ian S]

2 hours ago, ThaiFox said:

Thanks for the information.

 

If Nacho earns more than 40k a week he should be donating it back to the fans.

 

If he has personal issues he should be nowhere near the first team, he should be in counseling.

 

The full games where Nacho has been playing, he hasn't impressed either. I think he's been given every chance.

 

Ghezzal has been slaughted on here, but the guy is working hard in every match. Tackling, hassling opposition players and trying to give his all for the team. Nacho is the opposite. He does nothing to show he wants to succeed.

 

Nacho did very well at Manchester City. I was thrilled we got him, but it now looks like his success at Man City was down to the chances being laid on a plate for him rather than working hard to create chances or even working hard.

 

Puel may not have played to Vardy's strengths, but at least Vardy TRIES. 

 

I support fully and can forgive our players for short comings, but I'm sorry, I really can't forgive any Leicester City player for not trying, and, much like Beckford, Nacho doesn't give me any impression he wants to succeed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Did you watch Ghezzal on Saturday, there is a reason he was hooked at half time.

And I would not say Nacho did not try on Saturday as I recall him breaking up a dangerous counter attack in our right back position, however why the hell he was playing right side is another Puel mystery.

Nacho’s confidence is fried, whether he will make it is in serious doubt but just maybe a new manager will get something out of him.

[Ric Flair]

4 minutes ago, Babylon said:

I'm not suggesting they are to blame, at the end of the day Puel has just never got it together here. But I do appreciate how difficult the task is that he was set, I don't think anyone could have done that without backlash behind the scenes.

 

Come the summer the squad will have a totally different look about it and most of the mucky work will have completed, so I don't think his time here has been a waste.

I agree, it's been a difficult job he's had to do and I think you need exceptional personal skills to be able to do it and not cause a lot of upset and resentment and even then it's likely to be hostile on occasions. I do get the feeling that diplomacy and man management aren't necessarily Puel's strongest attributes and it's not helped him oversee this and get results at the same time. He almost needed to somehow have that " killing them softly " tact, as well as being able to motivate and inspire the replacements.

[The Doctor]

1 hour ago, Babylon said:

I would suggest the biggest difference was that they left space by pushing more than two or three people forward at a time, which I don't think Palace ever bothered to do. The fact they scored 4 goals when barely even bothering to attack shows how utterly shit we were defensively.

That's part of it, but even with fewer defenders, Gray was less static, wasn't just spinning for a ball in behind. I don't think he's got the intelligence or awareness to have done it deliberately, but the more fluid attack did disrupt their defence quite well.

 

1 hour ago, Babylon said:

What worries me massively and this comes from Huth basically saying the same, is that the players thought everything was fine as it was. It really wasn't, how high tempo, in your face and aggressive were we when we tamely slid down the table under Ranieri, or for Shakey when we were just as drab and ineffective against the lower teams, like we were at Huddersfield and at home to West Brom.

 

If they all disagreed that things needed to change, then there are big big issues. I can't shake the feeling that like so many fans, many player are totally hung up on what won the league and think that all we need to do is go back to that and all will be fine.

 

That is a concern, and we can safely say if they think that then it's Rochdale, not Roma, that needs programming into the fans sat navs.

 

1 hour ago, NotTheMarketLeader said:

You don’t think that may have something to do with the style of the opposition in the different games ie, Palace dropping to the edge of their area, whilst Tottenham played a completely different game? 

Potentially, but if we're saying that our star forward can only play against sides that defend suicidally, then it's probably time to move him on and try other options.

[Ali Begbie]

I really don’t get the ‘it was difficult for him’ argument. He took over a successful team with a great team spirit and was given money to burn.  He has under-performed and under-achieved. That’s not acceptable in League as competitive as the EPL, with top quality managers desperate for the chance to manage clubs like ours .

 

OK he has helped in a move away from the old guard – but that would have happened regardless of who was the manager.  

 

This season has been a wasted opportunity. Ironic really that Puel was sacked on the day he could easily have been leading us out at Wembley for the League Cup final - but for another of his head-scratching team selections.

 

His experimental approach to Premier League football has ultimately been his downfall. He seemed to adopt the principles of a Youth Team coach – determined to give lots of different players the opportunity to develop. Clearly this is not how you can run a Premier League team.

 

Watching the game yesterday was painful. Possession football just doesn’t lead to effective football unless you’ve got the quality of Manchester City. It was a fool’s errand from the start, with Puel too stubborn to see what was happening in front of his eyes, game after game after game.

 

I wish the man well, but I don’t remember ever being more relieved to see a manager given Le Boot.

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

17 minutes ago, Ali Begbie said:

 He took over a successful team with a great team spirit and was given money to burn.  

Wrong  

[lifted*fox]

5 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

Wrong  

 

it's so far off the mark you can't even see the mark from where it is. 

[Babylon]

24 minutes ago, Ali Begbie said:

I really don’t get the ‘it was difficult for him’ argument. He took over a successful team with a great team spirit and was given money to burn.  He has under-performed and under-achieved. That’s not acceptable in League as competitive as the EPL, with top quality managers desperate for the chance to manage clubs like ours .

 

OK he has helped in a move away from the old guard – but that would have happened regardless of who was the manager. 

A team so successful he was the third manager in about 6 months, with a history of bitching and whinging when things weren't done like they were before. We've had one of the lowest net spends in the league since he arrived, with an aging squad full of flops to sort out.

 

You think Shakey would have been so quick to move on from them? Because there was no sign of that whilst he was here really.

 

Yes, ultimately things weren't good enough and there wasn't anywhere close to being enough progress on the pitch. But it was not an easy task.

Edited 25 February 2019 by Babylon

[lifted*fox]

1 minute ago, Babylon said:

A team so successful he was the third manager in about 6 months, with a history of bitching and whinging when things weren't done like they were before. We've had one of the lowest net spends in the league since he arrived, with an aging squad full of flops to sort out.

 

 You think Shakey would have been so quick to move on from them? Because there was no sign of that whilst he was here really.

 

this is so close to the mark you can't see either side of the mark, it's THAT close (like literally right on top of it)

 

Edited 25 February 2019 by lifted*fox

[Sharpe's Fox]

Whoever the new man is hopefully he won't be as divisive as Puel who seemed to delight in baiting his own fans by saying that people wanted him gone because they forgot about the tragedy of Vichai dying or we couldn't expect to finish above Wolves and West Ham. We need a new manager to come in and bring us together.

[st albans fox]

He volunteered to take on the dressing room in his interview and the owners were impressed with his ideas of what could be done with the current squad - how developing young players is a much better business model than buying proven ones in

 

it was a tough gig and thankfully someone has done it now and we have a template for moving forward with options on the pitch (both personnel and formation) and ways of playing. we really didn't have that before. 

 

his main issue being his man management and his communication skills (plus his stubborn attitude).

 

hopefully Top and the board will have learned from this but i cant help thinking that perhaps the task he has undertaken was never going to mean he would last more than a couple of years anyway …...  

[walkerleeds]

1 hour ago, Ian S said:

Ok how about since the turn of the year, is that long enough.?

Or maybe we should just continue getting beaten by mediocre teams until you are satisfied it is time to review the managers position.

Er yes, very good, but I was quoting someone suggesting Puel should be sacked due to the last 5 games. 

[That_Dude]

15 hours ago, brucey said:

Nice summary

https://www.facebook.com/475367679494376/posts/798822457148895?sfns=mo

 

Great read. Thanks for sharing it.

[That_Dude]

4 hours ago, Strokes said:

Can we have a manager who isn’t afraid to play 3 at the back next? Everything about this squad screams 3-4-1-2. Our fullbacks are ready made wingbacks.

You'd still need very mobile CBs. We don't have them yet.

 

3-5-2 is a double edged sword and not many teams can play it. 

[Fosse93]

2 minutes ago, That_Dude said:

You'd still need very mobile CBs. We don't have them yet.

 

3-5-2 is a double edged sword and not many teams can play it. 

Morgan, Huth and Wasilewski weren't very mobile but that turned out alright.

[Sharpe's Fox]

4 minutes ago, That_Dude said:

You'd still need very mobile CBs. We don't have them yet.

 

3-5-2 is a double edged sword and not many teams can play it. 

Didn't we win like 7 out of 9 games with a back three of Wes Morgan, Robert Huth and Marcin Wasilewski? Don't think any of them were exactly Speedy Gonzalez.

[st albans fox]

10 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

Didn't we win like 7 out of 9 games with a back three of Wes Morgan, Robert Huth and Marcin Wasilewski? Don't think any of them were exactly Speedy Gonzalez.

yes - we had intensitee before we knew what it was ……….

[Guest Cujek]

2 hours ago, HankMarvin said:

Don’t know why certain people get so defensive over people that have information, I think it’s a form of jealousy.

It’s a bit strange really.

I work with a close relative of someone very high up at Leicester city, i know nothing because they are professional and never let anything out, damn it.