DuncanRG

Erm, is he? He's best suited to playing where Romeu is, and I think we all agree that Romeu's doing a fantastic job there. Schneiderlin at his best might be better there (he's never really played the holding role alone) but it's an expensive gamble with a position we already have well covered. To guarantee first team football, which Schneiderlin will demand, he would have to play in one of the shuttle roles. I'm sure he could play there, but I'm not sure we'd get the best out of him. His best is needed in order to justify his huge wages and possibly huge transfer fee. In a sense it would be like re-signing Alderweireld to play right back.

How on earth would being friendly with Lovren help him engineer a move? It wouldn't and doesn't - he's been describing Lovren as his brother since before he left. In fact, I seem to recall a tribute post when he scored his first Liverpool goal, or something like that. No one thought he was trying to move then. They're friends. It's incredibly childish to think the feelings of some bitter Saints fans take precedence.

What planet do you have to be on to suggest our best option right now is to SELL a striker?

Can't read Guardiola's mind but I think Van Dijk is exactly the sort of player they need to replace Kompany and put alongside Stones. Difficult to walk into that dressing room as a captain but he's made of the right stuff.

Or was he on set all these months, making the new Star Wars film?

Friendly rivalry is fine by me - wish them well but relish a win.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2016/12/19/southampton-will-refuse-sell-virgil-van-dijk-january-may-listen/ Interesting briefing to Jeremy Wilson - Fonte may go for 'sizeable offer' in Jan, Van Dijk staying in January but might go in summer with £40m valuation. I wonder what was in Fonte's contract offer besides the pay rise - he wouldn't have turned down the money unless there was something attached he didn't like. Perhaps a release clause? Wilson writes that we will only listen to offers for Van Dijk this summer if we've identified a replacement...but doesn't explicitly say we take the same approach with Fonte. Hope there's nothing in that.

That goal was brilliant. Better than either of Boufal's for me. Good performance and a really important three points. Now for a Liverpool win in the derby!

This at least puts paid to the Fonte cuptie conspiracy theory. Puel thinks he can't play three games a week.

And dismissed as not that good, to boot! This place is wonderful sometimes.

Probably the sort of thing I'd do if my mate's face was painted on the wall.

I hate these baseless claims he lacks charisma or especially respect in the dressing room (?!). You've got to be a special kind of thick to judge a manager's character on post-match interviews, where most are intentionally boring.

He has been improving slowly. Hope he improves quickly from now on.

This sums it up perfectly for me.

Yes, he can.

Was this not the same toothless attacking we've seen against all sorts of opposition and with all sorts of different players on the pitch? Players will always bear some responsibility but I struggle to see what other common thread you see between these performances.

It's the managers job to ensure the players do better. We know they're capable of it! (Not that I agree that Puel is 'rubbish', just that he needs to improve)

Seems that way to me too. Shame that even out of the Europa League we'll struggle to settle until after the Christmas fixtures/League Cup semis. I remember right at the start of the season we weren't gelling, then went on a decent run. Can MLG or someone look and see if the team selection was stable when that good run came about? I can't be bothered.

Agree with all of this, though I don't doubt the spirit in the dressing room. You make an interesting point about movement - you'll often see a decent run not picked out, or someone pulling a defender out of position and no one stepping into the space. Is that a problem that's come up through (understandable) lack of a regular XI?

Of course it's not a disaster, but we didn't create enough chances or force enough good saves in the circumstances. If we'd had the chances we did away at a top team, when they were attacking more than we attacked them, then it might be acceptable. This was attack v defence for over an hour and defence never looked like losing.

Don't be silly. Puel has to improve and we have to improve, but he's not a clown.

No, but it damages their ability to win or retain the ball, as we've seen tonight. That means we have more of the ball, and therefore more time to attack. We tried to launch countless attacks tonight but could hardly string anything together. That is a serious problem. As someone here mentioned earlier, at the start of the season it was a case of missing chances. That was a problem with individuals and their finishing. Now we're not creating anything, and that's worrying. It's not the end of the world - we've always struggled to break down teams who are determined to defend - but that really was clueless.

That would be a logical error. The players deserve praise and criticism as usual, but our biggest problems have been collective, not individual. These are talented players who have been successful in the past but have a collective scoring record comparable to the poorest teams in the league. You'll notice that we've been rotating the squad a lot recently, but the problem persists no matter who plays. Unless you believe a dozen or more players have lost their cutting edge simultaneously, you have to look elsewhere. Nope, I've defended Puel plenty in the past and still like him.

Would lumping balls into Van Dijk up front be less effective than what we're doing now?

Don't think that's right but if it was, there's a man who has responsibility for sorting it.