Claude Puel

I'd prefer Puel over Pellegrino aswell, but they were still right to sack Puel. He should have done a better job than he did, the problem was they replaced Puel with the wrong man.

Which means it was a mistake to sack him. Unless you think he would've been as appallingly bad as the clown has been this season (and there's absolutely no indication he would've been).

Who on here said he was “world class”?

Pamplemousse IIRC, sometime ago. But I'm sure it was tongue-in-cheek.

Which means it was a mistake to sack him. Unless you think he would've been as appallingly bad as the clown has been this season (and there's absolutely no indication he would've been).

No, still means the wrong man replaced him.

How does anyone know for sure Puel was the wrong appointment? Sure it wasn't the best season especially towards the end but he might of produced much better results after a bed in season and he might of made the best of what he had....Same squad but No Lemina, no Austin and no VVD for most of the season.

I'd prefer Puel over Pellegrino aswell, but they were still right to sack Puel. He should have done a better job than he did, the problem was they replaced Puel with the wrong man.

He speaks the truth (or gives an opinion I agree with).

Will never forgive Puel for setting out for a 0-0 against Beer Sheva. I would have sacked him just for that.

Will never forgive Puel for setting out for a 0-0 against Beer Sheva. I would have sacked him just for that.

Why?

Which means it was a mistake to sack him. Unless you think he would've been as appallingly bad as the clown has been this season (and there's absolutely no indication he would've been).

No.

The right man would have this team around Burnley in the League. A very good manager would be giving Arsenal something to think about.

Which means it was a mistake to sack him. Unless you think he would've been as appallingly bad as the clown has been this season (and there's absolutely no indication he would've been).

Pamplemousse IIRC, sometime ago. But I'm sure it was tongue-in-cheek.

Duckhunter asked for this evidence previously and it was provided. Maybe he conveniently forgot. I like the ‘tongue-in-cheek’ get-out. It really wasn’t though.

Why?

Pretty unforgivable as we were dumped out of Europe totally unnecessarily.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

How does anyone know for sure Puel was the wrong appointment? Sure it wasn't the best season especially towards the end but he might of produced much better results after a bed in season and he might of made the best of what he had....Same squad but No Lemina, no Austin and no VVD for most of the season.

No, he had plenty of opportunities to change his style and philosophy. When you realise you’re heading in the wrong direction the first thing you do is change course.

Both were equally bad appontments that have led to where we are now.

Reed should be the one getting all the flak and fearing for his job but sadly probably nothing will be done.

Both were equally bad appontments that have led to where we are now.

I'd take 8th & a cup final right now.

I'd take 8th & a cup final right now.

As would every single team outside the top 6.

Poch would also have taken that when he was manager of Southampton. Of course his 8th was the greatest 8th the top flights ever seen and Puels the worst. And it was so much harder in the cups in those faraway days, than the easy run Puel had.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Guilty conscience? Who said I was talking about you? I'm assuming you weren't involved.

Not guilty, just willing to stand by my word. My conscience is clear, I sleep well at night.

We should have been easily good enough to go out and play positively against Beer Sheva and get the win at home. Instead Puel set us up to **** about and play for 0-0 and we got what we deserved.

 

Pretty unforgivable as we were dumped out of Europe totally unnecessarily.

 

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

I think you have little idea of football tactics as if we conceded a goal we would have to have scored at least two to through.

Like Puel I would bet against that happening if the other team was ultra defensive

I think you have little idea of football tactics as if we conceded a goal we would have to have scored at least two to through.

 

Like Puel I would bet against that happening if the other team was ultra defensive

Nonsense, we had more than enough ability in that squad to beat Beer Sheva, especially at home.

I think Saint Pete's assessment is pretty spot on, and sums up Puel (and MP) in all honesty - set up to draw, at home, you deserve to lose.

As others have said, sacking Puel was the right thing to do (for a number of reasons), the failure come when they failed to attract a top level manager (i.e Tuchel) and were left with MP.

I'd take 8th & a cup final right now.

I'd take 8th, for sure. Not sure i'd be that bothered about coming second best (which gives you f uck all) in a cup final though.

As would every single team outside the top 6.

 

Poch would also have taken that when he was manager of Southampton. Of course his 8th was the greatest 8th the top flights ever seen and Puels the worst. And it was so much harder in the cups in those faraway days, than the easy run Puel had.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Poch - 56 points, 54 goals, +8 GD, 8 points behind 7th, 23 above relegation, entertaining football

Puel - 46 points, 41 goals, -7 GD, 15 points behind 7th, 12 above relegation, boring football

Yeah, they were basically the same.

Without the 25 goals from Vardy and Mahrez this season, Puel's Leicester would currently be 2nd from bottom on 21 points. And if we'd had Vardy and Mahrez's goals this season, we'd be in the top 6. If, Puel hadn't had Charlie Austin's goals in the early part of last season, we'd have finished 17th. So, I suggest it is the quality of the strikers more than the quality of the managers which is responsible for our current postions. If we'd had Vardy and Mahrez instead of Long, Carrillo, Gabbiadini, Ward-Prowse and Boufal we'd be heading for Europe with Pellegrino and Leicester would be going down with Puel.

Without the 25 goals from Vardy and Mahrez this season, Puel's Leicester would currently be 2nd from bottom on 21 points. And if we'd had Vardy and Mahrez's goals this season, we'd be in the top 6. If, Puel hadn't had Charlie Austin's goals in the early part of last season, we'd have finished 17th. So, I suggest it is the quality of the strikers more than the quality of the managers which is responsible for our current postions. If we'd had Vardy and Mahrez instead of Long, Carrillo, Gabbiadini, Ward-Prowse and Boufal we'd be heading for Europe with Pellegrino and Leicester would be going down with Puel.

Also, without Gabbi coming and hitting the ground running (he looked world class at times), it's likely we would have been in the same position as we are this season.

Poch - 56 points, 54 goals, +8 GD, 8 points behind 7th, 23 above relegation, entertaining football

Puel - 46 points, 41 goals, -7 GD, 15 points behind 7th, 12 above relegation, boring football

 

Yeah, they were basically the same.

An old fashioned idea would be for every team to play each other twice and then keep a tally or a league table. The best team would be the one that finished top, the second best team finishes second etc etc. Much better than the complicated Saints web method, where you measure points above relegation , or goals scored, or excitement at matches. Me I’m a bit old fashioned and stick to the old fashioned method. Under Lawrie we were second best, under Koeman 6th best, under Puel 8th best etc etc.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

An old fashioned idea would be for every team to play each other twice and then keep a tally or a league table. The best team would be the one that finished top, the second best team finishes second etc etc. Much better than the complicated Saints web method, where you measure points above relegation , or goals scored, or excitement at matches. Me I’m a bit old fashioned and stick to the old fashioned method. Under Lawrie we were second best, under Koeman 6th best, under Puel 8th best etc etc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yet you just posted that Silva took over and was 3 points off safety and finished 6 points ignoring he was 20th and finished 18th. you're all over the place mate. take a rest

Yet you just posted that Silva took over and was 3 points off safety and finished 6 points ignoring he was 20th and finished 18th. you're all over the place mate. take a rest

If I posted that Puel nearly finished 7th, then the number of points off 7th is a valid point.

It was posted that Silva nearly saved Hull from relegation, I merely pointed out that this was in fact, untrue. They were nearer safety when he took over.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If I posted that Puel nearly finished 7th, then the number of points off 7th is a valid point.

 

It was posted that Silva nearly saved Hull from relegation, I merely pointed out that this was in fact, untrue. They were nearer safety when he took over.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Me I’m a bit old fashioned and stick to the old fashioned method. I just judge all managers the same..

I don't judge some purely on a points total and some purely on league position.

I'm old fashioned like that

Me I’m a bit old fashioned and stick to the old fashioned method. I just judge all managers the same..

 

I don't judge some purely on a points total and some purely on league position.

 

I'm old fashioned like that

Correct.

Silva should be judged on his 18th place, he got Hull to 18th, up 2 places.

He did not however , nearly get them to 17th ( and therefore safety) as some have claimed.

Is it really that hard to understand?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

He did not however , nearly get them to 17th ( and therefore safety) as some have claimed.

 

Is it really that hard to understand?

 

But he did almost get them to 17, in fact they were 17th for 3-4 games.

The fact he gave them even a sniff of survival is a miracle.

Both were equally bad appontments that have led to where we are now.

 

Reed should be the one getting all the flak and fearing for his job but sadly probably nothing will be done.

False equivalency alert!!!!

But he did almost get them to 17, in fact they were 17th for 3-4 games.

 

The fact he gave them even a sniff of survival is a miracle.

Miracle?

1 win from survival when he took over, 2 when he left.

Hardly water into wine stuff.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think you have little idea of football tactics as if we conceded a goal we would have to have scored at least two to through.

 

Like Puel I would bet against that happening if the other team was ultra defensive

It's exactly this kind of negative nonsense that is music to Pellegrino's ears! We should have been confident in our own ability to score at least 2 and win the game. At the risk of stating the obvious, football is about winning matches, and the teams that win games are the teams that are successful. Somewhere along the line, as a club, we seem to have lost sight of this simple fact, and in my opinion, this started with Puel. No argument that Pellegrino is significantly worse in this regard with his "draw is as good as a win" mentality.

And by the way, we DID concede a goal against Beer Sheva despite playing in such a cowardly negative way, and then had to throw everything at them to try and score 2 in last 10 minutes! Which we almost did. Think how many we could have scored if we had played properly from the start. I personally don't call that clever tactics on the part of Puel.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

I can’t believe there’s really a Saints fan out there who doesn’t think the Hapoel game was a complete and utter **** up.

I can’t believe there’s really a Saints fan out there who doesn’t think the Hapoel game was a complete and utter **** up.

I agree. But I also think Koeman, with a better side to choose from, screwed up away to Midget Land, and to Sheffield Utd. And Poch, again with a better side, screwed up in every cup competition.

I still argue you can’t airbrush out from history a cup run to Wembley featuring all Prem sides, away wins at Arsenal and Liverpool and the glaringly obvious point of having sold and not replaced Pelle, Mane and Wanyama. Why can’t people see that this is worth a good chunk of points, especially with VVD and Austin out for half the season or more!!!

I agree. But I also think Koeman, with a better side to choose from, screwed up away to Midget Land, and to Sheffield Utd. And Poch, again with a better side, screwed up in every cup competition.

 

I still argue you can’t airbrush out from history a cup run to Wembley featuring all Prem sides, away wins at Arsenal and Liverpool and the glaringly obvious point of having sold and not replaced Pelle, Mane and Wanyama. Why can’t people see that this is worth a good chunk of points, especially with VVD and Austin out for half the season or more!!!

Because most people do not want to accept they were wrong. In hindsight, he did ok with the ****e he had to work with.

It was hard to accept our points drop off, that we had really become so average. The performances across the last 2 seasons prove, without doubt that the squad has been weakend massively.

I agree. But I also think Koeman, with a better side to choose from, screwed up away to Midget Land, and to Sheffield Utd. And Poch, again with a better side, screwed up in every cup competition.

 

I still argue you can’t airbrush out from history a cup run to Wembley featuring all Prem sides, away wins at Arsenal and Liverpool and the glaringly obvious point of having sold and not replaced Pelle, Mane and Wanyama. Why can’t people see that this is worth a good chunk of points, especially with VVD and Austin out for half the season or more!!!

Poch did not have a better side. Our squad depth after the first XI was woeful, will never forget that game vs Spurs where we lost 3-2 at home despite Hooiveld, Danny Fox and Gazzaniga playing

Poch did not have a better side. Our squad depth after the first XI was woeful, will never forget that game vs Spurs where we lost 3-2 at home despite Hooiveld, Danny Fox and Gazzaniga playing

Makes you wonder why the great man had Yoshida & Fonte on the bench.

Lambert, Lallana, Pre injured JRod, Morgan, Davis of 2013, Lovren . Would all walk into the side we had last season, Cork would be close. You can’t really moan about Hooiveld playing, when Fonte & Yoshida were on the bench.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I agree. But I also think Koeman, with a better side to choose from, screwed up away to Midget Land, and to Sheffield Utd. And Poch, again with a better side, screwed up in every cup competition.

 

I still argue you can’t airbrush out from history a cup run to Wembley featuring all Prem sides, away wins at Arsenal and Liverpool and the glaringly obvious point of having sold and not replaced Pelle, Mane and Wanyama. Why can’t people see that this is worth a good chunk of points, especially with VVD and Austin out for half the season or more!!!

This. But unfortunately all the Puel-out mob hear is "Blah bah blah blah ... ".

Anyway, most of us share the same opinion about the current manager.

Poch did not have a better side

Boruc

Clyne

Shaw

Lovren

Fonte

Cork

Schneiderlin

Wanyama

Lambert

Davis

Lallana

Ward-Prowse

JRod

Chambers

Yoshida

Gaston

That’s 16 he had to pick from. Are your seriously trying to say Puel had better overall squad than that?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Poch did not have a better side.

You must be delighted with the investments and improvements made to our playing squad since those dark days then. Because we are much better now then we were then and you'd like to thank the senior management team for delivering those improvements, correct?

There were some good players in that Poch team no doubt, but you have to credit Poch in part for developing some of them and coaching good performances out of them. Remember there's a number on that list who many on here have taken great delight in taking the **** out of for not looking so great since they moved on.

Not saying we haven't regressed in terms of quality, but still think a decent manager could get way more out of our current players than what we are seeing now or for a significant part of last season.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

Blah bah blah blah ... ". .

Crikey how many times are people going to go over this..he is gone..I thought he was ****e, you thought he was good...accept people have different opinions and get over it!!!

Also, without Gabbi coming and hitting the ground running (he looked world class at times), it's likely we would have been in the same position as we are this season.

Ihese stats are from Wikipedia so probably only include league games but even though Gabbbiadini had a little purple patch when he first joined us, he has been a goal every 4 or 5 games striker throughout his career, whereas Vardy is a goal every 2 games striker. That's a big difference. Charlie Austin's goals were the crucial ones which made the difference between us finishing 8th and 17th last season. Nearly every goal he scored won us points. But, we are where we are now in the league this season because of our lack of a reliable goal scorer. We have created just as many chances. Vardy and Mahrez would have scored from most of them and Pelle and Mane from a number of them too.

Gabbiadini

Senior career

Years Team Apps (Gls)

2009–2012 Atalanta 25 (1)

2010–2011 Cittadella 27 (5)

2012–2013 Juventus 0 (0)

2012–2013 Bologna (loan) 30 (6)

2013–2015 Sampdoria 47 (15)

2015–2017 Napoli 56 (15)

2017– Southampton 35 (

Vardy

Senior career

Years Team Apps (Gls)

2010–2011 F.C. Halifax Town 37 (26)

2011–2012 Fleetwood Town 36 (31)

2012– Leicester City 196 (75)

An old fashioned idea would be for every team to play each other twice and then keep a tally or a league table. The best team would be the one that finished top, the second best team finishes second etc etc. Much better than the complicated Saints web method, where you measure points above relegation , or goals scored, or excitement at matches. Me I’m a bit old fashioned and stick to the old fashioned method. Under Lawrie we were second best, under Koeman 6th best, under Puel 8th best etc etc.

 

Right so, when we got spanked at home by Spurs, Man City, Arsenal, West Ham and West Brom under Puel; if we had comfortably won all those games we’d still be 8th but that wouldn’t change your opinion of Puel at all.

On the other hand if a bunch of other fixtures on the last day, which had nothing to do with Saints, had gone differently and we’d ended up 13th, that would mean Puel was a worse manager.

There were some good players in that Poch team no doubt, but you have to credit Poch in part for developing some of them and coaching good performances out of them. Remember there's a number on that list who many on here have taken great delight in taking the **** out of for not looking so great since they moved on.

 

Not saying we haven't regressed in terms of quality, but still think a decent manager could get way more out of our current players than what we are seeing now or for a significant part of last season.

 

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

Spot on - Poch is the only manager I have seen that can make J-rod look top class, before and after (okay injury may have played a part), he was pretty average. Same for Lovren.

Spot on - Poch is the only manager I have seen that can make J-rod look top class, before and after (okay injury may have played a part), he was pretty average. Same for Lovren.

Let's not forget many people were calling for Lallana to be dropped and thought the prem was too high level for him before MP arrived.

Right so, when we got spanked at home by Spurs, Man City, Arsenal, West Ham and West Brom under Puel; if we had comfortably won all those games we’d still be 8th but that wouldn’t change your opinion of Puel at all.

 

On the other hand if a bunch of other fixtures on the last day, which had nothing to do with Saints, had gone differently and we’d ended up 13th, that would mean Puel was a worse manager.

What a historically dreadful decision by Saints to sack Puel. What a mess we are in

What a historically dreadful decision by Saints to sack Puel. What a mess we are in

It wasn't a dreadful decision, it was entirely the right decision to sack Puel. The football was dire, the points drop from the previous season was huge, the lack of goals and excitement for season ticket holders was stark. The problem is not the act of sacking Puel, it is the disastrous decision to appoint Pellegrino to replace him. A competent manager would likely have this squad in mid table.

It wasn't a dreadful decision, it was entirely the right decision to sack Puel. The football was dire, the points drop from the previous season was huge, the lack of goals and excitement for season ticket holders was stark. The problem is not the act of sacking Puel, it is the disastrous decision to appoint Pellegrino to replace him. A competent manager would likely have this squad in mid table.

Absolutely this. This clown of a manager is unfit for purpose. We should get our money back.

What a historically dreadful decision by Saints to sack Puel. What a mess we are in