Jump to content

Claude Puel


beavis17

Recommended Posts

Some of my favs...

 

Losing 0-5 Arsenal

Losing 1-0 to Sparta Prague

Drawing with HBS twice

Losing 2-1 to Hull who had one win in 20

Losing 3-0 to Palace who had one once in 18

Losing comfortably to WBA, Burnley, Swansea, WHU, Stoke

Not beating any of the top 6 in the league all season

 

Was a great season :lol:

 

Getting triggered, Glasgow?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what's changed? We've had one win at home this season and we needed the refs help to beat 10 man Wham. Last season at least we were a bit better on the road this season even away we are **** only managing to edge a tight games against bottom of the table Palace. We've actually got worse this season despite having no Europe and bringing in the quality of Lemenia and getting VVD back from injury.

 

Why does anything happening this season make last season better or worse?

It's absolutely irrelevant.

MP may or may not be ****e, it doesn't make Puel better or worse than he was?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does anything happening this season make last season better or worse?

 

It's absolutely irrelevant.

 

MP may or may not be ****e, it doesn't make Puel better or worse than he was?

 

 

of course its relevant how do you judge any season in football if you are not comparing it to the previous one. If a club get rid of a manager it is surely to replace him with someone better if not what is the ****ing point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look forward to us losing 3-0 at Palace and 3-1 at home to West Ham.

 

You can't just pick one game as an avatar for Puel's football.

 

Agree but point is you seem to be making a point that we were never not dull last season. There were glimpses and high points (although many like you are at pains to discount) that I eagerly await this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree but point is you seem to be making a point that we were never not dull last season. There were glimpses and high points (although many like you are at pains to discount) that I eagerly await this season.

 

There were high points, I'm not disputing that.

Inter (2nd half) and Sparta at home, both cracking.

EFL Cup semis - Excellent

EFL Final - I'm undecided personally. We were the better team but not as clinical and lost it from sloppy defending.

 

Overall though, looking at our league campaign - 17 goals in 19 games is pretty poor.

 

Against Leicester, Palace and Burnley we looked good and scored nine goals, albeit against substandard opposition. Take those games away and we scored 3 goals from open play in the other 16 home games and that's just awful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were high points, I'm not disputing that.

Inter (2nd half) and Sparta at home, both cracking.

EFL Cup semis - Excellent

EFL Final - I'm undecided personally. We were the better team but not as clinical and lost it from sloppy defending.

 

Overall though, looking at our league campaign - 17 goals in 19 games is pretty poor.

 

Against Leicester, Palace and Burnley we looked good and scored nine goals, albeit against substandard opposition. Take those games away and we scored 3 goals from open play in the other 16 home games and that's just awful.

 

Teams sat back against us at St Marys. We have no aerial threat since selling Pelle; Gabbi/Long/JWP/Davis/Tadic/Redmond are all 5'10 or shorter and lack strength to be a pivot. Gabbi is the only one of those 6 that takes his chances while the rest are awful finishers. We have no creative #10 to linkup with the #7/9/11. No more x-factor player like Mane. We're so incredibly easy to defend against when the other team wants to, and that's exactly what teams did last season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Teams sat back against us at St Marys.

 

Some did yes, the trouble is so did we a lot of the time. Sideways, backward passing and when we did finally go forward usually only Gabbi anywhere near the penalty box. It was painful to watch. That Hull game in particular was worse than anything we've seen this season performance wise.

 

Of course there were bright spots, I went to the Arsenal QF and yes we played very well that night, but you can't deny we were largely playing Arsenal's reserve team and they couldn't have looked more disinterested. The bad far outweighed the good under Puel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

of course its relevant how do you judge any season in football if you are not comparing it to the previous one. If a club get rid of a manager it is surely to replace him with someone better if not what is the ****ing point?

 

I thought you Puel lovers didn't agree with judging it against the season before otherwise the massive swing downwards in our points tally, the massively different results against the top 6 etc etc make Puels season worse than it actually was?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought you Puel lovers didn't agree with judging it against the season before otherwise the massive swing downwards in our points tally, the massively different results against the top 6 etc etc make Puels season worse than it actually was?

 

It’s a bit more complicated than that pal. It’s difficult to compare Puel with Koeman’s last season as he had different, namely inferior players at his disposal (losing Mane, Wanyama and Pelle, among other things).

 

By contrast, Pellegrino basically inherited the same squad as Puel, making comparisons far more appropriate. If anything, Pellegrino has more quality to work with than Puel had, thanks to the additions of Lemina and Hoedt and the availability of VVD and Austin.

Edited by shurlock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought you Puel lovers didn't agree with judging it against the season before otherwise the massive swing downwards in our points tally, the massively different results against the top 6 etc etc make Puels season worse than it actually was?

 

Who ever said last season wasn't worse than the season before? (though people seemed to have airbrushed the dire middle of Koeman's last season from their minds)

 

Most sensible people could at least see why there were differences between what Koeman had to work with and what Puel had to work with. Puel had to get by without three players who had contributed to much to Koeman's success, European group stages, our worst transfer window in years and some **** injuries to players in that context a drop off from the previous season was inevitable (and probably would still have happened even if we'd kept Koeman) and yet he still finished 8th, managed a cup final and brought in some academy boys into the team.

 

By contrast MoPe has had a full pre-season, lost no big name players in the summer, got a couple of decent (more than decent in Lemina's case) signings in to strengthen the squad and has no European football, or cup football, to contended with and has made us look like a worse team than last season we look no better in attack and are now a mess defensively.

 

For me getting rid of Puel was only the right decision if we replaced him with a manager who was going to do a better job. It's still early days but the current evidence would suggest that we haven't replaced Puel with someone better.

Edited by doddisalegend
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some did yes, the trouble is so did we a lot of the time. Sideways, backward passing and when we did finally go forward usually only Gabbi anywhere near the penalty box. It was painful to watch. That Hull game in particular was worse than anything we've seen this season performance wise.

 

Of course there were bright spots, I went to the Arsenal QF and yes we played very well that night, but you can't deny we were largely playing Arsenal's reserve team and they couldn't have looked more disinterested. The bad far outweighed the good under Puel.

 

Look at our home prem games since christmas (Score. Shots. Chances created)

Saints 1-4 Spurs. Shots 9-17. Chances 6-10.

Saints 1-2 WBA. Shots 10-7. Chances 7-4.

Saints 3-0 Leicester. Shots 20-11. Chances 13-7.

Saints 1-3 West Ham. Shots 22-6. Chances 13-4.

Saints 0-0 Bournemouth. Shots 14-12. Chances 11-5.

Saints 3-1 Palace. Shots 25-17. Chances 17-13.

Saints 0-3 Man City. Shots 8-18. Chances 5-10.

Saints 0-0 Hull. Shots 11-9. Chances 4-7.

Saints 0-2 Arsenal. Shots 14-11. Chances 11-9.

Saints 0-0 Man Utd. Shots 17-11. Chances 10-7.

Saints 0-1 Stoke. Shots 15-14. Chances 8-12.

 

The only teams that took more shots than us were Spurs and ManCity. So for all the "boring negative football" we were playing, other teams were usually sitting back even more making it harder for us to score.

Saints: 165 shots. 105 chances. 9 goals.

1 goal per 18.3 shots/11.7 chances

 

Opponents: 133 shots. 88 chances. 16 goals.

1 goal per 8.3 shots/5.5 chances

 

Our last 11 games under Puel only had 1 bottom 6 team so there weren't many "Easy wins". We played 2nd/3rd/5th/6th/9th/10th/11th/12th/13th/14th/18th.

 

Our football wasn't anywhere near as boring as the scorelines suggested. Our attacking players just sucked at taking chances and only Spurs, Palace and City attacked us properly with the rest sitting back a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Our football wasn't anywhere near as boring as the scorelines suggested.

 

I think it's dangerous relying so heavily on stats as they rarely tell the whole story. As the home team we should be expected to take the initiative and attack but I don't recall many games where we were peppering the opposition's goal and missing loads of good chances.

 

Think we'll have to agree to disagree. I prefer to rely on what I'm seeing with my own eyes and imo the football was every bit as boring and negative as most of the scorelines suggest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's dangerous relying so heavily on stats as they rarely tell the whole story. As the home team we should be expected to take the initiative and attack but I don't recall many games where we were peppering the opposition's goal and missing loads of good chances.

 

Think we'll have to agree to disagree. I prefer to rely on what I'm seeing with my own eyes and imo the football was every bit as boring and negative as most of the scorelines suggest.

 

Fair.

The stats say if we were as clinical as the teams against us we would've scored 19 in 11 which, given we played most of the top teams would've been a solid return. It probably wouldn't have felt so boring celebrating 19 instead of 9.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He’ll also have West Ham and Everton to talk to as well in the coming weeks... let’s see which one he chooses, as they’ll all be fighting over a ‘world class’ manager such as Puel.

 

Now that would be amusing if he turned up at West Ham, no doubt Fonte will be at the head of the playing squad to welcome him.

 

Personally I don't dislike Puel and have no grudges against him. Always seemed a decent bloke and manager although possibly out of his depth and comfort zone in EPL, and certainly not helped by our transfer record 2016/Jan 2017, or by players possibly looking to undermine him (if rumours are correct).

 

In the summer I felt a separation was in the interest of Saints & Puel, although whether we have improved our prospects with MP is questionable.

Edited by Badger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hilarious revisionist stuff being spouted on here about Puel. Somehow he seems to have become a half decent manager because he's better than the current guy (and I do agree that he was better than this bloke), like eating half a **** sandwich is better than eating a whole one.

 

He bored the pants off everyone and if he was here right now we'd be in the same position as we are, next to no goals and failing to get points. Oh, and like the current guy I don't subscribe to the excuse that he had a bad set of players - he just didn't manage them particularly well - chopping and changing and being overly cautious. Our 6 of our last 7 home games without a goal, yeah inspired leadership.

 

If he goes to Leicester at least their insomniacs will be able to come off their meds I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh this is better than I could have imagined, the trolls really did bite on my comment :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

You along with always banged on about how Silva was a poor manager due to relegation with Hull. You knowledge of football is so sparse, I wouldn’t in the slightest be surprised if you did consider him World Class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You along with always banged on about how Silva was a poor manager due to relegation with Hull. You knowledge of football is so sparse, I wouldn’t in the slightest be surprised if you did consider him World Class.

 

And you banged on an on about Bertrand being definitely off and that turned out to be wrong too..... It happens but you can't handle it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You along with always banged on about how Silva was a poor manager due to relegation with Hull. You knowledge of football is so sparse, I wouldn’t in the slightest be surprised if you did consider him World Class.

 

Koeman did well for us and other clubs, poorly for Valencia and Everton. Managers do well at some clubs and badly at others, it happens.

 

Silva wouldn't have done any better with us because the playing personnel are the issue. I'm not sure you are able to grasp this point yet, it might take us sacking another manager and bringing in a new one for you to finally understand this, if you are able to at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You along with always banged on about how Silva was a poor manager due to relegation with Hull. You knowledge of football is so sparse, I wouldn’t in the slightest be surprised if you did consider him World Class.

 

Pimplemouse classics

 

"Silva is a fraud"

 

https://www.saintsweb.co.uk/showthread.php?58288-The-Next-Manager-Thread&p=2485887#post2485887

 

"Anyone who wants Marco Silva is unambitious."

 

https://www.saintsweb.co.uk/showthread.php?58380-Puel-v-Marco-Silva&p=2493119#post2493119

 

#clueless

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you banged on an on about Bertrand being definitely off and that turned out to be wrong too..... It happens but you can't handle it

 

Let’s just clarify a few things.

 

I said Bertrand was off yes, this was whilst Puel was still at the club. As it happens, Puel left, Pellegrino cane in and persuaded Ryan along with a few others to stick around, for at least one more season.

 

Thus came from a very close source and I’ve no reason to doubt its true (performances would suggest it is as well).

 

You and Pamplemousse made a ridiculous assumption / judgment on a manger due to his relegation from the PL, with a Hull side that we’re destined for the drop anyway. In fact, it was down to Silva that they fought as long as they did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Koeman did well for us and other clubs, poorly for Valencia and Everton. Managers do well at some clubs and badly at others, it happens.

 

Silva wouldn't have done any better with us because the playing personnel are the issue. I'm not sure you are able to grasp this point yet, it might take us sacking another manager and bringing in a new one for you to finally understand this, if you are able to at all.

 

Really? So if we offered Watford VvD, Bertrand, Cedric, lamina, Romeu and Gabbi they wouldn’t take them?

 

Player for player our squad is better than Watford’s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let’s just clarify a few things.

 

I said Bertrand was off yes, this was whilst Puel was still at the club. As it happens, Puel left, Pellegrino cane in and persuaded Ryan along with a few others to stick around, for at least one more season.

 

Thus came from a very close source and I’ve no reason to doubt its true (performances would suggest it is as well).

 

You and Pamplemousse made a ridiculous assumption / judgment on a manger due to his relegation from the PL, with a Hull side that we’re destined for the drop anyway. In fact, it was down to Silva that they fought as long as they did.

 

One manager, in their first Premier League season, took us to a cup final and 8th place, another in their first got relegated. You can dress it up and spin it however you like, but that is fact. Something which even you cannot dispute.

 

Silva's done very well at Watford (although I seem to recall they've always started seasons well and dropped like a stone in the second half of the campaign) so I remain sceptical that he would've done any better with us. I've consistently stated that I believe the players are the issue rather than the manager. Nothing I've seen so far this season has made me change my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let’s just clarify a few things.

 

I said Bertrand was off yes, this was whilst Puel was still at the club. As it happens, Puel left, Pellegrino cane in and persuaded Ryan along with a few others to stick around, for at least one more season.

 

Thus came from a very close source and I’ve no reason to doubt its true (performances would suggest it is as well).

 

You and Pamplemousse made a ridiculous assumption / judgment on a manger due to his relegation from the PL, with a Hull side that we’re destined for the drop anyway. In fact, it was down to Silva that they fought as long as they did.

 

You made a declaration that he was definitely off and cannot wriggle away from that no matter how hard you try.... Sorry

We posted about Silva and admit it but we will never know if he would have been a success here BUT we do

know that Bertrand is still here despite your " sources"

All the speculative stuff you posted about RB is nothing more.... Get over it you were wrong, whereas we posted it as an opinion not a fact like you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who ever said last season wasn't worse than the season before? (though people seemed to have airbrushed the dire middle of Koeman's last season from their minds)

 

Most sensible people could at least see why there were differences between what Koeman had to work with and what Puel had to work with. Puel had to get by with out three players who had contributed to much to Koeman's success, European group stages, our worst transfer window in years and some **** injuries to players in that context a drop off from the previous season was inevitable (and probably would still have happened even if we'd kept Koeman) and yet he still finished 8th, managed a cup final and brought in some academy boys into the team.

 

By contrast MoPe has had a full pre-season, lost no big name players in the summer, got a couple of decent (more than decent in Lemina's case) signings in to strengthen the squad and has no European football, or cup football, to contended with and has made us look like a worse team than last season we look no better in attack and are now a mess defensively.

 

For me getting rid of Puel was only the right decision if we replaced him with a manager who was going to do a better job. It's still early days but the current evidence would suggest that we haven't replaced Puel with someone better.

 

there are no guarantees, you can't keep a manager, try a new one to see if he is better And then go back to the first one.

The decision was made as Puel wasn't the right manager for us end of. Whether the next manager is good or bad does not change the decision. Perhaps MP won't be the right man so we sack him but the next man is the best manager we have ever had...does that make the decision good again? How long into the future do we take to decide if it was good or bad?

 

As for the rest..RK lost far more than Puel and didn't take us backwards did he?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there are no guarantees, you can't keep a manager, try a new one to see if he is better And then go back to the first one.

The decision was made as Puel wasn't the right manager for us end of. Whether the next manager is good or bad does not change the decision. Perhaps MP won't be the right man so we sack him but the next man is the best manager we have ever had...does that make the decision good again? How long into the future do we take to decide if it was good or bad?

 

As for the rest..RK lost far more than Puel and didn't take us backwards did he?

 

Disagree football clubs raise and fall on these kind of decisions if you make a change you need to be damn sure you are making the right change. There was nothing in MoPes CV to suggest he was an upgrade and looks increasingly likely he isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone genuinely write this 'but he finished 8th' stuff without being ironic? Either ironic, paying very little attention or unbelievably stupid.

 

8th by default because other teams manage to be as rubbish? Great. 8th-15th/16th were all the same. People trying to apportion success to some and failure to others based on a point or two over a whole season really aren't worth paying much attention to. We were dire. Just dire in a really low quality season. Even final day we fluked 8th despite losing!

 

Leicester are mental if they appoint Puel. But football clubs seem to be full of crazy decisions and black and white thinking. They'll probably see '8th and cup final' too, exactly the same way Redknapp continues to get jobs, teams think Steve McLaren has something to offer, pay fortunes to Eriksson, or listen to Glenn Hoddle as a pundit. Stupidty is rife.

 

 

By that logic all teams, even the champions, finish by default because the other teams weren't as good....

 

The table doesn't lie where you finish is where you deserve to finish even if it's only on goal difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By that logic all teams, even the champions, finish by default because the other teams weren't as good....

 

The table doesn't lie where you finish is where you deserve to finish even if it's only on goal difference.

 

It's about so much more than where you finish. You could look at last years table and say we were 4 places from a Champions League places and 4 places ahead of 12th place, so we're halfway in-between in terms of quality. The difference being we were 30 points from one of those positions and 2 points from the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We also had a far stronger squad before Puel took over and, thanks to Koeman dumping us out early, no Europa League group stage to worry about.

 

We are worse this year than we were last with a stronger squad and fewer games.

 

Pellegrino has no captain (Fonte) or one of last seasons top goal scorers (Jay) he has a striking and stroping VVD and a team riddled with last seasons hangover.

 

He also had to keep Puels mate Eric Black.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's about so much more than where you finish. You could look at last years table and say we were 4 places from a Champions League places and 4 places ahead of 12th place, so we're halfway in-between in terms of quality. The difference being we were 30 points from one of those positions and 2 points from the other.

 

 

Were we poorer than the previous season? yes of course but that was almost inevitable when you take into account the loss of certain key players, higher number of fixtures, poor summer recruitment and injuries we suffered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s a bit more complicated than that pal. It’s difficult to compare Puel with Koeman’s last season as he had different, namely inferior players at his disposal (losing Mane, Wanyama and Pelle, among other things).

 

By contrast, Pellegrino basically inherited the same squad as Puel, making comparisons far more appropriate. If anything, Pellegrino has more quality to work with than Puel had, thanks to the additions of Lemina and Hoedt and the availability of VVD and Austin.

Plus having Gabbi available for the whole season. Plus no Thursday European matches. Plus (now) no League cup matches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disagree football clubs raise and fall on these kind of decisions if you make a change you need to be damn sure you are making the right change. There was nothing in MoPes CV to suggest he was an upgrade and looks increasingly likely he isn't.

 

They honestly don't work like that...if they did Leicester would already have another manager in place.

We spoke to other managers as well as MP... Therefore we hadn't decided who would replace him, we just knew Puel wasn't the right man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let’s just clarify a few things.

 

I said Bertrand was off yes, this was whilst Puel was still at the club. As it happens, Puel left, Pellegrino cane in and persuaded Ryan along with a few others to stick around, for at least one more season.

 

Thus came from a very close source and I’ve no reason to doubt its true (performances would suggest it is as well).

 

.

 

What you mean Bertrands uninterested performances this season prove your point?

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would anyone touch the Leicester job? I thought some of you clowns were deluded, but you're nowhere in the deluded stakes compared to the Leicester board. Win the league with Leicester, LEICESTER FFS, and you're sacked after a poor run, within a year.

 

Being paid a multi million pound contract for your job and if sacked receiving a huge payoff?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...