Claude Puel

Its funny how those same posters that cried when people correctly judged Puel after 20-25 games are now happy to sign off his success after just 6!

 

I'll personally stick to judging and evaluating managers (& players) over a prolonged period - 25-35 games always gives a fair and fuller perspective.

 

When will you boys learn? The same posters that said Everton were going down 2 weeks ago :lol:

So that's what a troll disclaimer post looks like.

I would PMSL if they hire Puel.

 

Followed by a swift visit to the bookies for a bet on Leicester relegation - currently 8/1 odds

And if he does well you are going to look a prize idiot..... again...

I dont think any premier league club will hire Puel

 

He will rock up at a middling French side mid season or next summer

No what he did was take over a team on a massive massive high (continuous improvement for 7 seasons) and managed to get us the quick fast boot from Europe, drop 17 points, score less, concede more.

 

If he delivers a similar size drop off for Leicester then they will be relegated this year.

Memories...

Claude Puel and perception

How quickly a reputation can change, and proof that a manager is so often reliant on the proficiency of his players. Claude Puel is persona grata again.

At Southampton, Puel earned a reputation for dismal attacking football, critics pointing to a poor record of goals scored. Yet Puel suffered because of the underperformance of Southampton’s strikers. That is not to say that there were not issues with Puel’s style, nor that he should not share part of the blame, but those selected to take chances and score goals failed to do so.

In Leicester’s seven matches under Puel, they have scored at a rate of 1.6 per game. Last season under Puel, Southampton scored at a rate of 1.1 per game, a clear difference. Yet dig down a little more, and the results are surprising.

In 2016/17, Southampton created chances and took shots at a rate of 10.4 and 14.5 per game. Under Puel in the last seven games, Leicester have created chances and taken shots at a rate of 7.8 and 9.7 per game, a comfortably worse rate. The difference is that Leicester’s shot conversion rate over that period is 20.8%. Last season, Southampton’s shot conversion rate was 10.1%.

That can be sold in two ways. Either you say that Puel is not a better coach than at Southampton, more that he has got lucky with Jamie Vardy and Riyad Mahrez (although it’s worth pointing that both are performing better than they were under Craig Shakespeare). It would be more accurate (particularly given the struggles of Mauricio Pellegrino) is to say that no manager could deal with the abysmal shooting that Southampton produced last season. Under Pellegrino the shot accuracy has improved only marginally, still under 11%.

Away from Southampton, Puel is flourishing again, albeit in a short sample size. Since arriving at the King Power, only Manchester City, Liverpool, Chelsea, Manchester United and Burnley have taken more points than Leicester.

http://www.bing.com/news/apiclick.aspx?ref=BDIGeneric&aid=C98EA5B0842DBB9405BBF071E1DA7651530FFE51&tid=AA4FFE018A154B9BB991059D5E723781&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.football365.com%2fnews%2fpremier-league-winners-and-losers-83&c=4704770564272300919&mkt=en-gb

Statements like "Puel had us playing some of the best football I've seen us play in years" and "Puel is a worldclass manager" are why this forum will never, ever get boring. The best comedians in the world couldn't come up with stuff like that.

Where are these statements? Who made them?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Where are these statements? Who made them?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Page 1 of this thread

Of course Leicester would be interested in him - he led us to a top half finish and a cup final with what was a pretty poor squad.

 

He's a world class manager, it's a shame our idiot fans are unable to see this. Leicester's owners are clearly very smart.

I always got the impression the players never truly got on board with his philosophies and it showed. No goals in six of our last 7 matches and only 17 goals at home all season in 19 games isn't a sign of a working system. There is no doubt in my mind that last season saw us playing the most boring football I have ever had the misfortune of paying for in my life. It's also worth pointing out that the system he's playing with Leicester isn't the same system he played with us. Perhaps he learnt his lesson.

I think it's fair to argue Leicester and Claude Puel are just a better match. Much like Southampton and Ronald Koeman was.

I have absolutely no regrets about getting rid of Puel.

There were some highs but there were a lot of lows, most notably in Europe where we let a very good chance to make a name for ourselves pass us by because of his ineptitude.

He was a truly crap communicator who was never going to inspire the players and I think he will be caught out at Leicester once that team starts to disintegrate.

Yes we finished 8th but more by luck than judgement and yes we got to Wembley. Had we actually won that game - yes we were unlucky - I would not be writing on this thread but, the facts are we lost and coming second does not win your prizes.

Nice guy probably and if we had kept Mane and Pelle things might have worked out better but I am not looking backwards despite the fact Pellegrino seems nothing special.

For me, Puel's reign should always have the caveat that we sold all of our goals & attacking threat prior to his arrival.

The only player who scored for us consistently after that, got injured for half a season along with our captain & best player.

Sure, his interviews were dull, but he was clearly a competent coach who improved a fair few players during his stint.

I wish him well (apart from his next game).

Page 1 of this thread

One bloke

Who said he had us playing the best football we'd seen in years?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I remember Demarai Gray’s name appearing on a transfer thread on this forum before he ended up at Leicester. Anyway, Puel told the Leicester Mercury that he wanted Gray when he was managing Saints. It doesn’t really go into detail about what if any attempts were made to get him:

http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/revealed-leicester-city-boss-puel-906134

I have absolutely no regrets about getting rid of Puel.

There were some highs but there were a lot of lows, most notably in Europe where we let a very good chance to make a name for ourselves pass us by because of his ineptitude.

He was a truly crap communicator who was never going to inspire the players and I think he will be caught out at Leicester once that team starts to disintegrate.

Yes we finished 8th but more by luck than judgement and yes we got to Wembley. Had we actually won that game - yes we were unlucky - I would not be writing on this thread but, the facts are we lost and coming second does not win your prizes.

Nice guy probably and if we had kept Mane and Pelle things might have worked out better but I am not looking backwards despite the fact Pellegrino seems nothing special.

So you hold the manager responsible for the cup final defeat? Maybe a more assertive presence could have influenced the lino?

Staggering that so many always will blame the manager regardless and overlook player and official incompetence.

So much fortune in ‘winning’ although guess many think if they look in the mirror and say ‘I will win today’ they will.

Coming second is for losers eh although you are wrong -it does often win you a prize but guess you’d sneer at an Olympic silver medal. Lawrie Mac let us down in 1984 - didn’t have what it took to win.

I have absolutely no regrets about getting rid of Puel.

There were some highs but there were a lot of lows, most notably in Europe where we let a very good chance to make a name for ourselves pass us by because of his ineptitude.

He was a truly crap communicator who was never going to inspire the players and I think he will be caught out at Leicester once that team starts to disintegrate.

Yes we finished 8th but more by luck than judgement and yes we got to Wembley. Had we actually won that game - yes we were unlucky - I would not be writing on this thread but, the facts are we lost and coming second does not win your prizes.

Nice guy probably and if we had kept Mane and Pelle things might have worked out better but I am not looking backwards despite the fact Pellegrino seems nothing special.

but had we finished 6th last season and not gone to a cup final most would have hailed it a great achievement.

Didn't coming second get us the prize of promotion from the Championship and League One?

He will have much better strikers at Leicester. If they put half the chances we created away he'll be a hit.

Oooo

but had we finished 6th last season and not gone to a cup final most would have hailed it a great achievement.

We would have got 24 more points and therefore have been a far superior side. so yes. We would also have Europa league football. Personally I would rather support a better team and be one of the top sides in the county (like under Koeman), than win a cup and get relegated a few years later.

Ideally you win the cup and get 6th. But saints never manager success properly.

For me, Puel's reign should always have the caveat that we sold all of our goals & attacking threat prior to his arrival.

 

The only player who scored for us consistently after that, got injured for half a season along with our captain & best player.

 

Sure, his interviews were dull, but he was clearly a competent coach who improved a fair few players during his stint.

 

I wish him well (apart from his next game).

To be fair, there aren't many managers who don't give dull interviews and it cant be easy dealing with the same asinine questions when you don't speak the language fully. We have only had two managers who weren't dull - McMenemy and Strachan.

how old are you then? 3

Pochettino had better games, 8-0 v sunderland was better than anything puel served up

 

im guessing you are in your teens as we played far better attacking football back in the day

I'm 33, so I got to see some of the lovely stuff we played in the 90's before it all went to ****.

Pochettino did have some good games but Puel really did get us playing some nice stuff but like I said, he liked his default defensive set up too much.

As for the 8-0. I was there. It was as much a capitulation by Sunderland as it was us playing well. I've seen us play better and concede 2 goals. Was a great day though and one i'll always remember.

Bump

Got the measure of us it seems

Oooo

As above. Their attackers are everything ours are not. Direct, explosive, a threat outside the box and clinical.

Pity Old Les sacked him. But, to be fair, Leicester have got a much stronger squad than ours. You can't really compare the likes of Shane Long, Steven Davis, James Ward-Prowse and Fraser Forster to Jamie Vardy, Riyad Mahrez, Demarai Gray and Kaspar Schmeichel. We simply haven't got a rich owner prepared to pay for players of that calibre.

I'm not just talking about the transfer fees. Leicestershire owner has kept players like Mahrez and Vardy whereas under similar circumstances Kat and Les would have cashed in on them at the earliest available opportunity. Probably the only reason they didn't sell van Dijk in the summer as they'd planned was that Mr Gao wouldn't let them sell any more players when he was in the final stages of paying Kat 210 million. Mind you Les has wasted fortune on some pretty mediocre new players so it' s not just about the sums of money spent but also about spending it wisely, which Leicester have done on Maguire, for example.

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11712/11170189/mahrez-reborn-under-puel

Bur he was a terrible coach........ wasn`t he?

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11712/11170189/mahrez-reborn-under-puel

 

Bur he was a terrible coach........ wasn`t he?

Did you even read the article?

Did you even read the article?

Yes, did you?

Yes, did you?

Yes it poses more questions and never says Puel has improved him?

It even says Puel had to relent from him playing in the middle as Mahrez didn't like it?

Puel has done well to release the shackles but don't kid yourself this is proof of his super coaching... Don't forget he still has some way to go just to get back to the level he was already at two years ago... We aren't talking about a rubbish player who he has turned into a world beater you know.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42347378

It would appear that some think we may have been a little hasty.

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA. Ha

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42347378

 

It would appear that some think we may have been a little hasty.

 

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

That's the rule and everyone should stick to that for all managers named Claude Puel. See you in 25-35 games.

I think everybody should stop judging Puel until he has been in charge for 25-35 games. That's the official number of games Puel have to be in place for before anyone can judge Claude Puel.

 

That's the rule and everyone should stick to that for all managers named Claude Puel. See you in 25-35 games.

If he is in the top 4 can we extend that please to 50 games?

the games were dull down to us not scoring, and that was down to Reed selling the majority of our goals and not replacing them.

Puel had us playing some of the best football I had seen s play in years

Agreed, we were dynamic and impressive for 75% of the season home and away, couldn't score for anything though. Other games we were more defensive, and at the end of the season played a load of top sides back to back so wasn't expecting much from that anyway.

Now we only seem to get those performances against teams our players might want to sign for.

Bump

Woy got the measure of Puel it seems

Bump

Woy got the measure of Puel it seems

I'd rather have Puel than the **** we've got now...

I'd rather have Puel than the **** we've got now...

Id prefer to have Woy Hodgson than either of em

I think we need to wait for Hodgson to manage Palace for 25-35 games before we can assess whether he is any good or not.

I think we need to wait for Hodgson to manage Palace for 25-35 games before we can assess whether he is any good or not.

They looked like a very well managed team today

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think everybody should stop judging Puel until he has been in charge for 25-35 games. That's the official number of games Puel have to be in place for before anyone can judge Claude Puel.

 

That's the rule and everyone should stick to that for all managers named Claude Puel. See you in 25-35 games.

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

So why is or current manager being judged in just ten games? Somebody is not sticking to the rules.

 

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

Puel has made a cracking start at Leicester because he is a very good manager with a good track record who did a fine job in his first Premier League season.

Hodgson has always done well at a certain level, he's back there again and doing well again. Ditto Big Sam.

Pellegrino is fu cking sh it and it's as plain as the nose on your face he won't work out here.

The 25-35 game thing is just a typical load of Toffeeman Heisenberg bo ll ocks.

He had a strange kind of puffer-jacket waistcoat thing on tonight underneath a normal suit jacket.

He had a strange kind of puffer-jacket waistcoat thing on tonight underneath a normal suit jacket.

I think you'll find that was tactical.

I think you'll find that was tactical.

It certainly had possibilities.

Bristol City, Chelsea reserves, Man City kids and Arsenal reserves showing just how difficult and important the EFL cup is.

Bristol City, Chelsea reserves, Man City kids and Arsenal reserves showing just how difficult and important the EFL cup is.

It's a shame. Leicester for example had a great chance to progress to a semi final and chose to make a load of changes.

I understand it's bottom priority for the top 6 but outside of that, why not have a go? especially if you are not going to get involved in a relegation scrap?

I see Lineker and a number of members of the press have had a bit of a pop about it...welcome to the new world guys!

It's a shame. Leicester for example had a great chance to progress to a semi final and chose to make a load of changes.

I understand it's bottom priority for the top 6 but outside of that, why not have a go? especially if you are not going to get involved in a relegation scrap?

I see Lineker and a number of members of the press have had a bit of a pop about it...welcome to the new world guys!

I remember Mopo doing it to us in 2014 (Sunderland) I was fuming.

Tbf to Puel he does take this cup very very seriously and Leicester played Maguire, Fuchs, Albrighton, King, Okazaki, Iheanacho, Gray, Vardy and Mahrez during the game. They just weren’t good enough against a spirited Man City kids team.

In hindsight it does free up the 2016 league champions to aggressively chase down Burnley for that converted 7th spot in the premier league.

Lots of opportunities

You have to say fair play to Puel. Looking like he learnt from the mistakes he made at us.

Getting Leicester playing like they did when they won the PL.

A shame it didn’t work out with us, probably because he didn’t have a Vardy up top, but Leicester looks a good fit for him so far.

You have to say fair play to Puel. Looking like he learnt from the mistakes he made at us.

 

Getting Leicester playing like they did when they won the PL.

 

A shame it didn’t work out with us, probably because he didn’t have a Vardy up top, but Leicester looks a good fit for him so far.

Ha there were enough of us pointing out how **** our forward players were last season. So we ditched the manager kept the same ****ty (Not that I think Austin is ****ty but playing a whole season seems like an impossibility for him) options upfront and low and behold we still can't score old manager goes to a club with a decent striker and quelle surprise he does a decent job should have kept Puel and bought Vardy....

Was it or is it Leicester have a better squad or just he doesn't have an egotistical old man interfeering

Ha there were enough of us pointing out how **** our forward players were last season. So we ditched the manager kept the same ****ty (Not that I think Austin is ****ty but playing a whole season seems like an impossibility for him) options upfront and low and behold we still can't score old manager goes to a club with a decent striker and quelle surprise he does a decent job should have kept Puel and bought Vardy....

Ultimately, he lost the dressing room. Rightly or wrongly, the club decided that it’s eaiser to replace 1 man than the whole squad.

He’s a decent manager for a club of us/Leicester size, but he just wasn’t the right fit for us, IMO.

MoPe on the other hand, very below average manager.

Was it or is it Leicester have a better squad or just he doesn't have an egotistical old man interfeering

Fair question. I imagine Les’ input (wanting to play a certain way, wanting to bring youth players through, having major say on transfers), had an impact.

Was it or is it Leicester have a better squad or just he doesn't have an egotistical old man interfeering

Don’t dare criticise the beloved players. adriansfc will be on your case otherwise.

Listened to his interview after the Chelsea game on Saturday. Really noticeable how much more comfortable he is doing interviews in English now, definitely worked on his vocab over the past 12 months

Fair play to the bloke though, just a shame it never worked out for him at St Mary's.

Listened to his interview after the Chelsea game on Saturday. Really noticeable how much more comfortable he is doing interviews in English now, definitely worked on his vocab over the past 12 months

 

Fair play to the bloke though, just a shame it never worked out for him at St Mary's.

Were there any interesting possibilities mentioned in the interview?