Jump to content

Stoke v Saints Match Thread


ALWAYS_SFC

Recommended Posts

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

So just so I understand, we can't blame the players if they don't score against 10 men for over an hour? But we blame Puel.

 

I take it with that logic, if we win, it's no credit to the players? We only credit Puel then?

 

I'm just trying to work out when players should be held accountable in your opinion?

 

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So just so I understand, we can't blame the players if they don't score against 10 men for over an hour? But we blame Puel.

 

I take it with that logic, if we win, it's no credit to the players? We only credit Puel then?

 

I'm just trying to work out when players should be held accountable in your opinion?

 

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

Its called an agenda..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume people realise that Stoke have the same number of defensive midfielders and defenders that they started the game with? Just because a team is one attacking player short it doesn't magically make their defence any more penetratable.

Edited by trousers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So just so I understand, we can't blame the players if they don't score against 10 men for over an hour? But we blame Puel.

 

I take it with that logic, if we win, it's no credit to the players? We only credit Puel then?

 

I'm just trying to work out when players should be held accountable in your opinion?

 

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

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.

 

Its called an agenda..

 

Nope, I've defended Puel plenty in the past and still like him.

Edited by DuncanRG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume people realise that Stoke have the same number of defensive midfielders and defenders that they started the game with? Just because a team is one attacking player short it doesn't magically make their defence any less penetratable.

 

Stop making sense, its Puels fault FFS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once again showing what happens when you sell your top goal scorers and don't replace with sufficient quality.

 

Mane and Pelle were not replaced with similar quality. This is the result.

 

If we don't sort it out in January it will be proof of a total lack of ambition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume people realise that Stoke have the same number of defensive midfielders and defenders that they started the game with? Just because a team is one attacking player short it doesn't magically make their defence any more penetratable.

 

True, but we did penetrate their defence when Rodriguez missed another absolute sitter. We really, really miss Pelle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stop making sense, its Puels fault FFS

 

So where does the problem lie? It's either with the board or with Puel. It's not the players fault if they're not good enough but if the squad is not up to it then it's down to Les and if they're not playing to their potential it's Claude. What is it because it's one of them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})