Jump to content

Russell Martin

LegalEagle

By LegalEagle
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

S-Clarke

S-Clarke

Posted
Posted

I wasn't a fan of Puel at all, but looking back now I do think the expectations played a part and he came in at a time when that ride was ending.

We'd improved our league position every year since 2009, it was incredible and great fun. We all got used to it, in fact accustomed to winning and doing well - those 6 years were strange for me as a Southampton fan as it was the first time we felt like a 'big club' and that we could take anyone on. My biggest regret from those years is that we didn't win anything, we really should have as I don't think we'll ever have such a strong side again.

Puel did lose a lot of talent in that summer, and our replacements thereafter we crap in relation to what we sold (Mane for Redmond is the biggest downgrade in footballing history you'd have to say).

I think after being used to exciting and attacking football for so many years, it felt like we'd regressed certainly in approach, points, totals etc. It wasn't all on Puel, but he was a symbol of when everything started to go wrong and we started to make daft decisions on transfers and managers.

He was probably the wrong manager for us at that point. He wasn't what we needed, I think we should have continued with a more progressive/attacking coach, but it was around this time everyone got excited for Pep and tried to build teams which were built on 'keeping the ball', rather than physicality and power.

  • Like 5
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

I wasn't a fan of Puel at all, but looking back now I do think the expectations played a part and he came in at a time when that ride was ending.

We'd improved our league position every year since 2009, it was incredible and great fun. We all got used to it, in fact accustomed to winning and doing well - those 6 years were strange for me as a Southampton fan as it was the first time we felt like a 'big club' and that we could take anyone on. My biggest regret from those years is that we didn't win anything, we really should have as I don't think we'll ever have such a strong side again.

Puel did lose a lot of talent in that summer, and our replacements thereafter we crap in relation to what we sold (Mane for Redmond is the biggest downgrade in footballing history you'd have to say).

I think after being used to exciting and attacking football for so many years, it felt like we'd regressed certainly in approach, points, totals etc. It wasn't all on Puel, but he was a symbol of when everything started to go wrong and we started to make daft decisions on transfers and managers.

He was probably the wrong manager for us at that point. He wasn't what we needed, I think we should have continued with a more progressive/attacking coach, but it was around this time everyone got excited for Pep and tried to build teams which were built on 'keeping the ball', rather than physicality and power.

Puel lost Mane and Pelle who scored over 30 goals between them and were replaced by Boufal, Redmond and Austin. Wanyama at the time was probably one of the best CDMs in the premier league, he was sold and replaced by a young Hojberg and then in January Fonte was sold and Van Dijk injured replaced by Stephens in his first season and Yoshida. We went from having one of the strongest spines and attacks in the Premier league to one of the worst in 6 months. This is my point the hand he got, he lost 5 of the best players not just in the team but in the league within a few months and their replacements were so poor. A lot of criticism aimed at Puel was around our Europa league exit and yes we underperformed but funny how Koeman doesn't get the same criticism for our pathetic performances against Midthylland or however it's spelt. 

As you say he is the marker for where things went down but i dont think you can give Puel too much of the blame given the circumstances he walked into. 

  • Like 12
OldNick

OldNick

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Puel lost Mane and Pelle who scored over 30 goals between them and were replaced by Boufal, Redmond and Austin. Wanyama at the time was probably one of the best CDMs in the premier league, he was sold and replaced by a young Hojberg and then in January Fonte was sold and Van Dijk injured replaced by Stephens in his first season and Yoshida. We went from having one of the strongest spines and attacks in the Premier league to one of the worst in 6 months. This is my point the hand he got, he lost 5 of the best players not just in the team but in the league within a few months and their replacements were so poor. A lot of criticism aimed at Puel was around our Europa league exit and yes we underperformed but funny how Koeman doesn't get the same criticism for our pathetic performances against Midthylland or however it's spelt. 

As you say he is the marker for where things went down but i dont think you can give Puel too much of the blame given the circumstances he walked into. 

Brilliant post Turks, Puel never got a fair crack and did incredibly well in his short tenure. That cup run was beautiful winning away at Arsenal beating Liverpool home and away and played in one of the most entertaining cup finals in living memory. SO sad that the fans were a bit entitled and didnt see that we needed some time to develop. 

  • Like 2
Lord Duckhunter

Lord Duckhunter

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Turkish said:

Martin on the other hand came in after a shit show of a premier league season and was fairly popular early on

He wasn’t “fairly popular “ he was very popular early on. All the hipsters were impressed, and it was only a few dinosaurs who cottoned on to the pony merchant early doors. 
 

He got promoted in the most boring manner possible. Nigel Adkin’s promotion was joyous, Lego’s was just a fucking drag. 

 

  • Like 4
OldNick

OldNick

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Challenger said:

How this bloke got a gig at a club the size of Rangers after last season is beyond bewildering.

Is Ross Wilson still there ? If so that would be a clue lol

Holmes_and_Watson

Holmes_and_Watson

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, OldNick said:

Is Ross Wilson still there ? If so that would be a clue lol

Wilson got some good early press at Rangers. But, when the signings didn't translate to success he was getting flak, and was off to Forest, where things have gone better.

malcolm waldron

malcolm waldron

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Turkish said:

Puel lost Mane and Pelle who scored over 30 goals between them and were replaced by Boufal, Redmond and Austin. Wanyama at the time was probably one of the best CDMs in the premier league, he was sold and replaced by a young Hojberg and then in January Fonte was sold and Van Dijk injured replaced by Stephens in his first season and Yoshida. We went from having one of the strongest spines and attacks in the Premier league to one of the worst in 6 months. This is my point the hand he got, he lost 5 of the best players not just in the team but in the league within a few months and their replacements were so poor. A lot of criticism aimed at Puel was around our Europa league exit and yes we underperformed but funny how Koeman doesn't get the same criticism for our pathetic performances against Midthylland or however it's spelt. 

As you say he is the marker for where things went down but i dont think you can give Puel too much of the blame given the circumstances he walked into. 

Far too sensible a post.  I think it would land better in future if you used 'fella' or 'pal' at the end of a couple of the sentences.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, malcolm waldron said:

Far too sensible a post.  I think it would land better in future if you used 'fella' or 'pal' at the end of a couple of the sentences.

okay pal

franniesTache

franniesTache

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Turkish said:

Puel lost Mane and Pelle who scored over 30 goals between them and were replaced by Boufal, Redmond and Austin. Wanyama at the time was probably one of the best CDMs in the premier league, he was sold and replaced by a young Hojberg and then in January Fonte was sold and Van Dijk injured replaced by Stephens in his first season and Yoshida. We went from having one of the strongest spines and attacks in the Premier league to one of the worst in 6 months. This is my point the hand he got, he lost 5 of the best players not just in the team but in the league within a few months and their replacements were so poor. A lot of criticism aimed at Puel was around our Europa league exit and yes we underperformed but funny how Koeman doesn't get the same criticism for our pathetic performances against Midthylland or however it's spelt. 

As you say he is the marker for where things went down but i dont think you can give Puel too much of the blame given the circumstances he walked into. 

The one thing with Puel that's always really annoyed me is people calling him boring. Some of his football away from home was absolutely incredible, if you think about games like Watford away, or Liverpool away in the league cup you couldn't accuse him of being boring.

It was just that - pretty sensibly - he didn't want to lose home games, because he knew if you built a solid foundation of not losing at home you could take risks away from home when teams were more likely to attack.

The problem is most of our support don't go away so didn't see that, and got annoyed at him doing something that was actually tactically pretty smart because they deemed it "boring"

  • Like 2
Midfield_General

Midfield_General

Posted
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, franniesTache said:

The one thing with Puel that's always really annoyed me is people calling him boring. Some of his football away from home was absolutely incredible, if you think about games like Watford away, or Liverpool away in the league cup you couldn't accuse him of being boring.

It was just that - pretty sensibly - he didn't want to lose home games, because he knew if you built a solid foundation of not losing at home you could take risks away from home when teams were more likely to attack.

The problem is most of our support don't go away so didn't see that, and got annoyed at him doing something that was actually tactically pretty smart because they deemed it "boring"

The weird thing was that a lot of people seemed to have a problem with the man himself being boring. Like they objected to the tone of his voice. As if that had some impact on his abilities as a manager. 

Truth is we were incredibly spoiled after a period of having Poch and Koeman as our managers. In hindsight they were two borderline world class managers and anyone we could reasonably expect to be able to get would have struggled to follow them. You have to wonder if we’ll attract managers of that calibre again. 

Edited by Midfield_General
  • Like 4
  • Confused 1
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
49 minutes ago, franniesTache said:

The one thing with Puel that's always really annoyed me is people calling him boring. Some of his football away from home was absolutely incredible, if you think about games like Watford away, or Liverpool away in the league cup you couldn't accuse him of being boring.

It was just that - pretty sensibly - he didn't want to lose home games, because he knew if you built a solid foundation of not losing at home you could take risks away from home when teams were more likely to attack.

The problem is most of our support don't go away so didn't see that, and got annoyed at him doing something that was actually tactically pretty smart because they deemed it "boring"

Exactly. Was it Sunderland we won 4-0, we played some great stuff at times. But with Stephens and Yoshida as his centre backs he had no choice but to be more pragmatic second half of the season 

  • Like 1
Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
50 minutes ago, franniesTache said:

The one thing with Puel that's always really annoyed me is people calling him boring. Some of his football away from home was absolutely incredible, if you think about games like Watford away, or Liverpool away in the league cup you couldn't accuse him of being boring.

It was just that - pretty sensibly - he didn't want to lose home games, because he knew if you built a solid foundation of not losing at home you could take risks away from home when teams were more likely to attack.

The problem is most of our support don't go away so didn't see that, and got annoyed at him doing something that was actually tactically pretty smart because they deemed it "boring"

But a club should always put its home supporters first.

I didn't just 'deem' it boring. It was boring beyond belief.

  • Like 1
Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Turkish said:

Exactly. Was it Sunderland we won 4-0, we played some great stuff at times. But with Stephens and Yoshida as his centre backs he had no choice but to be more pragmatic second half of the season 

Was that after his constructive dismissal of Fonte?

Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, Midfield_General said:

The weird thing was that a lot of people seemed to have a problem with the man himself being boring. Like they objected to the tone of his voice. As if that had some impact on his abilities as a manager. 

Truth is we were incredibly spoiled after a period of having Poch and Koeman as our managers. In hindsight they were two borderline world class managers and anyone we could reasonably expect to be able to get would have struggled to follow them. You have to wonder if we’ll attract managers of that calibre again. 

I had no problems with the man himself.

franniesTache

franniesTache

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

But a club should always put its home supporters first.

I didn't just 'deem' it boring. It was boring beyond belief.

No a club should put winning and finishing as high as possible first, because that's all that matters.

  • Like 1
Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
Just now, franniesTache said:

No a club should put winning and finishing as high as possible first, because that's all that matters.

Winning at home once in a whole would be good, I grant you that. But for a club like Southampton winning by boring everyone to death is the antithesis of our principles. 

OldNick

OldNick

Posted
Posted
49 minutes ago, Midfield_General said:

The weird thing was that a lot of people seemed to have a problem with the man himself being boring. Like they objected to the tone of his voice. As if that had some impact on his abilities as a manager. 

Truth is we were incredibly spoiled after a period of having Poch and Koeman as our managers. In hindsight they were two borderline world class managers and anyone we could reasonably expect to be able to get would have struggled to follow them. You have to wonder if we’ll attract managers of that calibre again. 

He wasnt easy to listen to in his post match interviews as his English was not perfect , but I doubt many of us would sound great using a second language. He was unfortunate aka Chris Nicholl who had to follow on from Lakrie, we had been spoilt and wanted a lot more and werent patient as Chris had to rebuild, exciting football with poor defending. 

  • Like 2
BotleySaint

BotleySaint

Posted
Posted (edited)

Must be a Rangers fan at the BBC who wants him to go. A whole article just made up of quotes from livid fans. BBC journalism at its lowest. I suppose it breaks up the endless Man Utd articles.. 

But yes.. RM. No way back for him. Utterly clueless about football. 

Edited by BotleySaint
  • Like 1
franniesTache

franniesTache

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Winning at home once in a whole would be good, I grant you that. But for a club like Southampton winning by boring everyone to death is the antithesis of our principles. 

As if we've ever been successful enough to have principles 🤣

Jesus christ we're a club that's won ONE trophy in 140 years.

ONE

The only principles we should have are "do whatever the fuck it takes to break that god awful record". Absolutely everything else is just pure arrogance and should be ignored,

"Principles" are why we just got relegated having almost broken the worst points total ever. We are not even close to good enough to have them.

Win by cheating, win by hoofing it, win by boring teams to death, win however the fuck we can, just fucking win.

  • Like 4
spyinthesky

spyinthesky

Posted
Posted

I genuinely feel sorry for Russell Martin having met him and realised he is an OK guy, happy to chat.

Whilst understanding his playing philosophy did buggar all for us last season and doesnt seem to be gaining much, if any, support at Rangers, all this vilification is rather unnecessary.

There are far more deserving people in the game to have a go at than RM.

  • Like 3
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, franniesTache said:

Jesus christ we're a club that's won ONE trophy in 140 years.

It could be worse... circa 60% of current English professional football teams have never won a major trophy...

  • Like 1
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
49 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Rangers fans are incensed https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/crlz4y36jwko

Damning.

I wish the bloke no ill and the celebration that he's struggling at Rangers seems unnecessary. 

That said, he is a poor manager. Some of us called  before he arrived but got shouted down. He's had a career spinning a philosophy which just doesn't work as well on grass as he thinks it will. 

He'll be out of Rangers soon, and it's hard to see where he goes from there. 

  • Like 1
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Turkish said:

Good question. Puel had a rough hand because he came in after a great spell and wasn't Poch or Koeman, fans were expecting a higher profile appointment and didn't take to him from the start, remember lots of comments about how boring he was. He also had our best attackers sold and was (unfairly IMO) blamed for us getting knocked out of Europe. But was ultimately relatively successful and came across as a decent guy doing his best. The issues were with Puel but he and his team were seen as boring and he got cut no slack due to the circumstances delt him.

Martin on the other hand came in after a shit show of a premier league season and was fairly popular early on IIRC. But the tide turned when it became pretty clear his style of play wasn't going to work in the premier leauge and his stubonness, smugness and arrogance turned most people against him. Martins unpopularity is self inflicted. 

I dont think i've seen fans take such glee in a manager underperforming elsewhere so i;m going to say Martin.

Hard to disagree with that.

Puel was dealt a very tough hand and played it well imo. Boring, ISH, but give me me any brand of football which leaves us in 8th and doing well in cups, rather than a brand that leaves us rock bottom and an embarrassment. 

  • Like 3
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Winning at home once in a whole would be good, I grant you that. But for a club like Southampton winning by boring everyone to death is the antithesis of our principles. 

FACT CHECK

we won 12 home games in Puels season in charge, including wins over Inter Milan and Liverpool. 

Edited by Turkish
benjii

benjii

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Turkish said:

FACT CHECK

we won 12 home games in Puels season in charge, including wins over Inter Milan and Liverpool. 

BORING!

egg

egg

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Turkish said:

FACT CHECK

we won 12 home games in Puels season in charge, including wins over Inter Milan and Liverpool. 

Indeed. I'm struggling with people discounting a victory against inter or liverpool because we didn't do it with enough swagger. Should it only count as a win if we get 8 or more for artistic merit? 

Crazy. 

SotonianWill

SotonianWill

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Turkish said:

FACT CHECK

we won 12 home games in Puels season in charge, including wins over Inter Milan and Liverpool. 

What killed Puel was that we scored no goals in the last 5 home games. My understanding of this defensive method is different from @franniesTache ; I believe it was not due to Home stability,  but mostly due to the fact we had lost VVD in the January. With a poorer defence (Yoshida, Stephens) - oddly not utilising a very good caceres - we had to neglect other attacking options. 

 

 

Personally, whilst he didn’t do a terrible job compared to what came next, I can’t forgive him for going for a 0-0 at home to Be’er Sheva.

 

 

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
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...