Lallana's Left Peg

Yeah I have no doubt that Puel's diamond is more mature than an Adkins diamond given his experience etc. But I think it wold be wrong to say no matter how well he understands it that he can eliminate its weaknesses. It is quite clear that it is a narrow formation that the opposition can expose specifically when you a) lose the ball, or b) allow a team to switch the play quickly and create overload 1 vs. 1 situations in advanced positions. Quite clearly there are strengths to the formation as well. But the weaknesses the diamond has will exist no matter who is the Manager because some are just inherent in the formation regardless. It is the same for any formation so I am not having a go at Puel for playing a diamond. For what it is worth I find the formation very attacking and enjoy watching it. Defensively absolutely nothing comes through the middle (as you would expect) but out wide there is so much space (again, as you would expect) and it's ok Puel fanning out the strikers to mark the full backs when we don't have the ball but we only do that when we get chance to reset and get into position. When we lose the ball upfield any team with competence can break well and create something so it is just the balance of how many men or how far we commit the team forward to ensure we don't become easy to break on that concerns me in general. That is not to say we can't take a risk but its just about balance and decision making. This can be developed as long as you have players who have tactical intelligence (which I think we do).

Sunderland are certainly awful. Watford less so (but certainly a team we should be beating at home). More on Arsenal below. Long periods? No way. They dominated possession and chances. When we lost the ball they would attack far too easily. We didn't deserve to lose and we created the better chances but the way we'd lose the ball and it result in a dangerous counter for Arsenal was very bad. I'm pleased to see that has stopped, but then it would do so against the last three teams we've faced as we've had more of the ball. I'm saying its hard to judge progress because of the standard of opposition we've faced. I would certainly say we've played better against the three teams we just beat than we did against Sunderland. As I say, October is the month where I will judge real progress with the new formation. I'm just not getting carried away with the three wins, just as it wasn't appropriate to get carried away with the poor start to the season. Some formations have inherent weaknesses no matter what the standard of player and understanding that exists between them. We saw the diamond under Adkins when we were one of the best teams in the Championship and teams would constantly find space down the wings and we would constantly find ourselves in 1 vs. 1 positions while defending - it's dangerous. Also because the diamond means we have lots of players concentrated in small parts of the pitch any switch of play can cause us problems too. That's a formation thing, not a quality thing. We have to accept weaknesses in a formation as long as we experience the strengths of it. I want to see how many strengths we experience when we play very good opposition. In the one game we've done that (Arsenal) we've had less possession, conceded more chances and looked unorganised in transition. That's where I want to see most progress and I can't judge that until we play a half decent team again. And, in the interest of fairness, we also saw some good things against Arsenal.

The last three games have seen us play awful opposition so it is hard to judge progress - certainly the end of next month will give us a good view of where we're really at. We've looked better defensively (shape wise) and things are little more coherent going forward. The balance feels better. Any half decent team will continue to exploit us with 1 vs. 1's out wide and in transition on the break - some of the opposition we face in the next month will be the biggest test of this.

I'm on the 17:20 out of Manchester to Malpensa.

Was in a queue when I tried to log in at 9am. Closed browser and tried again 5mins ago and got straight in with a 30min session. Ticket purchased - ticket number 4719.

I think we played really well. I thought Swansea were poor but I don't think that's the reason we played well. I was impressed with everything we did bar the finishing, but I don't think it is a day to dwell on that too much. It could have easily been five or six. I didn't like the way we handed the initiative back to them after we scored but that happens so much in football it's like an accepted thing. I was mostly impressed by the players mental resoluteness - it could have easily been one of those days but I aside from the frustration in front of goal it didn't stop us from remaining focussed at both ends of the pitch. I spoke to someone recently who had a stint in the medical science department at Man Utd in their Academy. Apparently when you look at the stats of playing twice a week versus once a week then the increased chances of injury are far higher than most perceive so that is why a lot of Managers rotate. You also have to factor in fatigue which will impact a players performance as well if they play twice a week (depending on the amount of running their position demands). Rotation comes at a cost of momentum, cohesion and understanding on the pitch but over the course of a season it has massive benefits in terms of injury prevention. You just have to balance that against the overall quality of your team and the opposition to determine what to do each time. Some you'll win, some you'll lose.

The big question is...has the move come too late for the first data release in FM17? **Calling MLG**

Partly, but don't forget one of the teams that got to the final last season finished below us in the league and the other finished 7th in La Liga. I'm not saying it means we're likely to get to the final but I'd say true odds would be far better than 100/1 even considering that odds will come in should be get our of our group and then lengthen when 3rd place teams from the CL enter. Of course none of this is relevant if we don't start to perform as we did last season.

Always feels a bit raw posting immediately after a game but ignoring the poor officiating at the end these are my initial thoughts: 1. My biggest concern is how easily we lose the ball in the final third and how often it results in a chance for the opposition the other end. That can be easily sorted and I am surprised it already hasn't. 2. If these are the formations we're going to persist with can anyone see who is going to get us the goals to allow us to even get near a Top 10 finish? Our most natural finisher is one who is not suited to our formation while the rest are all quick but do not have the touch or goal threat to take advantage of the positions their hard work gets them into. 3. It was a better performance than our previous three which bodes well and overall I am not too disheartened but there are still some fundamental issues to address which unless they are will result in a bit of a meh season. I don't know Puel well enough to know whether or not he will address them. 4. Romeu was immense as he should be in a game like this. Davis and Clasie are lost in this new team. Tadic will frustrate but we know that is the sort of player he is. Interested to see where Boufal fits in. 5. Puel told us the diamond works because it gives us more possession of the ball which is important as you work harder when don't have the ball and with loads of games this season we need to save ourselves. Well I have not see us so bad at keeping possession when the other team actively seeks to take it off us since we've been back in this league so lots of work to do there (teams that sit back and allow us to have possession are a different situation altogether). It's progress but not to the point that I know which way our season will go. Lets get a good confidence building win on Thursday and go from there.

Every time we lost the ball Arsenal carved out a chance. We're so easy to counter on. We do not have the right balance between attack and defence in transition. The reason we lost this game is because of a poor piece of officiating. But in terms of the bigger picture the ease with which teams create genuine goalscoring chances against us is very worrying. It needs to be fixed because we aren't taking our own chances.

It's a weird method for him to find a way to call football racist. And, for what it is worth, Saints Academy regularly miss out on good prospects to top London clubs and as a consequence we focus on those who are smaller and less physical (but have other attributes that are appealing) for development. So to then be criticised for developing them because the bigger clubs took the more physically impressive players (many of which who are black) is ridiculous. And if you look at the black players we have developed...many of them were small as well.

I think we have done some good business. Clearly Wanyama and Mane wanted to leave, whilst everyone else of value and interest to other clubs has signed new deals. We have signed some good young players on long term deals too. I wouldn't get too caught up in the net spend argument - we would have increased our wage bill considerably and I bet we are on the limits of FFP in that respect. I do believe the board have invested all they can into the team. My only concern, and it has been alluded to earlier in this thread, is our new formation and whether or not our players are suitable for it. I am not impressed with it thus far - most notably the lack of chances we create and I've never seen us look so vulnerable when we lose the ball. I remember when Adkins played the diamond a few times in the Championship and it wasn't great - and that was when we were one of the best teams in the league. I am sure the team will get better at playing it but when I look at our players I don't see players who naturally fit it.

Mid-table, a decent run in Europe, and a decent run in one of the domestic cups (that does not end because we played a weaker team). My only concern is what that then means for some of our better players leaving.

Easiest way to look at it is that for 3 years it would be a £10m + (3 x £4m) = £22m investment for Man Utd. Regardless of when they pay the transfer fee and in what sort of instalments it'll go in the books over 3 years as a £7.3m investment. That is about 1.5% of their turnover per year. It's the equivalent of Saints buying a player for £1m and paying him 20k a week. Peanuts for them.

Fonte left a team in the Championship playoffs to join a team outside the League 1 playoffs when he joined us. He didn't do that for his love of Southampton. He made a professional decision that was probably related to his wealth and his opportunity to achieve. If he did the same as Man Utd or Arsenal are after him how can anyone take exception to it?

With the squad nearly set I'll be very interested to see what kids get minutes over the next two games and who takes their chance. It is very clear to me from the Puel interviews yesterday that he has a remit to ensure there is a pathway to the first team for the youngsters so lets see who takes their chance in these games.

I think it is quite clear that Koeman did not like the idea of having Mane and Cedric down the right hand side last season because the former didn't have the best instincts to track back and Cedric would have up and down games defensively which meant we had a weak spot that teams could target. Cedric is ok defensively - his aggression in the tackle suits him against some players but others will use it against him. He is tenacious as you say, but at times you'd rather not want a player to have that as a trait when someone who had better positioning and tackling would never put themselves in the position he finds himself at times. He has a lot of potential though.

Not that we will ever know, but would be interested to find out why we felt we had to go public with the contract offers last night. Our record at releasing news in the media is not the best when the final outcome is determined.

I agree - that is the most natural fitting three for the way we appear to be playing thus far. Redmond and Long have the pace, movement and energy to break as we need to and also cover the full backs while Tadic is our most creative player. I can't stress enough how counter productive it is to see Austin play wide, deep, and covering full backs when out of possession. As others have said, it wouldn't work for Pelle either. He's a very square peg in a round hole at the moment.

Early says yet but Jay Rod looks a shadow of the player and this new formation does not suit Austin at all (he picks up the ball far too deep and is knackering himself covering the full-back). Doesn't bode well, lets see how it progresses.

Seeing the strikers fan out and mark full backs when we were out of possession was a painful experience in both games. But it was good to see two players in the box when the crosses came in each time.

I'm not overly worried if we don't invest any more in the team. That isn't to say I don't think there are areas we can strengthen, but at moment my own opinion is that it will be very hard to match last seasons achievement by virtue of other clubs performing to their expected level and our Europa League challenge. Add to that a crazy transfer market and I am comfortable with the pragmatic approach of investing in our current squad via new contracts and padding out the squad with Academy prospects. There is something more fulfilling as a supporter when we give a young homegrown player a chance. I would rather know they aren't good enough than be left wondering. And it's important to safeguard that opportunity in the modern game as Saints are slowly carving out a very good position. We are starting to see top prospects at top clubs question their future. Man City are on the verge of losing one of their best young English players because he doesn't think the club will give him a chance. It is happening at Chelsea too. They are starting to see through the promises they are made when they sign big contracts having done very little in the game. If Saints can be that club that keeps the pathway clear then we become a more attractive proposition all the time. It's really important right now to show that - more than ever. That is not to say I think there should be blind faith in kids and we see the team suffer, but in a season when we will need our largest ever squad I am far more intrigued by the approach of giving kids a chance than padding out the squad. That said, we know that the funds are there if the club see a deal that is right for them in the market. To lose Mane, Pelle and Wanyama and bring in Redmond and Hojbjerg and get VvD, Forster, JWP, Davis, Bertrand and Long sign new deals feels ok - it's better the devil you know at the moment and allows us to build in a far more planned manner than patching up the team each season. Lastly on the matter of goals - until we see how Puel intends to play and assess the fitness of Austin and Jay Rod we won't know if the goals we have lost from the team are easily replaced. But Jay Rod and Austin deserve a chance.

They aren't, but if you are going to join a club that talks about its past so much you might as well dress accordingly.

1 - Would you be happy with the perception of the club being that of an academy club? Yes 2 - Would you accept an attitude of almost positive discrimination towards youth to achieve this? Yes 3 - Looking at the depth chart for 16/17, where do you think we need to improve and/or add depth? (the answer of which will obviously depend heavily on your answers to 1 and 2) We need another young prospect at centre-half and an attacking midfielder. Maybe a striker depending on how we think the fitness of Austin and Jay Rod is. 4 - Do you see any academy players having breakthrough years? If so, who? Into the first team? Unlikely. Maybe Jack Stephens. If Callum Slattery can stay injury free then his talent could see him go far.