mrfahaji

Isn't the main issue that regardless of how we have done this season, what does it hint at for next season? Finishing 8th is decent. The points tally isn't, but we're still ahead of several teams in the division. However, the way the season has finished, the difficulty in scoring goals and the lack of improvement in performance all year is surely reason to be concerned that we are not exactly springboarding into the summer and next season.

You forgot to add "despite generally playing terribly in that game, not looking like a Premier League striker at any point during the season, and seems set to leave the club".

Thanks, sounds like you could have copied & pasted from a number of other reports recently. As you mention, aside from some neat triangles of passing from time to time, I'm not sure what endearing features there are about our play. Another concern I have is that we seem to be getting gradually worse. Most would accept that the Premier League has been pretty poor from 8th down this season - I can't think of any non-promoted teams who have looked better than they did last year? However, you could at least say that West Ham, Bournemouth, Swansea, Leicester & Crystal Palace have ended the season looking stronger than they did in the early/mid stages. Even though we have ended in our highest position all season, performance-wise I don't feel we've ever kicked into a higher gear, and look to have fewer ideas with each passing game. At best you could argue that this season has been one of fits and spurts - looking back through the fixtures, it's hard to identify a period when we were good. I'd probably say the EFL final, Sunderland and Watford - basically the arrival of Gabbiadini - but that didn't last long and we certainly haven't seen any rekindling of that form since Gabbiadini's return from injury.

Didn't get to see the game today, as this is the match/reactions thread rather than the 'Puel out' thread, has anyone or can anyone review how we played today? I've had a scroll through and haven't seen many match summaries/reviews.

Called it.

I don't know anything about the fall outs, but I know of a player not being picked or treated properly (there may be a reason, I only know one side of the story) in training.

Unfortunately I wouldn't blame any ITK posters for not giving more details here. I remember someone posted something about Austin a while ago, someone then copied and pasted it to Austin's twitter account asking him to comment! I don't think that's really what the forum is about. That's why I'm reluctant to expand on my earlier point (I'm not usually ITK, just get snippets once in a while).

It is, but I think the decision of "manager vs players" is a little more complex. There tends to be a view, and I would usually agree with it, that "player power" is a bad thing, but equally so is low morale or bad coaching. If players are being disruptive because the manager is making them work harder, or because they are set in the old ways and don't want to change (e.g. start of the season with the diamond), then of course the manager needs to be supported. However, if the players are exasperated because the manager (or coaching staff) aren't rewarding the right things in training, or they aren't giving the players a voice/input etc, then that's quite a different matter. From what I know, there is at least one example of Puel not being a very supportive or communicative man manager, which hints at the player unrest being true. Of course, it could be an isolated incident/player, and while the source of my information is probably telling the truth, it's not necessarily the whole truth (i.e. they may have an agenda, but no reason why they'd just make it up), but concerning nonetheless.

Funny, I was just thinking about this. Is building from the back the best way to go in terms of tactics & strategy? Rather than having a system and then trying to find the best striker for that system, perhaps we should work the other way. Decide who is playing up top, and vary your tactics around it. Gabbiadini, Austin and Long all have very obvious strengths, but also obvious weaknesses, and each player is very different from the others. Our game should be noticeably different depending on which forward is playing, but it isn't. I think that's a flaw.

What specifically isn't working in the system in your eyes? Which players are square pegs for round holes? If we don't have better alternatives, e.g. I would say CM is a problem, but not sure Hojbjerg or Clasie offer better options (thought I'd like to see Hojbjerg given a run to see), so in that case maybe a different system would work better. But what system?

Even though Koeman achieved a bit more with us, I wasn't convinced about his managerial ability compared to Pochettino.

Stuart "conqueror of Man Utd & Arsenal" Gray springs to mind.

Very good, thanks. Sounds like he plays a similar way to how we do, but with more emphasis on attack and pressing. I'd much sooner take him over Silva or Carvahal, as I don't think the players would have to learn a new system all over again, it would be refining what we already have.

Only in moderation I'd say. But also it's not necessarily about what they prefer to do, it's what's best for them. You really need to be 100% mentally, and close to it physically to get any points from a PL game, lack of time to rest, improve and prepare is crucial. Also, think back to football training as kids (if you were in a proper team) - everyone looked forward to "playing a match" at the end, doesn't mean it was the best thing to do for improving the players/team.

Agree with all that. The idea of their outside forwards cutting in is quite similar to what we do, but it seems like there is often a cross field ball on for them as well. Our full backs provide that a little, but the midfielders not so much. Perhaps this why we originally set up with 1 DM and two more attacking ones, but we struggled to control the games. Now we've gone for more resilience we're lacking that extra dimension going forward. What I didn't glean from this video/page was how they play defensively (apart from defence being a bit of a weakness in general). We tend to sit off teams until they get about 30-40 yards from our goal before crowding them out. I would like to see more pressing if I'm honest, but not sure if it's conducive to how we play with the ball. Apparently fixture build up was the reason for not playing pressing this year, so could we expect that to change or is it a convenient excuse? I suppose one telling fact for me is that if Puel is replaced, I would want the new manager to modify our style rather than revolutionise it. I really like the small triangles of passing we try to do, it just lacks a bit of purpose at times.

We are also not playing our top goalscorer even though he is fit to play and has been for some time. I can only think the strategy is to boost Rodriguez's value before he is sold in the summer. "Hey Newcastle, if we're going to sell one of our regular starters, we're going to need a decent offer for him!"

Because this was such a ground breaking thread, in that most posts offered insightful analysis and balanced discussion, I thought I'd bump it to ask whether there should be a tactics-related thread? So no discussion of players sales, board ambition, Puel's boringness, whether 46 points is an acceptable tally etc, but instead looking at systems and individual players strengths/weaknesses. It could even extrapolate to suggestions of players who would suit tactics etc. I've just posted (what I thought at least was) an interesting link on another thread, but can see that may be lost in the ether, just like this thread. Is it a realistic ambition to have such a thread of tactical discussion, or will it inevitably lose traction and be overrun by squabbles between everybody's favourite posters?

I went to a talk by Michael Cox (of Zonal Marking fame), and one of the questions he was asked was about any managers on the continent that impressed him with their style/tactics. He said that Maurizio Sarri of Napoli was doing a great job, and they play some fantastic football. I found this website, and watched the video half way down the page, Palermo vs Napoli. http://breakingthelines.com/tactical-preview/the-sarri-effect/ You can actually see the similarities between the way they set up and play and they way we do. The difference is the tempo, and the movement off the ball. Would be interesting to know what people make of this - does the description of Napoli tactics sound familiar? What are we missing to make it work for us? The players or is the manager lacking, if not ideas then the execution? Ironic that Gabbiadini came from this team because, apparently, the manager didn't fancy him for this system, yet I thought he suited it well. No doubt he is at least used to playing this way!

Not sure our points are mutually exclusive. It's nearly always better to plan, but may not be the reason we haven't been doing well. I think Black is right, but by the same token it doesn't always mean players are wrong to be concerned about something.

Didn't Ebbsfleet actually have the fans pick the team through a similar method? I think they got relegated.

True, although one thing I noticed against United was that Boufal did still receive some (admittedly small amount) applause when his name was read out, I don't think the fans continued to boo him. Whether or not that subtlety is lost on the players though, who knows.

Clearly it would be more beneficial for the players to know in advance. More focused planning tends to yield better results in most walks of life. Of course in an ideal world players would prepare meticulously for every game and every scenario regardless of whether they are picked, but pyschologically that's not realistic, especially if you're a player who doesn't normally play. Imagine if you were asked to write a report at work for a weekly meeting, only to find that most of the time no-one bothered to look at it. Even if you continue writing the report, chances are you'll stop busting a gut over it each week and would just do the minimum necessary.

Sorry to be pedantic, but a Quarterback tends to drop back before passing the ball. In fact, if a QB runs forward into space he can't then pass. So I'm not sure your analogy works. I've never been a big fan of that term anyway, especially now it seems to be in vogue.

This is the crux of the issue for me. If a lot of the players are unhappy, I'm not sure he has done enough this year to earn preference over them. One or two players may be a problem, sure, but if it's a general issue in the camp, then chances are there is something wrong.

I am aware of one example which sounds like Puel is handling the player poorly. I don't know the reasons why, it could even be fully justified, but from the details I've heard it does sound very strange. The only reason I'm not comfortable posting more is that in the past some posters have taken a screenshot of the forum and tweeted players with it, which is pretty bad form.