Claude Puel

[Suhari]

31 minutes ago, Saint Garrett said:

Wasn't huge excitement when we brought in Puel either. Similarities to Nathan Jones reaction tbh.

True.

Although Jones plays a more attacking style I understand, and of course he's not following on from Koeman's success.

If he gets us to 8th this season that'd be acceptable I suppose.

[64saint]

Naughty , naughty reviving this thread. The mere sight of the topic headline will have sent panic through the masses. 🙄😄😄 

[OldNick]

What did Puel do for us?

'Well, a cup final that we should have won'

'Yes, yes, a cup final, but what did Puel do for us?'

'An 8th place finish'

'Ok Ill give you that, 8th place and I would tear your arm off for that, but what did Puel do for us?'

'Beating Liverpool home and away in a semi final, never likely to happen ever again'

'yes, yes, but we didn't win any of the last home games, and couldn't score. We did miss a couple of penalties in those 0-0's though.'

'Umm, he couldn't do a post-match interview to make us laugh.' 

'Well I doubt you could if you were speaking in a native language'

 

 

[CB Fry]

I like that it only took about six posts before the Eric Black hate started

[Saint86]

2 hours ago, Saint Garrett said:

Wasn't huge excitement when we brought in Puel either. Similarities to Nathan Jones reaction tbh.

I really hope whoever we get in is a better manager than Puel. We'd have no chance of staying up if all we could do is pass the ball along the back line for the rest of the season 🤮

[Dark Munster]

8 hours ago, Saint Garrett said:

Wasn't huge excitement when we brought in Puel either. Similarities to Nathan Jones reaction tbh.

Huge difference. Claude had top flight experience, not to mention taking Lyon to their first Champions League semi final. So we weren't worried about that, and no one was thinking about looming relegation at that time.

I'd take him over Jones any day. Maybe by the end of the season I'll be proven wrong (I hope so).

[Bad Wolf]

7 hours ago, OldNick said:

What did Puel do for us?

'Well, a cup final that we should have won'

'Yes, yes, a cup final, but what did Puel do for us?'

'An 8th place finish'

'Ok Ill give you that, 8th place and I would tear your arm off for that, but what did Puel do for us?'

'Beating Liverpool home and away in a semi final, never likely to happen ever again'

'yes, yes, but we didn't win any of the last home games, and couldn't score. We did miss a couple of penalties in those 0-0's though.'

'Umm, he couldn't do a post-match interview to make us laugh.' 

'Well I doubt you could if you were speaking in a native language'

 

 

"But we only finished 8th because the league was so poor!!!!!! Koeman was so much better because we finished 6th!!!"
"But the league was poor..."
"IT DOESN'T MATTER, IT'S STILL SIXTH!!!"

[Pamplemousse]

Wonder where we'd be with Puel. Still in Europe I reckon, like Moyes with West Ham, he would've known how to consistently get us in those top 8 positions.

[Turkish]

48 minutes ago, Bad Wolf said:

Is anyone actually bothered by what brand of football is played? Obviously excluding stuff like "a losing brand. If the style of football doesn't affect the result, how much do you care?

We have plenty of "i want to be entertained" merchants on here.

Remember we hounded a manager out because he was boring, even though statistically it was probably one of our top 10 season in our 138 year history. Despite us being shit for years since he left they still go on about it.

[Bad Wolf]

30 minutes ago, Turkish said:

We have plenty of "i want to be entertained" merchants on here.

Remember we hounded a manager out because he was boring, even though statistically it was probably one of our top 10 season in our 138 year history. Despite us being shit for years since he left they still go on about it.

Indeed and they're entitled to prioritise entertainment if they prefer. They pay their money like anyone else but don't whinge if we lose every game 5-4 and go down bottom

[macca155]

2 hours ago, Turkish said:

We have plenty of "i want to be entertained" merchants on here.

Remember we hounded a manager out because he was boring, even though statistically it was probably one of our top 10 season in our 138 year history. Despite us being shit for years since he left they still go on about it.

Not looking to open an old argument (then promptly does), Claude's football was uber turgid. He essentially killed games, focussed too much on defence, and forgot that the point of football is to score goals. He wasn't our worse manager by a long way but I suspect that his tactics would have been overcome eventually. That's why he keeps being sacked.

The problem is there have been some pretty spectacular bad appointments since then, plus a fair bit of squad degradation. Had we known Pellegrino was up next, a manager with no perceivable tactics whatsoever, then I suspect Puel would have been tolerated a little longer.

To argue against myself, once we were safe, his sides were did start playing more freely and lo and behold started scoring goals.

[richardc]

33 minutes ago, macca155 said:

Not looking to open an old argument (then promptly does), Claude's football was uber turgid. He essentially killed games, focussed too much on defence, and forgot that the point of football is to score goals. He wasn't our worse manager by a long way but I suspect that his tactics would have been overcome eventually. That's why he keeps being sacked.

The problem is there have been some pretty spectacular bad appointments since then, plus a fair bit of squad degradation. Had we known Pellegrino was up next, a manager with no perceivable tactics whatsoever, then I suspect Puel would have been tolerated a little longer.

To argue against myself, once we were safe, his sides were did start playing more freely and lo and behold started scoring goals.

Oh please NO - lets all focus on slagging off the new manager

[aintforever]

4 hours ago, Turkish said:

We have plenty of "i want to be entertained" merchants on here.

Remember we hounded a manager out because he was boring, even though statistically it was probably one of our top 10 season in our 138 year history. Despite us being shit for years since he left they still go on about it.

Yet at the time you said sacking him was probably the right decision.

[Turkish]

40 minutes ago, macca155 said:

Not looking to open an old argument (then promptly does), Claude's football was uber turgid. He essentially killed games, focussed too much on defence, and forgot that the point of football is to score goals. He wasn't our worse manager by a long way but I suspect that his tactics would have been overcome eventually. That's why he keeps being sacked.

The problem is there have been some pretty spectacular bad appointments since then, plus a fair bit of squad degradation. Had we known Pellegrino was up next, a manager with no perceivable tactics whatsoever, then I suspect Puel would have been tolerated a little longer.

To argue against myself, once we were safe, his sides were did start playing more freely and lo and behold started scoring goals.

But that's my point. Puels season in terms of results was one of our best ever, 8th place and a cup final, which season were better than that? 76 & 84 definitely, 79, 85 probably 89/90 & 2003, 2016 perhaps. So you could make a case for him being our 3rd or 4th best manager ever in terms of end result. But people weren't happy because of the perceived style of play, also people laughably claiming our 8th place was a bad 8th place. So the point is people do care about the way we play. 

[Turkish]

2 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Yet at the time you said sacking him was probably the right decision.

Yes because he had lost the fans and according to some rumours some of the dressing room as well. So probably was, but i would have kept him and fucked off some of the players, they did so well after he went didn't they. That doesn't mean he had a terrible season or was a terrible manager. I know everything is your dense little world is black and white so you probably struggle to cope with that.

[aintforever]

5 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Yes because he had lost the fans and according to some rumours some of the dressing room as well. So probably was, but i would have kept him and fucked off some of the players, they did so well after he went didn't they. That doesn't mean he had a terrible season or was a terrible manager. I know everything is your dense little world is black and white so you probably struggle to cope with that.

Just a bit weird that you bang on about it all the time, having a go at other fans, when you agreed with the sacking, that's all.

 

 

[Turkish]

2 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Just a bit weird that you bang on about it all the time, having a go at other fans, when you agreed with the sacking, that's all.

 

 

I can see you're struggling. I didn't agree with the sacking, but i said it was probably the right decision give the circumstances. It is possible to think something is the right thing to do with agreeing with it you know. 

[aintforever]

1 minute ago, Turkish said:

I can see you're struggling. I didn't agree with the sacking, but i said it was probably the right decision give the circumstances. It is possible to think something is the right thing to do with agreeing with it you know. 

I think it's clear to everyone who is the one struggling here.

[Turkish]

1 minute ago, aintforever said:

I think it's clear to everyone who is the one struggling here.

Come on aintclever, it's not rocket science. 

[derry]

If I remember correctly, under Puel we finished 8th and had 46 points. Personally I thought the football on offer was garbage. I was glad to see the back of him. Bringing in Pellegrino and buying Carillo was stupidity. Les Reed's record at Charlton was abysmal not surprising for an FA bureaucrat. That was the top of the slippery slope that SR eventually through their arrogance and stupidity employing Jones and Selles sealed our fate. I hope their obsession with possession isn't going to lead to another clusterfuck.

[aintforever]

6 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Come on aintclever, it's not rocket science. 

No. it's mental gymnastics.

"I didn't agree with the sacking, but i said it was probably the right decision" 

 

[Turkish]

24 minutes ago, aintforever said:

No. it's mental gymnastics.

"I didn't agree with the sacking, but i said it was probably the right decision" 

 

No mental gymnastics needed, you're unsurprisingly too thick to understand the difference between not agreeing with something but thinking it's probably the right thing to do. the world aint black and white.

Edited 14 June, 2023 by Turkish

[Wade Garrett]

Stop going on about that boring fucker Puel.

[Pamplemousse]

Should have appointed Puel after Ralph. He'd have kept us up. Yes it would have been "boring" but functional.

[Osvaldorama]

My god are people still talking about this bloke. 
 

He wasted our season of European football and was generally hideous to watch and listen to. 

Edited 15 June, 2023 by Osvaldorama

[OldNick]

Some wonderful football was played under Puel.

How many mangers can they say they beat Klopps Liverpool over 2 legs. It wasnt a fluky result we should have scored far more against them. Add to that one of the most entertaining cup finals for years. We also played some decent football eg WHU away. I maintain that the last part of the season we kept drawing and we couldn't get the release of scoring a goal and the pressure released. Had we sneaked a one goal win (missed penalties I think) the feeling would have been so much better. It was like under Chris Nicholl we just couldn't win, then all of a sudden we scored a late goal at home to Newcastle and the pressure cooker was released.

Should have given him some more time, if things hadn't improved by Christmas then sack him then

[OldNick]

2 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

My god are people still talking about his bloke. 
 

He wasted our season of European football and was generally hideous to watch and listen to. 

The players missed some absolute sitters in many games. We should have gone through if they had done their job 

[Turkish]

9 minutes ago, OldNick said:

Some wonderful football was played under Puel.

How many mangers can they say they beat Klopps Liverpool over 2 legs. It wasnt a fluky result we should have scored far more against them. Add to that one of the most entertaining cup finals for years. We also played some decent football eg WHU away. I maintain that the last part of the season we kept drawing and we couldn't get the release of scoring a goal and the pressure released. Had we sneaked a one goal win (missed penalties I think) the feeling would have been so much better. It was like under Chris Nicholl we just couldn't win, then all of a sudden we scored a late goal at home to Newcastle and the pressure cooker was released.

Should have given him some more time, if things hadn't improved by Christmas then sack him then

People forget that when he joined we sold Mane and Pelle who were responsible for about 30 goals between them the previous season and replaced them with Redmond, Boufal and Austin. Wanyama also left. Then there was the contract issue with Fonte then selling and not being replaced and Van Dijk getting injured meaning we played most of the second half of the season with the shite Yoshida and the rookie Jack Stephens as our centre backs. Going from one of the best pairings to probably the worst in the division. It's no wonder he set us up defensively as we'd have got murdered with those two. Gabbiadini came in and was on fire then got injured and Austin also did his shoulder and was out for 3 months. He had a lot of bad luck with injuries along with having to start the season without our two leading goalscorers from the previous one. 

 

[Dark Munster]

34 minutes ago, Turkish said:

People forget that when he joined we sold Mane and Pelle who were responsible for about 30 goals between them the previous season and replaced them with Redmond, Boufal and Austin. Wanyama also left. Then there was the contract issue with Fonte then selling and not being replaced and Van Dijk getting injured meaning we played most of the second half of the season with the shite Yoshida and the rookie Jack Stephens as our centre backs. Going from one of the best pairings to probably the worst in the division. It's no wonder he set us up defensively as we'd have got murdered with those two. Gabbiadini came in and was on fire then got injured and Austin also did his shoulder and was out for 3 months. He had a lot of bad luck with injuries along with having to start the season without our two leading goalscorers from the previous one. 

 

Spot on. Thank you for sparing me having to write that. But trying to reason with the anti Puel mob is like pissing in the wind. 

Edited 14 June, 2023 by Dark Munster

[bugenhagen]

38 minutes ago, Turkish said:

People forget that when he joined we sold Mane and Pelle who were responsible for about 30 goals between them the previous season and replaced them with Redmond, Boufal and Austin. Wanyama also left. Then there was the contract issue with Fonte then selling and not being replaced and Van Dijk getting injured meaning we played most of the second half of the season with the shite Yoshida and the rookie Jack Stephens as our centre backs. Going from one of the best pairings to probably the worst in the division. It's no wonder he set us up defensively as we'd have got murdered with those two. Gabbiadini came in and was on fire then got injured and Austin also did his shoulder and was out for 3 months. He had a lot of bad luck with injuries along with having to start the season without our two leading goalscorers from the previous one. 

 

I was not "Puel out", but was not to bothered if he would stay or go, as I thought we were regressing - even if I can agree that he had a worse squad. We were lucky to finish 8 with our point tally that season, and my opnion was that with him we would probably continue the regression next season into mid-table, and possibly beyond.

I want to be entertained, but to entertain me, we have to create chances. I do not care if it is via possesion, counter-attack, gegenpress, long-ball or whatever style of play.

Edit: Or front-footed style of play, forgot about that  

Edited 14 June, 2023 by bugenhagen
Forgot

[Turkish]

Just now, bugenhagen said:

I was not "Puel out", but was not to bothered if he would stay or go, as I thought we were regressing - even if I can agree that he had a worse squad. We were lucky to finish 8 with our point tally that season, and my opnion was that with him we would probably continue the regression next season into mid-table, and possibly beyond.

I want to be entertained, but to entertain me, we have to create chances. I do not care if it is via possesion, counter-attack, gegenpress, long-ball or whatever style of play.

We were regressing because we sold our best players and replaced them with crap ones. 
 

Mane > redmond and boufal

Pele > Austin

Wanyama > Hojbjerg 

Fonte > we didn’t even replace

Van Dijk when injured > Stephens

how is any of that the managers fault?

[Saint Gifford]

To be fair, to play entertaining exciting football. 

You have to have entertaining exciting players.

Hence most of what we lost went as a rule to entertaining exciting teams with an exciting entertaining Manager. 
 

Exception of course with us Mr N Jones, as he was very very entertaining…………
 

 

 

[bugenhagen]

3 minutes ago, Turkish said:

We were regressing because we sold our best players and replaced them with crap ones. 
 

Mane > redmond and boufal

Pele > Austin

Wanyama > Hojbjerg 

Fonte > we didn’t even replace

Van Dijk when injured > Stephens

how is any of that the managers fault?

At the time I might have thought that he did not get the best out of Redmond, Boufal and Hoibjerg... but at the time I probably also believed that we had a magic black box working in our favour  in hignsight I accept I was led a little astray at the time  But I think is more to do with the leadership in the club at the time, and the blind belief that we could do no wrong. Puel was just part of it all, and I do not think he would have brought us forward, but he would probably have stabilized us a lot better than the clown(s) that followed (with the same board).

[Whitey Grandad]

4 hours ago, Turkish said:

But that's my point. Puels season in terms of results was one of our best ever, 8th place and a cup final, which season were better than that? 76 & 84 definitely, 79, 85 probably 89/90 & 2003, 2016 perhaps. So you could make a case for him being our 3rd or 4th best manager ever in terms of end result. But people weren't happy because of the perceived style of play, also people laughably claiming our 8th place was a bad 8th place. So the point is people do care about the way we play. 

In terms of results it was poor. Have you forgotten our sequence of home games at the need of the season?

[Convict Colony]

Turkish you are a sick puppy.

[Whitey Grandad]

2 hours ago, Dark Munster said:

Spot on. Thank you for sparing me having to write that. But trying to reason with the anti Puel mob is like pissing in the wind. 

His football was crap. End of.

[Whitey Grandad]

2 hours ago, Turkish said:

We were regressing because we sold our best players and replaced them with crap ones. 
 

Mane > redmond and boufal

Pele > Austin

Wanyama > Hojbjerg 

Fonte > we didn’t even replace

Van Dijk when injured > Stephens

how is any of that the managers fault?

Did Puel have no say in the replacements?

[SaintNewForest]

17 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Did Puel have no say in the replacements?

Doubt it. Redmond was signed when we had no manager in place, and Boufal thought he was signing for Koeman when we first registered an interest. 

[Turkish]

27 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Did Puel have no say in the replacements?

Austin and Redmond had already signed when he was appointed. Fonte wasn’t replaced, Hojbjerg signed 11 days after he was appointed so probably didn’t have much to do with that, Boufal no idea, so let’s be generous and say he was involved in replacing 1 of 5 key players we lost. Unfortunately you can’t beat him up with this one whitey

Edited 14 June, 2023 by Turkish

[Turkish]

24 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

In terms of results it was poor. Have you forgotten our sequence of home games at the need of the season?

I thought a season lasted 38 games plus whatever you do in the cups? 

[miserableoldgit]

Having been watching Saints for many, many years, this was the only time that I didn't stay for the "Lap of Honour" at the last game of the season....could be bothered.

[Turkish]

6 minutes ago, miserableoldgit said:

Having been watching Saints for many, many years, this was the only time that I didn't stay for the "Lap of Honour" at the last game of the season....could be bothered.

The season we finished 8th and got to a cup final. Wow.

[Ex Lion Tamer]

9 hours ago, Turkish said:

We have plenty of "i want to be entertained" merchants on here.

Remember we hounded a manager out because he was boring, even though statistically it was probably one of our top 10 season in our 138 year history. Despite us being shit for years since he left they still go on about it.

We have plenty of "all that matters is our league position that season" merchants on here. 

Remember we hounded a manager out because his style of play was boring, leading us to one win in our final eight league matches and no goals in our last five home games. Despite Puel being shit for years since he left they still go on about it.

Edited 14 June, 2023 by Ex Lion Tamer

[Turkish]

Just now, Ex Lion Tamer said:

We have plenty of "all that matters is our league position that season" merchants on here. Despite Puel being shit for years since he left they still go on about it.

Why does it matter what he did when he left?

[Ex Lion Tamer]

7 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Why does it matter what he did when he left?

If he's such a good manager you might think he would do something at another club

[Turkish]

11 minutes ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

If he's such a good manager you might think he would do something at another club

i dont care what he did when he left us. Only what he did when he was here. In any case he did well at Nice, which is why he got the job with us.

[Fabrice29]

My overriding memory of that season was really bad strikers. Tadic was unbelievable but rarely got any credit because nobody could score anything he was creating. Just goes to show the difference goals make because the football was decent but the goal scorers weren't. 

[Tanlee]

 Wish we had been so called boring as fuck under him this year and stayed up, rather than shit without any direction or purpose whatsoever 

[Dark Munster]

41 minutes ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

If he's such a good manager you might think he would do something at another club

Not really. Koeman hasn't done much since leaving us, and most would agree he was very good when he was here. Same with Adkins, Alan Ball, etc.

[CB Fry]

44 minutes ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

If he's such a good manager you might think he would do something at another club

Lawrie McMenemy = shit.