Jump to content

Puel

9-3

By 9-3,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
Out of curiosity,has Puel won 'manager of the month at all'.

 

How many times did Adkins....Pochettino and Koeman win it.

Google wasn't my friend.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I think Koeman won it 3 times over two seasons? I've got a feeling Pochettino never actually won it when with us (rather bizarrely, although maybe that's my memory playing tricks on me?). Can't remember as far back as Adkins. These days, I can't remember what I did yesterday, let alone 5 years ago :)

 

Edit: beaten to it by our Glasgow friend. I wasn't far out :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SKD

SKD

Posted
Posted
EPL minutes-

McQueen 450 minutes (5 games)

Sims 155 minutes (1.5 games)

Stephens 300 minutes (3 games) *Thanks Les Reed

Isgrove 0 minutes

Reed 280 minutes (3 games)

Hesketh 0 minutes

Targett 170 minutes (2 games)

 

McQueen 450 minutes (5 games) - Didn't get a look in under Koeman, probably helped by injury to Targett, but looked good when relied on (arsenal FA cup aside)

Sims 155 minutes (1.5 games) - Didn't get a look in under Koeman - His performances have been one of the highlights of our season so far.

Stephens 300 minutes (3 games) *Thanks Les Reed - IMO not good enough, never will be - again never got a look in under previous managers.

Isgrove 0 minutes - Again not good enough, will be gone in the summer.

Reed 280 minutes (3 games) - Needs to go out on loan, failed to impress in games he's been given a chance.

Hesketh 0 minutes - correct me if i'm wrong but isn't he injured? was given a chance in EFL cup and Europa league.

Targett 170 minutes (2 games) - been injured for pretty much the whole season.

 

fail to see your point with the above? if it's a dig, which I suggest it is, you've failed as you've proven that he's given the younger players a go at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pass the Dutchie

Pass the Dutchie

Posted
Posted
McQueen 450 minutes (5 games) - Didn't get a look in under Koeman, probably helped by injury to Targett, but looked good when relied on (arsenal FA cup aside)

Sims 155 minutes (1.5 games) - Didn't get a look in under Koeman - His performances have been one of the highlights of our season so far.

Stephens 300 minutes (3 games) *Thanks Les Reed - IMO not good enough, never will be - again never got a look in under previous managers.

Isgrove 0 minutes - Again not good enough, will be gone in the summer.

Reed 280 minutes (3 games) - Needs to go out on loan, failed to impress in games he's been given a chance.

Hesketh 0 minutes - correct me if i'm wrong but isn't he injured? was given a chance in EFL cup and Europa league.

Targett 170 minutes (2 games) - been injured for pretty much the whole season.

 

fail to see your point with the above? if it's a dig, which I suggest it is, you've failed as you've proven that he's given the younger players a go at least.

 

In Koeman's 2014/2015 season, he gave Premier League playtime to the following young players:

Reed

Isgrove

Targett

Hesketh

McCarthy

Ward-Prowse

Seager

Gape

 

In his second season, there was a lot less of that. If Puel's still here and has more of the squad he wants, and injuries and European games don't force his hand, I'm curious to see who he will pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SKD

SKD

Posted
Posted
In Koeman's 2014/2015 season, he gave Premier League playtime to the following young players:

Reed

Isgrove

Targett

Hesketh

McCarthy

Ward-Prowse

Seager

Gape

 

In his second season, there was a lot less of that. If Puel's still here and has more of the squad he wants, and injuries and European games don't force his hand, I'm curious to see who he will pick.

 

It's a fair point, I guess what I was more referring to in my original post was how younger players such as McQueen and Sims have flourished under him. Personally don't remember any players coming through under Koeman (who hadn't already played under Poch) who performed as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
benjii

benjii

Posted
Posted

Koeman generally played youngsters when he had to.

 

This season, for example, I doubt McQueen would have played if Koeman was here. He would have gone with Yoshida at left back with Bertrand and Targett injured. Sims also would not have played.

 

That's not necessarily a criticism of Koeman, as I think currently only Sims looks good enough to be a genuinely top-half Premier League player (although McQueen has been quite impressive too). He could perhaps have given Gallagher more time though.

 

I think the issue with Koeman was more that he seemed pretty closed to the whole concept and not particularly interested in anything beyond the first team. You might say, fair enough, and with the upheaval when Poch and all the players left we did need an experienced calm-head and steady pair of hands - we didn't really have room for idealism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pass the Dutchie

Pass the Dutchie

Posted
Posted
It's a fair point, I guess what I was more referring to in my original post was how younger players such as McQueen and Sims have flourished under him. Personally don't remember any players coming through under Koeman (who hadn't already played under Poch) who performed as well.

 

Matt Targett made his debut in the 2014/2015 season (6x PL) and got quite a reliable force in the 2015/2016 season (14x PL). But other than that, you're right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pass the Dutchie

Pass the Dutchie

Posted
Posted
http://rokerreport.sbnation.com/2017/2/10/14558384/scout-report-southampton-the-saints-are-inconsistent-but-can-mr-m-gabbiadini-make-a-difference

 

Found this an interesting read. We're obviously doing the right things but the conversion of chances stat along with Fraser's abysmal shot stopping are killing us.

 

A problem with taking statistics of this season so far as an indication of our potential for the remainder is that those statistics included Fonte and VVD in our central defense and Austin up front.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Posted
Posted
It's a fair point, I guess what I was more referring to in my original post was how younger players such as McQueen and Sims have flourished under him. Personally don't remember any players coming through under Koeman (who hadn't already played under Poch) who performed as well.

 

Sims, Flourished and 155 minutes of EPL football..... not sure those words go together?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
doddisalegend

doddisalegend

Posted
Posted

Liverpool trying to be Southampton again:rolleyes:. Amazing how a team that was being called exciting and attacking is two months latter all wrong

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/38927227

 

The biggest problem I have there is with Jordan Henderson and Emre Can playing together in the Reds' 4-3-3 formation.

 

They both play too many sideways balls, which are pretty looking and keep possession - but do not hurt the opposition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Give it to Ron

Give it to Ron

Posted
Posted
Liverpool trying to be Southampton again:rolleyes:. Amazing how a team that was being called exciting and attacking is two months latter all wrong

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/38927227

 

The biggest problem I have there is with Jordan Henderson and Emre Can playing together in the Reds' 4-3-3 formation.

 

They both play too many sideways balls, which are pretty looking and keep possession - but do not hurt the opposition.

 

I think we may see a difference now as on Saturday there were times when we tried to pick out Gabba with a quicker through ball. Its something we havent done enough of and many times Long/Jayrod haven't been picked out and having to bend runs and get caught as its delayed or not gone forward before their defence gets organised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint-Fred

Saint-Fred

Posted
Posted
Bollix no one really cares about style its about winning. If we played like peps Barca and lost every week people would still be unhappy. If we played route one smash it long but won every game everyone would be happy.

 

Leicester fans are great example didn't see any of them complaining about the style of football last season but now they aren't winning most weeks they're all whinging about it.

 

The style complaint is really just an excuse for people being unhappy we aren't winning more games. Nothing wrong with being upset when we don't win but lets just be honest about it. In ideal world your team wins every game playing like 1970s Brazil but in the end its the winning that truly matters not the way you do it.

 

 

Cue loads of posters saying they'd rather lose every week playing eye catching football....

 

I would sort of agree...it isn't the style it's the lack of goals.

 

24 in 24 games is not good enough.

Take out the three times we scored three and it's 15 in 21 games.

That is appalling.

We can play wonderful football but it's about getting the ball into the net.

Often that relates into winning especially if you are tight in defence.

Currently Puel marshals over a team that doesn't score of astern but has now started conceding...

4 against Spurs, 2. against west brom, 5 against arsenal, 3 against West Ham....

 

However if we had 1 0 wins for the rest. Of the season I would still want him to leave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cellone

cellone

Posted
Posted
I would sort of agree...it isn't the style it's the lack of goals.

 

24 in 24 games is not good enough.

Take out the three times we scored three and it's 15 in 21 games.

That is appalling.

We can play wonderful football but it's about getting the ball into the net.

Often that relates into winning especially if you are tight in defence.

Currently Puel marshals over a team that doesn't score of astern but has now started conceding...

4 against Spurs, 2. against west brom, 5 against arsenal, 3 against West Ham....

 

However if we had 1 0 wins for the rest. Of the season I would still want him to leave.

But if you only include the 3x3 then that's nine in three games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VectisSaint

VectisSaint

Posted
Posted
Bollix no one really cares about style its about winning.

Cue loads of posters saying they'd rather lose every week playing eye catching football....

Bollix. There is a happy medium where the style of play is good and games are won. Boring football with few league wins (Puel) is the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Posted
Posted

I think he has put egg on a few faces for sure.

 

When will people learn on here.... Trick is to have no opinion and simply sit on fences at all times. You can then point and laugh at people either way.

 

Question is has his wife made any BFFs yet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dark Munster

Dark Munster

Posted
Posted

For most of the season we've struggled for goals, and what does he do? He leaves out our one clinical striker (Gabbi) for every single match. Finally the stubborn bastard decides to play him, we are now scoring goals for fun. So what does he do now? He leaves out both our first choice CBs, replacing them with Yoshi and a kid, and we now are leaking goals left right and centre.

 

Puel out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :hunt:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted (edited)
Now we have a forward who can score goals maybe Puel can receive a bit of slack. Although JRod and Long have had a lot of game time, they have failed to step up to the plate since Austin got injured.

We now have some exciting permutations and plenty of pace up front.

And by dropping the diamond and the 433

 

Oh. And playing redmond as a wide attacker instead of a central forward type

Edited by Batman
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint-Fred

Saint-Fred

Posted
Posted
Is that 3 games in a row with the same starting line up now? Can only be a positive thing.

 

I would agree with this. He has changed his tactics, his rotation policy and got the team scoring..if he carries on like this I might even join the Puel in camp!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
Loving the posters claiming Puel has changed and is now doing what they wanted all along. Still that's easier than saying they were wrong about him.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's quite an entertaining and amusing spectator sport though

Link to comment
Share on other sites
washsaint

washsaint

Posted
Posted

Bunch of w*****s really. The reason he has changed the formation is simply that he now has the players in place who can play the style he wants whereas previously he had to set up to play to offset our weaknesses. JRod and Long (and Austin) have proved themselves incapable of adapting but we now have Gabbiadini.

 

If Puel is backed in the summer we could be in for a great season next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted
Bunch of w*****s really. The reason he has changed the formation is simply that he now has the players in place who can play the style he wants whereas previously he had to set up to play to offset our weaknesses. JRod and Long (and Austin) have proved themselves incapable of adapting but we now have Gabbiadini.

 

If Puel is backed in the summer we could be in for a great season next year.

 

so, tell us why we could not play 4231 earlier this season but we could play the diamond?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
washsaint

washsaint

Posted
Posted

Why? Because we didn't have the players up top to play that system. Austin is immobile, JRod and Long were incredibly wasteful and you and your kind who have whined and cried about the diamond haven't actually accounted for the fact that his style of play is to be fluid and interchangeable and not a rigid formation. He started Tadic in the #10 role at the start of the season but we didn't have the strikers to make that effective.

 

We still rely on crosses into the box but the difference is we now have striker who can create space, anticipates, etc.

 

SO the reality is that I don't think Puel's preferred tactics have changed much at all - it is simply that he can now have confidence we have the players to play his preferred style.

 

While some of the play earlier this season was dour and poor, how much of that was down to the fact our strikers could not score for toffee so he had to tighten up at the back? Koeman did the exact same thing last season and we ground out results until confidence returned and the front 3 came back to form.

 

But still, that won't fit with your warped agenda that seems to be to moan and whine about anything to do with Saints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted
Why? Because we didn't have the players up top to play that system. Austin is immobile, JRod and Long were incredibly wasteful and you and your kind who have whined and cried about the diamond haven't actually accounted for the fact that his style of play is to be fluid and interchangeable and not a rigid formation. He started Tadic in the #10 role at the start of the season but we didn't have the strikers to make that effective.

 

We still rely on crosses into the box but the difference is we now have striker who can create space, anticipates, etc.

 

SO the reality is that I don't think Puel's preferred tactics have changed much at all - it is simply that he can now have confidence we have the players to play his preferred style.

 

While some of the play earlier this season was dour and poor, how much of that was down to the fact our strikers could not score for toffee so he had to tighten up at the back? Koeman did the exact same thing last season and we ground out results until confidence returned and the front 3 came back to form.

 

But still, that won't fit with your warped agenda that seems to be to moan and whine about anything to do with Saints.

 

we could not play 4231 at all before Gabbiadini came in. But we could shoe-horn these players into a diamond

 

 

righto

 

 

we also started the season with Austin on the bench. when he did force a starting place, he started to score the goals (and is still our top scorer) despite spending decent amounts of a game wide left

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted
Pointless trying to have any kind of reasonable discussion with you........your avatar sums you up.

 

dont be like that because I think you are wrong.

we obviously could have played 4231 from the very first game. Puel obviusly wanted to go down a different route that worked for him in France. It was not working over here and (for what ever reason) he has changed. Fair play to him

 

but to suggest we did not have the players to play a system we have spent years playing, until 1 new player came in, is ridiculous

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Posted
Posted
Loving the posters claiming Puel has changed and is now doing what they wanted all along. Still that's easier than saying they were wrong about him.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

But he has changed things! Possibly because he now has the right players to play this style, but he has changed things.

 

He changed the formation and approach for Leicester and Liverpool end of January and we won 3-0 and 1-0

 

Was annoying when he chucked out the poor side in the FA cup (lost) and then seemed to revert to the old unsuccessful style n formation against Swansea (lost) and WHU (lost)

 

Seems to bounce around a bit, but surely now he will stick with a settled team and formation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint-Fred

Saint-Fred

Posted
Posted
Loving the posters claiming Puel has changed and is now doing what they wanted all along. Still that's easier than saying they were wrong about him.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

He isn't doing what I wanted as he would have resigned!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dark Munster

Dark Munster

Posted
Posted
Loving the posters claiming Puel has changed and is now doing what they wanted all along. Still that's easier than saying they were wrong about him.

Bunch of w*****s really. The reason he has changed the formation is simply that he now has the players in place who can play the style he wants whereas previously he had to set up to play to offset our weaknesses. JRod and Long (and Austin) have proved themselves incapable of adapting but we now have Gabbiadini.

 

If Puel is backed in the summer we could be in for a great season next year.

This, and this.

 

And don't forget the rotation slagging off. Apparently Puel has finally learned his lesson not to make massive changes. Of course this has nothing to do with the fact that we are now playing just one match over one or two weeks, as opposed to a game every 3 or 4 days. :mcinnes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SaintSeb

SaintSeb

Posted
Posted
But he has changed things! Possibly because he now has the right players to play this style, but he has changed things.

 

He changed the formation and approach for Leicester and Liverpool end of January and we won 3-0 and 1-0

 

Was annoying when he chucked out the poor side in the FA cup (lost) and then seemed to revert to the old unsuccessful style n formation against Swansea (lost) and WHU (lost)

 

Seems to bounce around a bit, but surely now he will stick with a settled team and formation?

 

I think to be fair we played the same system against West Ham as we did in the victories. We might have played a bit differently against Swansea as we were the away team but I can't recall properly to be honest.

 

I think the system we're playing now, whilst similar in shape to the old 4-2-3-1 is far more fluid and less direct than how we played it under Koeman, and without the super high line Poch favoured. Sort of a hybrid of the two approaches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
saintant

saintant

Posted
Posted

Some people seem to have forgotten that when Puel arrived we changed from a 4231 that had been tried and trusted to a diamond which I think was his favoured system in France. You can claim what you want and I think CP stated that the reason for the diamond was because he felt it took less out of the players during a time when we had a fixture pile up. Personally I don't agree with him and think we should have stuck to 4231 because it is a system proven to work for us. I think our overall results this season would have been better had we not introduced the diamond. Just my opinion and appreciate that many will disagree and that's what having debates on these forums is all about. I do accept that the introduction of Gabbiadini has been the icing on the cake for the 4231 system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Posted
Posted

I personally dont think its a critism of Puel to say he's changed things - the opposite in fact. His way (the diamond) didnt work in the EPL and some questioned if he knew any other way. He does and he's changed things.

 

Performances have improved and players seem happier... Its win/win.

 

Playing Redmond on the left (not CF, new Henry blabla) also shows that Puel isnt as stubborn as some say and he has also ditched the rotation policy - perhaps he just now knows his best 11? reduced fixtures? bit of both perhaps?

 

Either way the hows and whys are irrelevant. He needed to change things and he has... Kudos to him and long may the improved attacking football continue and we start looking upwards not down.

 

Im still convinced we can catch Everton, we have easier fixtures than them and only 11 points behind (WITH a game in hand) COYR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...