Jump to content

Mauricio Pellegrino signs as First Team Manager on a Three Year deal - OFFICIAL

Jimmy_D

By Jimmy_D,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

S-Clarke

S-Clarke

Posted
Posted

I must admit, it was a very odd interview from De Boer. I thought exactly the same.

 

The main headline that came out of it was that at least he'll have lots of money to spend. Not exactly the ideal thing to say....doesn't strengthen your hand, but it does probably appease the modern day football fan for a few days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tajjuk

tajjuk

Posted
Posted

Having seen what he actually said, I think the headline is a little sensationalist, he actually says twice I think that he wants to assess the squad they have first before looking at any signings and that he reckons they only need one or two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Patrick Bateman

Patrick Bateman

Posted
Posted

I'm really unsure about De Boer. I think he'll probably get off to a great start and make some good signings based on his playing reputation and name in the game. But there's something about him that makes me feel he's not a 'bonding' type of manager and it'll be a team full of individuals rather than a team.

 

No basis to that, just a gut feeling, especially after that interview he's just given; bizarre. Wonder what Palace fans think!?

 

I would say I feel happier with Pellegrino, but we've had nothing but positive articles thrown our way, so I'm brainwashed ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
S-Clarke

S-Clarke

Posted
Posted
Where is our manager? As Pilch says, no press conference, no interview. Nothing. Guess he must be on holiday.

 

I don't think he officially starts his role until the end of this week (I'm sure i read that somewhere). Probably putting everything in place and then we'll get the big fan-fare when all the players return next week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pass the Dutchie

Pass the Dutchie

Posted
Posted
Agreed. How about trying coaching to improve what you have or even assessing before spending loads of dosh that's what any manager/coach worth his salt would do.

 

Which is actually exactly what he said he would do. "It's too early to buy new players, first I need to get to know the players we have."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Coxford_lou

Coxford_lou

Posted
Posted
I don't think he officially starts his role until the end of this week (I'm sure i read that somewhere). Probably putting everything in place and then we'll get the big fan-fare when all the players return next week.

 

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere - can't remember where - that he needed a week back home in Argentina for personal/family reasons, before he started with us....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
Very unusual to install a manager without a press conference.

 

Agree. I'm pretty sure all our previous managers in recent history have been formally introduced 'in the flesh' on the day they were announced. It does indeed have a whiff of being rushed through to avoid being gazumped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ErwinK1961

ErwinK1961

Posted
Posted
Agree. I'm pretty sure all our previous managers in recent history have been formally introduced 'in the flesh' on the day they were announced. It does indeed have a whiff of being rushed through to avoid being gazumped.

 

Agree - plus I think the fact the club had said (via our favourite journalists) that the new manager would be in place by the end of last week probably added a bit of pressure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
krissyboy31

krissyboy31

Posted
Posted
I'm pretty sure I read somewhere - can't remember where - that he needed a week back home in Argentina for personal/family reasons, before he started with us....

Does he need to sort out a work permit? Presumably he's not a Spanish citizen?

 

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
angelman

angelman

Posted
Posted

What Todd said about Tisdale is moronic. Why should he jump to the top of the pile, like Giggs is trying? If he seriously thinks it mystifying, the what is more "mystifying" is that a Championship side hasn't given him the chance but that seemingly doesn't compute!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
S-Clarke

S-Clarke

Posted
Posted
Does he need to sort out a work permit? Presumably he's not a Spanish citizen?

 

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

Not sure why that would be an issue, he's been an EU citizen for a good while. Valenca, Alaves, Barca as a player, Liverpool as a player and coach etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
saint1977

saint1977

Posted
Posted
I must admit, it was a very odd interview from De Boer. I thought exactly the same.

 

The main headline that came out of it was that at least he'll have lots of money to spend. Not exactly the ideal thing to say....doesn't strengthen your hand, but it does probably appease the modern day football fan for a few days.

 

Yet, the narrative coming out of CP seemingly before the appointment was that CP had invested heavily with Pardew and Sam across 2-3 windows and that they needed someone to get the best out of some of those investments? Perhaps FDB was told that he could sell some of those bigger money signings e.g. Benteke and re-invest all of it? Or perhaps more money has been made available? Runs contrary though to Parrish's statement though about the new investors sorting out their facilities, which need heavy investment (not least the very old main stand at Selhurst and Arthur Waite is hardly luxury having watched Saints V Palace and Wimbledon there plenty of times).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
S-Clarke

S-Clarke

Posted
Posted
What Todd said about Tisdale is moronic. Why should he jump to the top of the pile, like Giggs is trying? If he seriously thinks it mystifying, the what is more "mystifying" is that a Championship side hasn't given him the chance but that seemingly doesn't compute!

 

You have to give young english managers a chance you know, otherwise we may never know they are good enough.

 

I'm sure, if Tisdale was any good, he'd have been picked up long before now. But he's still at Exeter, because he's not very good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
saint1977

saint1977

Posted
Posted
What Todd said about Tisdale is moronic. Why should he jump to the top of the pile, like Giggs is trying? If he seriously thinks it mystifying, the what is more "mystifying" is that a Championship side hasn't given him the chance but that seemingly doesn't compute!

 

Has a very good contract (and job security) with Exeter for that level and hence hasn't moved even within Leagues 1 and 2. They will make a few bob from Wheeler and particularly Watkins so Tisdale will good for more seasons there yet. On Todd's logic, Tisdale would be manager of Saints with Pinnacle owning us (as they were working with MLT), Paul McVeigh would be Norwich manager, the Skates should re-appoint Alan Knight and Liverpool with Aldridge as boss. Tisdale was a fringe player for years who had injury problems, he's done well at Exeter as a manager and has recovered popularity with the fans after a rocky 3-4 years. Was at Team Bath before that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greeenbeard

Greeenbeard

Posted
Posted

I live in Exeter and have watched City a number of times. The matches are never exactly dull (as in, lots of late goals and comebacks), however tactically Tisdale is uninspiring. All season the team played best out wide and crossing or playing into the middle, but 90% of the matches were played through the middle until the dying minutes when Exeter would spread wide and use space as a last resort. This resulted in so many of their late goals. They were very capable of good football but how much of it was down to Tisdale I'm not so sure.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
angelman

angelman

Posted
Posted (edited)

I feel quite touched that Martin Samuels spends so much time worrying about little old Southampton. His latest little insight into us is another cheery positive piece, although quite what the point of it is, is a little lost on me like so many of his pieces are.

 

One final point about new Southampton manager Mauricio Pellegrino. In summer 2012 he was appointed manager of Valencia, who had come third the previous season; he left on December 1 that year, Valencia 12th in the table, having won 10 of 21 matches.

 

He returned to Argentina and rebuilt his career with Estudiantes and Independiente. Gary Neville also went to Valencia, in more difficult circumstances, did poorly and got the sack in his first season, too. There is no chance of him being allowed to put his career back together at any Premier League club in England — and certainly not two of equivalent size to Estudiantes and Independiente.

 

Why do you think Les Reed, vice-chairman of Southampton, wants to appoint managers, rather than be one?

 

Now while the bit about poor old Gary might well be true - I am not quite sure whether he is suggesting that we employ him - old Martin seems to have rather ignored MPs season at Alaves, while not mentioning the teams GN (has not) managed since leaving Valencia. But it is the final bit, the question about Les Reed that I find interesting. I guess the simple answer is that Les Reed is now upstairs helping run the club, so abrogates responsibility for the team to the manager. Having helped us from the depths of L1 to the 8th, 7th, 6th, 8th of the past 4 seasons, I guess he has done a fine job. But that surely can't be the answer as it is too simple. Anyone got any other ideas?

 

I do feel a bit saddened though, that this is the final point about the new manager, although I suspect that he is telling a porky about that. I am sure that if things don't go too well, he will be back quite happily crowing about it. Or maybe he will go on about player sales.

Edited by angelman
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fan The Flames

Fan The Flames

Posted
Posted

Well it seems that there is more to Samuals dislike of Southampton than losing that court case and its Les Reed. Les is disliked by a few and it seems that Samuals is one, having a pop at the Reed's 'cushie number'. Totally ignoring the fact that Reed is quite good at what he does, because this contradicts all the ******** that Samuals has been spouting about us over the years. Samuals probably believed that we were ****ed after the fire sale and was happy to jump at the chance of sticking the knife in to a club that took him to court. When the demise didn't come he kept going and now he has painted himself into a corner. He will never admit that over the last few years he was wrong. Why do you think Martin Samuals, Daily Mail Chief Sports Writer, wants to write about football executives, rather than be one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greenridge

Greenridge

Posted
Posted
He said: "We track players over years and when the new manager comes in like Mauricio, we take him through that process.

 

Les also added:

 

It's pure coincidence that when Ron joined we suddenly dipped into the Dutch football market and when Claude arrived we did the same for the French market. Pure coincidence. Honestly.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Faz

Faz

Posted
Posted (edited)

There is nothing contradictory about tracking players for years, and then buying players a manager is familiar with. In the case of Puel, we had already been after Bouffal, and we needed right back cover so why not Pied if he fits the bill?

 

Unless, of course, Redmond and Gabbi are also French - in which case my argument goes out of the window.

 

If Bednarek is Spanish I'll look even more of a fool.

 

I hope we do unearth a Spanish gem or too. Their U21s are so technically gifted there must be others out there.

Edited by Faz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greenridge

Greenridge

Posted
Posted

Unless, of course, Redmond and Gabbi are also French - in which case my argument goes out of the window.

 

If Bednarek is Spanish I'll look even more of a fool.

 

I hope we do unearth a Spanish gem or too. Their U21s are so technically gifted there must be others out there.

 

I don't see any reference to exclusively buying from those markets. Oh, and Redmond arrived in the summer, well before Claude was appointed. Nice try though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ALWAYS_SFC

ALWAYS_SFC

Posted
Posted
Well it seems that there is more to Samuals dislike of Southampton than losing that court case and its Les Reed. Les is disliked by a few and it seems that Samuals is one, having a pop at the Reed's 'cushie number'. Totally ignoring the fact that Reed is quite good at what he does, because this contradicts all the ******** that Samuals has been spouting about us over the years. Samuals probably believed that we were ****ed after the fire sale and was happy to jump at the chance of sticking the knife in to a club that took him to court. When the demise didn't come he kept going and now he has painted himself into a corner. He will never admit that over the last few years he was wrong. Why do you think Martin Samuals, Daily Mail Chief Sports Writer, wants to write about football executives, rather than be one.

 

Because he is a pr ick

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Faz

Faz

Posted
Posted
I don't see any reference to exclusively buying from those markets. Oh, and Redmond arrived in the summer, well before Claude was appointed. Nice try though.

 

You didn't need to state "exclusively", the inference in your post was clear.

 

I really don't understand the incidious sniping at everything the Club/Reed do, despite the most successful period in most of our living memories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted
I feel quite touched that Martin Samuels spends so much time worrying about little old Southampton. His latest little insight into us is another cheery positive piece, although quite what the point of it is, is a little lost on me like so many of his pieces are.

 

One final point about new Southampton manager Mauricio Pellegrino. In summer 2012 he was appointed manager of Valencia, who had come third the previous season; he left on December 1 that year, Valencia 12th in the table, having won 10 of 21 matches.

 

He returned to Argentina and rebuilt his career with Estudiantes and Independiente. Gary Neville also went to Valencia, in more difficult circumstances, did poorly and got the sack in his first season, too. There is no chance of him being allowed to put his career back together at any Premier League club in England — and certainly not two of equivalent size to Estudiantes and Independiente.

 

Why do you think Les Reed, vice-chairman of Southampton, wants to appoint managers, rather than be one?

 

Now while the bit about poor old Gary might well be true - I am not quite sure whether he is suggesting that we employ him - old Martin seems to have rather ignored MPs season at Alaves, while not mentioning the teams GN (has not) managed since leaving Valencia. But it is the final bit, the question about Les Reed that I find interesting. I guess the simple answer is that Les Reed is now upstairs helping run the club, so abrogates responsibility for the team to the manager. Having helped us from the depths of L1 to the 8th, 7th, 6th, 8th of the past 4 seasons, I guess he has done a fine job. But that surely can't be the answer as it is too simple. Anyone got any other ideas?

 

I do feel a bit saddened though, that this is the final point about the new manager, although I suspect that he is telling a porky about that. I am sure that if things don't go too well, he will be back quite happily crowing about it. Or maybe he will go on about player sales.

 

Don't be so sensitive, you big girl's blouse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greenridge

Greenridge

Posted
Posted
You didn't need to state "exclusively", the inference in your post was clear.

 

I really don't understand the incidious sniping at everything the Club/Reed do, despite the most successful period in most of our living memories.

 

And the inference is clear that the majority of signings under Koeman and Puel were 'their' players not some black box findings from Les 'that we've been watching for years'. 'Years' really? I've got no problem with that whatsoever but Reed certainly leaves himself open when he trots out the marketing line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
angelman

angelman

Posted
Posted
Don't be so sensitive, you big girl's blouse.

 

oh sssh. I like to get myself all exercised over the fat oik, but in truth, the indignation is faux as I enjoy the fact that he is getting wound up and hopefully his triteness will carry on. However, I will say that I am fascinated by his writings about us and the reasons behind it. Of course there is the court case, but,,,,,,,

 

Now if you read an old piece of his about us, then there is a very different outlook. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2609004/MARTIN-SAMUEL-Why-Southampton-sign-stars-like-Christian-Benteke-Robin-van-Persie-John-Terry-instead-sell-sell-sell.html in particular....

 

Yet suppose Southampton wanted to take advantage of this ‘Class of 92’ windfall? Suppose owner Katharina Liebherr was minded, or persuaded, that her football club were on the cusp of something unique. That, by keeping the young players, keeping the good older players and adding a layer of expensively acquired talent on top, Southampton could have a proper tilt at muscling their way into the top four.

 

Then a man in a suit from UEFA would say no. Southampton would be spending beyond their given para-meters and that isn’t financially fair, apparently.

 

UEFA have no problem with Southampton being plundered by the elite. Yet if a very rich woman wanted to use her money to further her club, and make the most of their resources, that would not be allowed.

 

Bit different from his vitriol these days, so I wonder what Les has done to him.

 

However, later in the article, he touches on the very important point that I 100% agree with.

 

UEFA have a duty to keep the sport fluid and engaging, to maintain an element of surprise. Instead, they are cementing clubs in place, leaving Southampton without a business plan beyond upmarket feeder club.

 

But he, and all other journalists seem to have totally forgotten about this and are enamoured with the top 6. But here in this article from April 2014, he acknowledges our position of being a feeder club and why, but now, he goes on about us "sell, sell, sell, the Southampton Way". If you are going to be a ccok, then so much better to be consistent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted
oh sssh. I like to get myself all exercised over the fat oik, but in truth, the indignation is faux as I enjoy the fact that he is getting wound up and hopefully his triteness will carry on. However, I will say that I am fascinated by his writings about us and the reasons behind it. Of course there is the court case, but,,,,,,,

 

Now if you read an old piece of his about us, then there is a very different outlook. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2609004/MARTIN-SAMUEL-Why-Southampton-sign-stars-like-Christian-Benteke-Robin-van-Persie-John-Terry-instead-sell-sell-sell.html in particular....

 

Yet suppose Southampton wanted to take advantage of this ‘Class of 92’ windfall? Suppose owner Katharina Liebherr was minded, or persuaded, that her football club were on the cusp of something unique. That, by keeping the young players, keeping the good older players and adding a layer of expensively acquired talent on top, Southampton could have a proper tilt at muscling their way into the top four.

 

Then a man in a suit from UEFA would say no. Southampton would be spending beyond their given para-meters and that isn’t financially fair, apparently.

 

UEFA have no problem with Southampton being plundered by the elite. Yet if a very rich woman wanted to use her money to further her club, and make the most of their resources, that would not be allowed.

 

Bit different from his vitriol these days, so I wonder what Les has done to him.

 

However, later in the article, he touches on the very important point that I 100% agree with.

 

UEFA have a duty to keep the sport fluid and engaging, to maintain an element of surprise. Instead, they are cementing clubs in place, leaving Southampton without a business plan beyond upmarket feeder club.

 

But he, and all other journalists seem to have totally forgotten about this and are enamoured with the top 6. But here in this article from April 2014, he acknowledges our position of being a feeder club and why, but now, he goes on about us "sell, sell, sell, the Southampton Way". If you are going to be a ccok, then so much better to be consistent.

 

Because there's no indication that our current policy is driven by financial fair play considerations. Samuel would, no doubt, respond that yes, FFP might block us if we really wanted to roll the dice; but he's not calling for that. Rather his criticism is that we don't show ambition by taking advantage of the latitude we do have -certainly not in a manner that's consistent, in his eyes, with the hype and self-congratulation of the Southampton Way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rooney

rooney

Posted
Posted
I live in Exeter and have watched City a number of times. The matches are never exactly dull (as in, lots of late goals and comebacks), however tactically Tisdale is uninspiring. All season the team played best out wide and crossing or playing into the middle, but 90% of the matches were played through the middle until the dying minutes when Exeter would spread wide and use space as a last resort. This resulted in so many of their late goals. They were very capable of good football but how much of it was down to Tisdale I'm not so sure.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do Capels still sell nice Fish and Chips?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
angelman

angelman

Posted
Posted
Because there's no indication that our current policy is driven by financial fair play considerations. Samuel would, no doubt, respond that yes, FFP might block us if we really wanted to roll the dice; but he's not calling for that. Rather his criticism is that we don't show ambition by taking advantage of the latitude we do have -certainly not in a manner that's consistent, in his eyes, with the hype and self-congratulation of the Southampton Way.

 

But improving year on year shows that Reed was correct, and Samuels wrong, that is unless you consider that we should be in the top 4 or winning it like LCFC. However, Samuels considers last season a success for us, and does contradict himself quite often about the sales. Personally, I feel last season was not a success. The club did not adequately replace those that left, in particular Mané as well as the manager. But as I have said before, we do not know what the owner's instructions have been and maybe Reed was told to make the sales. He is not stupid in wanting to sell our best players, although I suspect that big offers and replacing with good players is part of the remit he has been given by the owner. He gets the blame in the sell, sell, sell but the ultimate decision for this, is the owner. She never gets brought into this, Reed never tells what remit he has, save for this year where the Chairman has said things slightly differently. Didn't he say that this year was different to others in that we didn't have to sell. That to me sounds like something from the owner.

 

And the Southampton Way tosh sounds like it is a Kreuger thing. Maybe it did well in selling us to USA and elsewhere, but domestically, we don't really go in for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pilchards

Pilchards

Posted
Posted

I get the impression that the black box targets at least 10 players per position.

If one of those players seems to be someone the current manager knows/likes then it may become the preferred choice of the panel if the price is right.

Pied/Boufal were surely Puel's choice if the price was good and the panel were satisfied.

I do expect Pellegrino to have his little selection of players he wants if our black box has rated them in our top 10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
I get the impression that the black box targets at least 10 players per position.

If one of those players seems to be someone the current manager knows/likes then it may become the preferred choice of the panel if the price is right.

Pied/Boufal were surely Puel's choice if the price was good and the panel were satisfied.

I do expect Pellegrino to have his little selection of players he wants if our black box has rated them in our top 10.

 

Indeed...

JWhl9j362hwkz0CGWuWCEcLT7KMPXPxdxHaVPnP0jpCYs9OvgF0KFNWa2WmxXPJENezeq-AOoT8vmJwMZbWrdUQiQGEMVNbUeQYIppkKvyDuFUbbjwXguYB8miDcC4eS3bKF3ciuepQZKliBfVTudQZdBrJZQHoZ_oampOA4COYnBaVv0t-WAqoajr6szYPR5jwmmTfkaJGaJfvkJocwvNOUXK1dm5oBlv6-3df0Do3ngxduLLTJZvtaveDgtkGLwVf3rX4N6dVk2COrmfRiIN9vzkhyKCNSYIHHNjoOr708Lh2AOXgYVlnFMECvHsfs-20PIrWO2tOfZCwmqG4M27myX62EDY0A_TDgpO3qGKkdERn_JSkTixQg2PWmwRnGsO2SCmjvegcEdTuhiWNYyl26o8xCcEtaix7KzASrqx2KenKQsTscR2BvCIopjC4dkO4nzNm1nRLBqesyq7UoWSGP35khSLj-jMhoGctlLpNci21tl5BFKoXLLMBx7cWfSoora8dglas6Th5fu_maf3Ee05CZ5PvDXGQ1VEERA6WBvKHnpLDXiuI-TV6P8bAkvs6MrSw41PfTJHZMsIDEBAYDfIvfu2ZmWYRd3A5hQzzUClEyomQw0A=w960-h720-no

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...