Saints can not attack and defend - What Puel knew

[striker]

Interesting article in the Ugly Truth. I agree with this, our CB's stink. It causes our whole scheme to commit more players back to help, which by definition makes us a defensive team.

 

https://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/southampton/forum/221140/saints-cannot-attack-and-defend/#5

[Lord Duckhunter]

He also had OR playing out of his skin, which gave us more protection.

 

The problem with the article is that it appears to absolve other players of the blame. Had our full backs preformed as woefully last season as this, we’d have lost more games. Had the midfield given the ball away as much as they’ve done the past 2 games, the same. Sat, the first goal was absolutely key, and lemina gave it away whilst Jack & Wes were up for a corner. Our centre halves are shell shocked, and they have 2 experienced pros beside them that are hiding & going through the motions, instead of helping them.

 

There’s 2 types of coaching, there’s the team structure, coaching of the team, and then there’s one to one coaching, of making players better. Puel appeared to coach players to be better players, OR a prime example, JWP another. Yoshida got better as the season went on, learning from his mistakes. Look at the contrast between Redmond and Stirling, now I’m not comparing them as players or in ability, but look how different Pep has got him playing. He’s learning, he’s opening his body up more, he’s taking up better positions, his finishing is better, he’s improving. Redmond is playing the exact same game, every time he steps on the pitch. His faults aren’t being worked on, tactically he’s no different. It’s damn hard work, so maybe our players don’t want to listen or put it in. Our players do get better, but they get better naturally as they get older and figure things out for themselves. I don’t see any evidence that we iron out their faults through intensive coaching. We seem to be doing the same with our centre halves, it’s sink or swim. A decent coach, together with senior pros could make them better players. Drill them, until it sinks in. Watch videos, talk through mistakes. They keep making the same positional mistakes, the same decision making mistakes, the same awareness errors. They’re either idiots that don’t take it in or not enough time is being spent on their development. I know which one I think it is. I’m not saying they’d be world beaters, but there’s something there. I’d bet my bottom dollar that had Puel stayed they’d be better players than they are now. It’s also absolutely mad to play two youngsters together , it’ll ruin them both.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Edited 3 April, 2018 by Lord Duckhunter

[Give it to Ron]

Sacking Puel wasn't wrong - look how he couldn't change the last 8 games...what was wrong was our shocking recruitment that January only getting Caceres - the recruitment of the worst manager I have seen and the refusal to replace him and another abysmal January window.

Selling good players and replacing them with poorer quality coupled with poor baffling managers is why we are where we are.

Had Pellegrino been sacked in November/December a better replacement than Hughes could have been possible...mind you that would have threatened our net spend trophy.

[Sheaf Saint]

It's not just what Puel knew, perhaps Pellegrino knew it too. He often said that controlling the game was the most important element on which to build a platform to win games, and looking at the way we surrendered the midfield on saturday and let WHU roll over us, I'm inclined to believe he knew what he was talking about in this respect. Although I'm not suggesting we shouldn't have sacked him, because he was clearly out of his depth and lacking in awareness in many other areas.

[SKD]

He also had OR playing out of his skin, which gave us more protection.

 

The problem with the article is that it appears to absolve other players of the blame. Had our full backs preformed as woefully last season as this, we’d have lost more games. Had the midfield given the ball away as much as they’ve done the past 2 games, the same. Sat, the first goal was absolutely key, and lemina gave it away whilst Jack & Wes were up for a corner. Our centre halves are shell shocked, and they have 2 experienced pros beside them that are hiding & going through the motions, instead of helping them.

 

There’s 2 types of coaching, there’s the team structure, coaching of the team, and then there’s one to one coaching, of making players better. Puel appeared to coach players to be better players, OR a prime example, JWP another. Yoshida got better as the season went on, learning from his mistakes. Look at the contrast between Redmond and Stirling, now I’m not comparing them as players or in ability, but look how different Pep has got him playing. He’s learning, he’s opening his body up more, he’s taking up better positions, his finishing is better, he’s improving. Redmond is playing the exact same game, every time he steps on the pitch. His faults aren’t being worked on, tactically he’s no different. It’s damn hard work, so maybe our players don’t want to listen or put it in. Our players do get better, but they get better naturally as they get older and figure things out for themselves. I don’t see any evidence that we iron out their faults through intensive coaching. We seem to be doing the same with our centre halves, it’s sink or swim. A decent coach, together with senior pros could make them better players. Drill them, until it sinks in. Watch videos, talk through mistakes. They keep making the same positional mistakes, the same decision making mistakes, the same awareness errors. They’re either idiots that don’t take it in or not enough time is being spent on their development. I know which one I think it is. I’m not saying they’d be world beaters, but there’s something there. I’d bet my bottom dollar that had Puel stayed they’d be better players than they are now. It’s also absolutely mad to play two youngsters together , it’ll ruin them both.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Had Puel stayed, they would have pretty much all left.

 

Puel is an okay manager, he done an okay job. Tactically he was pretty sound (you could see how we would set up, defend deep try and hit teams on the counter, if that wasn't on try and keep the ball / play through the 3rds) and as you said, he is okay at developing players. Lets not forget that Puel did have one of the leagues best CB's for half the season.

 

Unfortunately for Puel, communication was an issue, the dressing room didn't respect or like him and he didn't have the players to play his brand of football and entertain the fans in the same light (I'm taking a Vardy or Mahrez type)

 

imo, the improvements in OR, JWP and MY were in spite of Puel rather than as a result of Puel's training (Generally getting more / consistent game time certainly helped JWP and MY).

 

As above, sacking Puel was the right thing to do, the **** poor replacement (MP is a terrible manager, probably the worst I've seen at Saints) and keeping hold of said manager for so long wasn't. I'm convinced that if we had a 'Poch / Pep type' excellent man manager (obviously not them, but someone of that type) they would be able to get significantly more out of the players we currently have. It does however seem that there is a 'toxic' atmosphere at the club, at the moment though (starting at board room level) and I'm not sure whoever comes in will be able to change that quickly.

 

Given how poor we are at CB, I feel like we need a 'defend from the front' attitude. Any team that is given the time to put a deep cross in between Cedric and Stephens who will just be watching the ball, will score.

[Jonnyboy]

Was relegation a price worth paying to get rid of Puel? No. The club shouldn't have sacked him until a "top top" manager was signed up to take over.

[IFHP]

Was relegation a price worth paying to get rid of Puel? No. The club shouldn't have sacked him until a "top top" manager was signed up to take over.

 

Was relegation a price worth paying for not getting rid of the clown sooner? No. The club should have sacked him in December to give a new manager a chance and let the new manager buy his own player.

[Batman]

We may not be able to defend or attack... but fuk me, we have the bestest midfield in the country - fact

Edited 3 April, 2018 by Batman

[aintforever]

I agree with the bit about Puel maybe being defensive because of the CB situation but this season it’s not an excuse, we were just as ****e when VVD was here.

 

Our striker situation is much more to blame than the CBs but the reason we’ve got relegated is because we replaced a perfectly good manager in Puel with someone way out of their depth, then persisted with him far too long. Confidence is shot throughout the team and there is no cohesion whatsoever because of all the chopping and changing.

[RedArmy]

Stephens is utterly useless at defending any ball above waist height.

Hoedt is bambi on ice, a complete waste of money.

Cedric and Bertrand daydreaming about their new clubs for 90 minutes has exposed Stephens and Hoedt weaknesses even further, as has our complete inability to score goals.

 

None of that has anything to do with Puel, Pellegrino or Hughes. They've been dealt a sh1t hand by that utter clown Reed.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Had Puel stayed, they would have pretty much all left.

 

 

Shame we didn’t ship them out and kept Puel instead. I don’t think there’s one player I give a Shiite about. Bertrand, Cedric, Long, Gabbi, the lot of them can **** off as far as I’m concerned. They got their way and got rid of nasty Claude & look how they’ve repaid the club for that backing. Puel was professional, honest & diligent every single minute he was at the club, none of the players can say the same thing.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk