Jump to content

Replacement for Hughes

Bad Wolf

By Bad Wolf,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Posted
Posted
No. But Puel is a far superior manager to Hughes and the situations were far different. If Hughes had us 8th, and got us to a cup final even I couldn't deny him the job.

 

Impossible to compare.

 

Puel took over when we were on a huge upward trend and still took us backwards.

 

Pellegrino and Hughes just continued Puels decline

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ultimatt

Ultimatt

Posted
Posted
No. But Puel is a far superior manager to Hughes and the situations were far different. If Hughes had us 8th, and got us to a cup final even I couldn't deny him the job.
I've said it before. If the order was Koeman > MoPe > Hughes > Puel then Puel would be hugely popular

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DT

DT

Posted
Posted
Beggars belief that Hughes actually thinks he's done a good job at saints https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/southampton-fc-news-mark-hughes-sacked-media-standings-manchester-united-fixture-a8659811.html

 

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

 

The world is against him. Nothing to do with terrible results. Oh no.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shanghai Saint

Shanghai Saint

Posted
Posted
I've said it before. If the order was Koeman > MoPe > Hughes > Puel then Puel would be hugely popular

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

Just wrong ... Results aren’t there but ambition of Hughes’ side far outweighs anything we saw under Puel. It may have been a club in transition but the downward slide started with Claude’s negativity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stevy777_x

stevy777_x

Posted
Posted
Puel was a mess for this club - a period we’ve not recovered from.

 

No he wasn’t, we were solid under him and some games created a lot of chances but couldn’t finish but that is due to the rubbish strikers we had. After the cup final players were no longer interested in thr season as there was nothing to play.

He also introduced loads of younsters to the fold, Hesketh Sims McQueen... far from being a mess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Posted
Posted
Puel was a mess for this club - a period we’ve not recovered from.

 

This.

 

Just wrong ... Results aren’t there but ambition of Hughes’ side far outweighs anything we saw under Puel. It may have been a club in transition but the downward slide started with Claude’s negativity.

 

And this.

 

Puel has history of this. Remember Lyon....7 consecutive league titles > appoint Puel and errrr > sack him couple years later

Link to comment
Share on other sites
adrian lord

adrian lord

Posted
Posted

Yes Puel sucked the spirit out of the squad, he was a dull bureaucrat of a manager, and unlike his predecessors, not an inspirational leader: the footballing equivalent of a Barnier or a Junckers or a Verhofstadt. He set us on the trajectory to doom, disguised thinly at the time by an easy Cup run and legacy Koeman influence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
Yes Puel sucked the spirit out of the squad, he was a dull bureaucrat of a manager, and unlike his predecessors, not an inspirational leader: the footballing equivalent of a Barnier or a Junckers or a Verhofstadt. He set us on the trajectory to doom, disguised thinly at the time by an easy Cup run and legacy Koeman influence.

 

What an odd comparison

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kwsaint

kwsaint

Posted
Posted
He was dealt a terrible set of cards and still got us to 8th place. Guardiola probably wouldn't have been able to do that, only a world class genius of football could have achieved what Puel did.

 

Really? Puel a genius? Did you only watch the League Cup games, as many of the League games were turgid. The problem was not with sacking Puel but with what came next.

 

Can we get this thread back on track. Anyone hearing rumours about who we are approaching, because we definitely seem to be looking now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
qwertyell

qwertyell

Posted
Posted
Yes Puel sucked the spirit out of the squad, he was a dull bureaucrat of a manager, and unlike his predecessors, not an inspirational leader: the footballing equivalent of a Barnier or a Junckers or a Verhofstadt. He set us on the trajectory to doom, disguised thinly at the time by an easy Cup run and legacy Koeman influence.
An easy cup run where we played a Premier League club in every round and had to win away to both Arsenal and Liverpool?

 

Virtually bye'd our to the final...

 

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Posted
Posted
An easy cup run where we played a Premier League club in every round and had to win away to both Arsenal and Liverpool?

 

Virtually bye'd our to the final...

 

 

The Arsenal team that day....

 

Martinez

Jenkinson

Gabriel

Holding

Gibbs

El Nenny

Coqulin

Reine-Adelaide

Iwobi

Maitland-Niles

Perez

Link to comment
Share on other sites
disconnect

disconnect

Posted
Posted
The Arsenal team that day....

 

Martinez

Jenkinson

Gabriel

Holding

Gibbs

El Nenny

Coqulin

Reine-Adelaide

Iwobi

Maitland-Niles

Perez

 

That Arsenal team is still better than what a lot of premier league teams come up against in the cup. Our cup run was seriously impressive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tajjuk

tajjuk

Posted
Posted

IMO Puel was a solid if unspectacular manager who did a job probably about on par for the squad he had available with the cup run being a bonus (and very unlucky) probably sans cup run we would have gained a few more points at the end of the season but I think the players were gutted and lost drive.

 

He could at least set a up a team tactically sound (our performances against Liverpool showed that) and players looked like they knew their roles and jobs, and we looked like we worked on stuff in training. IMO the same cannot be said of Hughes.

 

Could we have done better? Totally, but we didn't that was more the issue, if you sack a solid manager who has done an ok job, because you have loftier ambitions you have to make damn sure your recruitment of the next manager is on point and the same for the new players you brought in. Which didn't happen.

 

I 100% believe though we'd have been nowhere near relegation last year or this year with Puel in charge, there would still have been plenty of grumbling and I don;t think we'd be some top 8 challenging team, but I think he would have got a lot more out of the summer signings and a lot more out of the team as whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Posted
Posted
Saints played Martina, Clasie, Reed, and McQueen, and in fact made 8 changes from the preceding win against Everton.

 

Followed by a 3-0 defeat to Palace and a Europe exit to Hapoel Be'er Sheva

 

If you take the engine out of a fiat panda it will initially coast, but will eventually crash into a wall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrfahaji

mrfahaji

Posted
Posted
IMO Puel was a solid if unspectacular manager who did a job probably about on par for the squad he had available with the cup run being a bonus (and very unlucky) probably sans cup run we would have gained a few more points at the end of the season but I think the players were gutted and lost drive.

 

He could at least set a up a team tactically sound (our performances against Liverpool showed that) and players looked like they knew their roles and jobs, and we looked like we worked on stuff in training. IMO the same cannot be said of Hughes.

 

Could we have done better? Totally, but we didn't that was more the issue, if you sack a solid manager who has done an ok job, because you have loftier ambitions you have to make damn sure your recruitment of the next manager is on point and the same for the new players you brought in. Which didn't happen.

 

I 100% believe though we'd have been nowhere near relegation last year or this year with Puel in charge, there would still have been plenty of grumbling and I don;t think we'd be some top 8 challenging team, but I think he would have got a lot more out of the summer signings and a lot more out of the team as whole.

 

Agree with all this. I don't think Puel was a bad manager, but after Koeman we were about as attractive a club to manage as we're ever likely to be. I'm sure we could have hired a manager of proven calibre, but the Puel choice felt like we believed our own hype, the board showing how clever they were by making a left-field appointment, as well as wanting more of a 'yes man' and not wanting to pay a big salary.

 

It wasn't so much that Puel was a bad manager, but more the opportunity cost in terms of what else we could have had (by the same token, appointing Puel now wouldn't be as bad).

 

Sorry kwsaint, we're still off-topic...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neef

Neef

Posted
Posted

Puel was fine, that was it. He had a difficult job with European football to play, and I remember him saying that he would have to change our style of play a little to accommodate for all of the extra games. We left him in it by selling almost all of our goals in Mane & Pelle, and then not replacing them adequately. Sold Fonte and then VVD was injured in that same January from memory.

 

Along with the poor transfer strategy, I think sacking him was the start of our decline. I feel like it was the first time the board bowed to pressure from the fans, as opposed to moving off of their own ideals. I feel like the same happened with making Hughes permanent this summer. Logically, it wasn't the right decision to make. But the fans wanted it, and we were wrapped up in the emotion of surviving relegation. We're suffering because of that again. When you try and please everyone, you end up pleasing nobody.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tajjuk

tajjuk

Posted
Posted
Agree with all this. I don't think Puel was a bad manager, but after Koeman we were about as attractive a club to manage as we're ever likely to be. I'm sure we could have hired a manager of proven calibre, but the Puel choice felt like we believed our own hype, the board showing how clever they were by making a left-field appointment, as well as wanting more of a 'yes man' and not wanting to pay a big salary.

 

It wasn't so much that Puel was a bad manager, but more the opportunity cost in terms of what else we could have had (by the same token, appointing Puel now wouldn't be as bad).

 

Sorry kwsaint, we're still off-topic...

 

 

Agree, we should and could have aimed higher when we appointed him and the transfer policy of that window was also poor as well, should have been stronger with Mane, selling him for £30 million was way under value and we sold him stupidly early in the window, then didn't replace him, plus then letting Pele go and not replacing him either.

 

The whole strategy smacked of complacency IMO, Les et al thinking they could just find more gems again, we then didn't learn from it a year later, doing basically the same thing, settling for a lesser manager target and still not replacing those players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
batterseasaint

batterseasaint

Posted
Posted

Puel was a safe pair of hands. If he'd stayed, we would probably be in exactly the same position now as we were then, and we'd be bored senseless by the football. As it is, he went to Leicester and has turned them into what we used to be under him.

 

Highlights the pointlessness of being a second-tier Premier League club. First priority is to avoid the looming financial disaster of relegation, second is to become 'best of the rest'. Easiest way to achieve that is to be hard to beat and grind out results, as Burnley did last year, and Leicester have done under Puel. But to what end? Thousands of fans are left losing the will to live in the stands. Every now and then, as we did with Pochettino and Koeman, you find a manager that can achieve the same thing with a bit of swagger.

 

With Puel, the club were left with the dilemma of whether to stick or twist. Seeing the boredom and unrest amongst the fans, they twisted, believing they could find the next Pochettino. But the gamble didn't pay off, because they failed to appoint a manager who's teams were committed to the style of play we wanted. Instead, we appointed a defensive-minded manager who the club thought they could mould into what they wanted. This is where the club failed; they tried to replicate the Pochettino appointment but forgot that he was appointed on the back of Cortese and Mitchell watching an Espanyol game in which they were completely sold by Pochettino's style of play. Pellegrino's team were renowned for grinding out draws, and so it proved that he wasn't able to adapt to different requirements. From the word go under Pellegrino, we played every game as if we were underdogs. They inadvertently appointed someone who's best hope was to replicate what Puel had done, not what Pochettino had done. So it was always going to fail. So they reverted to Hughes; yet another safe pair of hands. Or so we thought.

 

When the safe pair of hands takes us headlong towards relegation, and the 'gamble' hasn't paid off, where on earth do you look next? For me, they need to go back to basics. First, identify what style of football we want to play, then identify every team across the top leagues in Europe who play a similar style. And there's the starting point for the new manager search.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dr. Kucho

Dr. Kucho

Posted
Posted

Spoke to a Dutch ex pro football this week about Bosz. He said Bosz is a good manager but his problem is he doesnt adapt his teams to the opposition, if its Fulham at home or City away, Bosz will have his players attack and put pressure on the oppositions defence. Ajax a had slow start when Bosz took over, but because of the massive gap between Ajax, PSV and to a certain extend Feyenoord, they were still second once the players understood what Bosz wanted from them.

 

The guy I spoke to said we should go with Jardim, if he wants to come here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jonnyboy

Jonnyboy

Posted
Posted
Yes Puel sucked the spirit out of the squad, he was a dull bureaucrat of a manager, and unlike his predecessors, not an inspirational leader: the footballing equivalent of a Barnier or a Junckers or a Verhofstadt. He set us on the trajectory to doom, disguised thinly at the time by an easy Cup run and legacy Koeman influence.

 

How was it an easy cup run?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sydney_saint

sydney_saint

Posted
Posted (edited)

I will never forgive Puel for how he treated our Europa Cup campaign. He treated it as though it was normal for us to be in a European competition- maybe because he personally was used to it. That treats the club and fans with utter disrespect. We were never going to be qualifying for Europe year in year out despite what some of the club may have tried to lead us to believe. We were always going to fall down to our usual level, as we have done so, and it may be over a decade again till we are back in the competition. With an Inter side on its knees we should have qualified, going on a decent European cup run that would still be etched in our memories rather than us all reflecting back with resentment. Yes we didn't have a god damn right to qualify, and had we given everything out on the pitch and gone out I could have lived with it and moved on. I'm sure we all can. When it really comes down to it I don't think many of us are that unrealistic- all clubs have a few fans that dip towards the deluded side of the scale. But we didn't. He butchered a rare and valuable moment for us.

 

He also had the arrogance to rip apart a system that had worked for our players in finishing 6th. A genuinely good manager will tinker with what they have got and seek to improve it, especially if the team is on an upwards curve. FFS we had just come out of a season with Ranieri winning the league doing just that! He didn't have to look far for inspiration. Yes we lost Mane and Pelle, big losses of course. But let's not forget the rest of the team were used to playing in a certain way that delivered results. Again a good manager would have found a way to absorb those losses without impacting so many of the other players. Most of the players dropped in confidence, some still have not recovered.

 

And the final straw was those final 10 games. There was abit of good will, me included, after that cup final that he could have built a bit of momentum. With no fear of relegation he could have let the hand break off and let the players express themselves. I'll tell you know if we had finished 12th but were playing free flowing football he would not have got sacked. Instead it got worse, boring, dull unadventurous football. St Marys lost its formidable vibe, heck we couldn't score let alone win. This still plagues us. Effectively in one season he lost two opportunities to build on existing momentum and squandered both of them. That is when you know you don't have a manager who can take you further, and if he had stayed we would have dropped a little further, and a little further. Not as badly as we have done perhaps, but that is more of a reflection of other appointments.

 

As for a new manager- absolutely. With the exception of Burnley, most of the teams that have over achieved the last few years tend to play high intensity, organised pressing football, recognised ours dropped off a bit with Koeman but was still definitely present. Puel, Pellegrino and Hughes- common denominator beyond all being **** is that none of them do this.

Edited by sydney_saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Didcot Saint

Didcot Saint

Posted
Posted
I will never forgive Puel for how he treated our Europa Cup campaign. He treated it as though it was normal for us to be in a European competition- maybe because he personally was used to it. That treats the club and fans with utter disrespect. We were never going to be qualifying for Europe year in year out despite what some of the club may have tried to lead us to believe. We were always going to fall down to our usual level, as we have done so, and it may be over a decade again till we are back in the competition. With an Inter side on its knees we should have qualified, going on a decent European cup run that would still be etched in our memories rather than us all reflecting back with resentment. Yes we didn't have a god damn right to qualify, and had we given everything out on the pitch and gone out I could have lived with it and moved on. I'm sure we all can. When it really comes down to it I don't think many of us are that unrealistic- all clubs have a few fans that dip towards the deluded side of the scale. But we didn't. He butchered a rare and valuable moment for us.

 

He also had the arrogance to rip apart a system that had worked for our players in finishing 6th. A genuinely good manager will tinker with what they have got and seek to improve it, especially if the team is on an upwards curve. FFS we had just come out of a season with Ranieri winning the league doing just that! He didn't have to look far for inspiration. Yes we lost Mane and Pelle, big losses of course. But let's not forget the rest of the team were used to playing in a certain way that delivered results. Again a good manager would have found a way to absorb those losses without impacting so many of the other players. Most of the players dropped in confidence, some still have not recovered.

 

And the final straw was those final 10 games. There was abit of good will, me included, after that cup final that he could have built a bit of momentum. With no fear of relegation he could have let the hand break off and let the players express themselves. I'll tell you know if we had finished 12th but were playing free flowing football he would not have got sacked. Instead it got worse, boring, dull unadventurous football. St Marys lost its formidable vibe, heck we couldn't score let alone win. This still plagues us. Effectively in one season he lost two opportunities to build on existing momentum and squandered both of them. That is when you know you don't have a manager who can take you further, and if he had stayed we would have dropped a little further, and a little further. Not as badly as we have done perhaps, but that is more of a reflection of other appointments.

 

As for a new manager- absolutely. With the exception of Burnley, most of the teams that have over achieved the last few years tend to play high intensity, organised pressing football, recognised ours dropped off a bit with Koeman but was still definitely present. Puel, Pellegrino and Hughes- common denominator beyond all being **** is that none of them do this.

 

Absolutely bang on

Link to comment
Share on other sites
beatlesaint

beatlesaint

Posted
Posted
I will never forgive Puel for how he treated our Europa Cup campaign. He treated it as though it was normal for us to be in a European competition- maybe because he personally was used to it. That treats the club and fans with utter disrespect. We were never going to be qualifying for Europe year in year out despite what some of the club may have tried to lead us to believe. We were always going to fall down to our usual level, as we have done so, and it may be over a decade again till we are back in the competition. With an Inter side on its knees we should have qualified, going on a decent European cup run that would still be etched in our memories rather than us all reflecting back with resentment. Yes we didn't have a god damn right to qualify, and had we given everything out on the pitch and gone out I could have lived with it and moved on. I'm sure we all can. When it really comes down to it I don't think many of us are that unrealistic- all clubs have a few fans that dip towards the deluded side of the scale. But we didn't. He butchered a rare and valuable moment for us.

 

He also had the arrogance to rip apart a system that had worked for our players in finishing 6th. A genuinely good manager will tinker with what they have got and seek to improve it, especially if the team is on an upwards curve. FFS we had just come out of a season with Ranieri winning the league doing just that! He didn't have to look far for inspiration. Yes we lost Mane and Pelle, big losses of course. But let's not forget the rest of the team were used to playing in a certain way that delivered results. Again a good manager would have found a way to absorb those losses without impacting so many of the other players. Most of the players dropped in confidence, some still have not recovered.

 

And the final straw was those final 10 games. There was abit of good will, me included, after that cup final that he could have built a bit of momentum. With no fear of relegation he could have let the hand break off and let the players express themselves. I'll tell you know if we had finished 12th but were playing free flowing football he would not have got sacked. Instead it got worse, boring, dull unadventurous football. St Marys lost its formidable vibe, heck we couldn't score let alone win. This still plagues us. Effectively in one season he lost two opportunities to build on existing momentum and squandered both of them. That is when you know you don't have a manager who can take you further, and if he had stayed we would have dropped a little further, and a little further. Not as badly as we have done perhaps, but that is more of a reflection of other appointments.

 

As for a new manager- absolutely. With the exception of Burnley, most of the teams that have over achieved the last few years tend to play high intensity, organised pressing football, recognised ours dropped off a bit with Koeman but was still definitely present. Puel, Pellegrino and Hughes- common denominator beyond all being **** is that none of them do this.

 

This all day long......perhaps those that think Puel was wonderful need think about this !

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lord Duckhunter

Lord Duckhunter

Posted
Posted
On the button, Sydney - Trying to draw at home to that Israeli side and the tail off with dire football when safe being the low points of a strange season.

Also I suppose not going for the jugular in the San Siro, a great trip except the result.

 

If only he’d shown the same intent that Koeman did against Midtjylland eh. If there’s any missed opportunity in Europe that was it.

 

Whilst we’re on the subject of comparisons Sheffield Utd was pretty dire, another missed opportunity.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pamplemousse

Pamplemousse

Posted
Posted
I will never forgive Puel for how he treated our Europa Cup campaign. He treated it as though it was normal for us to be in a European competition- maybe because he personally was used to it. That treats the club and fans with utter disrespect. We were never going to be qualifying for Europe year in year out despite what some of the club may have tried to lead us to believe. We were always going to fall down to our usual level, as we have done so, and it may be over a decade again till we are back in the competition. With an Inter side on its knees we should have qualified, going on a decent European cup run that would still be etched in our memories rather than us all reflecting back with resentment. Yes we didn't have a god damn right to qualify, and had we given everything out on the pitch and gone out I could have lived with it and moved on. I'm sure we all can. When it really comes down to it I don't think many of us are that unrealistic- all clubs have a few fans that dip towards the deluded side of the scale. But we didn't. He butchered a rare and valuable moment for us.

 

He also had the arrogance to rip apart a system that had worked for our players in finishing 6th. A genuinely good manager will tinker with what they have got and seek to improve it, especially if the team is on an upwards curve. FFS we had just come out of a season with Ranieri winning the league doing just that! He didn't have to look far for inspiration. Yes we lost Mane and Pelle, big losses of course. But let's not forget the rest of the team were used to playing in a certain way that delivered results. Again a good manager would have found a way to absorb those losses without impacting so many of the other players. Most of the players dropped in confidence, some still have not recovered.

 

And the final straw was those final 10 games. There was abit of good will, me included, after that cup final that he could have built a bit of momentum. With no fear of relegation he could have let the hand break off and let the players express themselves. I'll tell you know if we had finished 12th but were playing free flowing football he would not have got sacked. Instead it got worse, boring, dull unadventurous football. St Marys lost its formidable vibe, heck we couldn't score let alone win. This still plagues us. Effectively in one season he lost two opportunities to build on existing momentum and squandered both of them. That is when you know you don't have a manager who can take you further, and if he had stayed we would have dropped a little further, and a little further. Not as badly as we have done perhaps, but that is more of a reflection of other appointments.

 

As for a new manager- absolutely. With the exception of Burnley, most of the teams that have over achieved the last few years tend to play high intensity, organised pressing football, recognised ours dropped off a bit with Koeman but was still definitely present. Puel, Pellegrino and Hughes- common denominator beyond all being **** is that none of them do this.

 

Complete and utter garbage. You should try and admit that you were wrong at the time, but there is simply no comparison between Puel and Pellegrino/Hughes - yet not too much difference between the players all three had at their disposal. You've written quite a lot but have managed to embarrass yourself with demonstrating your complete lack of footballing knowledge, congratulations, that takes some doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tajjuk

tajjuk

Posted
Posted

I'd imagine any system would need changing if you had just lost your two best goalscorers and hadn't really replaced them, or replaced them with different sorts of players.

 

IIRC of that season, in terms of chances created, shots, possession etc. we were basically the best outside the top 6, we just consistently did not put away our chances which hampered our progress.

 

I find the slack Puel got baffling, not only at the time but in hindsight as well you can clearly see the difference between a competent manager like Puel and the two useless ones we have had since. He was no Poch and never would be but people are making him out to be far worse than he was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Supersubpuckett

Supersubpuckett

Posted
Posted
I will never forgive Puel for how he treated our Europa Cup campaign. He treated it as though it was normal for us to be in a European competition- maybe because he personally was used to it. That treats the club and fans with utter disrespect. We were never going to be qualifying for Europe year in year out despite what some of the club may have tried to lead us to believe. We were always going to fall down to our usual level, as we have done so, and it may be over a decade again till we are back in the competition. With an Inter side on its knees we should have qualified, going on a decent European cup run that would still be etched in our memories rather than us all reflecting back with resentment. Yes we didn't have a god damn right to qualify, and had we given everything out on the pitch and gone out I could have lived with it and moved on. I'm sure we all can. When it really comes down to it I don't think many of us are that unrealistic- all clubs have a few fans that dip towards the deluded side of the scale. But we didn't. He butchered a rare and valuable moment for us.

 

He also had the arrogance to rip apart a system that had worked for our players in finishing 6th. A genuinely good manager will tinker with what they have got and seek to improve it, especially if the team is on an upwards curve. FFS we had just come out of a season with Ranieri winning the league doing just that! He didn't have to look far for inspiration. Yes we lost Mane and Pelle, big losses of course. But let's not forget the rest of the team were used to playing in a certain way that delivered results. Again a good manager would have found a way to absorb those losses without impacting so many of the other players. Most of the players dropped in confidence, some still have not recovered.

 

And the final straw was those final 10 games. There was abit of good will, me included, after that cup final that he could have built a bit of momentum. With no fear of relegation he could have let the hand break off and let the players express themselves. I'll tell you know if we had finished 12th but were playing free flowing football he would not have got sacked. Instead it got worse, boring, dull unadventurous football. St Marys lost its formidable vibe, heck we couldn't score let alone win. This still plagues us. Effectively in one season he lost two opportunities to build on existing momentum and squandered both of them. That is when you know you don't have a manager who can take you further, and if he had stayed we would have dropped a little further, and a little further. Not as badly as we have done perhaps, but that is more of a reflection of other appointments.

 

As for a new manager- absolutely. With the exception of Burnley, most of the teams that have over achieved the last few years tend to play high intensity, organised pressing football, recognised ours dropped off a bit with Koeman but was still definitely present. Puel, Pellegrino and Hughes- common denominator beyond all being **** is that none of them do this.

 

although i think puel is a better manager than mope and hughes, i agree with this summary. i could never understand why he moved away from our 4231 pressing style, especially as the squad was built around this type of play. i would have liked to see him try redmond and austin in the mane and pelle roles as i'm sure the football would have been better....rather than the tedious diamond borefest he went with for a while.

 

all water under the bridge now though and the club have contrived to make the situation even worse since he was sacked (only 18 months ago!!). feels as though we are in a 'managed decline' situation rather than a club with the ambition and resources to push for more top 10 finishes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Millbrook Saint

Millbrook Saint

Posted
Posted
although i think puel is a better manager than mope and hughes, i agree with this summary. i could never understand why he moved away from our 4231 pressing style, especially as the squad was built around this type of play. i would have liked to see him try redmond and austin in the mane and pelle roles as i'm sure the football would have been better....rather than the tedious diamond borefest he went with for a while.

 

all water under the bridge now though and the club have contrived to make the situation even worse since he was sacked (only 18 months ago!!). feels as though we are in a 'managed decline' situation rather than a club with the ambition and resources to push for more top 10 finishes.

 

Exactly this, and whilst the club does this they expect us to pay out for season tickets. The club are mugging us off and I resent it, I pay over £1000 a year for me and my daughter, for what exactly? I can take not winning every week, but what i can't take is this total incompetence from manager, to recruitment up to ownership, all the while we get to pay for the experience.

 

Ms Liebherr has a lot to answer for, how she can show her face is beyond me, she's shafted each and everyone of us whilst using our love of her dad to deflect from herself. She's got her grubby mits on the money, now she should just feck off, of course she won't whilst she still has a 20% stake in the club, which she only has because our skint owner couldn't afford the price the greedy ***** wanted.

 

The club is royally fooked, this may well take a generation to get over

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted

Still people are *****ing about Puel yet we finished 8th and did brilliantly well in the cup final. There really is no pleasing some people. If Puel had stayed I think we would still be a mid table side, but we will never know because the club bottled it. We had four consequatibe top 10 finishes but you wouldn’t know it to read the doom and gloom on here at the time. Now we really have something to moan about and many of the wrist slitters have vanished. Go figure?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sydney_saint

sydney_saint

Posted
Posted (edited)
Complete and utter garbage. You should try and admit that you were wrong at the time, but there is simply no comparison between Puel and Pellegrino/Hughes - yet not too much difference between the players all three had at their disposal. You've written quite a lot but have managed to embarrass yourself with demonstrating your complete lack of footballing knowledge, congratulations, that takes some doing.

 

Strange, I don't feel embarrassed? What exactly am I meant to be embarrassed about? I wrote out my arguments clearly even if you disagree, though quite a few seem to agree with me. Perhaps it is you who should be embarrassed by writing a reasonably aggressive response while barely articulating why the response lacks 'a total understanding of footballing knowledge'. Even Puel himself must have realised he made an error by ripping up our style of play by changing from the diamond back to the 4231 later on in the season. Unfortunately I do not feel he really knew how to implement it effectively and much of the mentality of the players was still to move it sideways and moving the ball to reduce risk of losing it rather than to score goals. I do think Puel is a much better manager than the two we have had. More than happy to admit that.

 

fwiw I was upset with Koeman missing the opportunity in his season competing in Europa, particularly furious with Wanyama, but more than made up for it by qualifying again, achieving a 6th place finish and playing some good football mostly along the way.

Edited by sydney_saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kwsaint

kwsaint

Posted
Posted

Meanwhile, back on the topic of the thread.

 

Times today reporting that we are looking to sell players in January to raise funds for replacements, as there is no extra money. The only problem with this is that the players that we want rid of (Forster, Long etc) will not bring in much cash.

Also reporting that we will not be looking at managers currently in post as we wont pay the release fees. So only looking at those currently out of work. MH clearly on borrowed time.

 

Really cant see this season ending well

 

(Any chance of a separate thread on Puel, so that I don't have to read any more about it?)

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...