Ricardo has played in numerous potions this season, right back, right wing and behind Vardy, I'm any decent manager could of thought up a way of utilising a player with his ability into a formation at the time of the King sub.
Incidentally, if you want to criticise Puel by saying that he's coached all the creativity and belief out of his attacking players, you may well have a point. But (James aside), I don't think his personnel choices and substitutions were the problem yesterday. The players he chose largely didn't perform anywhere near what anyone would expect of them.
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 55 seconds ago
Incidentally, if you want to criticise Puel by saying that he's coached all the creativity and belief out of his attacking players, you may well have a point. But (James aside), I don't think his personnel choices and substitutions were the problem yesterday. The players he chose largely didn't perform anywhere near what anyone would expect of them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And he takes responsibility for that because that’s what he’s paid for. To get performances and results.
He should have had a stronger bench, he needed to understand that we were crying out for pace and width far earlier than he did yesterday and do something about it.
YH - I suppose a 4-1-4-1 is a possibility, with Maddison and Ghezzal behind Iheanacho.
BS - I thought we were crying out for someone who could actually control a football more than pace and width. When he brought Gray on (pace and width), he contributed naff all.
“ One thing you can guarantee from King is that he'll try for you.”
Who didn’t try?
TB - That comment is part of a longer discussion on whether Silva should have been on the bench or not. My thought was that Silva's head wasn't necessarily in the right place if he's looking to leave and therefore Puel wasn't necessarily wrong to leave him out in favour of King.
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 3 minutes ago
BS - I thought we were crying out for someone who could actually control a football more than pace and width. When he brought Gray on (pace and width), he contributed naff all.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well we all know Gray is hit and miss. Look when he brought Maddison on things started improving - it’s not hard to figure out how to change things up and that if you bring on more attacking minded players then you should see more chances being created
No excuse for starting with James and Choudhury yesterday against Newport. Bonkers
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 1 minute ago
TB - That comment is part of a longer discussion on whether Silva should have been on the bench or not. My thought was that Silva's head wasn't necessarily in the right place if he's looking to leave and therefore Puel wasn't necessarily wrong to leave him out in favour of King.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We don’t know he is looking to leave or not. This isn’t a Mahrez situation, no one is in for him, there is speculation because Puel never plays him.
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 3 minutes ago
TB - That comment is part of a longer discussion on whether Silva should have been on the bench or not. My thought was that Silva's head wasn't necessarily in the right place if he's looking to leave and therefore Puel wasn't necessarily wrong to leave him out in favour of King.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, it was a question of the whole team, who didn’t try, who didn’t give their all?
TB - I don't think there was anyone who deliberately didn't give their all. This wasn't a Neil Danns situation. I do think many players weren't playing at their best though, or weren't entirely switched on, which is a different thing.
BS - I thought he was. I don't have any specific articles or links though, and I'm not about to go searching for them. I'll take that t*rd through my letterbox before you ask.
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 1 minute ago
BS - I thought he was. I don't have any specific articles or links though, and I'm not about to go searching for them. I'll take that t*rd through my letterbox before you ask.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it’s on its way.....
I've never actually had the pleasure of a t*rd through my letterbox before. Although I did once have the John Gee equivalent, which was to run a fox hunt through my back garden.
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 2 seconds ago
I've never actually had the pleasure of a t*rd through my letterbox before. Although I did once have the John Gee equivalent, which was to run a fox hunt through my back garden.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The John Gee equivalent would be to post a used copy of yesterday’s ‘economist’ through your letterbox.
DM much better put than me there is a stat doing the rounds showing how many changes where made by other managers the players must take the blame apart from James.
Dunge - you’ve just been endorsed by Nev. I imagine that’s like Boris Johnson flying the flag for Brexit
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 15 minutes ago
TB - I don't think there was anyone who deliberately didn't give their all. This wasn't a Neil Danns situation. I do think many players weren't playing at their best though, or weren't entirely switched on, which is a different thing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t really get a discussion about the players or blame put on them then, now if they didn’t give their all that’s different.
Lack of fitness, defensive tactics, one up front, there are a whole host of questions to ask when a good amount of those on show might slip easily into the first team as a replacement with the other quality around them but will struggle with a whole host of other underperformers in one go!
Puel probably gave Andy King his minutes as a goodbye, Puel c@cked that up for him didn’t he!
comment by The Artist formerly known as Black Starr (U12353)
posted 7 minutes ago
Dunge - you’ve just been endorsed by Nev. I imagine that’s like Boris Johnson flying the flag for Brexit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well if we're going to bring politics into it then I'll just dismiss all of your concerns about Puel as: "Project Fear" and carry on in blissful ignorance.
We lost to Newport? Fake News! We actually won 2-0.
All the same anti Puel arguments how does James get match fit with three midfielders leaving excpet in games like these then ?
Credit to Newport and blaming puels bench is a joke Puels bench is because of recruitment over three years.
I though you all would be pleased he played so many of the Prem winning team
Its done its over but you enjoy your new stick to beat Puel with.
comment by Nevsaysagoal2city (U5194)
posted 2 minutes ago
All the same anti Puel arguments how does James get match fit with three midfielders leaving excpet in games like these then ?
Credit to Newport and blaming puels bench is a joke Puels bench is because of recruitment over three years.
I though you all would be pleased he played so many of the Prem winning team
Its done its over but you enjoy your new stick to beat Puel with.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is Puel accountable for anything is nevs eyes?
He is accountable but are the players accountable in your eyes ?
Of course they are, the performance was unacceptable but most people know that, but so was the managers performance and team selection.
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 2 hours, 17 minutes ago
Man City and Spurs /have/ strong teams by definition. Spurs' reserve striker bagged a hattrick.
The last substitution was one that probably should have happened after 30 minutes when James was blowing out of his backside, let alone 75. And the alternative was Mendy, who is certainly not more attacking than King. The player we needed yesterday was Iborra, but he's leaving.
I'm not saying Puel wasn't at fault at all - he picks the side, he's responsible for the coaching, he is judged by results. But I still don't see really what he did yesterday that other managers wouldn't have done - even as far as picking a "favourite" in Matty James that he shouldn't have done.
As for picking two defensive midfielders, the way Newport were cutting us open in the first half more suggested that he needed another rather than fewer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
With regards to you last point, the phrase “defending from the front” springs to mind. A Puel team does none of it.
Sign in if you want to comment
That was fun not.
Page 2 of 3
posted on 7/1/19
Ricardo has played in numerous potions this season, right back, right wing and behind Vardy, I'm any decent manager could of thought up a way of utilising a player with his ability into a formation at the time of the King sub.
posted on 7/1/19
Incidentally, if you want to criticise Puel by saying that he's coached all the creativity and belief out of his attacking players, you may well have a point. But (James aside), I don't think his personnel choices and substitutions were the problem yesterday. The players he chose largely didn't perform anywhere near what anyone would expect of them.
posted on 7/1/19
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 55 seconds ago
Incidentally, if you want to criticise Puel by saying that he's coached all the creativity and belief out of his attacking players, you may well have a point. But (James aside), I don't think his personnel choices and substitutions were the problem yesterday. The players he chose largely didn't perform anywhere near what anyone would expect of them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And he takes responsibility for that because that’s what he’s paid for. To get performances and results.
He should have had a stronger bench, he needed to understand that we were crying out for pace and width far earlier than he did yesterday and do something about it.
posted on 7/1/19
YH - I suppose a 4-1-4-1 is a possibility, with Maddison and Ghezzal behind Iheanacho.
posted on 7/1/19
BS - I thought we were crying out for someone who could actually control a football more than pace and width. When he brought Gray on (pace and width), he contributed naff all.
posted on 7/1/19
“ One thing you can guarantee from King is that he'll try for you.”
Who didn’t try?
posted on 7/1/19
TB - That comment is part of a longer discussion on whether Silva should have been on the bench or not. My thought was that Silva's head wasn't necessarily in the right place if he's looking to leave and therefore Puel wasn't necessarily wrong to leave him out in favour of King.
posted on 7/1/19
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 3 minutes ago
BS - I thought we were crying out for someone who could actually control a football more than pace and width. When he brought Gray on (pace and width), he contributed naff all.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well we all know Gray is hit and miss. Look when he brought Maddison on things started improving - it’s not hard to figure out how to change things up and that if you bring on more attacking minded players then you should see more chances being created
No excuse for starting with James and Choudhury yesterday against Newport. Bonkers
posted on 7/1/19
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 1 minute ago
TB - That comment is part of a longer discussion on whether Silva should have been on the bench or not. My thought was that Silva's head wasn't necessarily in the right place if he's looking to leave and therefore Puel wasn't necessarily wrong to leave him out in favour of King.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We don’t know he is looking to leave or not. This isn’t a Mahrez situation, no one is in for him, there is speculation because Puel never plays him.
posted on 7/1/19
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 3 minutes ago
TB - That comment is part of a longer discussion on whether Silva should have been on the bench or not. My thought was that Silva's head wasn't necessarily in the right place if he's looking to leave and therefore Puel wasn't necessarily wrong to leave him out in favour of King.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, it was a question of the whole team, who didn’t try, who didn’t give their all?
posted on 7/1/19
TB - I don't think there was anyone who deliberately didn't give their all. This wasn't a Neil Danns situation. I do think many players weren't playing at their best though, or weren't entirely switched on, which is a different thing.
posted on 7/1/19
BS - I thought he was. I don't have any specific articles or links though, and I'm not about to go searching for them. I'll take that t*rd through my letterbox before you ask.
posted on 7/1/19
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 1 minute ago
BS - I thought he was. I don't have any specific articles or links though, and I'm not about to go searching for them. I'll take that t*rd through my letterbox before you ask.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it’s on its way.....
posted on 7/1/19
I've never actually had the pleasure of a t*rd through my letterbox before. Although I did once have the John Gee equivalent, which was to run a fox hunt through my back garden.
posted on 7/1/19
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 2 seconds ago
I've never actually had the pleasure of a t*rd through my letterbox before. Although I did once have the John Gee equivalent, which was to run a fox hunt through my back garden.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The John Gee equivalent would be to post a used copy of yesterday’s ‘economist’ through your letterbox.
posted on 7/1/19
DM much better put than me there is a stat doing the rounds showing how many changes where made by other managers the players must take the blame apart from James.
posted on 7/1/19
Dunge - you’ve just been endorsed by Nev. I imagine that’s like Boris Johnson flying the flag for Brexit
posted on 7/1/19
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 15 minutes ago
TB - I don't think there was anyone who deliberately didn't give their all. This wasn't a Neil Danns situation. I do think many players weren't playing at their best though, or weren't entirely switched on, which is a different thing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t really get a discussion about the players or blame put on them then, now if they didn’t give their all that’s different.
Lack of fitness, defensive tactics, one up front, there are a whole host of questions to ask when a good amount of those on show might slip easily into the first team as a replacement with the other quality around them but will struggle with a whole host of other underperformers in one go!
Puel probably gave Andy King his minutes as a goodbye, Puel c@cked that up for him didn’t he!
posted on 7/1/19
comment by The Artist formerly known as Black Starr (U12353)
posted 7 minutes ago
Dunge - you’ve just been endorsed by Nev. I imagine that’s like Boris Johnson flying the flag for Brexit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well if we're going to bring politics into it then I'll just dismiss all of your concerns about Puel as: "Project Fear" and carry on in blissful ignorance.
We lost to Newport? Fake News! We actually won 2-0.
posted on 7/1/19
All the same anti Puel arguments how does James get match fit with three midfielders leaving excpet in games like these then ?
Credit to Newport and blaming puels bench is a joke Puels bench is because of recruitment over three years.
I though you all would be pleased he played so many of the Prem winning team
Its done its over but you enjoy your new stick to beat Puel with.
posted on 7/1/19
comment by Nevsaysagoal2city (U5194)
posted 2 minutes ago
All the same anti Puel arguments how does James get match fit with three midfielders leaving excpet in games like these then ?
Credit to Newport and blaming puels bench is a joke Puels bench is because of recruitment over three years.
I though you all would be pleased he played so many of the Prem winning team
Its done its over but you enjoy your new stick to beat Puel with.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 7/1/19
Is Puel accountable for anything is nevs eyes?
posted on 7/1/19
He is accountable but are the players accountable in your eyes ?
posted on 7/1/19
Of course they are, the performance was unacceptable but most people know that, but so was the managers performance and team selection.
posted on 7/1/19
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 2 hours, 17 minutes ago
Man City and Spurs /have/ strong teams by definition. Spurs' reserve striker bagged a hattrick.
The last substitution was one that probably should have happened after 30 minutes when James was blowing out of his backside, let alone 75. And the alternative was Mendy, who is certainly not more attacking than King. The player we needed yesterday was Iborra, but he's leaving.
I'm not saying Puel wasn't at fault at all - he picks the side, he's responsible for the coaching, he is judged by results. But I still don't see really what he did yesterday that other managers wouldn't have done - even as far as picking a "favourite" in Matty James that he shouldn't have done.
As for picking two defensive midfielders, the way Newport were cutting us open in the first half more suggested that he needed another rather than fewer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
With regards to you last point, the phrase “defending from the front” springs to mind. A Puel team does none of it.
Page 2 of 3