Last 26 games

[st albans fox]

32 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

I'd love to know how they have a differing opinion to Puel's record against similar clubs then. I get why they got rid of Shakespeare as the honeymoon period soon wore off and we did look limited at the start of last season, but the same could be said under Puel. We were fantastic in his opening 10 games where we mixed up fast football with being more comfortable in possession (something we've been crying out for) but that has long gone now and somehow we've got worse defensively to boot.

Puel has the excuse that he is evolving the playing style - if he can no longer show evidence that he knows what he’s doing then we won’t hold back getting rid 

[Foxaholic ME]

On 17/09/2018 at 16:42, RumbleFox said:

I think you have confused the word "all" with the word "most"?  Unless you could please quote me the bit where I said we have been mid-table or lower for "all" of our history as I cannot seem to see it?  X

I  agree I should have quoted most . However  the main point of my argument is correct. We  have hardly been what I  call mid table with  the season over in Febuary. Apart  from the period I  quoted  we have mainly been fighting relegation  or promotion  from second tier I might  be different to you in considering seasons when we fought  relegation  won the last 3 games and finished  14th or thereabouts   as mid table. Was the great escape a mid table finish  In the years I have followed Leicester one of their virtues was they never finished  mid table  always something to play for. Last season  was one of the very few genuine  mid table finishes  since WW2  which was one of the reasons many  found boring this one could be the same.

[Foxaholic ME]

1 minute ago, Foxaholic ME said:

I  agree I should have quoted most . However  the main point of my argument is correct. We  have hardly been what I  call mid table with  the season over in Febuary. Apart  from the period I  quoted  we have mainly been fighting relegation  or promotion  from second tier I might  be different to you in considering seasons when we fought  relegation  won the last 3 games and finished  14th or thereabouts   as mid table. Was the great escape a mid table finish  In the years I have followed Leicester one of their virtues was they never finished  mid table  always something to play for. Last season  was one of the very few genuine  mid table finishes  since WW2  which was one of the reasons many  found boring this one could be the same.

 

Edited 18 September 2018 by Foxaholic ME

[Webbo]

I love the fact that people think if we hadn't won the league we'd be happy with the crap displays we've endured since January.

[RumbleFox]

2 hours ago, Foxaholic ME said:

I  agree I should have quoted most . However  the main point of my argument is correct. We  have hardly been what I  call mid table with  the season over in Febuary. Apart  from the period I  quoted  we have mainly been fighting relegation  or promotion  from second tier I might  be different to you in considering seasons when we fought  relegation  won the last 3 games and finished  14th or thereabouts   as mid table. Was the great escape a mid table finish  In the years I have followed Leicester one of their virtues was they never finished  mid table  always something to play for. Last season  was one of the very few genuine  mid table finishes  since WW2  which was one of the reasons many  found boring this one could be the same.

In all of our history we have mostly been a mid-table or lower team.  Mid-table here clearly meant in the top flight so a win in the Championship still puts us as "below" mid table in terms of the top flight.  I was not talking about boredom or excitement, I was talking about where we currently sit in the English league hierarchy.  I thought it was quite clear what I meant and that my general point was "in the grand scheme of things we are not doing too badly".  X

[MC Prussian]

To me, it's kind of a skewed argument using a mixture of this season's results (five games in) and the ones from last season.

You're using two different sets of tools and are comparing apples to oranges again.

 

I know I was frustrated last season, but...

 

Mid-December 2017 to May 2018 was already bad enough, and in Puel's defense, he's mostly had to work with a team that wasn't his AND deal with that Algerian winger situation also.

Trying to implement a strategy without one particular midfielder is a tough ask. But of course, some of the performances in that period were quite unforgivable.

 

Having said that, some of his decisions as of right now do baffle me. Why persist with Morgan? Why hasn't Puel be able to teach Pereira some defensive awareness yet? Why are we still playing with one recognized striker only? Why was Gray used as half-a-striker against Liverpool when he can't excel in that role at all? Why is Ndidi for example exempt from all criticism? What are Iborra and/or Silva thinking when they're left out?

Why do we have only one proper right winger/right midfielder in the form of Ghezzal? What's with Diabaté and his fall from grace?

Our outside midfielders have so far been rather ineffective and anonymous. They need to take on more responsibilty.

 

One would expect the manager to address these issues. Sooner than later.

Edited 18 September 2018 by MC Prussian