If you read social media then you would believe that Claude Puel is the most hated Southampton manager since Ian Branfoot, but is this mob mentality or has Puel done a good job under the circumstances, here we look at both sides of the story.

Social media brings out the worst in people, it enables them to spout off their views, often on the spur of the moment meaning that because the more conservative in the supporter base are not so outspoken that their view is the populist view.

The wisdom of crowds is an economic theory that suggests that it is not the populist or individual view that is often the most accurate, but that of the average.

ie That if the crowd at a county fair guessed the weight of a cow individually if their guesses were averaged the average was closer to the cow's true weight than the estimates of most crowd members.

That could be said of the views of football fans, it is not the wild comments aimed at an under fire football manager that are closest to the truth, but by taking the average and in these modern times it is usually only the extremist views that are heard.

If Manchester united had listened to their crowd back in 1989/90 season when Alex Ferguson had failed to win a trophy in three years then would they have gone on to their domination of English football for the next 20 years or so, the answer is probably not.

So are those shouting the odds on social media right or should we consider that a far bigger number are silent and that they may or may not feel the same way about the manager ?

In the interests of fair play lets take a look at the plus points of Claude Puel's reign and the areas that he has fallen down in.

Before we start though, let us see ourselves through the eyes of others, of the entire English game, only six other clubs would be considered to have had a better season than us, Everton being in Europe next season might not swap a defeat at Wembley for not going on a European tour, but ask a West Brom fan and he would tell you firmly that he would rather the Baggies had our season than theirs.

So the casual observer would look at our league position, our run in Europe and our appearance at Wembley and then say what have they got to moan about ! but then again they don't see what we see week in week out.

So let us look at the case for Claude Puel.

1. Jose Fonte, Puel walked into the job to a situation not of his making, before he had met Fonte, the players agent was trying to engineer a move out of the club for his client for no other reason than money, Puel was caught in the crossfire.

2. Puel was let down by Les Reed & his backroom team in August, they failed to land a striker who suited Puel's system, ie Gabbiadini or such and they failed to sign a decent central defender given the Fonte situation. This left the manager having to shoe horn in players up front to try and play his system who did not suit it.

3. Injury Issues, this was not in Puel's control, we have suffered the worst run of injuries of any club, right from the start we have had problems, be in Jeremy Pied, Charlie Austin, Virgil Van Dijk, Matt Targett, Alex McCarthy have all been long term injuries whilst the list of shorter team injuries has been endless.

4. Despite the above issues we go into the final games with a good chance of finishing 8th and a Wembley Cup Final appearance to our name, we would have bitten the proverbial hand off back in July for this season, on paper at least.

5. Puel was let down in the January transfer window by Les Reed's failure to replace Fonte with a quality central defender which was compounded by the injury to Virgil Van Dijk, if this had been dealt with then the second half of the season might have seen us win the League Cup and challenge Everton for 7th.

6. At times the Puel system looked to be exciting and score goals, without the issues mentioned he might have been able to play it to it's full ability, on it's day it scored goals and was attacking, but like Koeman's system it relied on having a strong defence, we did not have that.

7. Backroom staff, Koeman had a good team alongside him including Sammy Lee who knew the Premier League, Puel got Eric Black whose

All in all this season could have been different for Puel, perhaps he has just been an unlucky manager, certainly there are things he has done wrongly, but there are those who would say he has certainly done enough to suggest that given the breaks he could go on and be successful going forward, if he gets the team to a top ten finish and a Wembley final with all these issues that are out of his control, then what could he do with a full squad suited to the system.

Having looked at the case for Claude, now let's look at the other side of the coin and why people would consider that he is not the man for the job.

1. Communication, he does not come across well in interviews and his English is not the best, this seems to be the bug bear of many, but I will say in his defence that Mauricio Pochettino did not even try to speak in English publicly in 18 months at St Mary's , so this is perhaps not as big an issue as some would claim.

2. Rotation policy, this was applied too much in the first half of the season and to be blunt it seemed to bear no relation to the form of the players who were in and out of the team, he seemed unable to identify the core of the team and the benefits of keeping this intact and resting those around it rather than those in the core.

3. Lack of tactics, certainly at times Puel has remained too rigid, many substitutions have been like for like and have not been game changing, even when he has tried to change the formation mid match he has too often got it wrong as he did in the home game against Bournemouth which saw a game comfortably controlled for an hour suddenly seeing us hanging on for dear life and only spared defeat by the Cherries inability to his the target from close range.

3. Selections, strange at the best of times, players like to know where they stand, that if they play well they keep their place, with Puel form does not seem to be part of his selection process, Jordy Clasie found this out recently after coming back into the team, putting in a man of the match performance and scoring the winner at West Brom, his reward being to be dropped the next game and now not even in the squad for the last three games, Shane Long can point to similar treatment.

4. Martin Caceres, despite seeing his team go from one of the tightest in the Premier League to the worst in terms of goals against and shape since the injury to VVW, has not seen one single minute of first team action, Puel has seemingly been happy to see the defence leak goals and give away chances not taken week in week out and does not have an issue with this, despite having other options he could try.

5. Failure to adapt, Puel was let down by Les Reed in August in terms of a striker suited to his system, but he chose to enforce this system rigidly rather than adapt it to the squad he had, thus we had Nathan Redmond shoe horned in to the central striker spot when he was not suited to this role and Charlie Austin often forced to play wide before his injury.

6. Issues with the team. Recent interviews out of St Mary's have tried to give the impression that all is well between manager and his squad, but that is clearly not the case, Dusan Tadic's outburst and Shane Long's gestures at the bench after the substitution debacle suggested that they are not happy and surely Jordy Clasie cannot be enamoured of the way he is being treated, that is just on the surface and if that is what we can see, then what is below the water mark could well be more with rumours of rifts between other senior players, the board will know what is going on and whether this is as serious as the fans would claim or as insignificant as the club pr would have you believe.

7. Style of play. Our failure to score goals does not sit well with the crowd, on the face of it why we are not scoring goals is hard to pin point, at any given time we have at least 3 or 4 players on the pitch that are capable of getting 10 goals a season, the fact that none of them will is testament to the way the team is playing.

The issue at the moment is that the defence cannot handle breakaways, we either have to sit deep as we did at Liverpool and make sure that the opposition don't get space, in which case we can have a chance to keep a clean sheet, but this is at the expense of being able to commit men forward to attack, the game at Anfield was proving this point where we rarely got three men over the half way line in an attack and therefore could not muster one shot on target.

Puel has failed to adapt and try other formations, he has the options, he could play Bertrand in the middle of the defence, or Caceres or Martina or even Florin Gardos, but we have done the same thing and got the same result, we can either choose to defend in depth and protect the centre of defence from being ripped apart on the break or we can try and outscore them, when we have done that as we did at Chelsea and against Manchester City and Arsenal we look disjointed and have lost heavily.

8. Issues with the crowd, unfairly in my opinion Puel was being slagged off by a section of Saints support virtually two games into the season, I have always said that he should be given a fair crack of the whip, but a certain section decided that he was useless from word go for reasons that are unexplained, remember these are the same people who were on Pelle's back from word go and up till March of last year were telling anyone who cared to listen that Sadio Mane was the worst signing the club had every made, bizarrely the same people now claim the whole downfall of the club is down to selling the very players they detested.

The crowd should not be underestimated, season ticket sales must be slow at present and the board will be taking note of this, they know that so many are disillusioned with the manager and the style of play, the question is whether his position is retrievable.

9. Inconsistency. We have not won more than two games in a row and even that number only a couple of times, that tells you about the manager and his system, you can never predict a result week in week out because of the way that the team is selected, keep the core of a team and you can rotate it, you build team spirit and confidence, that in turn brings consistency.

So in summary, it is a sorry situation, some of which is not of the manager's own making, but plenty is, I said right up to recently that the manager should be judged on the full season, I said that he had the opportunity to show leadership qualities in the last 10 games or so and prove to the supporters and indeed his own squad that he knew what he was doing and in control of the situation.

It perhaps would not have seen us much better than we are, but he had to show that he had a way forward, that he has what it takes, it is in adversary that you see the mark of a man or in footballing terms a manager, I am afraid to say I don't see that in the way that Puel has handled the last two month's or so, anyone can pick eleven players for a team, but not everyone can pick the right eleven nor can anyone know when they need to change their original selection and what they need to do to get it right.

I am afraid that it is looking increasingly like Claude Puel's days are numbered at St Mary's, indeed they may have been for some time, there have been rumours going back to January that he was not happy in England, that he could not settle and wanted to move back to France.

If that is the case then perhaps he is going through the motions, perhaps he and the board already have a mutual agreement, but that they have also agreed that the best option was to see the season out and then part company amicably, certainly that would make sense and give the board the chance to make the right appointment after the season ends and their target perhaps becomes available.

It would have been hoped that perhaps Puel would have got a few points ended the season comfortably in the top ten and could have left with dignity, that now does not look like the case.

From the fans perspective we have to rely on the board to get things right, we owe them the chance to do so because they have never let us down before, of course they get things wrong and they perhaps have with Claude Puel, but as I have said in each of the last three summers, it is never about what has just happened, it is always about what you do next.

Saints fans need to have a little faith and realise that sometimes a step backwards needs to be taken to move forwards, the problem is we haven't seen a step backwards in 8 years, we have forgotten that every season cannot keep being better than the last, no club can ever do that.

When I see social media saying that this is the worse season ever with the worse team ever then I think that the person writing either hasn't been going very long or has a short memory, this is a decent squad being led badly, the league position backs that up in that we are inconsistent yet still 10th, I have seen far worse squads back in the late 80's and 90's to name but a few.

If this is a disastrous season then I wish we had had a few more !

Photo: Action Images

pete_boggs added 12:59 - May 12 You'll be isolated with your observations regarding Reed Nick. Most posters seem to only see what's in front of their face which is Puel and the players. I agree with your comments regarding the manager being let down with quality squad depth at the right time. The manager should be able to assemble a working unit from all members of the squad to be able to compete in each match as it comes up. The players have not been able to act well under his instructions. This shows that the squad is of not sufficient depth and quality for the top half of the premiership and there are only 2 or 3 players from the squad that would be desirable to a top half team. The main areas lacking in the squad are quality box to box attacking midfielders and accurate shooting quality up front. this is what would make a more enjoyable watch and until these problems are addressed the only bargaining tool the fans have is to withhold purchases of S/T's.

8

1885 added 13:30 - May 12 Although not always agreeing with all the opinions and points on this site, this article is really well written and thought provoking. As in this article; I feel split with both sides on the 'question' of Puel and his future at Saints. You have to be proud that Saints commit to youth and they were certainly thinking this when appointing Puel. I was at the game in Nice for Englands disaster against Iceland but talking to lots of French reporters as news broke of Saints interest in Puel, it was clear he offered something Saints fans wanted, a longer term prospect than the previous bitter experiances shown of 'Koeman the double headed snake' and the mute 'Poch'. He was renowned for youth development and it has to be remembered this takes time to see and achieve, begging the question should we be patient? However Puel also lacks that excitement and communication that allows for belief; can he communicate to his players, in an inspiring way, to get the most from all ages and personalities? I'm not convinced. ...at the moment. Saints are at another cross roads that will effect the future of the club and it’s supporters. With buy-outs, players values, commitment, management, transfers and the style of football all under scrutiny, lets stay calm, stay passionate and remember we are the Saints. We need to show the passion to help raise the team and remind them, Hull was a terrible game but the crowd hardly helped silently watching on as the passion from Hull rang out. If your angry, I suggest you put that passion into loud vocal backing, to show we are not a 'prawn sandwich' club, but a tight club who do things our way. I’m sure the board will be patient, as that has always been one of our strengths of the last decade, if they decide to replace Puel, I trust them; it will be for the right reasons, and certainly not one forced upon us. If he does stay, then we could re-inforce how a club should be run and supported, with loyalty, fearlessness, originality and passion. COYS.

7

petedoors1 added 13:37 - May 12 I think that Claude Puel is the worst Southampton manager since Ian Branfoot without doubt. He cant motivate the team, his tactics, his team rotation, his team selection, his interviews and his substitutions are terrible. Its PUEL OUT for me.
1

redandwhitedee added 13:51 - May 12 Personally i hated the football under Pardew, and also was not enamoured with watching Koeman's 'Lump it to pelle' style of play. Puel certainly would not have lost 6-1 at home to Liverpool as the wonderful Mr Koeman did. Puel has done well in his 1st season. the Prem lge is stronger by far this year than it was last year. He got us to the cup final by not only beating only prem lge teams all the way, but also not conceding a goal the entire way. I forget was it the wonderful Koeman or wonderful Poch who managed to lose to Sheff utd in 1/4 finals instead of such a feat ?? Players such as JWP, cedric, VVD, Bertrand, Davis, Yoshida, Romeu are blossoming under Puel - and all raised their games higher than under previous managers. I too am not happy with the attacking element, but Rome was not built in a day. Sometimes to develop as a team, you have to start at the back, get that right, then work forward. This manager lost possibly the best CB pairing in the league - and yet still replaced from within without any fuss or panic. He also lost his 1st choice striker early in the season - after he was already heading for a 20+ goal season. I don't think is his fault that Rodrigues and Long were unable to fill the void of Austin... They should have been more than capable given the money Puel's wonderful predecessors spent on those two players. Puel deserves another season or two absolutely. Well done.

3

DPeps added 14:06 - May 12 Just getting rid of Puel would be addressing the symptoms, not the cause
4

aceofthebase added 14:24 - May 12 Well said redandwhitedee! I think there is a lot of Koeman blindness.
5

ThereIn76 added 15:35 - May 12 Last season between 21 Nov and 9'Jan Saints won one match out of ten, lost at home to Stoke, Liverpool (1-6), Spurs and Palace, drew at home with Villa and lost away to Man City, Palace, West Ham and Norwich. But of course the only match in that spell that is remembered is the 4-0 win over Arsenal. Stability of staff and players would be lovely and Puel should stay.
0

SaintGeorge added 15:53 - May 12 Puel is rubbish, just total rubbish. Saints are can't score, can't defend but most unforgivably are totally dire to watch. This has been the worst season since Portvliedt and Wotte. Worse. It's just crap. This mush totally nailed it
0

SanMarco added 16:32 - May 12 I sense that a 'by mutual agreement' announcement may be imminent. Of course no-one in their right mind 'hates' Puel and I think he took over at a difficult time. Also I would agree on the comments on the quality of his support staff and he has not been that well backed by the transfer committee. Having said all that I would be pleased if he went. I agree with those who say that it won't solve certain other problems we have but this season has been deathly dull and very confusing. Yes, he has had injuries but so did his predecessors. It was his job to deal with that and he didn't. It also pays to remember that we SHOULD have won at Wembley so even his only major achievement was ultimately a failure. I don't like seeing managers being made scapegoats but my feeling is that he hasn't succeeded in the things that have been his responsibility. I am not shouting 'Puel Out' with a howl of anger but I do now want him to go.

4

Saintsfc added 18:44 - May 12 I can think of many many reasons not to continue with Puel next season (all are about him rather than this season) he's actually done a very good job. Comparing this season to Poch and Koeman would be insane, nothing about how Saints Fc is run suggests they want to better themselves each season, under those two managers what was achieved HAS to go down as over achieving. What club that wants to win trophies has this conversation at the end of each season. Q. Good season. How do we push on next year? A. I know, let's sell our best players. No club that wants to win has that conversation. I can't understand why Puel gets slated for saints situation. Slate Puel for being so overly protective over players, VVD Austin etc would not have been out this long at another club. Long story short, people who want Puel out for saints situation are deluded.

0

zonehead added 18:46 - May 12 He's made mistakes this season notably Europe which he was supposed to be experienced in, and although you say he didn't have the players to play his "system" whatever that is , he should be able to use the tools he has and the system he inherited was successful
0

bstokesaint added 19:00 - May 12 Saintsfc, have you ever considered the possibility that the club don't sit down and discuss who to sell, but instead players don't love the club in the way that you do and have the potential to earn much more money than you do? I'm more inclined to believe they talk amongst themselves and protect their own interests, leaving the club to do the same. What we need is a manager who can get the best out of what we have. I'm still on the fence with Puel, but I wouldn't be sad to see him go provided we got a quality replacement who could take some control, where there doesn't seem to be much right now. Good article by the way Nick. A well balanced argument.

2

Saintsfc added 19:04 - May 12 Bspoke that explains why the vast majority of players sign contract extensions? That is commitment. No club can contact that player without the clubs approval.
1

Saintsfc added 19:12 - May 12 Bstokesaint yes there some players out there that just want money, they are slowly making there way to China. Football is a well paid job full stop. A Ferrari cost 100k whether you earn 3mil or 20 mil. In my experience footballers want two things regular football at an ambitious club. All the elite players in world football (Maradona, Messi, xavi iniesta, cruyff, Beckenbauer etc etc etc did not play in the prem aka the league who pays the most! Just facts make of those facts what you choose to

1

bstokesaint added 19:37 - May 12 Saintsfc but the majority of those players you have mentioned also played for top European sides, some from kids and would't have stuck around at a club like Southampton! Contracts and contract extensions mean very little. They just ensure a player has more security and a club is better compensated. If you look at Everton as a comparison club both Lukaku and Stones wanted out despite what was considered to be an ambituous attempty by Everton to make a move on the Top 6. Both played regular football.

2

Saintsfc added 20:08 - May 12 Yeah good point bstokesaint..it's hard to categorise as they are humans all of which are different of course. In my opinion I believe a lot of ex saints players would still be at saints if Marcus/cortese partnership was around.. But who knows
2

law101 added 20:08 - May 12 The sad story of this season was summed up today for me on TalkSPORT! Adrian Durham compared us with West Brom and called us out for a negative and boring style of play! We have worked hard for 8 years to get a reputation as a good footballing side, with a clear style. We have never been afraid to have a go at the big teams and take the game to them. If you can't dare to dream against the big teams, what hope do you have as a supporter of teams outside the top 6?

4

Consigliere added 21:09 - May 12 "Better the devil you know?" or "Nothing ventured nothing gained- time for a change?" That (as this article demonstrates) is really the choice facing the club, and to be consistent with my last post about false dichotomy in football and the need for ambition, I should logically be in favour of a change, and be in the "Puel out!" camp. The fact that I am not is a reflection of the infuriating nature of the man. Sometimes - too often indeed - the team has been set up to be so boring as to be beyond watching, yet other times - the cup final and yes, the game last Wednesday - showed real ambition and flair even if it didn't work out in the end.. We have seen the best and the worst of Puel this season and it still isn't clear which is the real manager. Does he have the potential to unleash his inner Cavalier Claude or is he just Pusillanimous Puel? To be honest I just don't know, but I think we have seen enough (just enough) to think that with time it will be the former not the latter. He deserves a chance so in my view he should get another season to see if he can become the manager we all want. Lets come back to the debate in a year's time. I know this isn't a ringing endorsement but it is, I think, a realistic and fair view.

4

SaintPaulVW added 07:46 - May 13 This is a good summing up. I accept that he often been guilty of a boring style of play and this counts against him particularly in home fixtures. We seem to have made little progress in building attacks as a team this season. Again that counts against him as manager. Hopefully if he stays a few players can arrive to make his system work. Gabbiadini, VVD (subject to etc etc) and Austin fit should make things a bit easier. Seems like we complain about players leaving too soon but are quite happy to want to change a manager after one season. Opinions change, Mane really wasn't that well thought of after one season, but according to some after 2 he was one of the greatest players we ever sold. On balance I think Claude deserves another season. However if a mutual parting of the ways comes along, fair enough.

-2

Blogs 31 bloggers

Port Vale Polls