The Daily Echo are reporting that Saints are not factoring in possible interest in Claude Puel from other clubs in making their decision about his future, if so then why the delay ?

The Daily Echo who presumably are closer to the club than any other media outlet have run a story this morning that Saints are not waiting to receive an offer from another club for Claude Puel's services in making their decision on whether he stays or goes.

They say any decision made will not be about whether they can escape from his contract without paying him off or indeed receive compensation for his services, it will purely be on footballing merits.

The Echo article states

"Vice-chairman of football Les Reed is still mulling over the best way ahead with Ross Wilson, and is determined not to rush into a decision that they might regret."

"Saints do keep a shortlist of potential managerial targets should they end up needing to find a new boss, but the club will want to be sure they can land who they would want should they opt to make a change after one season under Puel."

That is fine, but with the season now having been over for two weeks you would have thought that the club would have already been able to make that decision.

They surely would not have been unaware of the issues surrounding Puel both on the pitch and off it with a growing proportion of the supporter base becoming disillusioned with the manager as the season petered out with Puel making as many baffling selection and tactical decisions as he did in the first half of the season.

Add to that the fact that a larger proportion than normal number of season ticket holders have failed to renew and the failure of the club to make a decision either way is worrying.

If they were going to keep Puel then they should have publicly backed their man and stood firm against the dissenters in the fanbase, the fact that they are still mulling things over and more to the point prepared to intimate to the press that fact is leading some to believe that they do not know what they are doing.

If they were going to sack Puel then they should also have done it swiftly and quickly in a professional manner, at the moment many are thinking that they are waiting for Saint- Etienne to make the decision for them and not only save them face but money.

Indeed surely that fact they haven't made the decision cannot be pleasing to Claude Puel who has now gone on holiday not knowing whether he will have a job when he comes back, in fact this further strengthens the theory that Les Reed is hoping that another club comes in, what would you do if you were Claude Puel, knowing my current employer was unsure about me and maybe about to sack me I would secure my future if another job was offered.

So what we have is a situation where no one is actually looking like they know what they are doing, Les Reed and his backroom team look like they are indecisive and unable to act, almost as if they are a rabbit caught in the headlights and unable to move.

In fact the situation looks so farcical and unreal that the only real hope is that it is actually some sort of smokescreen to allow Saints to go after a replacement for Puel under the radar, as it would be the case that if Puel was sacked then not only would it become a circus, but it could alert other clubs considering a change of manager and likely to go after the same targets as us, to suddenly get their act in gear.

In fairness to Les Reed a man who has come under fire literally every summer, although at times it may seem as if he is not in control, he has usually come through and although it may look like he is lacking strategy, things turn out for the best, now that cannot just be down to luck.

The reality at the moment though is that the situation appears to be caught in flux with the club unsure what to do for the best, their hearts telling them that they do not want to sack a manager for the first time in the era post Cortese after a year, but their heads telling them that the situation is getting worse not better.

Photo: Action Images

pete_boggs added 11:08 - Jun 3 I would imagine Puel is ecstatic with Reed's public vote of confidence and can't wait to work with him again next season. Well done Les!
0

Dellwizard added 11:31 - Jun 3 Maybe it's a case of sounding out a few managers on their list of replacements first, to see if the right ones would be interested in a move to St Marys. Before giving Puel the heave ho ! If they can't get their man, they will hold on to Puel.
4

BaselSaint added 12:27 - Jun 3 They always have at least two managers in their sights at all times, it's what they do. Reckon Les is playing for time before the announcement that Claude stays.
0

SaintMalta added 12:43 - Jun 3 They have always kept things as quiet as possible (which is right) and even with the recruitment of Puel they were not far off the mark. This is shown in the split in the fans views of the season! IMO we were not good enough, 8th was good but we were too close points wise to 17th and so far from 7th and the football was so dire most of the time but brilliant on the odd occasion which means we have a capable team. IMO they like to do things in a business manor not a football manor so all we can do is wait and I think we will find out that we have a new manager. SFC do not like advertising prospective recruitment's and although it bugs us to hell and back, it is the right thing! Sit tight, I'm enjoying the sun in Malta and we wait for the official word.

3

highfield49 added 12:55 - Jun 3 Once again the supporters are left completely in the dark and being fed nutrients in the manner of the mushroom. In trying to work out what on earth is going on I wonder if the club want to keep Puel but he isn't sure about staying, for family reasons or whatever. That would make some sense if he's been given a deadline to decide but no sense at all if there is a risk of missing out on a quality replacement in the interim. I reckon that Puel's replacement is already in place and he's been given a "holiday" to sort out a job elsewhere. Any other guesses?

3

sidsaint added 13:21 - Jun 3 This is becoming another normal summer situation for the club where the board seem to have no plan . It usually results in very little business at the beginning of the transfer market and a scramble to get things done at the end. Compare this with the speed of Man City who seem to know what/who they want and are going for it.Maybe this is the reason why season ticket renewals are down as supporters think "here we go again".

4

stmichael added 13:53 - Jun 3 Saints in summer chaos shock. Who would have thought it? Winging it again..
2

saintpp added 14:07 - Jun 3 Or perhaps they are just going to keep him and not get involved with answering to media speculation which would make sense,they dont have to come out say they are keeping him. But they could end any speculation by just stating Puel will be our manager next season which they havent done.
3

halftimeorange added 14:14 - Jun 3 I think too many supporters can't determine whether the season was a "disappointment" or a "failure". Many have correctly identified the baffling team selections and negative play as significant. We can speculate all we like over what the board and Claude respectively think but, in reality, we haven't got a clue. I can well believe that ST renewals are down but one exciting signing in either the managerial or playing department will change all that. One thing's for sure - Les Reed won't be going anywhere unless he's headhunted. Would that be so strange for a man who's seen our club rise from League 1 to be consistent top ten EPL finishers in a decade? Why say the board doesn't know what it's doing? All the people on it have enjoyed successful careers and from Katerina down I can't believe that any of them would want a black mark on their records. Part of Claude's problem is his lack of charisma and limited spoken English following on from the urbane Ronald Koeman but not once have I heard him give anything other than honest, sometimes guarded interview. His background, personality, playing style and ambition would have been thoroughly researched by the board before he was brought in. We don't know what his brief was and whether he's underperformed. We don't know what his KPI's were and what was said in his regular reviews. My own view is that 2015/16 warranted my expectations to be high. I didn't factor in RK's departure, Jose's wish to be away, VVD's injury and a new manager trying to establish himself with other people's players. Even his own man, Jeremy Pied, was soon injured. This was a strange season but not a failure measured against all those clubs who finished below us but it was disappointing in that we didn't finish closer to the seven clubs above. I still have faith in the board to get things more right than wrong, with or without Claude Puel and VVD. Running a business like Saints to a consistently reasonable level requires more than just a chequebook. And sometimes it's best to say nothing for a long time and then say nothing.

4

SaintBrock added 14:44 - Jun 3 Let's remember that Puel was Reed's third choice to replace Koeman so it shouldn't be that difficult for him to find somebody at least as good as Puel so why hang on to Puel as a fall back option? OK, you can also argue that Reed has time enough to make an informed choice of replacement before players return from training on July 1st and the transfer window opens. You can also argue that Puel has a contract for two more years so there is nothing to be discussed so no need to reassure him. I prefer Ockham's razor which is a principle from philosophy. Suppose there exist two explanations for an occurrence. In this case, the simpler one is usually better. Another way of saying it is that the more assumptions you have to make, the more unlikely an explanation is. I think Les has chickened out and Puel is staying. He lacks the nobility to expose his reputation once again. He knows he has burned his fingers with Puel. Will had Reed sussed out long ago! To sack, or not to sack: that is the question: Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, Or to take arms against a sea of troubles...

3

bstokesaint added 00:43 - Jun 4 To be fair Nick it's like the first week in June and the tone of this report feels a little bit OTT. Surely if Puel is under contract this could just be a non story. Basically all we know that is that any talk of the manager being unsettled is rumoured and I'm not totally convinced that just because a sector of the fanbase aren't very happy that the board should move accordingly.

1

bstokesaint added 00:50 - Jun 4 It would be nice to make moves like Man C for new players, but I'm not sure that it goes down the same at The Etihad. Board: "Have you identified any new players for next season?" Manager: "Yeah 5/6 that might help us bring in some silverwa. What's my budget?" Board: "Budget?!"
5

SaintBrock added 10:22 - Jun 4 This of course is when you wish SFC was a Plc and not privately owned, then we could be shareholders and have a right to know what' going on. Kreuger and his comms team have really let us down this year and the sooner they badger off the better. I may have made my last visit to St Mary's for the time being as the ST deadline came and went and Puel & Black are still here. Guess I've lost my old seat now. Not my loss 'though is it.

4

dirk_doone added 10:25 - Jun 4 We know from the last year what a ditherer Les Reed is. If he does wait for long time for Puel to find another job we can expect more dithering and an uninspiring managerial appointment.The main focus like last summer, will be on selling our best players.
7

Whiteknight added 12:08 - Jun 4 The issue is very clear. St. Etienne are rumoured to be considering appointing Puel and he is rumoured to want to return to France. The decision is meant to take place tomorrow 5th June. If this happens we would be due compensation. If we sack Puel we would have to pay compensation. By delaying sacking him Saints could be between £2 and £5 million better off. The lack of announcement is purely down to commercial reasons and actually makes a lot of sense and there is no conspiracy!

1

bstokesaint added 13:48 - Jun 4 Whiteknight your angle is by far the most logical and to me seems the most sensible. Are you sure that this meeting is due to happen tomorrow. You come across as IDK.
0

Whiteknight added 14:47 - Jun 4 Bstokesaint - sorry but I'm about as far from IDK as you can get! However, it just seems common sense to me that Saints can make money but not sacking Puel too quickly - it's a business decision.
0

SanMarco added 22:47 - Jun 4 What's IDK ???
1

Whiteknight added 10:26 - Jun 5 In Da Know - it's what us 50 something WASPs who are down with the kids say or it's Ian Duncan K. Either way I thought he meant in the know and I know nothing (in a Manuel voice).
0

SanMarco added 11:13 - Jun 6 Thanks for clearing that up Whiteknight!
0

Blogs 31 bloggers

Port Vale Polls