Saints have sacked Claude Puel, a decision that has pleased a large chunk of the fan base, but how will history judge ClaudePuel's one season at St Mary's ?

In many respects Claude Puel never stood a chance at Southampton Football Club, with barely a ball kicked in anger a section of the crowd had already decided that he wasn't good enough, in the main the same section that two years earlier had decided that Pelle and Sadio Mane were not of the standard required within two games of the season.

Add to that the Frenchman's general aura and his determination to force a new system into play and put square pegs into round holes to implement it and it appeared to be a recipe for disaster.

That is not to say that it was all Puel's fault, he walked into a club whose Captain had decided he wanted a big money move, something that was disruptive to the squad and a Europa League campaign.

The Europa League was Puel's first mistake and one that would eventually weight so heavily with the fan base that even a Wembley cup final appearance would not make up for it.

The supporters wanted a European campaign and they saw that there was a good chance of going far in the competition, but Puel was always trying to be too clever, always trying to rest players when they didn't need resting and seemingly doing so with future games in mind and not the one next up.

This came to a head in Prague when with a point needed to virtually qualify for the knockout stages he put out a much changed side who lost by a single goal, the gamble hadn't paid off and you could sense that even though he put out his full side for the final game against Beer Sheva, that he was going to pay the price.

After the Europa League exit and with supporters wanting him sacked there and then, this site advised caution, that he should be given and judged on a full season and not just the first four months.

For a time that looked a wise choice, getting to Wembley and an upturn in League form brought the season back to life, but Puel seemed to be an unlucky manager and the loss of Virgil Van Dijk cost ultimately cost Saints and Puel dearly.

After Wembley I said that he had earned the right to show he had what it takes, that the last third of the season should determine his future not the first third, however the reality started to show, Puel was a manager who did not make strange decisions due to a rotation policy, he seemed to make them because he had strange ideas.

That meant players coming into the side and doing well, scoring even yet being dropped for the next game, think Shane Long, think Jordie Clasie, Jay Rodriguez and James Ward Prowse, just four players who the manager seemed keen to drop just as they seemed to show form.

Why did the manager with a leaky defence, statistically one of the worst steadfastly refuse to play Martin Caceres apart from one occasion.

This lead to only one win in the last eight games from which only six points were gleamed, worse than relegation form, only four goals scored in those games, all away from home and ten conceded.

Add to that the appalling football being played !

Puel's side looked lost and directionless, it lacked motivation and tactical direction, it should perhaps be noted that the one win came in a game at already relegated Middlesbrough when Puel restored the likes of Clasie, Long and Rodriguez to the starting line up, who combined for the opening goal as well as Caceres only game.

None of these four where in the starting line up for the next game and that told you something.

I had petitioned fans to judge Puel on his final third and the evidence was clear, he was not the man for the job.

All in all Puel's position looked precarious, a fair chunk of the squad were unhappy due to his tactics and selections and wanted away, those in the fanbase against him were growing and a large number of season ticket holders not renewing were perhaps the final nail in the coffin.

The board could surely not be happy in what they were seeing, surely they could see what everyone else could and at closer quarters.

The problem though was getting through the problem without loss of face, it had to be a managed exit and not seen as a knee jerk reaction due to the supporters pressure, wisely the board were loathe to sack a manager after only one season, but they knew they had no choice, he was not the man they thought he was, he had to go to bring some stability to the squad and the fans.

Having said all this history will perhaps not judge Claude Puel too harshly, statistics don't tell tell the story of mind numbing performances at home where an earthquake looked more likely than a goal, they tell of 8th position, that being the fourth season in a row of a top ten finish for the first time in the club's history, add to that a Wembley cup final and in 30 years time that generation will look back and argue that from statistics alone this was perhaps the fourth best season in our history in terms of league position and getting close to winning a trophy.

So one thing we do have to be grateful for is the fact that although phrases like "worst manager ever" and "disastrous season" have been bandied about they are far from the truth, Claude Puel whilst not the right man for the job has left us pretty much in the same state as he found us, it could have been far far worse, but it wasn't the problem was with the playing and managerial style not the results, yes they should have been so much better, but we are in a position where we can write it off as a mistake and go again.

Of course we can't afford to make this mistake a second time and it is now all about what Ralph Krueger, Les Reed and the board do next.

For now though Claude Puel deserves to be recognised for what he did for the club, he deserves our respect for that and to be blunt only two other managers in the last century have taken us to a major cup final that has to count for something.

But having said that he was not the right man for the job, but that was not his fault it was not the worst season in our history and if you think he was the worst manager then you have probably only supported the club since 2009, I can assure you we have had many who were far worse.

Photo: Action Images

wibbersda added 11:17 - Jun 15 A good summation really. I feel the only reason he didn't play Caceres, other than the fact he wanted consistency with Stephens & Yosh, was that he was on a pay to play rate and he felt it would save money.
1

SonicBoom added 13:05 - Jun 15 You mention the phrase "worst manager ever" but Nick that is just listening to the usual extremists . Message boards are mostly saying he was a decent but wrong guy for the job. Those who didn't like the appointment from the start were actually proved to be right then. But most of us - including the players - gave him a chance but gradually ran out of patience.
2

SaintNick added 13:38 - Jun 15 Sonic, you are right it was the extremists and sadly they are usually the loudest. Those who made up their mind from the start were right, but that doesnt make them right, a broken clock is right twice a day. Most people did give him a chanceand you are right and as i said in the piece he didnt get better he got worse
2

pete_boggs added 13:53 - Jun 15 Can we do an appraisal of Les Reed?
0

GeordieSaint added 15:33 - Jun 15 That glorious moment when Simms broke up the pitch and set up Shane Long to seal the final was incredible and he deserves some credit for that. One of the best moments ever supporting the saints.
1

SaintBrock added 18:07 - Jun 15 Claude who?
0

Blogs 31 bloggers

Southampton Polls