|
Post by scfclifer on Jan 21, 2010 16:38:46 GMT
Points for me everytime,
And as a great man once said IF YOU WANT ENTERTAINMENT GO TO THE CIRCUS ;D
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Jan 21, 2010 16:41:36 GMT
Oh hello.. Care to expand on that dickwat Ok; You have unrealistic expectations. We are Stoke, not Spurs. You think Liverpool are shit. You don't like Pulis despite all the things he has done for Stoke. You don't like the style of play despite all the recent success and Stoke's current position in the league. You talk utter shite virtually every day. So yes I think you are deluded. Surely you can see my reasoning? No I can't. You have unrealistic expectations - why? Becasue I expect my side to ba able to pass and control a football instead of lumping it and mis controlling it for 90 minutes You think Liverpool are shit - er they are. You don't like Pulis despite all the things he has done for Stoke - that's a given. Why should I like him? I do respect him. You don't like the style of play despite all the recent success and Stoke's current position in the league - correct, but I appreciate the job he has done and the success he has achieved. You talk utter shite virtually every day - who the fuck doesn't?? OK?
|
|
|
Post by Jamo on the wing on Jan 21, 2010 16:45:57 GMT
I think the whole issue of points over style can used in the never ending war between our two most vocal (on here anyway) sets of fans.
Thankfully I think the majority aren't that bothered about style particularly, but are bothered about us playing well, which would invariably lead to points.
To my mind playing well isn't about style, playing well involves us being "on it" and playing at a good tempo. I'm not expecting us to play like Brazil (and to be honest I have no real interest in us doing so) but what I do want to see is us getting at the opposition and getting the ball into dangerous areas.
The easiest way of achieving all of this is playing our best players and having a positive mindset (especially at home.) As we improve the squad our play should improve but we should keep the key elements of what has given us our success in recent seasons.
|
|
|
Post by pez75 on Jan 21, 2010 16:50:02 GMT
Rubbish Pez People conned themselves into thinking that Stoke should win this game comfortably. Liverpool are not crap - they are a very good side that are high up in the league. They may be crap by their own high standards but they certainly aren't crap by ours. Some day, this obvious fact, as proved by the league table that you fuckers continually dismiss, will hopefully drop into your tiny fucking minds. Its not rubbish mcf and deep down you know it. Liverpool were at their lowest ebb in decades. The media were piling the pressure on Benitez and the team. Their 3 best players (excluding Reina) were out of the team. They had been turned over 3 days before by Reading after 120 tiring mins of football. All those factors add up to us having our best chance to have fucking good go at winning the game at home, and ripping into them from the start. They were there for the taking. You knew, I knew it, Momo knew it - every fucker knew it except fucking Pulis. If we were having this conversation after the heat of the game I reckon you would agree with me. As you have had time to settle down now and rearrange your Rimmers facade, you are now just peddling the same old blinkered views. The league table come May has fuck all to do with it - we all know that liverpool will finish way above us - but we will never play a Liverpool team as weak (both in playing staff and morale) as that again. On paper a point against the mighty Liverpool looks great, but we all know there is more to saturday's result than that.
|
|
|
Post by stokelad84 on Jan 21, 2010 16:53:54 GMT
So would playing Glenn Whelan have guaranteed a win?
If he's that good then why doesn't he play for Man Utd or Chelski??
|
|
|
Post by dozintheseventees on Jan 21, 2010 16:55:22 GMT
Jamo: Couldn't have put it better. If it's any consolation, I honestly believe that most Stoke fans would whole-heartedly agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2010 16:55:49 GMT
So would playing Glenn Whelan have guaranteed a win? If he's that good then why doesn't he play for Man Utd or Chelski?? Of course he wouldn't - but he would have asked more questions of them than Diao. In picking 3 defensive mids we set out not to lose, rather than trying to win. Wouldn't you agree? Try and actually answer this one rather than running off
|
|
|
Post by pez75 on Jan 21, 2010 16:58:29 GMT
So would playing Glenn Whelan have guaranteed a win? If he's that good then why doesn't he play for Man Utd or Chelski?? If that comment is aimed at me - where the fuck did you pluck that from? I personally would not have started GW.
|
|
|
Post by stokelad84 on Jan 21, 2010 17:00:09 GMT
Glenn Whelan would have been set up as a 'defensive midfielder' tho Rob. So how would he have drastically changed our game? Diao had to cover Andy 'Cafu' Wilkinson 3 times when he went on marauding runs to nowhere, but its easier to blame Diao isn't it
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Jan 21, 2010 17:03:49 GMT
Pez
Sorry mate, I just don't agree with you.
Yes, they were going through a bad patch and had a particularly bad result against Reading.
Their lowest ebb does not make them shit and 'there for the taking' though.
That said, I agree it would be one of our best opportunites to beat them though. The thing is, I'm not personally obsessed with how we do against the top 4 sides - just another game to me - infact, probably less important than those against the bottom 12 clubs.
They were under pressure last night because no matter how we see it, a draw for them against us is not a good result for them. The pressure wasn't lifted for them at all.
Despite being under pressure against Spurs, they still beat them without too much trouble which proves they aren't that bad.
The game has been blown out of all proportion by the media who want to stoke the 'liverpool are shit' and 'rafa must go' fire and on here, by Pulis Hating Wankstains - no surprise on either front.
I was very happy after the game - we had rescued a point ffs.
|
|
|
Post by stokieforever2008 on Jan 21, 2010 17:10:37 GMT
points no doubt about that
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 21, 2010 17:11:06 GMT
I think the whole issue of points over style can used in the never ending war between our two most vocal (on here anyway) sets of fans. Thankfully I think the majority aren't that bothered about style particularly, but are bothered about us playing well, which would invariably lead to points. To my mind playing well isn't about style, playing well involves us being "on it" and playing at a good tempo. I'm not expecting us to play like Brazil (and to be honest I have no real interest in us doing so) but what I do want to see is us getting at the opposition and getting the ball into dangerous areas. The easiest way of achieving all of this is playing our best players and having a positive mindset (especially at home.) As we improve the squad our play should improve but we should keep the key elements of what has given us our success in recent seasons. Quality post there Jamo.
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Jan 21, 2010 17:24:12 GMT
Agreed Paul I was going to comment on your post Jamo but got sidetracked with pezza I think one of the key problems that we have is that when things don't go well, we sometimes get marked as 'negative' instead of just plain old 'crap'. The other one is that there is no consideration as to how good the opposition is and for me - there has to be. You simply don't get as much of the ball against the better opposition and it is miles harder to play football against them than the lesser teams.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2010 17:33:53 GMT
Rubbish Pez People conned themselves into thinking that Stoke should win this game comfortably. Liverpool are not crap - they are a very good side that are high up in the league. They may be crap by their own high standards but they certainly aren't crap by ours. Some day, this obvious fact, as proved by the league table that you fuckers continually dismiss, will hopefully drop into your tiny fucking minds. Its not rubbish mcf and deep down you know it. Liverpool were at their lowest ebb in decades. The media were piling the pressure on Benitez and the team. Their 3 best players (excluding Reina) were out of the team. They had been turned over 3 days before by Reading after 120 tiring mins of football. All those factors add up to us having our best chance to have fucking good go at winning the game at home, and ripping into them from the start. They were there for the taking. You knew, I knew it, Momo knew it - every fucker knew it except fucking Pulis. If we were having this conversation after the heat of the game I reckon you would agree with me. As you have had time to settle down now and rearrange your Rimmers facade, you are now just peddling the same old blinkered views. The league table come May has fuck all to do with it - we all know that liverpool will finish way above us - but we will never play a Liverpool team as weak (both in playing staff and morale) as that again. On paper a point against the mighty Liverpool looks great, but we all know there is more to saturday's result than that. Cracking post Pez
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jan 21, 2010 17:35:13 GMT
Points.
Style is for the deluded (and West Brazil fans)
|
|
|
Post by alster on Jan 21, 2010 17:41:40 GMT
Points. Style is for the deluded (and West Brazil fans) Do you really hate football that much march4.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jan 21, 2010 17:46:20 GMT
Points. Style is for the deluded (and West Brazil fans) Do you really hate football that much march4. ;D I just love winning
|
|
|
Post by waitingforwaddo on Jan 21, 2010 18:45:08 GMT
Pssst...Alster.....yes he does! ;D
|
|
|
Post by waitingforwaddo on Jan 21, 2010 18:46:34 GMT
The bloke was a clown Lifer so he'd know all about it! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2010 20:26:27 GMT
Glenn Whelan would have been set up as a 'defensive midfielder' tho Rob. So how would he have drastically changed our game? Diao had to cover Andy 'Cafu' Wilkinson 3 times when he went on marauding runs to nowhere, but its easier to blame Diao isn't it Because not all defensive midfielders play the same. Diao is a screening defensive mid whose attributes revolve around playing it simple and crunching into challenges while never getting forward. Whelan is more inventive and forward looking in his passing and can also get forward to have a shot on occasion. Your hero Whitehead also plays for us as a defensive midfielder, as does Rory - it doesn't stop them getting into the box now and again.
|
|
|
Post by Somebody_Told_Me on Jan 21, 2010 20:58:58 GMT
POINTS POINTS POINTS
|
|
|
Post by fentonstokie1 on Jan 21, 2010 20:59:01 GMT
Points. I quite like the way everyone despises us and I'll like it even more as we add a little more quality and steel.
|
|
|
Post by gibby1409 on Jan 21, 2010 21:07:06 GMT
Points. I quite like the way everyone despises us and I'll like it even more as we add a little more quality and steel. Spot on Fenton! I Fookin love everyone hating us ;D We will add quality, we already have, it's just not a quick process, unless we do a Pompey! I've seen so much dross over the years, that even though last week was toss, it's so much better than the "Dark Times"
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jan 21, 2010 21:13:55 GMT
Glenn Whelan would have been set up as a 'defensive midfielder' tho Rob. So how would he have drastically changed our game? Diao had to cover Andy 'Cafu' Wilkinson 3 times when he went on marauding runs to nowhere, but its easier to blame Diao isn't it Because not all defensive midfielders play the same. Diao is a screening defensive mid whose attributes revolve around playing it simple and crunching into challenges while never getting forward. Whelan is more inventive and forward looking in his passing and can also get forward to have a shot on occasion. Your hero Whitehead also plays for us as a defensive midfielder, as does Rory - it doesn't stop them getting into the box now and again. Is that right? How many goals do we routinely score from central midfield while Pulis has been manager? I don't care about who scores so long as we get results, but that's just not true IMO
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jan 21, 2010 21:17:57 GMT
I've just checked. It's 8 in all league games in the past three seasons.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 21, 2010 21:29:47 GMT
Because not all defensive midfielders play the same. Diao is a screening defensive mid whose attributes revolve around playing it simple and crunching into challenges while never getting forward. Whelan is more inventive and forward looking in his passing and can also get forward to have a shot on occasion. Your hero Whitehead also plays for us as a defensive midfielder, as does Rory - it doesn't stop them getting into the box now and again. Is that right? How many goals do we routinely score from central midfield while Pulis has been manager? I don't care about who scores so long as we get results, but there's no need to make stuff up. I wouldn't say Rob's making stuff up Mark. Surely a fairer question would be to ask how many times does Diao get into the box when compared to Whelan or Whitehead. I know that players are certainly restricted by being asked to keep in the 'cage' but that doesn't then mean that all central midfielders for Stoke are completely stripped of any individual attributes they may have. Diao is certainly more of a 'stopper' than Whelan and equally Whelan is more 'creative' than Diao IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jan 21, 2010 21:49:16 GMT
Fair enough Paul.
I suspect one of the problems Whitehead had in settling in was adjusting to our system, where his job is almost solely to stay behind the ball. Maybe that's why he's looked better in recent weeks.
|
|
|
Post by jacka118 on Jan 21, 2010 22:38:04 GMT
Points everyday of the week, every week of the year, every year of the decade, every decade of the century, every century of the millenium
|
|
|
Post by StokieSC on Jan 21, 2010 22:46:13 GMT
If it aint broke, don't fix it.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2010 23:01:39 GMT
Fair enough Paul. I suspect one of the problems Whitehead had in settling in was adjusting to our system, where his job is almost solely to stay behind the ball. Maybe that's why he's looked better in recent weeks. I think you missed my point Greyers. My point was simply that Whelan and even Whitehead, even in Pulis system, playing as "defensive midfielders", offer more of an attacking threat than a screening midfielder in Diao. I realise that traditionally any praise for the manager cuts through you like children's laughter but in this instance I was actually criticising the exalted leader.
|
|