|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2010 17:32:52 GMT
Yes - it's got us this far and Pulis isn't about to change his spots. He's said so himself. What we can hope for is that the Mama role evolves, so that we see the player in that position not just a lump who wins it in the air and not much else (like Mama) but one with some mobility and goal threat who's good on the deck as well. Happily, both Jones and Walters look capable of doing this. But then thats not the Mama role is it?! As I said earlier, lets play football and start passing the ball. And for the record, at the end of last season Pulis said in an interview that he needed to change the way we play as we have been found out, hence the footballing players we have just got in. Erm, yes, it is the Mama role. The Mama role is the forward in our system playing behind the striker. So yes, yes it is. And Pulis said something along those lines and then more recently saying he wouldn't be changing. Who knows what the truth is, but anyone who thinks we're going to suddenly become a carpet football side is dreaming. Mixing the long with the short is the most likely form of evolution.
|
|
|
Post by u2oxeterstokie on Sept 16, 2010 17:36:33 GMT
But then thats not the Mama role is it?! As I said earlier, lets play football and start passing the ball. And for the record, at the end of last season Pulis said in an interview that he needed to change the way we play as we have been found out, hence the footballing players we have just got in. Erm, yes, it is the Mama role. The Mama role is the forward in our system playing behind the striker. So yes, yes it is. And Pulis said something along those lines and then more recently saying he wouldn't be changing. Who knows what the truth is, but anyone who thinks we're going to suddenly become a carpet football side is dreaming. Mixing the long with the short is the most likely form of evolution. simple, dont call it the Mama role because it isnt ;D
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2010 17:38:31 GMT
Erm, yes, it is the Mama role. The Mama role is the forward in our system playing behind the striker. So yes, yes it is. And Pulis said something along those lines and then more recently saying he wouldn't be changing. Who knows what the truth is, but anyone who thinks we're going to suddenly become a carpet football side is dreaming. Mixing the long with the short is the most likely form of evolution. simple, dont call it the Mama role because it isnt ;D What would you define the Mama role as then chief? The Mama role exists whether Mama is playing or not. It existed before he even came to the club.
|
|
|
Post by u2oxeterstokie on Sept 16, 2010 17:41:49 GMT
simple, dont call it the Mama role because it isnt ;D What would you define the Mama role as then chief? The Mama role exists whether Mama is playing or not. It existed before he even came to the club. So it was called the Mama role before he arrived? Interesting concept.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Sept 16, 2010 17:44:46 GMT
What would you define the Mama role as then chief? The Mama role exists whether Mama is playing or not. It existed before he even came to the club. So it was called the Mama role before he arrived? Interesting concept. Brilliant stuff ;D ;D ;D Now about the Messi role
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2010 17:46:12 GMT
What would you define the Mama role as then chief? The Mama role exists whether Mama is playing or not. It existed before he even came to the club. So it was called the Mama role before he arrived? Interesting concept. No. It was called "the Gifton role".
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Sept 16, 2010 17:48:43 GMT
So it was called the Mama role before he arrived? Interesting concept. No. It was called "the Gifton role". Sure about that ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by u2oxeterstokie on Sept 16, 2010 17:48:49 GMT
So it was called the Mama role before he arrived? Interesting concept. No. It was called "the Gifton role". ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Sept 16, 2010 17:50:44 GMT
What an entertaining thread ;D
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2010 17:52:31 GMT
No. It was called "the Gifton role". Sure about that ;D ;D ;D Whether it was ever actually called that or not, GNW played exactly the same position, which is the "Mama role" that we know and love today
|
|
|
Post by u2oxeterstokie on Sept 16, 2010 17:54:04 GMT
This is great
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2010 17:59:48 GMT
This is great Are you suggesting he didn't play the same role?
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Sept 16, 2010 18:01:04 GMT
This is great Are you suggesting he didn't play the same role? Just the thought of it being called the Mama role in anticipation of us finding a player called Mama.
|
|
|
Post by u2oxeterstokie on Sept 16, 2010 18:02:24 GMT
This is great Are you suggesting he didn't play the same role? Yes he didnt play the Mama role
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2010 18:06:03 GMT
Are you suggesting he didn't play the same role? Yes he didnt play the Mama role He played the Mama role before it was called the Mama role but still was, in fact, the Mama role. He was the Marathon to Mama's Snickers.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Sept 16, 2010 18:07:03 GMT
Yes he didnt play the Mama role He played the Mama role before it was called the Mama role but still was, in fact, the Mama role. He was the Marathon to Mama's Snickers. Good analogy
|
|
|
Post by stokester1989 on Sept 16, 2010 18:09:46 GMT
Fuller and Ken every day of the week. We need our best combination on to try and get the first goal in games. Impact sub , schimpact sub. It's a load of absolute garbage. The team that gets the first goal wins 70% of the time. Totally agree I disagree, For a starters alot of teams that get a goal then relax and get caught out. and personally i believe stoke play alot better when there behind. its the stokie spirit to never accept defeat!
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Sept 16, 2010 18:11:32 GMT
I disagree, For a starters alot of teams that get a goal then relax and get caught out. and personally i believe stoke play alot better when there behind. its the stokie spirit to never accept defeat! I don't think it's a good tactic to give your opponents a goal start every week.
|
|
|
Post by roylandstoke on Sept 16, 2010 18:16:01 GMT
I disagree, For a starters alot of teams that get a goal then relax and get caught out. and personally i believe stoke play alot better when there behind. its the stokie spirit to never accept defeat! Wasn't Monday the first time we've won after being behind in the Premiership?
|
|
|
Post by stokester1989 on Sept 16, 2010 18:31:18 GMT
I disagree, For a starters alot of teams that get a goal then relax and get caught out. and personally i believe stoke play alot better when there behind. its the stokie spirit to never accept defeat! Wasn't Monday the first time we've won after being behind in the Premiership? no, we came from behind against villa before when rory threw the ball and bounced off mamas back. some1 just commented saying its nto a good idea to give teams a headstart.. im not saying that we shud let teams get a goal lol, just that when we are a goal down our players dig in and work harder . it motivates them more
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2010 18:32:09 GMT
Wasn't Monday the first time we've won after being behind in the Premiership? no, we came from behind against villa before when rory threw the ball and bounced off mamas back. some1 just commented saying its nto a good idea to give teams a headstart.. im not saying that we shud let teams get a goal lol, just that when we are a goal down our players dig in and work harder . it motivates them more We scored first in that original Villa game.
|
|
|
Post by stokester1989 on Sept 16, 2010 18:41:55 GMT
my bad. i have the memory of a goldsifh. stoke players do dig in tho when there behind. i believe so anyways. ( apart from spankings from chelsea and manu)
|
|
|
Post by MarkWolstanton on Sept 16, 2010 18:45:47 GMT
Are you suggesting he didn't play the same role? Just the thought of it being called the Mama role in anticipation of us finding a player called Mama. When I think back to some of the superb strikers I have seen in the red and white stripes then have to read that one of the most basic none goalscoring lumps has a role named in his honour, I can't help but feel there is something very wrong in the world! The Greenhoff role? Nope. The Ritchie role? No. The Steino role? Not heard of. A player whose main contribution was to get in the way? Yes indeed! Only at Stoke!
|
|
|
Post by eddyclamp on Sept 16, 2010 18:50:05 GMT
What about Tony Ellis (the ghost role)
|
|
|
Post by fentonstokie1 on Sept 16, 2010 19:02:39 GMT
The thread is titled 'Our strikers', can someone explain how Mama entered into the equation?
|
|
|
Post by u2oxeterstokie on Sept 16, 2010 19:03:35 GMT
The thread is titled 'Our strikers', can someone explain how Mama entered into the equation? ;D
|
|
|
Post by PickSCFC on Sept 16, 2010 19:04:32 GMT
how the fuck did this descend into a 'mama role thread ???
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Sept 16, 2010 19:20:32 GMT
The thread is titled 'Our strikers', can someone explain how Mama entered into the equation? March (rather unsurpisngly - ;D) (re)introduced him!
|
|
|
Post by fentonstokie1 on Sept 16, 2010 19:35:57 GMT
The thread is titled 'Our strikers', can someone explain how Mama entered into the equation? March (rather unsurpisngly - ;D) (re)introduced him! Perhaps someone ought to explain to him then that Striker is another word for goalscorer, that surely will prevent him from repeating his error.
|
|
|
Post by french toast on Sept 16, 2010 19:38:05 GMT
Agree but would start with tuncay and jones, with fuller coming off the bench, Monday the perfect example why he's best coming off the bench. nope it wasnt. we get a lot of freekicks off fuller, and we miss them when he doesnt play. fuller is STILL our best player
|
|