|
Post by Staying up for Grandadstokey on Oct 15, 2010 9:37:28 GMT
Murphy was entitled to be upset.. Fulham had lost two of their top players to very bad tackles In Wilco's case the tackle was bad on three counts; We were in the last few seconds of the game and it was totally unnecessary The tackle was premeditated - we could see from the other of the ground that it was going to be late The tackle was almost certainly retribution - Wilco had squared up to the player minutes earlier and this was Wilco's brainless way of getting his own back Gerry has confirmed Pulis's thoughts on the tackle - he could see how bad it was and obviously told Wilco what he thought Where Murphy was seriously wrong was linking Wilco's bad tackle to Stoke physical approach - there is no connection As for Wolves I reckon Murphy has a point - they have been serial offenders this season. Wilco's tackle allowed him to tar us with the same brush Zamora's injury was not the result of a bad tackle, had it not been Karl Henry who made the tackle we would have heard little about it.
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Oct 15, 2010 9:43:08 GMT
Gerry was reet pissed off at Murphy who must be feeling like he dropped a bollock. As his fellow professionals round on hiim, (and even his own manager has got the right hump with him) he has a choice to say that his words were ill conceived and blown out of all proportion by a media with an agenda or to start to revel in his perception of his own significance as their puppet.
|
|
|
Post by TheWiseMaster on Oct 15, 2010 12:24:09 GMT
Murphy was entitled to be upset.. Fulham had lost two of their top players to very bad tackles In Wilco's case the tackle was bad on three counts; We were in the last few seconds of the game and it was totally unnecessary The tackle was premeditated - we could see from the other of the ground that it was going to be late The tackle was almost certainly retribution - Wilco had squared up to the player minutes earlier and this was Wilco's brainless way of getting his own back Gerry has confirmed Pulis's thoughts on the tackle - he could see how bad it was and obviously told Wilco what he thought Where Murphy was seriously wrong was linking Wilco's bad tackle to Stoke physical approach - there is no connection As for Wolves I reckon Murphy has a point - they have been serial offenders this season. Wilco's tackle allowed him to tar us with the same brush WM - you are right on several points. But to tar Wolves as a whole with Henry's tackles is as bad as Murphy's comments Unfortunately with Wolves it is not just the Henry tackles Both Henry's tackles and Craddocks (on Jones) are leg breakers. Going into a player,out of his vision and over his standing foot is certain to cause serious damage. Shawcross correctly described the tackle as dangerous and it is no different to a full tackle from behind As for Wolves attempts to get Barton sent of - it was disgraceful - if the attacks had been on any other player there would have been hell up. I don't like Barton but the tackles were part of a pattern from Wolves this season
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Oct 15, 2010 12:30:53 GMT
Murphy was entitled to be upset.. Fulham had lost two of their top players to very bad tackles In Wilco's case the tackle was bad on three counts; We were in the last few seconds of the game and it was totally unnecessary The tackle was premeditated - we could see from the other of the ground that it was going to be late The tackle was almost certainly retribution - Wilco had squared up to the player minutes earlier and this was Wilco's brainless way of getting his own back Gerry has confirmed Pulis's thoughts on the tackle - he could see how bad it was and obviously told Wilco what he thought Where Murphy was seriously wrong was linking Wilco's bad tackle to Stoke physical approach - there is no connection As for Wolves I reckon Murphy has a point - they have been serial offenders this season. Wilco's tackle allowed him to tar us with the same brush Change the record will you Paul. If there was no need for the tackle because of the time left, why were they still attacking? They should have just shepherded the ball back to their keeper until the whistle was blown. If the Fulham player had have scored because Wilko backed off you would have ripped into him for that. It was a poor tackle, but no worse than some of our other 'Favourites' have put in that you choose not to comment on. I suppose Huth smacking a player in our own area and getting banned for 3 matches was youthful exuberance was it? For me that was far more cynical and weasely. H
|
|
|
Post by rawli on Oct 15, 2010 12:32:45 GMT
Didn't Wolves also target Fuller last year at the Brit? I vaguely remember him having to go off after one of their defenders - Craddock I think - banjoed him on the halfway line.
|
|
|
Post by TheWiseMaster on Oct 15, 2010 14:57:18 GMT
I like Wilco as a defender - in fact he is one of our best
However he can also be brainless and with all the heat on us we can't afford any more of that type of defending (unless it's a mistake - which it wasn't)
Any more brainless tackling then I'm afraid Wilco will be history as far as the Prem is concerned
Pulis knows it too - which is why he ripped into Wilco
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Oct 15, 2010 15:03:47 GMT
I like Wilco as a defender - in fact he is one of our best However he can also be brainless and with all the heat on us we can't afford any more of that type of defending (unless it's a mistake - which it wasn't) Any more brainless tackling then I'm afraid Wilco will be history as far as the Prem is concerned Pulis knows it too - which is why he ripped into Wilco Paul, footballers in general are a bit shall we say reknowned for being dense. What Wilko did was no more a slight on our club than Huth twatting someone in the gob and getting banned for three matches, but I don't hear anyone calling for him never to play for the club again as you have suggested before. H
|
|
|
Post by TheWiseMaster on Oct 15, 2010 15:20:47 GMT
Players make mistakes - that doesn't bother me
However, what does bother me and will bother the club, is that we may get labelled as a dirty club and referees begin to change the way they referee our games - they are bad enough as it is
Pulis will be warning all the players - including Wilco and Huth - that we don't need any more bad press
What makes it worse is that neither Pulis nor the club deserves this crap
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Oct 15, 2010 18:08:39 GMT
The thing is Paul, we were labelled a dirty team well before the Huth and Ramsey incidents never mind Wilko's attempted tackle, by certain cretins in the media and footballing circles. It will never go away unless Pulis starts playing carpet football and complaining every time one of his angels gets tackled a la Whinger.
H
|
|