|
Post by werrington on Sept 26, 2011 17:05:29 GMT
There is a happy medium to be found Rob but sometimes away from home we are beaten before a ball has been kicked? Exactly, there's a happy medium. I don't see why, for example, we have to go to Anfield and play one up front and park the bus. And that is my point mate......We also went to West Ham and Birmingham either side of that game and played ultra negative tactics and lost both games when a more "attacking" venture may well have resulted in different outcomes?......The West Ham one in particular was appalling and shameful
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Sept 26, 2011 17:05:58 GMT
It could also be argued that we only now have a big enough squad to unleash the shackles every game and keep performing at a high level. It is not just about the game in question but the game before and the game after and in fact having a plan for the whole season. Fair points CM but can you honestly see him releasing the shackles at those same stadiums?......as Pennant has said attack is the best form of defence and as somebody who attends 90% of away fixtures its bloody hard work sometimes and thats not a dig at TP its just a fact I don't get to as many as I'd like at the moment but I attend more aways than home and have wondered why at times but I fully expect more aways to be targeted for more positivity this year although I don't expect Pulis to ever be gung ho away from home. I see the targeting of more games to be as much a part of the 'evolution' as anything else. I'll have points in Wales and at the Emirates for starters.
|
|
|
Post by tazi on Sept 26, 2011 17:09:18 GMT
These conclusions that were showed against Man Utd resulted from Pulis laying the foundations ever since we bacame a premiership club in the sense that he's built us up gradually as an attractive outfit resulting in better quality players..... I think Markwalstanton wanted to see it from the outset though. He's acting surprised it's happened and comes across as though Pulis has just kind of accidently stumbled across it. Sorry mate but thats not entirely true is it?.......we all know we have the players to do it and for certain games TP has refused to unleash the shackles....even when we lost 4-0 and 5-0 at Old Trafford and 7-0 at Chelsea we still had folk on here defending the tactics of stubborn defence and i;m pretty sure if we had "had a go" then we would not have lost by those scorelines?.....Saturday and Chelsea at home last season has exploded that myth My point being mate that we HAVEN'T ALWAYS had the players to do it.
|
|
|
Post by werrington on Sept 26, 2011 17:11:55 GMT
Sorry mate but thats not entirely true is it?.......we all know we have the players to do it and for certain games TP has refused to unleash the shackles....even when we lost 4-0 and 5-0 at Old Trafford and 7-0 at Chelsea we still had folk on here defending the tactics of stubborn defence and i;m pretty sure if we had "had a go" then we would not have lost by those scorelines?.....Saturday and Chelsea at home last season has exploded that myth My point being mate that we HAVEN'T ALWAYS had the players to do it. But sometimes have had Taz and yet he has decided against it....January until mid March last season was a fine example
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2011 17:14:20 GMT
Exactly, there's a happy medium. I don't see why, for example, we have to go to Anfield and play one up front and park the bus. And that is my point mate......We also went to West Ham and Birmingham either side of that game and played ultra negative tactics and lost both games when a more "attacking" venture may well have resulted in different outcomes?......The West Ham one in particular was appalling and shameful At Brum I thought we were the more positive of the sides to be honest. We were shit but we had the better chances until they got that goal at the end. Fulham was a shocker. West Ham was a wake up call and from then on we did have a go even away for the rest of the season. We had a go at Spurs and were unlucky not to take something at Blackpool. We seem to have reverted to type away now, but it'll be interesting to see how we line up at Swansea.
|
|
|
Post by MarkWolstanton on Sept 26, 2011 17:19:24 GMT
Ahem... do you not see a certain irony there! This last post of yours goes beyond what could be described as 'debate', and you have admitted yourself that you have your own agenda: support the manager even when it's obvious that he's making a balls up. Some posters have argued on this thread that the inclusion of Wilko makes us a more balanced side, just as many argued that playing Collins was a complete waste of time. Are they wrong, and is 'your' manager always right? And if not, is Mark (or anybody else) not entitled to start a thread to say what they think without it being brought down to the level of personal abuse you have just demonstrated? I'm sure Mark expected some reaction to his original comment, but not to the degree which you have shown. Sorry, fella, but you've let yourself down badly there. OS. As for the abuse, I get plenty from Mark thank you. We despise each other and we don't get on and that is not a problem. (On here, I hasten to add, not in real life). For the record I don't like the messageboards personas of WFW, RAF and FAF either. I don't despise you. I do despise your constant thread wrecking as do the other people who run this forum. I am struggling to understand your reason for registering on this community. You have already stated that you do not feel qualified to discuss tactics and do not want to discuss anything else to do with the club as you are happy to believe it will be sorted out just fine. That really doesn't leave much on a Stoke City discussion forum! You are simply WFW with a polar opposite view. I feel somewhat guilty for suspending him for being a crashing bore with a one theme agenda who can't debate without insulting people he doesn't know from Adam and leaving you to do exactly the same to be honest. If you have no other reason to be here than insult and rubbish points you disagree with let me save you the angst. Simply put up a thread containing something like: "we are (insert appropriate number) in the league FFS and Remember where we were (insert appropriate number) years ago FFS I'll bump the thread to the top on an occasional basis and even change your username to Superior Supporter in line with your stated view of yourself. If you can think of a purpose for continuing to post take a leaf out of Tazis book. That bloke sucks harder and swallows more TP cock than you do and argues tooth and nail with plenty of us on the board and off it. The difference is that he makes every effort to back up his argument with reason. That's why we respect the lad. You seem to forget we are all Stoke supporters. Tazi doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by tazi on Sept 26, 2011 17:20:23 GMT
My point being mate that we HAVEN'T ALWAYS had the players to do it. But sometimes have had Taz and yet he has decided against it....January until mid March last season was a fine example We've never had Crouch who was very instrumental as to our performance and Matty looked fitter than what he has done for sometime. In that respect one can understand as to how important it was to Pulis in wanting to bring Crouch to the club. Palacios along with the signing of Jerome appear to have given everyone a lift and a spring in their step and this obviously helped them on Saturday. I aint saying we'll see it every week at the Brit but by the same token others shouldn't suggest that it's not been witnessed in the past either. Anyhow, feels great for a Pulistaaaaaaaaaaaa, oh sorry, some wouldn't know..... Edit - Well, for what it's worth theres my reasons.....
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Sept 26, 2011 17:42:10 GMT
As for the abuse, I get plenty from Mark thank you. We despise each other and we don't get on and that is not a problem. (On here, I hasten to add, not in real life). For the record I don't like the messageboards personas of WFW, RAF and FAF either. I don't despise you. I do despise your constant thread wrecking as do the other people who run this forum. I am struggling to understand your reason for registering on this community. You have already stated that you do not feel qualified to discuss tactics and do not want to discuss anything else to do with the club as you are happy to believe it will be sorted out just fine. That really doesn't leave much on a Stoke City discussion forum! You are simply WFW with a polar opposite view. I feel somewhat guilty for suspending him for being a crashing bore with a one theme agenda who can't debate without insulting people he doesn't know from Adam and leaving you to do exactly the same to be honest. If you have no other reason to be here than insult and rubbish points you disagree with let me save you the angst. Simply put up a thread containing something like: "we are (insert appropriate number) in the league FFS and Remember where we were (insert appropriate number) years ago FFS I'll bump the thread to the top on an occasional basis and even change your username to Superior Supporter in line with your stated view of yourself. If you can think of a purpose for continuing to post take a leaf out of Tazis book. That bloke sucks harder and swallows more TP cock than you do and argues tooth and nail with plenty of us on the board and off it. The difference is that he makes every effort to back up his argument with reason. That's why we respect the lad. You seem to forget we are all Stoke supporters. Tazi doesn't. And MW finishes his innings with a glorious six he's knocked straight over the stands and out of the ground ;D Good first post, couldn't agree more Mark.
|
|
|
Post by OldStokie on Sept 26, 2011 20:42:33 GMT
Ay inner ite yet, Robbie. Metterfizzyforrically speaking, the sad bastard is like Spongebobs mate, Patrick Star... yer conner stop 'im that easy. Ay goos on and on. Say hello to Helen for me, Mark. 8 M.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Sept 26, 2011 20:50:12 GMT
Ay inner ite yet, Robbie. Metterfizzyforrically speaking, the sad bastard is like Spongebobs mate, Patrick Star... yer conner stop 'im that easy. Ay goos on and on. Say hello to Helen for me, Mark. 8 M. Glad to hear it Mick, be fun to see him knock the wand all over the pitch In a cricket sense naturally... Say hullu to Helen for me as well please Mark
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Sept 26, 2011 23:46:26 GMT
Agree with all of that Mark. On a bit of a tangent, wondered if Huth being rested for the first time in the league in the interests of playing a proper right back was significant? For the first time in the league he hasn't strained to accommodate Huth, Ryan and one of Woodgate/Upson. We'll likely keep rotating the centre halves, but if we persevere with Wilko/Shotton at rb (as we should), is it the beginning of the end of Huth at Stoke? I think we will keep Huth unless someone offers us stupid money for him. Woodgate is always going to be one game from getting a longterm injury judging by his record and Upson is also getting on a bit. We have a lot of matches to play and with injuries and suspensions there will be playing time for all 4 of our Centre Halves. did i read on here a while ago that huths getting near to the end of his contract? if so stoke may need to sell him
|
|
|
Post by Orbs on Sept 27, 2011 6:43:07 GMT
I think both sides are as one-eyed as each other. But, of the two extremes, I'd take the naivety of a happy clapper in the bad times over the knocker's determination to search out negatives even when things are going brilliantly. In which case one of us doesn't understand that the purpose of this message board is to discuss all things Stoke City good or bad. The original post on this thread simply celebrated the fact that some myths proposed by the people who will not allow discussion they perceive as anti- manager to take place had been blown away by the manager and players. If you are more comfortable in a World where supporters do not look to discuss aspects they would like to see improved I think you are going to be disappointed. It's what supporters do. How many times do you want people to say how much better things are now than a few years ago? The fact that like most supporters I didn't want Pulis back has never stopped me from stating he has done a great job and neither does it mean I can't criticise what he does to benefit from that. Given that I supported his original appointment when many were critical I feel I've got a reasonably balanced view although I'm a bit prone to scepticism. If you prefer the see no evil, won't hear any evil approach of the Wandonlodges then so be it. I tend to leave that to the Official SCFC site! God knows why I'm bothering to explain myself but there you go. It's just another thread wrecked by the usual suspects who in the absence of anything constructive to contribute prefer to personalise matters. By jove folks he's got it!! ;D Wonder if this post will also be deleted? Funny how friends rally round at times of need isn't it?
|
|