|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Mar 23, 2012 1:09:40 GMT
Maybe it's already happened FCF, we won't know.
But I guess what we do know is that Peter Crouch has joined us since the experiences of the players you've got in mind.
At the end of the day it is all about the $ with them (regardles of who's offering it).
I think QPR proves this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2012 1:28:41 GMT
Maybe it's already happened FCF, we won't know. But I guess what we do know is that Peter Crouch has joined us since the experiences of the players you've got in mind. At the end of the day it is all about the $ with them (regardles of who's offering it). I think QPR proves this. I can't argue the case with any great conviction Paul, but maybe Crouch was aware that he'd been a Pulis wet dream for many years, so possibly knew he was in safe hands. My main point is that if two clubs were in for me with my silky skills 'n' all, I'd think twice about joining Stoke as I'd be worried about the potential drop in my future earnings potential (for example a Whelan type player being put into a cage). You could argue just as strongly that someone like Shawcross, Huth and for a while, Etherington benefited from being at Stoke, but we seem to be a singularly different kind of club in the way our players are asked to perform. The team and the shape seem to be valued above individual performance, and this has its own merits, but I'd have doubts if as a player I thought I could go places in the game and was considering joining Stoke. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Mar 23, 2012 1:46:19 GMT
Maybe it's already happened FCF, we won't know. But I guess what we do know is that Peter Crouch has joined us since the experiences of the players you've got in mind. At the end of the day it is all about the $ with them (regardles of who's offering it). I think QPR proves this. I can't argue the case with any great conviction Paul, but maybe Crouch was aware that he'd been a Pulis wet dream for many years, so possibly knew he was in safe hands. My main point is that if two clubs were in for me with my silky skills 'n' all, I'd think twice about joining Stoke as I'd be worried about the potential drop in my future earnings potential (for example a Whelan type player being put into a cage). You could argue just as strongly that someone like Shawcross, Huth and for a while, Etherington benefited from being at Stoke, but we seem to be a singularly different kind of club in the way our players are asked to perform. The team and the shape seem to be valued above individual performance, and this has its own merits, but I'd have doubts if as a player I thought I could go places in the game and was considering joining Stoke. You could be entirely right FCF but without having a direct conversation with the players themselves (and even then they might still not tell the whole truth) I've got bugger all but speculation to base an opinion on. There's plenty enough stuff to debate on here (well from me anyway) based upon what I can see going on out on the pitch. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2012 2:01:42 GMT
I can't argue the case with any great conviction Paul, but maybe Crouch was aware that he'd been a Pulis wet dream for many years, so possibly knew he was in safe hands. My main point is that if two clubs were in for me with my silky skills 'n' all, I'd think twice about joining Stoke as I'd be worried about the potential drop in my future earnings potential (for example a Whelan type player being put into a cage). You could argue just as strongly that someone like Shawcross, Huth and for a while, Etherington benefited from being at Stoke, but we seem to be a singularly different kind of club in the way our players are asked to perform. The team and the shape seem to be valued above individual performance, and this has its own merits, but I'd have doubts if as a player I thought I could go places in the game and was considering joining Stoke. You could be entirely right FCF but without having a direct conversation with the players themselves (and even then they might still not tell the whole truth) I've got bugger all but speculation to base an opinion on. There's plenty enough stuff to debate on here (well from me anyway) based upon what I can see going on out on the pitch. Fair enough. Time for me to call it quits anyway. Night all. |
|
|
|
Post by stokecitydom on Mar 23, 2012 8:35:25 GMT
Walters chases and harrases people in the "withdrawn role" but how often does be tackle, block or win the ball back? He doesn't read the game well enough and always seems to be a yard or 2 off the pace.
The Wigan game a few months ago was a good example. Walters spent an hour chasing around not stopping anything, Jerome came on and hassled their defence and blocked twice in the first few minutes.
You cannot have a player in the team who simply just runs around. He has missed ample good goal scoring chances, his decision making is terrible and his overall technique is poor.
Atleast Jerome has an eye for a goal. Get him started and if he doesn't pull his weight then you can say I told you so.
|
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Mar 23, 2012 9:31:39 GMT
Walters will start on Saturday and Jerome will be on the bench if Etherington is fit.
The biggest travesty, after Wednesday night, will be the ommision of Pennant for Shotton.
That will just be rank stupidity on the part of our manager.
|
|
|
|
Post by Okie Stokie. on Mar 23, 2012 10:44:07 GMT
If we're going to get anything on Saturday, then one of the principal tactics will be to stop Citeh getting anything going from the back - there's not a cat in hells chance that Peter Crouch is the man to perform that role. I couldn't really put it any better than MD has here: Our system has always relied on a deep lying striker, though.
It's always happened while TP's been manager. The Mama role was as much about the work he did when the opposition had the ball as it was about him flicking on the long balls in the direction of Fuller.
His once superhuman stamina and work rate (sadly dented by his injuries) made him excellent at it. The downfall for scores of Mama replacements has been them not putting in the appropriate shift when the opposition have the ball.
Further anecdotal evidence comes in the unlikely form of Paul Scholes. He controlled our previous encounters with Manchester United until last year. Before, he was able to just set up on the halfway line and spray passes all over the pitch. Put simply, he is the single best footballer I have seen since promotion. Last season, Walters was put on the pitch with only one job - man mark Paul Scholes out of the game. Watch the game again and you'll see that's exactly what he did. Scholes was unable to influence the game because Walters was sitting deep, following him around everywhere and stopping him from playing. It's what the job entails.
I mean if you really want proof of it that's more fresh in the memory, look at the Norwich game. We had Jones and Jerome up front. Neither one was willing to do the work when the opposition had the ball, so what happened? They advanced up the pitch, grabbed the game by the scruff of the neck and began to play in our half. We had to change to that 4-5-1 and put Etherington in the middle because neither Jones nor Jerome was willing to get back and stop them building their attacks. That's why I think that Jerome will, from now on, be best utilised on the wing, while Walters continues in the deep role because he's absolutely made for it.
Yeah lets drop our leading scorer |
|
|
|
Post by cheekymatt71 on Mar 23, 2012 10:51:07 GMT
Walters chases and harrases people in the "withdrawn role" but how often does be tackle, block or win the ball back? He doesn't read the game well enough and always seems to be a yard or 2 off the pace. The Wigan game a few months ago was a good example. Walters spent an hour chasing around not stopping anything, Jerome came on and hassled their defence and blocked twice in the first few minutes. You cannot have a player in the team who simply just runs around. He has missed ample good goal scoring chances, his decision making is terrible and his overall technique is poor. Atleast Jerome has an eye for a goal. Get him started and if he doesn't pull his weight then you can say I told you so. +1 I totally agree with this. His running around is pretty aimless to be honest, yes he does add an extra body in midfield but his tackling is not really up to scratch and hes been guilty on a number of occassions of not closing a player down when they are about to shoot on the edge of the penalty area. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Mar 23, 2012 10:53:06 GMT
If we're going to get anything on Saturday, then one of the principal tactics will be to stop Citeh getting anything going from the back - there's not a cat in hells chance that Peter Crouch is the man to perform that role. I couldn't really put it any better than MD has here: Yeah lets drop our leading scorer You've obviously misunderstood what the thread is about okie. Bit of a surpise considering the topic of dicsusion is even in the title ... "Walters to be dropped for Jerome on Saturday?"Some of us think we should keep Walters and Jerome in the team, with the same set up as on Wednesday, other people are suggesting dropping Walters for Jerome and playing Etherington on the left. Dropping our leading scorer hasn't even been mentioned, as far as I can recall. |
|
|
|
Post by stokelad84 on Mar 23, 2012 10:53:13 GMT
Yeah lets drop our leading scorer Peter Crouch? |
|
|
|
Post by thestatusquo on Mar 23, 2012 14:05:09 GMT
Citeh can hit you from all over the place so I guess we'll sit back and try to stiffle them. Don't expect to see an end to end game.
|
|
|
|
Post by foster on Mar 23, 2012 14:10:31 GMT
Citeh can hit you from all over the place so I guess we'll sit back and try to stiffle them. Don't expect to see an end to end game. That's tantamount to giving up then. We did that last time and see what happened. We've got nothing to lose here and only something to gain. I'd rather go after them, enjoy the game, and risk losing 0-5 than sit back and lose 0-3. |
|
|
|
Post by thestatusquo on Mar 23, 2012 14:31:15 GMT
Foster
I totally agree with you but this is TP and we know what he does against teams he thinks we can't beat.
|
|
|
|
Post by foster on Mar 23, 2012 14:45:27 GMT
Foster I totally agree with you but this is TP and we know what he does against teams he thinks we can't beat. he goes 3-4-3? |
|
