|
Post by oldgit57 on May 7, 2013 9:25:40 GMT
It doesn't mean an easy ride but we showed a complete lack of ambition regardless. We got a well deserved point away against a team in desperate straights in a relegation showdown to make it 7 from 9 in what became three Cup Finals. I think some people really have lost all sense of reality. The reality is that Villa, a side who have struggled for most of the season, put 6 up these! We bottled it against 10 of em!
|
|
|
Post by foster on May 7, 2013 9:27:22 GMT
We struggled most of the season and managed 7 points out of the last 9?
|
|
|
Post by imnotbob on May 7, 2013 9:51:58 GMT
Yes, he did. It was shown on TV yesterday with sound just from the ground, no commentry. Pulis was shouting "keep it" over and over again when players were about to pass forward. This man doesn't want his players to attack, and you don't win games this way. Hope the game on Sunday is the last time we see him lead the team at the Britannia. I don't know why I'm breaking my "don't bother wasting your energy on the bloody Oatcake" rule that I've managed to maintain for months for the sake of replying to this garbage, but I can't help myself: Yes, you're right. I watched the game on Sky and Pulis was regularly shouting "keep it" largely midway through the 2nd half when we started to fall apart and hoof it aimlessly. At roughly the same time, the camera cut to Pulis frantically waving his arms trying to push them up the pitch as we started to sit too deep. It was clearly an attempt to get the players to clam down and try to build up a sensible attack. It's all there as clear as day to anyone who cares to watch it rationally. But, of course, many here don't know the meaning of the word "rational" anymore, which is why enforced my "don't bother with the Oatcake" rule on myself in the first place. I can't abide people who refuse to think rationally. And now, of course, I'll just get the "rimmer" bullshit thrown at me. Which is not rational in any sense of the word. Actually, I'll let you into a little secret. I've been a supporter of Pulis but I've also had my worries over some of his poor tactics after casting a critical and rational eye over them. In the last couple of months though, my opinion of him has taken quite a dive. You know why? It's not directly because of his tactics or our poor results (though it is because of a factor that may well influence those things). It's because of the religious bullshit he recently came out with, implying that a none-existent fictional character called 'God' guides him. As I said - I can't abide people who refuse to think rationally, and that includes the manager of a football club I support thinking there is some sort of 'divine being' influencing how he manages that club. Now I've wasted my energy (and it is wasted energy because, sadly, if there is one thing that its near impossible to change in life, its turning a non-rational thinker into a rational one!) I'll crawl back under my rock and leave the Oatcake regulars to pontificate (deliberate choice of word!). With apologies to the few rational thinkers there are on here. You know who you are. Kudos to you for managing to criticise and debate rationally in this shit-storm. Though I'm not sure whether to admire you or fell sorry for you for wasting your time and energy! (I can't help but laugh now as I think of some of the non-rational numpties thinking proudly "oh yeah - that's me! I'm rational!")
|
|
|
Post by philm87 on May 7, 2013 10:16:55 GMT
Players take responsibility when it's their fault. For example, if we were creating chance after chance that were being inexplicably missed or if the final ball was always wrong etc. That didn't happen. What happened was, a team with zero idea how to play against ten men, made it quite clear that they had zero idea how to play against ten men. In those last ten minutes of the first half, just after Gardner had been sent off, Pulis should have had the players going for it - make it two before half time, but he didn't. It was more hoofing, no more players getting forward than had been previously. To their credit, Sunderland came out firing in the second half but after weathering the storm for the first five/ten minutes, a manager with an ounce of attacking nous would have taken Whitehead off (Pulis made a point of saying he was terrified of making a tackle at half time as he was on a booking... get him off then, bright spark!!) and putting Adam in the middle. Then get width (Kightly and Ethers for Walters and Whitehead at around the 60 minute mark would have sufficed)and stretch the play. Continuing to play long balls through the middle against ten men is idiotic and typical Pulis. It was a scared and cowardly managerial performance which was proved by his post-match interview ('pleased to get a point') How anyone can defend that is beyond me. Yes, we got a point, yes most would have settled for that before the game. But things happen in a game which would help 99% of other teams/managers to get a confidence-boosting win. The game summed Pulis up for me, not in a positive way. This for me 100%.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 7, 2013 10:23:26 GMT
Which part of my post didn't you understand? I understood it. Are you struggling with those questions though?
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 7, 2013 10:27:14 GMT
Players take responsibility when it's their fault. For example, if we were creating chance after chance that were being inexplicably missed or if the final ball was always wrong etc. That didn't happen. What happened was, a team with zero idea how to play against ten men, made it quite clear that they had zero idea how to play against ten men. In those last ten minutes of the first half, just after Gardner had been sent off, Pulis should have had the players going for it - make it two before half time, but he didn't. It was more hoofing, no more players getting forward than had been previously. To their credit, Sunderland came out firing in the second half but after weathering the storm for the first five/ten minutes, a manager with an ounce of attacking nous would have taken Whitehead off (Pulis made a point of saying he was terrified of making a tackle at half time as he was on a booking... get him off then, bright spark!!) and putting Adam in the middle. Then get width (Kightly and Ethers for Walters and Whitehead at around the 60 minute mark would have sufficed)and stretch the play. Continuing to play long balls through the middle against ten men is idiotic and typical Pulis. It was a scared and cowardly managerial performance which was proved by his post-match interview ('pleased to get a point') How anyone can defend that is beyond me. Yes, we got a point, yes most would have settled for that before the game. But things happen in a game which would help 99% of other teams/managers to get a confidence-boosting win. The game summed Pulis up for me, not in a positive way. We certainly made di Canio's job many, many times easier than it needed to be. He knew exactly what to do to take control of the game because he knew exactly what we would do. I'll never know why we didn't take the game to them.
|
|
|
Post by mickstupp on May 7, 2013 10:40:17 GMT
Yes, he did. It was shown on TV yesterday with sound just from the ground, no commentry. Pulis was shouting "keep it" over and over again when players were about to pass forward. This man doesn't want his players to attack, and you don't win games this way. Hope the game on Sunday is the last time we see him lead the team at the Britannia. I don't know why I'm breaking my "don't bother wasting your energy on the bloody Oatcake" rule that I've managed to maintain for months for the sake of replying to this garbage, but I can't help myself: Yes, you're right. I watched the game on Sky and Pulis was regularly shouting "keep it" largely midway through the 2nd half when we started to fall apart and hoof it aimlessly. At roughly the same time, the camera cut to Pulis frantically waving his arms trying to push them up the pitch as we started to sit too deep. It was clearly an attempt to get the players to clam down and try to build up a sensible attack. It's all there as clear as day to anyone who cares to watch it rationally. But, of course, many here don't know the meaning of the word "rational" anymore, which is why enforced my "don't bother with the Oatcake" rule on myself in the first place. I can't abide people who refuse to think rationally. And now, of course, I'll just get the "rimmer" bullshit thrown at me. Which is not rational in any sense of the word. Actually, I'll let you into a little secret. I've been a supporter of Pulis but I've also had my worries over some of his poor tactics after casting a critical and rational eye over them. In the last couple of months though, my opinion of him has taken quite a dive. You know why? It's not directly because of his tactics or our poor results (though it is because of a factor that may well influence those things). It's because of the religious bullshit he recently came out with, implying that a none-existent fictional character called 'God' guides him. As I said - I can't abide people who refuse to think rationally, and that includes the manager of a football club I support thinking there is some sort of 'divine being' influencing how he manages that club. Now I've wasted my energy (and it is wasted energy because, sadly, if there is one thing that its near impossible to change in life, its turning a non-rational thinker into a rational one!) I'll crawl back under my rock and leave the Oatcake regulars to pontificate (deliberate choice of word!). With apologies to the few rational thinkers there are on here. You know who you are. Kudos to you for managing to criticise and debate rationally in this shit-storm. Though I'm not sure whether to admire you or fell sorry for you for wasting your time and energy! (I can't help but laugh now as I think of some of the non-rational numpties thinking proudly "oh yeah - that's me! I'm rational!") Very good post, Bob. We conceded a bad goal at a bad time, for me the only way they were going to score - even with 11 men- was via a set piece. I too heard Pulis shout 'keep it' on numerous occasions. More responsibility needs to layed at the feet of the players, it is not the managers fault that they couldn't defend a set play, make a hash of simple chances, and fail to complete the most basic of passes.
|
|
|
Post by luke2u on May 7, 2013 12:04:13 GMT
I don't know why I'm breaking my "don't bother wasting your energy on the bloody Oatcake" rule that I've managed to maintain for months for the sake of replying to this garbage, but I can't help myself: Yes, you're right. I watched the game on Sky and Pulis was regularly shouting "keep it" largely midway through the 2nd half when we started to fall apart and hoof it aimlessly. At roughly the same time, the camera cut to Pulis frantically waving his arms trying to push them up the pitch as we started to sit too deep. It was clearly an attempt to get the players to clam down and try to build up a sensible attack. It's all there as clear as day to anyone who cares to watch it rationally. But, of course, many here don't know the meaning of the word "rational" anymore, which is why enforced my "don't bother with the Oatcake" rule on myself in the first place. I can't abide people who refuse to think rationally. And now, of course, I'll just get the "rimmer" bullshit thrown at me. Which is not rational in any sense of the word. Actually, I'll let you into a little secret. I've been a supporter of Pulis but I've also had my worries over some of his poor tactics after casting a critical and rational eye over them. In the last couple of months though, my opinion of him has taken quite a dive. You know why? It's not directly because of his tactics or our poor results (though it is because of a factor that may well influence those things). It's because of the religious bullshit he recently came out with, implying that a none-existent fictional character called 'God' guides him. As I said - I can't abide people who refuse to think rationally, and that includes the manager of a football club I support thinking there is some sort of 'divine being' influencing how he manages that club. Now I've wasted my energy (and it is wasted energy because, sadly, if there is one thing that its near impossible to change in life, its turning a non-rational thinker into a rational one!) I'll crawl back under my rock and leave the Oatcake regulars to pontificate (deliberate choice of word!). With apologies to the few rational thinkers there are on here. You know who you are. Kudos to you for managing to criticise and debate rationally in this shit-storm. Though I'm not sure whether to admire you or fell sorry for you for wasting your time and energy! (I can't help but laugh now as I think of some of the non-rational numpties thinking proudly "oh yeah - that's me! I'm rational!") Very good post, Bob. We conceded a bad goal at a bad time, for me the only way they were going to score - even with 11 men- was via a set piece. I too heard Pulis shout 'keep it' on numerous occasions. More responsibility needs to layed at the feet of the players, it is not the managers fault that they couldn't defend a set play, make a hash of simple chances, and fail to complete the most basic of passes. But you can't keep the ball when players are on a run in a counter attck. To shout at the players in that moment you just don't want us to have a go at goal, and that's really disappointing.
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on May 7, 2013 12:14:05 GMT
Yes, he did. It was shown on TV yesterday with sound just from the ground, no commentry. Pulis was shouting "keep it" over and over again when players were about to pass forward. This man doesn't want his players to attack, and you don't win games this way. Hope the game on Sunday is the last time we see him lead the team at the Britannia. I don't know why I'm breaking my "don't bother wasting your energy on the bloody Oatcake" rule that I've managed to maintain for months for the sake of replying to this garbage, but I can't help myself: Yes, you're right. I watched the game on Sky and Pulis was regularly shouting "keep it" largely midway through the 2nd half when we started to fall apart and hoof it aimlessly. At roughly the same time, the camera cut to Pulis frantically waving his arms trying to push them up the pitch as we started to sit too deep. It was clearly an attempt to get the players to clam down and try to build up a sensible attack. It's all there as clear as day to anyone who cares to watch it rationally. But, of course, many here don't know the meaning of the word "rational" anymore, which is why enforced my "don't bother with the Oatcake" rule on myself in the first place. I can't abide people who refuse to think rationally. And now, of course, I'll just get the "rimmer" bullshit thrown at me. Which is not rational in any sense of the word. Actually, I'll let you into a little secret. I've been a supporter of Pulis but I've also had my worries over some of his poor tactics after casting a critical and rational eye over them. In the last couple of months though, my opinion of him has taken quite a dive. You know why? It's not directly because of his tactics or our poor results (though it is because of a factor that may well influence those things). It's because of the religious bullshit he recently came out with, implying that a none-existent fictional character called 'God' guides him. As I said - I can't abide people who refuse to think rationally, and that includes the manager of a football club I support thinking there is some sort of 'divine being' influencing how he manages that club. Now I've wasted my energy (and it is wasted energy because, sadly, if there is one thing that its near impossible to change in life, its turning a non-rational thinker into a rational one!) I'll crawl back under my rock and leave the Oatcake regulars to pontificate (deliberate choice of word!). With apologies to the few rational thinkers there are on here. You know who you are. Kudos to you for managing to criticise and debate rationally in this shit-storm. Though I'm not sure whether to admire you or fell sorry for you for wasting your time and energy! (I can't help but laugh now as I think of some of the non-rational numpties thinking proudly "oh yeah - that's me! I'm rational!") Not sure where you put me but that is a great post.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 7, 2013 15:11:25 GMT
imnotbob
Leaving aside the smug supposition that you're more rational than those people who don't agree with you, since when was supporting Stoke City rational? Football is about more than dull logic. If you don't believe me go make the rational choice of supporting a team that's got a chance of winning something.
I know the rest of us who have a different viewpoint are just thickos compared to you, but bear with us.
|
|
|
Post by iglugluk on May 7, 2013 15:46:28 GMT
Of course any player worth his salt should stand up and be responsible for his own performance. However, Pulis decided which players to buy and subsequently how the team should set up and play. After having Sunderland ( and the crowd ) on the ropes we let them off 2nd half yesterday. Apparently we had no real midfield options and had to keep 2 Def. Mids who were scared to make a tackle 'cause they were on yellows. Given the amount of midfield signings Pulis and his team made last summer that has to be a very questionable situation indeed. I ask myself: Why are we still relying on Whelan and Whitehead after all we've spent? Why didn't we take Huddlestone in the summer? Why haven't we got viable wingers on either side? Why haven't we got the fullbacks we need? Pulis should have answered these type of questions and quite clearly hasn't. It would be okay if he had only just taken over but he hasn't and it's not like he hasn't had the funds required either.
|
|
|
Post by Miles Offside on May 7, 2013 16:01:09 GMT
Which part of my post didn't you understand? I understood it. Are you struggling with those questions though? Probably the reason you're still not getting my first post is you think I was defending Pulis. I wasn't. I said Pulis has his responsibilities. What do you think I meant by that?
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 7, 2013 16:17:37 GMT
I know what you meant by that. My point was that the buck stops with him. He is responsible for it all. If a player's not doing what he wants or needs him to do, that's what he's paid to deal with. If he's got a right back and a striker on the wing, is still playing the same midfielders we had five years ago, persevering with a striker who doesn't score or even fit with how we play and hasn't signed a left back in years, then that's all his fault, nobody else's.
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on May 7, 2013 16:25:58 GMT
The players play how the manager tells the too,2nd half they changed it went for it pulis didn't know what do and must of told the players to sit back defend and hoof it forward, the man has no idea,if QPR and Norwich even changed there play and went to try get a result against us we wouldn't of beat them the man has to go Does he tell them to constantly miss place passes and give away the ball in dangerous areas?
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 7, 2013 16:31:59 GMT
The players play how the manager tells the too,2nd half they changed it went for it pulis didn't know what do and must of told the players to sit back defend and hoof it forward, the man has no idea,if QPR and Norwich even changed there play and went to try get a result against us we wouldn't of beat them the man has to go Does he tell them to constantly miss place passes and give away the ball in dangerous areas? No, but he is given state of the art training facilities, plenty of time and millions of pounds a year to deal with it. If after ten years we still start games with five players out of position and with players who lack rudimentary technique, who's responsible?
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on May 7, 2013 17:04:57 GMT
Does he tell them to constantly miss place passes and give away the ball in dangerous areas? No, but he is given state of the art training facilities, plenty of time and millions of pounds a year to deal with it. If after ten years we still start games with five players out of position and with players who lack rudimentary technique, who's responsible? The manager mostly, but the post I quoted was trying to lay it all at his door, the players need to take responsibility for poor performances, we know they can do better, even with the shit way they are being asked to play, most of them have been shit since Christmas.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 7, 2013 17:15:20 GMT
No, but he is given state of the art training facilities, plenty of time and millions of pounds a year to deal with it. If after ten years we still start games with five players out of position and with players who lack rudimentary technique, who's responsible? The manager mostly, but the post I quoted was trying to lay it all at his door, the players need to take responsibility for poor performances, we know they can do better, even with the shit way they are being asked to play, most of them have been shit since Christmas. All managers have to deal with the form of players and individual mistakes. It's a fact of life. He's been backed to the hilt in every way - with money, time and the personal support of the club's owners - and we still have glaring holes in the team, an approach that plays percentages as a way of stumbling to 40 points, the writing off of games before a ball has been kicked and a style of play that redefines 'rudimentary'. If he is to stay, he needs to answer some very serious questions about what the fuck he has been playing at. He doesn't think he's answerable to anybody but Mr Coates so I hope the questions come from that direction.
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on May 7, 2013 18:06:01 GMT
The manager mostly, but the post I quoted was trying to lay it all at his door, the players need to take responsibility for poor performances, we know they can do better, even with the shit way they are being asked to play, most of them have been shit since Christmas. All managers have to deal with the form of players and individual mistakes. It's a fact of life. He's been backed to the hilt in every way - with money, time and the personal support of the club's owners - and we still have glaring holes in the team, an approach that plays percentages as a way of stumbling to 40 points, the writing off of games before a ball has been kicked and a style of play that redefines 'rudimentary'. If he is to stay, he needs to answer some very serious questions about what the fuck he has been playing at. He doesn't think he's answerable to anybody but Mr Coates so I hope the questions come from that direction. I agree with you completely, 100%, but it doesn't help that 90% of the players have been largely not good enough since Christmas, I'm including players like Huth, N'Zonzi etc in that.
|
|