|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 16, 2013 20:43:01 GMT
Why not? I see people who I haven't seen for a while who give a little snigger and say, 'Mark Hughes' as if we've just employed the ghost of Alan Ball. I have every confidence that he will shove it down peoples throats but for a lot of people he is a figure of ridicule, just like Pulis is for others, lots of the, reside on here. The kind of people who found it 'laughable' we'd appoint Hughes are, generally speaking, the sort who can't remember what they had for tea yesterday. They see QPR and don't take into account his whole career. Athletic Bilbao are a bigger club than Stoke City. It'd be the equivalent of Pulis getting, say, the Everton job. Moreover, going from Bielsa to Pulis would make Pulis to Martinez look like a seamless transition. He's Pep's mentor and one of the pioneers of tiki taka. Big change going from that to your left back hitting the big man with a long diagonal every time he gets the ball. There's no difference though, people are laughing based on perceived reputation of the two managers, infact laughing at Hughes is a considerably bigger kick in the nuts the more I think about it.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2013 20:46:46 GMT
The kind of people who found it 'laughable' we'd appoint Hughes are, generally speaking, the sort who can't remember what they had for tea yesterday. They see QPR and don't take into account his whole career. Athletic Bilbao are a bigger club than Stoke City. It'd be the equivalent of Pulis getting, say, the Everton job. Moreover, going from Bielsa to Pulis would make Pulis to Martinez look like a seamless transition. He's Pep's mentor and one of the pioneers of tiki taka. Big change going from that to your left back hitting the big man with a long diagonal every time he gets the ball. There's no difference though, people are laughing based on perceived reputation of the two managers, infact laughing at Hughes is a considerably bigger kick in the nuts the more I think about it. I don't see how some people basing their view of Hughes solely on QPR means Pulis has a hope in hell of getting the Athletic job.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 16, 2013 20:50:10 GMT
There's no difference though, people are laughing based on perceived reputation of the two managers, infact laughing at Hughes is a considerably bigger kick in the nuts the more I think about it. I don't see how some people basing their view of Hughes solely on QPR means Pulis has a hope in hell of getting the Athletic job. I never said he had a chance of getting it just that some people find it equally laughable that Hughes simply strolls into what outside the top seven clubs is about as a good a job as you can get in this country, what with it's locally based and generous ownership.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2013 20:55:55 GMT
I don't see how some people basing their view of Hughes solely on QPR means Pulis has a hope in hell of getting the Athletic job. I never said he had a chance of getting it just that some people find it equally laughable that Hughes simply strolls into what outside the top seven clubs is about as a good a job as you can get in this country, what with it's locally based and generous ownership. Surely anyone with a memory longer than a goldfish can see why the two things aren't the same though? That Hughes' overall record is good enough that it shouldn't be a shock or a joke that he's got another prem job, whereas Pulis, about as parochial a manager as there is, getting a big job abroad at a team whose previous manager played a style as diametrically opposed to his as it gets is nothing short of fantasy.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 16, 2013 21:01:25 GMT
Whatever the rights or wrongs of it many people see it in pretty much a similar vein. You only had to look at our press conference and the initial reaction to see that Coates and Hughes knew exactly where Hughes's wider reputation was after QPR.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2013 21:03:44 GMT
Whatever the rights or wrongs of it many people see it in pretty much a similar vein. You only had to look at our press conference and the initial reaction to see that Coates and Hughes knew exactly where Hughes's wider reputation was after QPR. I still don't see the relevance on a thread about Pulis and Bilbao. 'Many people' might see the two as the same. They'd be wrong.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 16, 2013 21:08:31 GMT
Whatever the rights or wrongs of it many people see it in pretty much a similar vein. You only had to look at our press conference and the initial reaction to see that Coates and Hughes knew exactly where Hughes's wider reputation was after QPR. I still don't see the relevance on a thread about Pulis and Bilbao. 'Many people' might see the two as the same. They'd be wrong. Manager getting job he doesn't seem to deserve or is beyond his perceived competence. Very similar I'd say.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2013 21:14:37 GMT
I still don't see the relevance on a thread about Pulis and Bilbao. 'Many people' might see the two as the same. They'd be wrong. Manager getting job he doesn't seem to deserve or is beyond his perceived competence. Very similar I'd say. But that isn't true of Hughes is it, for starters? Plus, Bilbao are a far bigger club than Stoke, which magnifies the in likeliness. Pulis has never been linked with a big job of any kind even in this country. Hughes has had a bigger job than Stoke already in his career and done well at clubs of a similar stature. Pulis has no equivalent with a club of Athletic's stature, and that's before you even take into account the unlikelihood of him going to Europe given his parochialism at the club. Also, Hughes' style isn't a dramatic departure from Pulis' whereas Pulis would be a drastic change from Bielsa. The two are only similar if you if you ignore four fifths of Hughes' managerial career and the context of Bilbao, their size, and how they've played in recent seasons.
|
|
|
Post by fca47 on Jun 16, 2013 21:23:04 GMT
I must say that everyone I've spoken to who is not a Stoke fan, feels sorry for us and assumes we are not happy with the appointment.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2013 21:26:42 GMT
I must say that everyone I've spoken to who is not a Stoke fan, feels sorry for us and assumes we are not happy with the appointment. As an exile, this is the view of everyone I have spoken to
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2013 21:27:59 GMT
I must say that everyone I've spoken to who is not a Stoke fan, feels sorry for us and assumes we are not happy with the appointment. It could go either way couldn't it. Could be a Blackburn-style success, could be a QPR-esque disaster.
|
|
|
Post by MarkWolstanton on Jun 16, 2013 21:32:25 GMT
English football is generally regarded in the rest of the World as being behind the times being based on long ball chase, sweat and aggression.
The idea that a European club of any standing is going to take a manager from England who has taken that type of game and stripped it down to the most minimal of hit and hope bones seen since the Premier League came into being is talking themselves into the realms of fantasy.
To then try and draw a parallel between such a massive suspension of reality and a manager with a reasonable record in Premier League management getting a job at a Premier League club that flirted with relegation the previous season is message board madness not seen in the sober real world, surely?
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 16, 2013 21:36:26 GMT
Manager getting job he doesn't seem to deserve or is beyond his perceived competence. Very similar I'd say. But that isn't true of Hughes is it, for starters? Plus, Bilbao are a far bigger club than Stoke, which magnifies the in likeliness. Pulis has never been linked with a big job of any kind even in this country. Hughes has had a bigger job than Stoke already in his career and done well at clubs of a similar stature. Pulis has no equivalent with a club of Athletic's stature, and that's before you even take into account the unlikelihood of him going to Europe given his parochialism at the club. Also, Hughes' style isn't a dramatic departure from Pulis' whereas Pulis would be a drastic change from Bielsa. The two are only similar if you if you ignore four fifths of Hughes' managerial career and the context of Bilbao, their size, and how they've played in recent seasons. They're not the same thing but definitely based on similar prejudices. Just because people buy into one prejudice and not the other is largely irrelevant.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2013 21:42:01 GMT
But that isn't true of Hughes is it, for starters? Plus, Bilbao are a far bigger club than Stoke, which magnifies the in likeliness. Pulis has never been linked with a big job of any kind even in this country. Hughes has had a bigger job than Stoke already in his career and done well at clubs of a similar stature. Pulis has no equivalent with a club of Athletic's stature, and that's before you even take into account the unlikelihood of him going to Europe given his parochialism at the club. Also, Hughes' style isn't a dramatic departure from Pulis' whereas Pulis would be a drastic change from Bielsa. The two are only similar if you if you ignore four fifths of Hughes' managerial career and the context of Bilbao, their size, and how they've played in recent seasons. They're not the same thing but definitely based on similar prejudices. Just because people buy into one prejudice and not the other is largely irrelevant. I don't see how prejudice comes into it with Pulis and Bilbao? The circumstances surrounding the two are totally different. Perceptions that Hughes is a joke appointment are unfair based on his career in management overall. Perceptions that a club of Bilbao's stature would replace Marcelo Bielsa with Tony Pulis are in the realms of Daily Mash piss-take.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 16, 2013 21:43:27 GMT
They're not the same thing but definitely based on similar prejudices. Just because people buy into one prejudice and not the other is largely irrelevant. I don't see how prejudice comes into it with Pulis and Bilbao? The circumstances surrounding the two are totally different. Perceptions that Hughes is a joke appointment are unfair based on his career in management overall. Perceptions that a club of Bilbao's stature would replace Marcelo Bielsa with Tony Pulis are in the realms of Daily Mash piss-take. Would you feel the same if Mark Hughes was linked with the Bilbao job?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2013 21:46:49 GMT
I don't see how prejudice comes into it with Pulis and Bilbao? The circumstances surrounding the two are totally different. Perceptions that Hughes is a joke appointment are unfair based on his career in management overall. Perceptions that a club of Bilbao's stature would replace Marcelo Bielsa with Tony Pulis are in the realms of Daily Mash piss-take. Would you feel the same if Mark Hughes was linked with the Bilbao job? I'd think Hughes an utterly bewildering appointment for them, certainly. Why are you comparing the Stoke and Bilbao jobs when the only thing the two have in common are red and white stripes?
|
|
|
Post by MarkWolstanton on Jun 16, 2013 21:47:15 GMT
But that isn't true of Hughes is it, for starters? Plus, Bilbao are a far bigger club than Stoke, which magnifies the in likeliness. Pulis has never been linked with a big job of any kind even in this country. Hughes has had a bigger job than Stoke already in his career and done well at clubs of a similar stature. Pulis has no equivalent with a club of Athletic's stature, and that's before you even take into account the unlikelihood of him going to Europe given his parochialism at the club. Also, Hughes' style isn't a dramatic departure from Pulis' whereas Pulis would be a drastic change from Bielsa. The two are only similar if you if you ignore four fifths of Hughes' managerial career and the context of Bilbao, their size, and how they've played in recent seasons. They're not the same thing but definitely based on similar prejudices. Just because people buy into one prejudice and not the other is largely irrelevant. What the hell as prejudice got to do with it? Throwing in daft emotive descriptions like that doesn't mean anything. The idea Pulis would be acceptable at a top club in a country where football is played as a precise art is just fucking ridiculous. End of.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 16, 2013 21:51:59 GMT
They're not the same thing but definitely based on similar prejudices. Just because people buy into one prejudice and not the other is largely irrelevant. What the hell as prejudice got to do with it? Throwing in daft emotive descriptions like that doesn't mean anything. The idea Pulis would be acceptable at a top club in a country where football is played as a precise art is just fucking ridiculous. End of. I had the misfortune of watching Osasuna Vs Zaragosa last season, the only precise thing about it was that it was precisely fucking wank!
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 16, 2013 21:55:20 GMT
Would you feel the same if Mark Hughes was linked with the Bilbao job? I'd think Hughes an utterly bewildering appointment for them, certainly. Why are you comparing the Stoke and Bilbao jobs when the only thing the two have in common are red and white stripes? I'm not comparing the jobs, although on balance Bilbao's recent history has been poor other than 2011/12, I'm comparing the seeming hysterics that people have with either notion. The think that pisses me off most is that if Mr Z in his name, bottom six every year and just got relegated Martinez got it, no one would raise an eyebrow.
|
|
|
Post by MarkWolstanton on Jun 16, 2013 21:57:11 GMT
What the hell as prejudice got to do with it? Throwing in daft emotive descriptions like that doesn't mean anything. The idea Pulis would be acceptable at a top club in a country where football is played as a precise art is just fucking ridiculous. End of. I had the misfortune of watching Osasuna Vs Zaragosa last season, the only precise thing about it was that it was precisely fucking wank! What the fook has that got to do with it? To be honest this is so ridiculous it isn't worth discussing. I respectfully leave you to continue to argue with however is bored enough that the idea of Pulis taking over at Athletic Bilbao is on the same planet as Mark Hughes being appointed at Stoke. Enjoy before the men with restraints arrive.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 16, 2013 22:00:48 GMT
I had the misfortune of watching Osasuna Vs Zaragosa last season, the only precise thing about it was that it was precisely fucking wank! What the fook has that got to do with it? To be honest this is so ridiculous it isn't worth discussing. I respectfully leave you to continue to argue with however is bored enough that the idea of Pulis taking over at Athletic Bilbao is on the same planet as Mark Hughes being appointed at Stoke. Enjoy before the men with restraints arrive. You're making out the Spanish League to be something it simply isn't outside of the top clubs and I'm just highlighting the prejudice and hatred you and others continue to display even though you finally got your 'cum shot' with Pulis leaving. Night night.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2013 22:04:14 GMT
I'd think Hughes an utterly bewildering appointment for them, certainly. Why are you comparing the Stoke and Bilbao jobs when the only thing the two have in common are red and white stripes? I'm not comparing the jobs, although on balance Bilbao's recent history has been poor other than 2011/12, I'm comparing the seeming hysterics that people have with either notion. The think that pisses me off most is that if Mr Z in his name, bottom six every year and just got relegated Martinez got it, no one would raise an eyebrow. But the two notions aren't the same Sheiky. You yourself have said on this thread you don't think Pulis has a chance of the Bilbao job and you've said before that Hughes was one of the best available candidates. So why are we acting like the two are the same? There's a host of things that I keep listing that make Pulis to Bilbao a non-starter. It's not a matter of a dig at TP's reputation, things like methods experience, culture etc have to come into play too. A manager who's coming back from a major failure joining a middling top flight club, having had success at middling top flight clubs, isn't an eyebrow raiser on the same scale as a grizzled mid-table Welshman who's never managed outside England before landing a job at one of the biggest clubs in Spain, with all the basque baggage that goes with it, and replacing a manager with a style as far removed from his own as its possible to get.
|
|
|
Post by MarkWolstanton on Jun 16, 2013 22:06:25 GMT
There is that word prejudice again. Prejudice can also be used in a context to describe a state of mind where you have painted yourself into such a desperate corner that reality has been lost. It appears to be where this thread has led you again. He is gone. He is never coming back. The world goes on. Night night.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 16, 2013 22:11:15 GMT
I'm not comparing the jobs, although on balance Bilbao's recent history has been poor other than 2011/12, I'm comparing the seeming hysterics that people have with either notion. The think that pisses me off most is that if Mr Z in his name, bottom six every year and just got relegated Martinez got it, no one would raise an eyebrow. But the two notions aren't the same Sheiky. You yourself have said on this thread you don't think Pulis has a chance of the Bilbao job and you've said before that Hughes was one of the best available candidates. So why are we acting like the two are the same? There's a host of things that I keep listing that make Pulis to Bilbao a non-starter. It's not a matter of a dig at TP's reputation, things like methods experience, culture etc have to come into play too. A manager who's coming back from a major failure joining a middling top flight club, having had success at middling top flight clubs, isn't an eyebrow raiser on the same scale as a grizzled mid-table Welshman who's never managed outside England before landing a job at one of the biggest clubs in Spain, with all the basque baggage that goes with it, and replacing a manager with a style as far removed from his own as its possible to get. But I'm not comparing the worth of each job, Rob I'm comparing the reaction to each and there are definite similarities. I came across the press conference link again the other day and impressive as Hughes as I'm pretty sure even the Bilbao chairman wouldn't need to go the extremes that Coates and Hughes did to justify the QPR period. I don't think you appreciate the extent of the mockery that some otherwise reasonable people have for Hughes. Bring it on, it could be a uniting factor but it does definitely exist.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 16, 2013 22:15:31 GMT
There is that word prejudice again. Prejudice can also be used in a context to describe a state of mind where you have painted yourself into such a desperate corner that reality has been lost. It appears to be where this thread has led you again. He is gone. He is never coming back. The world goes on. Night night. I don't want him back but just because you choose to block out reality because your devil has gone doesn't mean it isn't happening. Luckily I support the team regardless of who the manager is. Sleep tight if you conscience allows
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2013 22:18:00 GMT
But the two notions aren't the same Sheiky. You yourself have said on this thread you don't think Pulis has a chance of the Bilbao job and you've said before that Hughes was one of the best available candidates. So why are we acting like the two are the same? There's a host of things that I keep listing that make Pulis to Bilbao a non-starter. It's not a matter of a dig at TP's reputation, things like methods experience, culture etc have to come into play too. A manager who's coming back from a major failure joining a middling top flight club, having had success at middling top flight clubs, isn't an eyebrow raiser on the same scale as a grizzled mid-table Welshman who's never managed outside England before landing a job at one of the biggest clubs in Spain, with all the basque baggage that goes with it, and replacing a manager with a style as far removed from his own as its possible to get. But I'm not comparing the worth of each job, Rob I'm comparing the reaction to each and there are definite similarities. I came across the press conference link again the other day and impressive as Hughes as I'm pretty sure even the Bilbao chairman wouldn't need to go the extremes that Coates and Hughes did to justify the QPR period. I don't think you appreciate the extent of the mockery that some otherwise reasonable people have for Hughes. Bring it on, it could be a uniting factor but it does definitely exist. But how can you ignore the worth of the jobs Sheiky when that makes a huge difference to the comparison? One is a far more outlandish and unlikely prospect than the other. The idea that Pulis could get the Bilbao job is daft. The idea that Hughes could get the Stoke job isn't. The size/worth of the jobs is one of the main reasons why that's the case. Whether Hughes succeeds or fails, I think it's fair to suggest that anyone dismissing him out of hand purely based on QPR isn't worth listening to.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 16, 2013 22:23:53 GMT
But I'm not comparing the worth of each job, Rob I'm comparing the reaction to each and there are definite similarities. I came across the press conference link again the other day and impressive as Hughes as I'm pretty sure even the Bilbao chairman wouldn't need to go the extremes that Coates and Hughes did to justify the QPR period. I don't think you appreciate the extent of the mockery that some otherwise reasonable people have for Hughes. Bring it on, it could be a uniting factor but it does definitely exist. But how can you ignore the worth of the jobs Sheiky when that makes a huge difference to the comparison? One is a far more outlandish and unlikely prospect than the other. The idea that Pulis could get the Bilbao job is daft. The idea that Hughes could get the Stoke job isn't. The size/worth of the jobs is one of the main reasons why that's the case. Whether Hughes succeeds or fails, I think it's fair to suggest that anyone dismissing him out of hand purely based on QPR isn't worth listening to. But the hilarity at both situations exists though Rob. You can dismiss it and perhaps are right to do so but plenty of people find the prospect of Hughes waltzing into a Premier League job equally as "rib tickling" as Pulis prowling the La Liga touchline on a Sunday night.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2013 22:27:03 GMT
But how can you ignore the worth of the jobs Sheiky when that makes a huge difference to the comparison? One is a far more outlandish and unlikely prospect than the other. The idea that Pulis could get the Bilbao job is daft. The idea that Hughes could get the Stoke job isn't. The size/worth of the jobs is one of the main reasons why that's the case. Whether Hughes succeeds or fails, I think it's fair to suggest that anyone dismissing him out of hand purely based on QPR isn't worth listening to. But the hilarity at both situations exists though Rob. You can dismiss it and perhaps are right to do so but plenty of people find the prospect of Hughes waltzing into a Premier League job equally as "rib tickling" as Pulis prowling the La Liga touchline on a Sunday night. Yeah. Plenty of people think/thought Pulis a dinosaur and didn't appreciate what he did for the club, while plenty of outsiders made him/us a punchline. In short, plenty of people don't do things like 'balance' or bother to scratch beneath the surface, so who gives a fuck what they think? Anyone who does see the two situations as equally 'rib tickling' doesn't know what they're talking about.
|
|
|
Post by Olgrligm on Jun 16, 2013 22:51:17 GMT
For all manner of reasons I doubt anyone would seriously give TP a chance of getting the job and I doubt that he would either. Yes, it's ludicrous that a joker like Martinez has walked into the Everton job, but that's a little besides the point. You wonder why, given all that, TP has applied. One paper suggests Benitez convinced him he'd be a frontrunner. Perhaps he knows something we don't? Perhaps the trip to Bilbao was surprisingly fruitful. Perhaps he's just taking a real flier on it and I'm reading too much into it. I suppose you can't knock him for trying.
Perhaps in Spain dour British managers are about to be the 'in' thing, like tanned chancers who talk about principles have become the latest must have football club accessory in this country.
|
|
|
Post by dutchstokie on Jun 17, 2013 13:34:35 GMT
He'll be doing Walters' family tree as we speak to see if he has any Basque heritage. Well he has got a bit of 'swarth' about him bayern, you must admit !
|
|