|
Post by gaznandi on Oct 24, 2013 9:21:00 GMT
Just out of interest, was there ever a statement that said that Mr Pulis had been sacked? Genuine question as I have never seen one. Wasn't it like this with Holloway? Mutual consent, different directions etc? Thanks anyway and goodbye?
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Oct 24, 2013 9:23:44 GMT
I think you are wrong MarkW
I for one couldn't give a fuck where he does or doesn't go...I don't even wish him well if he ends up at Palace as we need Palace and Sunderland to stay exactly where they are.
Personally, I can't see him doing anywhere near enough there with the players they have. They simply didn't do enough in the summer and have started to badly.
The notion that the club couldn't sustain Pulis is bullshit. Yes, they may want to reign back on spending but that could have been done with Pulis. Not sure exactly how much we are reigning it in by giving we were making offers of £7-8m for players and we have brought 5/6 players in. It seems we are that awash with money we can even make signings for players that won't land until January.
At the end of the day, it's his club and he can decide who he does or doesn't want but that doesn't make it right.
|
|
|
Post by MarkWolstanton on Oct 24, 2013 9:25:09 GMT
You can read this thread and detect that a very small number of individuals interest in Pulis getting the Palace or any job goes beyond a passing interest in the fate of a ex-manager. The thinly disguised sub-plot reads suspiciously like they want things beyond that; namely Pulis gets Premier League job, Pulis gets better results with Premier League club than Stoke achieve. Some are that polarised you suspect that they would be happy to see a Pulis run team like Palace stay up at our expense. Like that would prove some sort of point in their favour. We have seen it all before of course when Pulis was at Plymouth and so called Stoke supporters actually wished for and celebrated them beating Stoke! We all saw it. Fact is that even if the fondest wishes of the smallest of minorities came true it wouldn't change a thing. St Peter sacked Pulis because this football club could not sustain him any longer and needed to find a new way involving economically viable transfer policies and development of its own talent. The things Tony Pulis could never deliver on in a million dossiers of intent. In broad terms the time where TP being manager was mutually beneficial to him and the club had come to an end. Wishing disaster on our own club and that coming to pass in parallel to Pulis doing well elsewhere wont change that one jot. And why the fuck shouldn't we have more than a passing interest in a man who only left his post as our manager a few months ago. Like it or not Tony Pulis is very much a part of our rich history. I cared about Lou after he went, I cared about Steino after he went, I cared about Paul Ware after he went and I'll fucking well care about Tony Pulis if that's ok with you. Try reading the post, take something that relieves your premenstrual anxiety and then come back and tell me where I ever said taking an interest was wrong.
|
|
|
Post by foxysgloves on Oct 24, 2013 9:36:06 GMT
And why the fuck shouldn't we have more than a passing interest in a man who only left his post as our manager a few months ago. Like it or not Tony Pulis is very much a part of our rich history. I cared about Lou after he went, I cared about Steino after he went, I cared about Paul Ware after he went and I'll fucking well care about Tony Pulis if that's ok with you. Try reading the post, take something that relieves your premenstrual anxiety and then come back and tell me where I ever said taking an interest was wrong. Apologies. I confess I only read the first sentence. It's just I've grown accustomed to reading the same shite which seems to suggest that to have any interest in, or affinity with, Tony Pulis is somehow the same as being totally against Hughes. From what I can see, bar the extreme Antis and the extreme Pros, most people are supportive of Hughes and appreciative of what Pulis did. I'd love to see Tone get the job at Palarse providing it doesn't affect us in any negative way. Is that such a bad thing?
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Oct 24, 2013 9:39:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by superscfc on Oct 24, 2013 9:45:07 GMT
I like a few on here predicted Pulis for the job. It was inevitable that Holloway wouldn't see the season out, the club is run simaliry to Stoke I believe (owner etc are palace men). Holloway and Pulis are very good friends and I don't think he would leave Palace without discussing who might replace him.
Tone will get it and I am furious I never stuck some money on a couple of weeks ago
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Oct 24, 2013 9:56:00 GMT
pulis may feel ready to take it and i suspect i will be proved wrong when i say i dont think he would want to blemish "his never been relegated" line on CV
however, he will do a good job there in organising a defence and it will not be pretty but in my opinion crystal palace are as doomed as when derby, burnley, watford came up.
not much quality or desire to work with, no aging but experienced premier league pros to rely on and i think they are too far behind to have that foundation where they can attract the addition of an ethers and beattie in january
palace would be best appointing pulis with the mindsight of using the rest of the season (sad after only 8 games) to prepare to bounce back up after a year in the championship
does pulis want that challenge.
If I was pulis Id say from the start at least in public, we will try our best to stay up but that is my long term plan - would help hiin all quarters
|
|
expat
Youth Player
Posts: 357
|
Post by expat on Oct 24, 2013 10:08:13 GMT
We hear "by mutual consent" all the time in the media, but what exactly does it mean? Surely either the manager resigns, or the board sack him?
Is it just the club's way of saying "none of your business" like when we hear "undisclosed fee" with transfers?
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Oct 24, 2013 10:09:12 GMT
We hear "by mutual consent" all the time in the media, but what exactly does it mean? Surely either the manager resigns, or the board sack him? Is it just the club's way of saying "none of your business" like when we hear "undisclosed fee" with transfers? not so i think in this case, unless their presser was oscar worthy
|
|
|
Post by devondumpling on Oct 24, 2013 10:32:24 GMT
Isn't this a bit like losing a partner, after many years in a relationship which started out great but ended in lots of arguments. Following entering into a new partnership with a sexy new number, you still hold a bit of a flame for your ex and are interested in what happens to them. All of a sudden there is rumours of them going out with a rival and you feel a bit queasy if they hit off, which makes you doubt your own new relationship. You can't help thinking about the final outcome, and all this grass is greener stuff, devil you know etc. Alternatively you; Hope they fuck up Hope they fuck so you can get back together again Fuck off up the Vale Couldn't give a monkeys (sorry toss) Reach for words of wisdom on the oatie to solve your dilemma Suicide is the only way out
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Oct 24, 2013 10:43:39 GMT
You can read this thread and detect that a very small number of individuals interest in Pulis getting the Palace or any job goes beyond a passing interest in the fate of a ex-manager. The thinly disguised sub-plot reads suspiciously like they want things beyond that; namely Pulis gets Premier League job, Pulis gets better results with Premier League club than Stoke achieve. Some are that polarised you suspect that they would be happy to see a Pulis run team like Palace stay up at our expense. Like that would prove some sort of point in their favour. We have seen it all before of course when Pulis was at Plymouth and so called Stoke supporters actually wished for and celebrated them beating Stoke! We all saw it. Fact is that even if the fondest wishes of the smallest of minorities came true it wouldn't change a thing. St Peter sacked Pulis because this football club could not sustain him any longer and needed to find a new way involving economically viable transfer policies and development of its own talent. The things Tony Pulis could never deliver on in a million dossiers of intent. In broad terms the time where TP being manager was mutually beneficial to him and the club had come to an end. Wishing disaster on our own club and that coming to pass in parallel to Pulis doing well elsewhere wont change that one jot. In 30 odd years of supporting Stoke I only remember one group of supporters so hung up on an ex manager that they traversed the high seas to worship him on the day we effectively got promoted after a quarter of a century in the wilderness. I don't remember your high handed, prissy condemnations back then?
|
|
|
Post by Dave the Rave on Oct 24, 2013 11:15:28 GMT
I'd hate to see Tone managing any other club.
For me, he's part of Stoke City FC and always will be.
But if he did, i'd never want his team to finish above ours.
|
|
|
Post by MarkWolstanton on Oct 24, 2013 11:21:55 GMT
Try reading the post, take something that relieves your premenstrual anxiety and then come back and tell me where I ever said taking an interest was wrong. Apologies. I confess I only read the first sentence. It's just I've grown accustomed to reading the same shite which seems to suggest that to have any interest in, or affinity with, Tony Pulis is somehow the same as being totally against Hughes. From what I can see, bar the extreme Antis and the extreme Pros, most people are supportive of Hughes and appreciative of what Pulis did. I'd love to see Tone get the job at Palarse providing it doesn't affect us in any negative way. Is that such a bad thing? We agree completely. I'm less bothered than you on the latter element. I wasn't even bothered what Lou did when he left Stoke and I am of the opinion he was our best manager of the modern age after Waddo...... and lets not even bother having a debate about that one today please!
|
|
|
Post by Mr_DaftBurger on Oct 24, 2013 11:24:04 GMT
Isn't this a bit like losing a partner, after many years in a relationship which started out great but ended in lots of arguments. Following entering into a new partnership with a sexy new number, you still hold a bit of a flame for your ex and are interested in what happens to them. All of a sudden there is rumours of them going out with a rival and you feel a bit queasy if they hit off, which makes you doubt your own new relationship. You can't help thinking about the final outcome, and all this grass is greener stuff, devil you know etc. Alternatively you; Hope they fuck up Hope they fuck so you can get back together again Fuck off up the Vale Couldn't give a monkeys (sorry toss) Reach for words of wisdom on the oatie to solve your dilemma Suicide is the only way out Some psychos will never let them go and will continually monitor their every move.
|
|
|
Post by MarkWolstanton on Oct 24, 2013 11:26:29 GMT
You can read this thread and detect that a very small number of individuals interest in Pulis getting the Palace or any job goes beyond a passing interest in the fate of a ex-manager. The thinly disguised sub-plot reads suspiciously like they want things beyond that; namely Pulis gets Premier League job, Pulis gets better results with Premier League club than Stoke achieve. Some are that polarised you suspect that they would be happy to see a Pulis run team like Palace stay up at our expense. Like that would prove some sort of point in their favour. We have seen it all before of course when Pulis was at Plymouth and so called Stoke supporters actually wished for and celebrated them beating Stoke! We all saw it. Fact is that even if the fondest wishes of the smallest of minorities came true it wouldn't change a thing. St Peter sacked Pulis because this football club could not sustain him any longer and needed to find a new way involving economically viable transfer policies and development of its own talent. The things Tony Pulis could never deliver on in a million dossiers of intent. In broad terms the time where TP being manager was mutually beneficial to him and the club had come to an end. Wishing disaster on our own club and that coming to pass in parallel to Pulis doing well elsewhere wont change that one jot. In 30 odd years of supporting Stoke I only remember one group of supporters so hung up on an ex manager that they traversed the high seas to worship him on the day we effectively got promoted after a quarter of a century in the wilderness. I don't remember your high handed, prissy condemnations back then? You don't recall the joy of some when Plymouth beat us or the cartwheels of pleasure when Boskamp's Stoke lost games such as the night at Leicester then? Of course you do.
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Oct 24, 2013 11:27:32 GMT
I think Tony really needs to let this record of never been relegated go myself. The Palace job, geographically at least, represents an excellent chance for him to get back into management, but he's not going to save them.
And before anyone pipes about him saving Stoke, consider this; Palace have Man City (twice), Chelsea (twice), Arsenal (twice), Man Utd at home, Liverpool at home and Tottenham away left to play. That's nine games, in which they'll be lucky to get a couple of points. In fact, if TP took over today and you gave him the points he won last season against them then they'd get six points. Add the three they've already got and that would leave them on nine points from 17 games. That means he'd have to win nearly thirty points from 21 games to have even a chance of staying up. It's just not going to happen, especially with the squad Palace have and taking into account that they'll also have to play clubs battling to avoid relegation who'd consider a result against them as a must-have three points.
He's spoken recently about his next job being to build a club. Well, if he takes the Palace job then he'll have to take the relegation on the chin and start building the club from the Championship.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Oct 24, 2013 11:31:41 GMT
In 30 odd years of supporting Stoke I only remember one group of supporters so hung up on an ex manager that they traversed the high seas to worship him on the day we effectively got promoted after a quarter of a century in the wilderness. I don't remember your high handed, prissy condemnations back then? You don't recall the joy of some when Plymouth beat us or the cartwheels of pleasure when Boskamp's Stoke lost games such as the night at Leicester then? Of course you do. I remember mumf and Plymouth I genuinely do not remember anyone celebrating Bosklump defeats and he was pretty much universally popular prior to notegate. The fact is that there is no evidence of anyone being so hung up on an ex manager that they went to a foreign country to break bread with him! Do you remember that? Of course you do! Did you criticise it? Of course you didn't!
|
|
|
Post by Dave the Rave on Oct 24, 2013 11:34:28 GMT
All very subjective Dave,
Pulis picked up a fair few points at home against the big clubs during his time at Stoke, and also picked up points away at Tottenham and Liverpool.
I see no reason why Pulis couldn't achieve 30+ points from 26 games, particularly if he get's them winning at home (as he did for us for 4 seasons).
If he does take the job, it could well be to our detriment.
If I had to predict a result in a Pulis' Palace vs Hughes' Stoke at Selhurst Park, I'd bet on a Pulis win 9 times out of ten unfortunately.
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Oct 24, 2013 11:35:38 GMT
All very subjective Dave, Pulis picked up a fair few points at home against the big clubs during his time at Stoke, and also picked up points away at Tottenham and Liverpool. I see no reason why Pulis couldn't achieve 30+ points from 26 games, particularly if he get's them winning at home (as he did for us for 4 seasons). If he does take the job, it could well be to our detriment. If I had to predict a result in a Pulis' Palace vs Hughes' Stoke at Selhurst Park, I'd bet on a Pulis win 9 times out of ten unfortunately. With that squad at Palace? Seriously?
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Oct 24, 2013 11:40:13 GMT
0-0 draw would be odds on
|
|
|
Post by Dave the Rave on Oct 24, 2013 11:41:46 GMT
All very subjective Dave, Pulis picked up a fair few points at home against the big clubs during his time at Stoke, and also picked up points away at Tottenham and Liverpool. I see no reason why Pulis couldn't achieve 30+ points from 26 games, particularly if he get's them winning at home (as he did for us for 4 seasons). If he does take the job, it could well be to our detriment. If I had to predict a result in a Pulis' Palace vs Hughes' Stoke at Selhurst Park, I'd bet on a Pulis win 9 times out of ten unfortunately. With that squad at Palace? Seriously? It's when Tone is at his best i'd say. A bunch of championship cloggers is his ideal team.
Not too dissimilar to the squad we came up with.
I just wouldn't put any challenge past him. If they stand any chance at all, I can't see anyone better than TP.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Oct 24, 2013 11:41:48 GMT
All very subjective Dave, Pulis picked up a fair few points at home against the big clubs during his time at Stoke, and also picked up points away at Tottenham and Liverpool. I see no reason why Pulis couldn't achieve 30+ points from 26 games, particularly if he get's them winning at home (as he did for us for 4 seasons). If he does take the job, it could well be to our detriment. If I had to predict a result in a Pulis' Palace vs Hughes' Stoke at Selhurst Park, I'd bet on a Pulis win 9 times out of ten unfortunately. he had the nucleaus of a very good championship players, decent seasoned prem pros in faye delap etc, a brilliant experienced keeper, an excellent young defender from manchester united, ricardo fuller he also had a vociferous home support and a media that hated us to galvanise the team he also had enough of a decent start which was enough to entice ethers and beattie, who in the 2nd half were instrumental in our survival. the late mama goal against villa was the catalysist for that first season, paddy power had already paid out and if we had lost that game against a decentish villa side it may have been different the new man at palace will have none of those things
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Oct 24, 2013 11:42:40 GMT
All very subjective Dave, Pulis picked up a fair few points at home against the big clubs during his time at Stoke, and also picked up points away at Tottenham and Liverpool. I see no reason why Pulis couldn't achieve 30+ points from 26 games, particularly if he get's them winning at home (as he did for us for 4 seasons). If he does take the job, it could well be to our detriment. If I had to predict a result in a Pulis' Palace vs Hughes' Stoke at Selhurst Park, I'd bet on a Pulis win 9 times out of ten unfortunately. With that squad at Palace? Seriously? With a Pulis defence and our attack I would fear the worse.
|
|
|
Post by stokeramblers on Oct 24, 2013 11:43:26 GMT
I think Tony really needs to let this record of never been relegated go myself. The Palace job, geographically at least, represents an excellent chance for him to get back into management, but he's not going to save them. Oh how they'd dance! Til the wee small hours, with much drinking and merriment. 'Ding dong the witch is dead, the wicked old witch'
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Oct 24, 2013 11:46:12 GMT
With that squad at Palace? Seriously? With a Pulis defence and our attack I would fear the worse. I wasn't really talking about Stoke playing at Palace against a Pulis team. More the opinion that TP could win 30+ points from 26 games with that Palace squad. That would be like winning the same amount of points per game as he managed in five years as Stoke manager in the Premier League with his own squad of players. Pie in the sky stuff.
|
|
|
Post by MarkWolstanton on Oct 24, 2013 11:46:37 GMT
You don't recall the joy of some when Plymouth beat us or the cartwheels of pleasure when Boskamp's Stoke lost games such as the night at Leicester then? Of course you do. I remember mumf and Plymouth I genuinely do not remember anyone celebrating Bosklump defeats and he was pretty much universally popular prior to notegate. The fact is that there is no evidence of anyone being so hung up on an ex manager that they went to a foreign country to break bread with him! Do you remember that? Of course you do! Did you criticise it? Of course you didn't! Why the hell would I even begin to think about criticising people for choosing to visit an ex-manager as part of a trip abroad? They weren't wishing ill on our club while they were doing it. They never agitated to get him back. They just liked the bloke. This board had a handful of diehard Pulis men pissing themselves with joy when Stoke lost games after the Pulis sacking part 1. Perhaps you were in a coma. Reactions of people to other managers leaving are totally irrelevant however much as you like try to throw them up in the air as a smokescreen to the real point I was making. The rights and wrongs of other situations don't excuse the fact that we have a small number of people using this message board who have allowed themselves to become more aligned with the fortunes of Tony Pulis than Stoke City.
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Oct 24, 2013 11:48:29 GMT
I remember mumf and Plymouth I genuinely do not remember anyone celebrating Bosklump defeats and he was pretty much universally popular prior to notegate. The fact is that there is no evidence of anyone being so hung up on an ex manager that they went to a foreign country to break bread with him! Do you remember that? Of course you do! Did you criticise it? Of course you didn't! Perhaps you were in a comma. Or maybe he was in a hyphen? Or perhaps a full stop?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2013 11:48:40 GMT
Definition of "unlucky": -
1) Leaving your current job to join a new one because you don't get on with your current boss. Said 'boss' then leaves and joins the new company that you work at.
2) Cameron Jerome
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Oct 24, 2013 11:50:56 GMT
With a Pulis defence and our attack I would fear the worse. I wasn't really talking about Stoke playing at Palace against a Pulis team. More the opinion that TP could win 30+ points from 26 games with that Palace squad. That would be like winning the same amount of points per game as he managed in five years as Stoke manager in the Premier League with his own squad of players. Pie in the sky stuff. Fair point. If Pulis does go to Palace he will have his work cut out that is for sure.
|
|
|
Post by MarkWolstanton on Oct 24, 2013 11:51:34 GMT
Perhaps you were in a comma. Or maybe he was in a hyphen? Or perhaps a full stop? Probably both. Its dark and satanic living in Sheiky's world of denial where innocent men are hung out to dry by strange men in suits and everyone is out to get you.
|
|