|
Post by Jamo on the wing on Mar 12, 2014 20:28:15 GMT
No player is bigger than the club but for me, a little bit of Stoke City died when Ric left.
I know that sounds melodramatic but it's the truth.
Hopefully in the future, we'll find a player who can make fools out of defenders and score amazing goals.
Maybe then the little piece that's missing could return to complete the red and white jigsaw for me.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2014 20:38:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Mar 13, 2014 7:40:47 GMT
I don't think any other player would have been allowed to pick a fight with the captain during a game, interview on TV like he couldn't give a fuck whether he was punished, kept by Stoke, or not, and then be the one to come out on top. Griffin was largely done for after that episode and Fuller kept. Isn't that about right? Yep. He made huge allowances for him for a long time, no question. Perplexing that he wanted him gone so desperately in the end though. It's all right making allowances for one player when he is streets ahead of everyone else and does the business. As time went on, I think Pulis found it to hard to justify as we started getting bigger names in. I even think Fuller himself started to get more frustrated as he struggled to have the influence he once did.
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Mar 13, 2014 7:47:38 GMT
No player is bigger than the club but for me, a little bit of Stoke City died when Ric left. I know that sounds melodramatic but it's the truth. Hopefully in the future, we'll find a player who can make fools out of defenders and score amazing goals. Maybe then the little piece that's missing could return to complete the red and white jigsaw for me. I think that is about right. The players that started with us in the Championship and took us up will always be looked at more fondly IMHO and no one did more than Fuller. There was always hope with Ricardo on the pitch. I always remember looking at a large part of our fan base in disgust as they sang, 'Michael Owen - City's number 10' Treachery if you ask me. Fuller was City's number 10 - not that Scouse cunt.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2014 8:08:20 GMT
No player is bigger than the club but for me, a little bit of Stoke City died when Ric left. I know that sounds melodramatic but it's the truth. Hopefully in the future, we'll find a player who can make fools out of defenders and score amazing goals. Maybe then the little piece that's missing could return to complete the red and white jigsaw for me. I think that is about right. The players that started with us in the Championship and took us up will always be looked at more fondly IMHO and no one did more than Fuller. There was always hope with Ricardo on the pitch. I always remember looking at a large part of our fan base in disgust as they sang, 'Michael Owen - City's number 10' Treachery if you ask me. Fuller was City's number 10 - not that Scouse cunt. I felt exactly the same. Felt a little bit ill hearing that.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2014 8:09:32 GMT
Yep. He made huge allowances for him for a long time, no question. Perplexing that he wanted him gone so desperately in the end though. It's all right making allowances for one player when he is streets ahead of everyone else and does the business. As time went on, I think Pulis found it to hard to justify as we started getting bigger names in. I even think Fuller himself started to get more frustrated as he struggled to have the influence he once did. I can buy that but some weird shit seemed to happen. Playing him out wide but never playing him up front in his last season was beyond mental and Pulis wasn't daft.
|
|
|
Post by ParaPsych on Mar 13, 2014 8:17:59 GMT
I think the second season up was his best performance wise if not goals. We won 4 away games that season without West Brom even being in the league amd they were all down to Ric.
The first season was unusual for him because he scored a fair number of goals from set pieces and throws which he rarely did at other times.
I love him.
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Mar 13, 2014 8:29:26 GMT
The idea that Pulis hung Ric out to dry or was unfair to him in any way is one of the most ridiculous ideas ever to take hold on this board. They were both instrumental in eachothers best period of their careers. Both fucking legends.
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Mar 13, 2014 8:33:57 GMT
It's all right making allowances for one player when he is streets ahead of everyone else and does the business. As time went on, I think Pulis found it to hard to justify as we started getting bigger names in. I even think Fuller himself started to get more frustrated as he struggled to have the influence he once did. I can buy that but some weird shit seemed to happen. Playing him out wide but never playing him up front in his last season was beyond mental and Pulis wasn't daft. TBH Rob, I daren't talk about P***s anymore for fear of getting Johnno's thread binned or anchored. Once his name gets mentioned I think it sets off an alert....
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Mar 13, 2014 9:23:10 GMT
It's all right making allowances for one player when he is streets ahead of everyone else and does the business. As time went on, I think Pulis found it to hard to justify as we started getting bigger names in. I even think Fuller himself started to get more frustrated as he struggled to have the influence he once did. I can buy that but some weird shit seemed to happen. Playing him out wide but never playing him up front in his last season was beyond mental and Pulis wasn't daft. Especially given that the best performance from a forward that season came from Ricardo Fuller in Besiktas. On his own, first game back, Ric was immense for an hour.
|
|
|
Post by werrington on Mar 13, 2014 10:23:01 GMT
I can buy that but some weird shit seemed to happen. Playing him out wide but never playing him up front in his last season was beyond mental and Pulis wasn't daft. Especially given that the best performance from a forward that season came from Ricardo Fuller in Besiktas. On his own, first game back, Ric was immense for an hour. He also ran that Valencia full back a merry dance in the mestaiah......creating throw ins and corners galore His departure was political or personal as it could not of been for football reasons
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Mar 13, 2014 10:40:02 GMT
Especially given that the best performance from a forward that season came from Ricardo Fuller in Besiktas. On his own, first game back, Ric was immense for an hour. He also ran that Valencia full back a merry dance in the mestaiah......creating throw ins and corners galore His departure was political or personal as it could not of been for football reasons P***s made comments around that time that Fuller had put himself on the fringes of the group and then come back into it again. These decisions cannot always be made on pure footballing terms if a player becomes more trouble than they are worth. I'm saying I agree but I can only presume that P***s weighed it up and came to that conclusion.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2014 13:02:15 GMT
The idea that Pulis hung Ric out to dry or was unfair to him in any way is one of the most ridiculous ideas ever to take hold on this board. They were both instrumental in eachothers best period of their careers. Both fucking legends. What's your theory as to the wing thing then Muzzer?
|
|
|
Post by werrington on Mar 13, 2014 13:04:33 GMT
The idea that Pulis hung Ric out to dry or was unfair to him in any way is one of the most ridiculous ideas ever to take hold on this board. They were both instrumental in eachothers best period of their careers. Both fucking legends. What's your theory as to the wing thing then Muzzer? It's because he didn't want to try him alongside Crouch in case it worked Rob He wanted him out ....pure and simple
|
|
|
Post by stantheman on Mar 13, 2014 13:06:48 GMT
No player is bigger than the club but for me, a little bit of Stoke City died when Ric left. I know that sounds melodramatic but it's the truth. Hopefully in the future, we'll find a player who can make fools out of defenders and score amazing goals. Maybe then the little piece that's missing could return to complete the red and white jigsaw for me. Amen brother. I've been watching Stoke, home and away, for 30 + years, and I've not seen a player so attack minded, who got you off your seat, like Ric did. 50 x goals for £500k - bargain of the century. Still missing him loads, as I think it will be a very long time before we see the like of him again
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Mar 13, 2014 22:57:16 GMT
The idea that Pulis hung Ric out to dry or was unfair to him in any way is one of the most ridiculous ideas ever to take hold on this board. They were both instrumental in eachothers best period of their careers. Both fucking legends. What's your theory as to the wing thing then Muzzer? he thought he had better forwards? Or you mean the last game?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2014 7:43:42 GMT
What's your theory as to the wing thing then Muzzer? he thought he had better forwards? Or you mean the last game? The last few games. Even if he thought we had better forwards (which was massively debatable given the circumstances) why decide that now was the time to play him out wide? Why not just leave him as an impact sub, a role he was still doing well in?
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Mar 14, 2014 10:14:02 GMT
he thought he had better forwards? Or you mean the last game? The last few games. Even if he thought we had better forwards (which was massively debatable given the circumstances) why decide that now was the time to play him out wide? Why not just leave him as an impact sub, a role he was still doing well in? Why do so many things Pulis did. He played Jerome similarly ( Im convinced he saw them as similar) - I really cant believe he had it in for Fuller. For starters, does he really give enough of a shit what people think?
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Mar 14, 2014 12:23:38 GMT
I want to see TP carry out his promise & dedicate a chapter of his book (whenver he does that) to Ric.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2014 13:04:39 GMT
The last few games. Even if he thought we had better forwards (which was massively debatable given the circumstances) why decide that now was the time to play him out wide? Why not just leave him as an impact sub, a role he was still doing well in? Why do so many things Pulis did. He played Jerome similarly ( Im convinced he saw them as similar) - I really cant believe he had it in for Fuller. For starters, does he really give enough of a shit what people think? I don't think he had it in for Fuller - as people have said I think he almost certainly let him get away with murder for the vast majority of his time here - but I think he'd made his mind up he was going and it wouldn't surprise me if he wanted to avoid any scenarios where that might be complicated.
|
|
|
Post by nononsense on Mar 14, 2014 13:18:59 GMT
It's all right making allowances for one player when he is streets ahead of everyone else and does the business. As time went on, I think Pulis found it to hard to justify as we started getting bigger names in. I even think Fuller himself started to get more frustrated as he struggled to have the influence he once did. I can buy that but some weird shit seemed to happen. Playing him out wide but never playing him up front in his last season was beyond mental and Pulis wasn't daft. err, ya what ?? Let's look at Tuncay, Kitson, Gudjohnsen, Owen, and of course Fuller. Pulis was as daft as a bag of hammers when it came to how he set up his team to attack. He was bound and determined to defend his way to results and seemingly ignored the fact that goals had to be scored down the other end to actually win games ! When a team struggled to score as painfully as we did under Pulis, one would think a manager would have been willing to use any tool he had to get some goals, but no, not Pulis and the way he basically disregarded Fuller in his last season and a half made Pulis look very, very daft !
|
|
|
Post by thepremierbanksy on Mar 14, 2014 13:21:23 GMT
Why do so many things Pulis did. He played Jerome similarly ( Im convinced he saw them as similar) - I really cant believe he had it in for Fuller. For starters, does he really give enough of a shit what people think? I don't think he had it in for Fuller - as people have said I think he almost certainly let him get away with murder for the vast majority of his time here - but I think he'd made his mind up he was going and it wouldn't surprise me if he wanted to avoid any scenarios where that might be complicated. i.e. put him somewhere he might contribute but not score?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2014 13:23:55 GMT
I don't think he had it in for Fuller - as people have said I think he almost certainly let him get away with murder for the vast majority of his time here - but I think he'd made his mind up he was going and it wouldn't surprise me if he wanted to avoid any scenarios where that might be complicated. i.e. put him somewhere he might contribute but not score? Or put him somewhere where he was unlikely to pull up any trees.
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Mar 14, 2014 13:35:54 GMT
Fuck it....I can't help myself to plough it and it can hardly be described as my fault when yet again it turns into a kick Pulis in his cunt fest.
He wasn't as daft as a bag of hammers - it was simply his preference that was successful for the vast majority of his time here.
There was a post on here not so long ago that showed how under Pulis we averaged something like 1.17 points per games which was well above many, many clubs that would be argued to be our peers.
Now, you may have issue with the 'means' but you certainly can't have too much issue with the 'ends' based on the facts. No doubt that last season was a struggle at times but overall we were ahead of our peers.
The 'means' meant that we never had to score as many goals as other teams. It didn't make him look daft either as we still performed very well with or without him.
Now, the main point of this, which I seem to get lambasted for on a regualr basis, is completely and utterly about the 'means'. Can we be more attacking without shipping goals and throwing it all away. Well, the answer seemed to be a no until Hughes direction against 'The Shit'.
So this has fuck all to do with agenda but truly understanding what as a club we are trying to do and where we are moving too. If I annoy a load of fucking cretins that don't like it then so be it. I won't stop though as long as people continue to misrepresent what has happened over the years.
Yes, we are all sad that Fuller isn't here anymore and the player he once was but to make out as though it was a huge mistake by Pulis is simply daft. The facts don't back that up.
|
|
|
Post by nononsense on Mar 14, 2014 13:42:53 GMT
Fuck it....I can't help myself to plough it and it can hardly be described as my fault when yet again it turns into a kick Pulis in his cunt fest. He wasn't as daft as a bag of hammers - it was simply his preference that was successful for the vast majority of his time here. There was a post on here not so long ago that showed how under Pulis we averaged something like 1.17 points per games which was well above many, many clubs that would be argued to be our peers. Now, you may have issue with the 'means' but you certainly can't have too much issue with the 'ends' based on the facts. No doubt that last season was a struggle at times but overall we were ahead of our peers. The 'means' meant that we never had to score as many goals as other teams. It didn't make him look daft either as we still performed very well with or without him. Now, the main point of this, which I seem to get lambasted for on a regualr basis, is completely and utterly about the 'means'. Can we be more attacking without shipping goals and throwing it all away. Well, the answer seemed to be a no until Hughes direction against 'The Shit'. So this has fuck all to do with agenda but truly understanding what as a club we are trying to do and where we are moving too. If I annoy a load of fucking cretins that don't like it then so be it. I won't stop though as long as people continue to misrepresent what has happened over the years. Yes, we are all sad that Fuller isn't here anymore and the player he once was but to make out as though it was a huge mistake by Pulis is simply daft. The facts don't back that up. I'm not pining to get Fuller back. I am talking facts and how we finished next to last,last and next to last again in goals scored in the ENGLISH FOOTBALL LEAGUE under Pulis as he dicked around with idiotic tactics and generally ignored players like Fuller et al who might, i repeat might have improved things in that department as we averaged under a goal a game under him. Something that did not bother him whatsoever ! But now is it just coincidence that we are yet again in the nether regions of amount of goals scored under Hughes ?
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Mar 14, 2014 13:48:36 GMT
No, you are talking about some of the facts.
Yes, we are scoring more goals but we are also leaking more goals and right up until 'The Shit' averaging no better than a point a game which would have seen us right down there.
Only in the last month have we started to pull away again because....we have changed to more DIRECT fucking football. Even now we will do well to get over 40 points.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2014 7:16:11 GMT
Apologies if posted before, couldn't resist. We could do with his inspiration today. Fuller was an unorthodox SCFC genius.
|
|
|
Post by Jamo on the wing on Mar 15, 2014 7:59:49 GMT
Brilliant!
What a player, the man is a true legend and simply the best player I have seen in red and white in my years supporting the club.
With Ric in the team, anything was possible and we ALWAYS had a chance to win a game.
Genius.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2014 8:39:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by fca47 on Mar 15, 2014 8:49:20 GMT
Won us loads go games on his own, especially in the promotion season. We do need a Ricardo type player now, bit of pace and able to go past defenders. Great player for us.
|
|