|
Post by robwahlmann on Apr 20, 2014 18:52:09 GMT
To be fair, i heard his live post-match interview on Radio 5 Live with Mark Pougatch which this sounds like it's been taken from and it wasn't like that line reads at all. Pougatch asked him quite a leading question about "...now there's always talk about your teams style of play but you're quite exciting..." or something like to which Pulis laughed and said "Don't ask me about style of play or anything Mark, i'll get in all sorts of trouble" He was then asked about the talk of him being nominated for manager of the season and how it made him feel and also whether he felt he'd done a better job with Palace than at Stoke to which Pulis said summat like (I'm paraphrasing here) "I was at Stoke for 11 years Mark, i had great times at Stoke. I've not even been here a year so i can't compare the two. This is a totally different team to what I had at Stoke, with different strengths." He then went on to talk about Palace's specific strengths and talked about them being organised and used the line "I think we're an exciting team." So i think that this may well be a case of taking things out of context. When comments get edited and commas get put where full-stops should be and such like, anything can be twisted. I dunno, continue to do whatever. Yes, I heard that interview too and you are absolutely spot on!
|
|
|
Post by stokeramblers on Apr 20, 2014 18:54:13 GMT
I expect Coates to launch a retaliatory broadside via the Sentinel in the form of some gushing praise of our new manager. Pulis has some bloody cheek. It was entirely his team here... his monster that was utterly devoid of pace and flair in the end. Hardly a monster. Flawed maybe but don't forget that Begovic, Cameron, Shawcross, Wilson, Huth, Crouch etc etc were all very much his players. He may have lost the plot a tad but those players have all been slow in being critical of him and often gushing in their praise of him. I think we've upgraded with Hughes but I also think we were very lucky to have Pulis in charge laying the foundations for what looks like an exciting future. I'm sorry but he does have some cheek. He makes it sound as though he got lumbered with the squad here at Stoke. He could've bought in more pace whilst he was here if he's in to that kind of thing 'allegedly' I await Danny Gabbidon at right back next season and Joe Ledley on the left wing....
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Apr 20, 2014 18:54:57 GMT
To be fair, i heard his live post-match interview on Radio 5 Live with Mark Pougatch which this sounds like it's been taken from and it wasn't like that line reads at all. Pougatch asked him quite a leading question about "...now there's always talk about your teams style of play but you're quite exciting..." or something like to which Pulis laughed and said "Don't ask me about style of play or anything Mark, i'll get in all sorts of trouble" He was then asked about the talk of him being nominated for manager of the season and how it made him feel and also whether he felt he'd done a better job with Palace than at Stoke to which Pulis said summat like (I'm paraphrasing here) "I was at Stoke for 11 years Mark, i had great times at Stoke. I've not even been here a year so i can't compare the two. This is a totally different team to what I had at Stoke, with different strengths." He then went on to talk about Palace's specific strengths and talked about them being organised and used the line "I think we're an exciting team." So i think that this may well be a case of taking things out of context. When comments get edited and commas get put where full-stops should be and such like, anything can be twisted. I dunno, continue to do whatever. Perfect.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 18:56:57 GMT
To be fair, i heard his live post-match interview on Radio 5 Live with Mark Pougatch which this sounds like it's been taken from and it wasn't like that line reads at all. Pougatch asked him quite a leading question about "...now there's always talk about your teams style of play but you're quite exciting..." or something like to which Pulis laughed and said "Don't ask me about style of play or anything Mark, i'll get in all sorts of trouble" He was then asked about the talk of him being nominated for manager of the season and how it made him feel and also whether he felt he'd done a better job with Palace than at Stoke to which Pulis said summat like (I'm paraphrasing here) "I was at Stoke for 11 years Mark, i had great times at Stoke. I've not even been here a year so i can't compare the two. This is a totally different team to what I had at Stoke, with different strengths." He then went on to talk about Palace's specific strengths and talked about them being organised and used the line "I think we're an exciting team." So i think that this may well be a case of taking things out of context. When comments get edited and commas get put where full-stops should be and such like, anything can be twisted. I dunno, continue to do whatever. Perfect. So are we saying he didn't say "I didn't have too much pace at Stoke?"
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Apr 20, 2014 18:58:23 GMT
So are we saying he didn't say "I didn't have too much pace at Stoke?" I'm saying that opening post and subsequent ones are entirely misleading.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 18:58:54 GMT
How can he be manager of Crystal Palace because they're in the Premier league?.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Apr 20, 2014 18:59:22 GMT
Well you can't argue with that - our shit style of play under TP when we were the second lowest scorers last season and the lowest the season before (34 and 36 goals respectively) was all down to the players. Who'd have thunk that!
|
|
|
Post by foxysgloves on Apr 20, 2014 18:59:57 GMT
Hardly a monster. Flawed maybe but don't forget that Begovic, Cameron, Shawcross, Wilson, Huth, Crouch etc etc were all very much his players. He may have lost the plot a tad but those players have all been slow in being critical of him and often gushing in their praise of him. I think we've upgraded with Hughes but I also think we were very lucky to have Pulis in charge laying the foundations for what looks like an exciting future. That's as maybe but he can hardly act as if the fact he didn't have much pace at Stoke was down to anyone else can he? Is he saying that? What do you want him to say? I lost the plot at Stoke and signed the wrong players. Managers don't work like that....they put themselves in a positive light whenever possible. I don't recall MH taking much responsibility for the mess at QPR which their fans certainly felt he was a big part of. I wouldn't expect Hughes or Pulis to draw attention to their failings at previous clubs, however big or small those failings, so long as they do the job for their current club. And thankfully for us MH is doing just that.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 19:00:55 GMT
So are we saying he didn't say "I didn't have too much pace at Stoke?" I'm saying that opening post and subsequent ones are entirely misleading. So just to clarify, is that a yes or no? In any context, the strengths and weaknesses of the team were down to him as much as anyone else, surely? So to imply he's able to play a way there that he wasn't able to here is pretty disingenuous, no?
|
|
|
Post by Nick1984 on Apr 20, 2014 19:01:11 GMT
Who cares, Pulis' Stoke were boring, that's all that matters. He can win the league with Palace, it makes no difference as far as I'm concerned.
Hughes and Stoke go together likes peas and carrots.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 19:02:50 GMT
That's as maybe but he can hardly act as if the fact he didn't have much pace at Stoke was down to anyone else can he? Is he saying that? What do you want him to say? I lost the plot at Stoke and signed the wrong players. Managers don't work like that....they put themselves in a positive light whenever possible. I don't recall MH taking much responsibility for the mess at QPR which their fans certainly felt he was a big part of. I wouldn't expect Hughes or Pulis to draw attention to their failings at previous clubs, however big or small those failings, so long as they do the job for their current club. And thankfully for us MH is doing just that. I want him to not rewrite history. Why mention us at all? It's totally disingenuous to suggest he could never play the way he wanted to here when he was given carte blanche to do exactly that?
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Apr 20, 2014 19:03:33 GMT
Midweek"It's a different team to what I had at (former club) Stoke, we have pace and I didn't have too much pace at Stoke. We move the ball really quickly through the pitch, and I thought we did that really well today." Yesterday“We’ve played some really good football and we could have scored two or three goals,” Pulis said. “Don’t take away what we have got – this is a different team to Stoke, with different strengths. We have great pace on the break.” Not as barbed as the opening post suggests then grapey? Yeah, I think hancock's post gives the context pretty well. But still, the specific reference to the benefits of pace is still quite odd - given it's hard to argue it wasn't surgically removed from his Stoke teams from the summer of 2011 onwards. He's playing with 2 thrusting, talented wingers that give them a real edge on the counter, yet he's still got them integrated to the extent that they've conceded a truly bonkers 20 goals in his 25 games there. So you wonder what strength he thinks his Stoke teams had that Palace lack, given the way he's been able to marry the two up there so well after he's been parachuted in mid-season. I always thought it took time, and lots of it, for TP to drill his teams to death (especially the wide men), but what he's done from the word go is extraordinary
|
|
|
Post by foxysgloves on Apr 20, 2014 19:04:30 GMT
Hardly a monster. Flawed maybe but don't forget that Begovic, Cameron, Shawcross, Wilson, Huth, Crouch etc etc were all very much his players. He may have lost the plot a tad but those players have all been slow in being critical of him and often gushing in their praise of him. I think we've upgraded with Hughes but I also think we were very lucky to have Pulis in charge laying the foundations for what looks like an exciting future. I'm sorry but he does have some cheek. He makes it sound as though he got lumbered with the squad here at Stoke. He could've bought in more pace whilst he was here if he's in to that kind of thing 'allegedly' I await Danny Gabbidon at right back next season and Joe Ledley on the left wing.... He puts himself in a positive light. As virtually all managers seek to. Ultimately all managers live and die by results and both Hughes and Pulis are alive and kicking. TBH I only genuinely care how Hughes does but I don't get the hate that's being thrown in the direction of Pulis who has been consistently positive in what he says about Stoke.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Apr 20, 2014 19:04:46 GMT
I'm saying that opening post and subsequent ones are entirely misleading. So just to clarify, is that a yes or no? In any context, the strengths and weaknesses of the team were down to him as much as anyone else, surely? So to imply he's able to play a way there that he wasn't able to here is pretty disingenuous, no? Ahh so you do agree that the general sentiment of the opening post and the subsequent faux blarting was indeed misleading set in absolutely no context?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 19:05:23 GMT
Cup Final team:
Sorensen
Wilko Shawcross Huth Wilson
Pennant Delap Whelan Etherington
Jones Fuller
The team he left us with:
Begovic
Cameron Shawcross Huth Wilson
Shotton N'Zonzi Whelan Adam
Walters Crouch
Price difference between the two teams:
25M spent!
and that's not including the money wasted on the likes of Kightly, Shea et al!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 19:06:22 GMT
He's shooting himself in the foot.
|
|
|
Post by mermaidsal on Apr 20, 2014 19:06:58 GMT
He brought our squad, and made it boring. Give him time at Palace and he will do the same Fraid so... mind you he has long-time Stoke targets like Joe Ledley there...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 19:07:31 GMT
Just read this post. Therefore, pace is the answer. We've been crying out for it. We've got one or two pacey individuals, we need more. End of!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 19:08:36 GMT
So just to clarify, is that a yes or no? In any context, the strengths and weaknesses of the team were down to him as much as anyone else, surely? So to imply he's able to play a way there that he wasn't able to here is pretty disingenuous, no? Ahh so you do agree that the general sentiment of the opening post and the subsequent faux blarting was indeed misleading set in absolutely no context? I take it you're being deliberately evasive? I have no problem believing large chunks of it are out of context or sensationalised. Equally for him to say that about pace seems hard to take out of context, doesn't it? Is it not implying he wasn't able to play the way he wanted to here? It certainly seems that way, no?
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Apr 20, 2014 19:09:43 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Jimm on Apr 20, 2014 19:10:09 GMT
(zzz) He brought our squad, and made it boring. Give him time at Palace and he will do the same Fraid so... mind you he has long-time Stoke targets like Joe Ledley there... Predominantly a CM being played at LB, shocker lol
|
|
|
Post by foxysgloves on Apr 20, 2014 19:11:09 GMT
Is he saying that? What do you want him to say? I lost the plot at Stoke and signed the wrong players. Managers don't work like that....they put themselves in a positive light whenever possible. I don't recall MH taking much responsibility for the mess at QPR which their fans certainly felt he was a big part of. I wouldn't expect Hughes or Pulis to draw attention to their failings at previous clubs, however big or small those failings, so long as they do the job for their current club. And thankfully for us MH is doing just that. I want him to not rewrite history. Why mention us at all? It's totally disingenuous to suggest he could never play the way he wanted to here when he was given carte blanche to do exactly that? Maybe the constant jibes about the way Stoke played under him got to him. Maybe he's thinking of how, in the future, he doesn't want to be labelled a one trick pony this making him more employable. I got tired of analysing every word he said while he was here, I can't be arsed to start again now.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 19:11:30 GMT
I urge people to get a fucking grip, stop crying for 5 fucking minutes of comets non-stories and support the club now.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 19:15:55 GMT
I urge people to get a fucking grip, stop crying for 5 fucking minutes of comets non-stories and support the club now. I am supporting the club. I'm not prepared to let an ex manager of this club try to wash his hands of the problems he created at this football club, by telling half truths and one sided stories to the press. He spent a fortune at this football club on ageing shit that we can never recoup any type of money back on, and in turn made us one paced plodders that were the lowest scoring team in all 4 divisions of English football. Peter Coates did this football club and Tony Pulis the biggest favour of all time by sacking him. Had he still been here now we'd be back in the Championship and that manager, one of the luckiest in English football today, would have his perfect "never been relegated" record completely tarnished for good. He'd created a monster that he couldn't sort out.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 19:16:32 GMT
I want him to not rewrite history. Why mention us at all? It's totally disingenuous to suggest he could never play the way he wanted to here when he was given carte blanche to do exactly that? Maybe the constant jibes about the way Stoke played under him got to him. Maybe he's thinking of how, in the future, he doesn't want to be labelled a one trick pony this making him more employable. I got tired of analysing every word he said while he was here, I can't be arsed to start again now. Either way, he was responsible for shaping how we played and the lack of pace was down to him. Fair?
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Apr 20, 2014 19:17:28 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nononsense on Apr 20, 2014 19:20:02 GMT
He brought our squad, and made it boring. Give him time at Palace and he will do the same If Pulis had managed them the same way he did for us they would still be dead last in the League. But there was no way on earth he could do that and expect Palace to move forwards and upwards ! He HAD to be more positive. He finally realised that scoring goals down the other end is how you win games. He HAD to get his team to score to win. He HAD to be more positive all because he was starting fro mrock bottom and was hired to move them up. With us, we started pretty much in the middle and for his last 3 seasons he did everything with his negative tactics to drag us down !!
|
|
|
Post by stokeramblers on Apr 20, 2014 19:20:17 GMT
Admin are we having a problem with the board tonight? A few duplicate posts knocking about....
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Apr 20, 2014 19:20:24 GMT
Ahh so you do agree that the general sentiment of the opening post and the subsequent faux blarting was indeed misleading set in absolutely no context? I take it you're being deliberately evasive? I have no problem believing large chunks of it are out of context or sensationalised. Equally for him to say that about pace seems hard to take out of context, doesn't it? Is it not implying he wasn't able to play the way he wanted to here? It certainly seems that way, no? Pulis is responsible for all things good and bad over the best part of the past 10 or 11 years but even that particular quote is completely out of context.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 19:21:39 GMT
I take it you're being deliberately evasive? I have no problem believing large chunks of it are out of context or sensationalised. Equally for him to say that about pace seems hard to take out of context, doesn't it? Is it not implying he wasn't able to play the way he wanted to here? It certainly seems that way, no? Pulis is responsible for all things good and bad over the best part of the past 10 or 11 years but even that particular quote is completely out of context. What is the context then?
|
|