|
Post by ParaPsych on Jan 20, 2016 1:13:22 GMT
We played with the exact same tactics and approach we'd used successfully in the previous weeks' games. It just didn't work and the players couldn't get going at all. Pulis didn't bottle anything in terms of changing our approach in any way to something more negative*. If he'd suddenly changed our whole approach for that one match it would have been bizarte. If he failed at anything it was probably giving the players the necessary confidence required for such a big game, but that's not exactly an exact science as they were full of beans in the semi. It wasn't really a Gudjon at Walsall style tactical meltdown for me though. Now that was a full on bottle job where he just lost his mind and went with something really weird. * I'm fully aware that some would find that impossible. I refuse to engage with you. You reminded me of Walsall. Shudder! Kav scored a good goal. I forget the rest...
|
|
|
Post by OldStokie on Jan 20, 2016 1:13:26 GMT
We played with the exact same tactics and approach we'd used successfully in the previous weeks' games. It just didn't work and the players couldn't get going at all. Pulis didn't bottle anything in terms of changing our approach in any way to something more negative*. If he'd suddenly changed our whole approach for that one match it would have been bizarte. If he failed at anything it was probably giving the players the necessary confidence required for such a big game, but that's not exactly an exact science as they were full of beans in the semi. It wasn't really a Gudjon at Walsall style tactical meltdown for me though. Now that was a full on bottle job where he just lost his mind and went with something really weird. * I'm fully aware that some would find that impossible. I refuse to engage with you. You reminded me of Walsall. Shudder! You must not engage with Para. He's weird. Really weird. OS.
|
|
|
Post by ParaPsych on Jan 20, 2016 1:16:15 GMT
I refuse to engage with you. You reminded me of Walsall. Shudder! You must not engage with Para. He's weird. Really weird. OS. I have ear drops for that.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2016 6:00:32 GMT
I'm not sure whether "some people" is a reference to my post or not, but in case it is, I didn't mention his charity work which, worthy though it is, in my view is totally irrelevant to any football debate. Neither am I 'defending' him, particularly. I didn't agree with his decision at the time, and I wouldn't now, mainly because it was too extreme - I think a 'mixed' team would probably have not been too unreasonable in the circumstances. But I posted because I think it should be a more balanced debate than many of the contributions on the thread recognise. but it's also rather against my better judgement to have allowed myself to get sucked into a debate about a manager who has left our club some time ago, which has been repeatedly been done to death on here, and which is by its nature irresolvable. I don't see how you can present a balanced debate without answering those questions though Malcolm. None of the 'safety first' points stand up to any kind of scrutiny. Go on then. I'll get dragged in too. I have the same reservations as most about Valencia, Malcolm included it seems. It was a huge disappointment. But how does the safety first point not stand up to "any kind" of scrutiny, especially when know how TP's mind works? Our results were suffering after the Europa games, it was widely accepted. Sunderland tanked us 4-0 and Bolton 5-0 after away games in Europe that season. Pulis rested the first XI at Valencia, and we won the next two league games. We'll never know what would have happened if he hadn't rested them. If we'd lost those 2 games post Valencia (against teams who finished above us in mid table) we would have gone into the final game of the season on 38 points, 3 points above our opponents Bolton. Bolton went down. I'm not justifying TP's decision, but neither can his reasoning be dismissed out of hand. We may have won those 6 points anyway, but it was absolutely crucial that we performed well in those two home games; and I bet that if you sat down with Pulis he'd argue all night long that his Valencia decision was vindicated.
|
|
|
Post by rocket888888 on Jan 20, 2016 7:51:08 GMT
I think the heavily regimented Pulis-style was particularly susceptible to congested fixture lists. We definitely seemed to need all week to prepare for a match.
Anyway, I try to move on. I'm pretty sure Hughes will make sure he plays a full strength team in next season's European adventure :-)
Regardless of people's opinions on Pulis, I think it is fair to say that was definitely the beginning of the end for him and his relationship with the fans/club.
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Jan 20, 2016 7:55:08 GMT
I don't see how you can present a balanced debate without answering those questions though Malcolm. None of the 'safety first' points stand up to any kind of scrutiny. Go on then. I'll get dragged in too. I have the same reservations as most about Valencia, Malcolm included it seems. It was a huge disappointment. But how does the safety first point not stand up to "any kind" of scrutiny, especially when know how TP's mind works? Our results were suffering after the Europa games, it was widely accepted. Sunderland tanked us 4-0 and Bolton 5-0 after away games in Europe that season. Pulis rested the first XI at Valencia, and we won the next two league games. We'll never know what would have happened if he hadn't rested them. If we'd lost those 2 games post Valencia (against teams who finished above us in mid table) we would have gone into the final game of the season on 38 points, 3 points above our opponents Bolton. Bolton went down. I'm not justifying TP's decision, but neither can his reasoning be dismissed out of hand. We may have won those 6 points anyway, but it was absolutely crucial that we performed well in those two home games; and I bet that if you sat down with Pulis he'd argue all night long that his Valencia decision was vindicated. Why was it crucial that we performed in those two games in particular when there were three months of the season left and we had 30 points? It was FEBRUARY.
|
|
|
Post by Bera’s Beano on Jan 20, 2016 8:14:38 GMT
I don't see how you can present a balanced debate without answering those questions though Malcolm. None of the 'safety first' points stand up to any kind of scrutiny. Go on then. I'll get dragged in too. I have the same reservations as most about Valencia, Malcolm included it seems. It was a huge disappointment. But how does the safety first point not stand up to "any kind" of scrutiny, especially when know how TP's mind works? Our results were suffering after the Europa games, it was widely accepted. Sunderland tanked us 4-0 and Bolton 5-0 after away games in Europe that season. Pulis rested the first XI at Valencia, and we won the next two league games. We'll never know what would have happened if he hadn't rested them. If we'd lost those 2 games post Valencia (against teams who finished above us in mid table) we would have gone into the final game of the season on 38 points, 3 points above our opponents Bolton. Bolton went down. I'm not justifying TP's decision, but neither can his reasoning be dismissed out of hand. We may have won those 6 points anyway, but it was absolutely crucial that we performed well in those two home games; and I bet that if you sat down with Pulis he'd argue all night long that his Valencia decision was vindicated. I think until the last couple of pages the main concern was not that he fielded a weakened side as much as he pleaded and pleaded with fans to back him fully and get as many as possible to travel to Valencia and spend their hard earned money to back him, for him to field not even half a full team, not even fill the subs bench and then pretend like he gave it his all when in truth he obviously had no intention of going to Valencia to try and win that game as he had already planned to rest key players for the "must win" games after. But I do still think it was totally unacceptable that he completely cast away what could have been one of the best nights in Stoke history without so much as putting up a proper fight.
|
|
|
Post by Bera’s Beano on Jan 20, 2016 8:26:42 GMT
Given those results and indeed the accompanying performances you reference, I guess you are supporting the view that the final was bottled? We are witnessing a reasonably sensible discussion (Mr Gloves contributions apart) on how some of the major events of recent times involving Stoke City have been throttled to death and why. Its a perfectly fair discussion to have on a Stoke City message board I would suggest. Handle it or keep off it but you wont stifle it. I'm suggesting we were patched up after a very, very decent run in, which had some great performances, where no quarter was given against those in relegation and title contention. I think Man City played on our problems and tried to kick a couple of our players out of it and with 15 minutes to go, Tommy heroics notwithstanding, we should have taken the lead in our only FA Cup final to date. I know how people should fucking view it but aren't in the slightest bit surprised about how some people choose to. I completely agree with the Cup Final argument here momo, I don't for a second believe Pulis bottled or attempted to bottle the Final as we put out the best team we had available, even though key players were not 100%, and in honesty I went to the Final with the pre-conception that we weren't going to win but as long as we give it a proper go and don't throw in the towel then we could just make the history we've been waiting all of History for, and to be fair I left that day feeling disappointed yes, but in no way feeling short changed for the experience. I feel still to this day that the Cup Final was a better day than the Semi, yes the result wasn't good but to be in the Cup Final and really be in the match rather than give in (losing to a goal that should have technically been ruled offside, and feeling rather angry at Kenwyne for fucking the best chance we had), I was happy on the journey home either way. Whereas the Valencia trip was disgusting, pathetic and totally inexcusable from Pulis. I wouldn't have minded if he'd played it down as he always did, let everyone know he wasn't setting it as any kind of priority and just gone there hoping to win 1-0 and force a win on penalties then ok. But the way he pleaded to get fans to back him, to royally shove 2 fingers up to all who spent money to back them, and bravo to every single fan who did btw, was so poor, I changed completely from someone who was happy to suffer the poorer football just to be in the Premier League and beat teams like Arsenal and City every so often while having to hear the same "40 points" soundboard every week, to someone who was welcoming the end of Pulis, after all during his final season I was ready to not renew my season ticket and only did so out of blind faith to the red and white and the hope that change would come, which thankfully it did. (Although when Mark Hughes signed I was livid too so what do I know haha) P.S. I didn't choose this post for any reason in particular, just to wager in on the Cup Final vs Valencia argument.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2016 9:15:47 GMT
Go on then. I'll get dragged in too. I have the same reservations as most about Valencia, Malcolm included it seems. It was a huge disappointment. But how does the safety first point not stand up to "any kind" of scrutiny, especially when know how TP's mind works? Our results were suffering after the Europa games, it was widely accepted. Sunderland tanked us 4-0 and Bolton 5-0 after away games in Europe that season. Pulis rested the first XI at Valencia, and we won the next two league games. We'll never know what would have happened if he hadn't rested them. If we'd lost those 2 games post Valencia (against teams who finished above us in mid table) we would have gone into the final game of the season on 38 points, 3 points above our opponents Bolton. Bolton went down. I'm not justifying TP's decision, but neither can his reasoning be dismissed out of hand. We may have won those 6 points anyway, but it was absolutely crucial that we performed well in those two home games; and I bet that if you sat down with Pulis he'd argue all night long that his Valencia decision was vindicated. Why was it crucial that we performed in those two games in particular when there were three months of the season left and we had 30 points? It was FEBRUARY. I'm not excusing it, merely stating that I do, kind of, understand the logic - it does bear up to 'some kind' of scrutiny. The fact it was February doesn't really come into it. Despite the "take one game at a time" mantra, managers set targets from certain games. Pulis certainly did. After those 2 home games we had 3 successive away games - Chelsea, Spurs and Liverpool; followed by Man City at home at the end of March. We were flat track bullies back then and leaned heavily on our ability to take 3 points from home games against teams around us (Swansea and Norwich). This would undoubtedly be TP's justification - and without those 6 points we would have entered the final game of the season not being mathematically certain of avoiding relegation. Not saying I agree with the extreme of Valencia, but like Malcolm stated, it's not black and white.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Jan 20, 2016 9:16:09 GMT
We played with the exact same tactics and approach we'd used successfully in the previous weeks' games. It just didn't work and the players couldn't get going at all. Pulis didn't bottle anything in terms of changing our approach in any way to something more negative*. If he'd suddenly changed our whole approach for that one match it would have been bizarte. If he failed at anything it was probably giving the players the necessary confidence required for such a big game, but that's not exactly an exact science as they were full of beans in the semi. It wasn't really a Gudjon at Walsall style tactical meltdown for me though. Now that was a full on bottle job where he just lost his mind and went with something really weird. * I'm fully aware that some would find that impossible. I'm not Pulis lover and I'm prepared to cut him some slack for the FA Cup Final given than we lost not 2 but 4 key players ahead of that Cup Final. Losing Higginbottom and not having the option of Ricardo Fuller from the bench(as he was inexplicably being used back then) were equally as big a blows as taking to the field with a barely fit Huth and Etherington. To say he set the team up to play with the same tactics we'd used successfully in the previous weeks games simply isn't true though. In defeat away at Tottenham, we were absolutely superb. We played at a high tempo and "went for the throat". We lost an enthralling game and there wasn't a hint of complaint from anyone. We didn't go for the throat in the cup final. We sat back, played Etherington as a second left back and hoped for the best. Etherington was clearly injured so if we were going to play him, why not play him and absolve him of any defensive responsibility? Decimated by injury, I'm personally not prepared to be quite so damning of that particular capitulation than MarkW is but it is absolutely true that we sat there and hoped for the best and it is undeniably true that the two biggest games of my lifetime will forever be tarred with "what if?". Coming away from Wembley, my group of pals all accepted defeat gracefully, moved on before we had got back to our mini-bus, happily spoke and congratulated Man City fans on their win and went about their business as if we'd lost any run of the mill fixture. Me...I was devastated. I barely said a word all the way back, couldn't bring myself to speak to the Man City fans we saw and it took me weeks to recover. We played two league fixtures after that Cup Final. I went to both and cannot remember anything about the game. My only real memory is off wishing Martinez would "fuck off" so we could bring our team back out on to the pitch to receive the acclaim they deserved.
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Jan 20, 2016 9:30:18 GMT
Why was it crucial that we performed in those two games in particular when there were three months of the season left and we had 30 points? It was FEBRUARY. I'm not excusing it, merely stating that I do, kind of, understand the logic - it does bear up to 'some kind' of scrutiny. The fact it was February doesn't really come into it. Despite the "take one game at a time" mantra, managers set targets from certain games. Pulis certainly did. After those 2 home games we had 3 successive away games - Chelsea, Spurs and Liverpool; followed by Man City at home at the end of March. We were flat track bullies back then and leaned heavily on our ability to take 3 points from home games against teams around us (Swansea and Norwich). This would undoubtedly be TP's justification - and without those 6 points we would have entered the final game of the season not being mathematically certain of avoiding relegation. Not saying I agree with the extreme of Valencia, but like Malcolm stated, it's not black and white. But that's a dreadful reflection on the manager's ability to, erm, manage. What you're saying is that he didn't trust himself or a team that had enjoyed great success the previous season and played some of its best football for years, and then had £20m spent on it, couldn't be expected to have a go in Valencia and pick up the 6-9 points required from its remaining THIRTEEN GAMES to stay up. Sorry but that is absolutely pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jan 20, 2016 9:32:41 GMT
I'm suggesting we were patched up after a very, very decent run in, which had some great performances, where no quarter was given against those in relegation and title contention. I think Man City played on our problems and tried to kick a couple of our players out of it and with 15 minutes to go, Tommy heroics notwithstanding, we should have taken the lead in our only FA Cup final to date. I know how people should fucking view it but aren't in the slightest bit surprised about how some people choose to. I completely agree with the Cup Final argument here momo, I don't for a second believe Pulis bottled or attempted to bottle the Final as we put out the best team we had available, even though key players were not 100%, and in honesty I went to the Final with the pre-conception that we weren't going to win but as long as we give it a proper go and don't throw in the towel then we could just make the history we've been waiting all of History for, and to be fair I left that day feeling disappointed yes, but in no way feeling short changed for the experience. I feel still to this day that the Cup Final was a better day than the Semi, yes the result wasn't good but to be in the Cup Final and really be in the match rather than give in (losing to a goal that should have technically been ruled offside, and feeling rather angry at Kenwyne for fucking the best chance we had), I was happy on the journey home either way. Whereas the Valencia trip was disgusting, pathetic and totally inexcusable from Pulis. I wouldn't have minded if he'd played it down as he always did, let everyone know he wasn't setting it as any kind of priority and just gone there hoping to win 1-0 and force a win on penalties then ok. But the way he pleaded to get fans to back him, to royally shove 2 fingers up to all who spent money to back them, and bravo to every single fan who did btw, was so poor, I changed completely from someone who was happy to suffer the poorer football just to be in the Premier League and beat teams like Arsenal and City every so often while having to hear the same "40 points" soundboard every week, to someone who was welcoming the end of Pulis, after all during his final season I was ready to not renew my season ticket and only did so out of blind faith to the red and white and the hope that change would come, which thankfully it did. (Although when Mark Hughes signed I was livid too so what do I know haha) P.S. I didn't choose this post for any reason in particular, just to wager in on the Cup Final vs Valencia argument. To associate what happened in the Cup Final with what happened in Valencia completely diminishes the rightful indignation about the latter, Matt. One was the culmination of a great part of our history, the other was a needless surrender which you can probably trace back to the start of demise of Pulis.
|
|
|
Post by Bera’s Beano on Jan 20, 2016 9:39:52 GMT
I completely agree with the Cup Final argument here momo, I don't for a second believe Pulis bottled or attempted to bottle the Final as we put out the best team we had available, even though key players were not 100%, and in honesty I went to the Final with the pre-conception that we weren't going to win but as long as we give it a proper go and don't throw in the towel then we could just make the history we've been waiting all of History for, and to be fair I left that day feeling disappointed yes, but in no way feeling short changed for the experience. I feel still to this day that the Cup Final was a better day than the Semi, yes the result wasn't good but to be in the Cup Final and really be in the match rather than give in (losing to a goal that should have technically been ruled offside, and feeling rather angry at Kenwyne for fucking the best chance we had), I was happy on the journey home either way. Whereas the Valencia trip was disgusting, pathetic and totally inexcusable from Pulis. I wouldn't have minded if he'd played it down as he always did, let everyone know he wasn't setting it as any kind of priority and just gone there hoping to win 1-0 and force a win on penalties then ok. But the way he pleaded to get fans to back him, to royally shove 2 fingers up to all who spent money to back them, and bravo to every single fan who did btw, was so poor, I changed completely from someone who was happy to suffer the poorer football just to be in the Premier League and beat teams like Arsenal and City every so often while having to hear the same "40 points" soundboard every week, to someone who was welcoming the end of Pulis, after all during his final season I was ready to not renew my season ticket and only did so out of blind faith to the red and white and the hope that change would come, which thankfully it did. (Although when Mark Hughes signed I was livid too so what do I know haha) P.S. I didn't choose this post for any reason in particular, just to wager in on the Cup Final vs Valencia argument. To associate what happened in the Cup Final with what happened in Valencia completely diminishes the rightful indignation about the latter, Matt. One was the culmination of a great part of our history, the other was a needless surrender which you can probably trace back to the start of demise of Pulis. That's the point I was making Momo, they are completely different situations that should be viewed differently and happened differently. The Cup Final was the highlight of my time as a supporter, win or lose I feel we gave a great account and with a bit of luck could have seen us on the trophy. The Valencia Incident was the low point in the Pulis reign that signalled the beginning of the end. P.S Apologies if you were agreeing and not disagreeing lol.
|
|
|
Post by senojbor on Jan 20, 2016 9:42:04 GMT
He did it in the best interests of Tony Pulis ...He was/is only interested in his £1m+ bonus he gets every season for survival We had 32 points going into that game and he didn't back HIS expensively assembled squad to get his mythical 40 points DISGRACEFUL and with still 3 months of the season remaining Exactly. No morals, only interested in himself, his money (not ours) and his legacy. Look how he stitched Palace up. Asked for his £1m early, cashed it and then left them without a manger going into the new season. He owes Palace nothing. TBH I get a bit sick of this constant Pulis bashing two and a half years after he left club. I for one will be eternally grateful for what he acheived. It seems to me even now people can't drop the subject. But for the record NO premier league manager likes the meaningless Europa cup, it means Thursday games and no training on a Friday. It risks injuries to players and participating clubs don't even make much money from it. In fact they lose money in the early rounds. For us it was a novelty playing in a European competition for the first time in years and obviously supporters for the large part enjoyed it, but the league and the final league position is much more important financially. Had we taken a full squad and picked up injuries it may not have saw us relegated but it could have had a serious impact on the remainder of the season, and I dare bet MH would have done exactly the same.
|
|
|
Post by fca47 on Jan 20, 2016 9:42:53 GMT
Why is Pulis not in the title, that's what it's about. TP takes another bashing.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2016 9:49:02 GMT
I'm not excusing it, merely stating that I do, kind of, understand the logic - it does bear up to 'some kind' of scrutiny. The fact it was February doesn't really come into it. Despite the "take one game at a time" mantra, managers set targets from certain games. Pulis certainly did. After those 2 home games we had 3 successive away games - Chelsea, Spurs and Liverpool; followed by Man City at home at the end of March. We were flat track bullies back then and leaned heavily on our ability to take 3 points from home games against teams around us (Swansea and Norwich). This would undoubtedly be TP's justification - and without those 6 points we would have entered the final game of the season not being mathematically certain of avoiding relegation. Not saying I agree with the extreme of Valencia, but like Malcolm stated, it's not black and white. But that's a dreadful reflection on the manager's ability to, erm, manage. What you're saying is that he didn't trust himself or a team that had enjoyed great success the previous season and played some of its best football for years, and then had £20m spent on it, couldn't be expected to have a go in Valencia and pick up the 6-9 points required from its remaining THIRTEEN GAMES to stay up. Sorry but that is absolutely pathetic. My only argument was whether he did fear, for whatever reason, that his team looked in danger of winning 1 game from the final 12, which is what happened. I agree with you. He did lose his nerve, lost his bottle if you like. He saw his tired team getting spanked earlier in the season, as a direct consequence of Europe, and shat himself. He had no experience of Europe to draw on. But I do, kind of, understand why he took the incredibly ultra-cautious stance of 'concentrating on the league' and writing off the possibility of a 2-0 win in Valencia; when his tired looking first XI looked incapable of landing a punch on them in the first leg. And the results at the back end of that season don't exactly scream that he was 100% wrong. He would certainly argue his case, of that I have no doubt. And a very large percentage of that £20m outlay was on the pitch in Valencia.
|
|
|
Post by senojbor on Jan 20, 2016 9:52:21 GMT
Seeing as the cup final is mentioned. Apart from the fact two key players were injured Man city brought on Carlos Tevez - we brought on Danny Pugh. There was a bridge in class that day, that's why we lost.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jan 20, 2016 10:14:35 GMT
Seeing as the cup final is mentioned. Apart from the fact two key players were injured Man city brought on Carlos Tevez - we brought on Danny Pugh. There was a bridge in class that day, that's why we lost. And stayed in the game and Kenwyne fluffed our golden chance. A bottle job it most certainly was not.
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Jan 20, 2016 10:24:32 GMT
But that's a dreadful reflection on the manager's ability to, erm, manage. What you're saying is that he didn't trust himself or a team that had enjoyed great success the previous season and played some of its best football for years, and then had £20m spent on it, couldn't be expected to have a go in Valencia and pick up the 6-9 points required from its remaining THIRTEEN GAMES to stay up. Sorry but that is absolutely pathetic. My only argument was whether he did fear, for whatever reason, that his team looked in danger of winning 1 game from the final 12, which is what happened. I agree with you. He did lose his nerve, lost his bottle if you like. He saw his tired team getting spanked earlier in the season, as a direct consequence of Europe, and shat himself. He had no experience of Europe to draw on. But I do, kind of, understand why he took the incredibly ultra-cautious stance of 'concentrating on the league' and writing off the possibility of a 2-0 win in Valencia; when his tired looking first XI looked incapable of landing a punch on them in the first leg. And the results at the back end of that season don't exactly scream that he was 100% wrong. He would certainly argue his case, of that I have no doubt. And a very large percentage of that £20m outlay was on the pitch in Valencia. But the results were his responsibility and his fault, regardless of Valencia. He's managed his squad abominably. That he was concerned the team he'd built didn't have enough in the last three months of the season to get over the line is almost grounds for the chop in itself or at least some serious questions to be asked. As you say, the fact that the £20m he spent was deemed unimportant enough to play in Valencia is another can of worms and ultimately a bigger reason why he was sacked.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jan 20, 2016 10:29:33 GMT
My only argument was whether he did fear, for whatever reason, that his team looked in danger of winning 1 game from the final 12, which is what happened. I agree with you. He did lose his nerve, lost his bottle if you like. He saw his tired team getting spanked earlier in the season, as a direct consequence of Europe, and shat himself. He had no experience of Europe to draw on. But I do, kind of, understand why he took the incredibly ultra-cautious stance of 'concentrating on the league' and writing off the possibility of a 2-0 win in Valencia; when his tired looking first XI looked incapable of landing a punch on them in the first leg. And the results at the back end of that season don't exactly scream that he was 100% wrong. He would certainly argue his case, of that I have no doubt. And a very large percentage of that £20m outlay was on the pitch in Valencia. But the results were his responsibility and his fault, regardless of Valencia. He's managed his squad abominably. That he was concerned the team he'd built didn't have enough in the last three months of the season to get over the line is almost grounds for the chop in itself or at least some serious questions to be asked. As you say, the fact that the £20m he spent was deemed unimportant enough to play in Valencia is another can of worms and ultimately a bigger reason why he was sacked. Rob, how do you think Hughes managed his squad resources coming out of the Christmas period into the Liverpool semi-final?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2016 10:32:43 GMT
Seeing as the cup final is mentioned. Apart from the fact two key players were injured Man city brought on Carlos Tevez - we brought on Danny Pugh. There was a bridge in class that day, that's why we lost. And stayed in the game and Kenwyne fluffed our golden chance. A bottle job it most certainly was not. I also don't think it was a bottle job in the final. A team of far better players played better and didnt give us a sniff, not helped by the fact that Ethers and Fuller weren't fully fit at all. The first half against Liverpool also wasnt a bottle job, it was a case of being outplayed in those first 45. The Valencia game was, however, a bottle job and the white flag was raised before we even took off. It doesnt diminish at all everything else he achieved, but was the turning point for a number of fans. The fact is that nobody knows what would have happened if we had gone full strength. As such, i don't believe we can say "we would have won had we gone with a first team squad" in exactly the same way as i dont believe we can say his decision was vindicated as we beat both Norwich and Swansea. It is possible to be eternally grateful for the good things he did whilst also being eternally pissed at the bad. This is where i believe the vast majority of people sit, with a few at both ends of the extreme who take any criticism as being entirely ungrateful or take praise as turning a blind eye to his faults.
|
|
|
Post by bringmesunshine on Jan 20, 2016 10:36:08 GMT
Exactly. No morals, only interested in himself, his money (not ours) and his legacy. Look how he stitched Palace up. Asked for his £1m early, cashed it and then left them without a manger going into the new season. He owes Palace nothing. TBH I get a bit sick of this constant Pulis bashing two and a half years after he left club. I for one will be eternally grateful for what he acheived. It seems to me even now people can't drop the subject. But for the record NO premier league manager likes the meaningless Europa cup, it means Thursday games and no training on a Friday. It risks injuries to players and participating clubs don't even make much money from it. In fact they lose money in the early rounds. For us it was a novelty playing in a European competition for the first time in years and obviously supporters for the large part enjoyed it, but the league and the final league position is much more important financially. Had we taken a full squad and picked up injuries it may not have saw us relegated but it could have had a serious impact on the remainder of the season, and I dare bet MH would have done exactly the same. www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3402955/Crystal-Palace-ready-start-proceedings-against-West-Brom-manager-Tony-Pulis-reclaim-bonus-1million.htmlI take it you were unaware of this.
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Jan 20, 2016 10:44:55 GMT
Seeing as the cup final is mentioned. Apart from the fact two key players were injured Man city brought on Carlos Tevez - we brought on Danny Pugh. There was a bridge in class that day, that's why we lost. Tevez played alongside Aguero against Wigan - who brought on Ben Watson... who scored their winning goal! Not that I agree that we bottled the cup final.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Jan 20, 2016 10:51:06 GMT
But the results were his responsibility and his fault, regardless of Valencia. He's managed his squad abominably. That he was concerned the team he'd built didn't have enough in the last three months of the season to get over the line is almost grounds for the chop in itself or at least some serious questions to be asked. As you say, the fact that the £20m he spent was deemed unimportant enough to play in Valencia is another can of worms and ultimately a bigger reason why he was sacked. Rob, how do you think Hughes managed his squad resources coming out of the Christmas period into the Liverpool semi-final? I think he managed his squad and picked teams for every game with the sole intention of winning that game. Rightly or wrongly, I can live with that. We didn't play well in the 1st leg v Liverpool but it wasn't for the want of trying or being frightened. We threw everything at it and didn't play well. I doubt very much we'll give up the ghost on the second leg just because we played badly in the first. The Christmas period of games saw us emerge with 9 points from 12 an fa cup win and a narrow defeat in the first leg of a two legged cup tie. All is not lost.
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Jan 20, 2016 10:51:38 GMT
But the results were his responsibility and his fault, regardless of Valencia. He's managed his squad abominably. That he was concerned the team he'd built didn't have enough in the last three months of the season to get over the line is almost grounds for the chop in itself or at least some serious questions to be asked. As you say, the fact that the £20m he spent was deemed unimportant enough to play in Valencia is another can of worms and ultimately a bigger reason why he was sacked. Rob, how do you think Hughes managed his squad resources coming out of the Christmas period into the Liverpool semi-final? Not as well as he should in hindsight but he wants to win every match hence he played the people who have got him results all season. He should be more trusting of his squad.
|
|
|
Post by Bera’s Beano on Jan 20, 2016 10:51:42 GMT
But the results were his responsibility and his fault, regardless of Valencia. He's managed his squad abominably. That he was concerned the team he'd built didn't have enough in the last three months of the season to get over the line is almost grounds for the chop in itself or at least some serious questions to be asked. As you say, the fact that the £20m he spent was deemed unimportant enough to play in Valencia is another can of worms and ultimately a bigger reason why he was sacked. Rob, how do you think Hughes managed his squad resources coming out of the Christmas period into the Liverpool semi-final? Poorly, if we'd have rotated at West Brom then the Liverpool game is a whole other kettle of fish. Tiredness wasn't the entire reason we didn't beat Liverpool but it was a bad foundation to start upon. I like Mark Hughes a lot but that doesn't mean he won't get it wrong too, sometimes his substitutions leave me utterly bemused lol. Still we came out of it with a 8/10 Christmas in my opinion, 7th in the league, still in the League Cup tie, FA Cup to hopefully give a go. I reckon we will be going to Wembley this season, one way or another, (stadium tour anyone? ).
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jan 20, 2016 11:00:35 GMT
Oh don’t get me wrong, I thought we had a terrific Christmas and agree if he got it wrong, it was against West Brom. The game against Liverpool was one of our biggest home games for years though, I’m just intrigued with where getting it wrong, blurs with just not playing well and bottling games and prioritising one game over another!
|
|
|
Post by Bera’s Beano on Jan 20, 2016 11:14:40 GMT
Oh don’t get me wrong, I thought we had a terrific Christmas and agree if he got it wrong, it was against West Brom. The game against Liverpool was one of our biggest home games for years though, I’m just intrigued with where getting it wrong, blurs with just not playing well and bottling games and prioritising one game over another! My immediate reaction to the fact that we played poorly was that the players were bottling a big chance at a Cup Final as we needed to do the business at home to make the away leg a little easier, but as the game developed you could see the desire to win, but everything we tried wouldn't come off and Liverpool unfortunately set up pretty well to stop us, we should have targetted Lucas better in the Central Defensive role he was shoe horned into. If, come the 26th, we field Sidwell, Bardsley, Wilson, Shenton, and other none first 11 players and not fill the bench, then I would claim Hughes bottled it also. Just that it won't happen as Hughes isn't someone who will let one match go without a fight, he seems a natural born winner. You see how Pulis sets up when he goes away to Bristol City and while they weren't camped in their own half, they scraped a 1-0. When Hughes took us to Doncaster, yes we could have lost and 2-1 isn't a convincing score line, but he put out 4 forwards, a went hell for leather. FFS The debate is ENDLESS...
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Jan 20, 2016 11:53:27 GMT
But the results were his responsibility and his fault, regardless of Valencia. He's managed his squad abominably. That he was concerned the team he'd built didn't have enough in the last three months of the season to get over the line is almost grounds for the chop in itself or at least some serious questions to be asked. As you say, the fact that the £20m he spent was deemed unimportant enough to play in Valencia is another can of worms and ultimately a bigger reason why he was sacked. Rob, how do you think Hughes managed his squad resources coming out of the Christmas period into the Liverpool semi-final? I think he probably didn't use them as well as he might've done but can see why he wanted the momentum going. I don't think you can compare that with a 60-game season in which the manager flat-out refused to rest some players while using other expensive options sparingly if at all.
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Jan 20, 2016 12:00:54 GMT
MarkWolstanton said:
" cannot resist asking if Tony has blown smoke up your ass and its got in your eyes "
Can I ask Mark if this is a line from one of the poems you like to write?
|
|