|
Post by skip on Mar 23, 2016 0:33:41 GMT
The fundamental difference with WBA and Palace and ourselves, and by default respective attitudes towards Pulis is that the length of time we spent out of the top division. Upon our return no one gave us a prayer but Pulis' helped the siege mentality with his own peculiar dogmatic mindset. We were desperate to stay up and tactically and philosophically speaking, the 'by any means necessary' absolutely helped to achieve this aim as it riled the purists and led to a rather blunt or unorthodox attitude towards football and its methods deployed to achieve those aims; the borderline surreal spectacle of Rory's long throws, arming the ball boys with towels, opposition clubs moving their advertising hoardings to stop the throws and more broadly the fear of God put up bigger more successful clubs as the reputation of a visit to the Brit grew. The now infamous 'wet and windy Tuesday night in Stoke and so on and so on. Pulis with his singular mindset worked in our favour. To a point. But then his self imposed technical glass ceiling stopped working as effectively and his limitations stopped being a perverse source of points and pleasure and increasingly began to grate not with the away teams but with us, the fans. The binary season was rearing it's ugly head and the limited shelf life and short-termist tactical nouse was threatening to undo all the hard work. So he is asked to leave by the chairman, politely and respectfully but none the less, he is told his time is up. But then something odd happens. He goes to Palace and for some reason beyond my understanding all of a sudden Pulis the perverse pragmatist is reborn as a shrewd gameplayer who can keep a club up, work miracles and is held aloft as the troubleshooter hired gun. Football pundits and journalists alike start to take him seriously, after he leaves us. It adds to a general feeling that it wasn't Pulis' tactics that weren't fashionable or credible all along, but Stoke City. We had no right to want to stay in the top division for more than a season or two. I speak for no one else but I found this irksome particularly when I'd spent the last few seasons in a bizarre state of enjoying the thrill of top flight football but not only having to justify our managers methods to friends who support other clubs but also having a contradictory mindset - defending the man who had forced the binary season upon us, the man who came back to us with a charge sheet of bizarre off field activity, evidence stuffed down his tracksuit bottoms and other lower league clubs where he'd left with less than good grace.
Palace and West Brom have not experienced the whole saga of Pulis in the lower leagues. They've had more managers and yo-yo turmoil than we've had hot dinners but Pulis' is now permanently entwined into the fabric of of the collective psyche of Stoke City. They've flirted with him but we lived with him, he is our infuriating ex! And then he comes back as an opposition manager and the unedifying spectacle of him celebrating a goal that feels more like point proving, aimed squarely at us, the fans who never took him to our hearts regardless of the success of promotion and becoming a relatively secure fixture in the Premier League.
It's almost impossible for Stoke fans to not contemplate anything Pulis without being reminded of the saga; he reminds of pre-Internet fortune Coates, he reminds us of football in the doldrums, he reminds us of a painful lack of ability and ambition, he reminds us of who we were and until we've actually won something, he reminds of us who we think we are. Yes he took us to Europe via a cup final defeat but he also sold us down the river in Valencia souring the adventure.
Palace may be small by London terms but they're still a London club. West Brom may be in Smethwick but the Black Country isn't as regularly derided as Stoke on Trent. It's allowed to exist whereas people questioned not only our top division status but our very existence (cf: is Stoke in the Midlands or the North? etc.).
Tony Pulis will always mean much more to us than I would wager any club he manages now or in the future.
When Pulis' name is in the news for trousering £2m in bonuses dependent on his staying in post for longer the whole Pulis-at-Stoke bubbles to the surface and we end up with a thread as long as this one. Although I would urge caution before suggesting that any utterance of his name on here results in mass hysteria. There's a small number of vessels loudly proclaiming his worth and a small number pointing out his failings. It's hardly like everyone is chipping in. Count up the number of names who have posted more than a handful of posts on this thread.
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Mar 23, 2016 6:29:43 GMT
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Mar 23, 2016 6:37:27 GMT
Out of devilment, without reading the lot, has Geoff321 contributed to this thread at all? Just wondered like........ He's still getting over the defeat to Burton.
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Mar 23, 2016 8:18:26 GMT
Full on cornered ferret mode again, lashing out at evertyhing. Your fiercely loyal, I'll give you that, but you're also fucking mental. Seeing as you are lively and inventive with the truth are you actually Dave Kemp? At least that would explain the defending of the Indefensible. Shhhh. The grown ups are talking. Hhmm. You posting on a Tony Pulis thread? There's nothing grown up or talking about that. Sorry Dave.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Mar 23, 2016 8:26:36 GMT
Shhhh. The grown ups are talking. Hhmm. You posting on a Tony Pulis thread? There's nothing grown up or talking about that. Sorry Dave. Oh shit, have you broken up for Easter already?
|
|
|
Post by bringmesunshine on Mar 23, 2016 8:28:18 GMT
Talking of stinking hypocrites. Here he is! Another one who fails the basic test. Though, in your defence I suspect your balls hadn’t dropped when Tone first took over judging by the content of your posts. Full on cornered ferret mode again, lashing out at evertyhing. Your fiercely loyal, I'll give you that, but you're also fucking mental. Seeing as you are lively and inventive with the truth are you actually Dave Kemp? At least that would explain the defending of the Indefensible. love it.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Mar 23, 2016 8:31:36 GMT
Full on cornered ferret mode again, lashing out at evertyhing. Your fiercely loyal, I'll give you that, but you're also fucking mental. Seeing as you are lively and inventive with the truth are you actually Dave Kemp? At least that would explain the defending of the Indefensible. love it. What a double act you and wingy make.
|
|
|
Post by bringmesunshine on Mar 23, 2016 8:33:03 GMT
What a double act you and wingy make. Now now, temper temper.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Mar 23, 2016 8:39:01 GMT
What a double act you and wingy make. Now now, temper temper. Just playing son. Have you ever kissed a girl?
|
|
|
Post by samba :) on Mar 23, 2016 8:41:16 GMT
Just playing son. Have you ever kissed a girl? may I ask have you?
|
|
|
Post by bringmesunshine on Mar 23, 2016 8:50:05 GMT
Just playing son. Have you ever kissed a girl? Yep, another classic momoesk response.
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Mar 23, 2016 9:08:17 GMT
Hhmm. You posting on a Tony Pulis thread? There's nothing grown up or talking about that. Sorry Dave. Oh shit, have you broken up for Easter already? No. Friday is my last day. After reading your contribution to this thread it seems like you "broke up" a looooooooonggg time ago.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2016 9:08:55 GMT
Haven't read the thread in it's entirety, but I sense one of the two Oatcake truths are at play? We can't judge Pulis solely on what he did at Stoke, we have to take into account what happened at other clubs to come to the conclusion that he's a wanker. The other Oatcake truth, we can't judge ANY player on what's happened elsewhere in his career, what he does for Stoke is the only thing that matters.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Mar 23, 2016 9:12:45 GMT
Just playing son. Have you ever kissed a girl? Yep, another classic momoesk response. Can you add your opinion on the subject at hand during first break david, instead of engaging in this hilarious badinage and if such a word existed it would in fact be momoesque. Extra English for you I think. I don't want Mr Fornside to get his rod of correction out.
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Mar 23, 2016 9:22:48 GMT
Haven't read the thread in it's entirety, but I sense one of the two Oatcake truths are at play? We can't judge Pulis solely on what he did at Stoke, we have to take into account what happened at other clubs to come to the conclusion that he's a wanker. The other Oatcake truth, we can't judge ANY player on what's happened elsewhere in his career, what he does for Stoke is the only thing that matters. If in doubt. Ask momo, the bastion of all things moral and correct.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2016 9:41:43 GMT
Haven't read the thread in it's entirety, but I sense one of the two Oatcake truths are at play? We can't judge Pulis solely on what he did at Stoke, we have to take into account what happened at other clubs to come to the conclusion that he's a wanker. The other Oatcake truth, we can't judge ANY player on what's happened elsewhere in his career, what he does for Stoke is the only thing that matters. If in doubt. Ask momo, the bastion of all things moral and correct. Think he has a few rivals, personally.
|
|
|
Post by bringmesunshine on Mar 23, 2016 9:44:12 GMT
Yep, another classic momoesk response. Can you add your opinion on the subject at hand during first break david, instead of engaging in this hilarious badinage and if such a word existed it would in fact be momoesque. Extra English for you I think. I don't want Mr Fornside to get his rod of correction out. I have, on page 5, and you’ve posted directly after me 3 mins later. At his own request he took early payment of a bonus and left his employers before the terms of the contract stated the bonus was payable. This should be obvious in the tribunals judgement against him and the resulting order to repay the money, award costs and the addition of a £1,000,000 fine, as I said on page 5 he got exactly what he deserved, end of.
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Mar 23, 2016 9:49:29 GMT
What a double act you and wingy make. Yeah aknow.
|
|
|
Post by mumf on Mar 23, 2016 9:56:56 GMT
I have launched an emergency appeal fund and as we enter the second week MrMomo and I have managed to raise £9.36 if you nclude all the escudos and pesetas rattling around in the bottom of the jar ....but we are expecting a rather large cheque from sfance (of shit bin fame ) via Wells Fargo ....
|
|
|
Post by OldStokie on Mar 23, 2016 11:03:40 GMT
Some razor-sharp wit in this thread. Pulis is a cunt. Fact! *lots of chuckles*
OS.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Mar 23, 2016 11:32:26 GMT
The fundamental difference with WBA and Palace and ourselves, and by default respective attitudes towards Pulis is that the length of time we spent out of the top division. Upon our return no one gave us a prayer but Pulis' helped the siege mentality with his own peculiar dogmatic mindset. We were desperate to stay up and tactically and philosophically speaking, the 'by any means necessary' absolutely helped to achieve this aim as it riled the purists and led to a rather blunt or unorthodox attitude towards football and its methods deployed to achieve those aims; the borderline surreal spectacle of Rory's long throws, arming the ball boys with towels, opposition clubs moving their advertising hoardings to stop the throws and more broadly the fear of God put up bigger more successful clubs as the reputation of a visit to the Brit grew. The now infamous 'wet and windy Tuesday night in Stoke and so on and so on. Pulis with his singular mindset worked in our favour. To a point. But then his self imposed technical glass ceiling stopped working as effectively and his limitations stopped being a perverse source of points and pleasure and increasingly began to grate not with the away teams but with us, the fans. The binary season was rearing it's ugly head and the limited shelf life and short-termist tactical nouse was threatening to undo all the hard work. So he is asked to leave by the chairman, politely and respectfully but none the less, he is told his time is up. But then something odd happens. He goes to Palace and for some reason beyond my understanding all of a sudden Pulis the perverse pragmatist is reborn as a shrewd gameplayer who can keep a club up, work miracles and is held aloft as the troubleshooter hired gun. Football pundits and journalists alike start to take him seriously, after he leaves us. It adds to a general feeling that it wasn't Pulis' tactics that weren't fashionable or credible all along, but Stoke City. We had no right to want to stay in the top division for more than a season or two. I speak for no one else but I found this irksome particularly when I'd spent the last few seasons in a bizarre state of enjoying the thrill of top flight football but not only having to justify our managers methods to friends who support other clubs but also having a contradictory mindset - defending the man who had forced the binary season upon us, the man who came back to us with a charge sheet of bizarre off field activity, evidence stuffed down his tracksuit bottoms and other lower league clubs where he'd left with less than good grace. Palace and West Brom have not experienced the whole saga of Pulis in the lower leagues. They've had more managers and yo-yo turmoil than we've had hot dinners but Pulis' is now permanently entwined into the fabric of of the collective psyche of Stoke City. They've flirted with him but we lived with him, he is our infuriating ex! And then he comes back as an opposition manager and the unedifying spectacle of him celebrating a goal that feels more like point proving, aimed squarely at us, the fans who never took him to our hearts regardless of the success of promotion and becoming a relatively secure fixture in the Premier League. It's almost impossible for Stoke fans to not contemplate anything Pulis without being reminded of the saga; he reminds of pre-Internet fortune Coates, he reminds us of football in the doldrums, he reminds us of a painful lack of ability and ambition, he reminds us of who we were and until we've actually won something, he reminds of us who we think we are. Yes he took us to Europe via a cup final defeat but he also sold us down the river in Valencia souring the adventure. Palace may be small by London terms but they're still a London club. West Brom may be in Smethwick but the Black Country isn't as regularly derided as Stoke on Trent. It's allowed to exist whereas people questioned not only our top division status but our very existence (cf: is Stoke in the Midlands or the North? etc.). Tony Pulis will always mean much more to us than I would wager any club he manages now or in the future. When Pulis' name is in the news for trousering £2m in bonuses dependent on his staying in post for longer the whole Pulis-at-Stoke bubbles to the surface and we end up with a thread as long as this one. Although I would urge caution before suggesting that any utterance of his name on here results in mass hysteria. There's a small number of vessels loudly proclaiming his worth and a small number pointing out his failings. It's hardly like everyone is chipping in. Count up the number of names who have posted more than a handful of posts on this thread. Skip, you've nailed it. Well done Sir. Stick to your day job - our children's future is safe in your hands!
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Mar 23, 2016 11:48:08 GMT
Haven't read the thread in it's entirety, but I sense one of the two Oatcake truths are at play? We can't judge Pulis solely on what he did at Stoke, we have to take into account what happened at other clubs to come to the conclusion that he's a wanker. The other Oatcake truth, we can't judge ANY player on what's happened elsewhere in his career, what he does for Stoke is the only thing that matters. To be fair,I base my opinion of him as a wanker on the basis of some of his time at Stoke.
|
|
|
Post by skip on Mar 23, 2016 11:58:48 GMT
The fundamental difference with WBA and Palace and ourselves, and by default respective attitudes towards Pulis is that the length of time we spent out of the top division. Upon our return no one gave us a prayer but Pulis' helped the siege mentality with his own peculiar dogmatic mindset. We were desperate to stay up and tactically and philosophically speaking, the 'by any means necessary' absolutely helped to achieve this aim as it riled the purists and led to a rather blunt or unorthodox attitude towards football and its methods deployed to achieve those aims; the borderline surreal spectacle of Rory's long throws, arming the ball boys with towels, opposition clubs moving their advertising hoardings to stop the throws and more broadly the fear of God put up bigger more successful clubs as the reputation of a visit to the Brit grew. The now infamous 'wet and windy Tuesday night in Stoke and so on and so on. Pulis with his singular mindset worked in our favour. To a point. But then his self imposed technical glass ceiling stopped working as effectively and his limitations stopped being a perverse source of points and pleasure and increasingly began to grate not with the away teams but with us, the fans. The binary season was rearing it's ugly head and the limited shelf life and short-termist tactical nouse was threatening to undo all the hard work. So he is asked to leave by the chairman, politely and respectfully but none the less, he is told his time is up. But then something odd happens. He goes to Palace and for some reason beyond my understanding all of a sudden Pulis the perverse pragmatist is reborn as a shrewd gameplayer who can keep a club up, work miracles and is held aloft as the troubleshooter hired gun. Football pundits and journalists alike start to take him seriously, after he leaves us. It adds to a general feeling that it wasn't Pulis' tactics that weren't fashionable or credible all along, but Stoke City. We had no right to want to stay in the top division for more than a season or two. I speak for no one else but I found this irksome particularly when I'd spent the last few seasons in a bizarre state of enjoying the thrill of top flight football but not only having to justify our managers methods to friends who support other clubs but also having a contradictory mindset - defending the man who had forced the binary season upon us, the man who came back to us with a charge sheet of bizarre off field activity, evidence stuffed down his tracksuit bottoms and other lower league clubs where he'd left with less than good grace. Palace and West Brom have not experienced the whole saga of Pulis in the lower leagues. They've had more managers and yo-yo turmoil than we've had hot dinners but Pulis' is now permanently entwined into the fabric of of the collective psyche of Stoke City. They've flirted with him but we lived with him, he is our infuriating ex! And then he comes back as an opposition manager and the unedifying spectacle of him celebrating a goal that feels more like point proving, aimed squarely at us, the fans who never took him to our hearts regardless of the success of promotion and becoming a relatively secure fixture in the Premier League. It's almost impossible for Stoke fans to not contemplate anything Pulis without being reminded of the saga; he reminds of pre-Internet fortune Coates, he reminds us of football in the doldrums, he reminds us of a painful lack of ability and ambition, he reminds us of who we were and until we've actually won something, he reminds of us who we think we are. Yes he took us to Europe via a cup final defeat but he also sold us down the river in Valencia souring the adventure. Palace may be small by London terms but they're still a London club. West Brom may be in Smethwick but the Black Country isn't as regularly derided as Stoke on Trent. It's allowed to exist whereas people questioned not only our top division status but our very existence (cf: is Stoke in the Midlands or the North? etc.). Tony Pulis will always mean much more to us than I would wager any club he manages now or in the future. When Pulis' name is in the news for trousering £2m in bonuses dependent on his staying in post for longer the whole Pulis-at-Stoke bubbles to the surface and we end up with a thread as long as this one. Although I would urge caution before suggesting that any utterance of his name on here results in mass hysteria. There's a small number of vessels loudly proclaiming his worth and a small number pointing out his failings. It's hardly like everyone is chipping in. Count up the number of names who have posted more than a handful of posts on this thread. Skip, you've nailed it. Well done Sir. Stick to your day job - our children's future is safe in your hands! Thank you LP. I could have just called someone a deluded wanker but I thought I'd try and distill my thoughts on the matter. Apologies for the grammatical errors and clumsy structure, I wrote it on my phone at midnight. And if that isn't symptomatic of what Pulis means to Stoke I don't know what is!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2016 12:15:03 GMT
Haven't read the thread in it's entirety, but I sense one of the two Oatcake truths are at play? We can't judge Pulis solely on what he did at Stoke, we have to take into account what happened at other clubs to come to the conclusion that he's a wanker. The other Oatcake truth, we can't judge ANY player on what's happened elsewhere in his career, what he does for Stoke is the only thing that matters. To be fair,I base my opinion of him as a wanker on the basis of some of his time at Stoke. Fair enough. I'm aware there are two camps regarding Pulis and his time at Stoke. To be honest it's the latter of my points that really grinds my gears. But you could, for example, state that Tony Fernandez made life difficult for Hughes at QPR. It's seems (to me) that an evaluation of Paul Scally's character might not pass without debate. All owners and football mangers have an element of the raging egomaniac about them I'd wager. I've seen many Palace fans comment that Parish should have let it go, whilst agreeing that Pulis is a wanker.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Mar 23, 2016 15:15:09 GMT
To be fair,I base my opinion of him as a wanker on the basis of some of his time at Stoke. Fair enough. I'm aware there are two camps regarding Pulis and his time at Stoke. To be honest it's the latter of my points that really grinds my gears. But you could, for example, state that Tony Fernandez made life difficult for Hughes at QPR. It's seems (to me) that an evaluation of Paul Scally's character might not pass without debate. All owners and football mangers have an element of the raging egomaniac about them I'd wager. I've seen many Palace fans comment that Parish should have let it go, whilst agreeing that Pulis is a wanker. Fair enough. I've also seen the argument that because Scally is clearly a wanker then that must mean Pulis isn't. Whereas I think it was just two wankers What I don't get with this whole argument - and I've joined it against my better judgement - is the idea that you can't think two things at the same time. Namely that Tony Pulis did a good job for us but is not a particularly nice man and has done some seriously shady things in his time, including at Stoke. I know people mention him throwing the Valencia match but the bigger issue for me, and it fits with his behaviour at other clubs, was his behaviour during the binary season.
|
|
|
Post by skip on Mar 23, 2016 15:18:41 GMT
His behaviour in the binary season was snide, his behaviour away at Valencia was a blatant piss take out of the travelling fans. They're equally but differently bad.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Mar 23, 2016 15:28:05 GMT
His behaviour in the binary season was snide, his behaviour away at Valencia was a blatant piss take out of the travelling fans. They're equally but differently bad. What I suspect is that many fans had got over what he was up to during the binary season or were unaware of it. But a lot of people have never forgiven him for Valencia and it opened up a lot of wounds, both old and new.
|
|
|
Post by skip on Mar 23, 2016 15:35:23 GMT
His behaviour in the binary season was snide, his behaviour away at Valencia was a blatant piss take out of the travelling fans. They're equally but differently bad. What I suspect is that many fans had got over what he was up to during the binary season or were unaware of it. But a lot of people have never forgiven him for Valencia and it opened up a lot of wounds, both old and new. I don't know how but I have managed to blot the binary season out of my mind. I remember going to games, driving up from my new home in London but I can remember so little about it.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Mar 23, 2016 15:38:16 GMT
His behaviour in the binary season was snide, his behaviour away at Valencia was a blatant piss take out of the travelling fans. They're equally but differently bad. What I suspect is that many fans had got over what he was up to during the binary season or were unaware of it. But a lot of people have never forgiven him for Valencia and it opened up a lot of wounds, both old and new. It is ironic that our scratch team actually played better at Valencia than we did when Valencia visited the Brit. That doesn't excuse what Pulis did in hyping the game up and then putting out a reserve side, of course, but it does mean he probably got less flack over it than if we had taken a heavy beating.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Mar 23, 2016 15:46:38 GMT
What I suspect is that many fans had got over what he was up to during the binary season or were unaware of it. But a lot of people have never forgiven him for Valencia and it opened up a lot of wounds, both old and new. It is ironic that our scratch team actually played better at Valencia than we did when Valencia visited the Brit. That doesn't excuse what Pulis did in hyping the game up and then putting out a reserve side, of course, but it does mean he probably got less flack over it than if we had taken a heavy beating. I think he'd have got even less flack if he'd bothered to fill the bench. Managers can always argue that they need to rest players when they put out weakened teams. Not taking a full squad smacks of somebody who couldn't give a toss about the match or the fans.
|
|