|
Post by meladben on Feb 14, 2017 11:55:41 GMT
The facts are that Pulis is a proven liar and crook (read the court transcripts) who is currently actively trying to undermine my club and its players. Another fact is that you're a wind up merchant with no association with this club who I would cheerfully smack in the mouth if I ever met you for the way you've spent years telling us that this man is more important than Stoke City. And I'm not even like that. "Another fact is that you're a wind up merchant with no association with this club" Saw Stan Mathews return in 61, Was there for the Centenary, was there for Stan's benefit game, Travelled to Ajax, Two FA Cup semi finals, 1 league cup final, Autoglass Trophy Final, Promotions and relegations, Boothen stand/The Brit season ticket holder since 74, was accused of inciting Birmingham a riot, travelled to Valencia. So after supporting Stoke City over 50 years I don't need gob shite's like you trying to intimidate or tell me anything. Owned
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Feb 14, 2017 12:05:35 GMT
"Another fact is that you're a wind up merchant with no association with this club" Saw Stan Mathews return in 61, Was there for the Centenary, was there for Stan's benefit game, Travelled to Ajax, Two FA Cup semi finals, 1 league cup final, Autoglass Trophy Final, Promotions and relegations, Boothen stand/The Brit season ticket holder since 74, was accused of inciting Birmingham a riot, travelled to Valencia. So after supporting Stoke City over 50 years I don't need gob shite's like you trying to intimidate or tell me anything. Owned Except greyman didn't direct that quote at owdestokie.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 14, 2017 12:07:38 GMT
"Another fact is that you're a wind up merchant with no association with this club" Saw Stan Mathews return in 61, Was there for the Centenary, was there for Stan's benefit game, Travelled to Ajax, Two FA Cup semi finals, 1 league cup final, Autoglass Trophy Final, Promotions and relegations, Boothen stand/The Brit season ticket holder since 74, was accused of inciting Birmingham a riot, travelled to Valencia. So after supporting Stoke City over 50 years I don't need gob shite's like you trying to intimidate or tell me anything. Owned
More like a bit embarrassed actually ...
|
|
|
Post by bringmesunshine on Feb 14, 2017 12:56:24 GMT
Ryan4england has been strangely quite on this thread.
|
|
djh
Youth Player
Posts: 309
|
Post by djh on Feb 14, 2017 14:17:07 GMT
"Another fact is that you're a wind up merchant with no association with this club" Saw Stan Mathews return in 61, Was there for the Centenary, was there for Stan's benefit game, Travelled to Ajax, Two FA Cup semi finals, 1 league cup final, Autoglass Trophy Final, Promotions and relegations, Boothen stand/The Brit season ticket holder since 74, was accused of inciting Birmingham a riot, travelled to Valencia. So after supporting Stoke City over 50 years I don't need gob shite's like you trying to intimidate or tell me anything. Owned That's 2 of you who've managed to make right twats of themselves there.
|
|
|
Post by crownmeking on Feb 14, 2017 14:38:21 GMT
Ryan4england has been strangely quite on this thread. He's busy logging into his other account.
|
|
|
Post by pottersrule on Feb 14, 2017 14:43:47 GMT
It was always heading for trouble when we fired him and he didn't just retire. A lot of folks said he wouldn't get another top flight job but he did, twice in fact. He's a rival manager now and trouble is his teams keep giving us a bloody nose. We need to do a lot better against his sides, that is how we will find redemption, not churning this pointless shit around on a message board fun though it may be. What he's getting now is less than any manager would get for leaving messages for the club captain. On top of everything else, hopefully this now means we can recreate some of the old bearpit when he's next here. You may have something there mate,the return of the real 12th man like in the olden days.I await this fixture with relish.
|
|
|
Post by bringmesunshine on Feb 14, 2017 14:44:00 GMT
Ryan4england has been strangely quite on this thread. He's busy logging into his other account. Well multiple personalities would require multiple accounts.
|
|
|
Post by kustokie on Feb 14, 2017 14:44:51 GMT
Pulis has a bad record of falling out with someone at every club he has been to. I wonder what went on with James Beattie ? Unfortunately there is a legal document preventing Beattie from talking about his Stoke exit. Can't be coincidence that Mr. Pulis is the common denominator in all these legal proceedings There's the liar pattern there too... Beattie Story. Like they say you shouldn't believe everything you read but it's hard to look past all the related information to date. The accusation of narcissism certainly echoes - having worked for one up close over an extended period you could say it's something you watch out for once you come out the other side of that relationship - so you NEVER go there again. That's not to say you can't have a good relationship with them - you just have to follow their lead and not perform any kind of betrayal in their eyes. I have to say there are many tendencies on display here in his public image and what has been documented through the courts. The indignation when people are perceived to step out of line, the outrage at begin found out, the not addressing or admitting the facts directly and turning a story, the in or out attitude with people that's a big part of his management style. They also won't deal with ego's because they need control. There's also the fear of abandonment by your perceived flock and need to show yourself in a good but unrelated light -plus disgust when that's not recognised (coates family/people of stoke/charity/steak and chips - look at all the things I did that were good and I did for you people how can I be a bad person!!). The sense of entitlement that steps outside normal boundaries (see Palace and the law in general). It's hard to look past all that - it's a bit like watching a less worrying Donald Trump. That's not to say he's as far gone or is - it's only based on some of his actions in the public eye. Part of me actually ends up feeling rather sorry for their type because they can't seem to rationalise until you shine a light on their actions. They constantly reinvent themselves. So it must be a lonely existence. They say the best way to deal with them is reflect their own behaviour back at them and they will retreat and think twice before they attempt it again. Hughes strikes me as a smart guy and if advised i'd say that's exactly what he's doing. Narcissists play dirty so you have to play dirty back and call them out - it's a surefire way they take notice and step back of their own behaviour and to get under their skin. The other is to uncover their self righteous attitude. If the tone of the Ryan "loser" comment is also true then it aligns - the Wenger turnaround just adds further fuel to the fire for some. i.e. they discard any close relationships once it's served it's value to them. They always seek to look down on people and only get off on having influence over them when they need it. I have to say in that regard it makes me smile when certain people on here make out he's laughing at Stoke and sitting pretty. Sure he'll be driven by it but he'll also tortured by the rejection he suffered at Stoke, it's like a perversity. One thing is for certain though a narcissist laughs and gets off on the type of person that is taken in by his perceived reality (and not on a wind up) because they've won you over by whatever means to their cause. That's what they really get off on in terms of power - it feeds the ego and control, getting caught out and shown their true colours now that is what gets to them. Like I say it's by no means a given all this but it's not really stacking up in his favour in the way he's seen to behave. That said they can make great leaders and can really go places when they are ticking and pull people together (siege mentality anyone?). On the flipside when the wheels come off or they lose control it inevitably goes up in flames in a bad way and obsess with what they think is stopping their cause (transfer control?) and lose focus on whats working elsewhere. It's an interesting theory. Coates is a wiley old business fox and would know about leadership styles. He would perhaps see that and have sought to use and work with that talent in whatever way he could. Perhaps he sought to nurture and bring it into a better light with its shortcomings until he couldn't any longer...and perhaps just perhaps he is just a bit of a victim in all this but boy is he a hapless and unlucky one. It looks like you may have read the article in the Atlantic on the psychology of five US Presidents: Jackson, Theodore Roosevelt, Johnson, Nixon and Trump. If you haven't read the article, I highly recommend it. I learned a lot about this personality type. Some of the things they have in common are narcosistic, argumentative, a total lack of empathy and highly disagreeable. Compared with those five, TP is a lovable teddy bear. Nixon's best remembered words on TV before he resigned were "I am not a crook" (which he was). www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/the-mind-of-donald-trump/480771/
|
|
|
Post by dutchstokie on Feb 14, 2017 15:26:28 GMT
Ryan4england has been strangely quite on this thread. He's busy logging into his other account. ..... accountS !!!!!
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Feb 14, 2017 15:38:57 GMT
This might seem like an overreaction, but I'm more and more convinced that Pulis is The Antichrist.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2017 16:00:12 GMT
|
|
|
Post by BackwardsSideways on Feb 14, 2017 16:16:09 GMT
So who 'leaked' this story about the voicemail?
|
|
|
Post by steventaaffe on Feb 14, 2017 16:20:10 GMT
What an absolute circus this has been, and what really grinds my gears the most is, West Brazil beating us, I always have a gut feeling since tone signed for them that they will beat us home or away!!
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Feb 14, 2017 16:21:19 GMT
Wow ! 27 pages and counting. I wish we could generate a fraction of this emotional energy and manufactured anger about some of the other issues which affect fans in football ! The recent Palace case showed that Tony P. is capable of telling untruths both to his employers and in court, so I wouldn't shake hands on deal with him unless I'd also got his signature on a piece of paper. That said, it doesn't mean that anyone he is having an argument with is telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Unfortunately, this is not an industry characterised by honesty, integrity and consistency. And all kinds of people in it are quite capable of trying to use the media to wind up supporters for their own purposes. In this case, our manager's statement that he didn't know why WBA hadn't been playing Berahino was bound to irritate WBA, given that they knew that he knew about the drugs suspension. I don't know why he talked about the past at WBA at all, rather than just talking about what he sees the player giving Stoke City in the future. So someone at WBA ( I cannot believe it was anyone at the FA) retaliates by leaking the drugs story to the press. That was deplorable and unprofessional. Was it done by Pulis, or with his knowledge ? Might have been, but might not have been. Who knows ? No-one has any evidence on that point. If Stoke City felt strongly enough about that (which they are entitled to) in my view the right response would have been to complain about it through the proper channels - CEO to CEO, Chairman to chairman or through a formal complaint to the FA ( for which there is a process). Then we have players, Ryan and Charlie, deciding to use the media to comment to criticise WBA. My advice to players would be to leave the PR stuff to the PR people. So Pulis makes a private phone call to Ryan in response, leaves a voicemail and uses the word 'loser'. Mark Hughes decides to put this in the media, even though he admits he hadn't actually listened to it. As FSF Chair I would never make a public comment about a voicemail unless I had heard it for myself, to judge context. But why did Hughes feel it was helpful to put it in the public domain - presumably to wind up Stoke fans, in which, if this Board is anything to go by, he has succeeded. So then yesterday, Pulis states in the Guardian that he is disgusted by the 'spin' Hughes has given to this which he says is completely wrong and out of context, and that so far from saying Ryan is a loser, he was actually saying the reverse. None of us can make a judgement on this unless we hear the voicemail for ourselves. And so the spat goes on. I'm afraid it all feels a bit like the playground to me. The end result might be that Pulis will get the kind of reception Wenger has had next time he comes to the Brit., and Ryan will get the kind of reception he gets at Arsenal next time we go the Hawthorns. And what will actually have been achieved by these 'professionals' ?
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Feb 14, 2017 16:30:49 GMT
Wow ! 27 pages and counting. I wish we could generate a fraction of this emotional energy and manufactured anger about some of the other issues which affect fans in football ! The recent Palace case showed that Tony P. is capable of telling untruths both to his employers and in court, so I wouldn't shake hands on deal with him unless I'd also got his signature on a piece of paper. That said, it doesn't mean that anyone he is having an argument with is telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Unfortunately, this is not an industry characterised by honesty, integrity and consistency. And all kinds of people in it are quite capable of trying to use the media to wind up supporters for their own purposes. In this case, our manager's statement that he didn't know why WBA hadn't been playing Berahino was bound to irritate WBA, given that they knew that he knew about the drugs suspension. I don't know why he talked about the past at WBA at all, rather than just talking about what he sees the player giving Stoke City in the future. So someone at WBA ( I cannot believe it was anyone at the FA) retaliates by leaking the drugs story to the press. That was deplorable and unprofessional. Was it done by Pulis, or with his knowledge ? Might have been, but might not have been. Who knows ? No-one has any evidence on that point. If Stoke City felt strongly enough about that (which they are entitled to) in my view the right response would have been to complain about it through the proper channels - CEO to CEO, Chairman to chairman or through a formal complaint to the FA ( for which there is a process). Then we have players, Ryan and Charlie, deciding to use the media to comment to criticise WBA. My advice to players would be to leave the PR stuff to the PR people. So Pulis makes a private phone call to Ryan in response, leaves a voicemail and uses the word 'loser'. Mark Hughes decides to put this in the media, even though he admits he hadn't actually listened to it. As FSF Chair I would never make a public comment about a voicemail unless I had heard it for myself, to judge context. But why did Hughes feel it was helpful to put it in the public domain - presumably to wind up Stoke fans, in which, if this Board is anything to go by, he has succeeded. So then yesterday, Pulis states in the Guardian that he is disgusted by the 'spin' Hughes has given to this which he says is completely wrong and out of context, and that so far from saying Ryan is a loser, he was actually saying the reverse. None of us can make a judgement on this unless we hear the voicemail for ourselves. And so the spat goes on. I'm afraid it all feels a bit like the playground to me. The end result might be that Pulis will get the kind of reception Wenger has had next time he comes to the Brit., and Ryan will get the kind of reception he gets at Arsenal next time we go the Hawthorns. And what will actually have been achieved by these 'professionals' ? He's a cunt. Judgement made!
|
|
|
Post by GoBoks on Feb 14, 2017 16:32:20 GMT
The facts are that Pulis is a proven liar and crook (read the court transcripts) who is currently actively trying to undermine my club and its players. Another fact is that you're a wind up merchant with no association with this club who I would cheerfully smack in the mouth if I ever met you for the way you've spent years telling us that this man is more important than Stoke City. And I'm not even like that. "Another fact is that you're a wind up merchant with no association with this club" Saw Stan Mathews return in 61, Was there for the Centenary, was there for Stan's benefit game, Travelled to Ajax, Two FA Cup semi finals, 1 league cup final, Autoglass Trophy Final, Promotions and relegations, Boothen stand/The Brit season ticket holder since 74, was accused of inciting Birmingham a riot, travelled to Valencia. So after supporting Stoke City over 50 years I don't need gob shite's like you trying to intimidate or tell me anything. Bloody part-timer! Where were you for the FA Cup final or the semifinal against Bolton or the league cup semifinal against Liverpool? But, joking aside, you do realize that he was talking to Geoff 231, don't you? Or are you Geoff in disguise?
|
|
|
Post by werrington on Feb 14, 2017 16:35:33 GMT
So who 'leaked' this story about the voicemail? I thought you were " in the know "
|
|
|
Post by GoBoks on Feb 14, 2017 16:36:42 GMT
Wow ! 27 pages and counting. I wish we could generate a fraction of this emotional energy and manufactured anger about some of the other issues which affect fans in football ! The recent Palace case showed that Tony P. is capable of telling untruths both to his employers and in court, so I wouldn't shake hands on deal with him unless I'd also got his signature on a piece of paper. That said, it doesn't mean that anyone he is having an argument with is telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Unfortunately, this is not an industry characterised by honesty, integrity and consistency. And all kinds of people in it are quite capable of trying to use the media to wind up supporters for their own purposes. In this case, our manager's statement that he didn't know why WBA hadn't been playing Berahino was bound to irritate WBA, given that they knew that he knew about the drugs suspension. I don't know why he talked about the past at WBA at all, rather than just talking about what he sees the player giving Stoke City in the future. So someone at WBA ( I cannot believe it was anyone at the FA) retaliates by leaking the drugs story to the press. That was deplorable and unprofessional. Was it done by Pulis, or with his knowledge ? Might have been, but might not have been. Who knows ? No-one has any evidence on that point. If Stoke City felt strongly enough about that (which they are entitled to) in my view the right response would have been to complain about it through the proper channels - CEO to CEO, Chairman to chairman or through a formal complaint to the FA ( for which there is a process). Then we have players, Ryan and Charlie, deciding to use the media to comment to criticise WBA. My advice to players would be to leave the PR stuff to the PR people. So Pulis makes a private phone call to Ryan in response, leaves a voicemail and uses the word 'loser'. Mark Hughes decides to put this in the media, even though he admits he hadn't actually listened to it. As FSF Chair I would never make a public comment about a voicemail unless I had heard it for myself, to judge context. But why did Hughes feel it was helpful to put it in the public domain - presumably to wind up Stoke fans, in which, if this Board is anything to go by, he has succeeded. So then yesterday, Pulis states in the Guardian that he is disgusted by the 'spin' Hughes has given to this which he says is completely wrong and out of context, and that so far from saying Ryan is a loser, he was actually saying the reverse. None of us can make a judgement on this unless we hear the voicemail for ourselves. And so the spat goes on. I'm afraid it all feels a bit like the playground to me. The end result might be that Pulis will get the kind of reception Wenger has had next time he comes to the Brit., and Ryan will get the kind of reception he gets at Arsenal next time we go the Hawthorns. And what will actually have been achieved by these 'professionals' ? Hey Malcolm, you have a lot of contacts. Do you know any one at Wikileaks who could hack into Ryan's phone ..........
|
|
|
Post by bringmesunshine on Feb 14, 2017 16:36:47 GMT
So who 'leaked' this story about the voicemail? If you're going to post try to keep up, I appreciate that things move at a pedestrian pace in Smethwick but you can't all be backward can you ?
|
|
|
Post by bringmesunshine on Feb 14, 2017 16:41:23 GMT
Wow ! 27 pages and counting. I wish we could generate a fraction of this emotional energy and manufactured anger about some of the other issues which affect fans in football ! The recent Palace case showed that Tony P. is capable of telling untruths both to his employers and in court, so I wouldn't shake hands on deal with him unless I'd also got his signature on a piece of paper. That said, it doesn't mean that anyone he is having an argument with is telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Unfortunately, this is not an industry characterised by honesty, integrity and consistency. And all kinds of people in it are quite capable of trying to use the media to wind up supporters for their own purposes. In this case, our manager's statement that he didn't know why WBA hadn't been playing Berahino was bound to irritate WBA, given that they knew that he knew about the drugs suspension. I don't know why he talked about the past at WBA at all, rather than just talking about what he sees the player giving Stoke City in the future. So someone at WBA ( I cannot believe it was anyone at the FA) retaliates by leaking the drugs story to the press. That was deplorable and unprofessional. Was it done by Pulis, or with his knowledge ? Might have been, but might not have been. Who knows ? No-one has any evidence on that point. If Stoke City felt strongly enough about that (which they are entitled to) in my view the right response would have been to complain about it through the proper channels - CEO to CEO, Chairman to chairman or through a formal complaint to the FA ( for which there is a process). Then we have players, Ryan and Charlie, deciding to use the media to comment to criticise WBA. My advice to players would be to leave the PR stuff to the PR people. So Pulis makes a private phone call to Ryan in response, leaves a voicemail and uses the word 'loser'. Mark Hughes decides to put this in the media, even though he admits he hadn't actually listened to it. As FSF Chair I would never make a public comment about a voicemail unless I had heard it for myself, to judge context. But why did Hughes feel it was helpful to put it in the public domain - presumably to wind up Stoke fans, in which, if this Board is anything to go by, he has succeeded. So then yesterday, Pulis states in the Guardian that he is disgusted by the 'spin' Hughes has given to this which he says is completely wrong and out of context, and that so far from saying Ryan is a loser, he was actually saying the reverse. None of us can make a judgement on this unless we hear the voicemail for ourselves. And so the spat goes on. I'm afraid it all feels a bit like the playground to me. The end result might be that Pulis will get the kind of reception Wenger has had next time he comes to the Brit., and Ryan will get the kind of reception he gets at Arsenal next time we go the Hawthorns. And what will actually have been achieved by these 'professionals' ? He's a cunt. Judgement made! Fucking A.
|
|
|
Post by jimigoodwinsbeard on Feb 14, 2017 16:44:19 GMT
Collymore has nailed him in this mornings mirror Whats he said? Cant find article online.
|
|
|
Post by supersimonstainrod on Feb 14, 2017 16:46:26 GMT
Wow ! 27 pages and counting. I wish we could generate a fraction of this emotional energy and manufactured anger about some of the other issues which affect fans in football ! The recent Palace case showed that Tony P. is capable of telling untruths both to his employers and in court, so I wouldn't shake hands on deal with him unless I'd also got his signature on a piece of paper. That said, it doesn't mean that anyone he is having an argument with is telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Unfortunately, this is not an industry characterised by honesty, integrity and consistency. And all kinds of people in it are quite capable of trying to use the media to wind up supporters for their own purposes. In this case, our manager's statement that he didn't know why WBA hadn't been playing Berahino was bound to irritate WBA, given that they knew that he knew about the drugs suspension. I don't know why he talked about the past at WBA at all, rather than just talking about what he sees the player giving Stoke City in the future. So someone at WBA ( I cannot believe it was anyone at the FA) retaliates by leaking the drugs story to the press. That was deplorable and unprofessional. Was it done by Pulis, or with his knowledge ? Might have been, but might not have been. Who knows ? No-one has any evidence on that point. If Stoke City felt strongly enough about that (which they are entitled to) in my view the right response would have been to complain about it through the proper channels - CEO to CEO, Chairman to chairman or through a formal complaint to the FA ( for which there is a process). Then we have players, Ryan and Charlie, deciding to use the media to comment to criticise WBA. My advice to players would be to leave the PR stuff to the PR people. So Pulis makes a private phone call to Ryan in response, leaves a voicemail and uses the word 'loser'. Mark Hughes decides to put this in the media, even though he admits he hadn't actually listened to it. As FSF Chair I would never make a public comment about a voicemail unless I had heard it for myself, to judge context. But why did Hughes feel it was helpful to put it in the public domain - presumably to wind up Stoke fans, in which, if this Board is anything to go by, he has succeeded. So then yesterday, Pulis states in the Guardian that he is disgusted by the 'spin' Hughes has given to this which he says is completely wrong and out of context, and that so far from saying Ryan is a loser, he was actually saying the reverse. None of us can make a judgement on this unless we hear the voicemail for ourselves. And so the spat goes on. I'm afraid it all feels a bit like the playground to me. The end result might be that Pulis will get the kind of reception Wenger has had next time he comes to the Brit., and Ryan will get the kind of reception he gets at Arsenal next time we go the Hawthorns. And what will actually have been achieved by these 'professionals' ? He's a cunt. Judgement made! Almost Nietzschean in its succinctness Bayern! Kudos to you...
|
|
|
Post by werrington on Feb 14, 2017 17:04:05 GMT
Collymore has nailed him in this mornings mirror Whats he said? Cant find article online. Says he acts like some old school warrior and Shawcross needs to confront him next time they play
|
|
|
Post by mrpickles on Feb 14, 2017 17:05:18 GMT
So who 'leaked' this story about the voicemail? No one has. It's been openly divulged by our manager, who was quite clearly happy to put his name to the comments. However, the Berahino drugs story came from an 'unknown source' who obviously didn't want to be known as the source. Maybe the person thought that they would come across as a bitter and twisted twat in a baseball cap? (allegedly) Whether either were right to divulge the information is a matter of debate, but there's no denying that one of the sources has been forthright and open when releasing their 'story' and the other has gone about it under a veil of secrecy. So in summary, one story has been leaked and the other hasn't
|
|
|
Post by Mendicant on Feb 14, 2017 17:08:10 GMT
This might seem like an overreaction, but I'm more and more convinced that Pulis is The Antichrist. The Antichrist would have tried to beat Valencia.
|
|
|
Post by owdestokie on Feb 14, 2017 17:12:29 GMT
"Another fact is that you're a wind up merchant with no association with this club" Saw Stan Mathews return in 61, Was there for the Centenary, was there for Stan's benefit game, Travelled to Ajax, Two FA Cup semi finals, 1 league cup final, Autoglass Trophy Final, Promotions and relegations, Boothen stand/The Brit season ticket holder since 74, was accused of inciting Birmingham a riot, travelled to Valencia. So after supporting Stoke City over 50 years I don't need gob shite's like you trying to intimidate or tell me anything. Bloody part-timer! Where were you for the FA Cup final or the semifinal against Bolton or the league cup semifinal against Liverpool? But, joking aside, you do realize that he was talking to Geoff 231, don't you? Or are you Geoff in disguise? I realise now. At my age working with technology, with poor eyesight and a thumb. Sometimes you make a mistake. 😄😄 I have registered a sincere apology
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Feb 14, 2017 17:12:37 GMT
Wow ! 27 pages and counting. I wish we could generate a fraction of this emotional energy and manufactured anger about some of the other issues which affect fans in football ! The recent Palace case showed that Tony P. is capable of telling untruths both to his employers and in court, so I wouldn't shake hands on deal with him unless I'd also got his signature on a piece of paper. That said, it doesn't mean that anyone he is having an argument with is telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Unfortunately, this is not an industry characterised by honesty, integrity and consistency. And all kinds of people in it are quite capable of trying to use the media to wind up supporters for their own purposes. In this case, our manager's statement that he didn't know why WBA hadn't been playing Berahino was bound to irritate WBA, given that they knew that he knew about the drugs suspension. I don't know why he talked about the past at WBA at all, rather than just talking about what he sees the player giving Stoke City in the future. So someone at WBA ( I cannot believe it was anyone at the FA) retaliates by leaking the drugs story to the press. That was deplorable and unprofessional. Was it done by Pulis, or with his knowledge ? Might have been, but might not have been. Who knows ? No-one has any evidence on that point. If Stoke City felt strongly enough about that (which they are entitled to) in my view the right response would have been to complain about it through the proper channels - CEO to CEO, Chairman to chairman or through a formal complaint to the FA ( for which there is a process). Then we have players, Ryan and Charlie, deciding to use the media to comment to criticise WBA. My advice to players would be to leave the PR stuff to the PR people. So Pulis makes a private phone call to Ryan in response, leaves a voicemail and uses the word 'loser'. Mark Hughes decides to put this in the media, even though he admits he hadn't actually listened to it. As FSF Chair I would never make a public comment about a voicemail unless I had heard it for myself, to judge context. But why did Hughes feel it was helpful to put it in the public domain - presumably to wind up Stoke fans, in which, if this Board is anything to go by, he has succeeded. So then yesterday, Pulis states in the Guardian that he is disgusted by the 'spin' Hughes has given to this which he says is completely wrong and out of context, and that so far from saying Ryan is a loser, he was actually saying the reverse. None of us can make a judgement on this unless we hear the voicemail for ourselves. And so the spat goes on. I'm afraid it all feels a bit like the playground to me. The end result might be that Pulis will get the kind of reception Wenger has had next time he comes to the Brit., and Ryan will get the kind of reception he gets at Arsenal next time we go the Hawthorns. And what will actually have been achieved by these 'professionals' ? My take on it is that Stoke's involvement could be described as ill-advised. Whereas Pulis has been malicious.
|
|
|
Post by claytonscrubs on Feb 14, 2017 17:14:57 GMT
So who 'leaked' this story about the voicemail? I thought you had fucked off ! 😉
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2017 19:51:00 GMT
This might seem like an overreaction, but I'm more and more convinced that Pulis is The Antichrist. Check out the time of their first goal in each of their last three matches. 6,6,6. The evidence is stacking up.
|
|