|
Post by foster on Apr 24, 2018 13:40:23 GMT
It is you who are dillusional! I entered into no argument into who our best striker has been! It is you who lack the comprehension skills to understand what my post was about. I admit that employing Steve Bould would involve an element of risk but for the last ten years he has been immersed with top quality club working and coaching top quality players. Most of all he was born and raised as a Stokie! He has said that he would at some stage like to come back to Stoke. Steve Bould has had a great apprenticeship to have a crack at management. Please remember the level will be at Championship level. He will have close links with all the young talent that might be available from Arsenal as well as having the respect of other top clubs. The positives of this sort of risk far out way the positives of retaining Lambert or employing some other manager who has a reputation but who is passed their sell by date. Very good post.Bould would be a far better gamble than Potter. Would certainly be a bould move by the club.... bye
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Apr 24, 2018 13:43:19 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mickstupp on Apr 24, 2018 13:43:39 GMT
You've gone from saying fuller wasn't one of our best strikers to saying you want Steve Bould as manager? Are you on drugs? It is you who are dillusional! I entered into no argument into who our best striker has been! It is you who lack the comprehension skills to understand what my post was about. I admit that employing Steve Bould would involve an element of risk but for the last ten years he has been immersed with top quality club working and coaching top quality players. Most of all he was born and raised as a Stokie! He has said that he would at some stage like to come back to Stoke. Steve Bould has had a great apprenticeship to have a crack at management. Please remember the level will be at Championship level. He will have close links with all the young talent that might be available from Arsenal as well as having the respect of other top clubs. The positives of this sort of risk far out way the positives of retaining Lambert or employing some other manager who has a reputation but who is passed their sell by date. Bould was interviewed for the Stoke job in the summer of 1997. We went for Chic Bates instead.....
|
|
|
Post by captainmainwaring on Apr 24, 2018 13:43:44 GMT
I`m no great friend of Cartwright or Scholes but can someone explain to me why they think they should be sacked please ? It is not their job to question the manager`s choice of player or to coach or pick the team. Whilst they may be the first point of call for an agent looking to move on one of his players, it is for the manager to decide whether he would like to sign a player or not. My only real gripe with these 2 individuals is to question the hugely inflated salaries that they both alledgedly draw from the club Cartwright is pretty simple to explain, now we officially know that the scouting system we use does its own thing. We've signed donkeys for club record breaking amounts - that is the sack on its own for overseeing it, you would think, but no. The squad Sparky inherited needed a freshen up after his first season, it happens in football, it's natural. You acquire new players and you go again. The players that were identified have not been good enough, we have a team full of them. He's the one who draws up a final list/dossier to be presented to the manager, and it seems that every time transfer wonderland comes around, these lists have included bad players. Not only included but evidently given these players glowing reports! (I can see why we signed Berahino, he was hot property, but a lot of other signings have been strange to say the least) We're not talking about 1 or 2 either, it has been consistent bad signing after bad signing. What he does is basically what the manager is said to be doing - he gets given targets by his team, does his own personal investigations and then chooses which ones go to the boss. That's the only way it can work unless you do ALL the scouting yourself. That is consistent bad judgement, holy shit it is and if Sparky is getting hung out to dry (rightfully so) then so should Cartwright for the exact same reasons. If one thing is for certain though, if Cartwright stays, he/we need better scouts. Who is actually out there watching the games, telling him who is good, telling him how a player came across during a chat, etc etc etc. This whole Director of Football system has to be done properly if you're going to do it, it's no good being a brilliant spreadsheet guy if the ones feeding you the information have seen a Porsche through the window of a Ford garage. That is probably why Pulis kept it so in-house and personal, so he knew what the club was getting for their money himself. That sort of stuff just goes on in your mind.
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Apr 24, 2018 13:44:08 GMT
Smudge’s thoughts on the matter
|
|
|
Post by TrentValePotter96 on Apr 24, 2018 14:09:01 GMT
I think the vast majority of fans are still 'Coates In' if that's a thing, but most recognise that he's fucked up here. And the answer to that shouldn't be 'be grateful that Sir Peter owns us', it should be to ask serious questions about the future direction of the club.
|
|
|
Post by vahl on Apr 24, 2018 14:09:32 GMT
Cartwright is pretty simple to explain, now we officially know that the scouting system we use does its own thing. We've signed donkeys for club record breaking amounts - that is the sack on its own for overseeing it, you would think, but no. The squad Sparky inherited needed a freshen up after his first season, it happens in football, it's natural. You acquire new players and you go again. The players that were identified have not been good enough, we have a team full of them. He's the one who draws up a final list/dossier to be presented to the manager, and it seems that every time transfer wonderland comes around, these lists have included bad players. Not only included but evidently given these players glowing reports! (I can see why we signed Berahino, he was hot property, but a lot of other signings have been strange to say the least) We're not talking about 1 or 2 either, it has been consistent bad signing after bad signing. What he does is basically what the manager is said to be doing - he gets given targets by his team, does his own personal investigations and then chooses which ones go to the boss. That's the only way it can work unless you do ALL the scouting yourself. That is consistent bad judgement, holy shit it is and if Sparky is getting hung out to dry (rightfully so) then so should Cartwright for the exact same reasons. If one thing is for certain though, if Cartwright stays, he/we need better scouts. Who is actually out there watching the games, telling him who is good, telling him how a player came across during a chat, etc etc etc. This whole Director of Football system has to be done properly if you're going to do it, it's no good being a brilliant spreadsheet guy if the ones feeding you the information have seen a Porsche through the window of a Ford garage. That is probably why Pulis kept it so in-house and personal, so he knew what the club was getting for their money himself. That sort of stuff just goes on in your mind. What does? Are you one of our scouts or something? The only other way he cocks it up, besides being an exceptionally bad judge of footballer or having scouts beneath him that are equally as bad, is if he is linking players to the club based on nothing but an Agent's say so, which is way way way worse than trying yourself and failing. There is no credible evidence to suggest he is good at his job.
|
|
|
Post by Edward Tattsyrup on Apr 24, 2018 14:12:12 GMT
Smudge’s thoughts on the matter As usual, Smudge is pretty much bang on the money.
|
|
|
Post by pez75 on Apr 24, 2018 14:14:32 GMT
Hmm, I am no employment law expert and I know football contracts are proabably different to most, but I am certain that contracts of employment are mutually binding and cannot be terminated without the consent of both parties. Yes, but if you pay up the contract you don't have to have the player cluttering up the changing room or the training pitch nor do you have to include him in the squad. You've paid him his wages and that is it. In most cases in those circumstances the player WOULD want to leave as that is his best chance of getting a new job. If he simply sees out his contract (how ever many years it is) by watching day time TV and joining the local bowls club, he's going to be even less of an attractive proposition to a future club than he is at present. Fantasy land, never going to happen. We are not the first team to have a toxic player to deal with - why has this never happened before? In reality if you take that approach there is absolutely no point in paying him up in full - he is still under contract yet has all your money?!?! Madness, if Scholes did that I think Momo would explode!. Just tell him to keep away (a la Affelay) and hope he engineers his own move and you move him on in the normal fashion. My point remains the same - no player is going anywhere unless he wants to go or his contract runs out.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Apr 24, 2018 14:16:20 GMT
Smudge’s thoughts on the matter Personally I think he's going a bit too much with the angle that we want PC out which isn't really the case. We're mainly pissed off that he doesn't sack anyone or seem to change anything. I don't think the banner will do anything other than give people a bit of a laugh at PCs expense. Relegation is going to happen so why not poke some fun at it.
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Apr 24, 2018 14:22:19 GMT
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Apr 24, 2018 14:34:15 GMT
Smudge’s thoughts on the matter One bad season like fuck it is.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Apr 24, 2018 14:34:16 GMT
Smudge’s thoughts on the matter Personally I think he's going a bit too much with the angle that we want PC out which isn't really the case. We're mainly pissed off that he doesn't sack anyone or seem to change anything. I don't think the banner will do anything other than give people a bit of a laugh at PCs expense. Relegation is going to happen so why not poke some fun at it. Yeah how many actually want Coates out? People don't. They want him to wake the fuck up. That article last night was just a load of old arse gravy that people have rightly gone mental over. Once the dust settles it'll be back to wanting the 3 amigos gone and Coates to just wake up and smell the coffee.
|
|
|
Post by Fredrikstad Norway on Apr 24, 2018 14:37:49 GMT
The new Mr. Coates.... - Stoke are unlucky. - Berahino will come good. - We done all we could to get a striker in. - We where very close to sign a number of quality players. - Lambert said the right things in the interview, that is why he is our manager the next 3-5 years, relegated or not. (No matter what) This is how we become the new Sunderland!!! WE ARE DOOOO.......MED!!!
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Apr 24, 2018 14:40:56 GMT
Mark Hughes was sacked too late- Coates to blame. Scholes and Cartwright unfit for purpose- Coates employs them. Paul Lambert has no wins in 11 games- Coates employed him. "It's not Lambert's fault we haven't got a striker"- no it's Coates' fault as he left it until halfway through the window to sack Hughes. See a pattern? Coates is reverting to type- don't forget we were heading for oblivion under him before the Icelandics took over. He has form.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Apr 24, 2018 14:43:03 GMT
Smudge’s thoughts on the matter Personally I think he's going a bit too much with the angle that we want PC out which isn't really the case. We're mainly pissed off that he doesn't sack anyone or seem to change anything. I don't think the banner will do anything other than give people a bit of a laugh at PCs expense. Relegation is going to happen so why not poke some fun at it. The banner is to close to the truth and some don't like it, Coates has put us in this situation ably assisted by other associated cock wipes.
|
|
|
Post by stokeson on Apr 24, 2018 14:47:25 GMT
Mills ,Ball, Kamara. may all turn out to have better records than Lambert. Still don't know what the fuss is about.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Apr 24, 2018 14:49:30 GMT
Mark Hughes was sacked too late- Coates to blame. Scholes and Cartwright unfit for purpose- Coates employs them. Paul Lambert has no wins in 11 games- Coates employed him. "It's not Lambert's fault we haven't got a striker"- no it's Coates' fault as he left it until halfway through the window to sack Hughes. See a pattern? Coates is reverting to type- don't forget we were heading for oblivion under him before the Icelandics took over. He has form. Leopards change never their spots
|
|
|
Post by kronkie on Apr 24, 2018 14:52:15 GMT
Smudge’s thoughts on the matter Agree with most of what smudge says except the bit about 1 poor season,2 poor seasons leading to relegation he should have said.
|
|
|
Post by pez75 on Apr 24, 2018 15:02:04 GMT
|
|
|
Post by owdestokie2 on Apr 24, 2018 15:04:22 GMT
Smudge’s thoughts on the matter I have two minor issues with the article. 1. Smudge should have differentiated between a transfer process and a transfer policy which are two completely separate issues. The process being the implementation of the policy. I’m not sure if PC was trying to be “economic with the truth” when he said process instead of policy. Perhaps just a slip of the tongue, inappropriate phrasing. 2. I think it’s a bit harsh to “mirror” PL’s win ratio with CK’s. Yes the figures may mirror each other, but we are talking 20 years on in completely different footballing circumstances i.e We’re talking Premiership quality standard opposition.
|
|
|
Post by santy on Apr 24, 2018 15:10:08 GMT
Mark Hughes was sacked too late- Coates to blame. Scholes and Cartwright unfit for purpose- Coates employs them. Paul Lambert has no wins in 11 games- Coates employed him. "It's not Lambert's fault we haven't got a striker"- no it's Coates' fault as he left it until halfway through the window to sack Hughes. See a pattern? Coates is reverting to type- don't forget we were heading for oblivion under him before the Icelandics took over. He has form. I mean, if he wants to cause the club problems all he has to do is recall the £75m+ we owe the Bet365 group. Could put us out of business by lunchtime tomorrow. That's the angle you're going for here right, that he's out to destroy the club, that he wants to leave a legacy of problems?
|
|
|
Post by pez75 on Apr 24, 2018 15:12:52 GMT
Smudge’s thoughts on the matter I have two minor issues with the article. 1. Smudge should have differentiated between a transfer process and a transfer policy which are two completely separate issues. The process being the implementation of the policy. I’m not sure if PC was trying to be “economic with the truth” when he said process instead of policy. Perhaps just a slip of the tongue, inappropriate phrasing. 2. I think it’s a bit harsh to “mirror” PL’s win ratio with CK’s. Yes the figures may mirror each other, but we are talking 20 years on in completely different footballing circumstances i.e We’re talking Premiership quality standard opposition. [/b] Why? Stats are stats. We have been in this division for 10 yrs - this is the level we are at (for now...) so the quality of the opposition is relative.
|
|
|
Post by s8to on Apr 24, 2018 15:18:17 GMT
Hughes Holiday Camp v the Lambert Work House Hughes P22 W5 D5 L12 F23 A47 GD-24 Pts 20 Lambo P12 W1 D6 L5 F9 A15 GD-6 Pts 9 (The missing match is mufc away which we lost 3 zip with rooster in charge) Hughes points per game = 0.91 would trend to 34.5 points over a season Lambert points per game = 0.75 would trend to 28.5 over a season. We concede less under Lambert but score less too and win less. I think it's stretching it to say performances have improved. Burnley was a classic example. We played them away a few months ago and lost 1-0 but we had 50% of the possession and the on target shot count was 7-2 in our favour. This time against Burnley at home we drew 1-1 but only had 43% possession as the home side and the shot count was 7-3 in favour of Burnley. We're fighting hard but we now look like a plucky League 1 outfit on a big FA Cup away day playing against Premier League big boys. I'm concerned too much work and no play has made Jack a dull boy and he is going to flunk his exams too! Pretty much my thoughts exactly.. Unbelievable Jeff!!!
|
|
|
Post by foster on Apr 24, 2018 15:19:40 GMT
Mark Hughes was sacked too late- Coates to blame. Scholes and Cartwright unfit for purpose- Coates employs them. Paul Lambert has no wins in 11 games- Coates employed him. "It's not Lambert's fault we haven't got a striker"- no it's Coates' fault as he left it until halfway through the window to sack Hughes. See a pattern? Coates is reverting to type- don't forget we were heading for oblivion under him before the Icelandics took over. He has form. I mean, if he wants to cause the club problems all he has to do is recall the £75m+ we owe the Bet365 group. Could put us out of business by lunchtime tomorrow. That's the angle you're going for here right, that he's out to destroy the club, that he wants to leave a legacy of problems? Where is the 75m from? Got a link?
|
|
|
Post by Miles Offside on Apr 24, 2018 15:22:16 GMT
To use a phrase I think I've heard somewhere before "I don't know what all the fuss is about".
Peter Coates said "Paul is under contract and there are no plans to change". He's not going to say anything else with 3 games to go, is he?
He's not going to admit to being complacent when he made the "fuss" remark. He obviously believed at that point that we'd be ok.
And he's exploded the myth that the failed signings weren't the manager's choices. Had the signings succeeded, nobody would be criticising the recruitment process, they'd be too busy praising Toxic Mark.
Coates also said he wants us to come straight back up should we get relegated. Let's see if he means it.
|
|
|
Post by wakefieldstokie on Apr 24, 2018 15:32:39 GMT
To use a phrase I think I've heard somewhere before "I don't know what all the fuss is about". Peter Coates said "Paul is under contract and there are no plans to change". He's not going to say anything else with 3 games to go, is he? He's not going to admit to being complacent when he made the "fuss" remark. He obviously believed at that point that we'd be ok. And he's exploded the myth that the failed signings weren't the manager's choices. Had the signings succeeded, nobody would be criticising the recruitment process, they'd be too busy praising Toxic Mark. Coates also said he wants us to come straight back up should we get relegated. Let's see if he means it. Why say anything then? He’s trying to lower expectation, why do nothing about a manager with a very poor record and a recruitment manager that’s not just made one enormous arse up (which you may forgive) but he’s made 3 gigantic mistakes and a handful of smaller errors regarding players coming in. It beggars belief that someone doing their job so poorly can remain in place.
|
|
|
Post by Miles Offside on Apr 24, 2018 15:46:44 GMT
To use a phrase I think I've heard somewhere before "I don't know what all the fuss is about". Peter Coates said "Paul is under contract and there are no plans to change". He's not going to say anything else with 3 games to go, is he? He's not going to admit to being complacent when he made the "fuss" remark. He obviously believed at that point that we'd be ok. And he's exploded the myth that the failed signings weren't the manager's choices. Had the signings succeeded, nobody would be criticising the recruitment process, they'd be too busy praising Toxic Mark. Coates also said he wants us to come straight back up should we get relegated. Let's see if he means it. Why say anything then? He’s trying to lower expectation, why do nothing about a manager with a very poor record and a recruitment manager that’s not just made one enormous arse up (which you may forgive) but he’s made 3 gigantic mistakes and a handful of smaller errors regarding players coming in. It beggars belief that someone doing their job so poorly can remain in place. You ask "Why say anything then?" Let's face it, if he'd said nothing he'd be criticised for hiding from the fans and refusing to face the situation. You say the recruitment manager has "made 3 gigantic mistakes". He got the players Hughes wanted. Who would've been praised if those 3 players had been a success? It wouldn't have been the recruitment manager. He's not going to get rid of Lambert with 3 games to go. And he's not going to say now that he'll get rid of him at the end of the season. Neither of those scenarios are realistic.
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Apr 24, 2018 15:49:53 GMT
“Fight to keep our best players” just a pity you didn’t do that last summer🙄
|
|
|
Post by santy on Apr 24, 2018 15:53:32 GMT
I mean, if he wants to cause the club problems all he has to do is recall the £75m+ we owe the Bet365 group. Could put us out of business by lunchtime tomorrow. That's the angle you're going for here right, that he's out to destroy the club, that he wants to leave a legacy of problems? Where is the 75m from? Got a link? The £75m is the accumulation of additional funds the Bet365 group has added over the last few years and was in the last set of accounts which were before the start of this season (so any additional shortfall the club has had this season would go on top of that figure) s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/document-api-images-prod/docs/ilHH-h1ysIxrAkpgLq3aeMpKQw-5M4N5rxatsW8u3xE/application-pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=ASIAIAK7Q57ZK5NWT5PA&Expires=1524584599&Signature=oOTYri1qk%2FKJ95oVXaKk46QEhlc%3D&x-amz-security-token=FQoDYXdzEGAaDDEIUxI%2Bf%2BULZfQ8xSK3AzCQDNgwbT8uZOkYIaEdAvF2Zz1bSWtHtbu5NPz9oGRbhBPkyR511f5DvSzStD55iU8zY%2BvD3WtZYfvZk7rtFMB8eb9DRYvxdf27wLRkrOGahkQrwSZkq7o7XLNUs58aYUbQXgoh30ciDyI4nKkC2vVvfUcP0vcH3kE94vIeIaT9H3PGHTcxhy5R0zhJRkkY7HNuAl9wS58%2BxnRvLmscU%2FHx9BfnAq6NLSjw9Is43iO9vYtlL4%2FuHLz4%2FTSmh9SrHLKGZzbeZ5uzCl7JnpYO%2FfdlBHOzBWjE3SuECyJuD2p%2FPD1rhmVCUpWFWAD1MQ5vQ9ly4ZFxF%2B1SMwBcmPl%2FDa1tIKAkmKQl4sP4jfvhfg3bDJ1WNzUHwwqrXPhCybpaKwM3OMUd0tDGrGPq0mrhSyoXXAaB7sfjMPWxPrgyeJmpsxTunCp%2BkOioIShp8vXo0kc8A3QRc0MmMOYY7Mi5%2BSqKleiNWUJYyvrNbZq1rnrhOgtVmqaqRadahYAcHBgkyifSbWiooHJUFf6kDaJBwJE3MF2Sg83SVyDdStyqG5deBcIntYfs8NOLw13xOeN%2BGaF4xlYW1H8orf381gU%3DPage 22: Amounts owed to group undertakings: £75,658,000 A little note in there that the amount is payable on demand, but at present the demand will only be made when the club has the means to do so. The Bet365 accounts up to March 2017 also detail an at the time £73m investment outstanding (which would presumably be Stoke) and a whole host of other interesting bits about the club, and the Stadium although is a much larger set of accounts: s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/document-api-images-prod/docs/_5fe0c3TQMZNhd92sKWvXkXeKi_2liobSl-RUOYpqjc/application-pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=ASIAJ3LZBYUEKE5HVPPQ&Expires=1524584872&Signature=b7xWmA6VyHocU1mNmxKqxwC3mkc%3D&x-amz-security-token=FQoDYXdzEGAaDOuz%2BUKrageL0AS%2B%2ByK3AzT3OJVy3bTIooUZZXgwCmDnynhJ2764DcR4gmnDNyZKPup6KAn0M%2FMBT%2BX8onRrRnAOVFhnfiaShx%2Fn9dsLKCutiiBD9RnVnUzv%2FXPJ1ZC7fCukNYVysnmP4NgI54n%2Fisb8tnt3%2FHSOhslHpqRkhxhPOjcq6oENFa70OK%2FqvF29LuKfZOA39Gpj6ibkYzF37xp0%2FgLrsoMq28IPaWJf7K4mj3IZbul4AR8y3P87tqiHAsGjf4T4US4ZAswSHoU6e7wj0frucGi%2B7Wlw1cUrhW3R1%2BgrcmhTYayXWssv6XOkPlSklnm89pMFA3fX%2FHnE14KCaMk1yuGnX3pM2A6BqrWjSM4%2FOJErmkNzb%2FcCRLnedlAbK0XxeGDB2Ww%2BBIDZtlc%2Bd%2BGvWfaA2TQ9atXdl9iYpDAKOE%2FUZz9iEu1sgi6%2BS0AEdJfhArKkD8QvYZxOsFlqTcU8GQ8ItVU2SqK6OYyi5bWkXqv1hGwUJrKbssyX4W1pQQiaRK0TBSDqErh8ZuY63zyHTBauVLvvPxSLu4u57w2UkvhRJqB%2FcwqsMaKSsCYNewuRf3GIS27XXSNtYRkQGYvH56ko7o391gU%3DJust a not, the first set of accounts, the Stoke City accounts are until May 2017, the Bet365 accounts are only until March 2017 so there's a couple of months between them so numbers might be out a little bit between them.
|
|