|
Post by sufolkstokie on Sept 5, 2019 8:57:48 GMT
To those doubting the OP, it is he/she that has been putting the leaked team out before games. IF it is true then it show how far removed from reality they have become. Who in their right mind thinks Hughton would come in as a director of football? Madness
|
|
|
Post by onefatcopper on Sept 5, 2019 9:02:27 GMT
It would seem leaked team sheets are the worst of our problems. The club either can’t or are reluctant to sack Jones due to the fact that we are still paying Rowett, so sacking Jones now, means they would be paying three managers by the time we get a new man in. They’ve asked Hughton to come in as director of football, he’s refused as he doesn’t want to step on Nath’s toes for fear of undermining him after their good working relationship at Brighton. Now this is where the fun really starts, Peter is keen to take more power back as he’s become increasingly disappointed and worried by the growing list of bad decisions made since Jon took the reins. However Peter wants to bring Pulis back to which Scholes has given an ultimatum saying if Pulis were to come back, he’d be gone. In the middle of all of that Jon’s first choice for the job is again David Moyes. Hughton still sees himself as a Premier League manager, and in many peoples minds rightly so ! Peter wants Pulis back ? I don’t think so, and to many bridges burned between them anyway. Scholes it’s either him or me ? They would bite his hand off if he ever offered his employers this opportunity, he’s a underperforming Director of a Bet365 subsidiary and is clinging on to his position due to the loyalty shown by Peter, Scholes is a Director in name only and carries no influence in any power struggle at Stoke, he knows that he’s onto a good thing and is like a cockroach after a nuclear bomb! He survives, just .
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Sept 5, 2019 9:02:31 GMT
More conjecture, more rumour based off snippets in the media. For a start I do not buy that we even considered approaching a manager currently doing well in the game and looking for his next club a director of football role. The OP has seen their name in the spotlight over the team sheet and is currently bored at work, frustrated at the state of the club and has decided to stir the pot to continue their time in the limelight. How's that for a rumour?! I was told we wanted Hughton in a DOF role weeks ago. Not been told the rest but I don't think your post is close to the truth tbh. It of course could be bullshit. We could have been told by the same person, who could be wrong. But who knows?
|
|
|
Post by Billy the kid on Sept 5, 2019 9:06:29 GMT
More conjecture, more rumour based off snippets in the media. For a start I do not buy that we even considered approaching a manager currently doing well in the game and looking for his next club a director of football role. The OP has seen their name in the spotlight over the team sheet and is currently bored at work, frustrated at the state of the club and has decided to stir the pot to continue their time in the limelight. How's that for a rumour?! I was told we wanted Hughton in a DOF role weeks ago. Not been told the rest but I don't think your post is close to the truth tbh. It of course could be bullshit. We could have been told by the same person, who could be wrong. But who knows? alternatively it could be fake news designed to smoke out the source of the leaks.
|
|
|
Post by somersetstokie on Sept 5, 2019 9:10:15 GMT
The essential elements of the situation are clear, whatever the rumours and whatever the personal opinions of any of us.
1.Things are far from harmonious within the club due to internal politics and individual agendas. This might be reasonably expected as Peter started to take a step back from running things after so long as the club figurehead, and he left a form of vacuum as regards planning, control and good business practice.
2. Jones was clearly appointed as a new broom to bring drive and enthusiasm to the club and although he may have good intentions and ideas, he is still a young developing manager and he doesn't as yet have the experience and skill to effectively implement his theories, especially with regard to the big personalities in the team. He may come good in the long term but he seems to be struggling and out of his depth.
3. Whether the principles being applied now are Jones own, or echoes of the aspirations of the club hierarchy, or a marriage of both is unclear. However we have made a start in moving out underperforming, overpaid players, and we have to hope that the key to future improvements on the field lie in our youth policy.
4.Jones is already being undermined to some extent by the financial pressures to reduce the wage bill and he may have had to let players go out that he might prefer to keep and also recruit lesser players than he would wish for.
5. At this point we have to take a step back and deal in certainties, and the International break is an opportunity to do this. I think the family recognise that Peter wants to avoid seeing his legacy destroyed and are allowing him to step back into the lead role in controlling the club. I think that, whether for sentimental or rational reasons, he might want to rewind to a period when we were stable, relatively succesful, and regarded as a well run club. Tony Pulis was a hard man, and seemed to be most effective when operating on a restricted budget, and it is unlikely that he has lost his skills and edge, and may even of learnt from his mistakes. A new role at the club, even if it is on the board, now beckons, and he would be on hand to step in if a real crisis developed. Also if his return, as suggested, might be the end of Scholes, would that be a bad thing? Sort of killing two birds with one stone.
To conclude I believe that Peter will take back control of the club. The club will not go the whole way towards sacking Jones as he deserves better, but I think that TP will be appointed to the board, to add a purely football brain to help inform planning and decision making, and to shake things up behind the scenes, at the same time giving a bit of a wake up call or added motivation to Jones. I think our next actions will be strong and decisive, and perhaps a little bit of a surprise to some, but equally the club will not let things slide further. That is why we will see more of Peter, and new plans and initiatives will soon be in place.
|
|
|
Post by chigstoke on Sept 5, 2019 9:17:23 GMT
I was told we wanted Hughton in a DOF role weeks ago. Not been told the rest but I don't think your post is close to the truth tbh. It of course could be bullshit. We could have been told by the same person, who could be wrong. But who knows? alternatively it could be fake news designed to smoke out the source of the leaks. Potentially, flush them out.
Or it could be multiple people. I wouldn't suspect one of the players knows of the stuff going on between Jon, Peter and Scholes but it is not beyond the realms of possibility to suggest it is more than likely one of them leaking the team sheets.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Sept 5, 2019 9:21:27 GMT
I was told we wanted Hughton in a DOF role weeks ago. Not been told the rest but I don't think your post is close to the truth tbh. It of course could be bullshit. We could have been told by the same person, who could be wrong. But who knows? alternatively it could be fake news designed to smoke out the source of the leaks. It could be. I have no idea how true it is or not hence why I didn't post it.
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Sept 5, 2019 9:24:11 GMT
To those doubting the OP, it is he/she that has been putting the leaked team out before games. IF it is true then it show how far removed from reality they have become. Who in their right mind thinks Hughton would come in as a director of football? Madness
Or that leaking team sheets would be a sensible thing to do given the chaos already surrounding the club.
Cracking "support" of a club that's already in the shit internally
But hey, as long as the OP gets a boner from all the attention, that's all that matters to him/her i guess.
"Internal wars? Fuck that, let's make them public just so i can seem ITK and have people jizzing over my every word"
|
|
|
Post by FranktheRabbit on Sept 5, 2019 9:25:13 GMT
alternatively it could be fake news designed to smoke out the source of the leaks. It could be. I have no idea how true it is or not hence why I didn't post it. Says a lot that the OP isn't elaborating. Where they heard it from? etc. etc. Just sitting back smirking and watching us all do the guess work.
|
|
|
Post by Bojan Mackey on Sept 5, 2019 9:28:21 GMT
I’d rather teflon stay than that divisive fraud return.
If Peter ends up getting his own way and that happens that’s me done with Stoke until he’s removed.
Also why the fuck would we still be paying Rowett?
|
|
|
Post by LGH87 on Sept 5, 2019 9:28:47 GMT
The team sheets & today's info are not from the same source.
|
|
|
Post by femark on Sept 5, 2019 9:30:32 GMT
Good story, needs more dragons.
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Sept 5, 2019 9:31:02 GMT
Why would a respected poster have the need to make this up?For me he wouldn’t so it sounds one he’ll of a fuckkn mess😡
|
|
|
Post by sufolkstokie on Sept 5, 2019 9:31:56 GMT
IF it is true then it show how far removed from reality they have become. Who in their right mind thinks Hughton would come in as a director of football? Madness Or that leaking team sheets would be a sensible thing to do given the chaos already surrounding the club. Cracking "support" of a club that's already in the shit internally But hey, as long as the OP gets a boner from all the attention, that's all that matters to him/her i guess. "Internal wars? Fuck that, let's make them public just so i can seem ITK and have people jizzing over my every word"
Yes maybe - the club is just like those lot in Parialment at the mo though, no matter what side you lean to.
|
|
|
Post by 'i'mnaked' on Sept 5, 2019 9:31:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LGH87 on Sept 5, 2019 9:32:02 GMT
IF it is true then it show how far removed from reality they have become. Who in their right mind thinks Hughton would come in as a director of football? Madness Or that leaking team sheets would be a sensible thing to do given the chaos already surrounding the club. Cracking "support" of a club that's already in the shit internally But hey, as long as the OP gets a boner from all the attention, that's all that matters to him/her i guess. "Internal wars? Fuck that, let's make them public just so i can seem ITK and have people jizzing over my every word"
Simply reiterating what I've been told, with the words that were used, to people I thought may be interested. I genuinely couldn't give a shit about the attention from a few faceless people on a message board mate.
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Sept 5, 2019 9:34:11 GMT
How many would take Pulis back if it meant getting rid of Scholes?
|
|
|
Post by danceswithclams on Sept 5, 2019 9:36:00 GMT
The team sheets & today's info are not from the same source. My sources close to the boardroom tell me that there's no way in a gazillion years that T*ny P*lis will be coming back to the club in any capacity, and indeed, the hierarchy finds the suggestions that he might highly amusing indeed.
|
|
|
Post by robrigo on Sept 5, 2019 9:39:03 GMT
How many would take Pulis back if it meant getting rid of Scholes? I’ve got to admit that my resolve for a Pulis return has been weakening this last few weeks. I’m trying to fight the urge and not look back. But if it meant Scholes were to leave and we stabilised and got out of this mess- then yes, I’d dust off the baseball cap and begin practicing my Goarrn’s around the house again. That being said, Hughton would be my first choice.
|
|
|
Post by chigstoke on Sept 5, 2019 9:39:31 GMT
How many would take Pulis back if it meant getting rid of Scholes? It's similar to going to the doctors one day and prescribing you a medicine, the medicine brings gets rid of Scholes (the human flu) but like a lot of medicines, comes with side effects (Pulis being nausea and vomiting).
I don't ever want those side effects. Teflon Tony might be a human question mark, but I cannot bring myself to get rid of him if it meant tracksuit tony back.
|
|
|
Post by Laughing Gravy on Sept 5, 2019 9:39:41 GMT
Or that leaking team sheets would be a sensible thing to do given the chaos already surrounding the club. Cracking "support" of a club that's already in the shit internally But hey, as long as the OP gets a boner from all the attention, that's all that matters to him/her i guess. "Internal wars? Fuck that, let's make them public just so i can seem ITK and have people jizzing over my every word"
Simply reiterating what I've been told, with the words that were used, to people I thought may be interested. I genuinely couldn't give a shit about the attention from a few faceless people on a message board mate. Liam, by putting your head above the parapet like this aren’t you risking exposing your source(s) who must be very close to the club?
|
|
|
Post by LGH87 on Sept 5, 2019 9:40:43 GMT
The team sheets & today's info are not from the same source. My sources close to the boardroom tell me that there's no way in a gazillion years that T*ny P*lis will be coming back to the club in any capacity, and indeed, the hierarchy finds the suggestions that he might highly amusing indeed. I really hope your's are right!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2019 9:49:35 GMT
How many would take Pulis back if it meant getting rid of Scholes? I would. It’s a bit like root canal surgery - it would be painful in the short term but better in the long run. I’m not finding being absolute shite very exciting either so I’d take being bored for a bit if it meant we were solid and organised and could rebuild.
|
|
|
Post by wherty on Sept 5, 2019 9:54:26 GMT
To be honest I'm just playing along. I don't believe this 26th hand rumour whatsoever. Whoever created it got a bit carried away at the Hughton for DOF bit. Same! I said in a previous post also...when we sacked Rowett & Lambert, we would of paid their contracts off in full. So why would we still be paying their wages? Simple. We pay their wages until they get a new job. We did it with Lambert up until he got the Ipswich job and we're doing the same with Rowett. That's probably why he's in no rush to go back into management at the minute as we are still paying him.
|
|
|
Post by somersetstokie on Sept 5, 2019 10:10:47 GMT
Simple. We pay their wages until they get a new job. We did it with Lambert up until he got the Ipswich job and we're doing the same with Rowett. That's probably why he's in no rush to go back into management at the minute as we are still paying him.
So, if we are paying them can we get them to do something useful for the club, whether its conducting a review of the website, doing catering health checks or watching player target X 25 times.
|
|
|
Post by FranktheRabbit on Sept 5, 2019 10:20:32 GMT
Same! I said in a previous post also...when we sacked Rowett & Lambert, we would of paid their contracts off in full. So why would we still be paying their wages? Simple. We pay their wages until they get a new job. We did it with Lambert up until he got the Ipswich job and we're doing the same with Rowett. That's probably why he's in no rush to go back into management at the minute as we are still paying him. That doesn't make sense though? If their contracts are paid off, then that would include their wages? What would be the point of paying them until they found a new job, when we could just pay them off the moment they are sacked?
|
|
|
Post by potterpaul on Sept 5, 2019 10:26:44 GMT
Is the
"Still paying Rowett"
Fact or rumour
Anyone?
|
|
|
Post by wherty on Sept 5, 2019 10:27:46 GMT
Simple. We pay their wages until they get a new job. We did it with Lambert up until he got the Ipswich job and we're doing the same with Rowett. That's probably why he's in no rush to go back into management at the minute as we are still paying him. That doesn't make sense though? If their contracts are paid off, then that would include their wages? What would be the point of paying them until they found a new job, when we could just pay them off the moment they are sacked? Because to pay Rowett off we would have to give him 3.5 years wages....if he get another job within 12 months then we save on 2.5 years wages.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2019 10:52:30 GMT
Simple. We pay their wages until they get a new job. We did it with Lambert up until he got the Ipswich job and we're doing the same with Rowett. That's probably why he's in no rush to go back into management at the minute as we are still paying him. That doesn't make sense though? If their contracts are paid off, then that would include their wages? What would be the point of paying them until they found a new job, when we could just pay them off the moment they are sacked? That's how it's done these days.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Sept 5, 2019 10:55:10 GMT
How many would take Pulis back if it meant getting rid of Scholes? It would depend how long we'd be stuck with Pulis for and who replaced Scholes.
|
|