|
Post by stokefc on Jun 8, 2021 15:34:08 GMT
Tony Pulis traded 9th place finishes for longevity, Mark Hughes spent cash on top of that and took us into financial oblivion and the football league wilderness through sheer incompetence. He spent £18m on our record signing that played once as far as I can recal, a player we have struggled to give away The problem with this mate is that very little of it is true, is it? TP 'traded 9th place for longevity'. So it was all a cunning scheme to keep us in the bottom half of the table all along, because if we'd finished higher that would have been...bad? And this priceless scheme got him the sack in the end. So not a great plan, was it? Mark Hughes spent cash on top of that - pesky fact is that in his first two seasons he really didn't spend much at all. Shit the bed after that for sure. 'Took us into financial oblivion'. Was Gary Rowett given £50m in Monopoly money then? Wimmer sadly played significantly more than 'once'. Terrible signing mind. I think he's on about Imbula who also played more than once and was a terrible signing
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Jun 8, 2021 17:07:14 GMT
That may be the case but if so he’s a wanker with three consecutive top ten finishes at our club and no manager I can recall has achieve that even waddington as far as I recall . And while you king say lol at what he has at his disposal others with untold riches can’t even get us in the same league let alone the top half There is more to management than 9th place finishes using the spine of another mans team. Like leaving the club in a better position than when you found it, I'd say that's the mark of a good manager Gifty- So how come the manager before him couldn't get as high as that with his own team? How come it took someone else to take the 'spine' of his side and improve performances and league positions for three successive seasons?
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Jun 8, 2021 17:17:54 GMT
So by that logic we're saying Brian Clough can't be considered a good manager of Nottingham Forest, as he left them where he found them, in the second tier. Interesting... When that 'other man' couldn't finish that high himself, I'm not sure it speaks well of him to keep using that particular argument to deify him. It's been up to the owners in both cases to determine when they left. Pulis didn't choose to leave when he did. Neither did Hughes. The only difference is one was moved on at the right time and one was moved on when it was too late. Tony Pulis traded 9th place finishes for longevity, Mark Hughes spent cash on top of that and took us into financial oblivion and the football league wilderness through sheer incompetence. He spent £18m on our record signing that played once as far as I can recal, a player we have struggled to give away Traded 9th for longetivity 😂 Surely a manager worth his salt would have been confident enough in his own abilities to aim for 9th, especially as his apparently inferior replacement achieved it for three years running with the 'spine' of the same team? Especially given that finishing higher is apparently such a trifling achievement anyway 😀
|
|
|
Post by leicspotter on Jun 8, 2021 18:17:30 GMT
Managers are brilliant, until they are not, and it is generally only in hindsight that we can appreciate, or otherwise, their contributions. Tony Waddington was effectively driven out of the club through no real fault of his own...finances had led to the club selling almost all of the "family silver" from under him. That resulted in may years of decline for SCFC. I still think he has been our best ever manager. Both Tony Pulis and Mark Hughes delivered success for this club, and should be lauded accordingly, but neither were able to continue on the upward curve. It would be wrong to decry eithers achievements, but, equally it would be wrong to deny their limitations and mistakes. Mark Hughes would not be a good fit for this club, in the circumstances we now find ourselves in (circumstances many feel he is at least partly responsible for), he WAS a good fit for an established top flight club with the ambition and resources to "push on", and for a brief spell that is certainly what happened. Sadly, when he going got tough, MLH proved wanting and, IMHO, should have been removed from the firing line at least 6 months before he actually was. The rot had set in, signings had failed and the discipline in the dressing room was non existent. His stint at Southampton only served to reinforce my views on him. Wolves won't take him on, but he could do a job there. The blame for our current malaise is shared between Hughes, Scholes, the Chairman and the players (and maybe Daniel Levy ). Without knowledge of all the background facts I wouldn't attempt to apportion said blame between the aforementioned parties, but whoever pushed for or sanctioned the signings of Wimmer, Imbulla and Berahino should be held most culpable.
|
|
|
Post by yyy on Jun 8, 2021 20:19:58 GMT
Tony Pulis traded 9th place finishes for longevity, Mark Hughes spent cash on top of that and took us into financial oblivion and the football league wilderness through sheer incompetence. He spent £18m on our record signing that played once as far as I can recal, a player we have struggled to give away The problem with this mate is that very little of it is true, is it? TP 'traded 9th place for longevity'. So it was all a cunning scheme to keep us in the bottom half of the table all along, because if we'd finished higher that would have been...bad? And this priceless scheme got him the sack in the end. So not a great plan, was it? Mark Hughes spent cash on top of that - pesky fact is that in his first two seasons he really didn't spend much at all. Shit the bed after that for sure. 'Took us into financial oblivion'. Was Gary Rowett given £50m in Monopoly money then? Wimmer sadly played significantly more than 'once'. Terrible signing mind. Paint it how you like mate, Mark Hughes ruined stoke City, it's an undeniable fact. He tore up everything that made us successful to get established under Pulis, made training a holiday camp and signed a load of players that didn't give two shits about anything but their next pay packet. It took him 5 years to completely undo the strong foundations TP had put in place and replaced them with quick sand. When the backbone he had on a plate given to him finally had their better days behind him he was exposed for the clueless fraud he is. He dropped on big time, added a bit of flair to a solid backbone and it worked for a short period, all thanks to that backbone. Alan Pardew had simalar success at Palace after Pulis had filled the team with solid, honest pros. Hughes is a failure, he spent big money on utter rubbish, all of his signings were rubbish apart from 2, 3 maximum. They were all short term stop gaps at best. Pulis left a legacy, Hughes milked it until it was time to replace them and failed miserably, even with North of £50m to strengthen on top of foundations. The guy didn't even manage in 5 years and 10 windows to sign one decent striker, that's pretty incredible when he was one himself.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jun 8, 2021 20:25:30 GMT
The problem with this mate is that very little of it is true, is it? TP 'traded 9th place for longevity'. So it was all a cunning scheme to keep us in the bottom half of the table all along, because if we'd finished higher that would have been...bad? And this priceless scheme got him the sack in the end. So not a great plan, was it? Mark Hughes spent cash on top of that - pesky fact is that in his first two seasons he really didn't spend much at all. Shit the bed after that for sure. 'Took us into financial oblivion'. Was Gary Rowett given £50m in Monopoly money then? Wimmer sadly played significantly more than 'once'. Terrible signing mind. Paint it how you like mate, Mark Hughes ruined stoke City, it's an undeniable fact. He tore up everything that made us successful to get established under Pulis, made training a holiday camp and signed a load of players that didn't give two shits about anything but their next pay packet. It took him 5 years to completely undo the strong foundations TP had put in place and replaced them with quick sand. When the backbone he had on a plate given to him finally had their better days behind him he was exposed for the clueless fraud he is. He dropped on big time, added a bit of flair to a solid backbone and it worked for a short period, all thanks to that backbone. Alan Pardew had simalar success at Palace after Pulis had filled the team with solid, honest pros. Hughes is a failure, he spent big money on utter rubbish, all of his signings were rubbish apart from 2, 3 maximum. They were all short term stop gaps at best. Pulis left a legacy, Hughes milked it until it was time to replace them and failed miserably I haven't painted anything, that's what happened. Find something in the post to take issue with. If all it took to finish top half was adding a bit of flair to a solid spine and that's a piece of piss, it's pretty damning that the man Hughes replaced couldn't manage that himself. Not a fan of Pardew either but he'd achieved success elsewhere as well before Palace, even if he is a berk. Hughes did undo a lot of the good work he did. Pulis was undoing a fair bit of his own until the board stepped in. That's the difference.
|
|
|
Post by yyy on Jun 8, 2021 20:30:11 GMT
The guy didn't even manage in 5 years and 10 windows to sign one decent striker, that's pretty incredible when he was one himself.
He flogged Crouch to death until he was collecting his pension
|
|
|
Post by yyy on Jun 8, 2021 20:35:23 GMT
Paint it how you like mate, Mark Hughes ruined stoke City, it's an undeniable fact. He tore up everything that made us successful to get established under Pulis, made training a holiday camp and signed a load of players that didn't give two shits about anything but their next pay packet. It took him 5 years to completely undo the strong foundations TP had put in place and replaced them with quick sand. When the backbone he had on a plate given to him finally had their better days behind him he was exposed for the clueless fraud he is. He dropped on big time, added a bit of flair to a solid backbone and it worked for a short period, all thanks to that backbone. Alan Pardew had simalar success at Palace after Pulis had filled the team with solid, honest pros. Hughes is a failure, he spent big money on utter rubbish, all of his signings were rubbish apart from 2, 3 maximum. They were all short term stop gaps at best. Pulis left a legacy, Hughes milked it until it was time to replace them and failed miserably I haven't painted anything, that's what happened. Find something in the post to take issue with. If all it took to finish top half was adding a bit of flair to a solid spine and that's a piece of piss, it's pretty damning that the man Hughes replaced couldn't manage that himself. Not a fan of Pardew either but he'd achieved success elsewhere as well before Palace, even if he is a berk. Hughes did undo a lot of the good work he did. Pulis was undoing a fair bit of his own until the board stepped in. That's the difference. No sorry mate, Hughes signed utter dross after utter dross, pulis' biggest signing was Crouch, who is scfc's all time top premiership goalscorer, closely followed by another pulis signing, both paid their fee ten fold. We went down because of Hughes not because of pulis. We are where we are now because of Mark Hughes
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jun 8, 2021 20:40:18 GMT
The guy didn't even manage in 5 years and 10 windows to sign one decent striker, that's pretty incredible when he was one himself. He flogged Crouch to death until he was collecting his pension Peter Odemwingie was decent. Diouf was decent.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jun 8, 2021 20:42:02 GMT
I haven't painted anything, that's what happened. Find something in the post to take issue with. If all it took to finish top half was adding a bit of flair to a solid spine and that's a piece of piss, it's pretty damning that the man Hughes replaced couldn't manage that himself. Not a fan of Pardew either but he'd achieved success elsewhere as well before Palace, even if he is a berk. Hughes did undo a lot of the good work he did. Pulis was undoing a fair bit of his own until the board stepped in. That's the difference. No sorry mate, Hughes signed utter dross after utter dross, pulis' biggest signing was Crouch, who is scfc's all time top premiership goalscorer, closely followed by another pulis signing, both paid their fee ten fold. We went down because of Hughes not because of pulis. We are where we are now because of Mark Hughes Yes mate because the board didn’t do what they did with Pulis and sack Hughes until it was too late. They sacked Pulis before the decline was terminal.
|
|
|
Post by cerebralstokie on Jun 8, 2021 20:46:42 GMT
Managers are brilliant, until they are not, and it is generally only in hindsight that we can appreciate, or otherwise, their contributions. Tony Waddington was effectively driven out of the club through no real fault of his own...finances had led to the club selling almost all of the "family silver" from under him. That resulted in may years of decline for SCFC. I still think he has been our best ever manager. Both Tony Pulis and Mark Hughes delivered success for this club, and should be lauded accordingly, but neither were able to continue on the upward curve. It would be wrong to decry eithers achievements, but, equally it would be wrong to deny their limitations and mistakes. Mark Hughes would not be a good fit for this club, in the circumstances we now find ourselves in (circumstances many feel he is at least partly responsible for), he WAS a good fit for an established top flight club with the ambition and resources to "push on", and for a brief spell that is certainly what happened. Sadly, when he going got tough, MLH proved wanting and, IMHO, should have been removed from the firing line at least 6 months before he actually was. The rot had set in, signings had failed and the discipline in the dressing room was non existent. His stint at Southampton only served to reinforce my views on him. Wolves won't take him on, but he could do a job there. The blame for our current malaise is shared between Hughes, Scholes, the Chairman and the players (and maybe Daniel Levy ). Without knowledge of all the background facts I wouldn't attempt to apportion said blame between the aforementioned parties, but whoever pushed for or sanctioned the signings of Wimmer, Imbulla and Berahino should be held most culpable. In my view, this is the most balanced summary of why we are where we are now. Sorting the mess out will take two or three more years and constantly changing managers is not the solution as the basic problems will not go away.
|
|
|
Post by yyy on Jun 8, 2021 21:01:25 GMT
No sorry mate, Hughes signed utter dross after utter dross, pulis' biggest signing was Crouch, who is scfc's all time top premiership goalscorer, closely followed by another pulis signing, both paid their fee ten fold. We went down because of Hughes not because of pulis. We are where we are now because of Mark Hughes Yes mate because the board didn’t do what they did with Pulis and sack Hughes until it was too late. They sacked Pulis before the decline was terminal. Cant agree with that mate, at some point in over 10 years of service you are going to have a poor season, given the work he had done to take us from Championship relegation fodder to an established Premiership club, into the first major cup final for the club in 40 years he should have been afforded the time and the cash mark hughes received. Alex Ferguson had a few bad seasons with Man Utd, he went through spells of needing to change the team and did it 3 or 4 times but it didn't happen over night, it took a few windows each time. David moyes had a couple of bad seasons with Everton then had them punching again in the top 8 after dicing with relegation. If Pulis had got Demba Ba over the line he would never have been sacked, for a paltry £7m, went to Newcastle and tore the league a new one before moving to Chelsea. His knees were in good enough shape for Newcastle to sign him which does make me wonder if Scholes had something to do with Ba not signing, that was as dodgy as hell that deal, did we find something minor and play on it to try to get a lower fee? Who knows. I think Coates Junior fired him and Scholes never got on with him and as we know Jnr has since proved he's far from a good box of tricks. I think him and Scholes couldn't cope with a manager with a strong personality like Pulis had after Coates senior started to take a back seat
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jun 8, 2021 21:05:10 GMT
Yes mate because the board didn’t do what they did with Pulis and sack Hughes until it was too late. They sacked Pulis before the decline was terminal. Cant agree with that mate, at some point in over 10 years of service you are going to have a poor season, given the work he had done to take us from Championship relegation fodder to an established Premiership club, into the first major cup final for the club in 40 years he should have been afforded the time and the cash mark hughes received. Alex Ferguson had a few bad seasons with Man Utd, he went through spells of needing to change the team and did it 3 or 4 times but it didn't happen over night, it took a few windows each time. David moyes had a couple of bad seasons with Everton then had them punching again in the top 8 after dicing with relegation. If Pulis had got Demba Ba over the line he would never have been sacked, for a paltry £7m, went to Newcastle and tore the league a new one before moving to Chelsea. His knees were in good enough shape for Newcastle to sign him which does make me wonder if Scholes had something to do with Ba not signing, that was as dodgy as hell that deal, did we find something minor and play on it to try to get a lower fee? Who knows. I think Coates Junior fired him and Scholes never got on with him and as we know Jnr has since proved he's far from a good box of tricks. I think him and Scholes couldn't cope with a manager with a strong personality like Pulis had after Coates senior started to take a back seat If Coates Sr didn’t want him to be sacked, he wouldn’t have been. It’s that simple. And it wasn’t the odd bad season, it was a decline over a couple of seasons. Consider the football we played on the run to the cup final. Now name me five games in his final two seasons when we came close to looking like that kind of team again?
|
|
|
Post by yyy on Jun 8, 2021 21:21:02 GMT
Cant agree with that mate, at some point in over 10 years of service you are going to have a poor season, given the work he had done to take us from Championship relegation fodder to an established Premiership club, into the first major cup final for the club in 40 years he should have been afforded the time and the cash mark hughes received. Alex Ferguson had a few bad seasons with Man Utd, he went through spells of needing to change the team and did it 3 or 4 times but it didn't happen over night, it took a few windows each time. David moyes had a couple of bad seasons with Everton then had them punching again in the top 8 after dicing with relegation. If Pulis had got Demba Ba over the line he would never have been sacked, for a paltry £7m, went to Newcastle and tore the league a new one before moving to Chelsea. His knees were in good enough shape for Newcastle to sign him which does make me wonder if Scholes had something to do with Ba not signing, that was as dodgy as hell that deal, did we find something minor and play on it to try to get a lower fee? Who knows. I think Coates Junior fired him and Scholes never got on with him and as we know Jnr has since proved he's far from a good box of tricks. I think him and Scholes couldn't cope with a manager with a strong personality like Pulis had after Coates senior started to take a back seat If Coates Sr didn’t want him to be sacked, he wouldn’t have been. It’s that simple. And it wasn’t the odd bad season, it was a decline over a couple of seasons. Consider the football we played on the run to the cup final. Now name me five games in his final two seasons when we came close to looking like that kind of team again? Considering what he had achieved, he should have been allowed to see how it panned out and if we went down so be it, bring us back up better. If we had gone down with the team Pulis left we would have romped the championship at the first attempt
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jun 8, 2021 21:22:12 GMT
If Coates Sr didn’t want him to be sacked, he wouldn’t have been. It’s that simple. And it wasn’t the odd bad season, it was a decline over a couple of seasons. Consider the football we played on the run to the cup final. Now name me five games in his final two seasons when we came close to looking like that kind of team again? Considering what he had achieved, he should have been allowed to see how it panned out and if we went down so be it, bring us back up better. If we had gone down with the team Pulis left we would have romped the championship at the first attempt I’ve heard it all now.
|
|
|
Post by yyy on Jun 8, 2021 21:25:40 GMT
Considering what he had achieved, he should have been allowed to see how it panned out and if we went down so be it, bring us back up better. If we had gone down with the team Pulis left we would have romped the championship at the first attempt I’ve heard it all now. That team plus a few additions would have stormed it.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jun 8, 2021 21:26:20 GMT
That team plus a few additions would have stormed it. Ok m8.
|
|
|
Post by yyy on Jun 8, 2021 21:29:26 GMT
That team plus a few additions would have stormed it. Ok m8. Why not, take a look at the personal
|
|
|
Post by hotterpotter on Jun 8, 2021 21:32:49 GMT
It would be relatively easy to Mark Hughes these days.
|
|
|
Post by yyy on Jun 8, 2021 21:33:41 GMT
It would be relatively easy to Mark Hughes these days. To be perfectly honest?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jun 8, 2021 21:34:47 GMT
Why not, take a look at the personal And they’d all definitely have stayed after relegation, would they? Huth, Shawcross, Begovic, Crouch, Nzonzi, Whelan, Adam. Most with years of their top level career left. All bang up for a trip to Yeovil? I don’t recall you espousing his theory at the time, where were you then?
|
|
|
Post by hotterpotter on Jun 8, 2021 21:37:14 GMT
It would be relatively easy to Mark Hughes these days. To be perfectly honest? He must be pretty slow.
|
|
|
Post by yyy on Jun 8, 2021 21:39:45 GMT
Why not, take a look at the personal And they’d all definitely have stayed after relegation, would they? Huth, Shawcross, Begovic, Crouch, Nzonzi, Whelan, Adam. Most with years of their top level career left. All bang up for a trip to Yeovil? I don’t recall you espousing his theory at the time, where were you then? I believe more than a few would have stayed for a season, Pulis signed honest pros not mercenaries. One thing is for certain if we had to sell them for that reason How much would do you think we have got in sales?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jun 8, 2021 21:42:23 GMT
And they’d all definitely have stayed after relegation, would they? Huth, Shawcross, Begovic, Crouch, Nzonzi, Whelan, Adam. Most with years of their top level career left. All bang up for a trip to Yeovil? I don’t recall you espousing his theory at the time, where were you then? I believe more than a few would have stayed for a season, Pulis signed honest pros not mercenaries. One thing is for certain if we had to sell them for that reason How much would do you think we have got in sales? What, in this ludicrous scenario that ignores all the stuff actually happening at the time in favour of something totally baseless? Fuck it, let’s say a billion pounds. Or enough to buy the Burj Khalifa and stick it in the Mama role.
|
|
|
Post by yyy on Jun 8, 2021 21:43:40 GMT
Why not, take a look at the personal And they’d all definitely have stayed after relegation, would they? Huth, Shawcross, Begovic, Crouch, Nzonzi, Whelan, Adam. Most with years of their top level career left. All bang up for a trip to Yeovil? I don’t recall you espousing his theory at the time, where were you then? .... also, look at the team we got relegated with courtesy of Leslie Mark Hughes
|
|
|
Post by songthrush01 on Jun 8, 2021 22:05:26 GMT
There is more to management than 9th place finishes using the spine of another mans team. Like leaving the club in a better position than when you found it, I'd say that's the mark of a good manager So by that logic we're saying Brian Clough can't be considered a good manager of Nottingham Forest, as he left them where he found them, in the second tier. Interesting... When that 'other man' couldn't finish that high himself, I'm not sure it speaks well of him to keep using that particular argument to deify him. It's been up to the owners in both cases to determine when they left. Pulis didn't choose to leave when he did. Neither did Hughes. The only difference is one was moved on at the right time and one was moved on when it was too late. spot on that.
|
|
|
Post by yyy on Jun 9, 2021 6:22:27 GMT
I believe more than a few would have stayed for a season, Pulis signed honest pros not mercenaries. One thing is for certain if we had to sell them for that reason How much would do you think we have got in sales? What, in this ludicrous scenario that ignores all the stuff actually happening at the time in favour of something totally baseless? Fuck it, let’s say a billion pounds. Or enough to buy the Burj Khalifa and stick it in the Mama role. Think I've been perfectly reasonable myself, raised many good points that 'toxic avengers' just can't accept 😉 The sign of a good manager is the state the club is left in upon leaving and the manager is judged on the players he brings to the club as assets, or huge ball and chain around your ankles in Mark's case. I don't think the two squads the managers left the club with even compare, every single person would rather the squad pulis left behind than the excuse for one mark left behind. All those in the Mark Hughes love boat can say is "3 ninth place finishes", so was it worth it, I mean was it really worth it for the shit show he left behind? I'll take a cup final over 3 x 9th places finishes every day of the week, I'd guess so would a whole lot of others. 3 x 9th place finishes is nothing in the grand scheme of things, nobody thinks 'oh yes Stoke, they finished 9th three times in a row', awesome. Most won't even remember where Stoke finished every season, not even Stoke fans. TP put scfc & Stoke-on-Trent back on the footballing map. Should be reinstalled immediately upstairs and given the freedom of stoke, maybe even Mayor 😁. In twenty years time you won't be telling your grand kids you were there when Stoke finished 9th three times in a row, you'll be telling them you were at the last f.a cup final Stoke played in in 50 years and the only reason we didn't win it was we were unlucky with injuries and man City at the time were buying trophies. You'll say you watched them play on the continent and you were there when teams were scared stiff of coming to The Britannia stadium. If Stoke have proved anything since our greatest manager in a lifetime left it is how much input he actually had to the clubs success.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jun 9, 2021 6:57:27 GMT
What, in this ludicrous scenario that ignores all the stuff actually happening at the time in favour of something totally baseless? Fuck it, let’s say a billion pounds. Or enough to buy the Burj Khalifa and stick it in the Mama role. Think I've been perfectly reasonable myself, raised many good points that 'toxic avengers' just can't accept 😉 The sign of a good manager is the state the club is left in upon leaving and the manager is judged on the players he brings to the club as assets, or huge ball and chain around your ankles in Mark's case. I don't think the two squads the managers left the club with even compare, every single person would rather the squad pulis left behind than the excuse for one mark left behind. All those in the Mark Hughes love boat can say is "3 ninth place finishes", so was it worth it, I mean was it really worth it for the shit show he left behind? I'll take a cup final over 3 x 9th places finishes every day of the week, I'd guess so would a whole lot of others. 3 x 9th place finishes is nothing in the grand scheme of things, nobody thinks 'oh yes Stoke, they finished 9th three times in a row', awesome. Most won't even remember where Stoke finished every season, not even Stoke fans. TP put scfc & Stoke-on-Trent back on the footballing map. Should be reinstalled immediately upstairs. In twenty years time you won't be telling your grand kids you were there when Stoke finished 9th three times in a row, you'll be telling them you were at the last f.a cup final Stoke played in in 50 years and the only reason we didn't win it was we were unlucky with injuries and man City at the time were buying trophies. You'll say you watched them play on the continent and you were there when teams were scared stiff of coming to The Britannia stadium. If Stoke have proved anything since our greatest manager in a lifetime left it is how much input he actually had to the clubs success. Yeah, all complete nonsense mate. You outed yourself when you started making up your silly stories about how we should have nobly let Pulis relegate us and how that would have been ok somehow. You won't tell your kids about the times we beat Chelsea with a last minute screamer, smashed six past Liverpool in Steven Gerrard's last game, played Spurs off the park and beat Manchester United, or destroyed the richest team in the world either, presumably.
|
|
|
Post by yyy on Jun 9, 2021 7:07:27 GMT
Think I've been perfectly reasonable myself, raised many good points that 'toxic avengers' just can't accept 😉 The sign of a good manager is the state the club is left in upon leaving and the manager is judged on the players he brings to the club as assets, or huge ball and chain around your ankles in Mark's case. I don't think the two squads the managers left the club with even compare, every single person would rather the squad pulis left behind than the excuse for one mark left behind. All those in the Mark Hughes love boat can say is "3 ninth place finishes", so was it worth it, I mean was it really worth it for the shit show he left behind? I'll take a cup final over 3 x 9th places finishes every day of the week, I'd guess so would a whole lot of others. 3 x 9th place finishes is nothing in the grand scheme of things, nobody thinks 'oh yes Stoke, they finished 9th three times in a row', awesome. Most won't even remember where Stoke finished every season, not even Stoke fans. TP put scfc & Stoke-on-Trent back on the footballing map. Should be reinstalled immediately upstairs. In twenty years time you won't be telling your grand kids you were there when Stoke finished 9th three times in a row, you'll be telling them you were at the last f.a cup final Stoke played in in 50 years and the only reason we didn't win it was we were unlucky with injuries and man City at the time were buying trophies. You'll say you watched them play on the continent and you were there when teams were scared stiff of coming to The Britannia stadium. If Stoke have proved anything since our greatest manager in a lifetime left it is how much input he actually had to the clubs success. Yeah, all complete nonsense mate. You outed yourself when you started making up your silly stories about how we should have nobly let Pulis relegate us and how that would have been ok somehow. You won't tell your kids about the times we beat Chelsea with a last minute screamer, smashed six past Liverpool in Steven Gerrard's last game, played Spurs off the park and beat Manchester United, or destroyed the richest team in the world either, presumably. Burnley done it with Dyche and they're still there, if you're going to replace a manager that has climbed the mountain and built the structure fair enough but at least replace him with one with equally as good a record in the transfer market, not one fresh from filling qpr with junk and relegating them. Swapping Pulis for Mark Hughes was the equivalent of swapping a VW for a alpha Romeo and if you know your motors you know what I mean. Beating Liverpool on the last day of the season when the season is finished is a good result but the season is finished, it means nothing. We bloodied the nose of many a team under Pulis at the britannia, had the spurs keeper in tears, made Arsenal our bitches. Nobody and I do mean nobody enjoyed coming to Stoke under Pulis. People genuinely asked if Messi could do it in Stoke on a cold wet Tuesday night. Even Messi himself mentioned us. In comparison We got humiliated under Hughes time and again, with the famous phrase " what time is it, oh its 5 past stoke" a common occurance
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jun 9, 2021 7:15:20 GMT
Yeah, all complete nonsense mate. You outed yourself when you started making up your silly stories about how we should have nobly let Pulis relegate us and how that would have been ok somehow. You won't tell your kids about the times we beat Chelsea with a last minute screamer, smashed six past Liverpool in Steven Gerrard's last game, played Spurs off the park and beat Manchester United, or destroyed the richest team in the world either, presumably. Burnley done it with Dyche and they're still there, if you're going to replace a manager that has climbed the mountain and built the structure fair enough but at least replace him with one with equally as good a record in the transfer market, not one fresh from filling qpr with junk and relegating them. Swapping Pulis for Mark Hughes was the equivalent of swapping a VW for a alpha Romeo and if you know your motors you know what I mean. Beating Liverpool on the last day of the season when the season is finished is a good result but the season is finished, it means nothing. We bloodied the nose of many a team under Pulis at the britannia, had the spurs keeper in tears, made Arsenal our bitches. Nobody and I do mean nobody enjoyed coming to Stoke under Pulis. People genuinely asked if Messi could do it in Stoke on a cold wet Tuesday night. Even Messi himself mentioned us. In comparison We got humiliated under Hughes time and again, with the famous phrase " what time is it, oh its 5 past stoke" a common occurance The Dyche situation isn't the same. They went down after their first season back having deliberately saved their money and put it into having a go next time round. That was their strategy, there was no long decline, no dressing room division, no expectation. A 'famous phrase' that you've just made up? As many teams put five or more past a Pulis Stoke team in the Premier League as they did past a Hughes team. Belittling the Liverpool game is an odd move for a Stoke fan, presumably after the game you just shrugged it off weren't fussed? I notice you avoided mentioning all those other results that weren't on the last day of the season, any comment on those? Andy Gray asked if Messi could do it in his Little Englander Premier League hard sell mode. Who else did? Messi was taking the piss. I don't recall you telling us of the evils of Mark Hughes at the time, were you not around?
|
|