|
Post by thevoid on Jul 6, 2022 6:32:31 GMT
Explain “posting horseshit”. I was only saying that fine margins put us in 9th place bar 1 season. Plus I’d prefer to be in the EPL watching world class footballers at the Brit and registering 13th/14th security each season. That’s the nonsense though isn’t it? It never works that way - if you stand still you stagnate. There’s no correlation between us doing well and finishing 9th and then crashing and burning. The mistake wasn’t appointing Hughes, it was not sacking him soon enough. You talk about fine margins but why was this apparent disaster of a manager able to finish higher than his sainted predecessor ever was? They can never answer that last one
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Jul 6, 2022 6:50:59 GMT
Be interesting as to what you think would have guaranteed sold finishing positions for sustainability of EFL football. I can guess like but I just like people posting complete horseshit. Explain “posting horseshit”. I was only saying that fine margins put us in 9th place bar 1 season. Plus I’d prefer to be in the EPL watching world class footballers at the Brit and registering 13th/14th security each season. Mmm...you say 'fine margins' but fine margins stopped us reaching a cup final under Hughes- we lost a shoot out away to a team that has a better record on penalties than Germany. Plus the League Cup run was much tougher than the FA Cup one- Chelsea and Liverpool...who was the toughest opponent before the 2011 final, West Ham? You also say 'promotions' and 'cup finals' plurally, as though we had numerous promotions and finals under Pulis. I've touched on the 'fine margins' of the League Cup semi and Hughes couldn't get us promoted as we were in the highest possible division during his tenure. Plus, not sure how you could enjoy these promotions if we're constantly in 13/14th place.... You knock 9th placed finishes, but if they were so trivial and based on 'fine margins' how come Hughes' predecessor couldn't get there? You may like bumming around in 11th-14th place but that gets boring quickly- even Dyche's Burnley finished 7th once. I go to Stoke matches to watch Stoke more than the opposition, and it's a bit pointless wanting to see 'world class players' at Stoke if we don't lay a glove on them- under Hughes we stopped having our bellies tickled by The Shit and Chelsea and beat them on a regular basis. Going back to your wanting to see top class talent at Stoke, surely that extends to the home side too? I mean, if you'd rather watch Dean Whitehead and Salif Diao over Shaqiri and Bojan then you can't really be a lover of football 😎 Finally, I'd be interested to see your theories as to why Pulis became more negative after the highs of 2011. We were actually good to watch that season and played on the front foot a lot of the time, so why wasn't that built on?
|
|
|
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Jul 6, 2022 7:00:06 GMT
So explain how we could have guaranteed sustained EPL football. Horseshit delivery expected. I bow to your obvious superiority and knowledge of football and in particular Stoke City. “Horseshit delivery” provided as expected. You know you want to say keeping him would have guaranteed Premier League football forever or at least until he died or retired. Do it for oatcakes.
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Jul 6, 2022 7:03:45 GMT
"Fine margins" have helped Manchester City to four of their Premier League titles. It's a ridiculous argument, though some will do anything to rain on Mark Hughes's achievements. I'm not entirely sure what this has to do with Michael O'Neill mind you?
|
|
|
Post by owdestokie2 on Jul 6, 2022 7:50:44 GMT
Explain “posting horseshit”. I was only saying that fine margins put us in 9th place bar 1 season. Plus I’d prefer to be in the EPL watching world class footballers at the Brit and registering 13th/14th security each season. Mmm...you say 'fine margins' but fine margins stopped us reaching a cup final under Hughes- we lost a shoot out away to a team that has a better record on penalties than Germany. Plus the League Cup run was much tougher than the FA Cup one- Chelsea and Liverpool...who was the toughest opponent before the 2011 final, West Ham? You also say 'promotions' and 'cup finals' plurally, as though we had numerous promotions and finals under Pulis. I've touched on the 'fine margins' of the League Cup semi and Hughes couldn't get us promoted as we were in the highest possible division during his tenure. Plus, not sure how you could enjoy these promotions if we're constantly in 13/14th place.... You knock 9th placed finishes, but if they were so trivial and based on 'fine margins' how come Hughes' predecessor couldn't get there? You may like bumming around in 11th-14th place but that gets boring quickly- even Dyche's Burnley finished 7th once. I go to Stoke matches to watch Stoke more than the opposition, and it's a bit pointless wanting to see 'world class players' at Stoke if we don't lay a glove on them- under Hughes we stopped having our bellies tickled by The Shit and Chelsea and beat them on a regular basis. Going back to your wanting to see top class talent at Stoke, surely that extends to the home side too? I mean, if you'd rather watch Dean Whitehead and Salif Diao over Shaqiri and Bojan then you can't really be a lover of football 😎 Finally, I'd be interested to see your theories as to why Pulis became more negative after the highs of 2011. We were actually good to watch that season and played on the front foot a lot of the time, so why wasn't that built on? Let’s get the record straight. I never raised Mark Hughes in a MON thread. I simply responded to someone else who brought MH into a non related quote on this the MON post All I was saying was that bar one season where we were 6 points clear of Crystal Palace the margins between 9th and lower placings were marginal. I only raised TP’s last season as an example, no more, no less. After a disastrous February/May run we only finished 4 points short of 9th. We actually drew 15 games. I haven’t tried to open the old wounds of TP/MH…others have. My thoughts remain others disagree.
|
|
|
Post by owdestokie2 on Jul 6, 2022 7:53:22 GMT
"Fine margins" have helped Manchester City to four of their Premier League titles. It's a ridiculous argument, though some will do anything to rain on Mark Hughes's achievements. I'm not entirely sure what this has to do with Michael O'Neill mind you? Someone else raised the name Mark Hughes as a dig at me, I simply responded. You’re quite right and I fully support your comment re this being an MON post
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 6, 2022 8:03:39 GMT
Mmm...you say 'fine margins' but fine margins stopped us reaching a cup final under Hughes- we lost a shoot out away to a team that has a better record on penalties than Germany. Plus the League Cup run was much tougher than the FA Cup one- Chelsea and Liverpool...who was the toughest opponent before the 2011 final, West Ham? You also say 'promotions' and 'cup finals' plurally, as though we had numerous promotions and finals under Pulis. I've touched on the 'fine margins' of the League Cup semi and Hughes couldn't get us promoted as we were in the highest possible division during his tenure. Plus, not sure how you could enjoy these promotions if we're constantly in 13/14th place.... You knock 9th placed finishes, but if they were so trivial and based on 'fine margins' how come Hughes' predecessor couldn't get there? You may like bumming around in 11th-14th place but that gets boring quickly- even Dyche's Burnley finished 7th once. I go to Stoke matches to watch Stoke more than the opposition, and it's a bit pointless wanting to see 'world class players' at Stoke if we don't lay a glove on them- under Hughes we stopped having our bellies tickled by The Shit and Chelsea and beat them on a regular basis. Going back to your wanting to see top class talent at Stoke, surely that extends to the home side too? I mean, if you'd rather watch Dean Whitehead and Salif Diao over Shaqiri and Bojan then you can't really be a lover of football 😎 Finally, I'd be interested to see your theories as to why Pulis became more negative after the highs of 2011. We were actually good to watch that season and played on the front foot a lot of the time, so why wasn't that built on? Let’s get the record straight. I never raised Mark Hughes in a MON thread. I simply responded to someone else who brought MH into a non related quote on this the MON post All I was saying was that bar one season where we were 6 points clear of Crystal Palace the margins between 9th and lower placings were marginal. I only raised TP’s last season as an example, no more, no less. After a disastrous February/May run we only finished 4 points short of 9th. We actually drew 15 games. I haven’t tried to open the old wounds of TP/MH…others have. My thoughts remain others disagree. Yeah I raised it (I probably shouldn't have done) to point out that you, me and everyone else no more has this as an 'area of expertise' than those you're pointing the finger at. The fine margins stuff remains nonsense, you haven't offered a theory yet as to why those 'fine margins' always fell the way of a supposedly vastly inferior manager, any chance you could riddle us that one?
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Jul 6, 2022 8:17:38 GMT
Mmm...you say 'fine margins' but fine margins stopped us reaching a cup final under Hughes- we lost a shoot out away to a team that has a better record on penalties than Germany. Plus the League Cup run was much tougher than the FA Cup one- Chelsea and Liverpool...who was the toughest opponent before the 2011 final, West Ham? You also say 'promotions' and 'cup finals' plurally, as though we had numerous promotions and finals under Pulis. I've touched on the 'fine margins' of the League Cup semi and Hughes couldn't get us promoted as we were in the highest possible division during his tenure. Plus, not sure how you could enjoy these promotions if we're constantly in 13/14th place.... You knock 9th placed finishes, but if they were so trivial and based on 'fine margins' how come Hughes' predecessor couldn't get there? You may like bumming around in 11th-14th place but that gets boring quickly- even Dyche's Burnley finished 7th once. I go to Stoke matches to watch Stoke more than the opposition, and it's a bit pointless wanting to see 'world class players' at Stoke if we don't lay a glove on them- under Hughes we stopped having our bellies tickled by The Shit and Chelsea and beat them on a regular basis. Going back to your wanting to see top class talent at Stoke, surely that extends to the home side too? I mean, if you'd rather watch Dean Whitehead and Salif Diao over Shaqiri and Bojan then you can't really be a lover of football 😎 Finally, I'd be interested to see your theories as to why Pulis became more negative after the highs of 2011. We were actually good to watch that season and played on the front foot a lot of the time, so why wasn't that built on? Let’s get the record straight. I never raised Mark Hughes in a MON thread. I simply responded to someone else who brought MH into a non related quote on this the MON post All I was saying was that bar one season where we were 6 points clear of Crystal Palace the margins between 9th and lower placings were marginal. I only raised TP’s last season as an example, no more, no less. After a disastrous February/May run we only finished 4 points short of 9th. We actually drew 15 games. I haven’t tried to open the old wounds of TP/MH…others have. My thoughts remain others disagree. If you're raising Pulis's last season as an example of fine points between success and failure I would argue that those months just after Christmas were dire, probably just as bad as the relegation season and anything that has happened since. We were set up not to concede then conceded and never looked like drawing level. Even Jonathan Walters didn't seem interested in putting in the effort. MON at his worst is not as bad as those months when obviously something wasn't right. I think we got one win in May to be safe and the only reason we stayed up was because we did really well before Christmas.
|
|
|
Post by robwahlmann on Jul 6, 2022 8:17:42 GMT
We ended our relationship with Pulis at the right time in my opinion, and the first seasons under Hughes were really good times, but Hughes unfortunately was sacked too late as he couldn't see a good defender when he had one under his nose, and he didn't understand the importance of hard work and character. I think we would have stayed up with Pulis, but we wouldn't have seen the football we played the three first seasons under Hughes.
|
|
|
Post by scfc75 on Jul 6, 2022 8:42:21 GMT
Mmm...you say 'fine margins' but fine margins stopped us reaching a cup final under Hughes- we lost a shoot out away to a team that has a better record on penalties than Germany. Plus the League Cup run was much tougher than the FA Cup one- Chelsea and Liverpool...who was the toughest opponent before the 2011 final, West Ham? You also say 'promotions' and 'cup finals' plurally, as though we had numerous promotions and finals under Pulis. I've touched on the 'fine margins' of the League Cup semi and Hughes couldn't get us promoted as we were in the highest possible division during his tenure. Plus, not sure how you could enjoy these promotions if we're constantly in 13/14th place.... You knock 9th placed finishes, but if they were so trivial and based on 'fine margins' how come Hughes' predecessor couldn't get there? You may like bumming around in 11th-14th place but that gets boring quickly- even Dyche's Burnley finished 7th once. I go to Stoke matches to watch Stoke more than the opposition, and it's a bit pointless wanting to see 'world class players' at Stoke if we don't lay a glove on them- under Hughes we stopped having our bellies tickled by The Shit and Chelsea and beat them on a regular basis. Going back to your wanting to see top class talent at Stoke, surely that extends to the home side too? I mean, if you'd rather watch Dean Whitehead and Salif Diao over Shaqiri and Bojan then you can't really be a lover of football 😎 Finally, I'd be interested to see your theories as to why Pulis became more negative after the highs of 2011. We were actually good to watch that season and played on the front foot a lot of the time, so why wasn't that built on? Let’s get the record straight. I never raised Mark Hughes in a MON thread. I simply responded to someone else who brought MH into a non related quote on this the MON post All I was saying was that bar one season where we were 6 points clear of Crystal Palace the margins between 9th and lower placings were marginal. I only raised TP’s last season as an example, no more, no less. After a disastrous February/May run we only finished 4 points short of 9th. We actually drew 15 games. I haven’t tried to open the old wounds of TP/MH…others have. My thoughts remain others disagree. We were also only 6pts clear of relegation that same season. Fine margins indeed.
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Jul 6, 2022 9:22:50 GMT
Let’s get the record straight. I never raised Mark Hughes in a MON thread. I simply responded to someone else who brought MH into a non related quote on this the MON post All I was saying was that bar one season where we were 6 points clear of Crystal Palace the margins between 9th and lower placings were marginal. I only raised TP’s last season as an example, no more, no less. After a disastrous February/May run we only finished 4 points short of 9th. We actually drew 15 games. I haven’t tried to open the old wounds of TP/MH…others have. My thoughts remain others disagree. We were also only 6pts clear of relegation that same season. Fine margins indeed. You weren't supposed to mention that 🤫
|
|
|
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Jul 6, 2022 10:32:19 GMT
We ended our relationship with Pulis at the right time in my opinion, and the first seasons under Hughes were really good times, but Hughes unfortunately was sacked too late as he couldn't see a good defender when he had one under his nose, and he didn't understand the importance of hard work and character. I think we would have stayed up with Pulis, but we wouldn't have seen the football we played the three first seasons under Hughes. Why would we have stayed up under Pulis. He was taking WBA down every bit as much as Hughes was taking us down. This Pulis guarantee’s not getting relegated is utter horseshit.
|
|
|
Post by robwahlmann on Jul 6, 2022 13:12:33 GMT
We ended our relationship with Pulis at the right time in my opinion, and the first seasons under Hughes were really good times, but Hughes unfortunately was sacked too late as he couldn't see a good defender when he had one under his nose, and he didn't understand the importance of hard work and character. I think we would have stayed up with Pulis, but we wouldn't have seen the football we played the three first seasons under Hughes. Why would we have stayed up under Pulis. He was taking WBA down every bit as much as Hughes was taking us down. This Pulis guarantee’s not getting relegated is utter horseshit. It is a question never to be answered, but it's my opinion. You saw what he did at Palace as well I guess? I believe TP would have kept us up, but we would probably never have become a team getting 50 points plus in any season.
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Jul 6, 2022 14:51:27 GMT
I'll ask again, what has all this bollocks got to do with Michael O'Neill?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2022 14:55:59 GMT
That’s the nonsense though isn’t it? It never works that way - if you stand still you stagnate. There’s no correlation between us doing well and finishing 9th and then crashing and burning. The mistake wasn’t appointing Hughes, it was not sacking him soon enough. You talk about fine margins but why was this apparent disaster of a manager able to finish higher than his sainted predecessor ever was? They can never answer that last one Tony Pulis did more for this football club than Mark Hughes ever could have dreamed of.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 6, 2022 15:03:35 GMT
They can never answer that last one Tony Pulis did more for this football club than Mark Hughes ever could have dreamed of. They both did good jobs. One was sacked at the right time, the other was allowed to stay too long. If one was good and one was shit, why did the shit one keep finishing higher in the table?
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Jul 6, 2022 16:20:08 GMT
They can never answer that last one Tony Pulis did more for this football club than Mark Hughes ever could have dreamed of. Couldn't get to ninth though.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jul 6, 2022 16:21:55 GMT
Let’s get the record straight. I never raised Mark Hughes in a MON thread. I simply responded to someone else who brought MH into a non related quote on this the MON post All I was saying was that bar one season where we were 6 points clear of Crystal Palace the margins between 9th and lower placings were marginal. I only raised TP’s last season as an example, no more, no less. After a disastrous February/May run we only finished 4 points short of 9th. We actually drew 15 games. I haven’t tried to open the old wounds of TP/MH…others have. My thoughts remain others disagree. We were also only 6pts clear of relegation that same season. Fine margins indeed. 6 points is a gulf. 4 points is a tiny margin
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2022 16:23:51 GMT
Tony Pulis did more for this football club than Mark Hughes ever could have dreamed of. They both did good jobs. One was sacked at the right time, the other was allowed to stay too long. If one was good and one was shit, why did the shit one keep finishing higher in the table? Neither were shit, both did great jobs in general. We'll never know what would have happened if we kept Hughes. Still the best football have seen us play and likely ever to.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2022 16:23:58 GMT
Tony Pulis did more for this football club than Mark Hughes ever could have dreamed of. Couldn't get to ninth though. Yep, that much sought after 9th position on the league.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2022 16:24:54 GMT
Tony Pulis did more for this football club than Mark Hughes ever could have dreamed of. They both did good jobs. One was sacked at the right time, the other was allowed to stay too long. If one was good and one was shit, why did the shit one keep finishing higher in the table? I never said one was shit. My original post is still true.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jul 6, 2022 16:27:16 GMT
Tony Pulis did more for this football club than Mark Hughes ever could have dreamed of. Couldn't get to ninth though. The cup competitions were where the chance of silverware came. TP got us to 3 successive FA Cup quarter finals for the only time in our history. TP won us the only FA Cup semi-final in our history. TP is the only manager in our history to lead us out at Wembley in an FA Cup final. TP is the only manager in our history to have won ties in Europe. Not bad for a club over 150 years old.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jul 6, 2022 16:28:00 GMT
They both did good jobs. One was sacked at the right time, the other was allowed to stay too long. If one was good and one was shit, why did the shit one keep finishing higher in the table? I never said one was shit. My original post is still true. Both were miles better than anyone we’ve been managed by since.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2022 16:28:37 GMT
They both did good jobs. One was sacked at the right time, the other was allowed to stay too long. If one was good and one was shit, why did the shit one keep finishing higher in the table? I never said one was shit. My original post is still true. History now anyway and despite those who fail to grasp it, (not surprising in some cases) top 10 finishes are something we've hardly been doing regularly ever as a club ever so hardly something to look down on.
|
|
|
Post by hardcastle on Jul 6, 2022 16:29:13 GMT
Explain “posting horseshit”. I was only saying that fine margins put us in 9th place bar 1 season. Plus I’d prefer to be in the EPL watching world class footballers at the Brit and registering 13th/14th security each season. Mmm...you say 'fine margins' but fine margins stopped us reaching a cup final under Hughes- we lost a shoot out away to a team that has a better record on penalties than Germany. Plus the League Cup run was much tougher than the FA Cup one- Chelsea and Liverpool...who was the toughest opponent before the 2011 final, West Ham? You also say 'promotions' and 'cup finals' plurally, as though we had numerous promotions and finals under Pulis. I've touched on the 'fine margins' of the League Cup semi and Hughes couldn't get us promoted as we were in the highest possible division during his tenure. Plus, not sure how you could enjoy these promotions if we're constantly in 13/14th place.... You knock 9th placed finishes, but if they were so trivial and based on 'fine margins' how come Hughes' predecessor couldn't get there? You may like bumming around in 11th-14th place but that gets boring quickly- even Dyche's Burnley finished 7th once. I go to Stoke matches to watch Stoke more than the opposition, and it's a bit pointless wanting to see 'world class players' at Stoke if we don't lay a glove on them- under Hughes we stopped having our bellies tickled by The Shit and Chelsea and beat them on a regular basis. Going back to your wanting to see top class talent at Stoke, surely that extends to the home side too? I mean, if you'd rather watch Dean Whitehead and Salif Diao over Shaqiri and Bojan then you can't really be a lover of football 😎 Finally, I'd be interested to see your theories as to why Pulis became more negative after the highs of 2011. We were actually good to watch that season and played on the front foot a lot of the time, so why wasn't that built on? I think the (ill-judged?) signing of Peter Crouch completely changed our system of play and we found we couldn't reproduce the excellent form we pulled out in the last three months of 2010/11 (in both league and cup). TP never really found it again, did he. Which is why, ultimately PC felt he had to replace him. He'd gone stale
|
|