|
|
Post by sammychung on Feb 8, 2009 9:06:41 GMT
The issue I have here, is that Pulis openly states:
"People underestimate what Richard brings to the team Every single time he steps foot on the pitch he gives 110%"
Quite a noble attribute, however, thats exactly what you'd get from LL. But the difference with Liam is, he's more than capable of producing an assist or goal for us. Thats what makes this situation all the more baffling and frustrating.
One of biggest parts of Lawrence's game is his chasing down and running, only he could win you the game. He's equally as commited to the cause as Cresswell, but for some reason the latter gets the nod??? Bizzarre.
I wouldn't get rid of Cressie, in fact I feel he could have a part to play if we ever found ourselves say, 2-0 up (which would only happen with Lawrence or someone else). Cressie could come off the bench and defend from the front. Instead of us sitting back so deep we're defending half way up the south stand.
|
|
|
|
Post by northstokie on Feb 8, 2009 9:07:35 GMT
yesterday on the tele, I could have sworn I saw our number nine duck out of the way when the ball was crossed in for the first goal. Can anyone cuntfirm this was Cresswell? Yep, Cressy in all his glory |
|
|
|
Post by roylandstoke on Feb 8, 2009 9:11:57 GMT
Change the record. There are enough anti-Cresswell threads on here already  I don't think people are anti-Richard Cresswell. We all just appear to believe that through the generosity of our redemption seeking chairman we have much, much better players on the bench, in the reserves and even on loan elsewhere. |
|
|
|
Post by pulisatemyhamster on Feb 8, 2009 9:22:17 GMT
i'm not anti-cresswell, but this continual playing of him whilst leaving better options on the bench is turning me anti-pulis. no doubt we shall see him for another 3 fucking games playing out on the left now the cincinatti kid is banned.
|
|
|
|
Post by jemma1989 on Feb 8, 2009 9:31:05 GMT
we will see him till the rest of the season, Pulis showing his stubborness again, and when creswell does get that goal, its going to be awful seeing Pulis enter smug mode.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gunslinger on Feb 8, 2009 10:02:17 GMT
I don't buy this "gives 110%", "he works his socks off" and "cover every blade of grass" at all. It that is all that takes to play for Stoke then we should field the british marathon runners team in the next match. It's not Cresswells fault for being played, but the manager for picking him.
|
|
|
|
Post by bgpotter on Feb 8, 2009 10:12:44 GMT
i'm not anti-cresswell, but this continual playing of him whilst leaving better options on the bench is turning me anti-pulis. no doubt we shall see him for another 3 fucking games playing out on the left now the cincinatti kid is banned. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by boothenbus on Feb 8, 2009 10:38:34 GMT
He tries hard and gives alot but he just isn't good enough.
Lawrence everytime for me.
Cressy is a good player to keep around for the last 15-20 mins of a game to run around and protect a win.
|
|
|
|
Post by AlliG on Feb 8, 2009 11:21:57 GMT
Cresswell would have been a manager's dream in the early days of substitutes.
When you could only have 1 sub a game and only use him to replace an injured player a utility player like Cresswell would have been invaluable.
Someone who does exactly what the manager wants, drops back to cover his full backs or the midfield when the opposition have possession, chuggs forward when we are in possession and fills a space at the near post for set pieces would have been very useful.
For a cautious manager who likes to cover all bases, there is still a good argument even with 7 subs to have someone like Cresswell on the bench every week just in case one of the other subs goes on and then gets injured.
Last year he was a "square peg in a round hole" who did a job for the team and scored vital goals (though Lawrence performed exactly the same hard working role on the other flank and scored more goals).
It wasn't too great a surprise to see him start the first game of the season, but after £20m+ has been spent on new players I doubt even Cressy himself would have expected to still be starting games.
I will continue to give him my total support (the same as all the other players) during the time they are on the pitch, but, that doesn't mean that the steering wheel won't continue to get a good thumping when Dave Kemp reads out the team on Radio Stoke.
|
|
|
|
Post by stokie4life on Feb 8, 2009 11:49:31 GMT
Im sure that if Lawrence played he would give us "110%" but the difference between him and Cresswell is that he has quality, he can cross the ball and he can score goals.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alvechurch Assassin on Feb 8, 2009 11:58:55 GMT
put simply, there is no logical reason for cresswell to be starting any game in this league when given the alternatives
|
|
|
|
Post by tony harrison on Feb 8, 2009 19:41:44 GMT
Sure Cresswell is a decent bloke and he gives 100% effort but I think it is obvious by now that this is still not good enough.
When will he score ? He lost the ball loads of times yesterday, does not help the team by playing such a negative formation.
It's a joke !!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Stokie-Jiggz on Feb 8, 2009 19:48:43 GMT
Not a Cresswell hater nor like the guy much. However he does give 100% in all games, give the bloke credit agreed, i'm sure all the cresswell haters on here wouldn't of been moaning if he had scored that superb over head kick yesterday and we had gone onto win the game! |
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Feb 8, 2009 19:54:24 GMT
Not a Cresswell hater nor like the guy much. However he does give 100% in all games, give the bloke credit agreed, i'm sure all the cresswell haters on here wouldn't of been moaning if he had scored that superb over head kick yesterday and we had gone onto win the game! Oh here we go, a new term "The Cresswell Haters". How difficult is it to understand that the vast majority of Stokies have no problem with Richard Cresswell and his committment to the cause? No one argues that he doesn't give 100% in every game, but we are a Premier League club and we can't just put players into the starting eleven on commitment alone. During pre-season, the players all took a gruelling bleep test. The two players who lasted the test longest were Cresswell and Demar Phillips. So why didn't Demar Phillips figure in the first team this season before he was sold? I'll tell you why - because he's not good enough. And neither, at this level, is Richard Cresswell. He's the player who effectively scored the goal that won us promotion to the Premier League, but sadly when his Stoke career comes to end, it's more than likely he won't be remembered for that, and that's a damn shame. |
|
|
|
Post by Ddraigcoch on Feb 8, 2009 20:05:28 GMT
TP started Creswell to keep things solid for the first half and I can only assume that he would have taken him for Lawrence at some point in the 2 nd half.
Obviously that plan went Tits Up with the 'three' subs used up in the first quarter of the game.
With Etherington being sent off it was TP's hope that it would be a la Man City @ home and hold out for a point. Whcih we would have settled for in the end.
Although having said the above it was one of those days when TP contributed to the cock up by hoping that players carrying knocks would come through OK and it didn't work.
I was sat in with the Sunderland fans on the half way line and believe me they were getting on their players backs, Reid, Richardson and Cisse were getting plenty of stick. The quality of there paly was poor and couldn't beat the first man with crosses from either flank. For an away fixture we were comfortable for long periods of the game.
Even at 1 - 0 down they wanted to go to the corner flag to waste time. They were shittin it, can't defend a lead etc.
I agree this was disappointing to say the least but to my eyes there was fight in the team and we did not capitulate.
It was only when the second one went in that they were smilin.
Doom and Gloom will get us nowhere.
Kelly and Camara had decent debuts and had HC scored we would have probably won the game.
Be Loyal. Be POSITIVE, BE STOKE !!
|
|
|
|
Post by mark71 on Feb 8, 2009 20:11:17 GMT
Neither will selecting players whose only benefit to the team is that they run around alot.
|
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Feb 8, 2009 20:17:40 GMT
Not a Cresswell hater nor like the guy much. However he does give 100% in all games, give the bloke credit agreed, i'm sure all the cresswell haters on here wouldn't of been moaning if he had scored that superb over head kick yesterday and we had gone onto win the game! if...............  |
|
|
|
Post by Ddraigcoch on Feb 8, 2009 20:19:45 GMT
Creswell came on and ran around a lot against Citeh and we got 3 points. Not saying he should start but he has a role to play, particularly in TP'e eyes.
Slate him all you like but my guess is he is probably one of the fittest if not the fittest player in the squad.
And before you say it..........
No... I don't mean he has nice arse ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by mark71 on Feb 8, 2009 20:26:38 GMT
Well can you or anyone else please tell me what Cresswell offers the team other than running around alot, Goals scored? Goal assists? Crosses? Corners? Free Kicks?
I'm not having a dig at anyone who is sticking up for Cresswell but for the life of me I can't see what he offers the team other than running around a lot.
|
|
|
|
Post by eriksson74 on Feb 8, 2009 20:28:56 GMT
I would have been equally as chuffed if the one with the goal at his mercy had hit the back of the net other than him swiping a leg at nothing and the ball going through his legs!
Alas Cresswell is not the answer but the stubbon one will keep finding a spot for him, despite his constant inability to keep the ball and thus put pressure on us, therefore Tone needs to keep him in to allow him to put 110% in trying to win the ball back he has just given away!!!!
|
|
Banega23
Youth Player
kick and rush...
Posts: 462
|
Post by Banega23 on Feb 8, 2009 20:31:47 GMT
unlike most people, i'm not an avid cresswell basher. However, even yesterday, he made several mistakes in both promising positions, and areas where you can't really be losing the ball.
|
|
|
|
Post by stonestokie! on Feb 8, 2009 21:25:44 GMT
he is shit. but his bicycle kick wasn't that bad yesterday!  |
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 8, 2009 21:28:52 GMT
he is shit. but his bicycle kick wasn't that bad yesterday! Was quite good actually. Surprisingly. |
|
|
|
Post by stonestokie! on Feb 8, 2009 21:35:50 GMT
nearly went in, thought i was dreaming
|
|
|
|
Post by gazstoke on Feb 8, 2009 22:02:05 GMT
Provided no width whenever he has played on the wing.
classic case against sunderland, andy reid on the right wing, cresswell not helping the defence and andy reid is allowed to set up kenwyne jones for the goal.
|
|
|
|
Post by drwhom on Feb 9, 2009 9:07:11 GMT
Guardian Chalkboard seems to suggest he's pretty ineffective. Classic middle-third player but what surprised me is that Pulis doesn't get the same impression from the stats - one shot (off target) and TWO tackles (no blocks). It's like he's the anti-footballer. He plays lots of successful passes just in front of the dugout though so maybe that's why Pulis likes him. www.guardian.co.uk/football/chalkboards/cE4m9792ojAyHiRcX075I think |
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Feb 9, 2009 9:12:53 GMT
this is our club, some of us were here before pulis and coates some of us after, some in the dsays of waddo, some this season but all of us will be here after cresswell and pulis are gone
cresswell is losing us points FACT. i make this statement on the fact he is bringing nothing to the team as his stats show
this is our club tony, yours included, i dont want to be relegated, stop playing cresswell we have better options on the wing and up front
|
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Feb 9, 2009 9:14:06 GMT
angus said "I wouldn't get rid of Cressie, in fact I feel he could have a part to play if we ever found ourselves say, 2-0 up (which would only happen with Lawrence or someone else). Cressie could come off the bench and defend from the front. Instead of us sitting back so deep we're defending half way up the south stand. "
top assessment
|
|
StokieSideAss
Youth Player
Let's see how you like it[F4:[img]
Posts: 408
|
Post by StokieSideAss on Feb 9, 2009 9:32:35 GMT
TP started Creswell to keep things solid for the first half and I can only assume that he would have taken him for Lawrence at some point in the 2 nd half. Obviously that plan went Tits Up with the 'three' subs used up in the first quarter of the game. With Etherington being sent off it was TP's hope that it would be a la Man City @ home and hold out for a point. Which we would have settled for in the end. I dont think that was his plan at all, he would have taken Etherington off for Lawrence and put Cresswell left wing like he fucking always does. I cant remember the last time he took Cresswell off as a sub  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2009 10:16:29 GMT
I'm with a lot of others in that I don't blame Cresswell, I blame Pulis. And after the patronising offering from TP on Radio Stoke the other night, kind of backed up by John Acres, I almost smashed my new DAB radio to pieces.
Tony, I, amongst a lot of others, have been watching football long enough to know a 'trier' when we see one, and we also know what a footballer should 'look like', and 'be able to do'.
RC contributes absolutely nothing to our game, and the reasons that you keep sticking him in there - defensive work, tracking back, tacking etc - he isn't actually very good at any of them. We literally would be better starting the game with 10 men for what RC offers, seriously. And if you think that's crazy, take a look at your own fucking team selections before deciding who's crazy.
To watch RC 'try' against much much better Prem players is totally fucking embarrassing. If I was him I would feel dejected, traipsing back down the pitch in the wake of the full-back that's just taken me out of the game like a piece of piss.
The starting XI at Sunderland was a joke, btw. You are losing the plot.
|
|
