|
Post by greyman on Jun 19, 2013 8:01:48 GMT
Anybody calling him G Cam should be dropped, that's for sure. Presumably he plays as a defenceman in the EPL as well.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jun 18, 2013 14:26:26 GMT
That's definitely damning him. And you appear to have the Chairman on your side too.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jun 18, 2013 12:15:26 GMT
Horseshit greyman.....just accept that you lot couldn't assess that the tactics being employed were capable of results given the right players and rub of the green...regardless of how boring it may or may not have been. Your excuses are just are a crock of shit. I wouldn't accept that it is a worse team. I think it under performed last season but I wouldn't like to say that it was definitely a worse team. No excuses. he proved me wrong for quite some time. Then it all went tits up. I see you can't say for definite that last season's team was definitely a worse team than the one we had four years ago. Damning him with very faint praise. So he's given more money and almost more time than any manager in Stoke's history and you can't say definitely that the team is worse than before? Who exactly is the PHW?
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jun 18, 2013 9:16:48 GMT
The conspiracy theory. Nothing better than the conspiracy theory to try and explain and how so many fans decided to turn on the manager that would eventually return us to top flight football. Such tactics being the cornerstone of the reason why the promotion happened...just with better footballers once Coates put his hand in his pocket. Two things. It wasn't a conspiracy theory. Either Pulis got bogged down in what was happening off the pitch to the detriment of the team or he deliberately set out to get involved with it by buggering about. It still amazes me how after 'Coates got his hand in his pocket' instead of 'better footballers' we have managed to end up with a worse team than the one that finished the first season in the Premier League and a squad so full of holes. Must have all happened while Pulis wasn't looking.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jun 18, 2013 9:08:43 GMT
There are two issues coming out in this thread. The first is whether Tony Pulis was successful at Stoke and the second, will he be successful in the Premier League again. The answer to the first issue is yes, and the answer to the second, in my view, will be yes. For people also to say they are not interested in the future of Tony Pulis is really strange. I would think every Stoke fan, if only out of curiosity, would be hugely interested in what position he eventually takes up. What we aren't interested in is anything you have to say on things that don't concern you. Fuck off.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jun 18, 2013 8:35:01 GMT
I would think the last thing the anti Pulis fans would want is for Tone to get a job in the Premier League and prove them all wrong. You have no right to an opinion. Fuck off.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jun 18, 2013 8:34:14 GMT
Most clubs haven't got a spare 100mil for tony to work with like he did at stoke. did he need £100 million to keep us up the first season? Nothing like making things up. No. He needed the £100 million to give us a worse team than the one that stayed up in the first season.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jun 7, 2013 11:06:06 GMT
The only question to which Bardsley + Walters on the right is the correct answer is this:
How do we ensure we create nothing on the right hand side?
|
|
|
Suarez
Jun 4, 2013 20:06:22 GMT
Post by greyman on Jun 4, 2013 20:06:22 GMT
Until he breaks somebody's ankle with one of those sly little stamps he's so fond of? Or worse seeing as he thinks it's OK to gouge eyes and bite opponents. Personally I hope he has a career ending injury sooner rather than later. At what point does it become acceptable to wish a career ending injury on anybody? I suppose if any footballer deserves it, it's Suarez. I think Harry has gone a bit far up there though ^
|
|
|
Suarez
Jun 4, 2013 12:37:58 GMT
Post by greyman on Jun 4, 2013 12:37:58 GMT
How is punching somebody equivalent to biting and gouging? You're the one making the comparison between the two not me. I tell you what because you're obviously struggling. Go up the next person you see and ask them if they'd prefer it if you slapped them on the cheek or attempted to gouge their eyeball with your thumb. Let me know what they say. How long will you need?
|
|
|
Suarez
Jun 4, 2013 11:35:59 GMT
Post by greyman on Jun 4, 2013 11:35:59 GMT
It's not the fact he does them more, but the fact he does them at all.
I'd much rather somebody elbowed me in the ribs a hundred times than attempted to gouge my eye out of its socket just once. There are plenty of players taking shots at each other and only one biting and gouging opponents. He either needs to stop before he seriously hurts somebody or be forced to stop playing. In rugby they can ban players for up to 3 years for gouging and with good reason. They don't have the same sanction for clotheslining an opponent - and for good reason.
How often would you like to see him biting opponents during games for it to become something more than equivalent to shirt tugging? Every other week? How about if we just accepted biting as part of the game just to even things up? But maybe only for the technically gifted players? Maybe they could be accredited as 'technically superior' by the FA, and wear a special cap during games so that refs can accept their behaviour?
|
|
|
Suarez
Jun 4, 2013 10:52:09 GMT
Post by greyman on Jun 4, 2013 10:52:09 GMT
to be fair i would put money on it that you could put together a sequence that looks just as bad about Robert Huth (or most other players) as well if you tried hard enough to look for clips of him being a naughty boy....it's not that amazing or groundbraking how good OR bad you can make ANYONE look by only including snippets that you want people to see. if it had been an hour long montage of snippets of him just playing football and it just so happened that there was nothing but foul after foul after foul then fair enough but it's specifically a montage showing him when he's at his worst; like i said, you could do that about most players and get the same results. it's the same when the transfer window is on when people use bloody you tube clips to decide how good a player is,a bit of editing and carefully selected snippets can easily portray any player in any way you want to. yes, we all know what a complete idiot Suarez is both on and off the pitch but this vid is just someone pandering to those who hate everything he does and trying to infer that all he ever does is foul, dive and physically assault people. as far as i'm concerned it's just shit tabloid, lazy cliches put into a video format Eye gouging and biting opponents? Yeah, they're all at it.
|
|
|
Suarez
Jun 4, 2013 9:46:31 GMT
Post by greyman on Jun 4, 2013 9:46:31 GMT
We must keep him in the premier league imho, would be a great loss even with his conduct. Until he breaks somebody's ankle with one of those sly little stamps he's so fond of? Or worse seeing as he thinks it's OK to gouge eyes and bite opponents. Personally I hope he has a career ending injury sooner rather than later.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jun 3, 2013 14:43:08 GMT
I see. So now we need a written statement from him do we? Not just an interview with him in which he admitted that what was happening off the pitch contributed to the binary season not to mention the evidence of our own eyes?
I never said you'd made a statement about the academy. I was inviting you to dig a second hole for yourself. Feel free to join in all of the others who are trying to erase that from Pulis's history as well.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jun 3, 2013 14:19:32 GMT
How is it an incorrect stance? He certainly was fucking around but his reappointment worked out well in the long term.
Go on. Tell us he never wanted to shut the academy as well. That's something else people are trying to rewrite.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jun 3, 2013 13:39:56 GMT
Actually, yes he did. I know there are numerous attempts to rewrite history at the moment - both good and bad as far as Pulis is concerned - but he was fucking around with the club. All worked out OK in the long term but we shouldn't cover that up.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jun 3, 2013 13:36:05 GMT
There's no supposedly about it. He admitted it himself. If it is true, why don't you hold the same enmity for Coates with whom he was working? I did.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jun 3, 2013 8:01:30 GMT
There's no supposedly about it. He admitted it himself.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 31, 2013 10:03:21 GMT
..but most of the players that Crwho now produce couldn't get near our first team. The kind of players that we want will be at the likes of Man Utd, Liverpool, Man City etc I honestly don't know enough about the London area but I see the big clubs in the North West pretty much hoover up the best players from all over the shop. I remember MarkW saying that he was hopeful that this may be changing so hopefully we will start seeing players come through. Not sure whether Hughes is kid focused or not but personally, I don't think that kind of pressure should be put on a manager - he should be looking at them in simple terms - are they good enough or not. If they are they are picked and if not then the scouting needs to be better or there has to be some kind of admission as to why we are missing out. Important area for the club this and I think too many people ignore the reality of how difficult it is - piss easy to say though Like Nick Powell?
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 31, 2013 7:59:35 GMT
Some can produce players but it doesn't mean that it is necessarily cheaper than buying equivalents. Stoke have far greater geographic pressures than Southampton (in the sense that they don't have so much competition) That doesn't explain why we produce fewer players than Crewe, does it? For whatever reason we do not have a pipeline of even decent players never mind the likes of Walcott, Bale, Shaw and Oxlade-Chamberlain. And how do West Ham continue to produce players when they have even greater competition than us? I don't think this can all be laid at Pulis's door but the fact that our young player of the season is 24 - and actually could only be at least 24 - is not the sign of a club able to develop young players.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 30, 2013 13:09:52 GMT
There is no credit to be taken on the academy for anyone as yet. It's produced very, very, very, very little. Must be a massive drain on money surely? There's something not right in the setup, especially if you compare it to a club like Southampton. It may be a case of garbage in garbage out, may be a lack of will to develop players, or both and a dozen other things, but we do know academies can produce players, just that ours doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 30, 2013 12:44:41 GMT
I'm not just refering to the academy - which may well end up to being a white elephant- but the whole infastructure paid for by TV cash. That's fair enough. But we shouldn't let a man who wanted to shut the Academy down be credited with its development.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 30, 2013 12:42:11 GMT
It's more complicated than that. It's mad to say he's left no legacy and he is obviously one of the three most successful managers in the club's history. But in terms of legacy, we need to be careful not to rewrite history. The club's infrastructure development has more to do with Peter Coates than Pulis who we know wanted to close the Academy down completely and recently expressed his lack of interest in it on more than one occasion. So you can take that off the list. I don't think he's doubled the fan base. He's just tapped into latent support by achieving promotion. It will go latent again if/when we get relegated. So scrub that. As for the solid nucleus of players, I think serious questions need to be asked about that. We have a squad that is aging and full of holes with little young talent coming through the ranks. That ultimately is what got him the sack. Given the resources at his disposal and the support he's had, it's astonishing that the squad is so creaky. Coates has invested cautiously and incrementally. Over revenue but relative to it. Pulis was obviously a massive part of that increase and in Coates feeling of confidence to invest it. Rewrite history if you wish. Coates employed the man to do a job in order to create what he has created. We are now global in name and sound in structure and all the major strides forward through the Pulis years. Coates has now put another man in place to achieve carry on the process and utilise some of that investment better, but it was all put in place in the context of the progress, results and security Pulis provided. I'd agree with you about 90 percent. But I actually think we stopped progressing two years ago and actually went backwards this season. I think I'd even say that the squad that finished the first season in the Premier league was better in certain areas than the one we have now. I also don't think we've got any degree of security given what's happened this season. I'm not arguing that he hasn't taken part in a transformation of the club, just that there are big holes in some aspects of his legacy.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 30, 2013 12:37:41 GMT
It can't be his legacy if he wasn't interested in it and wanted it shut. He's got enough to point at and claim he did a good job without taking credit for other people's work.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 30, 2013 12:31:04 GMT
Muslim is as evil as any other religion. Terrible things get done in its name, but for most people who believe, it's a positive thing for them personally.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 30, 2013 12:28:31 GMT
What foundations have been left by Pulis? I'd love to know .... Apart from an established PL Club with outstanding academy and training facilities, doubling of the fan base, European experience, a solid nucleus of players and mst of all pride in our club after years of heartache. No he hasn't left any foundations as he I was never in either Rimmers or HWS camps so thank TP for his achievements and his love for our club. This love was based on a solid friendship with PC and the fans. There is no reason to believe that Les won't have the same relationship given a chance. It's more complicated than that. It's mad to say he's left no legacy and he is obviously one of the three most successful managers in the club's history. But in terms of legacy, we need to be careful not to rewrite history. The club's infrastructure development has more to do with Peter Coates than Pulis who we know wanted to close the Academy down completely and recently expressed his lack of interest in it on more than one occasion. So you can take that off the list. I don't think he's doubled the fan base. He's just tapped into latent support by achieving promotion. It will go latent again if/when we get relegated. So scrub that. As for the solid nucleus of players, I think serious questions need to be asked about that. We have a squad that is aging and full of holes with little young talent coming through the ranks. That ultimately is what got him the sack. Given the resources at his disposal and the support he's had, it's astonishing that the squad is so creaky.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 29, 2013 21:26:46 GMT
You could try reading up about the role of the Catholic Church in bringing the Nazis to power the Church's support for Hitler and the Holocaust. Or to bring it closer to home, the role of the Church in covering up for paedophiles. Or how about the role of Catholic priests within the IRA. What does that tell you about all Christians? I think it says a lot more about the Catholic clergy than Christians. I think it proves that you can associate nutjobs and extremists with any religion and any time. Doesn't mean anything beyond that and I don't see the EDL calling for the burning down of churches
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 29, 2013 20:55:12 GMT
You could try reading up about the role of the Catholic Church in bringing the Nazis to power the Church's support for Hitler and the Holocaust. Or to bring it closer to home, the role of the Church in covering up for paedophiles. Or how about the role of Catholic priests within the IRA.
What does that tell you about all Christians?
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 28, 2013 21:54:22 GMT
Not sure, but the newer ones will be the first to go if Stoke struggle. You have no right to an opinion about anything and certainly no right to criticise any Stoke fans at all. Fuck off.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on May 28, 2013 10:33:00 GMT
A spot like what, sorry? What are these people you're professing to speak for basing that on? Ok rob - maybe I am the only football fan in the Uk for whom Pulis would be top of my list of names to try to get my team out of relegation trouble (well I do know quite a few others but I'm not going to start naming them). I base my opinion, like most of my opinions, on years of experience and evidence but sadly have nowhere near enough time, and even less inclination, to produce a dossier and then disappear in ever decreasing circles of disagreement. I will say, simply, that in my opinion Pulis is as good at organising footballers and avoiding enough defeats to stay up as anyone in the country. You should include the past 18 months in this dossier of yours. He doesn't have a good track record of avoiding defeats over that period. As other people have said, we may well have swapped one relegation battle for another but something had to change in a club that was going backwards, expensively and without any thought for the glaring holes in the squad and the failure to develop a long term plan for player development.
|
|