|
Post by thepremierbanksy on May 21, 2010 10:16:06 GMT
No way will we 'snap their hands off'. As someone has rightly pointed out the bridges are not so much burnt as the victims of US army fire-bombing where Beattie and Kitson are concerned. That leaves us with Mama, who is seen as not good enough, and Fuller if we sell Tuncay.
Priority will be to shift beattie and kitson, and only if we sign two new strikers would tuncay be allowed to leave. Even then I'm the sort of person who would be reluctant to only take 4 strikers to a world cup, nevermind using 4 for a 50-game season, although i realise it is very difficult to keep 5 strikers happy.
The excuses about "a different culture" that were made for his storming off the pitch shows TP hasn't burnt his bridges with Tuncay. Personally I think he's still i decent Fuller back up and obviously covers quite a few positions.
|
|
|
Post by tahmet on May 21, 2010 10:20:54 GMT
I think I'd label him as a supporting Striker, 'In the hole'. A bit of a Joe Cole, no out and out position, but the natural talent to influence a game from just about anywhere in the final third. Theres no doubt that he's a flair player, but to be honest, I think that he would suit Stoke City perfectly if we gave him a license to roam. He will track back and close down, and he will create space for others... Just what a very regimented Stoke team needs. This. Completely disagree with you about him fiitting into Stoke's 'very regimented' system though. Indeed I can't for the life of me imagine what we were thinking when we first looked into signing the bloke. I 'third' this. I just read that interview that FullerMagic put up a few posts ago >http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/mar/08/newsstory.sport13 And it says that Tunny went to Boro cos Gareth Southgate gave him the freedom to roam. It seems that when he has freedom to play where he wants he can do the job like in the first half of the Fulham game - he just has so much energy. But with weaker teams outside the top 6 etc (us and Boro for example) we cant afford to let someone 'roam free' as we dont have strong enough players in the other parts of the squad to help for this. Ie. we have Delap in midfield whereas Chelsea have Lampard. I dont think Tunny is a bad player - just one that needs to find a team who suit his attributes most. Saying that, is Sunderland really the best choice for him?
|
|
|
Post by Birchesheadpotter on May 21, 2010 10:31:35 GMT
I think I'd label him as a supporting Striker, 'In the hole'. A bit of a Joe Cole, no out and out position, but the natural talent to influence a game from just about anywhere in the final third. Theres no doubt that he's a flair player, but to be honest, I think that he would suit Stoke City perfectly if we gave him a license to roam. He will track back and close down, and he will create space for others... Just what a very regimented Stoke team needs. This. Completely disagree with you about him fiitting into Stoke's 'very regimented' system though. We have the foundations set here for a fantastic team. The only thing we need to work on is the attacking department, and I'm not just talking about Strikers here. To advance, we need full-backs that will attack. We need a Midfielder that will attack, and we need wingers that, again, will attack. Tuncay is the perfect stepping stone for a team in transition. He WILL track and defend, he WILL create space and he WILL score goals, maybe not prolifically, but with the 1 in 3/4 ration we need from positions other than the front men. The reason that Tuncay is not fitting in at the moment is because, on the pitch, we are not accomadating him. We are not trusting him. We are not supporting him. Stop looking at him as the outlet and more of the feeder.
|
|
|
Post by antwilkes123 on May 21, 2010 10:40:27 GMT
That lad who posted last week about meeting Tunny's cousin......maybe he's right after all?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on May 21, 2010 10:51:58 GMT
This. Completely disagree with you about him fiitting into Stoke's 'very regimented' system though. We have the foundations set here for a fantastic team. The only thing we need to work on is the attacking department, and I'm not just talking about Strikers here. To advance, we need full-backs that will attack. We need a Midfielder that will attack, and we need wingers that, again, will attack. Tuncay is the perfect stepping stone for a team in transition. He WILL track and defend, he WILL create space and he WILL score goals, maybe not prolifically, but with the 1 in 3/4 ration we need from positions other than the front men. The reason that Tuncay is not fitting in at the moment is because, on the pitch, we are not accomadating him. We are not trusting him. We are not supporting him. Stop looking at him as the outlet and more of the feeder. Your argument might have held some water at the START of last season when we first signed Tuncay and indeed a lot of people argued that very point with me at the time but this season has clearly demonstrated that it's an argument with very little merit. Pulis plays percentage based, highly defensive football built around a deep lying target man. He always has and he always will ... because it's always worked for him.
|
|
|
Post by PerCyfilth ....Captains Log on May 21, 2010 10:53:14 GMT
What a shock March in fuck Tuncay off revelation ![:o](//storage.proboards.com/800541/images/7TTgAtwUz19SBi0cvrCX.gif) Whatever you think he is a MILLION times better footballer than Sidibe.
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on May 21, 2010 10:55:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by pushon on May 21, 2010 10:59:15 GMT
This. Completely disagree with you about him fiitting into Stoke's 'very regimented' system though. We have the foundations set here for a fantastic team. The only thing we need to work on is the attacking department, and I'm not just talking about Strikers here. To advance, we need full-backs that will attack. We need a Midfielder that will attack, and we need wingers that, again, will attack. Tuncay is the perfect stepping stone for a team in transition. He WILL track and defend, he WILL create space and he WILL score goals, maybe not prolifically, but with the 1 in 3/4 ration we need from positions other than the front men. The reason that Tuncay is not fitting in at the moment is because, on the pitch, we are not accomadating him. We are not trusting him. We are not supporting him. Stop looking at him as the outlet and more of the feeder.[/qu And unfortunately, he keeps giing the ball away ![:-[](//storage.proboards.com/800541/images/fwGSRilBFZwfei5Q6XIp.gif)
|
|
|
Post by pushon on May 21, 2010 11:03:12 GMT
We have the foundations set here for a fantastic team. The only thing we need to work on is the attacking department, and I'm not just talking about Strikers here. To advance, we need full-backs that will attack. We need a Midfielder that will attack, and we need wingers that, again, will attack. Tuncay is the perfect stepping stone for a team in transition. He WILL track and defend, he WILL create space and he WILL score goals, maybe not prolifically, but with the 1 in 3/4 ration we need from positions other than the front men. The reason that Tuncay is not fitting in at the moment is because, on the pitch, we are not accomadating him. We are not trusting him. We are not supporting him. Stop looking at him as the outlet and more of the feeder. Your argument might have held some water at the START of last season when we first signed Tuncay and indeed a lot of people argued that very point with me at the time but this season has clearly demonstrated that it's an argument with very little merit. Pulis plays percentage based, highly defensive football built around a deep lying target man. He always has and he always will ... because it's always worked for him. I have to agree with you Paul. So it'll be more of "Crap game! but we got a result, so you can't knock it"
|
|
|
Post by pushon on May 21, 2010 11:05:35 GMT
What a shock March in fuck Tuncay off revelation ![:o](//storage.proboards.com/800541/images/7TTgAtwUz19SBi0cvrCX.gif) Whatever you think he is a MILLION times better footballer than Sidibe. That's as maybe, but he isn't a MILLION times as effective as Sid, certainly not for Stoke anyway.
|
|
|
Post by coxeymcqueen on May 21, 2010 11:27:10 GMT
I would like to keep Tuncay to be honest but at the same time, if he wants a move then I would happily let him go. Saying that though, there is no way I would accept 4m from Sunderland for him. Bruce has squeezed every last penny at top dollar prices for the signings we have had from him. So it's payback time, I love Whitehead but if we paid 5m for him then we should demand at least 6.5m for Tuncay. It's not like Kitson where we will take anything to get rid. Tuncay is a good squad player and we should hold on to him unless we get top dollar. Bruce won't find anyone else of his quality for the price. 4m and he can fuck off. I couldn't agree more, mate.
|
|
|
Post by PotteringThrough on May 21, 2010 11:31:00 GMT
£4m isn't enough.
If we sign some of the players we're after this summer then Tuncay will play a lot better and link up a lot more. He is still committed to the club and does show this on the field. He's not had a great season but we paid more so I'd expect to at least break even on him.
|
|
|
Post by Birchesheadpotter on May 21, 2010 12:02:06 GMT
We have the foundations set here for a fantastic team. The only thing we need to work on is the attacking department, and I'm not just talking about Strikers here. To advance, we need full-backs that will attack. We need a Midfielder that will attack, and we need wingers that, again, will attack. Tuncay is the perfect stepping stone for a team in transition. He WILL track and defend, he WILL create space and he WILL score goals, maybe not prolifically, but with the 1 in 3/4 ration we need from positions other than the front men. The reason that Tuncay is not fitting in at the moment is because, on the pitch, we are not accomadating him. We are not trusting him. We are not supporting him. Stop looking at him as the outlet and more of the feeder. Your argument might have held some water at the START of last season when we first signed Tuncay and indeed a lot of people argued that very point with me at the time but this season has clearly demonstrated that it's an argument with very little merit. Pulis plays percentage based, highly defensive football built around a deep lying target man. He always has and he always will ... because it's always worked for him. This season has demonstrated nothing in terms of my argument. My argument is that with the support needed, he will be a success. I believe we are a few improvements (Sidwell, Noble, Luke Young, Messi) from being able to give him the free role that would see him able to pick the passes out. And unfortunately, he keeps giing the ball away ![:-[](//storage.proboards.com/800541/images/fwGSRilBFZwfei5Q6XIp.gif) I will refer to my previous point. Tuncay is currently (sparcely) playing the Striker role that would need to be occupied by another player for Tuncay, playing in a creative role, to make chances for. And it's not just a case of supporting Tuncay alone, the same point can be made for others in the team: Fuller recieves the ball, hold it up, barges people aside, tricks his way past the next, outpaces the full-back and for a simple tap-in, cuts the ball square to ???... We lose possession, Fuller throws his arms into the air. Ball is hammered about as far into the atmosphere by Robert Huths right boot as possible without it tearing apart, Mama Sidibe makes his way to meet it and (occasionally) out-jumps the defender, flicking it on to ???... We lose possession, Fuller throws his arms into the air. Tuncay makes a run and finds space before anyone on the pitch even noticed it was there, (occasionally) Whitehead passes the ball forwards toward Tuncay who recieves it, moves with purpose, has a look up, see's nobody, tries to hold onto it, see's nobody, beats a player and looks up again, see's nobody aaaand... We lose possession, Fuller throws his arms into the air.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on May 21, 2010 12:25:27 GMT
Your argument might have held some water at the START of last season when we first signed Tuncay and indeed a lot of people argued that very point with me at the time but this season has clearly demonstrated that it's an argument with very little merit. Pulis plays percentage based, highly defensive football built around a deep lying target man. He always has and he always will ... because it's always worked for him. This season has demonstrated nothing in terms of my argument. Well with the greatest of respect you haven't been watching too closely then. ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/800541/images/0m0lbCuTEBzaRn6f8QaM.gif) This season Pulis has shown he has absolutely no intention (regardless of what people were expecing/hoping for when he signed him) of giving him a free role or playing him in the hole. Pulis will never play Tuncay in the hole ... he has big target men to play that role, he always has done and he always will. He made a point of announcing on the radio that Tuncay and Ric wouldn't work together in one of his teams, I'm not quite sure what has to happen for the penny to drop.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2010 14:23:36 GMT
can't make my mind up about tuncs. i thought he was a nearly man at middlesbrough(i.e. missed a lot of chances), like he has at stoke. a lot of the time he seems to mishit the ball, especially in front of goal.also still got my doubts about tony and flair players. like i say, i'm still in a quandary about these thoughts. another worry is ether's and his contract negotiations (is he after a move, one wonders)? again and again we say we need better midfield players (are we ever going to see this under tony)? o.k. we got a good position in the prem last season, but without the right moves, i think we may struggle next season. like i've said earlier, my mind is right mixed up at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on May 21, 2010 14:35:46 GMT
The trouble with Tuncay is.....tunnel vision!
|
|
|
Post by Birchesheadpotter on May 21, 2010 14:53:10 GMT
This season has demonstrated nothing in terms of my argument. Well with the greatest of respect you haven't been watching too closely then. ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/800541/images/0m0lbCuTEBzaRn6f8QaM.gif) This season Pulis has shown he has absolutely no intention (regardless of what people were expecing/hoping for when he signed him) of giving him a free role or playing him in the hole. Pulis will never play Tuncay in the hole ... he has big target men to play that role, he always has done and he always will. He made a point of announcing on the radio that Tuncay and Ric wouldn't work together in one of his teams, I'm not quite sure what has to happen for the penny to drop. I don't think I have explained myself properly. I know full well that Pulis will never employ a creative 'free-role' character in his team. What I am trying to put across is that if Tuncay (and Pulis for that matter) were to be given time to work out his place in the team, and with the right support, he may well learn to play the way he wants whilst still adhering to Pulis' wishes. Whether it be on the wing or not, who knows? I just think that he is too talented and versatile a player not to be able to fit into any system given time. And that's only down to one man alone.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on May 21, 2010 15:34:12 GMT
With Tuncay, Kitson and BT possibly gone, it is essential that they are replaced with players who will slot straight into our system.
Kitson and Tuncay were big risks because they had never played in our 4-4-1-1 set up before. BT is ideally suited to the targetman role, but he has turned into a Billy Bigbollocks.
Now we are more established in the Prem, we need the mythical 'Mama with goals', be it KJ, Cole, Heskey, Zigic or Davies. In addition we must sign a younger version of Ric; someone who is full of potential and desperate to prove himself.
Then another striker is needed, perhaps an older player who will be a frequent sub or a utility player like Samba.
As other posters have said, this is going to be a big test for TP as Mama and Ric can't go on for ever.
|
|
|
Post by pushon on May 21, 2010 15:54:58 GMT
We are crying out for someone who can pass the ball....accurately!!
|
|
st0kefc
Spectator
Launch it!!
Posts: 38
|
Post by st0kefc on May 21, 2010 16:48:26 GMT
Like loads of people, I like Tunk! But when I think about why I do like him its always down to the same thing - he works really really hard and every fan likes to see that. But I dont think he fits into our squad with the current set of players unless TP can sign players that can complement Tunks play as well as the rest of the squad, and thats a big ask! Also, I am not convinced that he is actually good enough to make that kind of effort with signings.
In short, but not that happy about it, let him go if he wants to, but 4mill is not high enough.
|
|
|
Post by hamburgpotter on May 21, 2010 18:14:53 GMT
If Blunderland value Ken Jones at 14 Mill then surely Tuncs cant be worth much less than that ??? if not more!!. 4 mill is a fking joke
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2010 18:17:28 GMT
I can't see the quibbling about the fee. We paid £5m for him and he's not done anything to add any value to that, hasn't been a regular, whilst making it fairly clear he isn't happy here.
Hardly puts us in a great bargaining position does it?
|
|
|
Post by conzdad on May 21, 2010 18:51:35 GMT
Tuncay out and Heskey in!!! If it happens I will be checking in to the local asylum coz watching Heskey spend most of his time on his arse every week will send me into a nut job.Tunny has to stay,he will turn out to be a good signing
|
|
|
Post by lordb on May 21, 2010 18:59:03 GMT
imho one reason why Ric was so good 2009-10 was because he perceived Tuncay was a threat to his place
fair play to Ric he responded (lack of goals aside) superbly
be surprised if Tuncay stays
we do need two good level strikers dont we.
Tuncay & x£m for KYJ makes sense for both clubs
unfortunately KYJ will expect Villa,Liverpool e.t.c. to come in for him (& they may well do)
going to be,imho,nigh on impossible to attract KYJ or Carlton Cole to Stoke
I have no idea who,Heskey &/or Benjani apart,we are possibly going to be able to attract to SCFC
|
|