|
|
Post by bunnyscfc on Jan 19, 2013 23:51:42 GMT
I preferred Hartlepool away to today
|
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jan 19, 2013 23:53:05 GMT
I preferred Hartlepool away to today That is the problem, mate. It is something to do with the soul methinks. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2013 23:54:26 GMT
Its not going to be THAT difficult for a new manager to make a big difference. We have some quality players. The manager would just need to pick the best 11 consistently and play them in their correct positions and instuct them to go for it from the off . That would be a lot more enjoyable to watch and plenty good enough to keep us in this division and then we can evolve from there. BM You mean like happened at Bolton and Blackburn? March; football's been played for a long time now, and you can find any example you like of any team you like to fit your version of any stuation you like. I don't know what happened at Bolton and Blackburn. I don't care about what happened at Bolton or Blackburn. If I could be arsed, I could find a contrary example to yours - are you really saying there's never been a contrary example to yours? If you're not, then what's your point? It's getting tedious. Let's just talk about Charlton all night shall we? |
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jan 19, 2013 23:58:39 GMT
You mean like happened at Bolton and Blackburn? March; football's been played for a long time now, and you can find any example you like of any team you like to fit your version of any stuation you like. I don't know what happened at Bolton and Blackburn. I don't care about what happened at Bolton or Blackburn. If I could be arsed, I could find a contrary example to yours - are you really saying there's never been a contrary example to yours? If you're not, then what's your point? It's getting tedious. Let's just talk about Charlton all night shall we? Bolton and Blackburn were established Prem clubs with managers who played exactly the same safety first football as TP at Stoke. However, some silly people amongst their support found this to be 'boring' and so good managers were replaced and now both clubs find themselves struggling in the Championship. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2013 0:02:00 GMT
You mean like happened at Bolton and Blackburn? March; football's been played for a long time now, and you can find any example you like of any team you like to fit your version of any stuation you like. I don't know what happened at Bolton and Blackburn. I don't care about what happened at Bolton or Blackburn. If I could be arsed, I could find a contrary example to yours - are you really saying there's never been a contrary example to yours? If you're not, then what's your point? It's getting tedious. Let's just talk about Charlton all night shall we? qpr changed their manager and their results impoved! WBA have done alright in recent years when they've changed managers. norwich have been forced to change their manager and have done well so far with hughton. lots of teams change their managers in this division and do ok. i don't see how we compare to blackburn and bolton. this club is minted whereas bolton have 85 million worth of debt, no investment and there was no backing for their manager when they got relegated, and blackburn are owned by a bunch of total dickheads who are loathed by their supporters and have got every single decision wrong. the decline at those clubs most certainly cannot be attributed to a change of manager. the most important thing at stoke is the ambition of the owner to achieve long term stability as a premier league club. there are a lot of good managers out there, many already employed at other clubs, who could come in and help achieve that aim. this would be a very attractive prospect for any ambitious manager |
|
|
|
Post by BristolMick on Jan 20, 2013 0:03:12 GMT
What? Do you know that is exactly what happened at those two clubs? I dont follow either but judging by the fans reaction to the way Steve Keen managed Blackburn I would say you are way off beam. I just cannot understand the doom mongers whose main reason for hanging on to Pulis seems to based upon the 2+2=5 logic that if Pulis leaves we will be back in the wilderness for 23 years again. Codswallop. Not whilst Peter Coates is at the helm we wont! BM And you want to take the risk. Keep TP for 10 years and you get 10 years in the Prem. Swap him and you risk being back in the 3rd Division in 3 years. Why would we take such a risk - we can't get much higher in the Prem ever and TP has shown he can deliver good cup runs. What scaremongering drivel. The risk of us being in 3rd division in 3 years is miniscule with Peter Coates as chairman, So yes I am VERY HAPPY TO TAKE THE RISK, because if we are destined for 10 more years of Pulis's tedium it certainly isn't worth taking the risk of wasting your life turning up for a game (like I did today) in the vague hope that it might even be moderately enjoyable. BM |
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jan 20, 2013 0:06:14 GMT
And you want to take the risk. Keep TP for 10 years and you get 10 years in the Prem. Swap him and you risk being back in the 3rd Division in 3 years. Why would we take such a risk - we can't get much higher in the Prem ever and TP has shown he can deliver good cup runs. What scaremongering drivel. The risk of us being in 3rd division in 3 years is miniscule with Peter Coates as chairman, So yes I am VERY HAPPY TO TAKE THE RISK, because if we are destined for 10 more years of Pulis's tedium it certainly isn't worth taking the risk of wasting your life turning up for a game (like I did today) in the vague hope that it might even be moderately enjoyable. BM Thankfully, Uncle Peter has more sense than to take such an outrageous risk and to make the club a bigger laughing stock than Soton. Let's spend another 23 years in the wilderness. I'm too old for such nonsense. I have spent my decades of Purgatory - I just want to sit back and watch us in the Prem year after year after year without any worries about our safety. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2013 0:07:19 GMT
the most important thing at stoke is the ambition of the owner to achieve long term stability as a premier league club. I'm worried that our owner's only ambition is to make sure the Premier League money keeps trundling in. Pulis kind of guarantees this. |
|
|
|
Post by OldStokie on Jan 20, 2013 0:08:15 GMT
Swings and roundabouts. Nobody can deny that he's put our club in a position that we could only dream about a few years ago, but at the same time he's infuriating supporters with his favouritism and negativity. If he went, I wouldn't shed any tears, but I would be worried by who else came to the club. Coates doesn't have the best of records of appointing successful managers. Apart from Lou and Pulis, I can't think of one he's appointed. And there have been many.
So I'm sitting on the fence, and if it means me not bothering to go because I'm fed up of watching his dross but the club remains in the top flight, then so be it.
I think he's got a screw loose, but that doesn't mean he'll get us relegated.
OS.
|
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jan 20, 2013 0:08:34 GMT
the most important thing at stoke is the ambition of the owner to achieve long term stability as a premier league club. I'm worried that our owner's only ambition is to make sure the Premier League money keeps trundling in. Pulis kind of guarantees this. And what is wrong with that? This is exactly what our club should be about. We should rejoice that it is so. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2013 0:10:12 GMT
However, some silly people amongst their support found this to be 'boring' and so good managers were replaced and now both clubs find themselves struggling in the Championship. Why is it silly not to want to pay money to watch shit? |
|
|
|
Post by Orbs on Jan 20, 2013 0:10:37 GMT
No
|
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jan 20, 2013 0:11:12 GMT
However, some silly people amongst their support found this to be 'boring' and so good managers were replaced and now both clubs find themselves struggling in the Championship. Why is it silly not to want to pay money to watch shit? Football is about results. NOTHING else. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2013 0:14:04 GMT
I'm worried that our owner's only ambition is to make sure the Premier League money keeps trundling in. Pulis kind of guarantees this. And what is wrong with that? This is exactly what our club should be about. We should rejoice that it is so. I don't want to rejoice at the money the owner is making. I'd rather watch exciting football. |
|
|
|
Post by BristolMick on Jan 20, 2013 0:14:35 GMT
What scaremongering drivel. The risk of us being in 3rd division in 3 years is miniscule with Peter Coates as chairman, So yes I am VERY HAPPY TO TAKE THE RISK, because if we are destined for 10 more years of Pulis's tedium it certainly isn't worth taking the risk of wasting your life turning up for a game (like I did today) in the vague hope that it might even be moderately enjoyable. BM Thankfully, Uncle Peter has more sense than to take such an outrageous risk and to make the club a bigger laughing stock than Soton. Let's spend another 23 years in the wilderness. I'm too old for such nonsense. I have spent my decades of Purgatory - I just want to sit back and watch us in the Prem year after year after year without any worries about our safety. March you obviously have big problems with your maths so I will set it out as simply as I can. Pulis leaves = High chance we will remain in the premiership and next to fuck all chance that we will return to the wilderness for 23 years or be in div 3 in 3 years. So change the record. Some risks are not as big as you think. Fortune favours the brave. BM |
|
|
|
Post by padders01 on Jan 20, 2013 0:15:12 GMT
Why is it silly not to want to pay money to watch shit? Football is about results. NOTHING else. Football has changed, you are still stuck in the 60's and 70's hence the reason you are so happy to watch this turgid attempt at playing football |
|
|
|
Post by OldStokie on Jan 20, 2013 0:15:56 GMT
Why is it silly not to want to pay money to watch shit? Football is about results. NOTHING else. I think 95% of fans would disagree with you, March, but 95% of managers would.  OS. |
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jan 20, 2013 0:16:00 GMT
And what is wrong with that? This is exactly what our club should be about. We should rejoice that it is so. I don't want to rejoice at the money the owner is making. I'd rather watch exciting football. You mean the man who is supplementing the Sky money with £1M per month out of his own pocket every single month since he bought the club from the Icelanders. Rejoice that we have a club with such a sensible owner, talented manager and appropriate plan that will keep our club at the top level for decades. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2013 0:16:50 GMT
Why is it silly not to want to pay money to watch shit? Football is about results. NOTHING else. You mean thousands of people throughout the country are paying between £20 - £60 every week to watch something we could get for free just watching the results program on BBC1 |
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jan 20, 2013 0:18:20 GMT
Football is about results. NOTHING else. You mean thousands of people throughout the country are paying between £20 - £60 every week to watch something we could get for free just watching the results program on BBC1 There is no other reason to go apart from the camaraderie of thousands of other folk wishing your team win. That is why we go, otherwise we might as well turn up at the ballet. |
|
|
|
Post by padders01 on Jan 20, 2013 0:19:18 GMT
March will you stop supporting/watching Stoke when Pulis leaves/sacked?
|
|
|
|
Post by OldStokie on Jan 20, 2013 0:21:23 GMT
Thankfully, Uncle Peter has more sense than to take such an outrageous risk and to make the club a bigger laughing stock than Soton. Let's spend another 23 years in the wilderness. I'm too old for such nonsense. I have spent my decades of Purgatory - I just want to sit back and watch us in the Prem year after year after year without any worries about our safety. March you obviously have big problems with your maths so I will set it out as simply as I can. Pulis leaves = High chance we will remain in the premiership and next to fuck all chance that we will return to the wilderness for 23 years or be in div 3 in 3 years. So change the record. Some risks are not as big as you think. Fortune favours the brave. BM You're probably right, Mick, given that we now have the platform to build on. If Boskamp could finish mid-table with what he was left with and him never having managed in the English leagues, then it shouldn't be too difficult for a half-decent manager to keep us mid-table playing attractive football rather than (mostly) the turgid dross Pulis turns out. OS. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2013 0:22:51 GMT
I don't want to rejoice at the money the owner is making. I'd rather watch exciting football. You mean the man who is supplementing the Sky money with £1M per month out of his own pocket every single month since he bought the club from the Icelanders. Rejoice that we have a club with such a sensible owner, talented manager and appropriate plan that will keep our club at the top level for decades. Compare how much he paid for the club with how much he could sell it for now, and factor in the financial benefits Bet365 derive from their association with our club. That's the real reason Pulis has a job for life. Rejoice indeed. |
|
|
|
Post by PotteringThrough on Jan 20, 2013 0:23:09 GMT
No Wouldn't mind another coach in the mould of Peter Reid coming in. There's a good suggestion. I thank you, kind sir. "Bows to March4 and steps back into the crowd" |
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jan 20, 2013 0:24:51 GMT
March you obviously have big problems with your maths so I will set it out as simply as I can. Pulis leaves = High chance we will remain in the premiership and next to fuck all chance that we will return to the wilderness for 23 years or be in div 3 in 3 years. So change the record. Some risks are not as big as you think. Fortune favours the brave. BM You're probably right, Mick, given that we now have the platform to build on. If Boskamp could finish mid-table with what he was left with and him never having managed in the English leagues, then it shouldn't be too difficult for a half-decent manager to keep us mid-table playing attractive football rather than (mostly) the turgid dross Pulis turns out. OS. Boskamp - shudder. ;D I wonder where we would be if he was still manager? |
|
|
|
Post by OldStokie on Jan 20, 2013 0:25:43 GMT
I don't want to rejoice at the money the owner is making. I'd rather watch exciting football. You mean the man who is supplementing the Sky money with £1M per month out of his own pocket every single month since he bought the club from the Icelanders. Rejoice that we have a club with such a sensible owner, talented manager and appropriate plan that will keep our club at the top level for decades. Your whole argument, March, is based on the thesis that nobody else but Pulis could make a fist of the job here. Don't you find that a little silly? Not every team does a 'Charlton' when they appoint new managers. OS. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2013 0:28:59 GMT
You mean thousands of people throughout the country are paying between £20 - £60 every week to watch something we could get for free just watching the results program on BBC1 There is no other reason to go apart from the camaraderie of thousands of other folk wishing your team win. That is why we go, otherwise we might as well turn up at the ballet. Could we not just all meet up at the pub and keep a sneaky eye on the results?  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2013 0:31:06 GMT
There's a good suggestion. I thank you, kind sir. "Bows to March4 and steps back into the crowd" You make the most crackpot suggestion of the night and March agrees with you!  FFS. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jan 20, 2013 0:31:58 GMT
You mean the man who is supplementing the Sky money with £1M per month out of his own pocket every single month since he bought the club from the Icelanders. Rejoice that we have a club with such a sensible owner, talented manager and appropriate plan that will keep our club at the top level for decades. Your whole argument, March, is based on the thesis that nobody else but Pulis could make a fist of the job here. Don't you find that a little silly? Not every team does a 'Charlton' when they appoint new managers. OS. Let's watch Soton for the next 6 months then and we will all know the answer once and for all. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2013 0:32:55 GMT
Not every team does a 'Charlton' when they appoint new managers. They don't??? |
|
FFS. ;D 
