|
Post by dirtygary69 on Jan 20, 2015 15:44:49 GMT
If we had the team we had now back then do you think we could have gone further than we did ??
Well we certainly wouldn't have played our reserves with only four on the bench, that's for sure.
Just a question for those defending it by saying "he was right to change it because we were shit in the first leg." Do you ever remember him fielding a reserve team in a league game following a dodgy performance? I certainly don't. The fact that we only lost 1-0 just means that's a convenient excuse to fall back on. We could have got a tonking and I don't think Tony would have been surprised or bothered.
It's the fact that he wasn't arsed by it that still rankles somewhat.
Just a poor, poor time in an otherwise fantastic managerial tenure.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Jan 20, 2015 15:45:36 GMT
Well let's get into Europe again dan and then we will get the answer. Expecting Vale to get in Europe are you, you had your outing in the anglo Italian cup
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Jan 20, 2015 16:34:59 GMT
The fact is Stoke did wonderfully well to first qualify for the competition and then did exceptionally well in the tournament itself, yet some people only seem able to concentrate on one team selection for one game. Because what is the point of what you have mentioned, if he is just going to throw the towel in without a fight?
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Jan 20, 2015 16:42:45 GMT
The team he selected for the first leg were beaten at home, he must have thought changes would help. He's paid a lot of money to make decisions and he made one, we can all be wise after the event.
Nevertheless Stoke had already enjoyed their best ever European performance, that's what I think everyone should remember.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jan 20, 2015 16:44:34 GMT
Just had a look to see what the team actually was:
Stoke 29 Sorensen 04 Huth Booked 05 Collins 39 Woodgate 15 Diao Booked 24 Delap 32 Arismendi (Shotton - 65' Booked ) 40 Palacios (Pennant - 65' Booked ) 09 Jones Booked 10 Fuller 33 Jerome Substitutes 01 Begovic 30 Shotton 16 Pennant 44 Dawson
So off the top of my head Walters, Crouch, Matty missing on the offensive side. Would they have had the nous to unpick the Valencia defence and indeed would they have all started? Don't know and perhaps 1 or 2 might.
No Ryan I assume he was fit and didn't travel. Bego v Soro wan't quite the clear cut decision it later became.
Certainly weaker but not quite the 'we fielded the 2nd team' some folks are suggesting.
In all fairness though it was a very, very poor effort from TP to not even be arsed to fill the subs bench.
I am among his biggest fans but this was beyond disappointing and it scored an indelible black mark from me.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2015 16:49:19 GMT
What a limp excuse, he bottled it and badly let down thousands of fans who paid loads of money to travel to watch a second string side. This exactly. I have a lot of respect for Tony, and I am not in the business of bashing him, but this was one of his worst decisions in the job. I remember seeing the lineups and being absolutely horrified. Domestic form was poor to okay, but not enough to go down. We had a real chance, he blew it. by "Poor to Ok" you mean we'd just lost the last 5 in a row? i was outraged when i saw the lineup but the reality was that the team he put out played far better than the first teamers had against them at home and than the first teamers had done for the last month in the Prem. taking that into account, do you genuinely still believe the established First team would have done better at the Mestalla? if so, what exactly are you basing it on?
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Jan 20, 2015 16:49:58 GMT
Just had a look to see what the team actually was: Stoke 29 Sorensen 04 Huth Booked 05 Collins 39 Woodgate 15 Diao Booked 24 Delap 32 Arismendi (Shotton - 65' Booked ) 40 Palacios (Pennant - 65' Booked ) 09 Jones Booked 10 Fuller 33 Jerome Substitutes 01 Begovic 30 Shotton 16 Pennant 44 Dawson So off the top of my head Walters, Crouch, Matty missing on the offensive side. Would they have had the nous to unpick the Valencia defence and indeed would they have all started? Perhaps 1 or 2 might. No Ryan I assume he was fit and didn't travel. Bego v Soro wan't quite the clear cut decision it later became. Certainly weaker but not quite the 'we fielded the 2nd team' some folks are suggesting. A very poor effort from TP not even to fill the subs bench though in all truth. I am among his biggest fans but this was a black mark from me. The subs bench says it all though doesn't it. If I was Coates I would have considered it to be negligence.
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Jan 20, 2015 16:52:05 GMT
This exactly. I have a lot of respect for Tony, and I am not in the business of bashing him, but this was one of his worst decisions in the job. I remember seeing the lineups and being absolutely horrified. Domestic form was poor to okay, but not enough to go down. We had a real chance, he blew it. by "Poor to Ok" you mean we'd just lost the last 5 in a row? i was outraged when i saw the lineup but the reality was that the team he put out played far better than the first teamers had against them at home and than the first teamers had done for the last month in the Prem. taking that into account, do you genuinely still believe the established First team would have done better at the Mestalla? if so, what exactly are you basing it on? Ok so how did the second team which did so well fare in the next couple of Premiership games?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2015 16:55:27 GMT
by "Poor to Ok" you mean we'd just lost the last 5 in a row? i was outraged when i saw the lineup but the reality was that the team he put out played far better than the first teamers had against them at home and than the first teamers had done for the last month in the Prem. taking that into account, do you genuinely still believe the established First team would have done better at the Mestalla? if so, what exactly are you basing it on? Ok so how did the second team which did so well fare in the next couple of Premiership games? as i said before, what has that got to do with a thread about the Valencia match??? i was equally as bemused as to why Arismendi in particular wasn't then given a crack after he played well at the Mestalla but that's nothing to do with this thread (unless you're just now turning it into a general "Pulis is wank" thread...there really can;t be any other reason that you bring that up as it's got sod all to do with the thread title in question) given the fact that the first teamers had lost 5 in a row before the Valencia game you could say that he was mad to play them again after the Valencia game in which case you're then defeating your own point that he should have played them in this match as apparently they were so much better! you can;t have it both ways!
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Jan 20, 2015 16:56:51 GMT
This exactly. I have a lot of respect for Tony, and I am not in the business of bashing him, but this was one of his worst decisions in the job. I remember seeing the lineups and being absolutely horrified. Domestic form was poor to okay, but not enough to go down. We had a real chance, he blew it. by "Poor to Ok" you mean we'd just lost the last 5 in a row? i was outraged when i saw the lineup but the reality was that the team he put out played far better than the first teamers had against them at home and than the first teamers had done for the last month in the Prem. taking that into account, do you genuinely still believe the established First team would have done better at the Mestalla? if so, what exactly are you basing it on? I do yes Mick. Our form was poor, but did we look like we were going down? Just asking you...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2015 17:00:08 GMT
by "Poor to Ok" you mean we'd just lost the last 5 in a row? i was outraged when i saw the lineup but the reality was that the team he put out played far better than the first teamers had against them at home and than the first teamers had done for the last month in the Prem. taking that into account, do you genuinely still believe the established First team would have done better at the Mestalla? if so, what exactly are you basing it on? I do yes Mick. Our form was poor, but did we look like we were going down? Just asking you... what's that got to do with whether or not they'd have fared better at the Mestalla though???? the thread is about the Valencia game..many are saying he dropped a bollock by not playing the first teamers, i'm simply pointing out that those first teamers had just lost 5 in a row and didn't perform well in the home game either so it hardly backs up the idea that Pulis "Threw the game". are you saying that simply because we weren't likely to get relegated that therefore equates to those players (who didn't perform well in the home leg at all) being a better shout for the away game???? i really don't see how whether we'd have gone down or not has anything at all to do with this thread
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Jan 20, 2015 17:00:34 GMT
Ok so how did the second team which did so well fare in the next couple of Premiership games? as i said before, what has that got to do with a thread about the Valencia match??? i was equally as bemused as to why Arismendi in particular wasn't then given a crack after he played well at the Mestalla but that's nothing to do with this thread (unless you're just now turning it into a general "Pulis is wank" thread...there really can;t be any other reason that you bring that up as it's got sod all to do with the thread title in question) given the fact that the first teamers had lost 5 in a row before the Valencia game you could say that he was mad to play them again after the Valencia game in which case you're then defeating your own point that he should have played them in this match as apparently they were so much better! you can;t have it both ways! How's that, how did they perform? Why did Pulis play them?
|
|
sting
Youth Player
Posts: 354
|
Post by sting on Jan 20, 2015 17:00:52 GMT
He wanted to get knocked out. Simple. He fielded an even weaker team with only 3 on the bench at Besiktas. We needed a draw to top the group. They needed a win. He knew we would likely meet a seeded team. We met the highest seeded team as it happened. We went out. I did both trips and whilst I thoroughly enjoyed the experience, ultimately we should go out to try to win every game. There was no excuse in Turkey. He should have been hung out to dry way before the Valencia game by the owners. That night in the Mestalla he went too far. If was a watershed moment which ultimately ended in his inevitable departure. You don't bite the hand that feeds.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2015 17:05:42 GMT
as i said before, what has that got to do with a thread about the Valencia match??? i was equally as bemused as to why Arismendi in particular wasn't then given a crack after he played well at the Mestalla but that's nothing to do with this thread (unless you're just now turning it into a general "Pulis is wank" thread...there really can;t be any other reason that you bring that up as it's got sod all to do with the thread title in question) given the fact that the first teamers had lost 5 in a row before the Valencia game you could say that he was mad to play them again after the Valencia game in which case you're then defeating your own point that he should have played them in this match as apparently they were so much better! you can;t have it both ways! How's that, how did they perform? Why did Pulis play them? so you are having it both ways....using hindsight in terms of the first teamers but simply basing your outrage on the initial reaction to the team picked for the Valencia match...foresight for one but hindsight for the other as and when it fits did the team in the home leg play well at all against valencia? most definitely not......were the team who were playing in the matches preceeding the away leg on a run of played 5, lost 5? yes......so you automatically somehow think they were 100% bound to have done better than the team he ended up picking???? and that's backed up by what exactly....oh yeah the fact that the team he DID pick were significantly better against Valencia than the team you're advocating that he SHOULD have picked cracking logic that!!! this is a rare instance where we CAN use hindsight to gauge whether all of our initial disgust in his selection was justified (and believe me i was fucking livid when i saw the line up..the difference is that i can accept when i've been proved wrong rather than hang onto something that has no evidence to back it up simply to continue an agenda)..as it turns out it wasn't because the team he fielded gave it far more of a go than the team that played them at home i.e our first teamers
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Jan 20, 2015 17:06:38 GMT
He wanted to get knocked out. Simple. He fielded an even weaker team with only 3 on the bench at Besiktas. We needed a draw to top the group. They needed a win. He knew we would likely meet a seeded team. We met the highest seeded team as it happened. We went out. I did both trips and whilst I thoroughly enjoyed the experience, ultimately we should go out to try to win every game. There was no excuse in Turkey. He should have been hung out to dry way before the Valencia game by the owners. That night in the Mestalla he went too far. If was a watershed moment which ultimately ended in his inevitable departure. You don't bite the hand that feeds. Absolutely spot on.
|
|
|
Post by Caerwrangonpotter on Jan 20, 2015 17:10:24 GMT
It was a sighting of the lesser spotted Palacios & Arismendi on a lovely evening from what I remember
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Jan 20, 2015 17:11:39 GMT
How's that, how did they perform? Why did Pulis play them? so you are having it both ways....using hindsight in terms of the first teamers but simply basing your outrage on the initial reaction to the team picked for the Valencia match...foresight for one but hindsight for the other as and when it fits did the team in the home leg play well at all against valencia? most definitely not......were the team who were playing in the matches preceeding the away leg on a run of played 5, lost 5? yes......so you automatically somehow think they were 100% bound to have done better than the team he ended up picking???? and that's backed up by what exactly....oh yeah the fact that the team he DID pick were significantly better against Valencia than the team you're advocating that he SHOULD have picked cracking logic that!!! this is a rare instance where we CAN use hindsight to gauge whether all of our initial disgust in his selection was justified..as it turns out it wasn't because the team he fielded gave it far more of a go than the team that played them at home i.e our first teamers You have lost me mate. If our performances were so poor, why did it take five games to do anything about it? And if when the change came, we were that much better, why wasn't that team selected for the next fixture? The truth is that was one of the biggest nights in our history, and the manager couldn't handle it.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Jan 20, 2015 17:16:02 GMT
I do yes Mick. Our form was poor, but did we look like we were going down? Just asking you... what's that got to do with whether or not they'd have fared better at the Mestalla though???? the thread is about the Valencia game..many are saying he dropped a bollock by not playing the first teamers, i'm simply pointing out that those first teamers had just lost 5 in a row and didn't perform well in the home game either so it hardly backs up the idea that Pulis "Threw the game". are you saying that simply because we weren't likely to get relegated that therefore equates to those players (who didn't perform well in the home leg at all) being a better shout for the away game???? i really don't see how whether we'd have gone down or not has anything at all to do with this thread If our other form is irrelevant, he should have started our strongest team. Shawcross etc.
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Jan 20, 2015 17:19:07 GMT
what's that got to do with whether or not they'd have fared better at the Mestalla though???? the thread is about the Valencia game..many are saying he dropped a bollock by not playing the first teamers, i'm simply pointing out that those first teamers had just lost 5 in a row and didn't perform well in the home game either so it hardly backs up the idea that Pulis "Threw the game". are you saying that simply because we weren't likely to get relegated that therefore equates to those players (who didn't perform well in the home leg at all) being a better shout for the away game???? i really don't see how whether we'd have gone down or not has anything at all to do with this thread If our other form is irrelevant, he should have started our strongest team. Shawcross etc. Spot on. You can't have it both ways
|
|
|
Post by Vermelho20312505 on Jan 20, 2015 17:25:01 GMT
One the most despicable acts in our history. I am generally a Pulis backer but felt then, and still do now, that he should have been sacked the next morning.
Sent from my GT-I8190N using proboards
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Jan 20, 2015 17:29:26 GMT
One the most despicable acts in our history. I am generally a Pulis backer but felt then, and still do now, that he should have been sacked the next morning. Sent from my GT-I8190N using proboards He should have been, it was a disgrace, not only to the club, but to the Coates brand. That he wasn't removed shows their relationship was to the detriment of the club.
|
|
|
Post by tazi on Jan 20, 2015 17:33:34 GMT
He should have treated the fans who'd spent a great deal of money largely at his behest with some respect, he might have kept a few more onside. He did by not playing the shit from the week before! He won't understand what you're saying. All through convenience of course.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jan 20, 2015 17:34:27 GMT
Pulis Out!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Jan 20, 2015 17:36:14 GMT
what's that got to do with whether or not they'd have fared better at the Mestalla though???? the thread is about the Valencia game..many are saying he dropped a bollock by not playing the first teamers, i'm simply pointing out that those first teamers had just lost 5 in a row and didn't perform well in the home game either so it hardly backs up the idea that Pulis "Threw the game". are you saying that simply because we weren't likely to get relegated that therefore equates to those players (who didn't perform well in the home leg at all) being a better shout for the away game???? i really don't see how whether we'd have gone down or not has anything at all to do with this thread If our other form is irrelevant, he should have started our strongest team. Shawcross etc. At least he could of played a solid defence, Danny fookin Collins
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2015 17:37:38 GMT
One the most despicable acts in our history. I am generally a Pulis backer but felt then, and still do now, that he should have been sacked the next morning. Sent from my GT-I8190N using proboards He should have been, it was a disgrace, not only to the club, but to the Coates brand. That he wasn't removed shows their relationship was to the detriment of the club. Only a fucking idiot would think that Pulis did this on his own, *** behind the back of the chairman. The team was cleared with his employers. *** I know we do have some fucking idiots, you only have to read a thread like this ***
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Jan 20, 2015 17:51:21 GMT
I was a big fan of Pulis but anyone claiming this wasnt a b team is crackers. We were flying when the draw was made and looked like he could field a strong team and be safe. Unfortunately we barely got a point from xmas to the game and then the first team lost the home leg. We were left facing a couple of 6 pointers after an away trip in Europe we were already losing. Only one way thats going for Pulis.
|
|
|
Post by Vermelho20312505 on Jan 20, 2015 17:52:46 GMT
He should have been, it was a disgrace, not only to the club, but to the Coates brand. That he wasn't removed shows their relationship was to the detriment of the club. Only a fucking idiot would think that Pulis did this on his own, *** behind the back of the chairman. The team was cleared with his employers. *** I know we do have some fucking idiots, you only have to read a thread like this *** It actually doesn't matter who's fault it is. The club screwed it's own fans and threw away a chance of history. I should be telling my kids about the day we played Valencia (and possibly could have won). I'd never consider telling them about the day we got another 3 points again Swansea! Sent from my GT-I8190N using proboards
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Jan 20, 2015 17:54:15 GMT
He should have been, it was a disgrace, not only to the club, but to the Coates brand. That he wasn't removed shows their relationship was to the detriment of the club. Only a fucking idiot would think that Pulis did this on his own, *** behind the back of the chairman. The team was cleared with his employers. *** I know we do have some fucking idiots, you only have to read a thread like this *** That simply isn't true. Coates was very disappointed with the team selection and ultimately it did sour his relationship with TP. Several first team players who were left out home weren't happy either, including Ryan Shawcross who allegedly had a very big falling out with Pulis that almost resulted in his departure to Everton the following Summer. That team selection, in one of the biggest games in our history, was arguably the beginning of the end for Pulis and it undoubtedly led to some of the discontent that was prevalent amongst the playing staff thereafter. Even MCF slaughtered TP for his decision that night. It was sheer cowardice on his part and it was inexcusable.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Jan 20, 2015 17:57:05 GMT
The team he selected for the first leg were beaten at home, he must have thought changes would help. He's paid a lot of money to make decisions and he made one, we can all be wise after the event. Nevertheless Stoke had already enjoyed their best ever European performance, that's what I think everyone should remember. Not content with telling us what we should think on a daily basis, you're now trying to tell us what we should remember!! Unfuckingbelievable.
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Jan 20, 2015 17:58:22 GMT
I can't think of a more inappropriate word to use i.e. cowardice, when talking about Tony Pulis.
|
|