Recent Posts

jesus wept, is that your honest thoughts on it??

a man who threatens a woman is no man at all, quite the opposite

a famous man who is obviously insecure with himself and his own ineptitude, threatens to hit a woman journalist who only doing her job, well, it's utterly is disgraceful

if he said it to a man, it wouldn't be 'top banter' (and i fucking hate the word banter - it's for those without a real sense of humour), it would still be highly inflammatory, as Moyes is a man in a position of power to encourage others for ore acts of violence

there's no 'victim' mentality, he said the words, therefore he is the aggressor. Him and his stupidity can have no complaints


Also, if you think there is 'nothing wrong' with it, please have a think about your own morals and what you consider right or wrong

Stoke is definitely where the north meets the Midlands.

I see myself as a northerner over a Midlander.

My old boss from Portsmouth considered Stoke as where the north starts.

And let's be honest Birmingham is the biggest shithole in the country so it's best not to be associated with it.

porn said
August 16, 2014 at 8:58 pm
I do not even understand how I ended up right here, but I assumed this
submit used to be great. I don’t know who you are however certainly you are going to a well-known blogger if you happen to are
not already. Cheers!

There's no answer to that!

In a world where Leicester can win the Premier League, yes, anything is possible- but what are the chances of us finishing, say, in the top 6?

How often has a club outside the usual suspects done that in the past 20 years? The odds, the probablility, the percentages, call it what you will, are pretty fucking low. And this is what you don't seem to understand: what you are continually crapping on about, and beating Hughes over the head for failing to do, is something that every other club wants to do too- West Ham, Southampton, Watford, West Brom etc etc. They're all competing to finish as high as possible too, but how many of them have actually done it and how often?

It's extremely rare.

However, how many similar sized clubs to us have gone tumbling down the league, or even out of it? Shitloads.

The margins between stability and crisis are pretty fucking slim in this league, and you'd willingly ditch a manager who has an amazing track record of guiding mid-sized clubs to top-half finishes, thus sacrificing that stability, in the hope that we can somehow land some absolute managerial genius, who then somehow signs a load of world-class players on a mid-table budget? It's insane.

Arnautovic is one of Hughes better signings but he'd have been on his way if a bigger club had come in for him in the close season. They didn't.

Two-footed and strong but not much pace.

If Hughes ever digs up a Vardy or a Mahrez for peanuts. I might rate him.


I wont be holding my breath.

Ah yes. The good old days when we regularly had 30,000 packed onto the old Boothen End! The days when it took so long to get out of the ground that we stayed there between matches and people were born, schooled, grew up and raised children of their own on the Boothen, before finally leaving in a coffin when death claimed them as they reached their biblical 3 score years and 10! Happy days!

My understanding - you have to be 10yrds away from the penalty kick. Draw a 10yrd radius circle from penalty spot then part of the circle (ie the D) comes outside of the area by 4 yrds. Penalty area is 18yrds, penalty spot is 12 yrds, therefore if my maths is correct then distance from penalty spot to edge of the area is only 6 yrds. So if you stood on the edge of the area directly behind the penalty spot you would only be 6yrds away from the dead ball.

Someone owes me 1 million quid.

Argyle ball boy was in the process of throwing the ball towards the corner when he has been assaulted. Player should be banned Sine Die as he would be in local football.

Wow ! 27 pages and counting. I wish we could generate a fraction of this emotional energy and manufactured anger about some of the other issues which affect fans in football !

The recent Palace case showed that Tony P. is capable of telling untruths both to his employers and in court, so I wouldn't shake hands on deal with him unless I'd also got his signature on a piece of paper. That said, it doesn't mean that anyone he is having an argument with is telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Unfortunately, this is not an industry characterised by honesty, integrity and consistency. And all kinds of people in it are quite capable of trying to use the media to wind up supporters for their own purposes.

In this case, our manager's statement that he didn't know why WBA hadn't been playing Berahino was bound to irritate WBA, given that they knew that he knew about the drugs suspension. I don't know why he talked about the past at WBA at all, rather than just talking about what he sees the player giving Stoke City in the future.

So someone at WBA ( I cannot believe it was anyone at the FA) retaliates by leaking the drugs story to the press. That was deplorable and unprofessional. Was it done by Pulis, or with his knowledge ? Might have been, but might not have been. Who knows ? No-one has any evidence on that point.

If Stoke City felt strongly enough about that (which they are entitled to) in my view the right response would have been to complain about it through the proper channels - CEO to CEO, Chairman to chairman or through a formal complaint to the FA ( for which there is a process).

Then we have players, Ryan and Charlie, deciding to use the media to comment to criticise WBA. My advice to players would be to leave the PR stuff to the PR people.

So Pulis makes a private phone call to Ryan in response, leaves a voicemail and uses the word 'loser'. Mark Hughes decides to put this in the media, even though he admits he hadn't actually listened to it. As FSF Chair I would never make a public comment about a voicemail unless I had heard it for myself, to judge context. But why did Hughes feel it was helpful to put it in the public domain - presumably to wind up Stoke fans, in which, if this Board is anything to go by, he has succeeded.

So then yesterday, Pulis states in the Guardian that he is disgusted by the 'spin' Hughes has given to this which he says is completely wrong and out of context, and that so far from saying Ryan is a loser, he was actually saying the reverse.

None of us can make a judgement on this unless we hear the voicemail for ourselves.

And so the spat goes on. I'm afraid it all feels a bit like the playground to me. The end result might be that Pulis will get the kind of reception Wenger has had next time he comes to the Brit., and Ryan will get the kind of reception he gets at Arsenal next time we go the Hawthorns. And what will actually have been achieved by these 'professionals' ?

There's the liar pattern there too...Beattie Story.

Like they say you shouldn't believe everything you read but it's hard to look past all the related information to date.

The accusation of narcissism certainly echoes - having worked for one up close over an extended period you could say it's something you watch out for once you come out the other side of that relationship - so you NEVER go there again.

That's not to say you can't have a good relationship with them - you just have to follow their lead and not perform any kind of betrayal in their eyes.

I have to say there are many tendencies on display here in his public image and what has been documented through the courts.

The indignation when people are perceived to step out of line, the outrage at begin found out, the not addressing or admitting the facts directly and turning a story, the in or out attitude with people that's a big part of his management style. They also won't deal with ego's because they need control.

There's also the fear of abandonment by your perceived flock and need to show yourself in a good but unrelated light -plus disgust when that's not recognised (coates family/people of stoke/charity/steak and chips - look at all the things I did that were good and I did for you people how can I be a bad person!!). The sense of entitlement that steps outside normal boundaries (see Palace and the law in general).

It's hard to look past all that - it's a bit like watching a less worrying Donald Trump.

That's not to say he's as far gone or is - it's only based on some of his actions in the public eye.

Part of me actually ends up feeling rather sorry for their type because they can't seem to rationalise until you shine a light on their actions. They constantly reinvent themselves. So it must be a lonely existence.

They say the best way to deal with them is reflect their own behaviour back at them and they will retreat and think twice before they attempt it again.

Hughes strikes me as a smart guy and if advised i'd say that's exactly what he's doing. Narcissists play dirty so you have to play dirty back and call them out - it's a surefire way they take notice and step back of their own behaviour and to get under their skin. The other is to uncover their self righteous attitude.

If the tone of the Ryan "loser" comment is also true then it aligns - the Wenger turnaround just adds further fuel to the fire for some.

i.e. they discard any close relationships once it's served it's value to them. They always seek to look down on people and only get off on having influence over them when they need it.

I have to say in that regard it makes me smile when certain people on here make out he's laughing at Stoke and sitting pretty.

Sure he'll be driven by it but he'll also tortured by the rejection he suffered at Stoke, it's like a perversity.

One thing is for certain though a narcissist laughs and gets off on the type of person that is taken in by his perceived reality (and not on a wind up) because they've won you over by whatever means to their cause. That's what they really get off on in terms of power - it feeds the ego and control, getting caught out and shown their true colours now that is what gets to them.

Like I say it's by no means a given all this but it's not really stacking up in his favour in the way he's seen to behave.

That said they can make great leaders and can really go places when they are ticking and pull people together (siege mentality anyone?). On the flipside when the wheels come off or they lose control it inevitably goes up in flames in a bad way and obsess with what they think is stopping their cause (transfer control?) and lose focus on whats working elsewhere.

It's an interesting theory. Coates is a wiley old business fox and would know about leadership styles. He would perhaps see that and have sought to use and work with that talent in whatever way he could. Perhaps he sought to nurture and bring it into a better light with its shortcomings until he couldn't any longer...and perhaps just perhaps he is just a bit of a victim in all this but boy is he a hapless and unlucky one.