The Banter Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
BaZ87 said:
For every Swansea there are 5 other clubs that end up going down within a year or so if they try to play passing, attacking football.
Click to expand...

I agree, but there are also teams that come up and play to a less extreme of Stoke and go down, so it's not really a point. There is always a choice of how to play, I understand wanting to stay in the League from a money motivational point of view.

It will be interesting to see what Reading do, they played (some) good football but just weren't good enough but now have a large relegtion package and a team that are good enough to win the Championship.

BaZ87 said:
It's not a coincidence that over the years, the smaller sides that have tended to do well (or better than expected) have played defensive, longball football. It's simply easier/safer for them to make themselves different than to try and outplay teams.
Click to expand...

Swansea buck the trend though, so I don't think all the smaller sides do play defensive long ball football, but a lot do, Stoke took it to a whole new extreme and it's Pulis that has failed to evolve the club any further and has shown (imho) how limited he is as a manager.

BaZ87 said:
I'm not sure what your point is with West Ham either. They're a slightly less extreme example of Stoke.
Click to expand...

They're a much less extreme example of Stoke, they play some good football and have stayed up by having a balance between the two.
 
Andybtsn said:
I thought you'd come up with something witty.

If you don't like the rules....
Click to expand...

So you don't want actual feedback then on something that is clearly an issue?

Surely someone has thought of changing the rules between you lot on trolls? I mean some are just stupid and you have to accept that, but then you have blatant wums you'd rather just ban people like OMS who they **** off
 
Purdy said:
So you don't want actual feedback then on something that is clearly an issue?

Surely someone has thought of changing the rules between you lot on trolls? I mean some are just stupid and you have to accept that, but then you have blatant wums you'd rather just ban people like OMS who they **** off
Click to expand...

Was one of your suggestions to have me banned? :p:D

edit: I think some people are just getting upset because the football season is drawing to a close and they'll have nothing legitimate to argue over.
 
Last edited:
grimm said:
I think some people are just getting upset because the football season is drawing to a close and they'll have nothing legitimate to argue over.
Click to expand...

There is a lot of football on over the summer :cool:, also I'm not holding out for an amazing season next year! It's a pre World Cup season.

Oh Purdy! You've got to know the facts, like not winning a trophy is better than winning a trophy :p.
 
Tummy said:
....
Click to expand...

I'm not really sure what the whole point of this is.

In the 5 years that Stoke have been in the Premier League can you name another side of a similar size, stature etc, that have not either gone down or been in a relegation fight? Answering my own question, the only other club (and they very nearly went down in Stokes first season) are Fulham. So while there are other clubs that have stayed up while not being quite so physical as Stoke, they've also not been as effective as Stoke either.

Pulis had a responsibility as Stoke manager to do what was best for them, not to please supporters of other clubs. Stoke had a way of playing that was effective. It got them into the Premier League and they established themselves in midtable. It's only been the end to this season where they've struggled and it has conincided with them being less physical and less direct than they were.
 
Andybtsn said:
Like user's that just constantly berate other supporters about class and the like?
Click to expand...

Nah that is just facts and hatred.

BaZ87 said:
In the 5 years that Stoke have been in the Premier League can you name another side of a similar size, stature etc, that have not either gone down or been in a relegation fight? Answering my own question, the only other club (and they very nearly went down in Stokes first season) are Fulham.
Click to expand...


Can you name another club their size with 80 mil net spend?
 
Purdy said:
Can you name another club their size with 80 mil net spend?
Click to expand...

What's their wage bill like compared to these other clubs too? And that £80m is peanuts compared to, what will be, 6 seasons of Premier League TV money. I bet all those other clubs that have been in and out of the Premier League would have spent that £80m had you guaranteed them 6 years of safety.

As I said in my first post on the subject, Pulis's failing has been not being able to kick on from where he got them and made better use of what he's spent but the way people go on, it's like he's done a terrible job.
 
Stoke are going down without Pulis. He's punched way above his weight just like Big Sam did at Bolton and Curbishley did at Charlton*

This notion that all teams should play a certain style of football is embarrassing tbh. They should be allowed to play however the **** they like.

*and Moyes did at Everton.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom