Author Topic: Tony Pulis  (Read 5135338 times)

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

VVVAlbion

  • Senior Baggie

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 3333
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #550 on: January 25, 2015, 05:11:48 PM »
How far do we go back to claim an assist ? Berahino did the work to create the goal and Vic did the work to finish it.
Who is claiming an assist,  just pointing out an inch perfect pass to feet from a bloke who "can't pass a ball to any of our players" and is getting picked now by his seventh (?) Consecutive full time coach.
.COM, allowing everyone the opportunity to have an opinion.

valleybaggie

  • Junior Baggie

  • Offline
  • **

  • 239
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #551 on: January 25, 2015, 05:18:38 PM »
TP has stated a couple of times that the team is unbalanced and that we desperately need to make signings. I'm sure that when we eventually sign players that the formation and the personnel we are currently using will change. Does anyone think saido or sess will be playing wing back then? As for playing good football i'd rather see us go out knowing we've got a chance to win whatever method we use. i remember when megson first came some of the football we played wasn't pretty but it was effective. Everytime we walked on the pitch i for one thought we had a chance to win the game. we supposedly played good football under mowbary, it looked good on the eye but where did it get us relegated. tippy tappy with no end product i know which of the above i'd pick
« Last Edit: January 25, 2015, 05:35:51 PM by LiamTheBaggie »

WBASPE77

  • WBA Manager

  • Offline
  • *******

  • 17235
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #552 on: January 25, 2015, 05:37:13 PM »
If we play on the eye football attacking football but look weak at the back is that good football or just entertainment. I want to see Albion entertain me but would rather win and I dont care how we do it as long as we win.  Good football I think is assessing each game differently and playing accordingly to it.
WBAFC
MIB
Chester FC
Rangers FC

kirk

  • Reserve Baggie

  • Offline
  • ****

  • 2139
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #553 on: January 25, 2015, 05:40:51 PM »
HaHa there you go again kirky, failing to understand what people are posting, I'm tempted to explain in detail but not sure it's worth the effort.

Two points though 1) when was I wrong? (as in what did I say that was wrong  ??? )
2) "I'm loving WBA again"....so you fell out of love with WBA because they employed a head coach you didn't like...................oh dear  ::)

Lol don't you should be a politician the half truths and the constant spin, I did give a list of the reasons, you should take a read again you just might learn something. But my god your backing of Tony is on par with Gaius and Caesar, every game it's a constant winge, last time I checked we haven't lost. Yes it's good to be a baggies again but please take your own advise ' if you don't like it don't go' simples  ;D
It's easy to have faith in yourself and have discipline when you're a winner, when you're number one. What you got to have is faith and discipline when you're not a winner.

Nathan

  • Youth Baggie

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 759
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #554 on: January 25, 2015, 05:49:12 PM »
If we play on the eye football attacking football but look weak at the back is that good football or just entertainment. I want to see Albion entertain me but would rather win and I dont care how we do it as long as we win.  Good football I think is assessing each game differently and playing accordingly to it.

I said the same on a thread on here the day TP was appointed. I said it would be a 'horses for courses' scenario. If TP thinks he can win a game of football playing with flair then I think he will. If as appears to be the case he has realised we haven't got the quality in the squad to win games that way, then nobody can knock him for getting results any which way he can.

dont ask me to choose luv

  • Reserve Baggie

  • Offline
  • ****

  • 1836
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #555 on: January 25, 2015, 05:57:57 PM »
Lol don't you should be a politician the half truths and the constant spin, I did give a list of the reasons, you should take a read again you just might learn something. But my god your backing of Tony is on par with Gaius and Caesar, every game it's a constant winge, last time I checked we haven't lost. Yes it's good to be a baggies again but please take your own advise ' if you don't like it don't go' simples  ;D

"the half truths and the constant spin" eh? sorry LOST me completely there  ???

And again
when was I wrong? (as in what did I say that was wrong  ??? )
« Last Edit: January 25, 2015, 06:32:04 PM by LiamTheBaggie »
Life is about using the whole box of crayons!

LiamTheBaggie

  • Administrator
  • WBA Manager

  • Offline
  • *****
  • @westbromcom

  • 15005
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #556 on: January 25, 2015, 06:31:43 PM »
I don't like the way the conversation is heading.

Cut the nonsense and lets debate like adults please folks.
Dexy : LiamTheBaggie : MarkW : OldburyWBA
Adder : Hull Baggie : lewisant : Political Cake : tommcneill

Follow WestBrom.com on twitter - https://twitter.com/WestBromcom

seteefeet

  • Senior Baggie

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 4114
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #557 on: January 25, 2015, 06:32:25 PM »
Can see no reason whatsoever why Lescott played left back when Baird had been doing well and Poco was fit. Why take Vic off when he was giving a master class in hold up play and replace him with someone who is no good with his back to goal. Strange decisions but we got away with it.

dont ask me to choose luv

  • Reserve Baggie

  • Offline
  • ****

  • 1836
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #558 on: January 25, 2015, 06:42:29 PM »
Lol don't you should be a politician the half truths and the constant spin, I did give a list of the reasons, you should take a read again you just might learn something. But my god your backing of Tony is on par with Gaius and Caesar, every game it's a constant winge whinge, last time I checked we haven't lost. Yes it's good to be a baggies again but please take your own advise ' if you don't like it don't go' simples  ;D

Can you please provide evidence of constant whinging for every game?
Life is about using the whole box of crayons!

wba606

  • Baby Baggie

  • Offline
  • *

  • 77
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #559 on: January 25, 2015, 06:50:27 PM »
I said the same on a thread on here the day TP was appointed. I said it would be a 'horses for courses' scenario. If TP thinks he can win a game of football playing with flair then I think he will. If as appears to be the case he has realised we haven't got the quality in the squad to win games that way, then nobody can knock him for getting results any which way he can.
he doesn't want to play that way though, as his time at stoke showed

bry

  • Youth Baggie

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 699
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #560 on: January 25, 2015, 06:51:35 PM »
Sorry, was I not specific enough for you? Are there only two formations in the game of football?

Good football does not start with two banks of four camped on our box or do you disagree?
Sorry but I feel with the current quality of players at Pulis disposal any other way of playing other than the way we have would have resulted in us losing against Everton. What system with our players would you have employed against Everton and the Blues to get a result? We can't play good attacking passing football if we played 4 2 4 or 4 5 1. When Pulis has got us safe then we can talk about sparkling football. I think anything else is just naive. What would be devastating would be to play defensive football and still go down another possibility, especially with all the negativity towards Pulis. How would Mourinho set Chelsea up to play if he had our players?
« Last Edit: January 25, 2015, 06:54:39 PM by bry »

LiamTheBaggie

  • Administrator
  • WBA Manager

  • Offline
  • *****
  • @westbromcom

  • 15005
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #561 on: January 25, 2015, 08:03:51 PM »
I wonder what people mean by playing good football? Does that mean attacking football? Playing passing football? Tiki-taka? Is Chelsea parking the bus at Liverpool good football? Further to that debate lets look at some of the players we have. Arsenal I presume play the kind of “good football” people are arguing about. Would Brunt, Ideye Brown, Baird, Wisdom, Dorrans, Morrison, Samaras, Anichebe, Pocognoli, Gardener, Dawson fit neatly into their team. None of them would be able to play for Arsenal NONE. So why do we expect them to play that type of “good football” for us. Which team in the Premiership should we be able to play as well as? Newcastle, Spurs, Everton, Southampton, Liverpool? Good players play good football whatever the style attacking or defensive. We don’t have good players in Premier League terms that’s why we play unattractive football. Nothing to do with Pulis. Does Pulis organize Brunt to pass the ball constantly to the opposition team or Gardener,Wisdom the same. Or Anichebe to be unfit and have little belief in his ability I could go on. The good players we have who can play “good football” are Berahino, Foster, Lescott . With only  those three or four players Wenger would struggle to play “good football”. People need to wake up and smell the Bovril about this Barcelona esc football Pulis is depriving us of.

There is no measurement for good football. It is very subjective. What some might class as good football some might consider boring. I guess what all supporters want to see is general entertainment, whether we're pressing the opposition, making full bloodied tackles, running at full backs or getting crosses into the box. Those are facets which have been lacking from our play for a very long time.

I don't think fans want tikka-takka they just want to see a healthy combination between attacking and defending. Pulis has a CV which suggests his teams are very hard to beat, are often boring and show little chance of evolving. I don't buy the argument that we as a club or incapable of playing "entertaining" or expansive football. Swansea are a good measurement that having plans in place and recruiting well has its benefits. They have a good group of players, they play to a system and are entertaining to watch, they score goals and they defend well and they're not a club which are being bankrolled by wealthy owners.

What our problem has been is that we have had no semblance of style or direction ever since Hodgson left. We've been a totally mis-match and our recruitment has reflected that often signing players who are polar opposites. With Pulis, we know what we're going to get but despite the deficiencies in this squad they are far more capable of getting points rather than resorting to some out-dated, ancient methods of throwing 11 men behind the ball and offering nothing in any attacking sense as we saw recently at Goodison.
Dexy : LiamTheBaggie : MarkW : OldburyWBA
Adder : Hull Baggie : lewisant : Political Cake : tommcneill

Follow WestBrom.com on twitter - https://twitter.com/WestBromcom

bry

  • Youth Baggie

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 699
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #562 on: January 25, 2015, 08:17:26 PM »
There is no measurement for good football. It is very subjective. What some might class as good football some might consider boring. I guess what all supporters want to see is general entertainment, whether we're pressing the opposition, making full bloodied tackles, running at full backs or getting crosses into the box. Those are facets which have been lacking from our play for a very long time.

I don't think fans want tikka-takka they just want to see a healthy combination between attacking and defending. Pulis has a CV which suggests his teams are very hard to beat, are often boring and show little chance of evolving. I don't buy the argument that we as a club or incapable of playing "entertaining" or expansive football. Swansea are a good measurement that having plans in place and recruiting well has its benefits. They have a good group of players, they play to a system and are entertaining to watch, they score goals and they defend well and they're not a club which are being bankrolled by wealthy owners.

What our problem has been is that we have had no semblance of style or direction ever since Hodgson left. We've been a totally mis-match and our recruitment has reflected that often signing players who are polar opposites. With Pulis, we know what we're going to get but despite the deficiencies in this squad they are far more capable of getting points rather than resorting to some out-dated, ancient methods of throwing 11 men behind the ball and offering nothing in any attacking sense as we saw recently at Goodison.
Like I said in a previous post "How would Mourinho set up our players to play for Chelsea"? On the converse if Pulis had Chelsea's players do you think he would play boring defensive football just for the sake of it? I think Pulis will play the quality of football he is  allowed to by budget peace gives him.

wba606

  • Baby Baggie

  • Offline
  • *

  • 77
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #563 on: January 25, 2015, 08:22:39 PM »
people said that that stoke couldn't play  good football with the players that tony had, but then mark hughes came in and made them better to watch and started winning games. with a lot lower budget than pulis had

LiamTheBaggie

  • Administrator
  • WBA Manager

  • Offline
  • *****
  • @westbromcom

  • 15005
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #564 on: January 25, 2015, 08:37:00 PM »
Like I said in a previous post "How would Mourinho set up our players to play for Chelsea"? On the converse if Pulis had Chelsea's players do you think he would play boring defensive football just for the sake of it? I think Pulis will play the quality of football he is  allowed to by budget peace gives him.

I guess if Pulis was at Chelsea you would point to Hodgson's reign at Liverpool.

I don't see what relevance of our players playing for Chelsea and Mourinho has anyway.
Dexy : LiamTheBaggie : MarkW : OldburyWBA
Adder : Hull Baggie : lewisant : Political Cake : tommcneill

Follow WestBrom.com on twitter - https://twitter.com/WestBromcom

bry

  • Youth Baggie

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 699
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #565 on: January 25, 2015, 09:04:53 PM »
I guess if Pulis was at Chelsea you would point to Hodgson's reign at Liverpool.

I don't see what relevance of our players playing for Chelsea and Mourinho has anyway.
Because I believe that Pulis plays the way he does at the moment because we have such poor players not just because he likes only to play that way. If he had better players we would play more exciting football Here's a diagram.

                           Good players   =   Good football   

LiamTheBaggie

  • Administrator
  • WBA Manager

  • Offline
  • *****
  • @westbromcom

  • 15005
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #566 on: January 25, 2015, 09:18:55 PM »
Because I believe that Pulis plays the way he does at the moment because we have such poor players not just because he likes only to play that way. If he had better players we would play more exciting football Here's a diagram.

                           Good players   =   Good football

He had plenty of money at Stoke to adopt a more progressive style of football and he chose to ignore that so I don't hold much hope that our football will be any better next year. I remember him spending big money on the likes of Tuncay, Palacios, Maurice Edu and then abandoning them completely from the first team. If he does that here then we're going to be using and wasting valuable resources which are not on tap like he had from the Coates family.

I'm not naive, in the short term we're in need of a fire-fighter like Tony Pulis but I'm not sure our long term future is right in his hands. Providing we survive, I think we're going to have a lot of disgruntled fans next year complaining that they're bored stiff.
Dexy : LiamTheBaggie : MarkW : OldburyWBA
Adder : Hull Baggie : lewisant : Political Cake : tommcneill

Follow WestBrom.com on twitter - https://twitter.com/WestBromcom

Pulisisabaggie

  • Baby Baggie

  • Offline
  • *

  • 68
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #567 on: January 25, 2015, 09:25:53 PM »
people said that that stoke couldn't play  good football with the players that tony had, but then mark hughes came in and made them better to watch and started winning games. with a lot lower budget than pulis had
Stoke did not start playing like this after 3 games it took months ask any Stoke fans .Hughes gradually brought in quality players and changed the style or ballanced it cause they still hoof it now and again.

Baggie Boy

  • Youth Baggie

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 347
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #568 on: January 25, 2015, 09:26:39 PM »
He had plenty of money at Stoke to adopt a more progressive style of football and he chose to ignore that so I don't hold much hope that our football will be any better next year. I remember him spending big money on the likes of Tuncay, Palacios, Maurice Edu and then abandoning them completely from the first team. If he does that here then we're going to be using and wasting valuable resources which are not on tap like he had from the Coates family.

I'm not naive, in the short term we're in need of a fire-fighter like Tony Pulis but I'm not sure our long term future is right in his hands. Providing we survive, I think we're going to have a lot of disgruntled fans next year complaining that they're bored stiff.

I understand your point here but lets remember the Stoke squad he left was considerably better than the one he inherited, so I do think our squad will be improved over time. Also there were a few signings at Stoke that were 50-50, had they worked we would be sitting here saying he's a market genius. A textbook example is Jonathan Woodgate, a class player but injury riddled at Stoke. Similarly Michael Owen didn't work out, nothing to say it wouldn't have worked out like Lescott has here.

I would also state that the majority of his Palace signings are major parts of their current squad and make up the better part of the squad, players like Puncheon are of a decent footballing ability, so I think it is a little harsh to criticise him.

smudger 2007

  • Junior Baggie

  • Offline
  • **

  • 138
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #569 on: January 25, 2015, 09:27:18 PM »
Not sure whether style of play will get any better next season. But I feel he's just what we need now to stabilize us at the mo. I also think he talks sense every interview instead of In riddles like Irvine an Clarke used to. He's very honest and to the point which I refreshing in this day and age. The comments about anichebe were bang on he's still not fit and when or if he could be he could be double the handful he is now.never going to be prolific I know but could be a lot more useful and a foil for behrahino

Pulisisabaggie

  • Baby Baggie

  • Offline
  • *

  • 68
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #570 on: January 25, 2015, 09:31:35 PM »
He had plenty of money at Stoke to adopt a more progressive style of football and he chose to ignore that so I don't hold much hope that our football will be any better next year. I remember him spending big money on the likes of Tuncay, Palacios, Maurice Edu and then abandoning them completely from the first team. If he does that here then we're going to be using and wasting valuable resources which are not on tap like he had from the Coates family.

I'm not naive, in the short term we're in need of a fire-fighter like Tony Pulis but I'm not sure our long term future is right in his hands. Providing we survive, I think we're going to have a lot of disgruntled fans next year complaining that they're bored stiff.
Crystal Palace played nothing like Stoke so i am hopeful when he gets the new players in the style will change

LiamTheBaggie

  • Administrator
  • WBA Manager

  • Offline
  • *****
  • @westbromcom

  • 15005
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #571 on: January 25, 2015, 09:33:51 PM »
I understand your point here but lets remember the Stoke squad he left was considerably better than the one he inherited, so I do think our squad will be improved over time. Also there were a few signings at Stoke that were 50-50, had they worked we would be sitting here saying he's a market genius. A textbook example is Jonathan Woodgate, a class player but injury riddled at Stoke. Similarly Michael Owen didn't work out, nothing to say it wouldn't have worked out like Lescott has here.

I would also state that the majority of his Palace signings are major parts of their current squad and make up the better part of the squad, players like Puncheon are of a decent footballing ability, so I think it is a little harsh to criticise him.

You could argue that his better signings were the least expensive ones. Generally he wasted an awful lot of money. He won't get such an open cheque book here.

I have no doubt that he will probably leave us in a better position than when he took us over - although our fanbase might be slightly disinterested by then - just like what happened at Stoke - but I hope at that point we're not a squad of average British plodders leaving a real conundrum for his future successor.
Dexy : LiamTheBaggie : MarkW : OldburyWBA
Adder : Hull Baggie : lewisant : Political Cake : tommcneill

Follow WestBrom.com on twitter - https://twitter.com/WestBromcom

LiamTheBaggie

  • Administrator
  • WBA Manager

  • Offline
  • *****
  • @westbromcom

  • 15005
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #572 on: January 25, 2015, 09:38:46 PM »
Crystal Palace played nothing like Stoke so i am hopeful when he gets the new players in the style will change

Check out this post for an insight into Pulis at Crystal Palace which articulates my thoughts superbly

Seen quite a few comments floating around about how we should keep the faith with Pulis in regards to his playing style, and that Palace were anything from good to watch to one of the most attacking sides in the league last season.

I actually think on the pitch Pulis will do fine for us in terms of results (I have concerns about his impact off the pitch) but I think people are trying to kid themselves if they think Palace were some sort of attacking side last season, let alone a decent one. They had games where they played well, and games where they stunk the joint out much like most sides between 8th and 20th. But to say they were attacking is delusional in my opinion.

Im fully aware stats can be misleading, that they dont tell the whole story and I'd rather watch a game with my own eyes than rely on statistics. Also take in to account Pulis took over 11 games in. However some select stats below from last season

Goals scored 19th for the season
Goals scored from when Pulis took over 27 in 27 (would of been 18th averaged over the season, less than Villa and 5 less than us. They also scored 5 in the last 2, until then they were comfortably lowest scorers)
Goals from open play 19h
Short passes 20th
Shots per game 20th
Short pass accuracy 20th
Pass accuracy 20th
Possession 20th (the difference between Palace and West Ham in 19th was greater than the difference between 19th and 11th)

So maybe he's a manager who gets the ball wide, gets his wingers dribbling and gets crosses in to the box. Nothing wrong with that style, can be good to watch

Crosses per game 19th
Dribbles per game 13th (Albion, who we all realise have practically nobody who can dribble were 12th)
Attack left side of pitch 13th
Attack right side of pitch 10th
Attack centre of pitch 13th

So they didn't shift it wide and get the wingers running at full backs. Maybe they're a counter attacking side? They scored 2 goals on the counter all season.

Im not having a go at Pulis as such. Personally I found Mondays game almost unwatchable at times, god knows what a neutral would of thought but thats not our concern. However I appreciate theres many others on here who dont seem to care how we play as long as we stay up and thats fair enough. But can we cut the 'Palace were a good/great attacking side last season' especially after the abuse 90% of us were giving Stoke (rightly so) when Pulis was there.

As someone else said on the Ameobi thread, were going to see plenty more signings like him whilst Pulis is here. Its no surprise so far we've signed/signing Ameobi and sold Blanco and Varela even though the one thing we are crying out for is creativity and pace.

I have no problem with being hard to beat and our side defending very well but I do hope and pray that our performance against Everton was purely a one-off and not something that will become a regular occurrence throughout his tenure.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2015, 09:40:31 PM by LiamTheBaggie »
Dexy : LiamTheBaggie : MarkW : OldburyWBA
Adder : Hull Baggie : lewisant : Political Cake : tommcneill

Follow WestBrom.com on twitter - https://twitter.com/WestBromcom

PsalmXXIII

  • Site Donator
  • Senior Baggie

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 2863
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #573 on: January 25, 2015, 09:42:56 PM »
agree 100%

Agree, 95%

Why has Pulis got the liberty of playing the best football this squad can produce and others haven't?

Same negative defensive substitutions as AI, same squad (for now) and apart from playing badly and scraping draws instead of defeats and a 1-0 win, the football and playing staff performance is only slightly better down to Pulis' coaching. We all slated AI for results but why is it now suddenly 'Tony is working with a rubbish squad'?

Hunnington Baggie

  • Senior Baggie

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 3851
Re: Tony Pulis
« Reply #574 on: January 25, 2015, 09:44:28 PM »
Crystal Palace played nothing like Stoke so i am hopeful when he gets the new players in the style will change
so the argument here is 6 months at a team where he had very little input into what players were there and was leaking goals like crazy that he taught how to defend at the cost of scoring even less goals that they already were (to the point of being the worst at it last year), compared to the team he personally and freely created over a 7 year period and is responsible for Stoke still bearing the label of a rugby team because of his tactics and preferred style during that time...

Now tell me, what makes you think that he will change the style he so meticulously built over years at Stoke when we are already nine tenths of the way there already? We already have a good defensive core (always have done) so it's offensively that we need to strengthen.. something Crystal Palace already had in place and nearly went completely down the pan due to Pulis' preferred defensive tactics.