Jump to content
IGNORED

Pulis


GrahamC

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, AppyDAZE said:

He's got it wrong. What Wales needs is a great big melting pot. Big enough, big enough to take the world and all its got and keep it stirring for a hundred years or more and turn out Pulis kind of managers by the score (one for the older forumers)

As an older forumer,  the band was Blue Mink who used to sing.....

We've got Maddy Bell,

We've got Maddy Bell.

We've got Maddy,  we've got Maddy. 

We've got Maddy Bell.

 

Apparently. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing Tony Pulis cares about is Tony Pulis.  Didn't he negotiate a percentage of transfer fees for players sold?  Only interested in lining his own pocket.  You only have to look at how he falls out with every club to understand what a despicable man he is.

 

I'd take an eternity in the third tier watching a Danny Wilson team, and than watch a Pulis team in the Prem. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Leveller said:

You might not like him, but as a Welshman assessing what would be good for Welsh football (i.e. two rival teams in the Premier League) its difficult to deny, surely?

Yep and like a Sweatie arguing that Celtic and Rangers in the Premier league would be good for Scottish football, it's difficult to expect an English person to think anything other than he is a grade A****.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

I don't base my view on what he did while he was with us.  I base it more on what he thought of the situation at Ashton Gate, and what he has done since.  No doubt he would have changed the style of football we were used to at Ashton Gate, but I wonder what would have been better: the attractive but ultimately futile football of Danny Wilson, or the pragmatic, dull but possibly successful football that Pulis might have brought?

As to the signings above, Mercer was a top goalkeeper, and Holland a very decent midfield player, and who could have predicted their injuries?  Beadle was brought in as much for the dressing room as the pitch, and was successful in that respect.  When we signed Steve Jones I was working in London and many of my friends up there thought we had got a hell of a signing.  However, he just didn't gel, for whatever reason.  Less said about Burns, Mortimer and Lavin the better, but the fact is that what he was doing was very similar to what Gary Johnson did in his first few months, when he brought in a succession of journeyman players (including Bas Savage) to start turning the club round, before going for the players he really needed to succeed.  I think Pulis might have got us promotion in his second season, but I agree that the football wouldn't have been attractive to watch.

Top post young DP .

 There are some managers who just fit a club and sadly for us Pulis didn't fit .

I say ' sadly ' because I would have been happy for the club to progress ,like Stoke did , with him at the helm .

His time here was toxic and set the club back .

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Norn Iron said:

As an older forumer,  the band was Blue Mink who used to sing.....

We've got Maddy Bell,

We've got Maddy Bell.

We've got Maddy,  we've got Maddy. 

We've got Maddy Bell.

 

Apparently. 

Was there a Bristolian in that group, or am I mistaken? I'm obviously not AS old  :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's extremely unfair to mention Danny Wilson in the same sentence as Pulis.

Their styles of football are light years apart.

One is all about width, pace, wingers & exciting players .

The other was height, lethergy, long balls & six feet plus players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

I don't base my view on what he did while he was with us.  I base it more on what he thought of the situation at Ashton Gate, and what he has done since.  No doubt he would have changed the style of football we were used to at Ashton Gate, but I wonder what would have been better: the attractive but ultimately futile football of Danny Wilson, or the pragmatic, dull but possibly successful football that Pulis might have brought?

As to the signings above, Mercer was a top goalkeeper, and Holland a very decent midfield player, and who could have predicted their injuries?  Beadle was brought in as much for the dressing room as the pitch, and was successful in that respect.  When we signed Steve Jones I was working in London and many of my friends up there thought we had got a hell of a signing.  However, he just didn't gel, for whatever reason.  Less said about Burns, Mortimer and Lavin the better, but the fact is that what he was doing was very similar to what Gary Johnson did in his first few months, when he brought in a succession of journeyman players (including Bas Savage) to start turning the club round, before going for the players he really needed to succeed.  I think Pulis might have got us promotion in his second season, but I agree that the football wouldn't have been attractive to watch.

I can figure that. He spoke a very straight message, never offered any false hope...but yes...it was like watching paint dry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...