Have we been playing beautiful football for the last 20 years? Have I missed something?

[@owlstalk]

Just now, CircleSeven said:

As ever time will reveal all. 
 

The thing with the questions about how much Chansiri did or didn’t back Monk is its a bit like wondering if your ex girlfriend really loved you. 
 

It doesn’t matter now. It’s over. 

 

 

I disagree - it does matter because we now have a new manager in place and the same situation could/might not happen

It's all relevant

 

You don't learn if you just forget

[CircleSeven]

Just now, @owlstalk said:

 

 

I disagree - it does matter because we now have a new manager in place and the same situation could/might not happen

It's all relevant

 

You don't learn if you just forget

There’s a difference between not forgetting and moving on. 
 

We don’t forget WW2 but people can still go on holiday to Italy. 

[NorthernOwl]

3 minutes ago, CircleSeven said:

Just reading this exchange and a question occurred to me.

Assuming Monk didn’t make the recruitment decisions does anyone think Pulis will be subject to that kind of regime?

I do in all honesty find it quite hard to believe that any manager wouldn’t have some sway over signings (or at least have been promised some) but I really really can’t see Tony Pulis not having been promised to make his own signings. 

 

It's very rare these days for managers to have complete control of transfers.

 

It's generally bad business for a club to rely solely on the players known by the current manager as it simply makes the pool of possibilities very small.

 

Most clubs ask their ask the manager what he wants in terms of type of player and the recruitment team identify available options for the manager to have their say on. I'm pretty sure this was the system used with both Monk and Carlos.

 

Pulis being old school will I think mainly bring in players he's worked with before. And I suspect he will have insisted he could do this when he was negotiating his contract.

 

 

[@owlstalk]

1 minute ago, CircleSeven said:

There’s a difference between not forgetting and moving on. 
 

We don’t forget WW2 but people can still go on holiday to Italy. 

 

 

Whilst this is true we also keep an eye out for Nazi's killing people for a laugh - so we can ensure WWII never happens again

[Lucas Joao's Tooth]

Just now, @owlstalk said:

 

 

Let's not be namecalling people who have a different point of view mate - that's not on

Instead tell us how Pulis can be excused bad results because the games he has had have been against difficult teams, whilst Garry Monk wasn't allowed that excuse

Excused of bad results? 

A draw vs Stoke who are flying, a draw last night against a reading squad who've hammered lots and surprised many sitting in the top 8  WITH 10 MEN for over 60 minutes, a lose against a good preston side who again we had a ridiculous early sending off and a draw against a very good Swansea side away from home.

IF you consider those bad results good help us and god help you.

 

Garry Monk had over a season, playing a dire formation that we didn't have the players to play was too stubborn to change, ended up costing him his job.

TP has shown so much more balls already when it comes to changing formation etc, last night taking our two full backs off, when have you seen that before?

 

Pulis has had much worse of a run in and people are comparing already? Time to give heads a wobble, get realistic, he's had 4 games and we've had 2 sendings off in the first half, were lucky to have the points we have, Monk had the chance to recruit a striker, he chose Kachunga and Patterson, you're just not a fan of Pulis and have been talking absoloute s*** since he was appointed. 

 

People giving ridiculous statements about having less possession etc. when we've been down to 10 men and who even cares about the possession stat, its time to wake up realise we have a poor strikeforce and Pulis has his hands tied to a extent with Injuries and suspensions.

 

 

[Shiregreenowl 80]

22 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

Again - and this is the third time I've requested this - WHEN did Garry Monk say what you said he said?

 

 

 

(If you have no idea that's totally fine - just admit it!)

 

Can't recall  where but was asked when he took over that he wouldn't have taken job if he dint have a say 

[CircleSeven]

1 minute ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

Whilst this is true we also keep an eye out for Nazi's killing people for a laugh - so we can ensure WWII never happens again

And therein lies the heart of the problem. 
You can’t stop it happening again (the manager bit, not WW2).

So as a fan I move on because it’s outside my control and I may as well support whoever is here because I don’t have a choice (other than stopping supporting the club). 
In many respects going over and over the recent past has the reverse effect as people just switch off and think ‘here we go again, here’s so and so going on again about the same old stuff’. 
Move on, remember the past and bring it up when most pertinent and relevant.

While remembering all the time it doesn’t make any difference anyway. 

[@owlstalk]

Just now, Lucas Joao's Tooth said:

Excused of bad results? 

A draw vs Stoke who are flying, a draw last night against a reading squad who've hammered lots and surprised many sitting in the top 8  WITH 10 MEN for over 60 minutes, a lose against a good preston side who again we had a ridiculous early sending off and a draw against a very good Swansea side away from home.

IF you consider those bad results good help us and god help you.

 

Garry Monk had over a season, playing a dire formation that we didn't have the players to play was too stubborn to change, ended up costing him his job.

TP has shown so much more balls already when it comes to changing formation etc, last night taking our two full backs off, when have you seen that before?

 

Pulis has had much worse of a run in and people are comparing already? Time to give heads a wobble, get realistic, he's had 4 games and we've had 2 sendings off in the first half, were lucky to have the points we have, Monk had the chance to recruit a striker, he chose Kachunga and Patterson, you're just not a fan of Pulis and have been talking absoloute s*** since he was appointed. 

 

People giving ridiculous statements about having less possession etc. when we've been down to 10 men and who even cares about the possession stat, its time to wake up realise we have a poor strikeforce and Pulis has his hands tied to a extent with Injuries and suspensions.

 

 

 

 

Can you tell us what we are and aren't allowed to discuss then as you are clearly wanting to dictate this?

Are you saying we can't discuss stats?

Can we not look at possession or shots on goal or goals (or lack of goals)?

What are your rules?

 

[@owlstalk]

1 minute ago, Shiregreenowl 80 said:

Can't recall  where but was asked when he took over that he wouldn't have taken job if he dint have a say 

 

 

Remember though that Chansiri basically said/intimated in recent weeks that Garry Monk was the biggest yes man in the world - therefore that kind of response to that kind of question was always going to be the politically correct one

[Shiregreenowl 80]

Just now, @owlstalk said:

 

 

Remember though that Chansiri basically said/intimated in recent weeks that Garry Monk was the biggest yes man in the world

So if that's true your championing a guy that says one thing but doesn't really mean it 

[@owlstalk]

4 minutes ago, CircleSeven said:

And therein lies the heart of the problem. 
You can’t stop it happening again (the manager bit, not WW2).

So as a fan I move on because it’s outside my control and I may as well support whoever is here because I don’t have a choice (other than stopping supporting the club). 
In many respects going over and over the recent past has the reverse effect as people just switch off and think ‘here we go again, here’s so and so going on again about the same old stuff’. 
Move on, remember the past and bring it up when most pertinent and relevant.

While remembering all the time it doesn’t make any difference anyway. 

 

 

We're coming up to the January transfer window

 

So we will see if/how Chansiri backs Pulis and what questions or answers that brings

[@owlstalk]

Just now, Shiregreenowl 80 said:

So if that's true your championing a guy that says one thing but doesn't really mean it 

 

 

I'm not championing anyone at all

[CircleSeven]

1 minute ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

We're coming up to the January transfer window

 

So we will see if/how Chansiri backs Pulis and what questions or answers that brings

Just the 8 games to go between now and then

[Deepcar_lights]

2 hours ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

I also believe that many fans believe that the style/standard of football is just Pulis getting settled in, making us hard to beat etc

It isn't

This is the best Pulis will ever give us

When he gets a big massive brute of a striker up front things will get worse as he will revert to just hoofing the ball up to the striker and then rushing up the pitch to try and win the second ball

 

And I am so looking forward to it. 

 

Big brute. Yes! Old School! 

 

It will be fabulous. 

[gurujuan]

In response to the OP, no, by and large, we haven’t been playing beautiful football, aside from a season from Carlos, and some decent stuff from Laws.  It was pretty grim under Monk, but what on earth leads people to believe it will be better under Pulis?

[Owls-Fan]

2 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

In response to the OP, no, by and large, we haven’t been playing beautiful football, aside from a season from Carlos, and some decent stuff from Laws.  It was pretty grim under Monk, but what on earth leads people to believe it will be better under Pulis?

Think the point is wednesday fans are used to turgid football compared to how other clubs have played historically, and Pulis will be the same but has the track record of bringing a level of success to every role he’s had.  

[@owlstalk]

1 minute ago, Owls-Fan said:

Think the point is wednesday fans are used to turgid football compared to how other clubs have played historically, and Pulis will be the same but has the track record of bringing a level of success to every role he’s had.  

 

 

 

Every manager who's ever managed a football team have had a level of success

[CircleSeven]

4 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

 

Every manager who's ever managed a football team have had a level of success

Jan Siewert?

[Blatter]

Shandy makes a very valid point.

I don’t believe  many of the past managers that gat us out of trouble or got us promoted did it by playing beautiful football. 
Catterick won promotion with a direct long ball style

Charlton and Setters won promotion with a slightly better style but never described as beautiful.

Wilkinson won promotion with direct long ball tactics

Megson won promotion with direct long ball tactics.

The only exception I remember was Ron Atkinson who got us both relegated and promoted with some very attractive football.

Moral of the story is. Do what you have to do to get out of trouble. The pretty stuff can wait until the club’s on a sounder footing.

[Lucas Joao's Tooth]

14 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

Can you tell us what we are and aren't allowed to discuss then as you are clearly wanting to dictate this?

Are you saying we can't discuss stats?

Can we not look at possession or shots on goal or goals (or lack of goals)?

What are your rules?

 

 

I've seen people moaning about having less possession in a game when we've got 10 men? deluded people who live in a fantasy world.

 

 

Discuss stats that are meaningful.

Too many people get too caught up and wrapped up in stats and really most of them are useless and very misleading.

 

Possession stat -  absolutely baffles me, completely useless, one of the worst and people go off this stat religiously.

"BUT WE HAD MORE POSSESSION" 

Show me the areas they've had that possession, it was evident we was set up last night with 11 men behind the ball, to counter attack and hit them fast, we was happy to allow reading to have the ball and not press them when they were playing it around in defence going from centre back to centre back side to side looking to draw us out, so obviously they are going to have more "possession" but not in areas that hurt us. 1-1 Draw does them having a higher rate of possession mean they should have won then?

 

Sky come out with some cracking stats as well, against Swansea i can't remember exactly what it was but they made a massive deal that we hadn't won their in so many years or something along those lines. 

WOW that sounds bad - then you look more closely - well Swansea was bobbing around the lower leagues, then managed to rise up and ended up in the Premier League so how many times have our paths actually crossed? 

 

My favourite from sky is about a player not scoring for 6 months - What over the summer when the seasons finished and he's been out injured for 2 months and only actually played 4 times.