Jump to content

Players thought Pulis was going?


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, cowl said:

 

Given the rumours of DC insisting even fairly minor decisions require his approval, it would be hard to put that side by side with him allowing a managerial change to be made without his agreement, although it's likely his mate did do a lot of the running here in bringing Pulis in.

 

It's another point though; you'd think from how things have unfolded that even DC's mate was completely unaware that money was all of a sudden going to get this tight. Hardly surprising though, I suppose, considering he's only an ‘adviser’ anyway.

 

 

I'm wondering if old Tony was given assurance from one and hasn't even spoken to the other. Which he now states he hasn't. Well, not recently as we would hope. 

 

Tony has also made a right prat of himself, saying he's getting new players in and his current crop arnt up to it. Only to find out players arnt even being paid fully on time. (hardly his fault this, he's been given assurance, by one party I'd Imgine). 

 

One things for certain. 

 

Ryet mess unfolding, right in front of our eyes. 

Edited by Maddogbob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Maddogbob said:

 

 

I'm wondering if old Tony was given assurance from one and hasn't even spoken to the other. Which he now states he hasn't. Well, not recently as we would hope. 

 

Tony has also made a right prat of himself, saying he's getting new players in and his current crop arnt up to it. Only to find out players arnt even being paid fully on time. (hardly his fault this, he's been given assurance, by one party I'd Imgine). 

 

One things for certain. 

 

Ryet mess unfolding, right in front of our eyes. 

 




Also makes all  those who thought Monk was useless look very very silly indeed 

  • Like 1

 


Owlstalk Shop

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don’t think Pulis has ever in his footballing life worked with an owner like Chansiri before. If there’s any substance in this story then it can only be that he’s not really going to be backed in January anywhere like he wants or we need.
 

The talk of Hutchinson returning is another added ingredient to him not truly being backed and us having go go back to the past and not look to the future. We already have Luongo who  can’t seem to string a run  of appearances together in that role so why add another body to the mix who is a known injury risk?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, El Toro said:

Don’t think Pulis has ever in his footballing life worked with an owner like Chansiri before. If there’s any substance in this story then it can only be that he’s not really going to be backed in January anywhere like he wants or we need.
 

The talk of Hutchinson returning is another added ingredient to him not truly being backed and us having go go back to the past and not look to the future. We already have Luongo who  can’t seem to string a run  of appearances together in that role so why add another body to the mix who is a known injury risk?!

Maybe we can alternate their injuries. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 




Also makes all  those who thought Monk was useless look very very silly indeed 

I don't think Monk signed any of them. 

 

I'm starting to think bar Bruce (and even then, I think he had limited input), have had little to no say on incoming transfers. 

 

 

Edited by Maddogbob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, @owlstalk said:

Also makes all  those who thought Monk was useless look very very silly indeed 

 

And those that continued to support him right to the bitter end (and even still) look like wise beyond words, right?

 

lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, cowl said:

 

And those that continued to support him right to the bitter end (and even still) look like wise beyond words, right?

 

lol

I think this runs deeper than whoever actually picks the team. 

 

It's not that Monk was good, it's that we've manged to replace him with far worse manger, with outdated, eyebleeding tactics. Who's suddenly realised he's not getting what he was promised. 

Edited by Maddogbob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Maddogbob said:

 

 

I'm wondering if old Tony was given assurance from one and hasn't even spoken to the other. Which he now states he hasn't. Well, not recently as we would hope. 

 

Tony has also made a right prat of himself, saying he's getting new players in and his current crop arnt up to it. Only to find out players arnt even being paid fully on time. (hardly his fault this, he's been given assurance, by one party I'd Imgine). 

 

One things for certain. 

 

Ryet mess unfolding, right in front of our eyes. 

 

2 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 




Also makes all  those who thought Monk was useless look very very silly indeed 

 

Why does it?

Bob thinks Pulis is useless working under the same conditions as Monk, Monk was also useless. 

 

The club is a mess, whoever the manager is will find it a tough job, but Monk & now Pulis have not made the best fist of it to date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Maddogbob said:

Did he even have anything to do with even hiring pulis?

 

Or did his mate, give one of his mates a job? 

 

Think there might be a bigger picture here, we all agree swfc being run into the ground, that's clear. 

 

I strongly suspect Pulis getting the job was down to stuffing boy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Maddogbob said:

I'm wondering if old Tony was given assurance from one and hasn't even spoken to the other. Which he now states he hasn't. Well, not recently as we would hope. 

 

Tony has also made a right prat of himself, saying he's getting new players in and his current crop arnt up to it. Only to find out players arnt even being paid fully on time. (hardly his fault this, he's been given assurance, by one party I'd Imgine). 

 

One things for certain. 

 

Ryet mess unfolding, right in front of our eyes. 

 

I find it strange though that Pulis is still talking up his expectations for January.

 

Whatever communication there has been between Pulis and DC, it doesn't seem as though Pulis has been unequivocally told there will be no money for January.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

 

Why does it?

Bob thinks Pulis is useless working under the same conditions as Monk, Monk was also useless. 

 

The club is a mess, whoever the manager is will find it a tough job, but Monk & now Pulis have not made the best fist of it to date.

Pulis was useless before he got here. A past it dinosaur, very few wanted at this club or others. 

 

Clubs been a basket case for years or has that escaped you? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, cowl said:

 

I find it strange though that Pulis is still talking up his expectations for January.

 

Whatever communication there has been between Pulis and DC, it doesn't seem as though Pulis has been unequivocally told there will be no money for January.

I thought he was less positive yesterday on that. Even when Hutchinson returning (let's be honest it's the worst kept secret out there) was presented with it. 

 

Now this story. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Athelwulf said:

 

But why did Pulis take the job in the first place if he knew he'd be getting nothing in January?

 

He doesn't need the cash, and had to be persuaded to come, so surely he must have been given some guarantees before putting pen to paper.

 

It just doesn't add up otherwise.

 

Like it doesn't add up that he's had no contact with Chansiri.

 

I mean, if Hutchinson is returning, as most believe, surely there would have been some contact between Pulis and Chansiri on the matter.

 

OK, it makes sense for Pulis to threaten to leave in an attempt to wrest cash out of the Siamese Tw*T for players, but that's different to actually doing it.

 

Pulis is as sharp as a sh*thouse rat, and I guess we're just not used to that sort of manager at this club.

 

One thing's for certain, we're down if he does leave.

 

As things stand we don't know what he will get do we?

 

However, if you are considering taking over as manager of Sheffield Wednesday, when considering what budget you might have to work with, regardless of what you may or may not be 'promised' you have to consider:

  • that the club is operating under a points deduction for financial issues,
  • have not submitted their latest accounts on time,
  • have hardly paid many fees for players in the past two years,
  • have recently spent time under embargos
  • have been rumoured to have issues paying players. 

If you are expecting any kind of significant transfer kitty on that basis then you are naive and I can't see Pulis being so naive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Maddogbob said:

Pulis was useless before he got here. A past it dinosaur, very few wanted at this club or others. 

 

Clubs been a basket case for years or has that escaped you? 

 

No, just pointing out that none of this is justification that Monk was doing a great job. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So apparently according to some on here Nixon is never wrong:

 

6 days ago:

"Sun journalist Alan Nixon has revealed that there is nothing in rumours suggesting that Tony Pulis is going to walk from Sheffield Wednesday."

 

Nixon today:

"Tony Pulis set tongues wagging that he was going to walk out on Sheffield Wednesday"

 

Which is it?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...