Chansiri on why he sacked Tony Pulis

[NeonLeon]

Just now, SallyCinnamon said:

Carlos alluded to problems at the club.

 

Bruce jumped ship to Newcastle as quickly as he could.

 

The committee of experienced football men Pearson, Roeder, Hill, Senior all left the club within months. 
 

Monk alluded to problems at the club and even hinted to it again yesterday on Sky Sports citing ‘certain situations’ which go off at the clubs.

 

Katrien Meire was appointed CEO and left within a year.

 

Tony Pulis one of the most experienced managers in the game was sacked/terminated after 10 games in charge.

 

Players have had to go to the PFA about payment issues.

 

WHEN IS THE PENNY GOING TO DROP. 

Honestly it’s like banging your head against a brick wall. 
 

The evidence is literally pointing in what direction as to what the issue is. 
 

And in regards to Pulis - the chairman appointed him. No more debate in my eyes.

Chansiri baited Monk earlier too saying if he’s got something to say, then say it. Carlos alluded to saying something then stopped himself.

 

People are obviously putting career before speaking out. 
 

Or fairs, fair, they’ve got nothing to say. But it seems like the latter and they’re protecting their own integrity.

[Bluesteel]

10 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said:

Carlos alluded to problems at the club.

 

Bruce jumped ship to Newcastle as quickly as he could.

 

The committee of experienced football men Pearson, Roeder, Hill, Senior all left the club within months. 
 

Monk alluded to problems at the club and even hinted to it again yesterday on Sky Sports citing ‘certain situations’ which go off at the clubs.

 

Katrien Meire was appointed CEO and left within a year.

 

Tony Pulis one of the most experienced managers in the game was sacked/terminated after 10 games in charge.

 

Players have had to go to the PFA about payment issues.

 

WHEN IS THE PENNY GOING TO DROP. 

Honestly it’s like banging your head against a brick wall. 
 

The evidence is literally pointing in what direction as to what the issue is. 
 

And in regards to Pulis - the chairman appointed him. No more debate in my eyes.

You only need to listen to him to see he must be very challenging to work with. No doubt there.

 

But suggesting DC was mad to hire Pulis when we needed to grind out results and in his words “have a strong manager” is hardly fair. It’s just lumping that in to suit. 
 

Relegation threatened teams often call for Pulis. Including chairmen who are much more experienced.There isn’t really a debate on that. 

[FreshOwl]

13 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said:

Carlos alluded to problems at the club.

 

Bruce jumped ship to Newcastle as quickly as he could.

 

The committee of experienced football men Pearson, Roeder, Hill, Senior all left the club within months. 
 

Monk alluded to problems at the club and even hinted to it again yesterday on Sky Sports citing ‘certain situations’ which go off at the clubs.

 

Katrien Meire was appointed CEO and left within a year.

 

Tony Pulis one of the most experienced managers in the game was sacked/terminated after 10 games in charge.

 

Players have had to go to the PFA about payment issues.

 

WHEN IS THE PENNY GOING TO DROP. 

Honestly it’s like banging your head against a brick wall. 
 

The evidence is literally pointing in what direction as to what the issue is. 
 

And in regards to Pulis - the chairman appointed him. No more debate in my eyes.

Fair enough mate, not disputing any of that 

 

But it begs the question, what can we do as fans apart from hope he gets it right? 

[Bluesteel]

It’s possible to think DC is making a mess of things more generally whilst also understanding why he mightve gone for Pulis and then, why he pulled the plug as a sh17 fest rapidly unfolded.

[prowl]

4 hours ago, Devonstrix said:

DC can say what he likes but Pulis has little or no come back unless there’s anything defamatory in it. All depends what the terms of Pulis severance deal were. If he’s signed up to an nda he can’t really say much. He will just have to brief some of his Sandbanks chums to say stuff on his behalf! 

If he was fired it's unlikely he signed an NDA unless there was one in the original contract.

[Guest Hornsby]

Assuming Paxo his mate got Pulis the gig.

 

But did Erik agree ?

 

How is this guy here a year and no one knows?

[Tony Galvin Fan Club]

So glad Pulis has gone.

[prowl]

3 hours ago, Devonstrix said:

This suggestion that DC got rid of Pulis simply because he told him straight, is a load of old blx. Pulis likes to big himself up as someone who doesn’t take any cr4p and calls a spade a spade, but as much as we think DC has made loads of mistakes, he’s unlikely to think 'Oh that little Welshman in the funny cap has shouted at me, I think I’ll just waste a couple more million quid to get rid of him'. 
 

Like it or not, DC has pumped millions of quid into this football club and even if he does go about stuff in the wrong way, I’d say his intentions are likely to be much more honourable than Tony Pulis, who let’s not forget, 'treated' us to some of the worst football in living memory and some of us have got long memories! 

Pulis's integrity has nothing to do with his style of football. You can be honest and play boring football. You should look at Pulis's history to decide how honest he is not what happens on the pitch.

 

I'm not making any comment on what conclusion I might come to on the subject.

[MSOwl]

I wanted to do my laundry today but it looks like DC done it all for us today.

 

Wow just wow.

[SallyCinnamon]

13 minutes ago, Bluesteel said:

You only need to listen to him to see he must be very challenging to work with. No doubt there.

 

But suggesting DC was mad to hire Pulis when we needed to grind out results and in his words “have a strong manager” is hardly fair. It’s just lumping that in to suit. 
 

Relegation threatened teams often call for Pulis. Including chairmen who are much more experienced.There isn’t really a debate on that. 

I don’t think he was mad to hire Pulis. But to then come out and say he didn’t like old school English managers like Pulis and wanted to play attacking football is absolutely ridiculous. 
 

You know what you’re getting with Pulis. Everyone in football knows that. 

[asteener1867]

When Chansiri says "I spoke to my team"..what does he mean, the players, his staff?

 

[Bluesteel]

Just now, SallyCinnamon said:

I don’t think he was mad to hire Pulis. But to then come out and say he didn’t like old school English managers like Pulis and wanted to play attacking football is absolutely ridiculous. 
 

You know what you’re getting with Pulis. Everyone in football knows that. 

When I read this he said he was open that he didn’t like the British old school and Pulis defended his approach and said he played differently but ultimately he wanted a strong experienced manager to get results, which Pulis usually does. So gave him the job despite misgivings on style.

 

If Pulis had got double the points then maybe we wouldn’t be having this conversation but he hasn’t just sacked him because of the football, it’s because the football was poor, as were results and after each game he took more and more confidence away from the current team by saying ah they’re good lads bless them but basically have no chance unless I get to buy my own lads in. Putting our future solely on January and writing off the current team (who without a deduction wouldn’t be in the bottom 3) is ultimately what cost him.

 

For me, if there were clear issues with the squad and he was unsure whether short term spending on older heads including Hutchinson was right then I think sacking Pulis may be one of the very few examples of rectifying issues well in advance of them becoming terminal.

 

 

[matthefish2002]

Thought we got Pulis in to make sure we stayed up and style was secondary.

Didnt want Pulis at first but think he should have be given until end of the season especially if he had players lined up in January.

[akbuk]

7 hours ago, @owlstalk said:

"He said he would call in sick. Unprofessional. I said I didn’t want to help him by doing mutual consent, so I sacked him."

I'm glad he did sack him

[Mr Mercury]

5 hours ago, Therealrealist said:

Pulis came for a pay off..no doubt in my mind..and dc fell for it hook line and sinker

Agreed 

[FreshOwl]

8 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said:

I don’t think he was mad to hire Pulis. But to then come out and say he didn’t like old school English managers like Pulis and wanted to play attacking football is absolutely ridiculous. 
 

You know what you’re getting with Pulis. Everyone in football knows that. 

Think about it though. You want to play attacking football but know deep down you’re not in a position to do that. Along comes TP, a proven manager who knows this league inside out. You have an interview and he more than confirms that this squad has enough to stay up....with his experience you have to take his word on that. Better yet, he even outlines other methods and formations to you which are more attacking and explains in detail how he can switch it up based on the opponent.

 

Now from DC’s point of view - can you honestly blame him for hiring him? 
 

All DC’s ********-ups, this isn’t one of them. Sure lamp him for everything else, but not this 

[prowl]

28 minutes ago, Bluesteel said:

You only need to listen to him to see he must be very challenging to work with. No doubt there.

 

But suggesting DC was mad to hire Pulis when we needed to grind out results and in his words “have a strong manager” is hardly fair. It’s just lumping that in to suit. 
 

Relegation threatened teams often call for Pulis. Including chairmen who are much more experienced.There isn’t really a debate on that. 

I can understand not wanting Pulis as manager, I can understand employing him in our situation to get us out of relegation.

 

I can't understand employing Pulis and then deciding to sack him after a few games. Either don't employ him in the first place or give him time to do his stuff.

 

I don't think DC realises how unbalanced and basically poor our squad is. The fans do.

[matthefish2002]

8 minutes ago, FreshOwl said:

Think about it though. You want to play attacking football but know deep down you’re not in a position to do that. Along comes TP, a proven manager who knows this league inside out. You have an interview and he more than confirms that this squad has enough to stay up....with his experience you have to take his word on that. Better yet, he even outlines other methods and formations to you which are more attacking and explains in detail how he can switch it up based on the opponent.

 

Now from DC’s point of view - can you honestly blame him for hiring him? 
 

All DC’s ********-ups, this isn’t one of them. Sure lamp him for everything else, but not this 

 

You are only taking Chansiri word for what Pulis told him.

Think what happened was results were not as good as Chansiri had hoped and the two of them clashed over non payment of wages and January transfer window.

Chansiri now spinning it to paint Pulis in a bad light.

[FreshOwl]

Just now, matthefish2002 said:

 

You are only taking Chansiri word for what Pulis told him.

Think what happened was results were not as good as Chansiri had hoped and the two of them clashed over non payment of wages and January transfer window.

Chansiri now spinning it to paint Pulis in a bad light.

So DC made up that he met with Pulis, raised concerns over his tactics and Pulis said he would alter them? Seems a very strange thing to make up. And if DC was as clueless as some suggest, how would he be familiar with brands of football? 

[SiJ]

2 minutes ago, matthefish2002 said:

 

You are only taking Chansiri word for what Pulis told him.

Think what happened was results were not as good as Chansiri had hoped and the two of them clashed over non payment of wages and January transfer window.

Chansiri now spinning it to paint Pulis in a bad light.

Honestly, I don't think Chansiri has got much "spin" in him. 

 

I think he just rants and raves and says what he thinks.