Jump to content

Chansiri on why he sacked Tony Pulis


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, slinger208b said:

 

I can't work out what's difficult about my point.

 

Why not have an ambition at the beginning of the season but no point dropping that in when we are halfway through?..

because it is totally unrealistic given the situation we were in.  On minus 12; lost our better players; Fletcher, Murphy and Fox and replaced them with inferior players or in Fox's case no one in fact you could argue that Murphy wasn't replaced either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, @owlstalk said:

Chansiri on the sacking of Tony Pulis

 

We need to start from the beginning.

 

I interviewed him over a year ago but I was still not convinced at that time about his style of play.

But this time when I interviewed him, I felt he had experience and we needed someone strong. At the beginning we need to stay up and try and get in the play-offs if we can. But the priority was to stay up. He convinced me he could do that with this squad.

 

We talked with him one by one about every player that we have. He studied our players and squad.

He convinced me that he could help and that our squad was good enough to keep us in the league.

Of course, I understand we needed more players to strengthen.

 

I also told him that I don't like the English old school. He said he would change his tactics and formation depending on the opponents.

 

I told him I was very straight forward and that's what I want from all my managers. I told him he could contact me all the time by telephone or text.

 

He told me he would normally have dinner once a week with the owner when he was at MIddlesbrough. We can't do that at the moment. We said we need to get to know each other more.

 

"Since we played four, five, six games I started to think he is not the right one because of the way we play, the way he treated our players. But he’s good with the press. He knows how to make the press like him."

 

 

I felt at this moment he was a good fit to help us and that's why I brought him in.

 

We played four, five, six games and I started to think whether he was the right one for us because of the way he plays and the way he treats our players.

 

He was always good with the press and praise the fans. He knows how to make the press like him, which is good for him, but of course he can't damage the club.

 

I talked to my team and they said give him more chance and maybe he would do better.

 

I said 'okay, I will give more of a chance' but of course I still need to make a decision whether he is the right man by the end of the month. If he is not the right man, he should not recruit any players.

 

He text me and said he had been here for three weeks and would give me a summary of the club. He said 'we are a big club with big potential but the results don't lie over the past 12 months, the club's record has been poor and doesn't have identity and the whole structure is unbalanced.' It made my very surprised because we talked about the players at the interview.

 

When the players were not winning, he was saying something different and that the squad was unbalanced but they could still improve by bringing in the right players.

 

He can talk to me directly because he has my direct phone but he didn't like to talk to me.

 

He worked with our recruitment team on who he wants to bring in on loan or transfer. I said do it. Our people always start to work on the players a few weeks ago. Some we sent offers in until the window opened. I still allowed him to do what he wants.

 

 

I don't understand why he didn't call me. I tried to text him all the time. I told him to report to me at least once a week.

I wanted to talk to him but he didn't want to talk to me.

 

He said the squad didn't buy into his methods. That surprised me.

He told me he could play many styles depending on the opponent.

 

 

The way he said things to me told me he had no confidence at all, that he doesn’t know how to manage this team.

 

We arranged to talk after the Coventry game and after that call, it was late in Thailand but nothing came back. I asked my people to tell him do you want a meeting or not?

 

I am not the one who refused the meeting.

 

I asked him how I could help. I said it would be better to keep a good relationship. His lawyer sent me something that made him look good and me bad.

 

We spoke about mutual consent, make it easy. He never think about his staff, only about himself. I told him he needed to solve for his people as well.

 

Monday morning my lawyer had to go to the hospital, so my people told him we would talk after Tuesday’s game. In the morning he told my people that because my lawyer was busy and to come back about mutual consent on Tuesday.

He got mad. He said it had to be now. He said my players don’t look good in training, maybe they told them.

So he spends a year talking with the guy and when he finally gets him in he undermines him after 4-6 games?? Wtf. No wonder the club is in such a mess.

With this style of owner you will only end up with yes men around the place.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, briggowl said:

 

LOL

 

At the moment we're in the bottom three. Do you agree that we can make the play-offs? To me that is nonsense

 

 

Yes, but DC said 'In the beginning ...'

 

We were 14pts off 6th place when Pulis took over,  with 35 games left to play

Not impossible

 


 

13 minutes ago, York_Owl said:

I took at is meaning at the beginning of Pulis' time as manager and having the play offs as an expectation was totally unrealistic on both counts.

 

Yet I was hoping for results to improve and for that gap to 6th place to have been smaller by now    :sad:

 

To close a gap of 21pts with 24 games remaining is unrealistic

It's all about avoiding the drop now 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, let me get this right...

 

Chansiri appointed Steve Bruce, by his own admission saying he didn’t want to but was convinced to appoint him.

 

Now, Chansiri tells us he didn’t like Tony Pulis’ brand of football and didn’t want him, so appointed a manager in Garry Monk who plays a similar style, only to then appoint Pulis a year later?

 

Why does our Chairman keep making appointments he didn’t want? 😂

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ethel The Tree said:

 

Yes, but DC said 'In the beginning ...'

 

We were 14pts off 6th place when Pulis took over,  with 35 games left to play

Not impossible

 


 

 

Yet I was hoping for results to improve and for that gap to 6th place to have been smaller by now    :sad:

 

To close a gap of 21pts with 24 games remaining is unrealistic

It's all about avoiding the drop now 

Me too but with the squad we have and the way we have been playing (Rotherham, Luton, Wycombe) it was just a case of trying to scrape as many points together as we could before we get to the January transfer window and hopefully bring in a few players that could dramatically improve the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So both him and Monk tell DC they can work with the squad then turn around later and say they can’t and need a whole rebuild. Makes more sense for Monk to do that, than Pulis who shouldve already knew what we were up against. 
 

I got the impression that with the media TP was trying to back DC into a corner to spend on players. He’d not been there long and had that period of getting what he needed or so he thought. But by implying the current team aren’t good enough that is shaky ground. Especially in January as you can’t do as much. Almost a bit of naivety from TP for alienating the team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was crying out for transparency two days ago. 
Now I’m shouting ‘don’t air your dirty washing in public’!

 

What a situation to get in! 
 

Big take away for me. 
 

Stop hiring people you don’t believe are the right person!

 

Who hires people they think aren’t the right fit? Who? No one does it in any successful organisation! It’s literally the most stupid thing you can do!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, York_Owl said:

Even if it was at the beginning of the season we were on minus 12.

 

I took at is meaning at the beginning of Pulis' time as manager and having the play offs as an expectation was totally unrealistic on both counts.

Avoid relegation this season to aim did playoffs next season. That was the plan. 

Chansiri didn't think that with Pulis it would be acheived to push on next season IF we stay up this season. 

 

It's not rocket science what he was saying ! 

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...