Pulis vs Moore

[victorturner]

1 hour ago, S72 Owl said:

I don’t care about points achieved or other stats. To me Pulis goes down as one of our worst managers. The style of football was embarrassing to watch. Just imagine having to endure that watching from the stands. 

I agree except for one thing..we had to stay in this division. The consequences of not doing so are serious. You cannot afford to ignore points.

Maybe a different more open minded experienced manager should have been appointed after Monk. There are always good candidates available. Even recently late in the  season, Birmingham Charlton and Bristol C have found managers capable of stabilising. Our chairman is supposed to have had a yen for Pulis from previous years..all the more reason not to mess up the conditions under which he was hired.

[Hirstys_12th_Pint]

Our players are very poor and could not see many getting a tune out of them. 

 

Where I do feel for Pulis was the number of games we had in a short period of time, along with some of the sending offs.  

 

How much time did Pulis actually get on the training pitch with the squad. 

[bobness]

It seemed like the players were not interested in playing for Pulis. Could've been down to Pulis, could've been down to the fact they hadn't been paid.

Either way, Pulis wasn't hiding his frustration very well, and was clearly banking on a sweet bit of business in the transfer window. One that was never going to be forthcoming.

Makes you wonder what the hell went on when he agreed to sign, both internally at the club, and between him and our supreme leader.

Edited April 18, 2021 by bobness

[SallyCinnamon]

Just now, bobness said:

It seemed like the players were not interested in playing for Pulis. Could've been down to Pulis, could've been down to the fact they hadn't been paid.

Either way, Pulis wasn't hiding his frustrationg very well, and was clearly banking on a sweet bit of business in the transfer window. One that was never going to be forthcoming.

Makes you wonder what the hell went on when he agreed to sign, both internally at the club, and between Pulis and our supreme leader.

I’m sure DC said in the media briefing before sacking Monk, saying that if we need to spend he’ll spend.

 

So don’t think it’s beyond the realms of possibility Pulis thought there would be money available to improve the squad.

 

SPOILER ALERT - we re-signed a player we released in the summer and a lad who hadn’t played football for 6 months.

[S72 Owl]

1 minute ago, SallyCinnamon said:

I’m sure DC said in the media briefing before sacking Monk, saying that if we need to spend he’ll spend.

 

So don’t think it’s beyond the realms of possibility Pulis thought there would be money available to improve the squad.

 

SPOILER ALERT - we re-signed a player we released in the summer and a lad who hadn’t played football for 6 months.

Or maybe Pulis thought he could earn a few quick million? 

[SallyCinnamon]

1 minute ago, S72 Owl said:

Or maybe Pulis thought he could earn a few quick million? 

Probably. But if he knew he was going to be backed he’d probably have stayed.

[bobness]

Just now, S72 Owl said:

 

Or maybe Pulis thought he could earn a few quick million? 

 

So he signed with no intention of doing the job? Stuff of conspiracy theory.

 

Had Pulis been given support, and had DC respected his football acumen, we may not be staring League 1 in the face.

While many (including me) weren't thrilled with the appointment, we at least had the sense to appreciate that Pulis is an experienced no-nonsense manager. The day he got sacked was a dark day, not because Pulis was a good choice, but because it confirmed everything we feared about Chansiri.

[kobayashi]

Not very fashionable to defend the players but I defy anyone to claim they could have given their best in a workplace environment like SWFC. Absent senior management; behind competitors before you start due to previous management mistakes; rotating line manager; frequently not been paid as contracted; unlikely to be kept on beyond in a few months time. Few employees could or would be able to give their best.

[S72 Owl]

11 minutes ago, bobness said:

 

So he signed with no intention of doing the job? Stuff of conspiracy theory.

 

Had Pulis been given support, and had DC respected his football acumen, we may not be staring League 1 in the face.

While many (including me) weren't thrilled with the appointment, we at least had the sense to appreciate that Pulis is an experienced no-nonsense manager. The day he got sacked was a dark day, not because Pulis was a good choice, but because it confirmed everything we feared about Chansiri.

An experienced no nonsense manager, with well respected football acumen should have been able to do a better job. 

[bobness]

1 minute ago, S72 Owl said:

 

An experienced no nonsense manager, with well respected football acumen should have been able to do a better job. 

 

[Guest mrbluesky]

7 hours ago, victorturner said:

That’s 8 points out of 30.

Errr, ok.

[Bluewings]

Eventually though under Pulis there would be less people watching Wednesday at Hillsborough then there was 

during peak Covid.

[A E Neuman NYowl]

4 hours ago, bobness said:

It seemed like the players were not interested in playing for Pulis. Could've been down to Pulis, could've been down to the fact they hadn't been paid.

Either way, Pulis wasn't hiding his frustration very well, and was clearly banking on a sweet bit of business in the transfer window. One that was never going to be forthcoming.

Makes you wonder what the hell went on when he agreed to sign, both internally at the club, and between him and our supreme leader.

Pulis told Chansiri " This clubs rotten to the core "

DC smashed his face in and said " WANT SOME MORE"

 

end of story

[OwlerIT]

On 14/04/2021 at 11:53, alanharper said:

Neither Pulis nor Moore had the chance to bring in their own players so could only work with the tools (literally!) that they were given.

 

Chansiri and Monk's awful recruitment has cost us. We should have got rid of Monk after Brentford last year - if we'd brought Pulis in then I don't think we'd be in this mess now. His style of football was awful but he'd have had a big man in Nuhiu to suit it, possibly got a few more games out of Fletcher, and with a better end to the season the 12 point deduction could have been applied last year instead of this, resulting in being able to attract better players in the summer instead of scraping the barrel for ones that nobody else wanted who were desperate enough to join a club starting on -12.

Quote of the season - exactly right 

[Bluesteel]

There’s a point re results. But the players look more enthusiastic/happy and if they could stick the ball in the back of the net the difference between Pulis and Moore would be night and day. The thing that gives me a crumb of encouragement is the increased number of chances when compared to Monk and Pulis. 
 

I don’t think Pulis went due to results, there was a breakdown in relations. Reach didnt even celebrate a goal against Blackburn. 
 

I think at this point we stick with a manager people can live with and who plays attacking football, unless he does really badly. This manager is our Brian Laws, keeping positive during a difficult time. With him coming in here at the back end of a minus 12 season, in the mire I think the bad results are viewed in a different context ie any result at all has looked like a bonus. Monk was good at idenifying a “fragility” that developed during his time here but never sorted it and nor has anyone else.

[Bluesteel]

4 hours ago, SallyCinnamon said:

I’m sure DC said in the media briefing before sacking Monk, saying that if we need to spend he’ll spend.

 

So don’t think it’s beyond the realms of possibility Pulis thought there would be money available to improve the squad.

 

SPOILER ALERT - we re-signed a player we released in the summer and a lad who hadn’t played football for 6 months.

True. But wasn’t it Pulis who also suggested doing that.

[SallyCinnamon]

5 minutes ago, Bluesteel said:

True. But wasn’t it Pulis who also suggested doing that.

He suggested Hutchinson. 
 

Green I think was David Downes.

 

Both signings for a club with literally no money. 

[83owl]

2 hours ago, OwlerIT said:

Quote of the season - exactly right 

Apart from pretty much all of it is wrong.

[OwlerIT]

1 hour ago, 83owl said:

Apart from pretty much all of it is wrong.

So enlighten me, which parts are wrong? 

[victorturner]

5 hours ago, Bluesteel said:

There’s a point re results. But the players look more enthusiastic/happy and if they could stick the ball in the back of the net the difference between Pulis and Moore would be night and day. The thing that gives me a crumb of encouragement is the increased number of chances when compared to Monk and Pulis. 
 

I don’t think Pulis went due to results, there was a breakdown in relations. Reach didnt even celebrate a goal against Blackburn. 
 

I think at this point we stick with a manager people can live with and who plays attacking football, unless he does really badly. This manager is our Brian Laws, keeping positive during a difficult time. With him coming in here at the back end of a minus 12 season, in the mire I think the bad results are viewed in a different context ie any result at all has looked like a bonus. Monk was good at idenifying a “fragility” that developed during his time here but never sorted it and nor has anyone else.

Looking at the size of the problems at this complicated club, the naive idealism of the new current management team ( and their lack of experience) do not inspire confidence. Saturday was another round of picking the  wrong team ( Harris in, Rhodes out..really?) and of poor game management, and the Swansea match another  round of making poor substitutions. New manager bounce = 8 points out of 30.