Pulis on the wind up

[Guest]

4 hours ago, SallyCinnamon said:

Would have kept us in the division if backed with a left back or centre forward in January. 
 

Not addressing these issues and not paying players on time is what relegated us. Wasn’t down to any individual manager. All on the chairman last season

 

The left-back and forward issues should have been addressed in the previous summer never mind January and I agree that was a huge reason for our relegation.

 

Pulis however did worse than any of our managers last season with the same resources so I wouldn't have backed him to keep us up more than Monk, Moore or even Thompson on that basis.  

 

 

[Django]

8 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

He knew what he was coming into.

He had the same resources of every other manager we had last season. Remarkably the football was worse under him than under Monk, results and performance wise. The difference in the attitude of the team when a complete novice of a manager at professional level took over from him was clear. 

I’m guessing he was hoping to bring a few in during the January window 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Django said:

I’m guessing he was hoping to bring a few in during the January window 

 

He should have managed to improve morale and performances before that  - be better results and performance wise than the previous manager - otherwise what was the point in changing? 

 

He failed to improve on what Garry Monk was doing, in fact he made things worse. Some achievement that.

[Westfield Owl]

I find it amusing how any fan can critique any manager/head coach's performance last season, or blame them for our relegation.

 

Didn't we have about 6/7 people take charge of our dugout if you include caretaker managers etc.

 

Basket case of a club.

 

What's happening in the dugout is almost inconsequential when the club is a rotten from the very top.

 

And I'm no Pulis lover and was gutted when he was given the job here.

[TrickyTrev]

40 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

In what way?

Pulis played negative football. Nobody at all wanted to play for him. He made us worse, won one in ten and by pure coincidence brought in a former Celtic scout as his assistant manager which in no way contributed to one of our young prospects moving to Celtic soon after......

 

I expected much better and he failed to deliver on a huge scale. 

Cast your mind back to Alan Irvine’s tactical masterclass against 9 man Yeovil.

Edited October 16, 2021 by TrickyTrev

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, TrickyTrev said:

Cast your mind back to Alan Irvine’s tactical masterclass against 9 man Yeovil.

 

A nightmare indeed. 

Still not sure it was as bad overall as the 10-match spell under Pulis which yielded 7 points and not many more attacks by us. Also worth factoring in the length and level of management that Pukis had under his belt, justifiable to expect more on that basis, even when taking into account all of Irvine's badges.  

[4evaowl]

7 hours ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

Why?

 

He was quite rightly horrified by some of the stuff he saw going on and incurred the chairman's wrath for refusing to take advice from one of his 'football advisors' (the one who's still in his teens), so offered to walk away from his contract for nothing. The chairman instead opted to fire him and pay him off.

 

The circumstances surrounding his departure just show how much of a basket case our club is, I'm afraid.

I don't believe TP wasn't aware of the issues at the club before he took over.

Neither do I believe he offered to walk away from his contract for nothing.

However, I'm not in the know so happy to stand corrected.

What isn't in doubt is what a huge let down he was on the footballing side. A man of his experience couldn't make any improvement on Monk's results or performances (he was considerably worse).

[areNOTwhatTHEYseem]

2 minutes ago, 4evaowl said:

I don't believe TP wasn't aware of the issues at the club before he took over.

Neither do I believe he offered to walk away from his contract for nothing.

 

I doubt he expected some of the things he encountered during his brief tenure.

 

As for the contract thing, it was reported by Nancy Frostick in The Athletic that, "despite Chansiri’s claims that Pulis would not agree to leave on mutually-agreed terms rather than being sacked, The Athletic understands that Pulis had agreed to such a deal that meant he would relinquish his severance fee. A breakdown in dealings with club officials rendered such an agreement impossible as Chansiri opted instead to sack his manager."

[4evaowl]

19 minutes ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

I doubt he expected some of the things he encountered during his brief tenure.

 

As for the contract thing, it was reported by Nancy Frostick in The Athletic that, "despite Chansiri’s claims that Pulis would not agree to leave on mutually-agreed terms rather than being sacked, The Athletic understands that Pulis had agreed to such a deal that meant he would relinquish his severance fee. A breakdown in dealings with club officials rendered such an agreement impossible as Chansiri opted instead to sack his manager."

Thanks for the source. Still think something doesn’t make sense about his departure.

In any event, it’s his tenure as manager that was the real let down for me. 

[Lincowl]

He was mainly hampered by a bad working relationship with Chansiri. What’s Moore’s excuse?