Jump to content
oneBoro Forum

Boro v Aston Villa - Playoff Semi Final (Second Leg) 0-0 (0-1 agg)


Recommended Posts

There is no point changing the manager, we've been boring under 4 managers in a row and changing the manager again would just bring more upheavel and likely result in us losing alot more games anyway. People complain about it being "pulisball" like we were some amazing attacking team under monk that won 4-3's all day when we were boring under him and just conceded alot more. If we actually make good signings for once we'd probably be alot more entertaining than simply being traore and the other 10 waiting for him to do something.

 

and yeah I'll be renewing my season ticket regardless.

 

We didn't concede any more under Monk than Pulis.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 496
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  •  

    44

  •  

    40

  •  

    33

  •  

    29

Smogster makes an interesting point about the quality of the league next year.

 

I expect us to be challenging around the Top 4/6. Whoever loses he final between Fulham & Villa will likely be my favourites to win the league. Stoke may spend big, but we've seen that fail before - a lot depends who's in charge there I reckon. West Brom with Dean Smith could be a contender. Expect clubs like Brentford and Derby to keep building if they keep their current bosses too.

 

See bud I actually think it could be make or bust for both Villa and Fulham. A lot of talk from both clubs that Fulham will lose the likes sessegnon, Crainey and the manager. Villa apparently will be in massive financial trouble if they don't go up this year and will likely have to sell just to break even.

I don't think any if the clubs coming down are particularly scary either. I can see it being a weaker league next year. Won't matter like if we keep Pulis.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I thought you genuinely wanted a football debate then I'd spend a bit of time reading your posts and replying.

 

I've got no problems with a difference of opinion but I get the impression your sole purpose on here involves trying to get people involved in arguments with you.

 

You're calling people stupid on another thread, saying we're incapable of learning on this thread now your telling me what MY problem is.

 

If that isn't intended to provoke an argument then I don't know what is and like I said I can't be bothered.

 

Your initial offerings to the manager thread I started were to suggest Garry Monk, then Woodgate and Downing, then could we get Agnew back from Villa and finally the bad taste suggestion of Leo.  Was that your attempt at a genuine football debate then?

 

You have plenty of problems with a difference of opinion.  Everytime Pulis gets criticised on here you're straight on to defend the bloke.  Either you really think he's great or you were so desperate to get rid of Monk that you now feel you have to back Pulis to the hilt.  Personally I think it's the latter rather than the former.

 

I didn't call anybody stupid on the other thread.  You said that lots of people would accept pragmatic football as long as it gets results and I said in that case then lots of people are stupid.  It still hasn't been explained to me why good football can't be played with good results but you seem to insist that it's one or the other.  Why?  It's not the first time you've suggested it so don't make out that I'm being unreasonable.  Also, earlier on this thread you said, "I think sometimes some fans think more strikers = more chance of winning a game.  It's not that simple".  That's not calling people stupid of course, it's just insinuating it.

 

I stand by the comment I made about people being incapable of learning.  I'm reading the same things here that I read before Karanka left as well.  "There was nothing else he could do", "if we'd done this or that then we'd have been hammered", "who else is better?" (as every possible candidate is made out to be utterly useless), "it's not his fault".  Stuff get's repeated on here all the time.

 

I don't mind people being critical of me if that's the way they want to go but I do have a problem with hypocrisy.  There are a fair few on here that seem to think that when they do something it's fine but if someone else does it then there's a problem.  So if you want a proper debate then let's have one but if all you want to say is that nothing is down to Pulis and we can't find anyone better then with respect you aren't interested in any kind of debate or discussion so don't pretend that you are in an attempt to take the higher ground.

 

You have me down as a Pulis fan, I'm not. He wasn't my first choice and I don't particularly like his brand of football. I've said the same thing since day one but I'll admit if it gets us up then I'll take it for a couple of seasons.

 

I've defended Pulis at times on here and I've also been very critical of him. You are either focussing on just the positive comments I've made or you haven't read any of the critical points I've made. If it's the second one then fair enough but I find that very surprising.

 

I don't believe there's no one better than Pulis out there, if he left today I wouldn't be bothered in the slightest.

My comments on the manager thread were just very silly comments which I thought was obvious. You make make quite a few daft comments yourself which I can tell are obvious jokes, if anyone took the Leo comment in bad taste then I apologise but that certainly wasnt my intention.

 

I feel like when someone disagrees with you, you resort to the comments like last night. That makes me wonder whether you think everything is black and white and only you are ever right or you are just on a mission to constantly wind people up.

If I think someone wants to engage in an argument for the sake of arguing I'm not gonna waste my time.

 

One last thing. I said last night that Pulis could have tried other things I also think that if we'd have opened up the game any more then we'd have been picked apart on the break. I think he could have been more positive but I don't think it would have made a difference. That was my point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no point changing the manager, we've been boring under 4 managers in a row and changing the manager again would just bring more upheavel and likely result in us losing alot more games anyway. People complain about it being "pulisball" like we were some amazing attacking team under monk that won 4-3's all day when we were boring under him and just conceded alot more. If we actually make good signings for once we'd probably be alot more entertaining than simply being traore and the other 10 waiting for him to do something.

 

and yeah I'll be renewing my season ticket regardless.

 

I just read the West Brom fans post on the manager thread and I worry for our gates next season but fair play to you - I think Gibsons statement at the start of the season put something firmly into fans minds and the appointment of Pulis goes completely against that statement - plus fans seem to have way more input now - as much as its widely agreed Monk and AK had to go but the fans at the stadium and social media had a big hand in it too.

 

What's the target next season?

"We want to smash the league, we want to go up as champions.

"We need to bring in the type of players to do what I said.

"We have a core of players who we feel are more than capable .We need to add to them, more flair, more pace."

 

Thats a direct quote from the interview transcript from Gibson - I think thats haunted him since he said it. In context he had already stated complete change, new direction for the club etc. I think thats another reason some fans are struggling to warm to TP, as for me, I'm worn out with the past few seasons and just want us to compete really because when we are competing we are entertaining.

Who knows he might abandon the football styles hes always played and surprise us............

Link to post
Share on other sites

Smogster makes an interesting point about the quality of the league next year.

 

I expect us to be challenging around the Top 4/6. Whoever loses he final between Fulham & Villa will likely be my favourites to win the league. Stoke may spend big, but we've seen that fail before - a lot depends who's in charge there I reckon. West Brom with Dean Smith could be a contender. Expect clubs like Brentford and Derby to keep building if they keep their current bosses too.

 

See bud I actually think it could be make or bust for both Villa and Fulham. A lot of talk from both clubs that Fulham will lose the likes sessegnon, Crainey and the manager. Villa apparently will be in massive financial trouble if they don't go up this year and will likely have to sell just to break even.

I don't think any if the clubs coming down are particularly scary either. I can see it being a weaker league next year. Won't matter like if we keep Pulis.

 

Certainly Villa will be in trouble, they've massively gone for it two years in a row, to make FFP on the third year they'll have to sell.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pulis has to go for last night.

 

 

 

The state of football these days when a manager is already getting called on to be sacked after half a season in which he made it into the playoffs with a team that isn't his.

 

Just to enforce your point - Sam Araldyce sacked today after taking Everton to 8th from relegation fodder - it really is a sad state of affairs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pulis has to go for last night.

 

 

 

The state of football these days when a manager is already getting called on to be sacked after half a season in which he made it into the playoffs with a team that isn't his.

 

Just to enforce your point - Sam Araldyce sacked today after taking Everton to 8th from relegation fodder - it really is a sad state of affairs.

 

That's different though. I don't think they ever wanted Allardyce. Now that SIlva is available, that's probably who they will get.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pulis has to go for last night.

 

 

 

The state of football these days when a manager is already getting called on to be sacked after half a season in which he made it into the playoffs with a team that isn't his.

 

Just to enforce your point - Sam Araldyce sacked today after taking Everton to 8th from relegation fodder - it really is a sad state of affairs.

 

That's different though. I don't think they ever wanted Allardyce. Now that SIlva is available, that's probably who they will get.

Isn't Pulis the same? I mean who wanted Pulis? I certainly didn't

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pulis has to go for last night.

 

 

 

The state of football these days when a manager is already getting called on to be sacked after half a season in which he made it into the playoffs with a team that isn't his.

 

Just to enforce your point - Sam Araldyce sacked today after taking Everton to 8th from relegation fodder - it really is a sad state of affairs.

 

That's different though. I don't think they ever wanted Allardyce. Now that SIlva is available, that's probably who they will get.

Isn't Pulis the same? I mean who wanted Pulis? I certainly didn't

 

I didn't either. My heart sank on the way to the match on Boxing Day. I think we should follow suit and acknowledge that Pulis was a stop gap like Allardyce and move onto a manager who could build something to be proud of.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no point changing the manager, we've been boring under 4 managers in a row and changing the manager again would just bring more upheavel and likely result in us losing alot more games anyway. People complain about it being "pulisball" like we were some amazing attacking team under monk that won 4-3's all day when we were boring under him and just conceded alot more. If we actually make good signings for once we'd probably be alot more entertaining than simply being traore and the other 10 waiting for him to do something.

 

and yeah I'll be renewing my season ticket regardless.

 

We didn't concede any more under Monk than Pulis.

I'm not great on stats etc but would like to see how Pulis stacked up against Monk - I watched some highlights (I know highlights aren't everything but its all I had) of games under Monk and the corresponding games under Pulis, after watching three I went into the cupboard to cry - if the stats are similar then one thing stood out to me was that we were certainly more entertaining.

But its only my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have me down as a Pulis fan, I'm not. He wasn't my first choice and I don't particularly like his brand of football. I've said the same thing since day one but I'll admit if it gets us up then I'll take it for a couple of seasons.

 

I've defended Pulis at times on here and I've also been very critical of him. You are either focussing on just the positive comments I've made or you haven't read any of the critical points I've made. If it's the second one then fair enough but I find that very surprising.

 

I don't believe there's no one better than Pulis out there, if he left today I wouldn't be bothered in the slightest.

My comments on the manager thread were just very silly comments which I thought was obvious. You make make quite a few daft comments yourself which I can tell are obvious jokes, if anyone took the Leo comment in bad taste then I apologise but that certainly wasnt my intention.

 

I feel like when someone disagrees with you, you resort to the comments like last night. That makes me wonder whether you think everything is black and white and only you are ever right or you are just on a mission to constantly wind people up.

If I think someone wants to engage in an argument for the sake of arguing I'm not gonna waste my time.

 

One last thing. I said last night that Pulis could have tried other things I also think that if we'd have opened up the game any more then we'd have been picked apart on the break. I think he could have been more positive but I don't think it would have made a difference. That was my point.

 

I can only base my opinion on what I read from you on here mate and to me you seem to defend the bloke quite a lot for someone that doesn't particularly like him.  It's entirely possible I've missed your criticisms of him because I don't remember seeing much although I'm fairly sure you've mentioned the football not being so good at times if that's what you mean?

 

I know the comments on the manager thread were silly comments and I definitely do the same myself but I don't do that and then talk about having a serious debate.  I think I was quite clearly trying to have a proper discussion last night on that thread and on this one about the future even if you didn't agree with a word of it.

 

If I was on a constant mission to wind people up I'd like to think I could do a better job of it and I'd also like to believe I wouldn't spend so much of my time explaining why I think what I think.

 

I completely disagree with the last paragraph and I suspect ultimately that's why we will never agree on this stuff at all.  You seem to think that if you become more attacking then you will automatically be worse off?  Villa weren't exactly struggling to cause us problems as it was and part of the reason for that was because of how we set up.  Long ball up to Britt on his own and back the ball comes.  Nothing going forward so eventually you try and force something and the other team take advantage.  They looked more likely to score than we did and I don't accept that it was because we weren't defensive enough.  It was because we weren't attacking enough and it was because of the god awful way we played in my opinion.  Both of those things are down to Pulis.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have me down as a Pulis fan, I'm not. He wasn't my first choice and I don't particularly like his brand of football. I've said the same thing since day one but I'll admit if it gets us up then I'll take it for a couple of seasons.

 

I've defended Pulis at times on here and I've also been very critical of him. You are either focussing on just the positive comments I've made or you haven't read any of the critical points I've made. If it's the second one then fair enough but I find that very surprising.

 

I don't believe there's no one better than Pulis out there, if he left today I wouldn't be bothered in the slightest.

My comments on the manager thread were just very silly comments which I thought was obvious. You make make quite a few daft comments yourself which I can tell are obvious jokes, if anyone took the Leo comment in bad taste then I apologise but that certainly wasnt my intention.

 

I feel like when someone disagrees with you, you resort to the comments like last night. That makes me wonder whether you think everything is black and white and only you are ever right or you are just on a mission to constantly wind people up.

If I think someone wants to engage in an argument for the sake of arguing I'm not gonna waste my time.

 

One last thing. I said last night that Pulis could have tried other things I also think that if we'd have opened up the game any more then we'd have been picked apart on the break. I think he could have been more positive but I don't think it would have made a difference. That was my point.

 

I can only base my opinion on what I read from you on here mate and to me you seem to defend the bloke quite a lot for someone that doesn't particularly like him.  It's entirely possible I've missed your criticisms of him because I don't remember seeing much although I'm fairly sure you've mentioned the football not being so good at times if that's what you mean?

 

I know the comments on the manager thread were silly comments and I definitely do the same myself but I don't do that and then talk about having a serious debate.  I think I was quite clearly trying to have a proper discussion last night on that thread and on this one about the future even if you didn't agree with a word of it.

 

If I was on a constant mission to wind people up I'd like to think I could do a better job of it and I'd also like to believe I wouldn't spend so much of my time explaining why I think what I think.

 

I completely disagree with the last paragraph and I suspect ultimately that's why we will never agree on this stuff at all.  You seem to think that if you become more attacking then you will automatically be worse off?  Villa weren't exactly struggling to cause us problems as it was and part of the reason for that was because of how we set up.  Long ball up to Britt on his own and back the ball comes.  Nothing going forward so eventually you try and force something and the other team take advantage.  They looked more likely to score than we did and I don't accept that it was because we weren't defensive enough.  It was because we weren't attacking enough and it was because of the god awful way we played in my opinion.  Both of those things are down to Pulis.

 

Let's forget the rest and stick to the football then shall we?

 

Ok let's look at yesterday, I might be completely wrong but this is what I think.

 

We were away from home and starting the game a goal down, against a team who were just a bit better than us. We had a really tough task to overturn the game.

 

I think there's a number of ways we could have approached the game each system or formation would have pros and cons to it. A number of people were suggesting 442, in my opinion doing that would have seen us overrun in midfield where Villa were very strong.

 

Some people were suggesting coming flying out of the traps which might have worked it might also have left us wide open at the back. If we'd conceded first the tie was virtually over.

 

Another way to look at it is yesterday was a 90 minute game where we we were a goal down in the first minute. In that type of game the team who are losing rarely panic they just work their way back into the game.

 

What could Pulis have done differently? I think we could have got bodies around Britt a lot quicker, I think that is meant to be Howson's job but he looks lost and seems to play games where he barely touches the ball. Obviously by committing more midfielders up the pitch we are leaving more spaces for Villa to counter attack into.

 

That's what I'm saying we could have tried every formation under the sun but the bottom line was that we needed more men in forward areas and by doing that leaves you exposed in others. It's a very fine line, I know we should have gambled more towards the end but in my opinion Villa looked the more likely to score in a open game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's forget the rest and stick to the football then shall we?

 

Ok let's look at yesterday, I might be completely wrong but this is what I think.

 

We were away from home and starting the game a goal down, against a team who were just a bit better than us. We had a really tough task to overturn the game.

 

I think there's a number of ways we could have approached the game each system or formation would have pros and cons to it. A number of people were suggesting 442, in my opinion doing that would have seen us overrun in midfield where Villa were very strong.

 

Some people were suggesting coming flying out of the traps which might have worked it might also have left us wide open at the back. If we'd conceded first the tie was virtually over.

 

Another way to look at it is yesterday was a 90 minute game where we we were a goal down in the first minute. In that type of game the team who are losing rarely panic they just work their way back into the game.

 

What could Pulis have done differently? I think we could have got bodies around Britt a lot quicker, I think that is meant to be Howson's job but he looks lost and seems to play games where he barely touches the ball. Obviously by committing more midfielders up the pitch we are leaving more spaces for Villa to counter attack into.

 

That's what I'm saying we could have tried every formation under the sun but the bottom line was that we needed more men in forward areas and by doing that leaves you exposed in others. It's a very fine line, I know we should have gambled more towards the end but in my opinion Villa looked the more likely to score in a open game.

 

 

Well said. As Tony Mowbray once said, "Players win matches, not formations". We're all disappointed, but I think we all knew deep down that this group of players were no where near good enough to compete. Probably our only chance to go through would have been a late equaliser and then hold on in extra time for a penalty shoot-out. All of this just delaying the inevitable and another Wembley defeat.

What now? Looks  like the club are settling in for an extended Championship stay.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...