I fully agree with CT on this, that performance tonight was absolutely turgid and nothing like what Woodgate has said he wants his teams to play like. I'm personally of the opinion that I don't really care about performance aslong as we win, but we were getting results under Pulis mostly and played much better than what I seen tonight for the most part. Confirmation Bias is definitely effecting peoples positivity on Pulis football vs Woodgate football.
I have absolutely no doubt we would have had more points on the board so far and been through in the cup if TP was still in charge, but as has been said, Woodgate might just need time, but if anybody can sit and say what we produced tonight was better than 'Pulisball' they aren't being subjective at all and are purely basing it on a dislike for Pulis.
FWIW I thought it was time for Pulis to go so this isn't me defending TP, but what we're seeing isnt much different to last year.
Like I said in my other post, people hated Pulis for far more than that. I don't think all of it was actually justified, certainly not to begin with and certainly not all the time. Surely this situation proves that more than anything, where people can see a similar thing from a different manager and feel quite significantly different about it. There was that undertone to his tenure that existed far beyond what people saw at the Riverside and it bled into the atmosphere within the Stadium too, I imagine. I think at times some hated him more for the reputation of his football than they actually hated his football to begin with, despite claiming that it was entirely the latter and I find that quite bizarre.
We were able to beat what was in front of us last season as well. I suppose I am waiting to see more and I didn't see anything tonight even though we won. Like I say, the performance is the performance whoever is in charge but maybe that's a flawed way of looking at it, I don't know.