[wba_1996]

Can't understand the hate for TP on this thread, infact its a joke. He has all but guaranteed survival in less than 3 months after we looked doomed to relegation under clueless Irvine, also I don't get where this idea of him signing centre backs in every position and only signing giants comes from - McManaman is 5'9" and Fletcher is 6'0". Yes the away performances have been pretty boring but at home we have been excellent.

Would people rather we had Irvine back, got relegated and spent years in the championship missing out on the TV money and the chance to grow our club? Because that is what would have happened.

What "hate"? From my own perspective Pulis has been effective and played some good football -at home. Away, we've been dreadfully negative and yes, he has a habit of playing central defenders as full backs and surely even his most fervent supporters can see that Lescott is not effective at full back. My complaint is that why he can't see that our form and results have been excellent at home, so why not try to replicate it away where our results adopting his approach have been poor? I now understand why my Stoke supporting colleagues at work liked him so much and I didn't - simply they watched Stoke at home while I just endured his away performances

Sorry, Zinman. Its just your first post and certainly BaggieMan's seemed overly negative to me. I agree 100% with your post above though, and I'm not Pulis' greatest fan or anything I just don't see how people can be so displeased after what we endured in the 18 months prior to him coming in.

---

Can't understand the hate for TP on this thread, infact its a joke. He has all but guaranteed survival in less than 3 months after we looked doomed to relegation under clueless Irvine, also I don't get where this idea of him signing centre backs in every position and only signing giants comes from - McManaman is 5'9" and Fletcher is 6'0". Yes the away performances have been pretty boring but at home we have been excellent.

Would people rather we had Irvine back, got relegated and spent years in the championship missing out on the TV money and the chance to grow our club? Because that is what would have happened.

What "hate"? From my own perspective Pulis has been effective and played some good football -at home. Away, we've been dreadfully negative and yes, he has a habit of playing central defenders as full backs and surely even his most fervent supporters can see that Lescott is not effective at full back. My complaint is that why he can't see that our form and results have been excellent at home, so why not try to replicate it away where our results adopting his approach have been poor? I now understand why my Stoke supporting colleagues at work liked him so much and I didn't - simply they watched Stoke at home while I just endured his away performances

I agree with your sentiments 1996 but also agree that the word 'hate' is a bit strong. The simple fact is that TP has turned us round very quickly from nose diving into the Championship to very likely surviving with a little to spare (God willing).
Of that I'm sure we're all very grateful, but that doesn't make TP immune from any criticism.....actually even THAT word is a bit strong IMO. 'Questioning some selections' is maybe nearer the mark - which we are surely entitled to do (particularly when he plays our best CB at LB where his lack of pace is obviously going to be targetted).

Yeah 'hate' probably wasn't the best choice of word but it was the first that came to mind. Some of these quotes are a bit more than 'Questioning some selections' though wouldn't you agree:

"We may dream of a team of Tony Browns but TP dreams of a team of centre halves and Saturday gives him a chance to move closer to his dream."

"In summer we will see an influx of 6ft 6in skinhead thugs in the same mould as Ryan Shawcross and Charlie Adam.  Zzzzzzzzz...."