[Slick_Footwork]

He's done a cracking job so far in terms of results, not performances. I do agree though that us as baggies used to despise Stoke and the way they played and often said how glad we were that we didnt have Pulis in charge and how we would never want that style of play brought up here. So I think some of us are being a bit two faced. But who am I to judge cause no doubt I'll get slated for saying this by some.

I don't think the performances have been that bad at all. West Ham at home was probably the best
we've been for a couple of years. I thought we were excellent against Stoke and very good against
Southampton and Swansea.

And the bulk of that side are the same bunch of players that IMO gave the worst home performances
I've seen in many years against Everton and Newcastle in Irvine's time. We were pitiful.

The transformation is astonishing with the bulk of the same players.

Away from home there's a problem for sure. We don't have the speed and incisiveness to play such
a defensive style and pose much threat on the break. I guess that's something that will be worked on
in the summer.

There's a stigma with Pulis that is causing a lot of people to be negative, despite great results with
very mediocre players. When Hodgson played Reid and Ridgewell at full back, who were essentially
just defenders, nobody really moaned or even noticed. But because it's Pulis, people are moaning
despite the results.

If Pulis starts buying a bunch of plodders who can't play, then I will moan. Because I hate watching
people who can't play. But I can't get my head around people who are moaning about this before it's
happened (and might never happen).