Stoke chairman defends their tactics.

[paulchapo]

It wasn't just the style i meant but their physical push the rules as far as you can approach.

 

[BertTrautmann'sParachute]

To be fair, I don't think Stoke have a lot to answer for. Their fans for booing Silva maybe... but their actual team don't do a lot wrong. If anything it's the refs that let them get away with murder.

They 'don't do a lot wrong' but the refs 'let them get away with murder'? Well, which is it?

The best way I can explain it is that I have this theory that a team's rep paves the way for decisions they get.

'Physical sides' like Stoke are allowed to play hard, and they do, but they don't cheat.
But for many other sides a lot of the hard tackles Stoke make would be fouls, because the refs IMO don't acknowledge them as physical sides.

For me it's simply a consistency problem, some teams are allowed to get amongst their opponent and others aren't.

Happens on an individual level too, Balotelli can't touch a man without it being a foul but if Tevez slides about it's 'hard work' and less likely to be penalised.

Fully agree with that. It explains liverpool, stoke and everton as far as the refs go. Doesn't explain the rags, though, does it?

 

[jimmygrumble]

Sorry but i fookin hate stoke. All this stuff from Coates and Pullis is bollocks. They play percentages every step of the way, its dull, its tedious and its close to cheating. OK, if you want to be really open minded, you can say that they play to their strengths and if they had more money they would play proper football, crap. Newcastle, Norwich, Swansea to name but three, they dont have to ruin football to stay up.

Their game is based around the margins, an elbow in the back every jump, they play for set pieces, get to the opposing 18 yard line and fall over, get a throw in, a free kick, a corner. Narrow the pitch, break the game up, roll around injured if your winning, hoof the ball into orbit, play with 2 fucking giants with elbows at the ready.

I could go on and on, yeah ok they will stay up, but eventually they will crash and burn and good fuckin riddance. People pay good money to travel to watch their team , reduced to their level.

Where are John Beck and Wimbledon now, thats where Stoke will end up with luck.

phew, rant over.

 

[KolarovsLeftPeg]

They 'don't do a lot wrong' but the refs 'let them get away with murder'? Well, which is it?

The best way I can explain it is that I have this theory that a team's rep paves the way for decisions they get.

'Physical sides' like Stoke are allowed to play hard, and they do, but they don't cheat.
But for many other sides a lot of the hard tackles Stoke make would be fouls, because the refs IMO don't acknowledge them as physical sides.

For me it's simply a consistency problem, some teams are allowed to get amongst their opponent and others aren't.

Happens on an individual level too, Balotelli can't touch a man without it being a foul but if Tevez slides about it's 'hard work' and less likely to be penalised.

Fully agree with that. It explains liverpool, stoke and everton as far as the refs go. Doesn't explain the rags, though, does it?

The rags have an oddly versatile view which helps them IMO.
They're seen as physical, whilst being seen as a footballing team, explains why they do get a bit of leniency IMO. Teams like us and Arsenal don't get ANYTHING on the 50/50's, teams like Stoke and Everton dominate those decisions, I reckon the rags fall around the middle.

 

[BertTrautmann'sParachute]

Sorry but i fookin hate stoke. All this stuff from Coates and Pullis is bollocks. They play percentages every step of the way, its dull, its tedious and its close to cheating. OK, if you want to be really open minded, you can say that they play to their strengths and if they had more money they would play proper football, crap. Newcastle, Norwich, Swansea to name but three, they dont have to ruin football to stay up.

Their game is based around the margins, an elbow in the back every jump, they play for set pieces, get to the opposing 18 yard line and fall over, get a throw in, a free kick, a corner. Narrow the pitch, break the game up, roll around injured if your winning, hoof the ball into orbit, play with 2 fucking giants with elbows at the ready.

I could go on and on, yeah ok they will stay up, but eventually they will crash and burn and good fuckin riddance. People pay good money to travel to watch their team , reduced to their level.

Where are John Beck and Wimbledon now, thats where Stoke will end up with luck.

phew, rant over.

The 'bottom line' is that if everyone played football like stoke then the stadiums would be empty and the television cameras would be pointed at another sport.

 

[jimmygrumble]

Sorry but i fookin hate stoke. All this stuff from Coates and Pullis is bollocks. They play percentages every step of the way, its dull, its tedious and its close to cheating. OK, if you want to be really open minded, you can say that they play to their strengths and if they had more money they would play proper football, crap. Newcastle, Norwich, Swansea to name but three, they dont have to ruin football to stay up.

Their game is based around the margins, an elbow in the back every jump, they play for set pieces, get to the opposing 18 yard line and fall over, get a throw in, a free kick, a corner. Narrow the pitch, break the game up, roll around injured if your winning, hoof the ball into orbit, play with 2 fucking giants with elbows at the ready.

I could go on and on, yeah ok they will stay up, but eventually they will crash and burn and good fuckin riddance. People pay good money to travel to watch their team , reduced to their level.

Where are John Beck and Wimbledon now, thats where Stoke will end up with luck.

phew, rant over.

The 'bottom line' is that if everyone played football like stoke then the stadiums would be empty and the television cameras would be pointed at another sport.

Aye mate, you are right there, i boycotted going to stoke last season after going there in the league and the cup the season before, should have known better for this season. Same old. They should get done under trade descriptions for calling it football.

 

[BertTrautmann'sParachute]

The best way I can explain it is that I have this theory that a team's rep paves the way for decisions they get.

'Physical sides' like Stoke are allowed to play hard, and they do, but they don't cheat.
But for many other sides a lot of the hard tackles Stoke make would be fouls, because the refs IMO don't acknowledge them as physical sides.

For me it's simply a consistency problem, some teams are allowed to get amongst their opponent and others aren't.

Happens on an individual level too, Balotelli can't touch a man without it being a foul but if Tevez slides about it's 'hard work' and less likely to be penalised.

Fully agree with that. It explains liverpool, stoke and everton as far as the refs go. Doesn't explain the rags, though, does it?

The rags have an oddly versatile view which helps them IMO.
They're seen as physical, whilst being seen as a footballing team, explains why they do get a bit of leniency IMO. Teams like us and Arsenal don't get ANYTHING on the 50/50's, teams like Stoke and Everton dominate those decisions, I reckon the rags fall around the middle.

Okay, what you're saying is the refs, who depend on football for a living, penalise teams like City and Arsenal that attract people to football, whilst bending over backwards for teams that would turn people away from the game?

 

[KolarovsLeftPeg]

Fully agree with that. It explains liverpool, stoke and everton as far as the refs go. Doesn't explain the rags, though, does it?

The rags have an oddly versatile view which helps them IMO.
They're seen as physical, whilst being seen as a footballing team, explains why they do get a bit of leniency IMO. Teams like us and Arsenal don't get ANYTHING on the 50/50's, teams like Stoke and Everton dominate those decisions, I reckon the rags fall around the middle.

Okay, what you're saying is the refs, who depend on football for a living, penalise teams like City and Arsenal that attract people to football, whilst bending over backwards for teams that would turn people away from the game?

It's not quite so conscious is what I'm saying. Obviously if the refs were thinking about it so consciously it'd be a VERY odd way to officiate.

I just think that when a crowd like Stoke's is there, and Stoke are flying around with hard challenges the ref is more likely to subconsciously let them off because he knows they're based around a physical game.

 

[paulchapo]

Sorry but i fookin hate stoke. All this stuff from Coates and Pullis is bollocks. They play percentages every step of the way, its dull, its tedious and its close to cheating. OK, if you want to be really open minded, you can say that they play to their strengths and if they had more money they would play proper football, crap. Newcastle, Norwich, Swansea to name but three, they dont have to ruin football to stay up.

Their game is based around the margins, an elbow in the back every jump, they play for set pieces, get to the opposing 18 yard line and fall over, get a throw in, a free kick, a corner. Narrow the pitch, break the game up, roll around injured if your winning, hoof the ball into orbit, play with 2 fucking giants with elbows at the ready.

I could go on and on, yeah ok they will stay up, but eventually they will crash and burn and good fuckin riddance. People pay good money to travel to watch their team , reduced to their level.

Where are John Beck and Wimbledon now, thats where Stoke will end up with luck.

phew, rant over.

Great post!

 

[Neville Kneville]

The rags have an oddly versatile view which helps them IMO.
They're seen as physical, whilst being seen as a footballing team, explains why they do get a bit of leniency IMO. Teams like us and Arsenal don't get ANYTHING on the 50/50's, teams like Stoke and Everton dominate those decisions, I reckon the rags fall around the middle.

Okay, what you're saying is the refs, who depend on football for a living, penalise teams like City and Arsenal that attract people to football, whilst bending over backwards for teams that would turn people away from the game?

It's not quite so conscious is what I'm saying. Obviously if the refs were thinking about it so consciously it'd be a VERY odd way to officiate.

I just think that when a crowd like Stoke's is there, and Stoke are flying around with hard challenges the ref is more likely to subconsciously let them off because he knows they're based around a physical game.

They used to let Wimbledon get away with murder for the same reason.

As for the scum though, refs are just scared to give too many decisions against them, end of story.