I know you intend no criticism with your comments Ian. We both follow the game and would gladly see the ethos of open play perpetuated, but nonetheless I must disagree to some extent.
I used an 'N' word but it was nous and not negativity. A mate of mine is a Spurs fan and he constantly derides Pulis as an exponent of the 'long ball game'. There is a great article on the BBC website on this very subject - Tony Pulis. I think the perception is misplaced. Stoke play to a plan, and the players learn it and play with diligence and effort to it.
The win against Arsenal was no fluke. As have been many other wins of their this season. Long throws - forget it! Stoke get goals from rank bad defending. Defending long thros and long clearances are part of the game.
When is a long ball route 1 and when is it a 'visionary' pass. When Beckham did it we hailed him as a genius. When Stoke do it, it's route 1.
A good team can and should defend aganist such basic tactics and if Stoke were as 1 dimensional as people say they would be found out and roundly beaten out of the division. They haven't been.
Bolton. Coyle likes to play an attacking game. His flair would have got Burnley relegated anyway, but at Bolton they are made of sterner stuff with better quality and this season they have proved it or more than one occasion.
Bruce. Sunderland had a falllow spell and flirted with the relegation zone. He cited injuries and the like, but as usual his nous and player management skills won the day. Same with MacLeish
Moyes - probably the best British manager in the division after SAF (IMHO). No real money, always loads of injuries, often no luck, he always gets Everton back up and running.
Sorry but you can't accuse any of these guys of being negative. They just get the very best out of what they have. Same with Harry R at Spurs. Man management. He gets players with less ability to over achieve, and those with more most times to realise their potential. None of these guys will stand shirkers.
So if Upson is to go anywhere maybe it should be to one of these clubs 'cos he needs a good kick up the jacksy.
West Ham are going down because they have been gutless shirkers for most of the season. The word is 'losers'. I won't bother to get the stats but the Hammers have lost at least 7 games when they were in front. They cannot defend a lead which often was hard earned. Good first half then the opposing manager gets into his boys and the Hammers fold. Losers.
Maybe from 5th or 6th in the league one can look down and espouse the virtues of open football, jumpers for goalposts and all that. But from down here looking up I guarantee that your view is somewhat different.
I like open football as much as anyone. And most fans of WH would and do accept defeat well providing the players have given their all and not made basic errors unworthy of a professional sportsman. Thats what we haven't seen this year, and that is what Grant has presided over. For that alone he should go. This is a results driven business and his have been appalling from day 1. Even were they to somehow pull it off in these next 2 games my view would be the same.
The table doesn't lie. Luck, good or bad hasn't got so much to do with it.
No Hits, No Hype.......................Classic Rock Jan 2012
"
For me I am really pleased that we got a crack at it and hopefully learned a thing or two, - I was lucking enough to have a great Wednesday night at WHL in the rain and be part of it.
