This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Rumour: Pulis To Quit In The Summer
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 merganser  26 Jan 14 11.37pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
In Millen we trust!
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Willo South coast - west of Brighton. 26 Jan 14 11.38pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Skinster at 26 Jan 2014 11.33pm
Rumours flying around internet that laudrup is going to quit/sacked and pulis is wanted by Swansea? I cannot verify this statement.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| essetwentyone london 26 Jan 14 11.40pm |
|
|---|---|
|
The Beano is reporting that we are going to sign Desperate Dan as a centre half, Dennis the Menace as a striker and Tom,Dick and Harry as a midfield trio. Makes more sense than all the sh1t on this topic and especially out of the red rag "Mirror"
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| merganser 26 Jan 14 11.41pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Perhaps there will be a swap - Pulis. for Laudrup!
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
seltz85  Sydney 26 Jan 14 11.51pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Ian J at 26 Jan 2014 8.38am
Quote laddo at 26 Jan 2014 7.53am
It is obvious Tony Pulis has done a great job since coming in. However, if he wants Matthew Etherington (32) and Peter Crouch (33+) then I for one applaud the board for not sanctioning those transfers. Pulis would have been reassured about having money to spend. I absolutely believe that side of the story. However, the board have consistently said that they would only buy players with sell on value. They will also not be put over a barrel regarding wages. That ladies and gentlemen is sensible, long term, sound financial management. I amazes me that given our history some on this board demand we gamble our future. If I have one criticism there may well indeed be too many chiefs at the moment. However Pulis knew that structure was in place when he joined. If he is grumpy about it now then quite frankly he has no reason to be. The one thing that we don’t know is the nitty gritty of the discussions between Parish and Pulis that led to Tony Pulis accepting a job that he clearly had reservations about. There was an agreement that the board would make available funding in January for new purchases but was Tony Pulis told that whilst he was being employed for his skills in football management the board who had no footballing background at all would hold the power of veto over players that met his budgetary requirements. Have the board actually come out and said that they would only buy players with a sell on value as if so I think that it’s a ridiculous idea as we are a football club and not commodity traders. Was the huge fee paid for Dwight Gayle paid on the basis that he would have a sell on value as whilst he undoubtedly does, it’s nowhere near what we paid for him and he isn’t good enough to play in the Premiership but that’s what you get when you have the commodity traders mindset in a football club Not being put over a barrel in terms of wages is a sound idea and good business practice but it depends on what they view as a decent wage level. It appears from all of the players that turned us down (allegedly) in both the closed season and in the January window that our wage scale is not a Premiership wage scale at all but is set (probably) at The Championship. It’s a bit like joining the most expensive golf club in the area and then constantly complaining about the costs of membership. Your comment about there being too many chiefs is interesting as whilst the structure may have been explained to Tony Pulis before he took the job we don’t know that the supposed structure is actually working. Dor a start Iain Moody is supposed to be negotiating with the players on Tony Pulis’s wanted list but I suspect that isn’t happening and secondly with the best will in the world I don’t suppose he realised that the club’s chairman wanted to have the last word on almost everything. A common question asked on this forum is surely you would rather have our owners than those that own Cardiff or Hull. Well my answer is that I’m not sure that I do as Hull and Cardiff may have issues with their colours and strips but both owners have backed their club and it’s managers fully with the necessary funding and don’t interfere with the running of the clubs
Great Post. I agree 100% with everything apart from the owners bit. I wouldn't want owners like Hull or Cardiff, they have no idea what they are doing and will easily walk away from the club and leave it deb ridden if it doesnt go their way. Parish and Co wont do that, but I do think they need to speculate to accumulate, let's hope that by friday we have been surprised and a couple of much needed players have come onboard
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| seeweedhater London 26 Jan 14 11.56pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote merganser at 26 Jan 2014 11.41pm
Perhaps there will be a swap - Pulis. for Laudrup!
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| sueagle2012 26 Jan 14 11.59pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote movingforward at 26 Jan 2014 10.30pm
Quote sueagle2012 at 26 Jan 2014 10.28pm
Quote Medway Eagle at 26 Jan 2014 10.16pm
Just read on News now, that Pulis is now a target for Swansea, As Laudrup has fallen out with the chairman, to be honest if we don't sign the players he was lead to beleive we would, I would not blame him if he went there, he is a welsh boy anyway
Really can't see Swansea going for Pulis ...they have had invested heavily in the passing style with managers such as Soussa, Martinez, Rogers and Laudrup. Can't really see them doing a complete U turn and adopting Pulis style of football. Can you explain Pulis style of football? We haven't seen any hoof ball since he joined us, in fact Holloway played long ball far more! Yes.. agree it is not hoofball but Pulis focuses on remaining very tight at the back, giving up a lot of possession even at home and relying on winning by the odd goal. I actually think this is the most sensible approach for Palace but Swansea have now built a reputation on keep ball and "attractive" style of football with last 5-6 managers and I am not convinced they will do a U turn ..even if they get rid of Laudrup. Pulis is a great manager for our club but not Swansea type for me!
Edited by sueagle2012 (27 Jan 2014 12.00am)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Skinster 27 Jan 14 12.06am |
|
|---|---|
|
My understanding of the wage situation is not what we are prepared to pay now but what we are prepared to pay if we get relegated.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| movingforward 27 Jan 14 12.34am |
|
|---|---|
|
January 2013 Wigan bought in Roger Espinoza (Sporting Kansas City, free), Angelo Henriquez (Manchester United, loan), Joel (Atletico Madrid, loan), Paul Scharner (Hamburg, loan) and got relegated. Reading bought in Daniel Carrico (Sporting Lisbon, £500,000), Hope Akpan (Crawley, undisclosed), Stephen Kelly (Fulham, undisclosed), Nick Blackman (Sheffield United, £1.2m) and got relegated. QPR spent big on Loic Remy (Marseille, £8m), Tal Ben Haim (free agent), Christopher Samba (Anzhi, £12.5m), Jermaine Jenas (Tottenham, undisclosed), Andros Townsend (Tottenham, loan) yet got relegated. January 2012 Bolton bought in Marvin Sordell (Watford, £4m), Tim Ream (New York Red Bulls, £2.5m), Ryo Miyachi (Arsenal, L) and got relegated. Blackburn bought in Tim Payne (Waitakere U, U), Marcus Olsson (Halmstads, F), Anthony Modeste (Bordeaux, L). Bradley Orr (QPR, U) and got relegated. Wolves bought in Eggart Jonsson (Heart of Midlothian, £200,000), Emmanuel Frimpong (Arsenal, L), Sebastien Bassong (Tottenham, L) and got relegated. Lack of goals were main problems for all these teams. qpr actually had 14th best defence 2012-13, just couldn't score! We are ranked 20th on attack so far this season and need to score goals in order to have a fighting chance so with Murray not back until end Feb at earliest we have to buy a striker, someone that can feed off scraps and is proven at this level. Sunderland and Southampton bought well Jan 2013 to survive from relation, and Wigan bought Beausejour in Jan 2012, was a big influence on them escaping relegation.
“I fear the day when the technology overlaps with our humanity. The world will only have a generation of idiots.” ~ |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Midlands Eagle 27 Jan 14 6.12am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote FinchleyEagle at 26 Jan 2014 11.07pm
<sigh> Tabloids really are the scum of the earth. Although I guess it could be said if you pay any attention to them you deserve all you get... The Telegraph isn't a tabloid and it is them that are leading with the story about Tony Pulis being a target for Swansea
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Midlands Eagle 27 Jan 14 6.18am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote seltz85 at 26 Jan 2014 11.51pm
Quote Ian J at 26 Jan 2014 8.38am
Quote laddo at 26 Jan 2014 7.53am
It is obvious Tony Pulis has done a great job since coming in. However, if he wants Matthew Etherington (32) and Peter Crouch (33+) then I for one applaud the board for not sanctioning those transfers. Pulis would have been reassured about having money to spend. I absolutely believe that side of the story. However, the board have consistently said that they would only buy players with sell on value. They will also not be put over a barrel regarding wages. That ladies and gentlemen is sensible, long term, sound financial management. I amazes me that given our history some on this board demand we gamble our future. If I have one criticism there may well indeed be too many chiefs at the moment. However Pulis knew that structure was in place when he joined. If he is grumpy about it now then quite frankly he has no reason to be. The one thing that we don’t know is the nitty gritty of the discussions between Parish and Pulis that led to Tony Pulis accepting a job that he clearly had reservations about. There was an agreement that the board would make available funding in January for new purchases but was Tony Pulis told that whilst he was being employed for his skills in football management the board who had no footballing background at all would hold the power of veto over players that met his budgetary requirements. Have the board actually come out and said that they would only buy players with a sell on value as if so I think that it’s a ridiculous idea as we are a football club and not commodity traders. Was the huge fee paid for Dwight Gayle paid on the basis that he would have a sell on value as whilst he undoubtedly does, it’s nowhere near what we paid for him and he isn’t good enough to play in the Premiership but that’s what you get when you have the commodity traders mindset in a football club Not being put over a barrel in terms of wages is a sound idea and good business practice but it depends on what they view as a decent wage level. It appears from all of the players that turned us down (allegedly) in both the closed season and in the January window that our wage scale is not a Premiership wage scale at all but is set (probably) at The Championship. It’s a bit like joining the most expensive golf club in the area and then constantly complaining about the costs of membership. Your comment about there being too many chiefs is interesting as whilst the structure may have been explained to Tony Pulis before he took the job we don’t know that the supposed structure is actually working. Dor a start Iain Moody is supposed to be negotiating with the players on Tony Pulis’s wanted list but I suspect that isn’t happening and secondly with the best will in the world I don’t suppose he realised that the club’s chairman wanted to have the last word on almost everything. A common question asked on this forum is surely you would rather have our owners than those that own Cardiff or Hull. Well my answer is that I’m not sure that I do as Hull and Cardiff may have issues with their colours and strips but both owners have backed their club and it’s managers fully with the necessary funding and don’t interfere with the running of the clubs
Great Post. I agree 100% with everything apart from the owners bit. I wouldn't want owners like Hull or Cardiff, they have no idea what they are doing and will easily walk away from the club and leave it deb ridden if it doesnt go their way. Parish and Co wont do that, but I do think they need to speculate to accumulate, let's hope that by friday we have been surprised and a couple of much needed players have come onboard But the owners of Cardiff and Hull don't interfere with the footballing side of the club at all. One changed the colours that they play in and the other wants a slight change to the club's name. People do claim that if they don't get their own way that they might just walk away from the club but somehow I doubt it as it would mean writing off the sizeable debts that the clubs own them and no-ne is daft enough to cut off their noses to spite a few disgruntled fans.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| beagle pom tiddly om pom pom 27 Jan 14 6.37am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Ian J at 27 Jan 2014 6.18am
Quote seltz85 at 26 Jan 2014 11.51pm
Quote Ian J at 26 Jan 2014 8.38am
Quote laddo at 26 Jan 2014 7.53am
It is obvious Tony Pulis has done a great job since coming in. However, if he wants Matthew Etherington (32) and Peter Crouch (33+) then I for one applaud the board for not sanctioning those transfers. Pulis would have been reassured about having money to spend. I absolutely believe that side of the story. However, the board have consistently said that they would only buy players with sell on value. They will also not be put over a barrel regarding wages. That ladies and gentlemen is sensible, long term, sound financial management. I amazes me that given our history some on this board demand we gamble our future. If I have one criticism there may well indeed be too many chiefs at the moment. However Pulis knew that structure was in place when he joined. If he is grumpy about it now then quite frankly he has no reason to be. The one thing that we don’t know is the nitty gritty of the discussions between Parish and Pulis that led to Tony Pulis accepting a job that he clearly had reservations about. There was an agreement that the board would make available funding in January for new purchases but was Tony Pulis told that whilst he was being employed for his skills in football management the board who had no footballing background at all would hold the power of veto over players that met his budgetary requirements. Have the board actually come out and said that they would only buy players with a sell on value as if so I think that it’s a ridiculous idea as we are a football club and not commodity traders. Was the huge fee paid for Dwight Gayle paid on the basis that he would have a sell on value as whilst he undoubtedly does, it’s nowhere near what we paid for him and he isn’t good enough to play in the Premiership but that’s what you get when you have the commodity traders mindset in a football club Not being put over a barrel in terms of wages is a sound idea and good business practice but it depends on what they view as a decent wage level. It appears from all of the players that turned us down (allegedly) in both the closed season and in the January window that our wage scale is not a Premiership wage scale at all but is set (probably) at The Championship. It’s a bit like joining the most expensive golf club in the area and then constantly complaining about the costs of membership. Your comment about there being too many chiefs is interesting as whilst the structure may have been explained to Tony Pulis before he took the job we don’t know that the supposed structure is actually working. Dor a start Iain Moody is supposed to be negotiating with the players on Tony Pulis’s wanted list but I suspect that isn’t happening and secondly with the best will in the world I don’t suppose he realised that the club’s chairman wanted to have the last word on almost everything. A common question asked on this forum is surely you would rather have our owners than those that own Cardiff or Hull. Well my answer is that I’m not sure that I do as Hull and Cardiff may have issues with their colours and strips but both owners have backed their club and it’s managers fully with the necessary funding and don’t interfere with the running of the clubs
Great Post. I agree 100% with everything apart from the owners bit. I wouldn't want owners like Hull or Cardiff, they have no idea what they are doing and will easily walk away from the club and leave it deb ridden if it doesnt go their way. Parish and Co wont do that, but I do think they need to speculate to accumulate, let's hope that by friday we have been surprised and a couple of much needed players have come onboard But the owners of Cardiff and Hull don't interfere with the footballing side of the club at all. One changed the colours that they play in and the other wants a slight change to the club's name. People do claim that if they don't get their own way that they might just walk away from the club but somehow I doubt it as it would mean writing off the sizeable debts that the clubs own them and no-ne is daft enough to cut off their noses to spite a few disgruntled fans. Not true.
When the time comes, I want die just like my Dad - at peace and asleep. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.