They also got rid of Pulis. Because the fans weren't satisfied with merely staying in the Premier League, they demanded more exciting football. So they sacked the manager that kept them up...look what happened after that.

As for the American investment, they do seem to have become scapegoats in some people's eyes. But they were brought into the club by Steve Parish, and my perception is that they were willing to invest while leaving the day to day running to him. Is that condition a stumbling block to further investment either from Harris and Blitzer or any new investors ? I think it may well be the case.

Old, Ungifted and White

Not sure I agree with all the head in the sand stuff about 'getting enough points to stay up'.
Stoke City is a very good example of the complacency what may well do for our club. Yesterday's opponents are an excellent example of the level of investment needed to come back stronger after relegation.
We have had 8 seasons (the longest this club has ever enjoyed) now in the top division, making more money than the club has EVER made and with our players the highest-paid we have ever had.
This should have been long enough to attract a higher level of willing investment, unlike our American impediments, we are a London club after all.
Yet it seems after all this time that little if any progress has been made and the continuing complacency of Mr Parish, who follows in the tradition of other chairmen since the early 80s when we have been in the top division of trying to compete on the cheap which will only work for a while.
How many good windows have we really had ? Sanogo, Bamford, Adebiyor, Ferguson and all the ludicrous Holloway signings etc for example ?
We will no doubt again be outperformed by clubs like Fulham, WBA, brighton and Sheffield United in next month's window too.

He sticks with the same players every week regardless of performance, is so slow to react or get on the front foot and barely makes a substitution before 70 minutes (when it’s too late for the subs to make a difference) and our narrow style of play (in particular attacking) is so predictable and easy to defend.

A couple of good results won’t change this and if we’re looking at things overall we should also take into account the run of defeats at the end of last season - this could be repeated. We have to look to the next five years now and Roy should not feature in it.

So what's your point ?

Losing runs is one thing, where you finish at the end of the season is another.We have just had 2 heavy defeats, but at the moment that's still 2 in a row and not a '' run ''.

Pulis and Hodgson both play cautious styles of football. Stoke fans got fed up with it. HOL is plastered with posts complaining about Hodgson's methods - can't you see the parallel ?

Old, Ungifted and White

Just to set the record straight, my comments were based on what I suspect and not some information I have heard in the corridors of power or from those with club connections.

Edited by Willo (27 Dec 2020 11.31am)

That put me in mind of the punchline to ' Top Rank ' by Derek and Clive

Old, Ungifted and White