Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Happy Fox

Tony Pulis to City?

By Happy Fox, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

Bettsj2

Bettsj2

Posted
Posted

We're not great but could you see Steve Clarke improving us?

No I couldnt.

The only names that would be of any interest to me would be Pulis, Sherwood/Ferdinand combo and if we could tempt him back to the Prem, Laudrup. Some people mentioned Hoddle andy first reaction was '**** right off' but the more I think about it, he could actually not be that bad of an option. He's obviously wanting to get back into management and whilst his spell at Wolves was un-productive, his record everywhere else is decent.

To be honest though, as much as I dont see Pearson turning it around, i'm starting to think the owners are going to give him the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matt

Matt

Posted
Posted

Let's look at real statistics and then consider what is likely to happen.

 

Only one Premier League club has been bottom at end November and managed to finish above 17th.

 

That club was Palace under Pulis.

 

West Brom did it didn't they?

 

That's not saying we're gonna do it, I don't think we will, i've gone or record saying now we're bottom we will not get out the bottom 3 but i'm just questioning your post, I could be wrong but i'm almost sure West Brom did it one year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MHC

MHC

Posted
Posted

We need Tony Pulis. If we can't get him then we may as well keep Pearson because every other available manager is crap. I don't get why so many Leicester fans are against the idea of bringing in a manager who has never got a club relegated. Who is a big reason Stoke are a secure Premier League club. Who won the Premier League manager of the year last season. Who saved an awful Crystal Palace from certain relegation. Who walked out of Crystal Palace because the board wouldn't back him in the transfer market, something which our owners are unlikely to do. Who actually knows the league well and knows how to grind out results. Who has mastered the art of counter attacking football to perfection. A Tony Pulis Leicester would not be a "hoof ball" team, the philosophy of Tony Pulis' tactics is to absorb pressure and hit a direct or quick counter attack, something Pearson is trying to do (and failing miserably at it) currently. Time to get rid of the apprentice and bring in the master.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oxfordfox

oxfordfox

Posted
Posted

We need Tony Pulis. If we can't get him then we may as well keep Pearson because every other available manager is crap. I don't get why so many Leicester fans are against the idea of bringing in a manager who has never got a club relegated. Who is a big reason Stoke are a secure Premier League club. Who won the Premier League manager of the year last season. Who saved an awful Crystal Palace from certain relegation. Who walked out of Crystal Palace because the board wouldn't back him in the transfer market, something which our owners are unlikely to do. Who actually knows the league well and knows how to grind out results. Who has mastered the art of counter attacking football to perfection. A Tony Pulis Leicester would not be a "hoof ball" team, the philosophy of Tony Pulis' tactics is to absorb pressure and hit a direct or quick counter attack, something Pearson is trying to do (and failing miserably at it) currently. Time to get rid of the apprentice and bring in the master.

 

Good post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thracian

Thracian

Posted
Posted

Pulis or Pearson? Tough question. Pulis has vast experience of what's necessary to win points in the Premiership but we all know it will be dogged progress at best and not what we want beyond the next season or two.

 

Question is will our owners wait for Pearson to gain the experience necessary to either keep is up this year or to win us another chance next season? Or is survival this season absolutely vital in which case we need to ask will the doggedness of Pulis be any better than what will be the iunevitable doggedness of Pearson at this stage.

 

I've never seen Pearson as a natural attacker anyway - as evidenced by the fact that so many of our attackers and potential support scorers  seem to malfunction here.

 

How many goals do we get either from the back four or the central midfielders these days?

Uloloa's dried up, Nugent's probably forgotten what it's like to score anything but a penalty, Vardy's misfired and for all the achievements of the Academy set up there doesn't seem to be many coming from there to apply any pressure unlike the incredible throughput from Southampton.

 

Too often we've been firing blanks - literally - so Pulis's doggedness will hardly be noticed alongside our own doggedness of the last two months - except perhaps in points but there's the rub.

 

Whatever Pulis might do in the January window is anyone really convinced we have a team of hard-cases and battlers suited to the Pulis philosophy? And will it be too late by January anyway?

 

I don't know the answer but my nervy choice would be to stick with Pearson because he does learn and we might get a better return in the medium term. 

 

Long-term we need a natural tactician with a basically attacking philposophy and the ability to inspire people to get the best from themselves. Oh yes, and someone with the ability to refine our set-pieces so they do make a significant contribution to our goals column and a knack of signing players with scoring potential in more positions than is the case right now.

 

We can't thrive as a Premiership side by having self-inflicted handicaps.  

 

 

 

 

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oxfordfox

oxfordfox

Posted
Posted

Pulis or Pearson? Tough question. Pulis has vast experience of what's necessary to win points in the Premiership but we all know it will be dogged progress at best and not what we want beyond the next season or two.

 

Question is will our owners wait for Pearson to gain the experience necessary to either keep is up this year or to win us another chance next season? Or is survival this season absolutely vital in which case we need to ask will the doggedness of Pulis be any better than what will be the iunevitable doggedness of Pearson at this stage.

 

I've never seen Pearson as a natural attacker anyway - as evidenced by the fact that so many of our attackers and potential support scorers  seem to malfunction here.

 

How many goals do we get either from the back four or the central midfielders these days?

Uloloa's dried up, Nugent's probably forgotten what it's like to score anything but a penalty, Vardy's misfired and for all the achievements of the Academy set up there doesn't seem to be many coming from there to apply any pressure unlike the incredible throughput from Southampton.

 

Too often we've been firing blanks - literally - so Pulis's doggedness will hardly be noticed alongside our own doggedness of the last two months - except perhaps in points but there's the rub.

 

Whatever Pulis might do in the January window is anyone really convinced we have a team of hard-cases and battlers suited to the Pulis philosophy? And will it be too late by January anyway?

 

I don't know the answer but my nervy choice would be to stick with Pearson because he does learn and we might get a better return in the medium term. 

 

Long-term we need a natural tactician with a basically attacking philposophy and the ability to inspire people to get the best from themselves. Oh yes, and someone with the ability to refine our set-pieces so they do make a significant contribution to our goals column and a knack of signing players with scoring potential in more positions than is the case right now.

 

We can't thrive as a Premiership side by having self-inflicted handicaps.  

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

You are aware what Pulis did at Palace last season?

 

Not a long ball side at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nettle

nettle

Posted
Posted

Pulis or Pearson? Tough question. Pulis has vast experience of what's necessary to win points in the Premiership but we all know it will be dogged progress at best and not what we want beyond the next season or two.

Question is will our owners wait for Pearson to gain the experience necessary to either keep is up this year or to win us another chance next season? Or is survival this season absolutely vital in which case we need to ask will the doggedness of Pulis be any better than what will be the iunevitable doggedness of Pearson at this stage.

I've never seen Pearson as a natural attacker anyway - as evidenced by the fact that so many of our attackers and potential support scorers seem to malfunction here.

How many goals do we get either from the back four or the central midfielders these days?

Uloloa's dried up, Nugent's probably forgotten what it's like to score anything but a penalty, Vardy's misfired and for all the achievements of the Academy set up there doesn't seem to be many coming from there to apply any pressure unlike the incredible throughput from Southampton.

Too often we've been firing blanks - literally - so Pulis's doggedness will hardly be noticed alongside our own doggedness of the last two months - except perhaps in points but there's the rub.

Whatever Pulis might do in the January window is anyone really convinced we have a team of hard-cases and battlers suited to the Pulis philosophy? And will it be too late by January anyway?

I don't know the answer but my nervy choice would be to stick with Pearson because he does learn and we might get a better return in the medium term.

Long-term we need a natural tactician with a basically attacking philposophy and the ability to inspire people to get the best from themselves. Oh yes, and someone with the ability to refine our set-pieces so they do make a significant contribution to our goals column and a knack of signing players with scoring potential in more positions than is the case right now.

We can't thrive as a Premiership side by having self-inflicted handicaps.

.

Hoddle is you man tactically astute and plays great football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest ttfn

Guest ttfn

Posted
Posted

Hoddle is you man tactically astute and plays great football.

Yeah in 1998.

May as well get Howard Kendall or George Graham in.

(I like Hoddle, I really do, but he is finished as a manager).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Corky

Corky

Posted
Posted

Hoddle was brought in at QPR to introduce a three at the back system that was ditched after four matches and 9 goals conceded. He was awful at Wolves, mediocre at Spurs and his only good club jobs were at Swindon in 1993 and Southampton 13 years ago.

 

Would be totally the wrong choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oxfordfox

oxfordfox

Posted
Posted

Where have I mentioned or implied anything to do with "long ball"?

 

I guess it depends what you meant by "battlers suited to the Pulis philosophy".

 

If you meant a short passing style and quick counter attacking then we are in complete agreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...