Pulis would love to manage City

[Hutch's Shoulder]

His popularity seems to have a certain life cycle with the fans. While they think staying up is the limit of their ambitions he is popular and the functional approach is even celebrated like the early days at Stoke, and the Palace fans are obviously still in that phase. It was his inability to move on as Stoke became established that cost him.

[Mikhail Chigorin]

At best, today he's a Championship Manager where his style of play might be more acceptable to some.

He's now out of his depth in the Premiership as his time has come and gone.

[I Just Blue Myself]

At best, today he's a Championship Manager where his style of play might be more acceptable to some.

He's now out of his depth in the Premiership as his time has come and gone.

He's not though, is he. He's doing quite well with Palace (WLWWLLWL) considering three of those games they lost under him were v Chelsea, Newcastle & us.

I'd have him as defensive coordinator.

[Mikhail Chigorin]

At best, today he's a Championship Manager where his style of play might be more acceptable to some.

He's now out of his depth in the Premiership as his time has come and gone.

He's not though, is he. He's doing quite well with Palace (WLWWLLWL) considering three of those games they lost under him were v Chelsea, Newcastle & us.

I'd have him as defensive coordinator.

I'm presuming that you'd have him at City, as a 'defensive co-ordinator' (apologies if that's not what you meant) but, to me, this would be completely at variance with our current attacking style and philosophy and, to my mind, it would be to the detriment of our fluency in this aspect of the game.

His current record with Palace might be attributed to 'new Manager syndrome' so we'll have to wait until the end of the season to see how that pans out. Personally, I still wouldn't be surprised to see Palace go down.

However, for my money he's now a footballing dinosaur (along with Big Fat Sam) and tactics such as overt time-wasting, out and out fouling and long-ball lunacy are not fit for the Premiership.

He had his day with Stoke and now those days are gone (or, at least, rapidly going).

[Mase]

Judging by the entertainment v results thread, a number of people should rate Pulis highly. You can't fault his achievements, he got Stoke promoted, kept them up and got them to a cup final on a shoestring budget and looks to be doing the same with Palace. I'd still rather not watch matches then see my team play like his do though, as others have said he's one of the leading members of the anti-football brigade. Takes all the fun and joy out of football, people like him.

Alex McLeish got Birmingham promoted and won a cup final with them. The end.

[nottsblue]

At best, today he's a Championship Manager where his style of play might be more acceptable to some.

He's now out of his depth in the Premiership as his time has come and gone.

Very true. Managers like him have had their day in the sun at the top level. I just cant get my head round club chairman picking up the phone and thinking, "i need a new manager. Who can i get who the fans will appreciate and wull get the players playing good stuff. I know, i'll ring for ....."

[Hutch's Shoulder]

Very true. Managers like him have had their day in the sun at the top level. I just cant get my head round club chairman picking up the phone and thinking, "i need a new manager. Who can i get who the fans will appreciate and wull get the players playing good stuff. I know, i'll ring for ....."

What they think is 'who can we get who might keep up us up on zero budget'; I'm not sure anyone else would have got as many points for Palace from where they stated under Pulis.

It's not attractive, but in those circumstances it is effective. His weakness has been not being able to press on when the first objective is achieved.

[nottsblue]

Very true. Managers like him have had their day in the sun at the top level. I just cant get my head round club chairman picking up the phone and thinking, "i need a new manager. Who can i get who the fans will appreciate and wull get the players playing good stuff. I know, i'll ring for ....."

What they think is 'who can we get who might keep up us up on zero budget'; I'm not sure anyone else would have got as many points for Palace from where they stated under Pulis.

It's not attractive, but in those circumstances it is effective. His weakness has been not being able to press on when the first objective is achieved.

Understand where you're coming from but if I was a fan of Palace i'd be disappointed with him as manager. The thread of entertainment over results I think bears that one out. It appears a lot of us would sooner lose playing well rather than winning ugly. At the end of the day we pay good money to be entertained

[Twobob]

Understand where you're coming from but if I was a fan of Palace i'd be disappointed with him as manager. The thread of entertainment over results I think bears that one out. It appears a lot of us would sooner lose playing well rather than winning ugly. At the end of the day we pay good money to be entertained

I don't remember seeing an 'entertainment vs results' thread when we were struggling to stay up. My bad memory or are we now in a position to enjoy football without the risk of relegation?

[Im_Spartacus]

I don't remember seeing an 'entertainment vs results' thread when we were struggling to stay up. My bad memory or are we now in a position to enjoy football without the risk of relegation?

When you are battling for relegation, unless you are totally appalling (eg Pearce), you will generally be treated to some entertaining games, and when you are clearly inferior to the opposition, the entertainment for me often comes in how the manager sets the team up tactically even if its sometimes pretty poor to watch for the neutral.

The latter stages of Chelsea's champions league run were anti football, but as a neutral and no doubt as a Chelsea fan, you do become more pragmatic about what constitutes entertainment when faced with an overwhelmingly superior opposition as they were with both Barca and Bayern.

[nottsblue]

Understand where you're coming from but if I was a fan of Palace i'd be disappointed with him as manager. The thread of entertainment over results I think bears that one out. It appears a lot of us would sooner lose playing well rather than winning ugly. At the end of the day we pay good money to be entertained

I don't remember seeing an 'entertainment vs results' thread when we were struggling to stay up. My bad memory or are we now in a position to enjoy football without the risk of relegation?

We obviously are in a position not to be concerned with relegation. However being at the top of the league or fighting for the titles brings similar pressures, ie still need to win games. We are fortunate we have a manager who wants to win games by playing magnificent, attacking football. This may yet end up costing us the title as it did Newcastle under Keegan. Beaten by a side who sometimes sacrificed winning beautifully for winning ugly, especially in big away games.
Now, Palace are fighting for wins just as much as us but with inferior players. They possibly have to win ugly or they might not survive. All I am saying is I am not sure if I'd want my club to give in playing football and watch turgid shite week in week out for 4/5 years like Stoke did. At least Wigan under Martinez were pleasing on the eye even if they perhaps were lucky and outstayed their time in Prem