Tony Pulis

Watching MoTD last night proved to me what a lucky escape we had in not appointing Tony Pulis. He obviously has no idea of tactics or how to set up a 4-4-2 system.
For a start, his two central midfielders were tackling, winning the ball and passing to a team mate. Isn't he aware that the classic pairing is that one doesn't move or tackle but is there to take corners and free kicks. Meanwhile the other does run round but is not there to do anything constructive if he gets near the ball.
Moving to the wide men, what was the point of beating players and getting to the byline before pulling the ball back - surely it's much quicker to aim for the penalty spot or the keeper with a long diagonal ball straight away from the halfway line.
This leads me to Pulis's front two who constantly ran around beating players and scoring goals - how are the keeper and the back four supposed to hoof the ball out from the back to the main striker if he's running around all over the place instead of remaining stationary so they know where he is.
Finally, the back four - how are you supposed to know if your keeper is any good if they keep tackling the opposition before they can get a shot or header on target.
We should thank our lucky stars he was never under consideration for the City job.

Think we had a lucky escape there mate

Was definetely a painful watch - Gestede handing out assists and goals for fun, inmediately followed by the man we should of had as manager providing a masterclass...

Oh and Fraizer Campbell scored his second in less than a week. Might watch something more cheery - The Titanic maybe.

City and theTitanic - definite similarities.

Just shows how much you lot know about football.  According to Pulis he is having to play that way because he is working to find a system that suits the players he has.  What sort of manager does that?  Surely he should be 'doing a Russell' and getting rid of  players and bringing in those he wants top play to his style of football.

Yeah that guy simply does not fit the carefully-thought out ethos of Cardiff City...

On a more serious note - glad Pulis has managed to ditch his reputation as a rugby manager recently. He doesn't religiously stick to one ethos, he adapts to a teams current strengths and builds around that. With Stoke it just happened to me a backbone of big, strong players.

I don't know what happened at City for all ambition to implode after just seven games of this season. Okay, Ole wasn't the right man and he jumped rather than being pushed anyway, but the finances for the season would have been set already. Therefore the arguement that the squad had to be decimated because of FFR doesn't hold water.

Furthermore, given that Pulis is blessed with the skill to get the best out of what he inherits, it was definitely an opportunity passed.

Oh, for someone of influence in the club with some experience of football!

TDA wrote:I don't know what happened at City for all ambition to implode after just seven games of this season.  Okay, Ole wasn't the right man and he jumped rather than being pushed anyway, but the finances for the season would have been set already.  Therefore the arguement that the squad had to be decimated because of FFR doesn't hold water.

Furthermore, given that Pulis is blessed with the skill to get the best out of what he inherits, it was definitely an opportunity passed.

Oh, for someone of influence in the club with some experience of football!

I've made no secret of the fact that I'm bothered by this as well. It seems that Tan has effectively given up - refuses to invest more money and turns down glaringly obvious opportunities to strengthen our back room.

What sense is there in giving up for a man who openly admits he's in it for a profit?