Brilliantly deluded rant from a Stoke fan. oatcakefanzine.proboards.com/thread/226789/stoke-city-swansea-match-thread/page14 Its made the post! http://www.southwales-eveningpost.co.uk/Stoke-fan-really-really-really-didn-t-like/story-20619896-detail/story.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
I can understand his position - he is defending his club. Stoke have, for years, been the subject of criticising and outright loathing for the way they play and, deserved or not, there comes a time that you grow to defend your team no matter what. It reminds me of a blinkered mum standing up for a son who has been expelled from his third school: "Why do they all pick on little Johnny? All those kids who do their homework make him look bad - they do it on purpose. Snobs." No-one likes being told that they are substandard and immoral, which is really the gist of what they hear, so they snap back at it. Like the the mother blinded by loyalty, it's defensive rather than logical. And, when someone does that, when they snap back at criticism, they latch onto certain things as a foundation to build their opinions on and then exaggerate beyond all recognistion. The technique is called reductio ad absurdium - they exaggerate a perception of Swansea based on Chico's embarrassing behaviour and then the discussion becomes about this perception they create, rather than watching us. Suddenly honest players like Dyer become cheats for hitting the deck, despite the fact that a hack sent him there. In that way, it gets set up as a simple "artistry vs physicality" debate where people take the sides based on how they want to be perceived themselves. Whether you want to be considered tough and manly (grr, I wear a baseball cap and trackies) or creative and imaginative (look at out pass stats!) our side is right and the other side is wrong. Don't get me wrong, I thought Stoke under Pulis were a horrible team - and I like our pass stats, so you know which side I am on - I have no idea how much they have changed under Hughes and didn't get the chance to see the game last night. They used to get away with so much (the whole game spent tugging, pushing and kicking with the football itself an after thought) and, in contrast, teams that are less physically imposing tend to get given more yellows and reds than they deserve (I'm thinking Arsenal as well here) because they do not impose themselves on the ref. I can see things, obvious things like the Chico incidents, that I would change about our team - but I can't really see myself how someone can really buy into the idea of "good honest football" being about punting the ball intot he box and seeing what happens. That kicking and pushing etc are part of the game (the rules somewhat disagree with that) and that it shouldn't be taken out. Pulis fanned the flames of this, no doubt as a defensive measure himself as he faced criticism, by saying that the good honest sort in Stoke wouldn't put up with this passing the ball lark. It's a shame that some people bought into it, instead of seeing it for what it was: a defensive move to try to get the fans on side with an antiquated approach to playing. I have always appreciated that some team's ethos will always focus on being more direct, and I do like seeing different approaches form different teams, but Stoke always took it too far and I think most football fans groaned when Pulis got his way back into management.
Yes , funny how some fans are blinded by their own shortcomings ,silly boy/girl/or a combination of the two
Poor sod,his/her life is so empty and meaningless,and following teams like Stoke/Cardiff can really mess with your psyche. Stoke have this OP,joe,and Cardiff have Hughs. My case rests.
Not a fan then I feel sorry for whoever was sat around him, sounds like he had an angry night. I thought everyone, bar us, loved you guys?
He sounds a delicate little flower easy to push over the edge by the look of it , one eyed in the extreme maybe when he sees the game again on the box he will realise what a filthy bunch of giraffes that even with the help of the ref still were unable to beat the classy, skill full , tactically superior, non **** taking, honest beautiful swans on their home turf !
Obviously this guy had 3 points earmarked for Stoke and lost the plot after our man of the match earned us a point . Could have been 3 points with a bit of luck.
No amount of retrospective viewing of this,or any other game involving Stoke,will alter the OP's opinion/perspective or his rabid opinions. A psychiatrist would have no trouble in diagnosing his/her mental state. Not being a psychiatrist,however,somewhat restricts my opinion here,other than to say that it's as clear a case of "oneeyeditis" as I've ever come across. This is what happens when an individual focuses his/her entire life on one interest,in this case Stoke City,with the success or otherwise of that venture,dictating reactions and moods,on a daily/hourly basis.. In strict footballing terms, most neutrals would dismiss Stoke as an irrelevance;their style of play an abhorrence. So,if an individual invests ALL of their time and emotions into following such a team,little wonder then that they eventually crack,and produce such spurious posts as this OP has. His mental instability has taken complete control,and he is incapable of making any rational value judgements re the team he supports.
If only he'd put more effort into supporting his team at the stadium rather than rants on the forum maybe they'd create a decent atmosphere? 1-0 and you still don't sing!
