Captain's Blog: Classless Pulis Fooling No One With Meyler Lies
I think that from the moment the Stoke City ground staff started painting the pitch markings blue before the game on Saturday, we all suspected that we were unlikely to be talking about the beauty of football this weekend. And, despite a winning goal of genuine class from a young player of real quality, those suspicions have been confirmed with equal measures of ignominy and disgust.
But it wasn't the challenge from Robert Huth for which he received a controversial red card that left the bitter taste in the mouth. It wasn't even referee Martin Atkinson for making the decision to send the German off. No, it was Stoke's manager Tony Pulis who must surely take the brunt of the shame for what was an utterly reprehensible and unjust character assassination of David Meyler in which he openly called into question the player's professional and sporting integrity.
My original thoughts on the Robert Huth challenge was that he was unlucky to receive his marching orders. That opinion hasn't changed. I can understand Atkinson's reasoning, especially in the current post-Kompany climate, but I don't think many would have complained had the colour of the card brandished been yellow and not red.
I fully accept that Huth tried to pull out of the challenge, however that he had that intent yet was still unable to prevent himself from aggressively sliding through Meyler's ground merely serves to highlight the fact that he was not in control of the challenge and underlines its recklessness. Nonetheless, I can sympathise with the Stoke perspective on that one and hope the decision is reversed on appeal.
But that is where Tony Pulis' post-match rant deviated from a path of reasonable and fair reflection and descended into petulant mud-slinging, trial by conjecture, and a display of the kind of persecution complex of which even your average Liverpool fan would be ashamed. According to the Stoke manager, Huth's red card was all David Meyler's fault.
Nonsense. the player was sent off because in the week following referees issuing clubs with a message highlighting their criteria for reckless challenges, Huth decided to commit to a challenge he could not possibly control in poor conditions and right under the nose of a referee with a reputation for taking a very dim view on such tackles. David Meyler had absolutely nothing to do with it.
Lets make no mistake about it – Pulis' extraordinary comments were little more than the ramblings of an under pressure sore-loser desperate to deflect attention away from his own team's stuttering form and poor performance. "There are a lot of players going down now from challenges who are not injured, who are not really hurt", bemoaned Pulis, "but going down because they think they can affect the referee's decision. What the lad has done today, for me personally, is unacceptable"
Is this what it has come to? Stand your ground and get snapped in half by a giant rampaging centre-half or avoid serious injury and risk being ignorantly branded a cheat on national television by a bitter middle-aged man in a baseball cap?
Not that Meyler did manage to avoid it of course. Yes, to Huth's credit he had his studs facing down, but since when were studs the only part of the footballer's apparel or anatomy capable of causing harm to an opponent? Television replays clearly showed impact between Huth's raised knee and Meyler's ankle. Pulis himself provided proof of contact with the photograph he amusingly emailed to Match of the Day to try and highlight the case for Huth's innocence, and the direction of Meyler's leg can be clearly seen to change in footage of the challenge. It is also difficult to envisage Huth himself making a point of checking on Meyler somewhat apologetically like he did if he knew there was no contact between them. There was contact between the players. There is no two ways about it.
When you factor in David Meyler's injury record in the leg that took the impact, it is not unreasonable at all to suggest that staying down, assessing how it felt, and allowing the physio on to double-check was the prudent course of action. Not that he could have done much more in the two seconds it took Martin Atkinson to go to his back pocket, of course.
Obviously, the fact Meyler ("or whatever his name is" - you stay classy, Tony) was able to play on shows he was thankfully not seriously injured. But that doesn't mean he didn't get legitimately hurt. Whether or not there was sufficient impact, be it from the challenge itself or the resulting awkward fall, to cause him enough momentary distress to justify staying down and receiving treatment seems to be the prevalent question. But only one man can answer that and that man isn't Tony Pulis. The fact he feels he is in a position to comment conclusively on the matter is an incredible display of delusion.
It has been pointed out to me over the weekend that this is merely the latest in a long line of Pulis rants regarding 'play-acting' and imaginary card waving and it is a genuine bugbear to him. I think we'd all like to see that aspect of the game cleaned up, but crassly presuming the guilt of players when there is more than enough reasonable doubt to give them the benefit of and publicly dragging their name through the mud is not the way to go about it.
And especially not when the player in question – during the very same game – didn't even go to ground when the target of a very nasty Ricardo Fuller tackle. Strangely, given his status as the self-proclaimed white knight in the fight against needless footballing theatrics, that incident was omitted entirely from Pulis' post-match comments. Just like he kept on forgetting about his crusade for refereeing accountability last season around the same time Stoke started to benefit from their errors. Funny that.
But then again, this is just the world according to Tony Pulis. A world in which Robert Huth is the gallant hero for trying to pull out of a tackle he should never have committed to in the first place given the conditions and David Meyler, a player who has battled back from two career threatening injuries already in his short career, is the dastardly and conniving villain for daring to escape another one. I hope no one is stupid enough to genuinely believe the Stoke manager's silly little face-saving and shamelessly self-serving fairy tales.
7 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Sorry Captain but that is complete shite and you know it and to be honest I’m surprised at you as I always saw you as the best visitor on the oatcake board
Now having the chance to watch match choice on sky sports yesterday a few things came to my attention about your 22 year old angel, I won’t go into the sending off as you can probably already guess my view on it but what about the big grin on his face as he walks off the pitch? Are you seriously telling me if he was just looking after himself that would be his reaction?
Secondly with about 20 minutes to go he starts to walk away from your area with nobody near him and just sits down to receive treatment on a none existent injury(even the commentators on sky said it was strange as he wasn’t limping or anything) So by my reckoning that’s more that just protecting himself it’s CHEATING but I don’t suppose you saw them did you??
So what aspect of the report was "complete shite"
Are you a web based orthopaedic surgeon with access to D Meylor’s medical records and a familiarity (at least a familiarity) with his character? For the record he is a very brave centre midfield player, similar to Lee Cattermole, in that he gives no quarter and expects none in return, but seems to stay on his feet more than Lee does. He is also a deeply religious catholic which I’m presuming makes him a decent and honest person too.
Did you look at the replay and categorically rule out that 16 stone of sliding centre back made any contact whatsoever with David Meylor? Who having already seen how out of control Huth was and to protect himself from imminant injury had jumped in the air as best he good given the slippery surface and the poor timing of Huth’s slide.
You have presumed that Meylor was grinning as some kind of admittance that he was guilty of cheating thereby perpetuating your Kenny wannabee managers slanderous claims that he was play acting, when he has absolutely no history of this kind of behaviour. In fact quite the contrary as he has caused at least part of his own injury problems through the full steam commitment that he gives his tackling.
I’m sure you know the typeof players that are prone to exaggeration, as you have a few in the Stoke team and we have seen a few unsavoury double reverse pikes from Sess and Seb in our games too, but we never condone it as SAFC fans.
As for later in the match, look again. He notices an unusual and worrying bleb appearing in the site of his past operations and immediately sits down in case it is as serious as it looks. I’m sure he has been told to take no risks and as he has been rushed back into the team because of injuries to Vaughan and Cattermole, he was right to sit down and wait for the Physio sitting down, both times. Notice that when he was sythed down later, but it was his ankle, he stayed on his feet!
You keep on defending the spurious and frankly slanderous bile that your embarrassing manager puts out as a smoke screen every time his team and record buys are found wanting and we’ll stand by the much more honourable MoN.
I do not wish ill of any young player who has fought his way back from 2 career threatening injuries, not even if he was a Mag or the diving cheat Suarez, because it just isn’t right. You feel free though if you are that sure that is what happened, when all of his history points elsewhere.
by Ringo Grumio Nibbler on Feb 6, 2012 6:57 PM GMT up reply actions
MEYLER CONDEMNED BY HIS SMILE
This really is almost worse than Pubis, or whatever his name, is making assumptions with no evidence.
So here are a few suppositions of my own:-
Meyler was smiling at the thought of a hot bath.
Smiling because he had got through a game unscathed by the attentions of a bunch of bruisers
But most probably because we had picked up another three points at a difficult ground like Stoke’s
Gentlemen... lets keep it on topic
This blog isn’t about whether or not Meyler ‘faked injury’ or whatever. None of us are in a position to say that with any certainty. Just like Arsene Wenger was in no position to brand Shawcross a dangerous and careless thug. Pulis should not be condemning the character of people he does not know and publically calling their integraity into question.
I will let Tony Pulis’ himself back me up here…
Pulis on Wenger branding Shawcross a senseless thug: “He’s can’t comment on my players. He doesn’t know what my players are made of or are about.”
Pulis on Meyler : “But when you see him doing that, the referee might have reacted a little differently today if the kid had got up and been honest about the challenge.”
Simple as that.
I don’t think the ref even studied Meyler when he was on the floor anyway, the red was coming out of his pocket regardless of anything Meyler was doing on the floor afterwards. An un-winnable tackle was attempted at 200 miles an hour and Meyler flips up in the air, we all thought it was a red card. The point is, rightly or wrongly, he was sent off because of that. His alleged play-acting was irrelevant.
Compare this to when Leon Osman tripped over his own feet before appealing at the SoL on boxing day, costing us 2 points due to the resulting penalty. There was no extreme, over-the-top condemnation of the player from Martin O’Neill. He brushed past it and showed true class, and spoke about the game. Pulis should be more annoyed they didn’t test our keeper, and at his defenders’ pathetic defending for our goal.
by Goldylad on Feb 6, 2012 9:47 PM GMT via mobile reply actions
The Stoke argument that he ‘faked’ any sort of injury is ridiculous. Meyler got caught by Huth travelling at some speed. Whether that was with knee, foot or whatever, a man of that size hitting you in anyway would hurt you. It might not break your ankle into a thousand pieces, but it hurts. Once the pain has subsided, you can carry on.
How many people have injured themselves, perhaps banged into something or tripped over, felt hurt, stopped and then carried on? That’s exactly what happened to Meyler.
As for the red card, many are arguing and arguing based upon the tiniest moment of a slow motion replay. Whatever angle you look at it in real time, which his all the referee had at the time, it looked a red card all day long.

by 













