Battle of the Brittania ends all square

We must get back on top. They expended alot of energy first half with their closing down, so fingers crossed it cost them in the end.

Yes it was a hands on a goal bound ball....but things happens so fast you cannot expect a ref to see it all...that's just how humans are.....time to video referring has been beyond demand for quit some time.

And to all you Howard haters....like the Norwich game, also today Howard actually saved us a point.

But guys....we should feel okay with a point...after all we did not score today.
But West Ham I know we get 3 from.

I agree with your comment about a good result, Stoke don't roll over for anyone, but the way Fellaini has shaped the last couple of matches he won't be missed. Am I just being cynical or did he want a sending off so that he can piss off back to Belgium for Christmas? ( it makes no difference if he's a Christian or not, it would still be a holiday time in Belgium or wherever)

I'm not having that the officials don't see all that crap that they get away with. It's like, ah, fuck it, its Stoke, they always do it. Dirty fuckers.

A good point for me. Its a tough place to go Stoke. A very physical side.

If only Ossie had put away that sitter, or the referee gave our weekly non penalty.

We're going to find out how we play without Fellaini for a few games over christmas. Surely a 3 game ban (maybe more) for a shocking headbutt, elbow, punch. Take your pick.

Shawcross is a nasty piece of work. We should have had a penalty at every set piece. Both arms around Fellaini all game. Still no need for that reaction though.

Also I was saying earlier that a real weakness is Pienaar and Osman's shooting. A few people disagreed and I hope to be soon receiving their apologies. Both missed absolute sitters.

I thought we were poor today but Stoke are a bunch of animals. I don't know how their fans sit through that every week.

To compound it Howard slides from great to idiot , and you aint going to win anything or qualify for anything with people who don't score , and a goalie who drops a clanger every other game.

Shame about Fellaini's headbut. I thought he had grown up and was past all that stupidity. He does realise the games are filmed, right?

Bjørn means bear, so better watch out for this crazy Norwegian.

Shame the refs all blind again. I do take comfort in the red shite's loss. Even though I know I should not. I just imagine the sad little face of camel-tooth up front. Love it!!

Fella will rightly get a ban, but when are Stoke's tactics at corners going to get some attention?

We deserved a point but Stoke messed us up today.

We were a bit shit all night... Osman, Naisy and Pienaar looked like Happy, Grumpy and Doc vs the Jolly Green Giants. Felli was neutralized, as well as Jelavic. The moaning and complaining from those two doesn't do us any favors and Felli will rightly get a ban. Jelavic hasn't offered much in link-up play or coming back to get the ball to start the counters. He is what he is... a goal shark who only needs one chance... I'm delighted to have him, but also interesting to see how much trouble Kenwyne Jones gives us as a target man... something Jelavic doesn't really do much.

Say what you want about Shawcross... he's effective. We've been linked with him and I'd be happy to have him on ours.

And twice today Howard backed into his own goal like agianst Norwich I don't get i. Not much point in making a save if you are behind your own goalline.

There must be a GK in our price range that can at least challenge TH for the shirt.

As for Felli, well deserves a ban for a least a couple of incidents, very predictable that Stoke were going to try to wind him up, and also predictable that he was going to bite and lose his rag.

Thought that Barkley played well when he came on and surely deserves a spot somewhere in that midfield, out wide in place of Naismith if necessary

Even the simple two-yard pass (his speciality) he rarely plays to the correct side of the player, often leaving him short or making him change direction unnecessarily. He misses important chances as today - always disappears in the big games, gives the ball away invariably when we have men committed forward (thereby putting inordinate pressure on our defence), loses the ball regularly - and balances out that litany of mediocrity with one one or two slightly more than competent things a game.

Simply not good enough!

In no way was Ossie worse than any of these today.

I thought he played well against a very physical side.

He's a quality player, he just can't shoot. The same applies for Pienaar.

Can't see it happening though.

I think the ref should also get a ban - along with quite a few of Stoke's rugby-tackling players. What they do is synonymous with cheating, in my view.

By the way, do Stoke have dispensation play to different rules from the rest of the PL (Man Utd excepted, of course) when they play at home - in terms of fouls etc.? It seemed like it today ... again. What about the thwack across Pienaar's mouth?

Rant over: it's just that we're (almost) always the victims ...

He's a liability. And that's a fact, not an opinion ... [joke].

Barkley looked composed and assured today I would like to see him get a chance over Osmen, I am confident he wouldnt miss so many good chances, he actually has a good shot on him with enough power to get the ball off the floor when he shoots unlike Osmen.

Felliani has looked off the boil the last couple of games, its probably for the best that he gets banned for 3 games so his price doesnt drop in January when it comes time to sell him.

I don't believe he's good enough for the squad.

I feel desperately sorry for the Stoke season ticket holders who have to watch that shower every week.

Fact is we now have Felli, Mirallas, Neville, Anichebe and Hibbert out without mentioning any further injuries.
We have no full back cover at all without pushing a centre back out of position.
Felli should be fined ALL his wages for the term of his punishment, its not the way a real team player acts.
He will be a marked man from now on.
I thought he had stopped getting himself booked for silly fouls and learned his lesson, but now he is back to square one.

Stoke are dreadful and Shawcross gets away with murder, but Felli fell right into their trap.
He has as much nous as Duncan Ferguson ie; NONE !!

If one is CONSTANTLY fouled without referee protection, then some sort of lashing out is inevitable.

Lest we forget: both Duncan and Marouane are innocents when compared to those who knowingly provoke them.

Stoke have an old and good tradition, but under Pulis they are ugly, fraudulent and depserate. It's time something were done about their unacceptable behaviour. Horrible to watch.

(174) What I can never understand, is why that bloody twat Shawcroft ... (177) barlow - 'Dirty fuckers.'

(187) Paul McGinty 'It will be a bit rich if Fellaini gets retrospectively suspended. Stoke want to disrupt and play physically' (213) paul dark 'when when he lashes out ... '

Fucking pathetic. 'Lashes out' singular not plural Paul Dark: the stupid fucker headbutted, then elbowed and then smashed Rawcross — three times!!!! Barlow, you call Stoke 'dirty fuckers', how about calling prick Fellaini 'dirty fucker'? 'That bloody twat Shawcross': am I the only one on here who was amazed at his professionalism after he was assaulted THREE TIMES by prick Fellaini, didn't make a meal of any of them, complained once, rightly, to the ref after that disgraceful head butt which made me utterly ashamed to be a blue. And, worst of all, fucking McGinty's goat — ''It will be a bit rich if Fellaini gets retrospectively suspended'. Utter fucking bollocks. Like Moyes who has more dignity in his little finger than that out-of-order Belgian twat had on the pitch today, Fellaini should be rightfully suspended for 3 games. Each one of those three assaults on Shawcross deserved a red card. Pathetic McGinty, own up, man up, accept it, thuggery is not acceptable on the ptich in any shape or form, and deal with it, Stoke are physical, we knew that, but there was not a single mutant player who came anywhere near the fucking thuggery of that Belgian liability today.

Why didn't Moyes sub him? If we can get 25 mill sponds plus for the Belgo hothead sell him at once. And the good news: well done Coleman, well done Gibbo (what a ball for the first chance for Jelly), well done Ross in a 20 mins bout that showed touch and nous a million miles distant from Nayshit, and well done Distin. More bad news: Howard yet again cost us a goal.

Just because it's one of ours who THREE TIMES assaults an opponent does not mean that some of you on here can turn a blind eye to it or, more pathetically, moan about mutant Stoke.

Some of Howard's attempted saves look as though he has delibratley not stretched his arms as much as he could or not jumped as high as he can, saves that I have seen him save with ease in the past and any decent keeper should have been able save. We need to find a keeper in January or 4th place will be a distant memory.

Glad someone is on the same wave length as me.

Moyes needs to be more 'nasty', less honest so go speak. When an incident with one of our players happens like today he should ignore it and focus on the inadequancy of the refs . Point out the 'penalty' , the constant fouling at corners of which were the only team to be Fucking punished.

I've said Felli deserves a ban for his "shocking" headbutt, elbow or punch.

I don't know whether you've seen the game yet but I'll stand by my "Dirty fuckers" if that's alright with you.

Watch how much of Fellaini they show tonight. They'll go to town on him.

The FA have hamstrung themselves with that rule, if they turn it from TV evidence the club could take legal action citing the RS v Wigan game

Though you right. They'll throw the book at fellaini. It will be highlighted on every footy programme from here to the moon whereas if a red cunt does it ie. ratboy they just ignore it.

Never used to believe in conspiracy theories but now .....

It's if the referee didn't see it when the FA can step in and give a ban.

Did the Fellaini incident happen on the ball and in the run of play though.

They could be guilty of double standards here so what they do will be intriguing...

He could be prosecuted if Shawcross complains to the police and thats a fact !!

Im just sad that it has to be an Everton player and luckily our manager has come out and castigated Felli on TV otherwise it would reflect very badly on our club.
At least DM has not avoided the question by saying he didn't see the incident as so many others do.
DM has faults but he is an honourable person who does not condone thuggery by players.
Other clubs managers should learn from his honesty.

If any other team are watching the incident on TV Felli will be baited in every game he plays from now on, he has become a liability.
Just think of the stupid damage he has caused to our clubs credibility and his future career.

Not many players or indeed managers will be as familiar with the rules as David Moyes and I'm pretty sure if he has the chance he will have some tough questions for the FA.

SP should have out that last chance away……. And as for Ozzie…….. well best not say any more about that.

Have you been waiting all season to get that in? Absolutely fuckin' ridiculous comment.

Back to the game.
Awful affair at the Britannia today. It went pretty much to form two teams whom draw a lot, guess what? they draw. Gutted about Fellaini, they wound him up proper, still he`s a pro and should be able to deal with it sensibly instead of being reduced to Stokes level.

Looking forward to coming to Liverpool for Christmas and going to the Wigan game, unfortunately it looks like Fellaini and super Kev wont be joining me.

I thought we handed them a foothold in the game by not using the ball back to the keeper or ball across the back line.

Using Fellaini as an outlet want going to work consistently today and I feel we missed the opportunity to pick up three points from an eminently winnable fixture.

And why would Moyes take Fellaini off? take our top scorer off, and our tallest player, against Stoke? he has been one of the league's best footballers this season...it is amazing how quickly some fans could turn.

And Howard can't warm the bench unfortunately Roman..because Mucha has looked very poor in every appearance he has made for us. I really don't know what he was doing for their goal though..just seemed to lose his positioning. We could really do with a capable backup...or Friedel or Given for six months?

And Fellaini will get 3 matches...the headbutt was obvious and poor...the other incidents were less so.

'Forget last weeks lucky win against Spurs and forget we are in fourth spot.'

The stupidest sentence I've read all day. So basically forget all the good stuff we've done and concentrate on the negative.

Osman has one bad game, and typical Marsh-esque fashion, he's not even a Premier League footballer? What a load of crap! He's been so consistent this season, and one bad game, everyone starts over exaggerating and over reacting.

Lucky to get 5m for Fellaini? Yeah he played bad too, but wait a sec, how many points has he won for us this season? Yeah, he did a stupid headbutt, he deserves a lengthy ban, but he has contributed a lot to us this season.

Seriously, get a grip

Now, Fellaini is going to get branded as a violent player just because he finally let his frustration get the better of him. It reminds of the similar branding of Duncan Ferguson. The Guardian listed him in their ten most violent footballers when in fact if they had just listed the victims of his attacks they would have had a more legitimate list. Sadly, one of my most satisfying moments in football was seeing Duncan trying to strangle Stefan Freund; it was something that I had wanted to see happen for a long time.

Ben, Osmen has been consistantly average at best his whole career. He has 1 good game in 5 the other 4 games he is either non existant or gives the ball away constantly. He can do a job in cm when every other midfielder is injured otherwise he should be on the bench.

Exactly what I said after the City game when people came on here defending the ref for calling the penalty against us (which so many Evertonians seem to love to do, always taking the side against Everton). They said it was a penalty, I said they are only given against the likes of us when playing the likes of City, United or Chelsea. When the same happens to us, every single commentator will to a man say it happens on every play and "not a penalty for me". And that's exactly what happened all match today. Stoke just bear hugged our players and pulled them back during every set piece, throwing little sly elbows in the ribs and taking little kicks to the shins.

The commentator even stated when Huth went through the back of one of our players "nice sly shove in the back by Huth there". It's amazing and so pathetic to watch and listen to. Praising a clear foul against us, and then basically treating Fellaini as though he was going around kicking little children. Shawcross knows exactly what he's doing and there is a reason why many players didn't want him called up to their national side. Fellaini lost his cool and will be punished. But Stoke will get away with it again, all their tackles from behind which are supposed to be an automatic yellow card went unpunished, and the commentators at the beginning of the next match will talk about how "tough to break down and physical" they are. I might just give up and start watching La Liga, they play football there, not rugby. If I want to watch Rugby I want to know that my team can fight back the same way.

Fellaini deserves punishment , but if the ref had have seen it he would have got no more than 3 possibly 4 game ban.

Was ratboy not a 'Thug' when he took out Mirallas and Distin?

I hope Stoke kick the RS off the park on Boxing Day then let's see what MOTD say about them.

If anyone doubts that there are dark forces out there, then you only have to watch how double standards are applied especially IMHO by the BBC.

Where was the praise given to David Moyes for his honesty.

When Everton had the 'Dogs of War' tag the BBC wrongly kept using it as a derogatory term in relation to Everton's style of play.

I can't remember any Everton side resorting to tactics regularly employed by Stoke City, but that's OK isn't it!

I admire the honesty of David Moyes but sometimes it seem that we are the only fucking honest club in the league. Quick to condemn our own and quick to excuse others.

It was a robust game and Shawcross gave as good as he got. Moyes should have predicted this in his pre-match press conferences. The referee should have been made aware that Moyes knew what would happen.

Fella is doing his job and doing it to the best of his ability, looking the part, maybe someone should ask Lawro what he thinks he looks like, what with his hair, his shirt and his gut all hanging out, before he starts throwing stones he ought to have a look at himself.

On Howard, I think he has an eye sight problem. Not having a go, and I think his ability is top class. But if you look at his howlers, he usually seems to miss a hand on the ball (as he did last night) or misjudge the depth of the cross/long ball. He's in is early-mid 30s, and eye deterioration is common at this age. Does anyone know if he wears contacts?

He lost his head big time. Whether they wound him up doesn't matter.

I just hope Lawrenson isn't right. Seems to me he's just tried to get the ball rolling for a pretty long ban(twat).

If he was that bad, then how the hell are we in the top 4 at the moment? "Osmen" is just a scapegoat, he has one bad game and everyones all over him

Maybe BK has bonuses lined up for those players who make cock-ups or get suspended in order to save him from buying anyone anytime soon. I wouldn't put it past him. Far too expensive for him if we qualify for the CL, much better just jogging along in the top 10.

Only other offering is that the Stoke player does not make a meal of it, he knows what he is,and he has taken what is coming to him, ugly but rightly or wrongly, part of the game, no quarter asked or given.

Roman I agree with you about Howard, a few weeks ago I woke up with blured short range vision in my right eye and my peripheral vision is affected as well. The doctor said I have a globule of fluid on my eye.

From what I can see, he's either got eye problems are he is delibrately letting goals in because some of the goals have looked very strange.

The main reson Ozzy always gets picked is coz we have a very small squad and our midfielders are always injured while ozzy hardly ever gets injured. Moyes is also know for having his favourites, hopefully ross gets his chance and scores a few goals and take ozzys place before the end of the season.

Sick of the vitriol at our own players.

Typo aside, those are the the right words in the wrong order.

He's going to get a ban he deserves and we are going to need to cope or this will derail our season if we somehow play as if Fellani is our one man team. Given other absences through injury now is surely the time to see if Ross B can step up and play just behind Jela. Will our notoriously cautious manager take the chance on this kid so many rate so highly ? I hope so. We need to know if he has it in him and give him the chance to show he's more than hype.

The season just got a lot tougher.

Aiden are you suggesting Osman has carried the rest of the side for years?

Refused to watch MotD knowing something would be said and the remote would ended going through the screen.

Takes me back to the derby and having read the papers the following day, one match report stated Mirallas turned his own ankle. Not one fucking bad word to say against that buck-toothed dirty horrible shite they call Saurez.

It seems we're always going to get the bad press, we know it on here.

Moyes should speak out more against the officials, players should comment more through the media. Let's make an uproar about it. Stop playing the nice guy/team. It's getting us nowhere.

Haven't heard one pundit mention the inept refereeing that cost us a penalty. We should make that our priority, or the fact Stoke continually foul. Why we were punished against Citeh yet got nothing today.

It would certainly take the spotlight of Fellaini, whether he's done wrong or not.

Sadly. though goal keepers aren't judged on how hard they try. Tim Howard really is starting to spread fear. I would have expected my mother-in- law to have looked less foolish than he did at Stoke's goal. If he is the best goal keeper at the club then David Moyes has failed abysmally in that area. Mucha must really be woeful.

How many players this season SHOULD have been punished retrospectively??

How many players actually HAVE been punished retrospectively??

Just what do the Rules state about what constitutes a foul ( in the box and thus a penalty ).

Is there an Official criteria for retrospective punishment.

And are ' They' all going to pounce on Fellaini just coz the TV got a good clear picture of the incident...I think we all know the answer to that one.

Opinion 1) : You can't, or shouldn't change the interpretation half-way through the season.

Opinion 2) : FIFA have a basoc set of rules that cover all games from the World cup Final down to the local park.

If the Reff didn't see it ( like the whole of the ball being across the whole of the line illustrations on their website, 4 pictures, not over, not over, still not over, Over! ) then officially, It didn't happen, until a set retrospective procedure is laid down that makes one law for everybody.

I want to see Barkley play in place of him or put Osman on the right with Naismith behind Jelavic. Maybe this is the first time we get to see the old partnership again.
I think the negativity has started to creep in again, it was a good result and we did it when Fellaini was almost non-existent today (similar to West Brom/Wigan games).

I'm sure we'll cope, and the best thing to do is to move on and focus on next weeks game.

He obviously wanted Christmas off. Now he's got it. Well done Fellaini.

I can't be arsed with him after that.

We are better than that sort of behaviour.

1. Each of the minor offences were yellow cards, the attempted elbow, the hand in the face, both done with intent.

2. The head butt was more of a placing of the head into the face, but clear intent, a straight red. That's 3 weeks. So I reckon he will get at least 3 possibly 4 weeks if the FA do anything. Big if.

3. Moyes's condemnation of the player is justified as is the apology. but why not outline some of the justification for the frustration that caused it? Honesty is all well and good, but to say that Stoke and Shawcross didn't target Fellaini for exactly that reason is ridiculous. For Pulis to cry wolf is to show him up for the hypocrite he is as a manager.

Stoke kicked us off the park last season and this game showed the same tactics. So all very well for goody two-shoes Moyes to condemn his own player but he actually gave credit to Stoke "they are a good team" — they are not. They deserve no credit for the way they fouled at every turn. Their mission was to stop Everton playing football by any means, fair and foul.

Lastly, just when will the FA stop the fouling in the box? The holding, the theatrics, the cheats? Where is the protection?

It's fine criticising Fellaini's actions, but whenever you caveat that with a 'but'... You justify his behaviour.

It's also rather ironic that people are deriding Shawcross for his tactics, whenever there was widespread criticism of the penalty awarded against Fellaini for the exact same thing.

6 game ban, and sent to bed with no dinner.

I find it sad that we have some on here saying because Fellaini was being pushed, pulled etc, that can be used as some sort of defence. Pushing, pulling, holding goes on in every game between attacking players and defenders and until the officials get a grip of it, players are going to keep on doing it.

Finally, it's not as if this is out of character from Fellaini, when he first came he was somewhat partial to using his elbows.

Most sensible post of the thread.

Unbelievable blue blinkers on show so far, so I'm glad someone else can be unbiased too.

It was a triple show of disgraceful, petulant, unprofessional and sly thuggery at best.

From my own experience of playing, it's very hard and unnatural to keep one's cool if one is constantly provoked without the (lawful and correct) protection of the rules/referees. They are there for that reason. Had the referee (correctly) blown for a blatant penalty before the incident, justice would've been done.

I feel sorry or the Stoke fans. It's an ugly club with an ugly manager and ugly players. Like Man Utd, they want to win before they want to be a football club - and that defeats the object of the whole thing. Thank God that our club has values beyond winning at any cost (which is why we've always been, and always will be, a greater 'club' than Man Utd or Liverpool).

I think Fellaini should be fined two weeks salary, should be given a three-match ban - but the sentimental-hysterical journalism (a VERY British thing) will make sure the 'thug' is rightly crucified for his actions on the poor, innocent Ryan Shawcross and (to listen to the embarrassing, sanctimonious Pulis) poor poor Stoke.

I do wish someone with a public voice would come out and say that (teams like) Stoke provoke deliberately and that they should be penalized constantly by referees and should be the subject of an FA investigation. But, of course, to do such a thing, the FA would need to look at itself and its own refereeing standards - which really need to move with the times.

Then there might be some sanity (and fairness) in football ... and on this board.

Let's get one thing straight. We are as guilty of harrassing opposing players on set pieces in our area. Heitinga is one of the worst offenders in the league.

Paul Dark, you just displayed everything that is wrong with the majority of posts in this thread.

Investigation into Stoke? Gimme a break.

Forgive me saying: I think your post displays everything that is wrong with the sentimentality (hammering Shawcross for not making a meal of it??) and sanctimoniousness (we are as bad as Stoke) of the Press reaction. I think people need to look a bit deeper than the head-butt.

I agree that every club is guilty of holding in the box, but it should be stamped out. Stoke are in a different league, though.

The referee's repeated failure to protect Fellaini (his duty, by the way) led to these problems.

Behave yourself, mate.

But if you're interested in what managers say, then David Moyes said yesterday that they are a good tean. I happen to agree, despite the lazy analysis that pervades.

You sound like some drunken nobhead with your stupid rants. Fool.

I've said Fellaini deserves a ban for what he did. I haven't defended him once.

How is what Moyes said post match (who you said behaved with decency and dignity) any different than what I've said?

It's also a bit rich of you to tell someone they could do with a bit of decency and dignity.

Cock.

Also, I was thinking back to some of the other times when Fellaini has been a nob and lashed out, it's funny, because on them ocassions it wasn't Fellaini's fault, it was the players who he lashed out at.

I think this is a typical case off, everyone else are thugs, dirty bastards, cheats etc when it's commited against us, but when it's one of our own, well, that's okay.

Yes, there is holding and shirt pulling in every penalty area every game, but Shawcross yesterday was on another level. Both arms around Fellaini's waist EVERY TIME and nothing ever given. The referee could see it and chose not to act. Isn't Fellaini inclined to feel some sort of injustice considering he conceded a penalty recently with much less contact?

Every Evertonian has rightly condemned Fellaini's actions... we should also acknowledge the circumstances surrounding it.

Fellaini did act in a thuggish manner. Fair to say. Problem I have and a few others on here is he'll get highlighted for his behaviour, (by his own manager no less) whereas the persistent thugs, ie, Ratboy and lets say Shawcross don't even get a mention. Not one raised eyebrow. Not one uttered sentence in their direction. Its disgraceful.

Moyes should of turned the attention on them, persistent fouling, blatant penalty we should of had. Not come out and public castrate one of his own while saying nothing about the former( fuck me he didn't even do it against the RS when ratboy put Mirallas out and then tried to end Distin's career).

All said and done, Fellaini has done well taking the heat off Pienaar and Howard who are the real villains.

Where I was really disappointed with him on Saturday was not the act of stupidity; it was the fact that he could not get into the game and instead of doing something about it decided to spend the entire match sulking and feeling sorry for himself. He never got beyond a trot the entire game, the play passed him by and he was ineffectual in winning headers or holding up the ball.

Of course Shawcross, Huth and the rest roughed him up a bit – what a surprise they do it every week – but a truly great player would find a way to get the better of them and influence the game. It showed me that Fellaini is a very good player but a long way off being a great player in terms of ability and attitude.

"6 game ban, with no dinner" Really? Had the referee seen the incident and shown the deserved red card then Fellaini would have faced a 3 match ban for violent play.

Shawcross was long overdue a yellow card for repeated fouling. Maybe if that yellow had been issued we'd not be talking about the headbutt.

As for Shawcross not making a meal of it, he went down like the Belgrano but was quickly to his feet without so much as a smear of his makeup once it was clear no action would be forthcoming. Seriously, if a nancy boy headbutt like that puts you on your arse he'd not have lasted long having a bevvie in the Triton.

Fellaini has acted like a prick, but let's not imagine that this was NOT a Stoke ploy to get our (usually) most influential player sent off.

Personally, I loved it and smiled when I watched it on MotD this morning. Fellaini was looking for the opportunity to let that twat have it – fucking good. That fuckwit Shawcross had been marking him with his arms the whole match so he had it coming. Moyes is doing what Moyes does best – making Everton look good and trying to to take the sting out of the situation in so much as Everton will deal with this.

Don't fancy listening to any reprimands so leave it out – we all have our opinions and personally I would have battered Shawcross a lot earlier. However, I will be at the Stoke game when they come to our place and I can assure you Shawcross will know he's at GP.

I also like the idea that you suggest describing Stoke as a bad team, is lazy. What exactly is good about them? they close down alot, kick it long, or play it wide, and then cross it in...they play like a football league club. In fact, I watched a second round FA cup replay in the week, and the football on show was simply a less evolved version of Stoke tactics. But that wouldn't even matter that much, if they were not so fucking Dirty.

Fellaini should not have let it get to him...by doing so, he let himself, and the club down, and used the type of violence that should not be seen on a football pitch. But more than a 3 game ban...really? Players get banned for three matches for challenges which could end careers....Terry got a four game ban after being convicted for racist abuse... but Ciaran and others with similar sentiments...you think Fellaini should get a six game plus ban? A 3 game ban comes for violent conduct..and this was violent conduct. He should be banned tomorrow, we should accept it, but I don't see the grounds for him being given a 6/7/8/9 ban which has been suggested on here, and in some elements of the press. The headbutt was clear...the others were less so...last time I checked, the FA didn't use some strange totting up procedure for dishing out bans...If he gets anymore than 3 games, it will simply highlight (yet again), the inconsistent nature of FA punishments in view of the John Terry racism incident and a series of other terrible challenges which have only been punished with a 3 game suspension.

They have tried to evolve their game over the last couple of seasons and have improved immensely in my opinion. The Stoke 'tag' has stuck and allows people to judge them without watching them.

People also have short memories if they can't remember how we played not to long ago!

The way Stoke go about their business is abominable (in almost every way) and any comparison to Everton quite ludicrous.

Have a (serious) word with yourself, mate!

Try a little closer to the present and Tim Cahill's constant winding up and niggling of opponents, or Fellaini's 2 full seasons of elbowing everybody and anybody who came near him...

Paul Dark,

Well framed argument. Yes, I'm a Stoke supporter.

But, with respect to long ball and bullying claims...every season in the league, Stoke have had the lowest overall possession stats... this season they may be bettered by Reading, but I will guarantee now that they will be in the bottom three. Doesn't suggest a passing game to you does it?

For Bullying, see the Fair play table: http://soccernet.espn.go.com/stats/fairplay/_/league/eng.1/barclays-premier-league?cc=5739

Stoke consistently foul more than any team in this league....Pretty obvious, and hard to disprove.

Now when someone describes Stoke as one dimensional, or limited, they do not mean they simply play a past long everytime they get it...they mean they fundamentally favor an out-dated school of football based primarily on long balls, crosses and bully tactics. One or twice a season they score off a nice passing move....it doesn't when the 'old' Stoke tag is not applicable. They've got better at playing their game too...because they have significantly invested in players who are better than their original squad. But their tactics are essentially unchanged.

But please Ciaran...how exactly is the 'Stoke tag' not applicable? because your attempts to suggest otherwise are fundamentally lazy.

And the annoying thing is...Stoke have no excuse to do it now. In the last five seasons, they have the THIRD highest net spend in the league, and on average, have had a net spend of 18million more per season than us. They have the resources to play better football, and change, more so than we do...but they haven't.

Stoke for fair play award and Fellaini for lifetime ban?

The sanctimoniousness and contrariness of some just baffles me.

Of course it was a comment, an inane one.

I'd be happy to address this apparent logical fallacy in my argument.. if you could just point it out..

I don't agree in the slightest with your conclusion that Stoke have two styles of play..Over the last couple of seasons i've seen them play some great football.. I'v also seen them play some effective and direct football..

To say they only do 1 of two things is in itself a one dimensional analysis.. i'd also have to question how much of them you've seen lately..

The lazy analysis of them precedes them in the footballing media with pundits such as Micky Quinn analysing them as 'long ball merchants' - while admitting to not actually watching them..

Of course they also play hard, Huth is a dirty bastard - but to single them out as being reliant on kicking teams off the pitch because of ythe likes of Huth doesn't tell the whole story.

It also seems a tad rich for us to criticise anybody whenever we have some unsavory people within our ranks - including the fella who all this commotion is about...But then again, objectivity never goes down well..does it!

The only difference till recently was they played with wingers something we did part time when Landon drooped in.

Oh! and we couldn't find a suitable Tom Jones song to wake us from our Goodison stupor.

A penalty is given against us for City and the Ciarans of the world say it was a penalty, while many of us point out that it happens on every play but we never have them given. Then we play Stoke and they do it on every set piece, but does Ciaran come on here and ask why we weren't being given those same penalty decisions that he agreed with being given against us? No he doesn't, he goes out of his way to compliment them, saying over the past two seasons they've played some great football. That statement right there should be laughed at by all who read it.

Adding a "but" after saying what Fellaini did was wrong is not justifying it. It's pointing out the events that led up to that event, something Distin has done today, and many other managers around the league have done in the past. If my son was to hit a child at school, but he tells me that was only in reaction to him being pushed around all day in the playground, and having his sweater stolen, me adding a "but" after saying my son should not have punched that kid would not be justifying his reaction. It would be explaining the whole situation, everything that had happened, and not allowing those others who are now playing the victim get away with all of their actions that led up to the final incident. It's called telling the whole story. If someone had stopped those kids from pushing around my child, a punch would not have been thrown. If the referees would have whistled for all the fouls Stoke committed on set pieces by grabbing our players and their "sly shove in the back by Huth" that the commentator praised, Fellaini would not have reached that level of frustration. Is that really so hard to comprehend?

If someone assaults someone of the ball, unless its a case of self defence, then context is abso-fuckin-lutely irrelevant..

There are two separate issues here.

I don't need to comment on whether Shawcross' actions merit a penalty or not. My opinion is clear on the issue, in fact you've even repeated it. That should be crystal clear, even for you.

No, it is not irrelevant. In discussing why an action occurred you must analyze the entire situation. Fellaini's action occurred while he was again being bear hugged by Shawcross, being pulled back. It had happened all match and at that moment he snapped, wrongfully so. But to just ignore what led up to it is to allow them to get away with it. Distin has said as much today. But you don't come out and ask why Everton weren't granted penalties. You come out and simply slate Fellaini and refuse to discuss anything that led up to it or any of Stoke's tactics, in fact you defend them.

Neither did I defend any of Shawcross' behaviour.

If youre going to try and attack my point, the very least you could do is familiarise yourself with it.

Get a fuckin' grip!

To explain them, yes, we need to refer to Shawshite's actions.

But to say whether or not felli's actions are acceptable, you don't need to refer to anything Shawshite did (EXCEPT in mitigation) - all you need to do is say whether felli acted within the laws of the game and whether he then deserves the punishment he gets - he didn't and he does (even with mitigation he deserves the ban he'll get). I think that's what Ciaran and many others is saying. And he deserves it from the point of view of having fucked things up for our team for the next few games.

I think that's easy to understand.

Regarding your childish suggestion that I haven't seen alot of Stoke...first, fantastic arguing style..try to prioritize the primacy of your argument by denouncing another because of an assumption they have had less first hand evidence... first, you are wrong. Because of my working life, I watch an awful lot of football, including, a second round FA Cup replay, one Spanish league game, one Bundlesliga, three Premiership matches and a Serie A match over the last week. I would say, with some certainty, that I have watched Stoke at least as much as you have, and most probaly more.

Now, your silly comments aside...let's move on. Firstly, Stoke's thuggery is not confined to Huth. As I illustrated in my last post, they are bottom of the fair play league. Your use of Huth is a strange one...considering some of the challenges Shawcross has made over the past few seasons and his general level of play....not to mention Charlie Adam, who is a notoriously dirty player, and Dean Whitehead, who is the most booked player in the league this season. To try and to suggest they are not dirty is simply not true...the facts illustrate that they are...and even without facts, the large majority of football fans would describe Stoke as the dirtiest team in the league. There is no smoke without fire in their case. Or do you think that Stoke lead the league in yellow cards/red cards because they are not..dirty?

Now your suggestions of Stoke playing well...spring from you having seen them play some nice football on occasions? well done, they can't be a a limited side then...... I mean seriously, you do realize that calling Stoke a long-ball team, or one-dimensional, does not suggest that they never have phases of play which contradict that? I mean surely that is not your argument? But anyway.. Stoke are a fundamentally ugly football team, who has I have stated before, play it long, or to the wings, the large majority of the time. They very very rarely play it along the ground through the middle. Now, in support of this, I give you possession statistics, which you have conveniently chosen to ignore because they defeat your argument. Stoke consistently have less possession in Premier league matches, at around 40% in matches. They have less possession, because of a fundamentally direct style. This is an easy conclusion to make.

You are trying to defend an indefensible argument here. You state that Stoke are 1) not dirty 2) and play good football – And they have the most cards in the league, and consistently lower possession in almost every match they play.

You do realise that all that sophistry is just your opinion, don't you?

The analysis of Stoke as a bullying team who simply play long ball is lazy because it's simply not true. They have tried to evolve their game over the last couple of seasons and have improved immensely in my opinion. The Stoke 'tag' has stuck and allows people to judge them without watching them.

My reason is sound...t hat is why you are refusing to meet it head on. You say in your opinion Stoke play good football and are not dirty... which I've heard very very few football people claim. However, in response I illustrate that Stoke have less possession than any more Premier League team, and receive more cards. Please explain to me how their lack of possession is not related to a fundamentally direct style? and how their position at the top of the card table illustrates that they are not a dirty side? Instead of hiding behind a very undergraduate style of avoidance.

Also, Liverpool have had a few pens not given this season... primarily because of the reputation of Suarez. Maybe Suarez's reputation is so bad, referees have just decided to stop giving them to anyone in Liverpool.

Also, Mourinho looks like he will be available in the summer after tonight's result. Apparently a caller on 606 stated yesterday that Liverpool will get him. :D

The first thing Pulis looks at when he buys a player is his aerial ability. And it's not like they don't spend money. They have the resources to buy decent footballers but instead choose to stick with this long ball game.

There is no 'good' or 'bad' football, it's purely opinion. All I know is that I couldn't watch that guff every week.

You've thrown out a tenuous stat based on possession and another based on cards - then you've pronounced a conclusion that on this basis Stoke are a dirty long ball team.

There's no refinement in the argument, other than a hop, skip and a jump from these dubious facts to your conclusion.

We have 3 less yellow cards than Stoke, and had Fellaini been rightly been sent off.. not only would he have overtaken Whiteheads total, we'd have been down around were Stoke are in the fairplay league. By your flawless logic we're dirty bastards too.

So while I actually didn't actually say we couldn't criticise Stoke because of Fellaini, it's obvious to me that given our dubious temperament its rather churlish to do so.

As for your suggestion that I'm 'defending the indefensible'.. another bullshit slight of hand.

What team(s) in the Premier League play worse football than Stoke, in your opinion.

And how exactly are yellow cards and red cards not a barometer of how dirty a team is? please explain to me what is a more useful tool for analysis? Your subjective judgement, which strangely contravenes the dominant rhetoric concerning the way Stoke play football?

And possession statistics..are they not an indicator of how direct a team is? interesting how yet again you avoid the questions I ask.

And your argument is purely based on seeing them play on a few occasions...btw, let me know if I am right...when you imply you've watched Stoke play more than anyone else, do you mean a few games a season when they are on Sky? I'm just trying to determine why you think you watch Stoke more than everyone else.

Have you ever considered the possibility you are wrong? Stoke consistently foul the most, get the most cards, have the least possession, score the most headers.... it doesn't take much to make a few conclusions...the only hop, skip and jumping go on here, is your strange conclusion that Stoke play good football. But eh? stats can be used to say anything eh? all the managers complaining are wrong? And I suppose all the people disagreeing with your absurd notions are wrong as well.

When I was a kid, my hero was Alan Hudson at Stoke City. Very technical guy. But that changed when I first watched Bob Latchford and fell in love with Everton. He would be well suited for the Stoke of today

How many games has Owen played and how many goals has he scored at Stoke? Christ, this is a side that for years almost purely relied on long throws into the box to get goals.

By the way, very much enjoying watching this Barcelona v Atletico match. All the defending has been done on their feet, no diving in at the ankles. Some cracking goals with amazing lead up play, made possible by the fact that they don't stand for rough house defending. It is possible to defend without tackling from behind and holding onto your player for dear life. And just then an aerial challenge comes in with an elbow raised by the Barcelona player and it's immediately met with a yellow card. Falcao would be a fool to move to England.

The point I was making, is that we are not far behind Stoke on the card and foul count, so by your logic that's enough to label us 'dirty'. That's why your conclusion is flawed, and that's why stats are not definitive on this issue.

ps: I never implied I'd watched Stoke more than everybody else.. another straw argument. But as you've asked, I don't rely on Sky for my football and I get all 360 games.

Ciarán, you're talking nonsense.

Do you not understand that Phil? Is it nonsense?

I don't think so.

http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2012/12...eader.html?m=1

Dubious: Not to be relied on. Suspect.

Oxymoron: A figure of speech in which apparently contradictory terms are used in conjunction.

Nonsense: Spoken or written words which make no sense

• 'Ciaran was talking nonsense'

Arsenal finished with the highest average possession in the division last season, 60%, while Stoke's was the lowest at 40%. - http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2012/aug/24/stoke-city-arsenal-tactics

This season, Stoke had an average of 37% in October: http://www.talksport.co.uk/magazine/features/121013/premier-leagues-possession-table-find-out-where-your-club-ranks-182989

But in fairness to them, aside from Liverpool arguably, they had the toughest start in the league. Since them, possession has averaged around the 40% mark (Check out the match stats...)

So Ciaran...I'd say what I said was pretty factual. Btw, check out the figures for their pass completion... they are as embarrassing as their possession stats. What other stats are dubious btw...the yellow and red card?

And Ciaran if you suggest that other posters have not seen Stoke much lately, and then refer to the primacy of your opinion based on first hand evidence, then I think there is a heavy implication that you have watched Stoke more than the poster you are denouncing? Pretty obvious relationship if you ask me.

What I really find amazing, is that Stoke still play great football, which is not fundamentally direct, with a lower passing accuracy and lower possession than the other teams in the division...and they are not dirty, but receive more cards than anyone else in the division. How exactly do they manage that Ciaran? I'm confused...anyone else know?

I make a prediction: Ciaran won't answer the question, because he can't, and knows he cant.

Now I accept that Fellaini transgressed - and if the referee had seen the head-butt then he would have received (and deserved) a straight red. But the reaction of Shearer really bothered me; his career was filled with unsavoury moments in which he failed to cover himself on glory. After he managed to stamp all over Neil Lennon (in 1998) without the referee seeing it, he basically (it is alleged) responded to the threat of a ban by threatening the FA with a refusal to play for England. In a World Cup year. So his hypocrisy - and his refusal to accept his own transgressions - mark him out as the sort of person who shouldn't really be sitting down and broadcasting his supposedly balanced views to the public.

I didn't claim anything of the sort, you made it up..

I also didn't say that Stoke played 'great football' - yet another fabrication on your part..

I said they played good football as well as direct football and that they had impoved in the last couple of seasons..

Ive answered your question, the fact that youve choose to ignore the comparisons with our disciplianry record is somewhat telling.

In respect to Fellaini, aggression is a part of his game. I know sometimes controlled aggression is necessary for certain footballers, but I think Fellaini has too often stepped over the line in the past. I'm also worried that now, when he returns from suspension, he will become a target for yellow and reds, because of the media fervor over the Stoke incident.

But he apologised, and Moyes criticised. It doesn't alter the nature of the incident, but it has been the best possible reaction. If he learns from it, it will be forgotten in a few months. We have also acted far better than other teams in this league when they have been involved in embarrassing/disgraceful incidents....not going to mention any names, but one particular incident involved a rat faced Uruguayan.

They're also well down the fair play league, must be dirty feckers too.

He's a fuckin' great (young) player (imo again) and this rush to sell him/label him a liability, is bewildering. The lad doesn't receive any protection from referees, whether away at god forsaken holes like Stoke, or at Goodison. He reacted. He shouldn't have. I can get over it.

What I really find amazing, is that Stoke still play great football, which is not fundamentally direct, with a lower passing accuracy and lower possession than the other teams in the division...and they are not dirty, but receive more cards than anyone else in the division. How exactly do they manage that Ciaran? I'm confused...anyone else know?
I make a prediction: Ciaran won't answer the question, because he can't, and knows he cant.

I also did answer your question...I referred to the fact that you mentioned a red card which was not given. And your point does not hold up...we do not have a record like Stoke's....we are 13th in the fair play table, and they are 20th...what are you on about? I also personally believe we have on occasions played in a dirty manner, especially in the past but clearly this season have committed less card worthy fouls than Stoke. We also do not employ the tactics that Stoke do on a frequent basis and consequently do not have the reputation of Stoke among other footballing clubs and fans. And in your manner of trying to alter the fairplay table based on cards that were given...then the red we received for Pienaar should not count, as it was the result of a referee's error.

Also Ciaran...you didn't say Stoke played great football? that is a fabrication? well, who said this again:

I don't agree in the slightest with your conclusion that Stoke have two styles of play..Over the last couple of seasons i've seen them play some great football..

'some GREAT football'.

Serious Ciaran...how can you still continue with your claims? Stoke consistently have lower percentage stats in the league than their opponents, which averages at around the 40% mark...they have very low pass completion figures..and foul more than other teams. Stoke have a reputation as an ugly team for a reason...they have a bunch of tall players and score a high proportion of their goals from headers...this isn't myth making...there isn't an attempt to create anti-Stoke narrative. We don't need Said to write back. The figures are there...the testimonies are there....the comments of irritated managers and players are there, most recently from our own central defender.

I'll leave it on this note again from Barton concerning Owen's transfer.

“Good luck at Stoke, Get practicing your heading lad….

But then maybe Barton hasn't watched Stoke much lately either.

All they're doing is trying to buy some false legitimacy, while in the background doing what they're done ever since they came into the EPL which is muscle, foul and cheat teams off the park. They make Big SAMs sides look like Barcelona.

I was also referring to the moral high ground of the media...not my own. My fallibility in that respect is illustrated through my admittance that I had in the past done things on a football pitch which I would criticise the modern footballer for. Please read the post before trying a witty comeback, which is just emphasising your position as the Toffeeweb idiot this evening.

Fuck, ill get me coat then.

David Moyes - YESTERDAY - "Stoke are a good team".

P.S do you not consider the inclusion of the word 'some' to be a rather important qualifier?

Anyway, don't answer. I think the forum has had enough of this argument.

Maybe, Tony, your players are so dirty that they bring out the animal in every player they try and stop with your underhand tactics. Or ,on the other hand (and this is a long shot) the refs can see how what they are doing and let it go.

In which case, as most people on here have posted, the officials need to get a grip of the snide tactics straight away, otherwise it becomes insidious and the whole game turns vile.

Also..funny to see so many assaults on Stoke's football....are all these posters missing something as well?

And Moyes called Stoke a good team? ooo ok...they must not be a fundamentally direct football team, with the lowest possession stats in the league over the past few years, and the highest card count. I didn't know Moyes said that before I made this argument...shit, I wonder if others will have to retract what they've said about Stoke now too.

http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2012/12/david-moyes-shows-brendan-rodgers-how-to-be-a-real-leader.html?m=1

GET 'KIN REAL and stop dancing around the bleedin obvious.

Until the prem sort out the in the box argie bargie we will have the Carra Lescott carry on ( how long ago was that ) and we will have people getting their retaliation in first.

Banning Fellaini is just the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff senario

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-2249133/Martin-Samuel-Marouane-Fellaini-wrong-lets-grips-real-problem.html

It happens every time we play Stoke, persistent fouling by Shawcross and holding that is against the laws of the game went unpunished and Felliani snapped, it's called being human. Yes he was in the wrong but if the ref had got a grip and given a foul the first time (See City away last week pen against us for much less) then I'm pretty sure the headbutt wouldn't have happened.

Hoping you can read this from the lofty heights of your moral high ground up there, time to inject some realism into proceedings.

Also being a good team does not mean that the team plays 'good' as in attractive football.

As for every other poor decision that does or doesn't go our way - two wrongs do not make a right, so please stop pointing to every other foul or penalty appeal we don't win.

Fellaini butted the guy, no defence.

I've answered the above several times now. Just because you can't recognise or accept the answer doesn't mean i've avoided it.

I'll have another go in the vague hope you'll grasp the train of my argument.

Firstly, I did not say they play 'great football'... I said that i've seen them play 'some great football' over the last couple of seasons. I've never said they're Arsenal. What i'm saying is that they've tried to changed their game and are not so dependant on direct football.

However you're happy to stand by teh rather vacuous point that they're route one and nothing else.

The stats you've provided in no prove that they haven't played some good football. The point which was put to you (which you roundly dismissed) was that yestersday Swansea had a very low possession, but played their normal game when they had the ball. That was an average over a game.

You have produced your question above on the premature basis that the stats youve provided have proven your point. They haven't.

The matter is one for debate. Perhaps you would be better served by recognising this fact.

Secondly, on the 'dirty' tag. I think you'll find i've accepted from the start that they have a few players who are programmed in a certain way. However, to tag the whole team 'dirty' on this basis is in my opinion misleading. More importantly, I also find it rather churlish to label a whole team dirty solely on the basis of a collective disciplinary record. This is especially pertinent considering that we are essentially a single red card away from them in the fair play league.

Luckily for him and us, it looks like the FA are only going to charge him for the headbutt.

By the way: Fellaini is an enormous asset to our club. I hope he stays for a very long time to come.

The first is the Fellaini has an issue with his temper, there is no doubt about that and he needs to sort that out.

The second which was the point I was making was that if the referee followed the letter of the law then Shawcross wouldn't have been able to spend 90 minutes bear hugging Fellaini as he wouldn't have been on the pitch. As Martin Samuels link says:

"the first foul that was committed in the Stoke City penalty area in the 59th minute on Saturday was by defender Ryan Shawcross."

If that had been punished appropriately I do not believe the events that followed it would have occured.

I suppose I'm a bitter blue but it wrankles me the lack of consitency of both

1) Decisions, i.e. why did City get a penalty against us for a tug but Stoke didn't get any punishment for fully holding our players in the box?

2) Media coverage - Both duirng after the derby no one mentioned the 2 obvious malicious challenges of Suarez's on Mirralles and Distin, (MOTD and Sky apparently missed them both). When Miralles went off at half time Sky said he'd pulled up awkwardly! Contrast that to the media frenzy over Felliani, yes 3 incidents he lost his temper because he was man handled all game, yes totally in the wrong and deserves punishing but not calculated cynical attempts to put other players out of the game. MOTD 2 even had the headbutt as the opening intro to the highlights of the goals last night, which was good in one way as it showed the limited cotact it took for the strapping Shawcross to drop like a sack of spuds before his team mate eventually pulled him up and he jogged on then as if nothing had happened.

Ditto on Felliani, he's been outstanding this season and will do just as well if not better if dropped back into central midfiled so is priceless to us.

I do have some sympathy with him losing his temper too from my own experiences however far removed they are from the premier league. As a scrawny 16 year old I played sunday league football for a pub team (I was a glass collector there), I played on the right wing so most of the time would either put the ball through the left backs legs or push it past him and try and do him on pace. As you can imagine if the defender did mange to get me, bearing in mind most of them were a lot bigger and older than me, then they'd give me one hell of kick, stamp, push, elbow whatever they could get away with. One game I just snapped, I'd been getting kicked all over the park, had a bloodied nose from an elbow and not even a free kick all game. Another whack to my knee and that was it, I got up and swung for the full back who probably barely felt the punch I landed on him but obviously the whole team got stuck in then! The point being the full back should have been long off the pitch before that happened, I got sent off (Rightly so) but he just carried on as he was. Not really fair, casue and effect, I'd retaliated not instigated it but I was the only one punished.

Now firstly, it is clear from my comments that I do not think Stoke are ONLY route one, but 'fundamentally' play a simplified version of football which primary involves playing it directly into the forwards, or crossing it from the wings.. There you go again going for absolutes. Now this is supported by 'average' possession stats, and pass completion stats. These are facts. Now please....try to understand this, because it is getting frustrating..... you refer to: 'That was an average over a game' in relation to Swansea yesterday.... now, firstly, every possession stat for a match will be an average for a game...well done. Swansea were away to Spurs...therefore there was a high probability that Swansea would have less possession, just as they will when they play United or City away. The usual Swansea game is based on high possession football, because they kept it on the ground, and this is illustrated through consistently high possession stats and good pass completion figures. But we are not dealing with a one-off average with Stoke are we? you understand that concept right? they had around 40% the WHOLE of last season, which was their best I believe in the division so far. They consistently, home and away, have less possession than their opponents, hence their insanely low possession stat, despite low-mid table finishes. This is because they fundamentally play DIRECT football. Now in response to his stat, this factual declaration which can easily be authenticated, you have given bullshit...you have said they play some good/great football, which you have seen them play (Well done...even the infamous Wimbledon team played 'some' good football), and suggested I haven't watched them much, presumably because I had the audacity to think like most football fans, and doubt your opinion in relation to Stoke's football. What you say is not supported by stats, or general opinion. Yet again you have not answered my question. Is it so hard?

I have asked, and I will ask again, if Stoke do not play fundamentally direct football, why do they have the consistently lowest possession stat of every team in the league? and low pass completion stats? (despite 14th-11th? placed finishes, which illustrate they are more successful in terms of points than at least six other teams). Now try to understand the concept of an answer...it is not a response to state that Swansea had 40% possession yesterday, because it was a one off match...surely you can see the flaw in that logic? and with respect to their dirty tag, Stoke's manner of playing, which Distin among others as pointed out, is not confined to one or two players...Huth as you acknowledge is dirty. Charlie Adam, one of their summer signings, is also an extremely dirty player, whilst Nzonzi hasn't the best of reputations in that respect. Whitehead currently leads the league in yellow cards, whilst Wilkinson has put in several poor challenges this season, and has a general reputation in the game. Shawcross has been responsible for two broken legs, and also receives far more than his far share of yellow cards. Fundamentally therefore, this team has a series of individuals who receive many yellow and red cards, and who have a reputation in football. The disciplinary table in this case backs it up. Now you are right, yellow and red cards are not the sole indicators of a team's level of dirty play...but Stoke also consistently make more fouls, and have a series of players with dirty reputations in football. It is clear that Stoke play a fundamentally physical game, which involves more pushing/pulling and the like that any team in this league. This I have issue with...because I do not think it is productive in terms of footballing evolution..and because I do not think they have a reason to do it. They have had the third highest net spend in the league over the course of the last 5 seasons, and should be moving forward. IMO, which I think is authenticated by general statistics, there only improvement has been in the quality of player, not in their fundamental game. Adam will pass more effectively than Delap...but the ball still ends up going wide to Whitehead, Etherington or Kightly, or/then is directed in the air to one of their serious of tall strikers, Crouch, Jerome, Jones etc

And we are not one red card away from them in the disciplinary table. We are seven yellows, or 3 reds, and one yellow. There is a substantial difference.

Finally, back to possession. You mentioned Swansea, illustrating that low possession does not necessarily mean a direct style...which of course is correct in excluded games, but not over the length of a season.
As a quick comparison, last season in home games, Swansea had 59.5 possession has an average, and 56.5% in away games. Stoke had 41.8% in home games, and 38.8% in away games. The home average for the entire league was 51.4% and the away average was 48.6%. Stoke therefore fell well below the average, and their difference in style to Swansea is well exhibited in the statistics.

Now Ciaran, I don't understand as well, why you are defending Stoke. I've seen your comments on here..you seem to favour good positive football. Now you can represent Stoke as you want...but we both know that if a direct style was not the primary component of their game, then they would have higher pass completion, and possession figures. So why do you oppose a 'Stoke' tag, which whilst tempered slightly, is still fundamentally correct? I am quite certain that if Everton replicated the way Stoke played, you would critic the nature of our football(as everyone right did, when the lack of playmakers resulted in a more regressive style of play in the first half of last season). I'm also, from your comments about Fellaini, quite certain that you'd disapprove of the some of the potentially career ending challenges Huth, Shawcross and Adam have been responsible for.

A simple 'I'm right' would've sufficed. You add nothing new whatsoever with that epic rant.

It's just opinions Jim. Why are you getting frustrated? Ciaran obviously has a different opinion than you and he will not change it to suit yours, no matter how many posts you make.

Accept it and move on. I find this a better practice than arguing for a full day on a point that is essentially nothing to do with Everton.

Stoke are shit! No they're not! Yes they are.......ad infinitum....

"Robert Huth made light of the Marouane Fellaini headbutt on Ryan Shawcross by sarcastically telling his Stoke colleague he shouldn't have dived.

The morning after the incident the German defender tweeted: 'Hate to see diving in the Prem. Stay on your feet Shawcross.'"

It seems some people have forgotten Fellaini plays for Everton and on here we all support Everton so how did this thread turn into a discussion from people harping on about how good Stoke are and how Stoke's style is fair and Fellaini had no right or justification to react to constant fouling?

Suffice to say Stoke are the best rugby league team I have seen on a football field since Wimbledon graced the Premier League.

The morning after the incident the German defender tweeted: 'Hate to see diving in the Prem. Stay on your feet Shawcross.'"

----------------------------

Brilliant....Huth gets top marks for that.

Still won't stop Fellaini getting banned.

I had them all wrong....

I always think one thing that sets us everton fans above the shite's is that we can take an honest look at ourselves.....and have a laugh when the criticism/banter is aimed in our direction.

According to EFC official website