Gill has never publicly commented on the subject, just the usual part line of "cross that bridge when we come to it". Charlton on the other hand has said "he's a talent but I don't see him here" and questioned his suitability for United. If someone with as big a say as Sir Bob has in the appointment of the next manager says that, then I think it should be enough to temper the clamour for Jose and the the conviction that his arrival is a certainty.
Next Man Utd Manager Expected To Be Jose Mourinho Or David Moyes
- Thread starter Niall
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) are here to discuss Amad saving our blushes in a win against Southampton as well as our now annual loss at home to Brighton. They discuss Amorim's post-match comments, revisit how mid-table we may or may not be, and discuss some transfer news.
Gill has never publicly commented on the subject, just the usual part line of "cross that bridge when we come to it". Charlton on the other hand has said "he's a talent but I don't see him here" and questioned his suitability for United. If someone with as big a say as Sir Bob has in the appointment of the next manager says that, then I think it should be enough to temper the clamour for Jose and the the conviction that his arrival is a certainty.
He is by no means a certainty. Like I said he'd be a certainty because I think he wants it for sure but I have my doubts weather the board would take him. I think SAF will recommend him because they genuinely like each other, just have to see how big a pull SAF's opinion will have.
But will bobby have more of a say than te current boss, a man who's best friend in football is one mr mourinho?
About equal I'd say. Bobby is the man that insisted on SAF after all...
As for Mourinho being SAF's best buddy, since when? OK, they've never had a slanging match ala Wenger or Rafa, but I wouldn't say they were friends. There's obviously a mutual respect there, if anything Mourinho has kissed SAF's arse a million times over but nothing more than that.
Fergie has a lot of time for Moyes aswell, and I don't mean in the same way he has for Fat Sam. He genuinely respects Moyes as a man and the work he's done at Everton. I've heard him rave about Moyes a lot more than I have heard him praise Jose.
Only he knows his own views on who's best equipped to succeed him though, so any arguments between ourselves about it is futile really.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonny Feehan
1. More likely to stay and provide long term stability ala Fergie
2. Mourinho would mean more sensational and ABU media attention than ever.
3. Moyes has proved he can handle big egos and provide motivation
4. He seems to understand and optimise the transfer market.
5. He believes in investing in a sound youth policy
6. He is Scottish and Fergie wants him to be his successor
Just my opinion of course.
Lighten up Domzi. 6 was mainly in jest and why would I need mind reading powers to have an opinion on 5? He has brought some excellent young players through, the latest being Seamus Coleman.
Basically it is a choice between a proven, expensive, short term, extroverted mercenary who will probably, in our present financial situation, be relatively handcuffed and a young, ambitious manager with the potential to provide some sort of continuity to the present regime. Take your pick.
Originally Posted by Sonny Feehan
1. More likely to stay and provide long term stability ala Fergie
2. Mourinho would mean more sensational and ABU media attention than ever.
3. Moyes has proved he can handle big egos and provide motivation
4. He seems to understand and optimise the transfer market.
5. He believes in investing in a sound youth policy
6. He is Scottish and Fergie wants him to be his successor
Just my opinion of course.
Lighten up Domzi. 6 was mainly in jest and why would I need mind reading powers to have an opinion on 5? He has brought some excellent young players through, the latest being Seamus Coleman.
Basically it is a choice between a proven, expensive, short term, extroverted mercenary who will probably, in our present financial situation, be relatively handcuffed and a young, ambitious manager with the potential to provide some sort of continuity to the present regime. Take your pick.
He does not need to be defensive there. He has got one of the best if not the best attacking options in the world!
When did Bobby say that though?
A few years ago I'd probably have agreed with him.
Be interesting to get his views now, seeing as Mourinho and Fergie seem to have built a good relationship in recent years.
About a year or 18 months ago, I think.
Since then Mourinho led a dour, cynical side to the CL, who relied on tactical and physical prowess rather than skill or footballing majesty to achieve their success. Now he's at Madrid and doing well, but let's face it, a chimp could get a frontline of Ronaldo, Di Maria, and Higuain to function and score plenty.
His sides score a healthy total of goals but do they entertain? By and large, no IMO.
Inter were an entertaining side.
People just compared them unfavourably to Barcelona. Everyone looks shit next to them. Funny thing is, in that match Barca were no great shakes. Inter out-footballed them in the first leg by a distance.
I watched them plenty of other times, and they played good football on the deck, regularly cutting teams apart, orchestrated through Sneijder. I've only seen Madrid a handful of times, but they're playing some brilliant stuff.
I disagree with your opinion about his teams not entertaining especially with Real Madrid. I watched pretty much all their games so far. They have been good this year. I mean they will be just because of the talent they have in their side. They are definitely not as entertaining as Barca but they have far better than most other top European sides.
Inter won the final with 38% possession and were outplayed comfortably until the goal.
That stat was probably lower against Barcelona and Chelsea(outplayed in San Siro and out possessioned at SB).
They deserved their triumph for their defensive excellence, hard-headedness, and lethal cutting edge on the counter but no way were they an attacking, entertaining team to watch.
Jose
Inter were really no more or less boring than other recent CL sides, and that certainly isn't a valid argument against why Mourinho shouldn't manage United, especially when contrasted to his achievements.
It does not really matter how they play as long as they win titles. Would you care if United played defensively under Mourinho and still won UCL, PL and the FA Cup? I doubt you would. You would tell every person who says United are playing defensive to shut the feck up and deal with it.
They won the champions league. We also won the champions league not long ago not playing particulary amazing football, looking quite shaky.......against the same opponents!
A win is a win when it comes to a final. We even won it more recently.............on penalties! Come on.
Listen, I would prefer Mourinho to be our next boss, I'm merely offering legitamate reasons why the club may not go down that road.
I'm not disputing what you've said about winning is winning and that, but not in a million years were Inter an entertaining team, they were a counter-attacking team with defence their main priority.
Even Rafa has them playing a better brand of football, albeit with more mixed results at the moment.
In '08 we were lauded for our "fantastic counter-attacking football"
Yup, the difference being we didn't rely on that to score goals and we didn't sit in with clean sheets our priority, Barca away being the exception although I'd argue we just played shite that night, couldn't pass a ball straight all evening.
We also didn't use 2 holding midfield player's throughout our run like Inter did with Motta and Cambiasso. When Motta was suspended for the final, did they bring in a midfielder like Stankovic? No, Jose drafted in a full-back in Chivu and shifted another defender into midfield in Zanetti.
Well it's unfair to say they only play boring counter attacking football on the basis of a semi against Barca (as we did) and a final against Bayern (in which they played *similar* to how we did against Chelsea) as we were very dour in both too, only without the total difference that we sat at OT against Barca and they completely outplayed them at the San Siro.
There's a world of difference between Inter's sitting back, very rigid, low tempo counter attacking football and our pressing high up the pitch, fluid, quick tempo football we played in 06-08.
Counter attacks can start anywhere on the pitch. The notion that it's only applicable to teams who sit deep is ridiculous, see Arsenal in 02-04 for another example.
Counter attacks can start anywhere on the pitch. The notion that it's only applicable to teams who sit deep is ridiculous, see Arsenal in 02-04 for another example.
In the semi at San Siro, they took their chances and rode their luck in the sense Barca missed a couple of good un's. They bullied Barcelona, and all credit to them and Mourinho for that but they didn't outplay them.
As for the final, they were dour and cynical. Bayern were the only team to turn up with the intention of playing positive football, Inter were on the back foot for the majority of the game, Bayern had all the possession, a few good/half chances, but were punished on the counter. Again, congrats to Inter but it wasn't a footballing clinic, it was a triumph of defensive resilience, tactical savvy, and the ability to take chances when they presented themselves. Inter created 3 chances all game and took 2 of them(Milito's goals and Sneijder's chance).
In our 3 good Champions League runs we played attacking football on about 4 occasions. Against Roma in Old Trafford in the 7-1 game, against Arsenal in Old Trafford, against Milan in Milan and against Barcelona in Rome. The 7-1 game we had to go out and attack, in Milan we got obliterated, and in Rome we got humiliated. Arsenal at Old Trafford was basically the only game that in which we played attacking football throughout without getting spanked.
The rest of matches in those runs consisted of solid counter attacking football, with midfielders playing holding roles. Even Arsenal in the Emirates, we were under pressure early in the game and destroyed them with two counter-attacks and a set piece from over 40 yards. You could make an argument for the game against Milan where we won 3-2, but again, that was only when we had to. Against Barcelona in Camp Nou we played Rooney and Tevez as auxilliary full backs, in Old Trafford we scored one and shut up shop completely, against Roma in the 0-2 game Spaletti said we were the best Italian team and everyone talked about our Catenaccio, we did the same thing to Inter. Against FC Porto we scored early and shut up shop.
Last season we played better attacking football in Europe than we had done for years, and fell at the earliest hurdle since going out in 2005 - not a coincideince. It's almost impossible to win the Champions League playing great attacking football, Barcelona are the only team to have done it in recent years, and that was due to a) an awful lot of luck against a team who counter-attacked them to death in the Semi Final, and b) coming up against a team who wanted to go toe-to-toe with them. If we had done what TSO did in his CL Final, drafted a defender into midfield to replace Fletcher instead of playing another forward, we probably would have done a lot better in Rome.
First of all, we'd have to have had a defender versatile enough to play CM to do what Jose did. We didn't/haven't hence we didn't although SAF wouldn't have done so anyway. We needed Hargreaves available in Darren's absence, didn't have him or anyone similar and it cost us.
We may have played what is percieved(wrongly) to be a defensive system in Europe, but we always played possession football with the intention of creating chances and scoring goals. Inter are different in the sense they were the opposite, wingers who's first port of call was to defend and track back, 2 holding midfielders designed to close space, get in their face, and protect Inter's defence. That's not an attacking set-up, that is a system and personnel designed to keep clean-sheets first and foremost.
I'm sure Inter intended on creating chances and scoring goals as well. They did knock 3 past Barcelona, far more than we ever did. As for Wingers whose first port of call was to defend, did you see Park against Barcelona at Old Trafford? Darren Fletcher is exactly the type of player you describe, a player who closes space, gets in opponents faces and protects the defence. So is Hargreaves. Carrick used to play equally defensively, just in a different way. I'm not arguing that Inter use an attacking set-up, I'm arguing that a team is unlikely to win the Champions League using an attacking set-up.
I'm sure Inter intended on creating chances and scoring goals as well. They did knock 3 past Barcelona, far more than we ever did. As for Wingers whose first port of call was to defend, did you see Park against Barcelona at Old Trafford? Darren Fletcher is exactly the type of player you describe, a player who closes space, gets in opponents faces and protects the defence. So is Hargreaves. Carrick used to play equally defensively, just in a different way. I'm not arguing that Inter use an attacking set-up, I'm arguing that a team is unlikely to win the Champions League using an attacking set-up.
I suppose I should have added "and quality to play there in a CL final". Are you seriously saying we'd have been better off deploying O'Shea in midfield in direct competition with Xavi, Iniesta, and Busquets? 
Fletcher is certainly not a holding player who's remit is purely to be destructive. Same applies to Hargreaves.
You're right, an element of caution is usually required to go far in CL, Inter had more than an element of caution though, their team and whole gameplan was built on the very concept. I'm not taking anything away from their achievements, but I'm not going to sit here and let people paint them into something they never were in order to defend Mourinho.
Fletcher is certainly not a holding player who's remit is purely to be destructive. Same applies to Hargreaves.
You're right, an element of caution is usually required to go far in CL, Inter had more than an element of caution though, their team and whole gameplan was built on the very concept. I'm not taking anything away from their achievements, but I'm not going to sit here and let people paint them into something they never were in order to defend Mourinho.
Better off, yeah. Obviously Carrick-O'Shea-Anderson is worse than Xavi-Busquets-Iniesta, but it's a lot more solid defensively than Carrick-Giggs-Anderson, which is what we needed.
It's fair enough that they didn't play particularly entertaining football against Barcelona (nobody does if they want to win) or indeed throughout their Champions League run, but I think it is very harsh to criticise Mourinho for that. The Barcelona side he faced was one of the greatest attacking sides in all history, if you go toe-to-toe with them, you get battered. Usually if you shut up shop against them you lose as well. I think the fact that he beat them, should be something he is granted immense credit for, it's unfair to concentrate simply on the 'boring football' aspect of it. We've done the same thing ourselves, several times in European games, because it's necessary to win. His CL system focused on keeping clean sheets, but again, what's wrong with that? Keeping clean sheets is a very good way of ensuring you progress in the Champions League.
Wow, I've heard many would be-antidotes to the mauling we got in Rome, some valid, some not, that one takes the biscuit though. Good grief.
I'm not slagging him off for the Barca match or indeed his philosophy on the whole, he's won 2 CL's on the back of it which is a superb achievement. I'm merely pointing out that his philosophy isn't in line with ours(you're trying to use our European approach to justify the opposite but it's not) and that I can see why our hierarchy might not get Mourinho here like so many of you insist they will/should.
Guess you must have missed all our CL away games in the last few years.
Blanc expresses his desire
LAURENT BLANC has revealed he would be keen on replacing Alex Ferguson as manager of Manchester United.
But the France boss who finished his career as a central defender with the Red Devils said Fergie should be the man to choose his successor at Old Trafford.
Blanc, 44, said: "Sir Alex is the cornerstone of Manchester United. He personifies Manchester's project he's got this passion.
"It would be a very interesting. It would be a very tough challenge but maybe interesting if he is the one starting it with me or someone else but I could be interested.
"But nobody should take it from him. It would be very sad for Manchester and it would be even sadder for him."
Blanc, who will be in charge of France at Wembley for next week's friendly against England, added:"It would please me a lot but it would be tough to find a successor to Sir Alex.
"He has done it for 24 years and it will not be easy."
LAURENT BLANC has revealed he would be keen on replacing Alex Ferguson as manager of Manchester United.
But the France boss who finished his career as a central defender with the Red Devils said Fergie should be the man to choose his successor at Old Trafford.
Blanc, 44, said: "Sir Alex is the cornerstone of Manchester United. He personifies Manchester's project he's got this passion.
"It would be a very interesting. It would be a very tough challenge but maybe interesting if he is the one starting it with me or someone else but I could be interested.
"But nobody should take it from him. It would be very sad for Manchester and it would be even sadder for him."
Blanc, who will be in charge of France at Wembley for next week's friendly against England, added:"It would please me a lot but it would be tough to find a successor to Sir Alex.
"He has done it for 24 years and it will not be easy."
Peter Schmeichel has tipped Barcelona coach Pep Guardiola to replace Sir Alex Ferguson at Old Trafford.
The United boss is not too far away from his 70th birthday but shows no signs of slowing down and is as enthusiastic as ever about his team.
However, he cannot go on for ever and a number of names have been mentioned as possible successors.
Martin O'Neill and Mark Hughes are thought to be in the running while former Chelsea boss Jose Mourinho is many people's favourites for the United hot-seat.
But former Red Devils shot-stopper Schmeichel feels that Guardiola could be the right man, although he still has plenty to learn.
"With all due respect to Guardiola, it is difficult to compare him to Ferguson because Fergie has created so many good teams over so many years," he told the Daily Mirror.
"But I do like Guardiola's style a lot. I have been to see Barca train and I saw how well things were going there with all 25 players working with smiles on their faces.
"He seems very assured and transmits a lot of confidence to his players and does not interfere much from the bench.
"He lets them play and I like coaches like that."
The United boss is not too far away from his 70th birthday but shows no signs of slowing down and is as enthusiastic as ever about his team.
However, he cannot go on for ever and a number of names have been mentioned as possible successors.
Martin O'Neill and Mark Hughes are thought to be in the running while former Chelsea boss Jose Mourinho is many people's favourites for the United hot-seat.
But former Red Devils shot-stopper Schmeichel feels that Guardiola could be the right man, although he still has plenty to learn.
"With all due respect to Guardiola, it is difficult to compare him to Ferguson because Fergie has created so many good teams over so many years," he told the Daily Mirror.
"But I do like Guardiola's style a lot. I have been to see Barca train and I saw how well things were going there with all 25 players working with smiles on their faces.
"He seems very assured and transmits a lot of confidence to his players and does not interfere much from the bench.
"He lets them play and I like coaches like that."
Anyone fancy Joachim Loew?
hes my kinda bear
no. next.
If Ole breaks the Rosenborg monopoly then he'll have earned it.
and have taken molde into the first round knock out of the CL.
Its a very special person who takes on the daunting task of succeeding SAF. A proven track record of success at the highest level must be a prerequisite. I'd add to that by saying he has to have a very strong personality as well. Those two requirements rule out most including Moyes. Mourinho ? He certainly qualifies on both counts but will he come and for how long ?