Mourinho has never lasted more then 3 years at a club. Let's see where they are in 12 months time.
Approval rating has dropped from 3/4 to 2/3 after today's game.
My view has always been the same - he's just not the right fit for this club. We are up there with Barcelona, Madrid, Munich in terms of 'super clubs' and I am delighted we have a manager who will look to impose ourselves on the opposition.
Football is entertainment and although it is ultimately about winning, United have to do it in a certain way, it's in our history and it's what the club and fans expects. We won't win all the time but if van Gaal gets it right it will be a team that will be talked about for how they won on their own terms. That is the type of manager we need and one I think the club expects.
My view has always been the same - he's just not the right fit for this club. We are up there with Barcelona, Madrid, Munich in terms of 'super clubs' and I am delighted we have a manager who will look to impose ourselves on the opposition.
Football is entertainment and although it is ultimately about winning, United have to do it in a certain way, it's in our history and it's what the club and fans expects. We won't win all the time but if van Gaal gets it right it will be a team that will be talked about for how they won on their own terms. That is the type of manager we need and one I think the club expects.
If you wanted to give an example that Mourinho would attempt more daring football if he had a better team that's a strange one. That Chelsea side was even more defensive than the current one, famed for closing out games 1-0.
We're talking about a man who left out Benzema, Higuain and Kaka on the bench so he could squeeze in Diarra and Pepe in midfield at home in the CL with REAL MADRID. Mourinho will never be the type of manager to build a team that can dominate a CL semi-final heavyweight opponent with expansive football. Will never happen. But as long as he wins, no matter how, Chelsea fans couldn't care less I suppose.
Well, you could argue that the definition of a tactical genius in football is someone who has the knowledge and the, say, tact to read his opponent - and to turn the latter into a win more often than not - at the highest level, using mostly known ways and means.
There are very few Einsteins in football, who turn everything known and believed-in upside down with their ideas - it's usually variations on a theme (the theme itself being older than Maureen or LVG) rather than inventing some brand new form of gunpowder.
Last edited:
Agree with you, mostly. I thought we looked immature battering against a wall. In the mind games of the managers, Maureen won, but what concerned me was LVG's response in the second half. There was no change and it was amazing that it took almost 70 minutes before Falcao got a decent pass. I thought ADM unlocked Falcao. McNair showed invention and Shaw was sprightly but a few didn't show up today. Mata was subbed but Ander, MF and Young could have gone with him. Without Carrick we look incomplete and with Rooney in midfield we lose our potency. I didn't agree with LVG this was our best game and his subs were strange. In the end Maureen looked the part of a champion while LVG walked away kicking his heels. long term I think our future strength will require a man of pure creative invention, possibly a Pep or Maureen because today showed that LVG struggles to look outside of his box.
Shit football, shitc**t, no thanks.
I may be unduly...patient here. But my take on LVG's present United team is that it's a work in progress. Not only that - it's a work in progress which today lacked several players who are, clearly, currently very important.
So, to me, that's a huge mitigating factor even before we start looking at how we actually fared on the pitch. I'm not sure what we might've reasonably expected from him in terms of innovation - I reckon he set up well enough.
But the subs - yes, those may be questioned. Adnan added very little, sadly - and I don't quite grasp the logic behind it either. I wanted him to sub off Falcao for ADM and push Rooney up front - just going for the goal. We were losing - we should've gone all out for an equalizer, for my money. LVG is too cautious in general. That's one of my beefs with him. Fergie would've aimed to grab something, anything from that match - and damn the consequences in terms of an added goal conceded, I've no doubt about that.
Niggaplz. Chelsea 04-6 like the invincible Arsenal are incredibly overrated in England (sky influence, best league in the world and all bullshit), but in the grand scheme of things they achieved nothing in Europe.
Louis' Ajax was the best team in Europe reaching 2 consecutive CL finals, doing it with a bunch a teenagers, in style. Mourinho delivered some shit on the stick with his pal Benitez.
I don't think anyone in england(never mind europe) apart from Chelsea fans will be thinking 'Oh boy, Chelsea 04-06 what a team that was!' lol. Teams are admired for their style of play while winning trophies which is why most neutrals love Brazil.
Out of interest, when you say LVG struggles to look outside of his box, what would you have done differently with the players available?
Agree. The best teams stand the test of time, while the invincible's hold a special place in English football looking back most people will admit they were hardly a great team(the record in Europe will always hold them back). If we are going to be really critical then there's only been 2 great teams since the PL started that can go a head to head with some of the best teams all of time.
.United 99(treble winning)
.United 08/09 (Back to back PL titles and CL finals)
Chelsea think their 2005 team was amazing or the best ever or whatever because they weren't used to having great teams. The best in the Premier League ever? No chance. Not on the same level as the Invincibles or United's 99 team.
I have to agree with @ForlansHair about Mourinho. There comes a time when a club is so big and with a history so rich, that trophies simply don't cut it. These footballing institutions, like United, Arsenal, Madrid, Barcelona and even Liverpool demand a certain level of entertainment value in their football. Mourinho is fine at a club like Chelsea/Inter but I don't think his style of football would fit or be accepted in any of Europe's historically truly elite clubs. Not to say it isn't successful, it clearly is; but it's not the values and qualities that top teams strive for and are built upon.
I have to agree with @ForlansHair about Mourinho. There comes a time when a club is so big and with a history so rich, that trophies simply don't cut it. These footballing institutions, like United, Arsenal, Madrid, Barcelona and even Liverpool demand a certain level of entertainment value in their football. Mourinho is fine at a club like Chelsea/Inter but I don't think his style of football would fit or be accepted in any of Europe's historically truly elite clubs. Not to say it isn't successful, it clearly is; but it's not the values and qualities that top teams strive for and are built upon.
Couldn't have said it better. Great post.
Sorry Purist but your being a bit cheeky there putting Arsenal in that list(0 European clubs is hardly historic). Also while Liverpool is hardly the most loved club around here, it's a bit much to say ''even Liverpool have a level of entertainment value in their football'' implying Liverpool are somehow shit, when in fact they have 5 European cups(Although they won't let you forget that) and 5 more league titles than your team.
Well that felt dirty standing up lot.
Thanks for that Purist.
Don't make yourself look silly, now. 13 league titles and one game away from being the most decorated team in FA Cup history. We've been a mainstay in Europe for several decades now and although whilst never winning the Champions League is obviously a blemish on our standing as a club, it isn't as though we need that to validate everything our club is about. Nottingham Forest are hardly up there with Europe's elite, are they? How about Villa?
There's no doubt that Arsenal are a massive club throughout Europe and one of the pillars of English football, arguing otherwise makes you sound a bit daft.
It's got nothing to do about validation(Arsenal are clearly a big club) but more about perspective. The clubs you mention in your previous post(United, Madrid, Barcelona, Liverpool) are in another class compared to Arsenal in terms of history and trophies(You really never get more than 2 clubs per country), there's really no way of getting around it. You might have more of chance with comparing clubs like Villa,Forest and Chelsea but even then it's not clear cut.
I know this is going off topic but I thought it was worth mentioning(and interesting as well).
Last edited:
Positives: He creates a great team spirit, very effective defensive systems and increases the competitiveness of any team.
Negatives: his idea of football is to move the ball as little as possible in the midfield and getting the ball quickly to the front.He is not a friend of creative players. He likes specially Khedira, Motta, Ramires. He is a hypocrite, he sells his performance in front of the press as a way to take the pressure off the players but then He attacks them publicly without hesitation: Iker, Benzema, Pepe, Pedro Leon, Cristiano...
He dislikes promote young players.
He talks a lot of meritocracy but then he is always interested in players of his agent. I still remember a young player called Pedro Mendes, who debuted with him in Champions League, He used to be in the bench in Madrid B but his agent was Mendes (he plays now in Parma), by the way, the starter was Carvajal, who had to go on loan to Leverkusen to get minutes.
Furthermore, He is impolite, underestimates other coaches in press conference and encourages the complaints to the referees and an aggressive style. The biggest example of that was the semifinal of Champions in his first season at Madrid and the embarrassing spectacle of the Supercopa some months later with a finger in the eye included.
In summary, I believe that a team with such a large budget as United, without much urgency to win should opt for Mourinho as a last option.I think that is a good coach for teams that need a profound change and short term joys
Negatives: his idea of football is to move the ball as little as possible in the midfield and getting the ball quickly to the front.He is not a friend of creative players. He likes specially Khedira, Motta, Ramires. He is a hypocrite, he sells his performance in front of the press as a way to take the pressure off the players but then He attacks them publicly without hesitation: Iker, Benzema, Pepe, Pedro Leon, Cristiano...
He dislikes promote young players.
He talks a lot of meritocracy but then he is always interested in players of his agent. I still remember a young player called Pedro Mendes, who debuted with him in Champions League, He used to be in the bench in Madrid B but his agent was Mendes (he plays now in Parma), by the way, the starter was Carvajal, who had to go on loan to Leverkusen to get minutes.
Furthermore, He is impolite, underestimates other coaches in press conference and encourages the complaints to the referees and an aggressive style. The biggest example of that was the semifinal of Champions in his first season at Madrid and the embarrassing spectacle of the Supercopa some months later with a finger in the eye included.
In summary, I believe that a team with such a large budget as United, without much urgency to win should opt for Mourinho as a last option.I think that is a good coach for teams that need a profound change and short term joys
I stopped reading after the Villa/Forest/Chelsea not being clear cut thing. Sorry mate, but I think the quality of those posts are vile. Just my opinion.
Watching the game yesterday my thoughts were that it was a typical Chelsea performance. They are a hard team to watch.
Yes. Best manager in the world by a long shot.
We played some lovely counter attacking football under Mourinho in fairness. But, truth be told, we had the perfect team to play that kind of football, dunno if it would work at many other clubs.
Still would. Proven winner.
Van gaal has won plenty but yesterday's game is one thing he can learn about, for next season of course. What it takes to win a big game when you are even not at your best.
Going to stamford bridge and got 70% of possesion is brilliant though. If we can just add a bit of cutting edge upfront, then we would have end up with something.
Still i believe van gaal had laid out the foundation for next season. Exciting times.
Van gaal has won plenty but yesterday's game is one thing he can learn about, for next season of course. What it takes to win a big game when you are even not at your best.
Going to stamford bridge and got 70% of possesion is brilliant though. If we can just add a bit of cutting edge upfront, then we would have end up with something.
Still i believe van gaal had laid out the foundation for next season. Exciting times.
Well maybe i just dont see 100% ugly in "parking a bus" tactic like you,agree with you tho,we all want to watch good/great football just i dont have that much issue with doing something different when you need to.Lets say like this, thank God i am not Liverpool fan (not trying to offend you),because if i were,i would lost it 100% in a game vs Chelsea last season.
Come on mate. Don't sit on the fence.
Shit fence, too.
Chelsea 04/05 were better than Arsenal's so called invincible (but lost to half of Europe) side. They picked up more points and won more games.
As for Arsenal in your list of footballing institutions, let's not forget the likes of George Graham before Arsene arrived in London.
I think next weekend at the Emirates might be worse from Mourinho and Chelsea in the negativity stakes.
In what universe is Inter not a historically truly elite club? 3 EC/CL titles, 3 UEFA Cups and 18 league titles in Italy is an incredibly rich history of success, won over several decades by many great sides full of worldclass players.
Liverpool and Arsenal are footballing institutions but Inter isn't?
What. Arsenal aren't an historically elite club.
I think that everyone (bar your fans) would say that Inter is a bigger (by some distance) club than Arsenal and so a more footballing institution than you.
They have mroe league titles (in what historically was a stronger league) and 3 UCL while you don't have any UCL. More great players have played for them than for you. More great managers have been there than in your team. In the end, not even close.
But people do call him a tactical genius all the time for doing what's been done tons of time before.
Like I said earlier, what for me makes mourinho a top manager is the man management , discipline and self belief he gives his players. His tactics are nothing special at all IMO.
Sir Alex is considers possibly the greatest ever manager. But does that mean he was a genius tactician? Not for me.
Because management is about so many things. Buying, selling and promoting the right players, motivating your players, man management and getting them to buy into your plan are all important.
For me Jose is good at most things that a manager needs to be good at. But I do think the focus on his tactics and championing them every time his team shuts out another is ridiculous.
Clearly not. Unless the manger who wins the premier league is by default "the best by a long shot". There are other great managers about. Give them some credit as well.
I would have played a counter game of patience. Our cavalier style was a big disadvantage. Knowing Maureen was going to park the bus I would have done the same and press to draw them out. That would have put the pressure on them at home and frustrate the crowd.
Five in the midfield and four at the back, with Ander playing link man. Get the players to hold their lines until 15 minutes before half time and then test them. By biting early we enabled Chelski to dig in. I would slow it down again for the first 15 minutes of the second and then test them again for the last third. Then channel their mobility, which LVG had been quite successful in earlier games, and aim to steal a goal much like they did.
Our game put Chelski under siege which pretty much played to Terry's strengths enabling him to pivot the defence around him. We then tried to flank him which never works against them unless the crosses are accurate which they weren't.
If we had boxed them into the middle it would have frustrated Drogba and caused them to compress their midfield. That would have made it harder for Hazard to make his runs. I might have asked Rooney to sit on him and Fellaini with his elbows on Fabregas given his nose job fears.
In all a bit like Southampton at home, not pretty but at Chelski why not.
I would rather lose every single game playing like we did today rather than win playing like Chelsea did yesterday. Everyone at Stamford Bridge was dull as ditchwater and only sang for about 5 minutes out of the 90. I would honestly become disinterested in football if I was subjected to that kind of game from my team, especially at home. If we had a better holding midfilder on the ball than Rooney it would have been a whole different ball game. They got lucky with our injuries and lucky with the goal, its been their lucky year so they can celebrate it. Winning is great, it makes you happy and gives you bragging rights but if there's no entertainment then it becomes sad. I would never want Mourinho to do that to United so I would never want him here.
Red tinted specs. The Chelsea 04/05 side was better then at least one of those, record points, goals conceded, clean sheets etc. That Ajax side was in a slightly older era of football, I think Joses Chelsea 04/05 could easily have competed with them.
Chelsea: Man United's key players 'in our pockets' - Jose Mourinho
Chelsea boss Jose Mourinho said Manchester United's important players were "in our pockets" in a match that went "exactly" as they wanted.
The Blues boss says his side have "almost" won the Premier League title after their 1-0 win at Stamford Bridge moved them 10 points clear at the top.
United dominated possession and had more chances than the league leaders.
Mourinho said: "We prepared for it to be like this. It was the game we wanted and expected."
Chelsea will be champions if they win at Arsenal and Leicester in their next two matches, having beaten third-placed United with a first-half goal from Eden Hazard.
Still accept him as a manager.
Chelsea boss Jose Mourinho said Manchester United's important players were "in our pockets" in a match that went "exactly" as they wanted.
The Blues boss says his side have "almost" won the Premier League title after their 1-0 win at Stamford Bridge moved them 10 points clear at the top.
United dominated possession and had more chances than the league leaders.
Mourinho said: "We prepared for it to be like this. It was the game we wanted and expected."
Chelsea will be champions if they win at Arsenal and Leicester in their next two matches, having beaten third-placed United with a first-half goal from Eden Hazard.
Still accept him as a manager.
I really hope the next time a small team does this to him, the other manager comes out and says the same thing lol.