See reference to 1999 FA Semis. That to me is my most enjoyable win over arsenal.
The Mourinho Thread: Should he stay or go? | Sacked
- Thread starter Livewire1974
- Start date
- Status
You enjoyed the full 90 minutes of the CL final against Bayern? Christ. We were dicked on, from start to finish. It was horrendous. Bizarre choice to have as the game you most enjoyed watching.
Injury time in that match gave me my best moment watching United but I’ve already made it clear that I’m not talking about moments. I’m talking about the most enjoyable 90 minutes of football I’ve watched the team play.
It's not funny and it doesn't make my day. If an internet forum makes yours, then more power to you I suppose.
Mourinho is a fairly/relatively defense minded/cautious coach and everyone knows this is factually correct. He has at times had teams that scored a lot of goals but a manager is judged over the length and breadth of his career and more importantly in his approach towards games. Chelsea hammered us 4-0 once at Stamford Bridge. It didn't make them a really attacking team. Neither did them thrashing Arsenal 6-0 or 6-1. Nor does the fact that he happened to manage one of the great attacking units in world football at Madrid. Over the course of his brilliant career he's proven, clearly and absolutely, that he's not a carefree attack minded manager. That isn't even a slight on him. In response to this I'm sure Mourinho, if he's objective, would admit this to be the case and it wouldn't bother him one bit. Because he's content with who he is. It's his ardent fanbois who can't take the label of a cautious/defense minded/non attacking coach. Juve are a pretty defensive 'top' team by top team standards despite their incredible record over the last decade. They'll be proud of it too. They enjoy and champion their strength at both ends rather than pretending to be attack minded.
So I wholeheartedly disagree. I do not believe he's an attacking coach the way Klopp, Pep or SAF used to be. He's usually cautious but can bend his rules as he's quite adaptive as well.
Also the overwhelmed point makes no sense. If you're referring to us, then we overwhelm literally noone but our own selves undrr Mourinho. And if you're referring to winning teams then that's an even worse point. There have been plenty of hugely successful teams that weren't super attacking. And there is nothing wrong with it.
L
Not that I'd get much of a chance to say that post SAF anyway.
Agree. Of course a big moment gives you a big high. But I don't watch us thinking "Better not play too well now. We don't want to win this too convincingly. Actually, you know what, we're just half an hour in, so I hope Leicester score and make the rest of the game a real belter."
Not that I'd get much of a chance to say that post SAF anyway.
To be honest, the way we so often win by a single goal under Mourinho bothers me more than whatever tactics he uses to achieve the result. It’s stressful as hell willing the clock to run down, knowing you’re a goal away from dropping points. Especially against teams you should be comfortably putting away. Feck that shit.
I do get that a really close game between two top teams both playing very well is more entertaining than humping cannon fodder 2 or 4 nil. However, we play cannon fodder much more often than we play top teams, so I would obviously prefer a manager that made those games fun to watch. And grinding out a single goal victory against relegation candidates is not fun to watch, by any definition.
Yeah, I mean, I guess it depends on the perspective you're using. Objectively, as a neutral, you want to see two teams playing top class football. But I don't watch football for objective enjoyment when I watch Manchester United. I watch hoping we can perform as well as possible and achieve as much as possible. That's the end goal, to win, and possibly have a blast while doing so? I always hope for that from my team even if it's not likely sometimes.
The 'moments' part is another deal. That we feel the greater highs from success on the back of large struggles, is just a psychological trait rather than a desire.
Of course as a neutral we like to watch close games but from your own perspective I don't see how you wouldn't want your club to finish games off early and with style.
Do we reckon this is how Liverpool won in 2005? At half time, the Milan players were just like "guys this is embarrassing, let's give them some face second half". And fair play to them, it nearly worked! Had they just won 5-0 it would have been sickening.
Not that I agree with @cheeky_backheel but, on that point, I'd take our 4-3 win over City in 09/10, the 2-3s in 12/13 and last season over drubbing them, for instance (not that we have drubbed them). Those wins kind of feel more enjoyable. But still there's no way I'd turn my head from destroying Arsenal 8-2 again or any team, for that matter.
I guess if someone offered me a 0-6 drubbing of City on Sunday or 3-4 win with a 90 minute winner, I'd take the latter every day of the week.
I guess if someone offered me a 0-6 drubbing of City on Sunday or 3-4 win with a 90 minute winner, I'd take the latter every day of the week.
Really. 6-0 is more convincing and all that counts to me. I don’t get pleasure from seeing other teams do well against us.
Whaaaaaat? The former would be sensational. Would love it, love it (/Keegan) if we smashed them 6-0. An unbelievable buzz.
Like I said, I have no issues with us scoring 7, 8 or 9 goals against a team. But winning a close game is something I really enjoy. All those comebacks during the Fergie era, the 90 minute winners - those are the reasons I love this club. I'd love to smash City but I just find close games, where we win, so much more entertaining. It's the same for every sport I watch - nothing will beat coming out winners in a close fought, blood pumping, stressful game.
It's not about doing well against us. One of favourite United games was the 5-2 comeback against Spurs. We didn't "smash them", per say, we played a crappy first half and came back in the most emphatic manner.
7-1 against Roma or 3-2 vs AC Milan. I loved the former but the latter just lives with me. I'll never forget that last minute Rooney goal. I screamed louder than any of the goals against Roma.
I don't agree. Because 6-0 proves our superiority and I want us to be as good as we can be.
Regardless even if you prefer a 4-3 I'm sure you don't sit there hoping for a City goal to make it close/level. That's the crux. Fans don't actively want close games. They want their team doing the best it can.
Different strokes, I guess.
My favourite comeback would be the 5-3 against Spurs. Perfect combination of triumph against adversity with the dizzy joy of dealing out an absolute shellacking. The second half was an absolute pleasure, from start to finish. I prefer that sort of sustained fun to 90 minutes agony, followed by a massive thrill in injury time.
This is all moot, mind you, I don’t think we’ve ticked either box under Mourinho. Our comebacks have been against teams we should be annihilating and our (rare) victories against the best teams around have invariably ended with us camped in our own box, desperately defending our lead (or not, as we recently saw with Chelsea).
EDIT: City last season. That was a good comeback tbf.
You're a damn fool, everyone knows gritty wins by 1 goal are the stuff fans dream of! I am so happy that we are letting teams score against us more this season, makes things interesting!! Who needs goals? Leave that to the hipsters Klopp and Guardiola
Yup. Most of the examples that come to mind are from the Fergie era. We've had some great results under Mourinho (City, Palace and even Newcastle) but the performances havent been up to standard.
The whole post-Fergie era has been a pile of steaming turd, in terms of the quality of games we’ve played in. Look at Liverpool - Arsenal last weekend. Two top four teams having a real go at each other, playing really good football. Have we had a single game like this in the last 5 years?
I have to admit this is possibly the most bizarre debate I've ever read on Redcafe and that's saying something. People trying to convince a United fan that United scoring a lot of goals and winning by big margins is a good thing...
I loved how nail-biting both our CL wins were and the moments of victory were sheer catharsis - but I'd still kill to see United destroy the opponent in a CL final the way Barcelona destroyed us in 2011. That sort of absolute and obvious superiority is more satisfying than anything.
It’s weird and depressing. I’ve pretty much written Mourinho off but I’m always desperate to look for some positivity on here. So it’s crushing to see his last few advocates defending him with loony tunes stuff like it’s possible to score too many goals.
I'd pay good money to see us dominated, the keeper slips on a passback in the 90th minute and the squad celebrate like they won the CL on Sunday.
City are scoring 5 a game and its just souless. I remember looking forward to away games around 2000 because nobody ever gave us a game at OT
City are scoring 5 a game and its just souless. I remember looking forward to away games around 2000 because nobody ever gave us a game at OT
Mourinho is attack minded, he is just not a carefree attacker as he tries to build his attacks on a solid defence. Pep on the other hand tries to build his attack off dominating possession (in fact his Barcelona team were notorious for spending significant amount of time passing the ball between themselves in their half of the pitch), while Klopp is more cavalier and plays a more open game. Different flavors but all are still attacking.
It is disingenuous to attribute the attacking success of Mourinho's madrid team to the players when no other manager has equaled it before or since, but then when the results are poorer you blame it on the manager. You cannot be as successful as Mourinho has been in his career if you are not attack minded. His style might not be pretty but that doesnt change the fact he attacks.
Your example of Juve seems to indicate that you believe one cannot be attack minded while having a solid defence. A simple review of Juve's most often used lineup proves otherwise. Yes they can play defensively when needed, but can also attack if desired as evidenced by their performance in Madrid last season.
My original argument (before the digression) is that most teams dont score 5+ goals in a game cos when leading by 3 to 4 goals (i.e. overwhelmed the opposition) most managers would deem the contest over and often substitute key players, reducing their chances of scoring more goals. Thus your counter argument that it is cos the team is either not capable or being defensive is not valid. At no point was my comment specifically about Mourinho or United.
While it might shock you, I did enjoy it. With the FA cup result, I was confident that as long as the scoreline remained 1-0, we would make a comeback. As Bayern wasted their chances, I got more confident, and after they hit the post, I was almost sure we were going to win on penalties (I had a similar feeling during the FA game after Bergkamp missed the penalty cos that is usually how it tends to happen in football with the team squandering chances eventually losing).
The games I hate watching the most are the opposite, where we have a 1 goal lead and waste chances to put the opposition away, as I simply dread the late equalizer I can almost see coming.
Completely incorrect. He is not definitely not an attacking manager. But I suppose Mourinho fans long for a different version of reality to suit their demi God.
It isn't disingenuous to attribute the Madrid attacking swagger to the team when they had that swagger both before and after him albiet with less goals but often with more success. Because he's never created a team with that style and panache in attack neither before after Madrid. He simply had too strong an attack to do otherwise and fine tuned it to make it more effective. All his other teams have been effective, solid functional but without a sense of magic and flair to their football that attacking managers like SAF, Pep and Klopp do.
Like I said, only a huge Mourinho would argue against the truth like this. Nobody else believes he's an attacking coach like the ones I've mentioned. His primary focus is functionality, solidarity and effectiveness. It's the hallmark of coaches who aren't outright attack minded in nature.
Just because he broke the goal scoring record one season doesn't mean he's an attacking manager. Ronaldo scored something like 60 goals heights he never reached before or after. Plus Benzema scoring 30 goals and Higuain the same .those three scored over 100 between themselves. He never had a strikeforce like this before or after at any other club.
They were very top heavy and all he needed was to organize the rest of the team.
They still parked the bus in all the big CL games and the players got fed up of it in the end. Being made to feel like the underdog is tiring.
He wasn't the right fit for that club and he isn't the right fit for this club.
Clubs like Chelsea, Atletico, Inter Milan etc he is better for these clubs because they don't demand to win in a certain style. Just winning is enough.
Last edited:
We’re through the looming glass now.
Where do these people come from, after scraping one goal wins against Everton & Bournemouth, it’s all now fecking fine again to say nonsense like this?
Must be why City fans can't fill their stadium, why would you pay money to watch your team just score 5 goals like that? Disgusting
Honestly I'm just glad these guys are finally driving the rest of you crazy
.
.If other managers, who are supposed to be equal or more attack minded than Mourinho, cannot make the team score as many goals as a 'defensive' coach did, then those managers cannot be objectively said to be attack minded.
I have already said he is not attacking manager like Pep, Klopp or SAF, but neither are any of those managers like the other. Klopp has a different style to Pep, and both are different from SAF. Your argument against Mourinho relies on style, being selective in which managers you deem worthy of your definition of 'attacking' but yet you compile a list of managers with different styles. To attack is to seek to score and that is the true measure of an attacking side.
If you want examples of defensive coaches, I would suggest you take a look at the likes of Rocco, Herrera, Capello and Cesare maldini (add Diego Simeone)
Last edited:
Not that hard to relate to. Would you prefer a 6-0 win where we're the only team playing, or a 2-1 win where we score the winner in the final minutes of stoppage time? Both are good, but personally, I'd enjoy the last minute win more.
and if you cant compose a simple counter argument, it is better to keep your nonsense to yourself.
It seems to me any manager in his position has two options:
1. Build a system around what you have available that gets the best out of the players you have; or
2. Work with the players you have through effective coaching to improve them and buy other players to address those needs.
I suspect most top managers use 2 primarily, whilst ensuring that they get the best out of the players they have - if they consider those players to be talented and adaptable enough. So far, Mourinho's United are doing neither.
I don't understand making excuses for a manager for things (to a greater or lesser extent) within his control. When he was bringing in Matic, Pogba, Lukaku and Sanchez, City were buying players too, the vast majority of whom have fit neatly into what Pep wants to do.. They are also now getting best out of players like Sterling who have improved massively having been properly coached - something we don't see at United.
If Mourinho, after 3 years, doesn't have the players he wants to implement his own system (and my your reckoning appears miles of having those players) and having spent £350 plus million then that is a disaster. If he isn't coaching players to fit his style, or implementing a style with what he's got, what exactly is he doing to earn his keep?
I think Mourinho needs more time to see if he can turn things around.
However anyone who says the current close games would be more enjoyable than if we beat every team comfortably by a 3 goal margin is kind of silly. Beating teams by 1 goal in a end to end game is stressful and very risky as if we keep dong it we will eventually drop lots of points.
People calling others 'Mourinho fan boys' just because they support the manager is ridiculous.
Maybe the people who want Mourinho to stay should start calling everyone else 'Revolving door fan boys'. Both names would be ridiculous.
However anyone who says the current close games would be more enjoyable than if we beat every team comfortably by a 3 goal margin is kind of silly. Beating teams by 1 goal in a end to end game is stressful and very risky as if we keep dong it we will eventually drop lots of points.
People calling others 'Mourinho fan boys' just because they support the manager is ridiculous.
Maybe the people who want Mourinho to stay should start calling everyone else 'Revolving door fan boys'. Both names would be ridiculous.
The argument is enjoyment vs endurement.
People ENJOY games with last minute goals because that feeling of jubilation makes you forget the fact you had to ENDURE shit on the stick football for 89 minutes prior.
Some people will be happy to endure rubbish football if the wins stack up because at the end of the season your team may hold a shiny trophy.
You, the fan, does not hold that trophy however. So at some point you get fed up of enduring. Some of us don't care about what happens in May. Football is a 9 month long campaign and satisfaction isn't judged on a pot at the end.
Thousands of people support clubs who will never win a major trophy but they're not in it for trophies. They derive pleasure through being a part of something: watching players grow, watching the club grow, being in a local community. Enjoyment > endurement.
For these people football is a entertainment first and foremost and all that counts is the next game. We don't care about league tables and top four calculations - we care about the enjoyment watching the team gives. Week by week improvement. Something to look forward to.
Generally if those three happen, wins stack up and success follows. Success is relative - a club of United's resources can expect to win the league in such fashion.
People ENJOY games with last minute goals because that feeling of jubilation makes you forget the fact you had to ENDURE shit on the stick football for 89 minutes prior.
Some people will be happy to endure rubbish football if the wins stack up because at the end of the season your team may hold a shiny trophy.
You, the fan, does not hold that trophy however. So at some point you get fed up of enduring. Some of us don't care about what happens in May. Football is a 9 month long campaign and satisfaction isn't judged on a pot at the end.
Thousands of people support clubs who will never win a major trophy but they're not in it for trophies. They derive pleasure through being a part of something: watching players grow, watching the club grow, being in a local community. Enjoyment > endurement.
For these people football is a entertainment first and foremost and all that counts is the next game. We don't care about league tables and top four calculations - we care about the enjoyment watching the team gives. Week by week improvement. Something to look forward to.
Generally if those three happen, wins stack up and success follows. Success is relative - a club of United's resources can expect to win the league in such fashion.
6-0 for me I like a clean sheet!
Don't worry your socks off about that, they get called 'haters', 'plastic fans', 'clueless', 'vile spewing morons that foam at the mouth' etc..
Any of that name calling is pathetic in fairness.
Absolutely. I've found it very difficult to have a conversation with any pro-Mourinho supporters without the 'hate' label coming into the fore. I find them far worse than anyone that says 'fanboi' as it's usually a retort to the word 'hate / hater' being bandied about.
- Status