You still haven’t seen that day. What you’ve seen is people happy to be moving away from the terrible taste of utter failure. There’s a huge difference between being happy not to be 7th and being happy to be 2nd.
The Mourinho Thread: Should he stay or go? | Sacked
- Thread starter Livewire1974
- Start date
- Status
You still haven’t seen that day. What you’ve seen is people happy to be moving away from the terrible taste of utter failure. There’s a huge difference between being happy not to be 7th and being happy to be 2nd.
So set in your tribalism you can't even think outside the boxThis guy is Liverpool to his very core.
He doesn't even hide it very well
I've seen Liverpool fans on here so it wouldn't matter, but I really just don't care enough to really support any sports team so blindly. However I'm flattered that your only retort was "You're a Liverpool fan" lol.
Have you looked up the definition of generalization and cliche yet?
When in doubt blame it on the juice. Do you want the dictionary.com link?I'm too drunk for this shite. At first it was comical, now it's getting tedious.
Go read a dictionary, mate
You can see Mourinho clearly wants to show (to the younger players, in particular) that there is some sort of meritocracy in the team selection. But when his senior favourites are the ones stinking the place up (whether it's due to his own style of play or the players' own forms), he ends up looking like a bit of an idiot.
The likes of Martial, Shaw have found their forms quicker than Matic, Young, Lukaku or Sanchez has this season.
The likes of Martial, Shaw have found their forms quicker than Matic, Young, Lukaku or Sanchez has this season.
He stays. He hasn't all of a sudden become a terrible. Has does have a track record of winning things.
Won two trophies. Everything else is irrelevant. End of thread. Woodward out.
Okay let's assume we cannot touch City for now because of their bottomless pit of cash.
We are not competing with City this season anyway, our target is top 4 this season. Why does Liverpool who have spent way less than us setting up their defence have a comparable defensive record to City? Why does Arsenal who were very poor than us last season and have bought one defender look far better this season? Why the feck do Watford and Bournemouth have a better defensive record than us? Have they spent 250m too?
Then again following your logic it's Poch's fault for playing Sanchez. Or is it Levy's for hiring Poch?
Young player passing the ball to his more experienced CB who's renown for his ability on the ball, is somehow young CB's fault and not Toby's because he did everything wrong, from poor touch to receive the ball, lingered on it for too long, failing to notice the danger and then bottling the pass. It's comical that you're ever trying to absolve Toby and blame it on Sanchez for giving him a perfectly usable pass.
Listen if Toby's strongest suit isn't his ball playing along with his anticipation than you really ought to go and watch cricket. It's universally agreed and probably if you could ask Toby he'd tell you that himself. It's the reason Spurs are so adamant on playing it from the back, because Vertongen and him to are great on the ball.
According to me you're a WUM because one of the reasons we wanted Toby so much is due to his ability on the ball and experience, because Mourinho was allegedly going for a player to makes it easier for us to play from the back.
After all the bs you've written, one gotta ask do you even watch football.
Difference lies in the amount of flops both manager's had and their ability to improve their players overall, both their signings and the ones they already had.
How come you've forgotten about Coutinho tho? He was their best player and Klopp still made them reach CL final and made them very competitive in the league this year.
Don't know what bottomless spending keep mentioning about City, imagine if we had paid fees for Sanchez and Ibra, we'd probably have outspent them....and still be exactly where we are with the leagues most expensive team
Because I'm an idiot who thought Coutinho and wrote Moutinho
Fair play in that case
Tbh he brought them more money than all of the others you named.
Funny how Jose spent more than that on attack and still looks average.
That shouldn't be the norme on which one's to measure progress abd success, Considering we've finished 2nd last season, but we had negative score vs. Chelsea who finished like 5th (I honestly can't remember was it 5th or 6th) and they've beaten us in the FA Cup final .
This is a good question to ask and I believe only the century long rivalry with have with Liverpool would prevent many of going for option Klopp.
I was asking the similar question a while back when people were celebrating 2nd place trophy whether they'd swap 2nd place trophy in a season where we never challenged for the title and an early CL exit to Seville, for a crack at Madrid in CL final.
This is tiring - Sanchez made the wrong pass!Then again following your logic it's Poch's fault for playing Sanchez. Or is it Levy's for hiring Poch?
Young player passing the ball to his more experienced CB who's renown for his ability on the ball, is somehow young CB's fault and not Toby's because he did everything wrong, from poor touch to receive the ball, lingered on it for too long, failing to notice the danger and then bottling the pass. It's comical that you're ever trying to absolve Toby and blame it on Sanchez for giving him a perfectly usable pass.
best pass was cross field to Davies and safest was back to the GK. He chose the wrong option by passing to Toby
Toby was going to be under pressure immediately he received the ball. Yes he failed to deal with it but the genesis of the problem was Sanchez's pass.
Not going to repeat this cos it seems you lack the basic football iq to understand a simple analysis.
If you were right, then Toby is an average defender who plays for spurs simply cos he is good on the ball, and that is just too far from reality to even debate it.
He plays for spurs cos he is a very good defender, and his anticipation is part of what makes him a good defender. It is also why he plays for Belgium. Ability to play from the back is secondary.
On one hand Mourinho is in love with hoof ball but now he wants Toby cos he is an average defender but can play from the back - seriously? Maybe you had a dream that we hired PepAccording to me you're a WUM because one of the reasons we wanted Toby so much is due to his ability on the ball and experience, because Mourinho was allegedly going for a player to makes it easier for us to play from the back.
After all the bs you've written, one gotta ask do you even watch football.
Mourinho wants an experienced CB that is better than the current group to improve the quality of the position and bring leadership and experience. A look at his past teams shows that playing out from the back is not his priority when signing defenders.
This is tiring - Sanchez made the wrong pass!
best pass was cross field to Davies and safest was back to the GK. He chose the wrong option by passing to Toby
Toby was going to be under pressure immediately he received the ball. Yes he failed to deal with it but the genesis of the problem was Sanchez's pass.
Not going to repeat this cos it seems you lack the basic football iq to understand a simple analysis.
If you were right, then Toby is an average defender who plays for Spurs simply cos he is good on the ball, and that is just too far from reality to even debate it.
He plays for Spurs cos he is a very good defender, and his anticipation is part of what makes him a good defender. It is also why he plays for Belgium. Ability to play from the back is secondary.
On one hand Mourinho is in love with hoof ball but now he wants Toby cos he is an average defender but can play from the back - seriously? Maybe you had a dream that we hired Pep
Mourinho wants an experienced CB that is better than the current group to improve the quality of the position and bring leadership and experience. A look at his past teams shows that playing out from the back is not his priority when signing defenders.
I mean you ought to get your eyes checked because to make things even more ironic those pictures you've posted actually prove that Toby has bottled it, hard. He had all the time in the world to pass it on the first touch, shield the ball with his body or hoof it. He had acres of space, but hey don't let logic interfere with your mind-boggling narrative.
Again you with your attempts to twist things, jeez. You're spending half of time seeing things no one else is seeing and the other half arguing with yourself because you've imagining I've said/implied some stuff, like Toby being average for example.
I case you haven't noticed but good defensive abilities are kinda a must when you're playing for a top side, one doesn't have to say it all the time, it goes without saying that Toby is great at that, but you actually discarding his ball ability just shows how little you know about football.
In case you haven't got the news, it was your very own Mourinho who came out and said "we don't have the ability to play from the back" and "we played super defensive last season ,we'll try to be more attacking this season". Now that combined with the fact all our CB targets have ball playing ability in common it doesn't take a genius (well maybe except in your case) to figure out that Mourinho maybe had a bit more open approach in his mind.
But don't let that stop you from imagining stuff again, I've grown fond of that.
That's your logic, not mine.
Its yours cos that it uses the same 'contribution' premise for your evaluation of Sanchez
And at which point of his career Messi had an average contribution? Just to highlight the ridiculous of your point, Messi hasn't scored less than 40 goals+15 assists in a season since 2009-2010.
what about his NT 'contributions' or were you so blinded by your hate for Mourinho that you didnt even read the post you were responding to?
You do realize that Messi is Argentina's most prolific player and that he is, if I'm not mistaken, the second(or third) most prolific player in activity at International level behind Ronaldo. There is nothing average about his performances with Argentina which is why I ignored the silly comparison.
You are just clutching at straws and now using an imaginary hate.
Some serious overrating of Liverpool in here.
Messi's performance for the NT is worse than for club. He was below par in both qualifying, 2010 WC and 2011 Copa, but scored 55 goals in 53 appearances for Barcelona in the 2010/11 season. He was so poor for the NT that he was even booed at a point. Following your logic , Messi was no longer one of the best players in the world cos his contributions declined
So did LVG.
So you actually don't know what average means? You can have worse performances than previously and still be higher than average which is the case with Messi or Ronaldo and why they are all time greats. Messi being judged to different standards doesn't make his performances average when compared with others. And there is a point where Messi will decline to a level that is below average, that's inevitable.
Also you didn't follow my logic, you simply made one up. At no point did I suggest that a declining player couldn't be one of the best, I said that this status was based on the level of contribution. To make it simple, I stated that Sanchez wasn't performing like one of the best, that he was performing at a similar level to Mkhitaryan which means that the squad didn't improve.
If you don't understand that, just move on.
This logic doesn't make sense. Managers don't stay at the top forever. We might as well appoint Trapattoni.
Messi was never poor or average. That you're applying this to Sanchez's dreadful 2018 shows that you don't really have a logical argument to present.
so the fans that booed him were all blind. thanks for your great insight
Messi's performances for the NT were poor enough over a period that he scored only 1 goal in 8 games and was bad enough that he got booed. Messi wasnt performing like one of the best and was performing at the level of an average player thus he didnt make the NT better.
Where is the difference from your Sanchez logic?
The difference is the actual contribution since 2009-2010, you probably noticed the fact that I used the term "actual" meaning "that exists now". Here we are judging Sanchez at United and he hasn't played or contributed like one of the best, if he does in the future perfect but I can't judge his current contribution based on something that hasn't happen yet.
I never thought Messi was poor in 2010's WC. He was a midfielder for that side and I remember him being the most dangerous player in the side.
But during the same period Messi was contributing at world class level for his club. So how do you reconcile the two differing levels of performance for club vs NT?
Fans booing players/the team can happen for a variety of reasons. He's generally carried that team singlehandedly. The overarching being that ironically he Messi hasn't been 'average' or 'poor' and that's obvious to anyone with a working pair of eyes. He's obviously judged very differently due to his general standards.
All in all, it's a far cry from Sanchez rendering your argument as a pretty shallow and illogical one. Sanchez is not performing week in week out and has ranged from poor to mediocre for a year now.
8 games is your sample? Sanchez has been poor for a year and we're talking about genuinely week in week out poor here.
Try not to jump in mid-conversation if you wont bother to familiarize yourself with the background
I don't need to reconcile it, you are comparing a sample of 8 international games against +50 games in clubs in a season. If as you are claiming he was world class during these +50 games then the conclusion during that period is obvious.
You do need to be able to reconcile it otherwise your premise of measuring a player's quality by 'actual contribution' fails
Messi has high contribution for club = high quality player
Messi has lower contribution for NT = lower quality player
So how can the same player be a high quality and a lower quality player over the same period?
Don't respond to me after that but the bold part is the issue with you, lower isn't synonym to low.
- Status