Mourinho's end-of-season jokes come back to haunt him
Remember Mourinho's end-of-season jokes (with graphical aids) about how other teams complained they should've won the title because they were the better team, had more possession, played prettier football, didn't park the bus etc.?
Well... this was inevitable:
Charity shield - "We were the best team. We had more initiative, we controlled the game by having ball possession. Arsenal defended with 10 players. They had a couple of chances in counter attacks but we had ours in organised football.
Swansea - "They didn't have chances against 11. I would say we were the best team with 11 players and with 10 we fought hard, some fighting at the limit of their condition."
Man City - "We were the best team by far in the second half. What they did in the first we did in the second. We dominated... Their goalkeeper was good and we couldn't score. They were only coming up with long balls."
Well... this was inevitable:
Charity shield - "We were the best team. We had more initiative, we controlled the game by having ball possession. Arsenal defended with 10 players. They had a couple of chances in counter attacks but we had ours in organised football.
Swansea - "They didn't have chances against 11. I would say we were the best team with 11 players and with 10 we fought hard, some fighting at the limit of their condition."
Man City - "We were the best team by far in the second half. What they did in the first we did in the second. We dominated... Their goalkeeper was good and we couldn't score. They were only coming up with long balls."
(edited 8 years ago)
Scroll to see replies
He was right in his post match interview though. Pellegrini made exactly the same type of sub Jose would bringing Demechellis on for Sterling, yet wasn't universally panned for it. Wenger did the same against Palace, and Chelsea in the community shield.
Original post by The Shed End
He was right in his post match interview though. Pellegrini made exactly the same type of sub Jose would bringing Demechellis on for Sterling, yet wasn't universally panned for it. Wenger did the same against Palace, and Chelsea in the community shield.
I think the issue yesterday was that - because Fabregas and your midfield's ill-discipline just exarcebated your defensive frailties - City still ran riot, even more so, when Demichelis was brought on. You looked for an equaliser, but that allowed City to equally show their strength going forward and scoring two late goals meant Demichelis' introduction wasn't seen as negative. On the contrary, lazy people will just see it as freeing City's attacking options up.
Well we conceded immediately when the subs came on, didn't even have a chance to do anything because Ivanovic pussied out of a physical challenge. That said not sure why we're persisting with Falcao over Remy
Original post by The Shed End
That said not sure why we're persisting with Falcao over Remy
Because his wages dictate it?
Decent to be reminded of this but it's not really surprising. I've always said Mourinho is a ****ing clown.
Will leave Chelsea before the season is out as well..
Will leave Chelsea before the season is out as well..
Original post by Wilfred Little
Decent to be reminded of this but it's not really surprising. I've always said Mourinho is a ****ing clown.
Will leave Chelsea before the season is out as well..
Will leave Chelsea before the season is out as well..
He's still a great manager. Lets be honest, most managers talk a lot of ****. I remember SAF saying "he could have been killed" after RVP got hit by a football.
Original post by BioStudentx
He's still a great manager. Lets be honest, most managers talk a lot of ****. I remember SAF saying "he could have been killed" after RVP got hit by a football.
The only manager who don't bs the press is Brendon Rodgers
Original post by DiceTheSlice
Brendon Rodgers
Brendan.
Where's FFTypoCorrector when you need him?
Sad attempt at wumming.
Probably what happens when you haven't won anything for a few years.
Probably what happens when you haven't won anything for a few years.
Original post by Jimmy Seville
Sad attempt at wumming.
Probably what happens when you haven't won anything for a few years.
Probably what happens when you haven't won anything for a few years.
This was at the end of their league-winning season.
What he was saying was right, it's just afterward he did exactly what he criticised other people of doing, but turned up to 11.
He won't change. He'll go to more big clubs, fail to build a legacy and establish a dynasty, fail to be universally loved, fail to play good football, but might win a couple of trophies for a board with a short-term approach who don't mind indulging in his persona and the controversy he's bound to bring.
Original post by Mackay
He won't change. He'll go to more big clubs, fail to build a legacy and establish a dynasty, fail to be universally loved, fail to play good football, but might win a couple of trophies for a board with a short-term approach who don't mind indulging in his persona and the controversy he's bound to bring.
Both his Porto and his original Chelsea sides, particularly the latter, played some absolutely fantastic football. People overlook how unbelievable that 04/05 Chelsea side was, more often than not equating the defensive record of 15 goals conceded to 'bus parking', when in reality it was a result of one of the most efficient tactical set-ups of the modern game. They played a possession based game with fast transitions and a strong midfield and were unbelievably well drilled and disciplined, yet still creative with a large emphasis on decision making. Perhaps not the free-flowing, goals-galore, attacking football people want to see, but to accuse that Chelsea side of not playing "good football" is a travesty tbh.
Only really in his second season at Inter did he swap for the more negative, disruptive and counter-attacking style he is now known for, focussing more on his opponents game than his own. Even then, his Real Madrid side are one of the best examples of counter-attacking in recent times and set a league goal record in the process. Likewise his Chelsea side in the first half of 14/15 played some great football.
Time out would help Mourinho rediscover his roots I feel, and stop him being such a paranoid, crazy dickhead. If he was taking a sabbatical and going to United for the 2017 season I would be extremely concerned, as it is, less so. Not that I don't expect him to deliver trophies mind.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Nickini
Time out would help Mourinho rediscover his roots I feel, and stop him being such a paranoid, crazy dickhead. If he was taking a sabbatical and going to United for the 2017 season I would be extremely concerned, as it is, less so. Not that I don't expect him to deliver trophies mind.
Time out would help Mourinho rediscover his roots I feel, and stop him being such a paranoid, crazy dickhead. If he was taking a sabbatical and going to United for the 2017 season I would be extremely concerned, as it is, less so. Not that I don't expect him to deliver trophies mind.
I'm unsure.
The man hasn't been the same since he was snubbed for the Barcelona and United jobs. Despite winning La Liga at Real Madrid, he did it in the most abrasive manner possible.
He'll deliver trophies, given the right set up and backing, but it isn't sustainable long-term. It just isn't. He'll never build a dynasty, but United may be prepared to accept that in the knowledge that there will never be another Sir Alex Ferguson.
For what it's worth, I think both Mourinho and United would snap the other party's hand off. The latter would surely relish the controversy the former brings.
Original post by Mackay
I'm unsure.
The man hasn't been the same since he was snubbed for the Barcelona and United jobs. Despite winning La Liga at Real Madrid, he did it in the most abrasive manner possible.
He'll deliver trophies, given the right set up and backing, but it isn't sustainable long-term. It just isn't. He'll never build a dynasty, but United may be prepared to accept that in the knowledge that there will never be another Sir Alex Ferguson.
For what it's worth, I think both Mourinho and United would snap the other party's hand off. The latter would surely relish the controversy the former brings.
The man hasn't been the same since he was snubbed for the Barcelona and United jobs. Despite winning La Liga at Real Madrid, he did it in the most abrasive manner possible.
He'll deliver trophies, given the right set up and backing, but it isn't sustainable long-term. It just isn't. He'll never build a dynasty, but United may be prepared to accept that in the knowledge that there will never be another Sir Alex Ferguson.
For what it's worth, I think both Mourinho and United would snap the other party's hand off. The latter would surely relish the controversy the former brings.
I don't disagree that Mourinho currently is incapable of building a dynasty - but at his best (circa 10 years ago), I think he might have been. As I said above his style has changed, and yes, his more recent style of management where he pushes players to give that extra 10% is not sustainable, and equally his man-management skills seem to have fallen off a cliff as well. But in his prime? He played a much more sustainable and impressive brand of football as I said above, and you will scarcely find a group of players more loyal to their manager than his first stint at Chelsea.
People point to his abrasive and controversial personality as reasons why he couldn't possibly manage long term, but SAF, the greatest long-term manager of all time was not dissimilar himself.
I think if Mourinho hadn't regressed as a manager he would be capable of building a dynasty, and if he were to take a break from the game he might just get back to his old self. As it stands though I don't see it.
Original post by Nickini
He wasn't snubbed for the United job, SAF said he had already agreed to return to Chelsea.
I don't disagree that Mourinho currently is incapable of building a dynasty - but at his best (circa 10 years ago), I think he might have been. As I said above his style has changed, and yes, his more recent style of management where he pushes players to give that extra 10% is not sustainable, and equally his man-management skills seem to have fallen off a cliff as well. But in his prime? He played a much more sustainable and impressive brand of football as I said above, and you will scarcely find a group of players more loyal to their manager than his first stint at Chelsea.
People point to his abrasive and controversial personality as reasons why he couldn't possibly manage long term, but SAF, the greatest long-term manager of all time was not dissimilar himself.
I think if Mourinho hadn't regressed as a manager he would be capable of building a dynasty, and if he were to take a break from the game he might just get back to his old self. As it stands though I don't see it.
I don't disagree that Mourinho currently is incapable of building a dynasty - but at his best (circa 10 years ago), I think he might have been. As I said above his style has changed, and yes, his more recent style of management where he pushes players to give that extra 10% is not sustainable, and equally his man-management skills seem to have fallen off a cliff as well. But in his prime? He played a much more sustainable and impressive brand of football as I said above, and you will scarcely find a group of players more loyal to their manager than his first stint at Chelsea.
People point to his abrasive and controversial personality as reasons why he couldn't possibly manage long term, but SAF, the greatest long-term manager of all time was not dissimilar himself.
I think if Mourinho hadn't regressed as a manager he would be capable of building a dynasty, and if he were to take a break from the game he might just get back to his old self. As it stands though I don't see it.
From Jonathan Wilson today: "That night, the story broke that Manchester United were going to appoint David Moyes as a successor to Alex Ferguson. According to Diego Torres in his biography of Mourinho, the Madrid manager was appalled. He had believed that he had a special relationship with Ferguson, but the outgoing United manager had not even called him to let him know of the decision. That night Mourinho was restless, fretful, constantly checking the news to see if there may have been some mistake. The following morning he called his agent Jorge Mendes to see if it might be possible to derail the deal and reinsert himself into the picture.
"By the following day, Mourinho was insisting that his intention had always been to go back to Chelsea, that his wife wanted to live in London. Perhaps that was true, but perhaps he saw this as a second betrayal."
Original post by Mackay
I'm unsure.
The man hasn't been the same since he was snubbed for the Barcelona and United jobs. Despite winning La Liga at Real Madrid, he did it in the most abrasive manner possible.
The man hasn't been the same since he was snubbed for the Barcelona and United jobs. Despite winning La Liga at Real Madrid, he did it in the most abrasive manner possible.
It's funny how sometimes a manager loses his aura, and when it happens it's difficult to get back.
I've seen this happen before. Ruud Gullit, when he first came to the UK, was well loved by the media, he was the epitome of cool, they loved him as a player and then in his first season as a manager, the media heroworshipped him as the authority on football. He won the FA Cup in his first season, Chelsea's first trophy in decades. Then he had a spat with the board and was sacked, and somehow was different, when he was in media studios he was never as relaxed, and when he took over at Newcastle he was defensive and prickly, seemed to be fighting the media, his own players and fans.
Kenny Dalglish had a Ferguson-esque reputation in the mid 1990s, not only had he continued Liverpool's great success for a while, but after a break from the game he came to Blackburn, brought them promotion and won the league. When he took over at Newcastle who had finished 2nd the year before people saw him as potentially the final piece of the jigsaw. But Kenny's spell in Newcastle was a disaster and after that he always looked much older. He was also much more defensive with the media. He always had a bit of sarcastic wit, but in his first Liverpool and Blackburn spell he was generally relaxed and had fun with the media, second time round he retreated in to "Liverpool Football Club" like it was Millwall "noone likes us we don't care".
Kevin Keegan was another who seemed to walk on water in Newcastle for a while and was everyone's favourite entertaining manager but after he had his first mini-breakdown as Newcastle manager he always seemed fragile.
I'm always wary of a much hyped manager - wait till they have their first 'test' and then see how you view them. Once Aidy Boothroyd was going to be the "English Mourinho", what happened to him? Malky Mackay as well was seen as a paragon of dignity. Even Brendan Rodgers was once earmarked all the way for the top but has had a fall from grace.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- The Arsenal Thread XXV
- The Manchester United Thread XXIII
- Chelsea F.C. Thread IX
- Time for Erik Ten Hag to be sacked?
- Tottenham Hotspur Society II
- What TV show are you currently watching?
- The Liverpool FC Thread XVII
- Summer 2023 Anime Preview
- The Arsenal Thread XXVI
- The 2021-2022 epl season banter(with niz)
- Miscellaneous Thread VII
- The Official TSR Fantasy Premier League 2023/24
- What is Your Favorite Football Club
- Not sure if I should forgive my Bf for getting physical in an argument
- AQA English Language Paper 1 Question 5
- Haaland - overrated?
- Spring 2024 Anime Preview
- TSR Tennis Society IV
- Social Anxiety and i might have Agoraphobia, ruined my junior and high school lives b
- Premier League Predictions 2023-24
