Chelsea Thread

Mourinho is overrated if you ask me. He never really proven anything other than that he can play extremely cynical and destructive football with very expensive squads. Now, I don't dispute that he do what he does very well... I just don't like what he does and I don't think it's particularly worthy of praise.

I know I'm fairly biased but I am going to mention Klopp and Dortmund, but I think he has proven more than Mourinho with less money and better football. So, if anyone is amazing...
 
Last edited:
Chelsea has played decent football on occasion this season, but lately when it has mattered the real Mourinho shines through. Chelsea is a team that likes to play cynical as history is proof enough of, and with Mourinho at the rudder they get that in abundance.

Every time Mourinho feels a tiny bit of resistance on the opposite half, he uses turtle strategies. He did it with Real Madrid, the most expensive squad in the world.

Now if you're wearing so thick bias-goggles that you can't see that then you're the one not worthy of replying.
 
When he retires he will probably go down as the most successful manager of all time.

He won the CL with Porto, the only time a club outside of the top 4 leagues has won the CL in the last 20 years
 
Do you remember how that Porto team played? You guessed it; cynical, destructive and defensive. Mourinho's pattern.

Anyway, I'm not against defensive strategies but it's a pattern here and by a club with a budget too big to rely on anti-football to win. It's not about being a hypocrite, but taking into account several important facts like economy, squad strength and overall stature in the world of football. It does not look good when one of the best teams use extreme measures to win. Extreme measures are forgiving when smaller teams does it because not doing it would be kamikaze.

Besides, there's that difference between Greece who won Euro finals and the Greece who tried to defend the title. The biggest difference was that the first iteration had a clear attack strategy in their defensive lineup. The second iteration didn't. Chelsea didn't try to attack in Madrid. Not once. They were not trying to play football. A team filled with some of the most expensive, top earning footballers on this planet against a "smaller" team.

That's what makes it so easy to dislike it.
 
I know we're supposed to give credit for winning 'however possible' - but God that Porto team was horrible. Cheating, time-wasting, snide, lucky bastards.
 
Godotelli said:
When he retires he will probably go down as the most successful manager of all time.

He won the CL with Porto, the only time a club outside of the top 4 leagues has won the CL in the last 20 years
Click to expand...

Ajax 1995 :)
 
Come on, he was playing with a team like porto against the biggest clubs in the Europe. How did you expect he played? He just wanted to win, and he did it....
 
Take a look at the squad he had which included Carvalho, Paulo Ferreira, Deco, Costinha and Maniche. They weren't huge underdogs on paper in any of the matches, yet they played like they were in all of them.
 
it's what's called hindsight. none of us thought those players were that good, back in 2004. mourinho's the man who made them famous. of course, they were underdogs, they're porto ffs. not madrid, not juve. I can fully understand your frustration with his "win at all costs" approach time and time again but you're trying too hard to belittle his successes. porto 2004 is his biggest, yet not the only one.

ajax 95 won it, when this still was a "champions-only" league. that's not really a sensible comparison.

I'm sure next year will be a lot different for chelsea, and none of you haters will have a good word about mourinho then. just as in the 2012 season with real.
 
Last edited:
No, I'm not trying to belittle his successes at all. I'm just pointing out how they've come. I didn't react particularly to Porto's strategy in 2004 but when he repeats the same pattern with Chelsea, Internazionale, Real Madrid and Chelsea again then it's obvious that this is his only way and it's not especially praiseworthy anymore.

If Chelsea supporters are fine with that way of achieving trophies, that's fine. I react when they pretend it's normal football and doesn't seem to understand the criticism. In other words, so biased that they can't see what's going on.
 
Last edited:
"I'm just pointing out how they've come."

what's the difference? it's generally what people do when they try to praise or diminish the achievements. you're making it sound like those were very easy things to do. so if this is the way you're pointing out how they've come, I don't see how supposedly you're not belittling them.

I really don't get it. how he repeated the same pattern with all those four teams? when people talk about his inter team, bam, "he parked the bus at camp nou against the lovely barcelona, lousy bastard". nobody says a thing about how busquets made motta sent off around 30th minute and they were ten men against their "mighty" barcelona, or the first leg of the tie, where inter played a very good football and won 3-1 against them. I mean, this was a goddamn single game. if that's the thing, his chelsea scored 4 against barcelona back in 2004or5 and I should go around repeating that chelsea team was great "normal" football team then. I don't know how people pretend to remember his inter, when they even seem to totally forgot esp. his last two seasons with real. for instance, his team played much less defensively against bayern in 2012 semis compared to this year's but he lost the tie with penalties then and madrid eliminiated bayern this year and "oh, mourinho's gone, real back to normal". if you're really saying he implied the same pattern in madrid, that's just wrong man. they were a joy to watch imo. his inter had one of the finest defensive lineups maybe in the history of the game so why should they have played that "normal" footbal (my ass, I loved watching that great players maicon, zanetti, cambiasso, samuel, lucio finally winning some thing)? just like mourinho himself said a few days ago. when you have cech, who can send the ball to the other box and drogba up there, who can get everything in the air why should you play that "normal" football?

he always plays what's suitable to his team each year. that's the pattern. one can watch all the games he played against barcelona and can easily see he always tried different tactics in almost each game.

if things were that easy as said, city and psg should have also been big powers in cl right from the time they were bought. but chelsea succeeded this, because they had mourinho. real never played a semi final since 2003, and did it three years in a row between 2011-13, because they had mourinho. they weren't bankrupt between all that period. no need to repeat how special those porto and inter successes are either.
 
Last edited:
Kanouté, you complain about people hatinf Mourinho, but your problem is that you can't be a the least optimistic about Barcelona.

I'm one of the people who has defended Mourinho and Chelsea quite often. The fact is that Mourinho's team have big difficulties against teams who playlike he does in big matches.

Mourinho is a very cynical coach,but every successfull coach has to be cynical. Opinions are divided about Mourinho. Some people see him as a vilain other as a genius. He isn't a vilain and if he is a genius then big SamAllardyce and Tony Pulis (to give only two examples of clubs who have beaten Chelsea) are geniusses too...

The fact is: a manager is a genius if he wins. If he looses he is nothing any more. Maybe managers/coaches are less important than most people claim they are...
 
Thing is, I'd still rather watch a Mourinho side than a Tiki Taka Crappa team like Barca Zzzzzzzzz

Even Bayern are boring now. JUST SHOOT for god sake!
 
Mou 1st spell w/ RM was ok he was ripping the club from the inside. The next season became a reality when the best player was being torn by the division Mou was causing. Ronaldo was trying to scream for help w/o pointing fingers. He was getting abuse being called ' hater for not winning personal accolades ' he wanted more money they say. No he wanted Mou out!!! That style of football is not what RM needed.


Last night a younger and more reckless player came out and spoke about Mou's football. He is not impress by Mou's tactics. Hazard is not happy w/ Mou's Chelsea football!! Mou is on his way out! Haha see ya don't let the door hit you where the good Lord split you;)

Hazard is reckless by his comments , he is employed by Chelsea .(clear)
 
Kanouté said:
"I'm just pointing out how they've come."

what's the difference? it's generally what people do when they try to praise or diminish the achievements. you're making it sound like those were very easy things to do. so if this is the way you're pointing out how they've come, I don't see how supposedly you're not belittling them.

I really don't get it. how he repeated the same pattern with all those four teams? when people talk about his inter team, bam, "he parked the bus at camp nou against the lovely barcelona, lousy bastard". nobody says a thing about how busquets made motta sent off around 30th minute and they were ten men against their "mighty" barcelona, or the first leg of the tie, where inter played a very good football and won 3-1 against them. I mean, this was a goddamn single game. if that's the thing, his chelsea scored 4 against barcelona back in 2004or5 and I should go around repeating that chelsea team was great "normal" football team then. I don't know how people pretend to remember his inter, when they even seem to totally forgot esp. his last two seasons with real. for instance, his team played much less defensively against bayern in 2012 semis compared to this year's but he lost the tie with penalties then and madrid eliminiated bayern this year and "oh, mourinho's gone, real back to normal". if you're really saying he implied the same pattern in madrid, that's just wrong man. they were a joy to watch imo. his inter had one of the finest defensive lineups maybe in the history of the game so why should they have played that "normal" footbal (my ass, I loved watching that great players maicon, zanetti, cambiasso, samuel, lucio finally winning some thing)? just like mourinho himself said a few days ago. when you have cech, who can send the ball to the other box and drogba up there, who can get everything in the air why should you play that "normal" football?

he always plays what's suitable to his team each year. that's the pattern. one can watch all the games he played against barcelona and can easily see he always tried different tactics in almost each game.

if things were that easy as said, city and psg should have also been big powers in cl right from the time they were bought. but chelsea succeeded this, because they had mourinho. real never played a semi final since 2003, and did it three years in a row between 2011-13, because they had mourinho. they weren't bankrupt between all that period. no need to repeat how special those porto and inter successes are either.
Click to expand...

I'm not against defensive tactics at all. I appreciated how Inter won against Barcelona because it was a defensively strategic victory. That particular Inter squad also had exactly what was needed to execute such strategy very well and attack with determination on occasion. For me it's actually about who does it, who they do it against and how they do it. It may be borderline hypocrisy but I feel that my reason for distinguishing between the usages makes it not so.

This particular Chelsea squad, while struggling with a proper and effective striker, still has a lot of offensive firepower. They wouldn't sell Mata if they didn't, for example. Eto'o, Torres, Schurrle and Ba aren't "nobodys" in the world of forwards for that matter. In the first match against Atlético they were sabotaging and not trying to play football for 90+ minutes. That's a disrespectful for anyone who bought tickets to that match as they came to watch football and Chelsea did everything in their power to prevent football from being played. It would have been perfectly understandable and acceptable if the match was between AIK and Atlético though. You expect a little less cynicism and anti-football from a world class team filled with several prospects for the upcoming World Cup.

In several El Clasico's Mourinho also did everything in his power to make the matches a parody. While Real Madrid has a fairly good defensive setup their strength is undeniably in attack, so "using the strength of the squad" is obviously a loose term in your book.

It might be good for Chelsea's trophy cabinet in the long run, but it won't be good for their reputation and it's not good for football to act like that when you're supposed to be role models for the upcoming generations.

Accept that and enjoy any eventual trophies which I suppose would and should have a nasty after taste. The whole Mourinho package is at least in the grey area of what's ethical and he does not represent good sportsmanship either. Mourinho would be able to turn a F1 race into a destruction derby in a sense, and it should be acknowledged even if some people accept and enjoy it.

PS. Porto avoided the big guns in their 2004 run as well. They met Real Madrid in the group stage and played Monaco in the final. The players I mentioned were far from unproven in 2004 and if you look at the opponents I still stand by my agrument that they weren't particularly underdogs.
 
Last edited:
man, you're repeating yourself over and over and over again. nobody, even the most expensive squad in football history have to play attractive football. they are meant to play winning football. if you don't want to watch mourinho football, then you're free to stop whining and turn the tv off. I do so most of the time.

some people just don't get me here. it's perfectly okay, if you don't like mourinho or his football. I'm not a big fan of either. I'd like to watch pellegrini, wenger, rodgers, bielsa, klopp, löw etc football. I don't react when people say "I don't like mourinho football, he's a cunt" whatever. because I don't care. I'm no fascist to make people think otherwise. if they don't like mother teresa, I don't care. I don't give a shit.

but you're doing it again. "porto avoided big guns". what's this now? I mean, how am I supposed not to react this and not to be seen as a mourinho lover in some of you's eyes?

firstly, they beat united in the last 16. they were a "big gun".

lyon, le guen's team. finished their group first ahead of bayern. they had a great squad (juninho, essien, malouda, elber etc).

deportivo, in the last 16. they beat juventus twice. in q's they made that miracle comeback against title holders milan from 4-1 to 4-0. 2003 final was played between milan and juve. deportivo is the team eliminated both the year after. not just the "deportivo".

monaco, eliminated real and chelsea (10 goals in 4 games). chelsea were the team that knocked "the invincibles" arsenal out of europe that season btw. and monaco did shit against porto.

there you go. had enough of some of your false claims that are clearly raised out of hate. that's the problem. not the fact you dislike him or his way of doing things.
 
Kanouté said:
but you're doing it again. "porto avoided big guns". what's this now? I mean, how am I supposed not to react this and not to be seen as a mourinho lover in some of you's eyes?

firstly, they beat united in the last 16. they were a "big gun".
Click to expand...


There are many moments that decide a tie - but had Scholes' goal stood - when he was played onside by no less than 3 Porto players - we probably wouldn't ever have heard of Jose Mourinho. Or if Tim Howard hadn't decided to have his worst career moment in the 90th minute of that match.

Porto didn't outplay United at all. They fluked their way through that match with some ridiculous officiating. It was smash and grab - mixed in with a whole world of play-acting and time wasting. I'm a quarter Portuguese, and that was my first real exposure to 'modern' Portoguese teams. I was ashamed. Sadly, every other one I've seen since has only reinforced that impression. But that's another story...
 
had scholes goal stood it was not a given porto would be eliminated. I understand you but nobody knows what would happen after that. maybe we'd never heard of mourinho, maybe howard would make not only one but two mistakes and porto could still go on to win it (who knows?). I didn't mean to make a comment about the game itself.

p.s. then there's the fact that even if united beat porto that year, mourinho could have had another run in the years to come. who knows...
 
Last edited:
beachryan said:
There are many moments that decide a tie - but had Scholes' goal stood - when he was played onside by no less than 3 Porto players - we probably wouldn't ever have heard of Jose Mourinho. Or if Tim Howard hadn't decided to have his worst career moment in the 90th minute of that match.

Porto didn't outplay United at all. They fluked their way through that match with some ridiculous officiating. It was smash and grab - mixed in with a whole world of play-acting and time wasting. I'm a quarter Portuguese, and that was my first real exposure to 'modern' Portoguese teams. I was ashamed. Sadly, every other one I've seen since has only reinforced that impression. But that's another story...
Click to expand...

That is a shortsighted post.
If that squad player hadn't scored against Forest in the FA CUP we probably wouldn't have heard of Alex Ferguson. You make it sound as if every victory of Mourinho is cheating. Ferguson was at times as cynical as Mourinho, but he never got stick for it in England because he was Brittish and behaved well according to Brittons.

Much of what Mourinho does and (even more) how it is perceived is down to cultural differences.

I'm pretty sure that Mourinho takes himself less serious than most people treat him...
 
Kanouté said:
there you go. had enough of some of your false claims that are clearly raised out of hate. that's the problem. not the fact you dislike him or his way of doing things.
Click to expand...

No, they're not raised out of hate but due to the reasons I gave you. If he hadn't been a cynical anti-football practitioner there wouldn't be any reason to dislike his way of doing things in the first place.

"Produce little and risk even less" is the system of the little guy against Goliath. If it's turned around the entertainment part of football disappears and the sport suffers in the end. It does says something when the teams arguably biggest star and best offensive player, Eden Hazard, agrees with my Chelsea criticism. They aren't playing football and I also mentioned before his comments were official that some players struggle mentally to perform such anti football and I actually complemented Chelsea's players for being able to do it despite the inner torment some of them must have felt in the first match.
 
Last edited:
Eden Hazard on his way out of Chelsea perhaps?
http://m.bbc.com/sport/football/27258633

The lad has got personality. He apparently told the press "Chelsea isn't setup to play attacking football, only defending and counters".

Mourinho caught the bait. He simply cannot play down those quotes, he just has to come across as douche! It's uncanny :LOL:

For starters, Atletico's first goal was never Hazard's fault. It wasn't a counter attack and he didn't necessarity have to cover for Ashley Cole. In fact, it was Cole who was at fault because he drifted inside to box allowing space for the Atletico player in the far post.

Anyway, now I fully expect Hazard to be benched for the last few games of the season and then be sold.
 
Hazard was by far Chelsea's best player in the Premier League. Easily the most menacing player they've got.

Brilliant piece of man management, well done Mourinho :LOL:
 
Sometimes the best young players need a push. I'd wager that's what Mourinho is up to here.

Also can't believe they'd sell him. He's their most valuable asset.
 
beachryan said:
Sometimes the best young players need a push. I'd wager that's what Mourinho is up to here.

Also can't believe they'd sell him. He's their most valuable asset.
Click to expand...

Or maybe it won't be Mourinho to manage him next season:
mourinho1a.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom