Match Day Thread 2017/18 Premier League, Cups & Euro Watch

No he didn't. Go and read what he actually said

 

Depends what you mean by attack minded and entertaining. I would have to disagree as compared to the likes of Pep and Klopp, front foot with pressing,closing down and the will to score more than the opposition (typically chucking on more strikers). Rafas brand was far more defensive, defensive players first, flair players who weren't solid never got an opportunity and i think this was shown in the year when you should have won the league but drew too many games

 

he said he can tolerative a defensive (boring) team if he thinks the team is inferior. What more is their to say?

 

The only comparable stats are from his first Chelsea stint.

P 136, W 80, D 29, L 27 GF 245, GA 121, win% 59

 

The first goal is important, I think Salah , Firmino or Mane will score first. I am optimistic Liverpool 2:1 Totteham.
Liverpool are unlikely to keep a clean sheet.

 

I'm not comparing Rafa's style to Klopp's gegen pressing, im talking about you putting Rafa In the same bracket as the likes of Pulis.

 

I'd just like to point out that I've never at any time said I don't want us to win, just not at any cost.
Why watch football if the result is the only thing that matters - why not just tune in to the results and sit and gaze at the league table?
I'm a passive consumer of football and I want to be entertained. It would be shallow of me to brag about something that I had no hand in achieving, but I obviously enjoy watching my team perform well.
Of course you can't play well every game, and to grind out a win occasionally is a necessity. I would describe that as satisfying, but I wouldn't want to be watching it all the time, no matter how successful it was. Needs must sometimes, but I don't want it as a playing philosophy.
If I wanted to be bored all the time I'd watch Eastenders.
If you think differently then that's fine, but at least accept that what I'm saying is true for me.

The Arsenal game was much more exciting than the Huddersfield one, but I was obviously disappointed and frustrated that we didn't win.
I was satisfied with the Huddersfield game and the result, but it was a routine win and the second half was boring. I actually found my attention wandering a bit in the second half because it was so obvious that even we couldn't manage to throw that one.
There are two levels of interest in football - each individual game, and the success rate over the season. There are similarly two factors in each game - the performance and the result. For me both things are important whereas it seems for many it's only the latter that counts.

 

even though that's not the debate which was rafa playing boring footie but winning things and not that rafa didn't win games, that's a bigger win ratio and more goals per game than rafa but mourinho is a boring old fart when it comes to playing footie and rafa wasn't (going by stats i presume since you brought that in)

 

Mourinho was compared to Pulis and to be honest i don't think Rafa is far from Mourinho hence why i've lumped them all together. The only difference is Pulis is a bit more extreme and had far lesser players

 

That is fair enough.

I don't necessarily think people who do not mind a boring philosophy for a few trophies is a glory hunter though. I can be bored watching a game but by the end if we've won through a hard one its good satisfaction.

To tell you the truth, i was happy with Mourinho in his first chelsea stint even though the footie was quite boring but even at the start of the 3rd season i wanted him gone for someone a bit more progressive (ironically my ideal person was wenger but his footie stinks nowadays haha). For me though, i would prefer a winning manager to a attacking manager who loses (i agree you should go for both).

Maybe that's just how i play the game, i'm a defender in real life and i hate it when people are pulling off tricks at stupid times and not scoring. For me i just like winning, not to brag but just that feeling. It's not about the bragging and telling everyone Chelsea is the best.

 

Mourinho first team at Chelsea was pretty entertaining with Robben & Duff on the wings.

I'm with Saint on this everyone accepts that sometimes you need to grind out results but i don't want that to be the norm.

 

If it's not a long term approach and you're only doing it because you feel you have to? Yes, fine, be defensive.

I've never moaned about Pulis, Allardyce, etc btw.

 

did he inherit that? was it bought for him?

 

Better to blow up in glory it appears than to win.

 

You think my

You think my reply to Astro was serious?

 

Clearly you haven’t had to watch more than a game or two with them as managers......

Thank god we are away tomorrow

 

It wasn't boring to us at the time because we were managing to win despite everyone under the sun expecting us to get demolished! We were ****e so we had to defend. Winning is always enjoyable but the actually game play when defending for your lives? Not so much.

That was only his first year btw. After that we had structure but maintained an attacking flair until G&H cane along and ripped the sole out the club.

 

Mourinho's first stint saw the rise of Chelsea from a middling team to champion material so it's bound to have an emotional effect on you.
Similarly, Houllier made us more competitive and restored discipline and organisation to the club so there were positives to his reign.
The football wasn't brilliant but we had something to build on.
It's obvious though that we've not got both sides of the equation balanced for a long time now, which is why trophy success is sporadic.

I was a winger, and fairly lightweight so I ****ing hate defenders.
Just thought you'd like to know that.

 

We did have Houllier though. Oh, and Roy Hodgson!!!