Hes both. He doesn't need to be a coward though. Unless you don't think Chelsea are as good as you like to tell yourself?
Anyway I can turn notifications off, my alerts are being spammed with these two playing "I'm gonna get the last word if it kills me!"
I concede. I can go to some pretty low levels on here but somethings are just too much. Its like facing off against Sisu. Theres no hope.
[BetterE="Bodanki, post: 7842390, member: 1015959"]Anyway I can turn notifications off, my alerts are being spammed with these two playing "I'm gonna get the last word if it kills me!"[/QUOTE] Better to give as good as you get than lie d That's right. You have no hope. Switch off the computer, chill out and get over the defeat. Come back refreshed at the weeke. Ta ta.
This thread is getting nowhere fast. So let's agree on this 1. Chelsea played a very defensive formation. Most agree that JM planned it that way. he could have taken a risk against a weakened side and not to play defensive. But he didn't. why should he if he doesn't have to? He is not here to entertain but to win. He has said " Football is about points.". As Chelsea had more points over the season, they will be deservedly champions. 2. United although weakened through key injuries dominated Chelsea. As JM played defensive it was not surprising. United was the better team. 3. United took many positives from the match. Most pundits thought that this was an improvement from last season and the early season. There were signs that with a few additions United will be more of a challenge for the title next season.
Jose set up with a game plan. I seriously doubt it was anything more than getting a draw so the win was a bonus. Here's the thing that keeps being missed here. Fergie and Jose approached countless league games against each other (United vs Chelsea) with the same mentality. Truly dull affairs and often far too much respect for each other, looking forward to the bottle of tipple afterwards more than the game itself. The irony is that the reaction from fans, media and pundits following those matches was to slate the way BOTH teams set up to cancel each other out, play negative football and settle for the draw. BUT now, when we see one team employ the same tactic while the other takes the game to them, playing to win - those same fans, media and pundits think those same negative tactics mentioned earlier are now a masterclass I'm not criticising Jose or Chelsea. He did what he always does AND had we set up in the same way there's no doubt we would have walked away with a point. BUT it all depends what you enjoy or want as a fan of your club. For me winning at all costs isnt important. I am a bit of a purist and above all I want to see LVG is building a style of football I want to watch for 90 mins and one that will lead to winning in style. The performance on Saturday wasnt about Saturday at all, it's about the direction we're going in. And like the previous 3 games I dont know any United fan who isnt feeling confident about that. Yeh I could be happy if we'd gone to Chelsea on Saturday, put out a side that cancelled each other out, got the point and fcked off home (we didnt need the win either). Instead I'd rather risk losing that point, playing attacking, expansive, free-flowing football everytime. It's the make-up and the ethos of the club. It's the style of football the club AND its success is built on. I genuinely cannot relate to anyone who doesnt understand or want that for the team they support, regardless of the club.
Well said This is where Jose is going wrong: football is NOT all about points. For true fans it is about the beautiful game. Why is it not possible to play good football, entertain and excite the crowds and win too? Barcelona, Madrid and many other teams including the recent United sides can do it.
There's a time and a place for defensive football. At home to an injury hit side when you top the league probably isnt that time. Not to the extent seen on Saturday. Chelsea had a 71% pass completion rate. Basically one in three passes went astray. That certainly wasnt planned. Nor was it planned that we would have 12 shots at goal against a team playing with every player in their own half. Our poor finishing on the day was more effective than Chelseas 'tactics" at preventing us from scoring.
Jose has brought much success to a club that hadnt experienced any such success in a very long time. As such he will always be loved by Chelsea fans. And I can understand that. But I for one am grateful, for by the grace of God, our Busby or Fergie could have easily been a Mourinho and built United's success and style of football in the same manner. Good luck to Jose but for me there is something inherently wrong with seeing football in the manner he does. His time at Real Madrid was marked by one game. His first against Barcelona. Pressure was on him from within the club and the fans towards him playing an expansive attacking football in the manner and tradition the club was accustomed to. BUT he didnt agree...so what did he do... To prove a point he deliberately set up a gung-ho attack and lost 5-0. He was willing to sacrifice the game against the club's arch rivals to force home to everyone at Real that they were wrong and his philosophy was right. At that moment I realised the man really has no love for the clubs he manages or the sport itself. He only really cares about having the means meeting the ends - no matter how sterile that means may be. Now that is fine for a club like Chelsea, or even Inter, who havent known real success in over a generation. But at Real he miscalculated their expectations, not just in results but equally in approach and style of football. And the same would apply at a club like Manchester United. Which is why I would never want him.
It's not that difficult a concept. He's shown in the past he can play attractive, winning football and given the defence and midfield United had out there, there was some scope to exploit that. Fair enough he got the result. Whether or not you believe United were unlucky is a matter of opinion but it's almost like he chooses to play dour stuff to prove a point. When it works, if that's what the fans want, then fair enough. When it doesn't, as the PSG game showed, the peasants will revolt.
Can't recall anyone revolting after PSG. We actually created more against United than QPr. To be fair, they created more chances than United and gave us a tougher game. We were a little fortunate against QPR, but the result was correct v United as we were superior and they would not have scored if they played til Xmas
Well I didn't speak to every individual Chelsea fan but those I know were almost all pissed off at the tactics and the mood on your board was along the same lines.
No mate I would rather do both. Play free, flowing football AND win. Blueman why the fck do we buy this myth that's perpuated by the media that we can only do one or the other? Like somehow playing negative football equals more chance of success than playing attacking football built on a good defence. Total wool over the eyes.
