Mourinho is cute

PHB

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/c/chelsea/3665180.stm

Pot: MR BLACK GET THE **** OVER HERE

The Muppet

Yep its his little chootchy cheeks that makes him cute.



I watched most of the game and I though a draw was a fair result as both teams had good chances to score and either could have won. I would not really agree with his post match comments.

eirebhoy

Chelsea are hardly setting the world alight on the entertainment front (except when Duffer comes on of course ) so I don't see how he can say what he did. Chelsea defended twice as much against Utd than Spurs did today.

therecklessone

I had to laugh at his little frustrated head in the post-match interview...

I particularly enjoyed this gem:

I would have been frustrated if I had been a supporter who paid £50 to watch this game because Spurs came to defend.

If I were a fan, I'd be asking why I had to pay £50 to watch the match the game full stop!

Anyway, what did the moany bast*rd expect? Sours didn't have millions to spend on the top Euro talent this summer, we have to make do with what we have. I didn't see the game, but all the reports I've read suggest Spurs deserved the draw, we defended well and Robinson made a few crucial saves.

As PHB said, pot/kettle/black arse spring to mind.

smemon

cant wait to see chelsea get beat by someone, imagine the excuses and quotes he'd come out with then.

anyway this was a massive game for chelsea, not just a derby but the way the arsenal match turned out yesterday. it was the 1st test for murinho having 1st place in his own hands, needing a win.

poor result and lets arsenal off the hook, the 1st battle for the title i think goes to arsenal after chelsea shoot themselves in the foot.

Big Ears

Em would,nt Chelsea have needed in excess of 5 goals to go top ?

eirebhoy

therecklessone wrote:

I didn't see the game, but all the reports I've read suggest Spurs deserved the draw, we defended well and Robinson made a few crucial saves.

Spurs certainly deserved their draw and it was nowhere near as bad as Mourinho is making out. Spurs had period's of domination too. Robinson actually had very little to do.

therecklessone

eirebhoy wrote:

Spurs certainly deserved their draw and it was nowhere near as bad as Mourinho is making out. Spurs had period's of domination too. Robinson actually had very little to do.

Cheers eirebhoy. More reason to laugh at the Angry Little Man.

sikes

at a time in the game near the end there were only 2 shots opn target one for each team. they had loads of wild chances and lots of possession but never created much in the way of clear opportunities

JohnnyBravo

Spurs had 1 chance
Chelsea had 68 percent possesion for the entire game
Chelseas forward line looks bad
Drogba is pure s**te hes like an expensive heskey
He kicks the ball too far ahead of him and generally runs it over the line
I have never seen such a passionless derby
AND WHY OH WHY PLAY JOE SHOW PONEY COLE he is rubbish am i the only one who can see this

END OF RANT

eirebhoy

I don't know where you got your stats Johnny.

Chelsea   Team Statistics   Spurs 
0              Goals        0 
0          1st Half Goals   0 
3        Shots on Target    2 
14      Shots off Target    2 
4         Blocked Shots     4 
9             Corners       6 
17             Fouls        14 
8             Offsides      2 
1          Yellow Cards     2 
0            Red Cards      0 
74.9    Passing Success    65.7 
42            Tackles      42 
61.9    Tackles Success    59.5 
57.4       Possession      42.6 
49.4 Territorial Advantage 50.6 

Joe Cole had a disappointing season last year but has been playing well this season although Chelsea's midfield was their problem. Tiago hasn't been impressive (Mendes of Spurs looks much better), Lampard does a job but has never (ever) been outstanding whenever I've seen Chelsea, Cole had no end product yesterday and Makelele doesn't see much of the ball (he does more work off the ball).

I'd be very suprised if Chelsea wouldn't have got more than 2 points from their last 2 games if Duffer started both.

therecklessone

Chris Waddle has got in on the debate, and its a classic...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/t/tottenham_hotspur/3672940.stm

Ranieri was a man of the people but Mourinho's completely different.

"He believes he should be at Chelsea, he believes he will win the league and he believes he's the best manager. And he believes, probably, that he's the best-looking manager.

smuckers

JohnnyBravo wrote:

Spurs had 1 chance
Chelsea had 68 percent possesion for the entire game
Chelseas forward line looks bad
Drogba is pure s**te hes like an expensive heskey
He kicks the ball too far ahead of him and generally runs it over the line
I have never seen such a passionless derby
AND WHY OH WHY PLAY JOE SHOW PONEY COLE he is rubbish am i the only one who can see this

END OF RANT

Christ, Drogba wasn't an expensive Heskey in Paris now was he? Its Kezman who has struggled to adapt to the PL. Tiago is good but doesn't add anything that we already have.
Cole was v good on Sun and is improving quickly.

JohnnyBravo

Regardless of how much cole is improving he is turnoing into gronkjaer in that he cant pass a blood test
It sickens me that he is keeping a player of duffs calibre out of the team
Realistically i cant see duff staying beyond next season if it continues this way


As for the paris Game
PSG were atrocious

Bateman

PSG were atrocious; I suppose that's Mourinho/Cole/Drogba's fault too? :rolleyes:

Drogba is proving to be an excellent signing; his power, pace and strength should have seen Chelsea win a penalty against Villa; so we could still be joint-top without having beat Spurs. But these decisions even themselves out over the course of the season, and you just get on with it.

I like the way everyone hates Mourinho; it's great to have that needle everytime you play a game. Mourinho's comments after the game were stupid, but you can bet your arse he wasn't saying the exact same thing to the team in the dressing room after; I'm sure he didn't win trophies by telling his players they were "great" after a flat performance. He made his name playing defensive, dogged football at Porto, so his comments have to be looked at as toungue in cheek.

smuckers

I remember Wenger saying the same thing when Valencia knocked out Arse of The CL but there wasn't a fuss made about that.

therecklessone

The difference I imagine would be that Wenger's Arsenal play some of the most entertaining attacking football in the modern game.

Moaninho's Porto were reknowned for their defensive tactics, timewasting and general acting the bo**ox. He's imported the defensive tactics to Stamford Bridge.

Wenger wasn't being a hypocrite by complaining about Valencia's tactics.

Bateman

True, but with players like Duff, Parker, and Robben in the team, Mourinho knows he has the class to attack teams when he deems it appropriate. I am still convinced that Chelsea will play football when the time is right, some of the passing movement against Villa was breathtaking, regardless of the end product.