Valdanos rant at Rafa/Jose

Mr Alan

RE*AC*TOR wrote:

I've watched a lot of Liverpool games this season (being a liverpool fan), and there have been some really really awful games. Not your run of the mill dull games, games that truly shake your ability to continue as a football fan.

True there have been some great, exciting games, and I would consider the semi final second leg with Chelsea to be an exciting game, but I would agree with the summation, that for a neutral, who just wants to enjoy the spectacle of football, Liverpool would currently not be as safe a bet as Man UTD, or probably Arsenal.

The weakest part of the Liverpool team is the frontline, even our best forward (Kuyt) is a workhorse type player, in the mould of Mark Hughes. So when the frontline isn't offering something special, the machine-like grinding of the midfield and back-four assumes control. This can be ok against Barca or such big teams, but against bottom half of the premiership teams, you should be able to "play" your way through them, instead of reducing it to a discipline and physicality competition.

If Gonzalez / Pennant / Bellamy etc had proved more potent, I think this wouldn't have been such an issue. But by and large they haven't offered the type of play they were bought for. Pennant is starting to progress, and has offered some good games of late, Gonzalez has really only shown glimpses, Bellamy though, a proven premiership performer is surely the most bizarre failure, and undoubtedly will depart for pastures new in the summer.

The merry-go-round then will begin again in earnest in the summer, Voronin, a Ukranian striker is already Anfield-bound, but doesn't seem to offer profligacy in front of goal that is needed, another Kuyt methinks. Gonzalez should be given another season to prove himself, but competition for his place will come with the return of Garcia from injury, and likewise Kewell (if he escapes the clearout). Pennant may find himself vying for places with not only Steven Gerrard, but perhaps Daniel Alves. The Sevilla full-back / winger, is a long-term Rafa target. He fulfills not only Benitez's love for multitasking players (ahh Zenden), but also offers a quick, skillful attacking option and scorer of spectacular goals in La Liga.

Whether or not these addition or other unseen additions will provide that consistent creative output for Liverpool remains to be seen. One thing is surely certain, next season Liverpool will be well organised, well disciplined, and well let in few goals. The last time Liverpool were the most exciting team to watch in the Premiership was under the guidance of Roy Evans. Those days are dead, yet fewer and fewer people mourn them since the unexpected success of '05. Should '07 prove to make it 6, I think few Liverpool fans will dwell on the mind-numbingly dull trip to Man City, and perhaps one or two fans, whose team offer weekly shows of pure entertainment, will look somewhat enviously at Liverpool's dull, grinding machine.

Great post

DerekD Goldfish

Liverpool are ahve have been for the past few years a horrible team to watch sure there is the odd great game but they are few and far between. as I said in another thread When Irelnad resorted to crap football under chalton or when greece won the european chapionship with it it was understandable.
When Bolton use it to propell an adverage side to european football its understnadable but when one of the most famous and succesful club teams in history resort to the kind of crap liverpool regularly play It really sickens me Liverpool V Man City may well have been the worst game of football ive ever seen and I include Pats v UCD games which is saying something.

iregk

HashSlinging wrote:

If you want to see loads of scores, go and watch GAA or rugby, I like chess, and I also like strategy.

I'm not saying I want to see goals galore, not sure where you picked that up from, I've ridiculed enough people before for basing a games quality on the amount of goals. I like chess and strategy as well. I'm a huge cycling fan and love watching that so well accustomed to sitting watching a slow strategic encounter. Whats your point exactly?

My point was for a football match both teams pumping long balls to a target man isn't exactly the pinicle of strategy now is it? No its not, its boring dire football. The other semi was fantastic stuff, great passing movement and creativity.

redspider

To be fair to Valdano, he was a very good footballer and the type of football (product) they try to produce at Real Madrid is of the entertaining type.

But, for every Valdano and Maradone, there is a Passeralla, for every Pele a Dunga. Not all aspects of football are about attack only. Its both about scoring and keeping the ball out.

And Good Managers dont have to have been Good Players. To use an analogy, like Football, theatre/films dont have to be directed by actors. Steven Spielberg is a crap actor but a good director! And that is similar to football. Each role (Player, Manager) is different, and you can become an expert in one or the other, but seldom a genius at both, especially a creative genius, and there are many examples of that, Best, Greaves, Maradona, Pele .... even Cruijff had 'unusual'/poor results as a manager.

Valdano is just pee'd off that for all of Real Madrids efforts, they are winning nothing at the top level these days in Europe. It will take more than 'efforts' in defensive qualities like Gravesen and Woodgate as well ..... Real Madrid will more than likely have to compromise and build a balanced attack and defensive team to win the CL again.

Redspider

cardshark202

RE*AC*TOR wrote:

I've watched a lot of Liverpool games this season (being a liverpool fan), and there have been some really really awful games. Not your run of the mill dull games, games that truly shake your ability to continue as a football fan.

True there have been some great, exciting games, and I would consider the semi final second leg with Chelsea to be an exciting game, but I would agree with the summation, that for a neutral, who just wants to enjoy the spectacle of football, Liverpool would currently not be as safe a bet as Man UTD, or probably Arsenal.

The weakest part of the Liverpool team is the frontline, even our best forward (Kuyt) is a workhorse type player, in the mould of Mark Hughes. So when the frontline isn't offering something special, the machine-like grinding of the midfield and back-four assumes control. This can be ok against Barca or such big teams, but against bottom half of the premiership teams, you should be able to "play" your way through them, instead of reducing it to a discipline and physicality competition.

If Gonzalez / Pennant / Bellamy etc had proved more potent, I think this wouldn't have been such an issue. But by and large they haven't offered the type of play they were bought for. Pennant is starting to progress, and has offered some good games of late, Gonzalez has really only shown glimpses, Bellamy though, a proven premiership performer is surely the most bizarre failure, and undoubtedly will depart for pastures new in the summer.

The merry-go-round then will begin again in earnest in the summer, Voronin, a Ukranian striker is already Anfield-bound, but doesn't seem to offer profligacy in front of goal that is needed, another Kuyt methinks. Gonzalez should be given another season to prove himself, but competition for his place will come with the return of Garcia from injury, and likewise Kewell (if he escapes the clearout). Pennant may find himself vying for places with not only Steven Gerrard, but perhaps Daniel Alves. The Sevilla full-back / winger, is a long-term Rafa target. He fulfills not only Benitez's love for multitasking players (ahh Zenden), but also offers a quick, skillful attacking option and scorer of spectacular goals in La Liga.

Whether or not these addition or other unseen additions will provide that consistent creative output for Liverpool remains to be seen. One thing is surely certain, next season Liverpool will be well organised, well disciplined, and well let in few goals. The last time Liverpool were the most exciting team to watch in the Premiership was under the guidance of Roy Evans. Those days are dead, yet fewer and fewer people mourn them since the unexpected success of '05. Should '07 prove to make it 6, I think few Liverpool fans will dwell on the mind-numbingly dull trip to Man City, and perhaps one or two fans, whose team offer weekly shows of pure entertainment, will look somewhat enviously at Liverpool's dull, grinding machine.

Good post. As a Utd fan, I appreciate good football. I never hated pool in the Evans days, but I do now. I used to like chelsea, even under ranieri, but not now. And while I never liked Arsenal as such, I have a great respect for the way they play football. In short, if you play nice attacking football, and are somewhat successful, you have a better chance of winning over new young fans. Ask yourself how many youngsters who have been watching the EPL all season will become pool fans of their own accord? And I doubt that Arsenal fans will be envious of pool, even if they do fluke the CL, cos they know that in one or two years they will have left pool for dead unless Benitez makes some drastic changes. I think the big clubs in particular have a duty to the game and the fans to try and play football in an attractive manner. If every game was as boring as the pool chelsea match, I doubt that there would be many fans left.

astrofool

Barring the CL final to go, Liverpool have had a very similar season as Arsenal did last year.

Zapp Brannigan

cardshark202 wrote:

even if they do fluke the CL,

Dont like that one bit.

Yeah Pool and Chelski play unattractive football, but as has been said it's effective. We saw a perfect example of this in the LFC Barca match. Skill versus determination and determination won.
That said I'd love to see the Liverpool of old again as nothing is better than watching a team cut through their opposition with skill and beautiful movements.

Ardent

People keep banging on about the Liverpool v Chelsea second leg semi final a couple of weeks ago. I heard the same moaning about the final between Milan and Juve a few short years ago.

Sometimes, at this level, you might find a game that won't be packed full of breath-taking chances and end-to-end play. Get over it, that's football.

RE*AC*TOR

cardshark202 wrote:

And I doubt that Arsenal fans will be envious of pool, even if they do fluke the CL, cos they know that in one or two years they will have left pool for dead unless Benitez makes some drastic changes.

While I didn't specifically mention Arsenal - why wouldn't they be envious of CL success? After a relatively mediocre season, by their recent (ie past decade) high standards, you don't think they would have liked if it was them lifting that trophy?

Speaking of the Evans days, at that time, I did wish we had a Roy Keane or an equivalent, I did wish we had defensive consistency. Now, I wish we had more attacking potency. As a fan ultimately you desire to fill the blanks in your teams portfolio of skills.

cardshark202 wrote:

If every game was as boring as the pool chelsea match, I doubt that there would be many fans left.

I thought it was a great match, not necessarily for the beautiful Brazilian-esque type football, but for tension, passion and physicality. I personally can appreciate less "showy" types of football, perhaps its from watching Ireland all these years.

LuckyLloyd

cardshark202 wrote:

Attractive football is the stone cold nuts.

Changed your sig I see.

PiE

I love how certain supporters are so vocal about how football should be played, as if their own club is suddenly the only true bastion of the beautiful game.

Utd won the league, fair play. Chelsea were rocked by injuries to all their star players right through the season, had to accomodate players the manager didn't want, had to endure endless media-circus bullsh*t speculation every day and STILL almost managed to overhaul Utd at the top. Take one of those 3 factors outta the equation and Chelsea would have won the league with their "ugly" football.

PHB

Maybe, maybe not.
I think that whole argument is bull**** to be honest. Every team has injuries, sure United had their first choice back four out for a good few games, they had the strength in depth to get through it though, which is what it's all about.
btw, we were ahead of Chelsea before they got any injuries.

Necronomicon

PiE wrote:

Chelsea were rocked by injuries to all their star players right through the season

And United had no injuries? Gary Neville, Rio Ferdinand, Nemanja Vidic and Patrice Evra all getting injured at the same time springs to mind. I don't remember Chelsea having their entire back four getting injured at the same time. Although, they didn't have a consistent back four because they have no decent right back. Maybe that had more to do with it?

had to accomodate players the manager didn't want

Lol, managers up and down the country are crying rivers for Jose, having two world-class players thrown at him.

shatners basoon

PHB wrote:

Maybe, maybe not.
I think that whole argument is bull**** to be honest.

I think this thread ,is bull**** to be honest, it'd be more productive for us all to be sitting in a circle with the pool supporters on one side and United supporters on the other slapping each other with big fookin fish!

Both liverpool and Chelski can play good football, they've shown in many times throughout the season (reactor summed up pool's inadequacies and chelski have been lacking in width all season due to injuries etc.), however, they're style certainly doesn't involve as much flair as United's or Arsenal's, it involves more effort, heart and guts (the lack of which is the main reason United aren't in the CL final). Despite what some of you may think fans actually appreciate this, opposing fans mightn't but a team's fans surely do.

That being said i can also see all the things which are wrong with liverpool's style of play and the lack of finished product (created more chances than any other team in the PL). This needs to be rectified.

Eirebear

Chucky the tree wrote:

Fergie was a world class player wasnt he?

:rolleyes:

Fergie was actually a decent player in his day mate, hard as nails he was...but then again he didnt do it for an English Team and then Move to Celtic when he was 6 months off retiring so why would anyone in this country care eh?

shatners basoon

He wasn't a world class player though and thats what his point was. Was O'Neill a good player actually?

Eirebear

shatners basoon wrote:

He wasn't a world class player though and thats what his point was. Was O'Neill a good player actually?

again O'Neil was a fairly decent player, not world class true, but a journeyman.

i dont think benitez or morinho were even up to the same level as fergie or O'Neil as a player, thats where valdanos' comments come into it.

Chucky the tree

KdjaCL wrote:

So name one manager who wasnt a pro that manages a team that plays attractive football. Valdano is spot on tbh and the best way to summarise it is if Zidane played for either club what position would he play ? He has only one position but well its fairly obvious why it wouldnt work at certain clubs.


EDIT/// wtf do you think Rafa and jose play attractive football with pool and che?



kdjac

I already asked you to quote the post where i said they both play attractive football, but you didnt. Wanna try and find it?


No? Thought not.

Chucky the tree

PHB wrote:

If United had lost the premiership this year, while it would have really sucked, I could at least say I enjoyed nearly every match.

So why were alot of united fans asking for fergie to get the sack a few seasons ago when they were winning jack ****?

shatners basoon

Because fans are fickle and stupid and the sooner we all realise that, a better place our world will be!

Mitch Connor

Chucky the tree wrote:

So why were alot of united fans asking for fergie to get the sack a few seasons ago when they were winning jack ****?

Well, personally i did think it was time for fergie to step down, but a major component of that was the fact we were playing CRAP football.

Last season, the season before that, and the one previous saw generally crap football from United, trying to play overly patient, overly caustious euro style.

This season has been different, we have played with an attacking style and passion, it has been a throwback to the 90's style that brought us so much success domestically, and eventually in europe. For that reason, i wouldn't have minded not winning the league, and i wouldn't have been calling for fergie to step down in the summer. As long as United try to play football the right way I am generally happy.

shatners basoon

I don't think thats particularily true. United still tried to play good attacking football but were nowhere near as consistent at is as you were this year. This year has been a very good year for you, the style has been the same but its gone up a notch (at least at the best of times). there's a great difference between intent and success.

PHB

So why were alot of united fans asking for fergie to get the sack a few seasons ago when they were winning jack ****?

Cause they were stupid, but also cause Fergie persisted with a 4-5-1, which is about defense. This happened after our defeat to Real Madrid in the CL, and Fergie believed the only way to win the CL was to adopt that approach, and he became obsessed with it.

shatners basoon

PHB wrote:

, but also cause Fergie persisted with a 4-5-1, which is about defense.

no its not, you're best display of the season was with a 451 and it wasn't very defensive. 4-5-1 can be an attacking formation, any bloody formation can be an attacking formation. United's strength is both attacking and defending in numbers. you can do that with any formation.
It was lack of success that turned the fans against fergie, nothing else.

Pepe LeFrits

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote:

You wou;dn't though PHB, look at the Arsenal, play great football, have won nothing, you don't see too many jubilant Arsenal fans on here telling everybody how great it is to watch a team that plays attractive football week in and week out.

Only ultimate success breeds jubilance but without that it doesn't mean it hasn't been great to watch this season.

One of the main consolations that I have from Arsenal not winning anything this season (which, regardless of what style of football a team adapts, happens), is that Arsenal at times this season have been sumptuous and thrilling to watch. I've thoroughly enjoyed watch Arsenal play (most of the time, there have been a few dreadful performances) and have some great memories. On average, money spent on an Arsenal ticket this season has been money well spent, regardless of the results.

PHB

no its not, you're best display of the season was with a 451 and it wasn't very defensive. 4-5-1 can be an attacking formation, any bloody formation can be an attacking formation. United's strength is both attacking and defending in numbers. you can do that with any formation.

While true, that's not how we used to play a 4-5-1.
When playing against Roma, we played a 4-2-3-1, giving an almost free role to the two wingers. If you have to classify it as either a 4-3-3 or a 4-5-1, you'd call it a 4-3-3.

Before hand, Fergie persisted with the 4-5-1 every game, even in the league. It's the reason why lots of United fans hate Quierez, because they blame him for the 4-5-1.

It was lack of success that turned the fans against fergie, nothing else.

While that was part of it, a lot of it was also about the 4-5-1. If United had lost this year, people wouldn't have been annoyed.

leninbenjamin

PHB wrote:

While true, that's not how we used to play a 4-5-1.
When playing against Roma, we played a 4-2-3-1, giving an almost free role to the two wingers. If you have to classify it as either a 4-3-3 or a 4-5-1, you'd call it a 4-3-3.

Before hand, Fergie persisted with the 4-5-1 every game, even in the league. It's the reason why lots of United fans hate Quierez, because they blame him for the 4-5-1.



While that was part of it, a lot of it was also about the 4-5-1. If United had lost this year, people wouldn't have been annoyed.

uh, didn't Chelsea win the league twice playing 4-5-1? it was because Fergy didn't win anything with 4-5-1 that people wanted him to leave, i.e. purely the success factor.

KdjaCL

Chucky the tree wrote:

I already asked you to quote the post where i said they both play attractive football, but you didnt. Wanna try and find it?


No? Thought not.

Umm who said you Someone posted the name of the song they used Pass and move tis the pool groove.

Draupnir and Reactor made 2 excellent posts about Valdanos rant, both are spot on. But the fact remains Valdano tried to get both as manager of Real and possibly will try again.


kdjac

kinaldo

Manc fans should get off their high horse when they slag off what they perceive to be dull football. Some of the dull games involving "United" this season :

Spurs H 1-0
Arsenal H 0-1 (although Arsenal were very good)
Reading A 1-1
Benfica A 0-1
Copenhagen A 1-0
Southend A 1-0
Blackburn A 0-1
Celtic A 1-0
Chelsea H 1-1
West Ham A 1-0
Lille A 1-0
Fulham A 1-2
Liverpool A 0-1
Lille H 1-0
Man City A 0-1
Chelsea A 0-0

I'm sure I missed a few but there's plenty there for the footballing purist Mancs to chew on, and of course they all remember those games well. Their previous two seasons would probably both dwarf that list.

Liverpool may not be the most exciting team but at least under Benitez they've given us two of the greatest finals ever. Even Houllier's team produced a memorable 5-4 Uefa Cup final.

For true excitement from the beautiful game I will always prefer Spanish football. Look at what Getafe did to Barca last night - 5-2 down from the 1st leg and then they crush a full strength Barca 4-0! Valdano will have taken great delight in watching that.

iregk

leninbenjamin wrote:

uh, didn't Chelsea win the league twice playing 4-5-1? it was because Fergy didn't win anything with 4-5-1 that people wanted him to leave, i.e. purely the success factor.

Chelsea actually played an alternating 4-5-1/4-3-3 formation. It was more 4-3-3 than anything else.

Mitch Connor

When United won the league in 2003, we were playing a 451/433 formation

Ruud up top, with Giggs, Scholes and Ole (who nabbed the position off Becks for the last part of the season) behind him.

PHB

Those were games with low scores, not necessarily boring.

Also, the CL games when we thought we had already qualified were basically a team of reserves much like the Chelsea game. Same with the Southend game.

Spurs H 1-0 - Was also a pretty good game.
Arsenal H 0-1 (although Arsenal were very good) - It was an end to end game, in which nobody could finish until the end. It was great football though.
Reading A 1-1 - As I remmeber, United had like 15 shots in that game, and it was really quite good.
Blackburn A 0-1 - As I remember, United really went at Blackburn in the first half, but the dodgy conditions make it tough, then we finally got the breakthrough in the 2nd half.
Chelsea H 1-1 - Was a ****ing fantastic game, as United attacked like hell in the first half, then Chelsea attacked like hell in the 2nd half.
Fulham A 1-2 - Was also a great game, especially the championship winning goal in the last minute through blistering pace and skill.

Games are not determined by how many goals you score, or don't score. It's determined by how you play.
True skill is not just good attacking with bad defending, it's both.

United managed to score 83 goals this season, while concedding 26 goals. Compare this to Chelsea scoring 63 goals while concedding 23, and Liverpool scoring 55 while concedding 25.

Spurs are exciting as hell to watch, hell, they are sixth placed with a goal difference of plus 2. They concede so much, yet attack enough to make it work somewhat. It cause they are committed to attack, which is half the reason their defense is so poor.
Contrast this to Bolton, who play defensive football, and just manage enough goals to get enough points.
United and Arsenal are good versions of Spurs, with better defenders (and attackers)
Liverpool and Chelsea are good versions of Bolton, with better attackers (and defenders)

Dull football isn't about the amount of goals scored, it's about how teams play.

herbieflowers

But as well as that there's been about 20 games where Man U have scored 3 or more goals...but s every football fan knows, it's impossible to play immaculately every single game of the season, to win a title you need to win those that you didn't deserve to win, those that you grinded out withoutactually playing well and those where you demoish the other side (Fulham, Bolton home and away, Blackburn at home etc)

leninbenjamin

iregk wrote:

Chelsea actually played an alternating 4-5-1/4-3-3 formation. It was more 4-3-3 than anything else.

same difference really. its 4 - 3 - 3 when a teams attacking, 4 - 5 - 1 when they are defending. United's tried to be similar in any event.