Atletico Madrid v Chelsea, UCL SF, k/o 7:45pm UTV

weldoninhio

BarcodeMuncher wrote: »

People seem to overlook the fact he praised West Ham and claimed he would do the same in their position, but ahh shure

I think "in their position" is the telling part. Mourinhio had a squad that they spent hundreds of millions on. Atletico would have been in west hams position last night when you compare budgets. Not Chelsea.

Nerdlingr

grumpymunster wrote: »

Did you actually read or listen to TSHO's post match interview V west Ham, because I really don't think you did.

Yep, I've read it.
Did you?
Mourinho is the master of back handed compliments. He accepted West Ham's position but was critical of it.
"19th century football", "cheating", "only one team wants to play" "All very basic" "ten defenders in the box" High praise indeeed eh? Ah but sure it must be a Media witch hunt!!

He even has a pop at them because they've a great squad, a strong bench and should be able to play better. Everthing he criticises them of he can apply to himself and his own Chelsea team.

I'm sure what he said about the referees after last weeks was taken out of context too no? He's a sarcastic hypocrite. But he wins football games, and thats all that matters to Chelsea fans.

The Volt

The Volt wrote: »

Mourinho factor in CL to me screams 0-0 here tonight

Made the match unbearable to have this backed at 17/2. Think I'll back goals tonight

MaroonAndGreen

Nerdlingr wrote: »

Yep, I've read it.
Did you?
Mourinho is the master of back handed compliments. He accepted West Ham's position but was critical of it.
"19th century football", "cheating", "only one team wants to play" "All very basic" "ten defenders in the box" High praise indeeed eh? Ah but sure it must be a Media witch hunt!!

He even has a pop at them because they've a great squad, a strong bench and should be able to play better. Everthing he criticises them of he can apply to himself and his own Chelsea team.

I'm sure what he said about the referees after last weeks was taken out of context too no? He's a sarcastic hypocrite. But he wins football games, and thats all that matters to Chelsea fans.

Covieniently left this bit out didnt you.

''They need the points but because they need points, to come here and not play and do it the way they did . . . is it acceptable? Maybe yes.
I cannot be too critical because if I was in this position, I don't know, would I do the same? Maybe I would.''

Yeah clearly a hypocrite when he said in the same interview he'd do the same. What more do ye want?

And in relation to the ''19th century football'' he said: ''This is football from the 19th century. Too bad. What do I mean about 19th-century football? Pretending injuries.''

Pretending injuries, not the defensive and positional shape as many in here would try and have you believe, so so obvious 99% of the people in here havent even listened to the interview!!!

Bohrio

MaroonAndGreen wrote: »

''They need the points but because they need points, to come here and not play and do it the way they did . . . is it acceptable? Maybe yes.
I cannot be too critical because if I was in this position, I don't know, would I do the same? Maybe I would.''

I think he was referring to "if he was last in the league and with a team like this" so basically If I had a small ****...y team I would do the same

Nerdlingr

MaroonAndGreen wrote: »

Covieniently left this bit out didnt you.

''They need the points but because they need points, to come here and not play and do it the way they did . . . is it acceptable? Maybe yes.
I cannot be too critical because if I was in this position, I don't know, would I do the same? Maybe I would.''

Yeah clearly a hypocrite when he said in the same interview he'd do the same. What more do ye want?

And in relation to the ''19th century football'' he said: ''This is football from the 19th century. Too bad. What do I mean about 19th-century football? Pretending injuries.''

Pretending injuries, not the defensive and positional shape as many in here would try and have you believe, so so obvious 99% of the people in here havent even listened to the interview!!!

He didnt say he would do the same thing, he said maybe he would. Not the same thing at all. Big difference. People need to read the transcipts properly or clean out their ears. And I think you'll find he does talk about the team shape, you conveniently left that bit out eh?

"Pretending injuries; cheating... I don't know if that's the right word; the goalkeeper taking time not after minute 70 but in the first minute; 10 defenders in the box, kicking long balls to nobody , defenders not putting a foot outside the box. All very basic. But I'm nobody to criticise. They are happy. They get a point. I hope the point means something for them at the end of the season."

GavRedKing

Nerdlingr wrote: »

But he wins football games, and thats all that matters to Chelsea fans.

Ya, thats all that matters in football, full stop.

Bo**ocks to your tiki taka or possesion game or 100mph attacks, if ya cant win games and trophies its all pretty pointless, especially to the biggest clubs.

I like to be entertained but I'd sacrifice that for success every day of the week, no problem.

Bohrio

GavRedKing wrote: »

Ya, thats all that matters in football, full stop.

Bo**ocks to your tiki taka or possesion game or 100mph attacks, if ya cant win games and trophies its all pretty pointless, especially to the biggest clubs.

Game styles like tiki taka are hard to harvest. It takes time to get to that confidence level, this is why when I see a team playing like that I tend to like it better than a team who holds back with 10 players in their area. And it is not only holding back is not even trying to create counter attacks

Talking about tiki taka, how many years do you think it took for Barcelona to reach the level the reached during their dominance up to 2 years ago? It was hard work, and an idea or will to define a style no matter what. I style that Johan tried to implement and implemented to a point 20 years ago and that Guardiola finished. It doesnt happen in 1 year, if you want results in 1 year then you need someone like Jose, effective, not nice to watch winning at all cost showman.

Personally I rather lose playing a nice football than hold back and play like a small team just because I know (or think) that I am not good enough to win the game unless I park the bus? Sorry I dont believe for a second that Chelsea wouldnt be good enough to win any team out there playing them without parking the bus, I understand when I small team does it but Chelsea? Come on... but again, developing a style like that doesnt happen in 6 months, it happens after years and years of playing, winning and most likely loosing.

I like to be entertained but I'd sacrifice that for success every day of the week, no problem.

That seems to be the difference with Chelsea fans. For instance, Real Madrid fans will not tolerate a coach who doesnt make the team win and play nice football, they even sacked Capello because his football was boring... (although they also sacked Del Bosque a bit later as well... :S)

Turtwig

Heynckes Bayern showed how you can be defensive, intense and counter attacking and far far more effective. To suggest Chelsea cannot play similar to Bayern is kind of bizarre given the quality of both squads. Yes Bayern have the stronger squad but there's not such a gulf in class that Chelsea couldn't emulate that approach. Mourinho may win the champions league but the notion that he's somehow playing Chelsea to their strengths is beyond me. He's playing Chelsea to extremely limited restrictions.

Sanity_Saviour

Bohrio wrote: »

Game styles like tiki taka are hard to harvest. It takes time to get to that confidence level, this is why when I see a team playing like that I tend to like it better than a team who holds back with 10 players in their area. And it is not only holding back is not even trying to create counter attacks

Talking about tiki taka, how many years do you think it took for Barcelona to reach the level the reached during their dominance up to 2 years ago? It was hard work, and an idea or will to define a style no matter what. I style that Johan tried to implement and implemented to a point 20 years ago and that Guardiola finished. It doesnt happen in 1 year, if you want results in 1 year then you need someone like Jose, effective, not nice to watch winning at all cost showman.

Personally I rather lose playing a nice football than hold back and play like a small team just because I know (or think) that I am not good enough to win the game unless I park the bus? Sorry I dont believe for a second that Chelsea wouldnt be good enough to win any team out there playing them without parking the bus, I understand when I small team does it but Chelsea? Come on... but again, developing a style like that doesnt happen in 6 months, it happens after years and years of playing, winning and most likely loosing.



That seems to be the difference with Chelsea fans. For instance, Real Madrid fans will not tolerate a coach who doesnt make the team win and play nice football, they even sacked Capello because his football was boring... (although they also sacked Del Bosque a bit later as well... :S)

So what I'm picturing here is little old Bohrio aged 9 playing for his local team, Bohrio United. They're 8-0 down but, by golly, are they playing some lovely football, tika-taka football all round and they've had almost all of the ball. The final whistle goes and he's beaming from ear to ear because they played better football.

Can you honestly say you'd prefer your own team to lose playing pretty football than get results? Chelsea won a Champions League playing shíte football but the name on the trophy isn't going to say that

Panthro

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

So what I'm picturing here is little old Bohrio aged 9 playing for his local team, Bohrio United. They're 8-0 down but, by golly, are they playing some lovely football, tika-taka football all round and they've had almost all of the ball. The final whistle goes and he's beaming from ear to ear because they played better football.

Can you honestly say you'd prefer your own team to lose playing pretty football than get results? Chelsea won a Champions League playing shíte football but the name on the trophy isn't going to say that

While his fans in the stands roared "Jose Boh-ri-oooo!"

greendom

NIMAN wrote: »

Well its a sad state of affairs that one of the worlds top teams, who have spent vast money on transfers, and whose wage bill would be among the highest in the world, have to resort to playing that brand of football.

Especially against a team with a fraction of Chelsea's resources.

There is no shame when a team like Wigan or an international team like Greece play in that manner. Chelsea though, should be able to out-play virtually every side they play yet they choose to play such negative football. Very disappointing for the average football fan

Meglamonia

The hate and jealousy in this thread is ridiculous towards Chelsea.

Everyone having a go at them is only sick their team isn't in it.

If it were United who produced that display last night their fans would be jizzing in their pants oh what a tactical performance, I don't care once we're winning.

Seems people just love to hate Jose/Chelsea, which a Chelsea fan is a good thing because you know your doing good

Panthro

Meglamonia wrote: »

The hate and jealousy in this thread is ridiculous towards Chelsea.

Everyone having a go at them is only sick their team isn't in it.

If it were United who produced that display last night their fans would be jizzing in their pants oh what a tactical performance, I don't care once we're winning.

Seems people just love to hate Jose/Chelsea, which a Chelsea fan is a good thing because you know your doing good

This thread has given us a few chuckles alright!:D
Say nothin'!

Bohrio

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

So what I'm picturing here is little old Bohrio aged 9 playing for his local team, Bohrio United. They're 8-0 down but, by golly, are they playing some lovely football, tika-taka football all round and they've had almost all of the ball. The final whistle goes and he's beaming from ear to ear because they played better football.

Can you honestly say you'd prefer your own team to lose playing pretty football than get results? Chelsea won a Champions League playing shíte football but the name on the trophy isn't going to say that

No, when I was 8 I was raised to play for fun not to win.

So were you the 8 year old kid who would do anything to win even if it meant cheating or kicking the s**** out of everyone? You werent told play for fun, you know that, in school, nowadays when 8 years old play games they dont keep score anymore just to avoid the "winning at all cost" attitude? Guess this is not common in London

I can honestly say I do, and have for the most of my life, my team(s) never won much... then they did, and then it was over, until next time... and I am very happy about that, it was all worth it IMO

MaroonAndGreen

Bohrio wrote: »

No, when I was 8 I was raised to play for fun not to win.

So were you the 8 year old kid who would do anything to win even if it meant cheating or kicking the s**** out of everyone? You werent told play for fun, you know that, in school, nowadays when 8 years old play games they dont keep score anymore just to avoid the "winning at all cost" attitude? Guess this is not common in London

I can honestly say I do, and I have for the most of my life my team(s) never won much... then they did, and then it ws over, until next time... and I am very happy about that.

''Show me a good loser, and ill show you a loser'' - Vince Lombardi.

greendom

Meglamonia wrote: »

The hate and jealousy in this thread is ridiculous towards Chelsea.

Everyone having a go at them is only sick their team isn't in it.

If it were United who produced that display last night their fans would be jizzing in their pants oh what a tactical performance, I don't care once we're winning.

Seems people just love to hate Jose/Chelsea, which a Chelsea fan is a good thing because you know your doing good

No hate for Chelsea or Jose here - only for the way he chooses to play football.

Bohrio

MaroonAndGreen wrote: »

''Show me a good loser, and ill show you a loser'' - Vince Lombardi.

“Winning isn't everything--but wanting to win is.”
― Vince Lombardi

And by definition a loser is always a loser, you either lose or win, not sure what that quote was about... and I didnt say I lose I said that I have principles and I dont follow the win at all costs... etc

MaroonAndGreen

Bohrio wrote: »

“Winning isn't everything--but wanting to win is.”
― Vince Lombardi

And by definition a loser is always a loser, you either lose or win, not sure what that quote was about... and I didnt say I lose I said that I have principles and I dont follow the win at all costs... etc

You said losing would be okay as long as you played good football

Bohrio

MaroonAndGreen wrote: »

You said losing would be okay as long as you played good football

Yes, I said that I rather lose and follow my principles than win at all cost. Some people here will win at all cost, I guess that means, cheating, bribing, playing dirty etc... I am not like that

You are stating the obvious, so there you go

''Show me a good loser, and ill show you a loser'' - Vince Lombardi.

''Show me a good winner, and ill show you a winner'' - Bohrio.

''Show me a good steak, and ill show you a steakr'' - Bohrio.

''Show me a good peanut, and ill show you a peanut'' - Bohrio.

I have more if you like?

grumpymunster

Bohrio wrote: »

Yes, I said that I rather lose and follow my principles than win at all cost. Some people here will win at all cost, I guess that means, cheating, bribing, playing dirty etc... I am not like that

You are stating the obvious, so there you go

''Show me a good loser, and ill show you a loser'' - Vince Lombardi.

''Show me a good winner, and ill show you a winner'' - Bohrio.

''Show me a good steak, and ill show you a steakr'' - Bohrio.

''Show me a good peanut, and ill show you a peanut'' - Bohrio.

I have more if you like?

A steakr is not and never will be a steak

GavRedKing

Bohrio wrote: »

Yes, I said that I rather lose and follow my principles than win at all cost. Some people here will win at all cost, I guess that means, cheating, bribing, playing dirty etc... I am not like that

None of that went on last night by either side.

Bohrio

GavRedKing wrote: »

None of that went on last night by either side.

I know, didnt say it did, I am just replying to the example given, it is an the extreme implicit in the saying "winning at all cost" meaning that there is nothing a person will do to win, "at all cost", "no matter what" etc...

This is obviously an extreme example but it is what the phrase means.

Everyone has principles, and that phrase is applied accordingly to ones belief but that is not what it means

weldoninhio

GavRedKing wrote: »

None of that went on last night by either side.

I'd class time wasting as cheating. A lot of that went on last night.

NIMAN

Compare that game tonight to the Chelsea game. Like night and day.
Only one reason for that: Chelsea.

Atleti v barca was a great, end to end game full of chances on both sides.
Atleti v Chelsea, BORING

GavRedKing

NIMAN wrote: »

Compare that game tonight to the Chelsea game. Like night and day.
Only one reason for that: Chelsea.

Atleti v barca was a great, end to end game full of chances on both sides.
Atleti v Chelsea, BORING

Im glad you watched it, your input is important to us here at Chelsea.

Panthro

NIMAN wrote: »

Compare that game tonight to the Chelsea game. Like night and day.
Only one reason for that: Chelsea.

Atleti v barca was a great, end to end game full of chances on both sides.
Atleti v Chelsea, BORING

Atleti v barca...Barca lost.
Atleti v Chelsea..Chelsea didn't.

Why? Because they played to their strengths and not to the needs of the purist neutral spectator.

BarcodeMuncher

Bohrio wrote: »

I know, didnt say it did, I am just replying to the example given, it is an the extreme implicit in the saying "winning at all cost" meaning that there is nothing a person will do to win, "at all cost", "no matter what" etc...

This is obviously an extreme example but it is what the phrase means.

Everyone has principles, and that phrase is applied accordingly to ones belief but that is not what it means

I will admit I prefer good fast flowing football, I would love if Chelsea played like Arsenal and won all round them, but to be honest what I really love is my team winning, if that doesn't have the gloss of some teams fair enough. I can understand the point regarding money investing not equating to the appeal of the football on display and do love when the team goes for a game. But what I want at the end of a season of any brand of football is to see my team lift the trophies. That night at Munich shows even the most defensive performance can offer the most thrills, I enjoyed that match more than any amount of possession and attacking flair.

Panthro

BarcodeMuncher wrote: »

I will admit I prefer good fast flowing football, I would love if Chelsea played like Arsenal and won all round them, but to be honest what I really love is my team winning, if that doesn't have the gloss of some teams fair enough. I can understand the point regarding money investing not equating to the appeal of the football on display and do love when the team goes for a game. But what I want at the end of a season of any brand of football is to see my team lift the trophies. That night at Munich shows even the most defensive performance can offer the most thrills, I enjoyed that match more than any amount of possession and attacking flair.

That bloody Robben penalty.
Honestly, if I didn't eat my own hands that night I never will!:D

Sanity_Saviour

Bohrio wrote: »

Yes, I said that I rather lose and follow my principles than win at all cost. Some people here will win at all cost, I guess that means, cheating, bribing, playing dirty etc... I am not like that

You are stating the obvious, so there you go

''Show me a good loser, and ill show you a loser'' - Vince Lombardi.

''Show me a good winner, and ill show you a winner'' - Bohrio.

''Show me a good steak, and ill show you a steakr'' - Bohrio.

''Show me a good peanut, and ill show you a peanut'' - Bohrio.

I have more if you like?

''Show me a good winner, and ill show you a winner'' -
-> Bohrio
--> Michael Scott

Backstreet Moyes

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I'm obviously a complex individual who loves a perfectly executed possession based game as much as a perfectly set up and executed defensive shape.

Were you not the fella who criticised AC Milan for their perfectly executed plan when they beat Barca 2-0 last season. You talked about it being negative and anti football. Yet when Chelsea do it you love it, that just doesn't make much sense. Maybe i am mixing you up with somebody else i presume i must be otherwise it would make no sense.