Jose Mourinho

Pro. F

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Is football a bastion of "class" though? As Strachan said when reacting to the Suarez bite on ITV 'there are no morals in football'. It's competitive sport soaked in money twice over. Mourinho is certainly immature and classless in his behaviour. Wasn't Ferguson though (to a lessor extent mind)? Clough was hardly a gentleman.

Football is definitely not a bastion of class. Football managers tend to be very lacking in class imo and the classy ones are probably the exceptions. Myself, I think it all stems from the awful rules enforcement which encourages immature behaviour, rather than the money or the competitiveness.

Ferguson was undoubtedly lacking in class. An awfully undignified loser at times and a petty and deceitful character too. Clough seems to have been an alcoholic sociopath.

Sanity_Saviour

grumpymunster wrote: »

I am not absolutely certain I picked your post up correctly. I am sort of reading that a little differently now in that you are saying the whole concept of "class" is at best spurious which are my thoughts. If that is the case apologies.

haha I was agreeing with you completely, I was a bit confused with the response myself!

grumpymunster

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

haha I was agreeing with you completely, I was a bit confused with the response myself!

Apologies :o:o:o:o:o

MonsterCookie

If it helps, from thesaurus:

'Class ... having elegance or taste or refinement in manners or dress'

For me, when people talk about class it speaks to refinement in manners. Nobody is perfect and while Jose is probably not the worst, his treatment of some people lacks class if you go by this definition.

Still, his record as a manager is beyond question.

Pro. F

grumpymunster wrote: »

You can of course point out where he blamed the medical team for the DRAW against Swansea. He point was not that but you have possibly never really listened to what the man has said, though that is only my opinion and as such I cannot confirm or deny.

I did see his interview where he tried to foist blame on the medical staff after the draw with Swansea. I didn't remember if it was a draw or a loss. Not that that was important, dropped points against mid-table opposition are normally considered a bad result for a team like Chelsea.

grumpymunster wrote: »

He is of course the only manager ever to blame a referee for a defeat.

Most football managers blame referees for bad results. Most football managers are lacking in class. (Note: my experience of this is almost exclusively with English speaking managers, so I can't really say how it goes in many other parts of the world.)

grumpymunster wrote: »

I think you will find that the word "class" has long been used as a definition of classification of people pre-dating even the 19th century. That is why I prefer the word decent because you can have flaws but still be overall a decent person. Life is rarely black and white.

I think you'll find that the word "decent" has long been used as a way of describing people too and also suffers from mild ambiguity just like the word "class", but hey it's no biggy.

Life is indeed rarely black and white. Just because people have been saying that he lacks class as a manager (you can just think of the word "decency" there if that sounds better for you) doesn't necessarily mean that they think he is utterly detestable in every aspect of his life. Some people probably get carried away and think so, but I'm able to admit that he might be a nice fella in other areas of his life.

grumpymunster wrote: »

Pretend outrage still alive and kicking then good to see really.

Are you by any chance a Daily Mail reader?

grumpymunster

Pro. F wrote: »

I did see his interview where he tried to foist blame on the medical staff after the draw with Swansea. I didn't remember if it was a draw or a loss. Not that that was important, dropped points against mid-table opposition are normally considered a bad result for a team like Chelsea.



Most football managers blame referees for bad results. Most football managers are lacking in class. (Note: my experience of this is almost exclusively with English speaking managers, so I can't really say how it goes in many other parts of the world.)



I think you'll find that the word "decent" has long been used as a way of describing people too and also suffers from mild ambiguity just like the word "class", but hey it's no biggy.

Life is indeed rarely black and white. Just because people have been saying that he lacks class as a manager (you can just think of the word "decency" there if that sounds better for you) doesn't necessarily mean that they think he is utterly detestable in every aspect of his life. Some people probably get carried away and think so, but I'm able to admit that he might be a nice fella in other areas of his life.



Are you by any chance a Daily Mail reader?

Good God no

Pro. F

grumpymunster wrote: »

Good God no

Funny, because you have the Daily Mail mindset down to a tee.

grumpymunster

Pro. F wrote: »

I did see his interview where he tried to foist blame on the medical staff after the draw with Swansea. I didn't remember if it was a draw or a loss. Not that that was important, dropped points against mid-table opposition are normally considered a bad result for a team like Chelsea.



Most football managers blame referees for bad results. Most football managers are lacking in class. (Note: my experience of this is almost exclusively with English speaking managers, so I can't really say how it goes in many other parts of the world.)



I think you'll find that the word "decent" has long been used as a way of describing people too and also suffers from mild ambiguity just like the word "class", but hey it's no biggy.

Life is indeed rarely black and white. Just because people have been saying that he lacks class as a manager (you can just think of the word "decency" there if that sounds better for you) doesn't necessarily mean that they think he is utterly detestable in every aspect of his life. Some people probably get carried away and think so, but I'm able to admit that he might be a nice fella in other areas of his life.



Are you by any chance a Daily Mail reader?

He actually accused the medical team of being naive for bringing the team down to 9 players allowing us more open to a counter attack and thus a loss when we were trying to push for a winner.

The medical team may or may not have been naive (I think they were a bit but that is a purely personal opinion and I can see a strong counter argument as well) but he never blamed them for the draw.

He blamed the ref for the dropped points

Pro. F

grumpymunster wrote: »

He actually accused the medical team of being naive for bringing the team down to 9 players allowing us more open to a counter attack and thus a loss when we were trying to push for a winner.

The medical team may or may not have been naive (I think they were a bit but that is a purely personal opinion and I can see a strong counter argument as well) but he never blamed them for the draw.

He blamed the ref for the dropped points

The fact that he brought them into it at all means that he was exposing them to being blamed for the dropped points. The classy thing to do would have been to sort it in private, if it needed to be sorted, while not mentioning it in public.

symbolic

I thought he showed some class here:

http://www.joe.ie/sport/jose-mourinho-makes-a-fans-dream-come-true/47288

grumpymunster

Pro. F wrote: »

Funny, because you have the Daily Mail mindset down to a tee.

Now now no need for that.

Rarely read the papers anymore full of tosh. If I were to pick up a paper would be the grauniad, not read an Irish paper since the demise of the Tribune.

Don't tell me though let me guess you read either The Express or The Sun

grumpymunster

Pro. F wrote: »

The fact that he brought them into it at all means that he was exposing them to being blamed for the dropped points. The classy thing to do would have been to sort it in private, if it needed to be sorted, while not mentioning it in public.

No the correct thing to do would have been to discuss it in the privacy of his office in a rational manner. You have not really read this thread have you or do facts play no part in your life perhaps.

Pro. F

grumpymunster wrote: »

No the correct thing to do would have been to discuss it in the privacy of his office in a rational manner.

What is your point in this sentence?

grumpymunster wrote: »

You have not really read this thread have you or do facts play no part in your life perhaps.

What are you talking about? What facts am I missing?

grumpymunster

Pro. F wrote: »

What is your point in this sentence?



What are you talking about? What facts am I missing?

Read the thread and figure it out for yourself.

Yawn...................

Andersonisgod

I'll just echo what others have said. I don't think the Chelsea collapse this season is some great mystery, it's what happens to Mourinho's teams at roughly the same point each time. The physical denands of playing for a top club should not be discounted but it's the mental demands that Mourinho places on his players that ends with the whole thing cracking. It's just too much, the siege narrative, the venomous, snakepit that he turns the dressing room into, throwing players under buses (pun recognised) to deflect blame and blaming random, crazy stuff like the club doctors.

All of that and the apparent division between some players in the squad who wanted to play a more expansive game and Mourinho and his squad not really being able to do that has left the team the mess they currently are.

In the short term this is a fantastic manager, one that practically guarantees success, in the long term, in terms of the bigger picture and influence on the game Mourinho is lacking and he knows it.

Pro. F

grumpymunster wrote: »

Read the thread and figure it out for yourself.

Yawn...................

I have read the thread and from reading I could see that you are desperately trying to pretend that Mourinho's behaviour as a manager is something other than immature and classless. You'll quibble about how to define a word that everybody else can understand. You'll pretend that religion, marital status, wealth and education are good measures of decency. You'll decry anybody who disagrees with you as pretending to be outraged. And when all that doesn't work you'll resort to nonsense sentences making spurious points that you refuse to explain.

So much effort to delude yourself.

grumpymunster

Pro. F wrote: »

I have read the thread and from reading I could see that you are desperately trying to pretend that Mourinho's behaviour as a manager is something other than immature and classless. You'll quibble about how to define a word that everybody else can understand. You'll pretend that religion, marital status, wealth and education are good measures of decency. You'll decry anybody who disagrees with you as pretending to be outraged. And when all that doesn't work you'll resort to nonsense sentences making spurious points that you refuse to explain.

So much effort to delude yourself.

Didn't read it very well then did you

grumpymunster

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I'll just echo what others have said. I don't think the Chelsea collapse this season is some great mystery, it's what happens to Mourinho's teams at roughly the same point each time. The physical denands of playing for a top club should not be discounted but it's the mental demands that Mourinho places on his players that ends with the whole thing cracking. It's just too much, the siege narrative, the venomous, snakepit that he turns the dressing room into, throwing players under buses (pun recognised) to deflect blame and blaming random, crazy stuff like the club doctors.

All of that and the apparent division between some players in the squad who wanted to play a more expansive game and Mourinho and his squad not really being able to do that has left the team the mess they currently are.

In the short term this is a fantastic manager, one that practically guarantees success, in the long term, in terms of the bigger picture and influence on the game Mourinho is lacking and he knows it.

It will be very interesting to see what happens this is certainly new ground for him.

One of two things will happen I guess his reputation as a manager will be enhanced or he will crash and burn. But for sure if we don't start getting results soon this season is a write off.

alchemist33

Pro. F wrote: »

The fact that he brought them into it at all means that he was exposing them to being blamed for the dropped points. The classy thing to do would have been to sort it in private, if it needed to be sorted, while not mentioning it in public.

grumpymunster wrote: »

No the correct thing to do would have been to discuss it in the privacy of his office in a rational manner. You have not really read this thread have you or do facts play no part in your life perhaps.

That's the same thing!

grumpymunster

alchemist33 wrote: »

That's the same thing!

Indeed it nearly is the same thing and was discussed to death earlier. I think it was just some more futile prodding to try and get a reaction :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Sanity_Saviour

grumpymunster wrote: »

Read the thread and figure it out for yourself.

Yawn...................

I wouldn't bother, since he seems to have a mind reading device, not sure how you can compete with that!

Pro. F wrote: »

I have read the thread and from reading I could see that you are desperately trying to pretend that Mourinho's behaviour as a manager is something other than immature and classless. You'll quibble about how to define a word that everybody else can understand. You'll pretend that religion, marital status, wealth and education are good measures of decency. You'll decry anybody who disagrees with you as pretending to be outraged. And when all that doesn't work you'll resort to nonsense sentences making spurious points that you refuse to explain.

So much effort to delude yourself.

lol, desperately trying to pretend indeed

Magico Gonzalez

Mourinho is a the most machiavellian manager working today, he does what he needs to win. His embodiment on the pitch is Costa. Despised, adored, brutal, brilliant, rule bending maniac.

I dare say he would not give a watery ****e about his public perception. That's not what they pay him for.

I imagine he is more concerned about the trend of getting the heave ho after 3 years after the pressure cooker environment he creates predictably explodes.

If I was a Chelsea fan, that's what I would care about, not what church he goes to and whether he donates money to a donkey sanctuary and helps old ladies across the road.

Pro. F

Magico Gonzalez wrote: »

Mourinho is a the most machiavellian manager working today, he does what he needs to win. His embodiment on the pitch is Costa. Despised, adored, brutal, brilliant, rule bending maniac.

I dare say he would not give a watery ****e about his public perception. That's not what they pay him for.

I imagine he is more concerned about the trend of getting the heave ho after 3 years after the pressure cooker environment he creates predictably explodes.

If I was a Chelsea fan, that's what I would care about, not what church he goes to and whether he donates money to a donkey sanctuary and helps old ladies across the road.

Actually Machiavelli was all about doing the dastardly stuff out of sight while appearing virtuous in public. It always surprises me that so many managers ignore that advice.

Magico Gonzalez

Pro. F wrote: »

Actually Machiavelli was all about doing the dastardly stuff out of sight while appearing virtuous in public. It always surprises me that so many managers ignore that advice.

Machiavelli didn't live in the 24 hr news media information overload culture, facebook & youtube exposure where not problems he had to worry about.

Pro. F

Magico Gonzalez wrote: »

Machiavelli didn't live in the 24 hr news media information overload culture, facebook & youtube exposure where not problems he had to worry about.

True, but it's not like the media have to look very hard to see Mourinho behaving badly. He brings a lot of the bad press on himself.

Pro. F

grumpymunster wrote: »

Indeed it nearly is the same thing and was discussed to death earlier. I think it was just some more futile prodding to try and get a reaction :rolleyes::rolleyes:

You had no problem discussing it again when I mentioned it in amongst a list of criticisms of his behaviour, but after a few posts you tried to pretend that I was ignoring some facts that you can't be bothered to share but that supposedly support your argument.

Arrogant, egomaniacal, boorish, nasty, winner of 2 CLs...I'm now confused as to whether we are talking about Mourinho, Ferguson or Clough.

They all go down as greats though.

Magico Gonzalez

Deleted User wrote: »

Arrogant, egomaniacal, boorish, nasty, winner of 2 CLs...I'm now confused as to whether we are talking about Mourinho, Ferguson or Clough.

They all go down as greats though.

Much as he represents the very epitome of sporting satan for us Liverpool fans, Ferguson is a cut above the other 2. Clough's achievements have to be framed by the state of the European game at the time, at one stage English clubs had won 7 out of 9 Euro Cups. Mourinho has a long way to go before he's winning leagues like the great sith lord himself. He doesn't have the know how, or personality or whatever it is to renew a team, not just in terms of players but in terms of its personality and attitude. There are still players in that team who think they can take on Jose, Ferguson would have jumped on it and shipped them out or scared the living bejaysus out of them.

gosplan

Gas. Such an ungracious man totally lacking in humility goes around the top leagues picking rows with whoever comes his way.

'Yeah but what do you mean by lacking class'

gosplan

Magico Gonzalez wrote: »

Much as he represents the very epitome of sporting satan for us Liverpool fans, Ferguson is a cut above the other 2. Clough's achievements have to be framed by the state of the European game at the time, at one stage English clubs had won 7 out of 9 Euro Cups. Mourinho has a long way to go before he's winning leagues like the great sith lord himself. He doesn't have the know how, or personality or whatever it is to renew a team, not just in terms of players but in terms of its personality and attitude. There are still players in that team who think they can take on Jose, Ferguson would have jumped on it and shipped them out or scared the living bejaysus out of them.

I'd say Mourinho is amazing at winning leagues. Someone like Wenger is amazing at regenerating teams.

Fergie did both for a long time. Astounding.

His teams also played great football.

Magico Gonzalez

gosplan wrote: »

I'd say Mourinho is amazing at winning leagues. Someone like Wenger is amazing at regenerating teams.

Fergie did both for a long time. Astounding.

His teams also played great football.

Fergie was unique.

* heads off to wash his mouth out *

Magico Gonzalez

Magico Gonzalez wrote: »

Much as he represents the very epitome of sporting satan for us Liverpool fans, Ferguson is a cut above the other 2. Clough's achievements have to be framed by the state of the European game at the time, at one stage English clubs had won 7 out of 9 Euro Cups. Mourinho has a long way to go before he's winning leagues like the great sith lord himself. He doesn't have the know how, or personality or whatever it is to renew a team, not just in terms of players but in terms of its personality and attitude. There are still players in that team who think they can take on Jose, Ferguson would have jumped on it and shipped them out or scared the living bejaysus out of them.

Ferguson did it with one big club.

Mourinho and Clough did it with very unfancied clubs in Porto and Forest.

Mourinho also did it with 2 different clubs.

There are various ways of separating them.

Panthro

Well....this thread is a fcukin unmitigated disaster altogether at this stage.
Who'd have seen that coming.

Think its time the mods did the right thing and lock up this bull shyt.

gosplan

Panthro wrote: »

Well....this thread is a fcukin unmitigated disaster altogether at this stage.
Who'd have seen that coming.

Think its time the mods did the right thing and lock up this bull shyt.

Nah. It's a pretty interesting topic tbh, especially after the weekend rant.

Hard to say whether he'll get it back or not. Also hard to see why it's going so wrong. He argued with half of Madrid but still got second and a CL semi in his last season.

gosplan

I guess for me, the big difference this time around is in how he's building his squad.

The defence really needs freshening up but it seems that Jose feels he has five defenders for four places.

The problem is that he's spent 35 million or so on defenders in the last year and a bit. But none of them are good enough to play for him.

I know the spend is different but I always remember his ability to play with Duff, Robben, Cole and SWP rotating in and out constantly. Maybe the most formidable Chelsea team ever. He just doesn't seem to be able to do squad options these days.

niallo27

Deleted User wrote: »

Ferguson did it with one big club.

Mourinho and Clough did it with very unfancied clubs in Porto and Forest.

Mourinho also did it with 2 different clubs.

There are various ways of separating them.

Ferguson won a European trophy with Aberdeen. A European trophy with Aberdeen. He also broke up the Celtic Rangers stronghold.

niallo27

gosplan wrote: »

I guess for me, the big difference this time around is in how he's building his squad.

The defence really needs freshening up but it seems that Jose feels he has five defenders for four places.

The problem is that he's spent 35 million or so on defenders in the last year and a bit. But none of them are good enough to play for him.

I know the spend is different but I always remember his ability to play with Duff, Robben, Cole and SWP rotating in and out constantly. Maybe the most formidable Chelsea team ever. He just doesn't seem to be able to do squad options these days.

Defenders are poor these days though. Look at the money liverpool have wasted on them. City are the same. Very hard to find a decent one these days.

Billy86

Deleted User wrote: »

Ferguson did it with one big club.

Mourinho and Clough did it with very unfancied clubs in Porto and Forest.

Mourinho also did it with 2 different clubs.

There are various ways of separating them.

Ferguson won the Cup Winners Cup and Super Cup with Aberdeen; outside of Celtics European Cup win in 1967, and Rangers CWC in 1972 no other Scottish Club has ever won a European honour as best I know. In his 8 years with Aberdeen he also won four Scottish Cups and three SPL titles at the end of this season that will have been 30 years ago and still nobody else has managed to break the Old Firm since in the league. 19 of the 29 Scottish Cups since have also been won by the dominant Old Firm. He also won the League Cup in his last season with them, basically winning everything that there is to win in Scottish football, and with a club that was clearly behind its main two rivals in terms of finances and resources. His spell at Aberdeen was nothing short of remarkable.

His first role was in charge of St. Mirren who he got promoted as champions while playing a bunch of kids (average team age of 19, captain was 20... and this is back in the 70s when young players were not often given as much of a chance!). I am pretty sure Alan Hansen would not have been the first to assume you never win anything with kids.

It amazes me how some people seem to think he just won a raffle or something to go and managed Man United.

Billy86

Billy86 wrote: »

Ferguson won the Cup Winners Cup and Super Cup with Aberdeen; outside of Celtics European Cup win in 1967, and Rangers CWC in 1972 no other Scottish Club has ever won a European honour as best I know. In his 8 years with Aberdeen he also won four Scottish Cups and three SPL titles at the end of this season that will have been 30 years ago and still nobody else has managed to break the Old Firm since in the league.

Oh true.

It was an era when Jim McLean took the less fancied Dundee United to a League Title, a European Cup semi final and a UEFA Cup Final.

But, to repeat the point I made, Mourinho won the CL with 2 different clubs, and with a club that was much smaller than ManU. So the point I made stands exactly as I made it.

gosplan

niallo27 wrote: »

Defenders are poor these days though. Look at the money liverpool have wasted on them. City are the same. Very hard to find a decent one these days.

No disrespect but Liverpool's wasted money is not due to some general shortage of defenders.

niallo27

gosplan wrote: »

No disrespect but Liverpool's wasted money is not due to some general shortage of defenders.

None taken but what decent defenders were bought by the top teams in the last few years.

Dirty Dingus McGee

niallo27 wrote: »

None taken but what decent defenders were bought by the top teams in the last few years.

I'd imagine it's much more difficult to look like a good defender these days because teams in general play in a more attacking manner and with more pace than in the past and so defenders are left more exposed than they used to be.

gosplan

niallo27 wrote: »

None taken but what decent defenders were bought by the top teams in the last few years.

Bellerin, Debuchy, Kos, Gabriel, Monreal

JustTheOne

gosplan wrote: »

Bellerin, Debuchy, Kos, Gabriel, Monreal

All class and cost next to nothing compared to other teams.

Gabriel is still new. Arsenal fans have seen what he is capable of.

I reckon said poster won't agree with your picks.

Lukker-

niallo27 wrote: »

None taken but what decent defenders were bought by the top teams in the last few years.

Zouma and Azpilicueta. Shaw and Darmian.
Otamendi, Mangala, Sagna.

niallo27

I realise not every defender bought was ****e but for every good one you could probably name 3 dodgy ones.