egafd.com

Am I the only person who finds Mourinho, deeply, deeply tedious.

Having watched a few of the important games that Chelsea have played in, like today against Liverpool, the game at Man City and the first leg against Atletico, he would appear to have a colossal cheek to slag off West Ham for playing "19th century football".

The worry is that teams will try to ape the Mourinho approach to big games which will result in everyone playing a back six and depend on a mistake or a counter attack to get a victory. I suspect that this approach has already been copied by some international teams which has resulted in recent World Cups being a huge disappointment football-wise.

When you look at his Champions League wins:

Porto - boring as fuck.
Inter - boring as fuck

And alas the Mourinho approach seemed to live on in Chelsea's Champions League win under di Matteo. Against Barcelona in the semis, boring as fuck. In the final against Bayern, boring as fuck. And outclassed against both teams.

As for his jibe at Wenger for being a specialist in failure, Mourinho at his teams in the last nine or ten years has had a net spend of many, many times Wenger's.

Let's hope the boring as fuck, high spending one loses the second leg against Atletico or failing that gets hammered by Real or Bayern and that they don't win the Premier League.

Otherwise, European football may get a whole lot more boring.

Tedious, flashy, annoying.....and he wins trophies for fun....Ben Hogan was a miserable twat, McEnroe moody and bad tempered, Senna an ego maniac but to guys like that winning is everything...

Arginald Valleywater wrote:

> Tedious, flashy, annoying.....and he wins trophies for
> fun....Ben Hogan was a miserable twat, McEnroe moody and bad
> tempered, Senna an ego maniac but to guys like that winning is
> everything...

Winning isn't everything ? winning is the ONLY thing.

Mourinho totally out-thought Rodgers, today.

Chelsea were 5 points behind Liverpool and Liverpool only needed a draw to keep the title in their own hands. Liverpool held all the cards. Think about that.

Liverpool played the game like a 'must win' match when a draw would have sufficed. In pressing Chelsea and winning back the ball early, it made Chelsea sit back and eliminate the space Liverpool needed to play their football. Basically, Mourinho set a trap and Rodgers fell straight into it.

What Rodgers should have done was realise it was Chelsea under pressure for the points, let them have the ball, lull Chelsea forward which would create space and then use the pace of Suarez and Sterling on quick counters. At some point, to keep their title hopes alive, Chelsea would have had to commit men forward. Rodgers and Liverpool's players should have kept this in mind.

The genius was Mourinho's obvious gameplan of time wasting from the very first minute, as if Chelsea weren't the ones that needed the win. It put Liverpool on the front foot, desperate to get the ball and do something with it and gave Chelsea the advantage of doing what they'd obviously been coached to do all week....sit back and close the space. Liverpool played like they needed the win because they'd not won the title in 24 years. Mourinho used that to his advantage.

It wasn't just about Mourinho setting up to defend but about putting the pressure on Liverpool to try and waste energy desperately doing things they didn't need to do. 0-0 would have been a great score for Liverpool and would mean they'd just need to win their next two games to be champions. Like an idiot, Rodgers fell for it and Liverpool played the game like some sort of must win cup final. It was naive from their point of view and very clever from Mourinho's point of view. A bit of a gamble too because if Liverpool had sat back and invited Chelsea on to them, Chelsea would eventually have had the problem of being 5 points off the top and time running out.

And Mourinho's ace up the sleeve was, of course, Mr. Stevie G. He's already gifted Chelsea one title with a backpass to Drogba 3 seasons ago and he's just about done it again! That little miscontrol and slip from Gerrard did make my pants bulge a little bit. Hilarious.

Still, not all is lost. Everton have a good record against Man City and could yet give their neighbours a lifeline.

Nobody could find Mourinho's gameplan boring if they actually understood what he was trying to do. Clearly, Rodgers failed to see it.

Some confusion here.

Is Mourinho an incredibly successful manager? Yes.

Is Mourinho an extremely talented tactician in terms of setting his team up? Yes.

As for "Nobody could find Mourinho's gameplan boring if they actually understood what he was trying to do".

Err yes they could. It's not as if it is the first time Mourinho has done this. It is one of his standard approaches.

Maybe there are those who like a bit of time wasting starting in the first few minutes and a seemingly 6 man back line. Being "clever" or "successful" is not necessarily synonymous with not being boring.

It's boring as fuck.

They won get over it

Err, we know they won it. That isn't the point of the thread.

I can understand some viewers who don't have a deep understanding of the game being bored, though. Not everyone can be a connoisseur.

Well, it is good to see you have got over another of your hissy fits.....

"Fuck DJ. He implied I was some heartless bastard that doesn't give a fuck just because I don't agree with him. He tried to pass it off as nothing and when I show him so he can't deny it he glosses over it in his reply. His heart's in the right place but his own pride and arrogance lets him down. That's tolerable normally, but when he starts sullying my character in that way without feeling the need to apologise he stops being worth my time. There'll be no more exchanges."

...even if you are talking shite!!!
"

Mourinho is a defensive minded football coach. A defensive minded coach/manager tends to play boring football. I don't watch Chelsea much but ask their supporters would they have a boring winning team or a losing attacking team.