Barclays Premier League 13/14 Thread Part 'x'

[Duty281]

First topic message reminder :

Superb by Mourinho. When are Liverpool at their most dangerous? The first thirty minutes of games; that is, generally, when they tear teams apart.

Not allowed to do that today, though, even against a very weakened Chelsea side. Liverpool didn't get a clear chance all game, and one costly, costly error gave Chelsea what they needed.

That and frustration, as Liverpool rapidly ran out of ideas and invention.

Back in City's hands now - another title won on goal difference?

[AberdeenSteve]

Doesn't say a lot for Rodgers tactics that he couldn't set his team up to overcome something so basic.

      

[Crimey]

Well we'll see what is said the next time West Ham earn a 1-0 win.

[sportform]

Gerrards individual performance in the Cl final eclipses any single Scholes game.

However I am a huge fan of Scholes. For me England's best midfielder in recent times. That is why he wound me up so much giving up on England.

Gerrard was so good as a midfielder in that match that Liverpool got overrun in the first half by Milan and Kaka and were 0-3 down.

It wasn't until Gerrard was move up top in a 3-4-3 that Liverpool got back into the game. When they got level he was moved to right back.

Gerrard is the king of the 'Hollywood ball'. The media love to hail those passes but ignore the other 90% that go nowhere.

Gerrard 'world class'? Pull the over one.

[Hammersmith harrier]

Crimey, to call Scholes 'a cog' is an insult to the man.

For me, he was the heartbeat of United's midfield for the dominant period, a constant in a team of characters. You're never going to stand out when you're in a team with likes of Beckham, Giggs, Ronaldo, Rooney etc. because they're the ones that command the headlines and the attention.

Scholes did the business without having to be an extrovert.

I just find it strange that this was very rarely said until the tail end of his career.

I also said this in the context of a comparison to Gerrard's role in the Liverpool sides he has been a part of. I think Gerrard in Scholes' place would equal the same result, but Scholes for Gerrard wouldn't. I think that is fair enough. Doesn't diminish the accomplishments of either. Neither have had the opportunity to showcase their skills in the environment of the other so it is obviously speculation anyway.

Gerrard instead of Scholes would have severely weakened our midfield and I would go as far as saying I doubt we'd currently have more league title wins that Liverpool.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Remember when Didi Hamann said Citeh would be a better side without Yaya and that he was overrated earlier in the season?

Yeah that went well

[Crimey]

Crimey, to call Scholes 'a cog' is an insult to the man.

For me, he was the heartbeat of United's midfield for the dominant period, a constant in a team of characters. You're never going to stand out when you're in a team with likes of Beckham, Giggs, Ronaldo, Rooney etc. because they're the ones that command the headlines and the attention.

Scholes did the business without having to be an extrovert.

I just find it strange that this was very rarely said until the tail end of his career.

I also said this in the context of a comparison to Gerrard's role in the Liverpool sides he has been a part of. I think Gerrard in Scholes' place would equal the same result, but Scholes for Gerrard wouldn't. I think that is fair enough. Doesn't diminish the accomplishments of either. Neither have had the opportunity to showcase their skills in the environment of the other so it is obviously speculation anyway.

Gerrard instead of Scholes would have severely weakened our midfield and I would go as far as saying I doubt we'd currently have more league title wins that Liverpool.

I think you are underrating both Gerrard and the quality of the rest of the Manchester United sides.

[GSC]

Boo hoo. It's so hard potentially only finishing 2nd. United fans have reinforced how spoilt fans of big teams are

[Crimey]

Remember when Didi Hamann said Citeh would be a better side without Yaya and that he was overrated earlier in the season?

Yeah that went well

To be fair, his apathy last season was one of their major reasons their season was so poor. He is a fantastic, almost unplayable player when he wants to be, but I do think he, unfortunately, does become lazy. He has been exceptional this year though.

[AberdeenSteve]

Moving away from the ripping Liverpool a new one.

Yaya Toure is a f****** animal. The swear word is necessary.

[Hammersmith harrier]

Scholes could pull off the hollywood passes like Gerrard and with far greater success but he excelled at keeping the ball moving something Gerrard cannot do, that was the key to our success. Scholes dictated the pace of the game depending on the circumstance and allowed the attacking players to do their thing, the scooped pass against Milan to set up Rooney was both majestic and genius.

[Hero]

Gerrard can tackle though (though in counterbalance he can also slip on his arse and look on in despair as his lifelong dream disappears)

[Crimey]

Scholes could pull off the hollywood passes like Gerrard and with far greater success but he excelled at keeping the ball moving something Gerrard cannot do, that was the key to our success. Scholes dictated the pace of the game depending on the circumstance and allowed the attacking players to do their thing, the scooped pass against Milan to set up Rooney was both majestic and genius.

That is exactly what Gerrard has been doing this year. For most of Gerrard's career it wasn't his job to do that, he played either behind the forward or on the right of midfield where he could come up with something special, score goals and get assists. When Scholes played similar positions he definitely wasn't as good as Gerrard was, now Gerrard has been moving deeper he hasn't scaled the heights of Scholes but in the short time he has been playing there he has been no slouch, probably the best player of his kind in the Premier League this year.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

Well we'll see what is said the next time West Ham earn a 1-0 win.

Grow up Crimey

[Crimey]

Gerrard can tackle though (though in counterbalance he can also slip on his arse and look on in despair as his lifelong dream disappears)

Another good point. Scholes is perhaps a more specialised player, while Gerrard, for much of his career, has been an all-rounder, exceptional at pretty much everything. He could pass, shoot, tackle, head the ball, read the game and obviously cross. In a hypothetical first eleven of one player, I would rather have a team of Gerrard's than a team of Scholes'.

[Crimey]

Well we'll see what is said the next time West Ham earn a 1-0 win.

Grow up Crimey

I just think it will be interesting to see what is said about the tactics of Allardyce, which while not the same as Mourinho's today are usually lambasted despite being relatively successful and with worse players.

[Hammersmith harrier]

Scholes could pull off the hollywood passes like Gerrard and with far greater success but he excelled at keeping the ball moving something Gerrard cannot do, that was the key to our success. Scholes dictated the pace of the game depending on the circumstance and allowed the attacking players to do their thing, the scooped pass against Milan to set up Rooney was both majestic and genius.

That is exactly what Gerrard has been doing this year. For most of Gerrard's career it wasn't his job to do that, he played either behind the forward or on the right of midfield where he could come up with something special, score goals and get assists. When Scholes played similar positions he definitely wasn't as good as Gerrard was, now Gerrard has been moving deeper he hasn't scaled the heights of Scholes but in the short time he has been playing there he has been no slouch, probably the best player of his kind in the Premier League this year.

Scholes has never played on the right of midfield (somebody by the name of David Beckham played there) and he was in behind the striker for about one season right at the beginning of his career, he was a dictator who burst forward when his legs allowed him to. In his later career he dictated slightly deeper without the bursts forward but he's always been a one or two touch player.

The fact Gerrard plays deeper doesn't mean he does the same role, he tries to play far too many extravagant passes that don't come off.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

Depends which Allardyce tactics. I have no problem with going away to a team on form, closing down the spaces they do danger in and picking how and when to go in attack. Who had the better chances today? Who deserved to win that game?

I can talk you all the way through the cons and pros of each manager and why I find the comparison lazy.

Most of all, that was a weakened team. And he managed them as a whole team. I don't think Rodgers could do what Mourinho did today.

I'm not sure when football snobbery began so strongly in this country, but not every part of football is how many passes I can make in front of line of defenders then moan cos they won't let me through.

[Crimey]

Scholes could pull off the hollywood passes like Gerrard and with far greater success but he excelled at keeping the ball moving something Gerrard cannot do, that was the key to our success. Scholes dictated the pace of the game depending on the circumstance and allowed the attacking players to do their thing, the scooped pass against Milan to set up Rooney was both majestic and genius.

That is exactly what Gerrard has been doing this year. For most of Gerrard's career it wasn't his job to do that, he played either behind the forward or on the right of midfield where he could come up with something special, score goals and get assists. When Scholes played similar positions he definitely wasn't as good as Gerrard was, now Gerrard has been moving deeper he hasn't scaled the heights of Scholes but in the short time he has been playing there he has been no slouch, probably the best player of his kind in the Premier League this year.

Scholes has never played on the right of midfield (somebody by the name of David Beckham played there) and he was in behind the striker for about one season right at the beginning of his career, he was a dictator who burst forward when his legs allowed him to. In his later career he dictated slightly deeper without the bursts forward but he's always been a one or two touch player.

The fact Gerrard plays deeper doesn't mean he does the same role, he tries to play far too many extravagant passes that don't come off.

Yet he has 86.1% pass completion rate....Clearly not that many.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

[Hero]

Scholes could pull off the hollywood passes like Gerrard and with far greater success but he excelled at keeping the ball moving something Gerrard cannot do, that was the key to our success. Scholes dictated the pace of the game depending on the circumstance and allowed the attacking players to do their thing, the scooped pass against Milan to set up Rooney was both majestic and genius.

That is exactly what Gerrard has been doing this year. For most of Gerrard's career it wasn't his job to do that, he played either behind the forward or on the right of midfield where he could come up with something special, score goals and get assists. When Scholes played similar positions he definitely wasn't as good as Gerrard was, now Gerrard has been moving deeper he hasn't scaled the heights of Scholes but in the short time he has been playing there he has been no slouch, probably the best player of his kind in the Premier League this year.

Scholes has never played on the right of midfield (somebody by the name of David Beckham played there) and he was in behind the striker for about one season right at the beginning of his career, he was a dictator who burst forward when his legs allowed him to. In his later career he dictated slightly deeper without the bursts forward but he's always been a one or two touch player.

The fact Gerrard plays deeper doesn't mean he does the same role, he tries to play far too many extravagant passes that don't come off.

Yet he has 86.1% pass completion rate....Clearly not that many.

What percent was the pass to Ba?   

[AberdeenSteve]

With all this talk of legendary English central midfield players. Why has nobody mentioned Tom Cleverley? Trevor Sinclair? Jermaine Jenas?

[Hammersmith harrier]

Scholes could pull off the hollywood passes like Gerrard and with far greater success but he excelled at keeping the ball moving something Gerrard cannot do, that was the key to our success. Scholes dictated the pace of the game depending on the circumstance and allowed the attacking players to do their thing, the scooped pass against Milan to set up Rooney was both majestic and genius.

That is exactly what Gerrard has been doing this year. For most of Gerrard's career it wasn't his job to do that, he played either behind the forward or on the right of midfield where he could come up with something special, score goals and get assists. When Scholes played similar positions he definitely wasn't as good as Gerrard was, now Gerrard has been moving deeper he hasn't scaled the heights of Scholes but in the short time he has been playing there he has been no slouch, probably the best player of his kind in the Premier League this year.

Scholes has never played on the right of midfield (somebody by the name of David Beckham played there) and he was in behind the striker for about one season right at the beginning of his career, he was a dictator who burst forward when his legs allowed him to. In his later career he dictated slightly deeper without the bursts forward but he's always been a one or two touch player.

The fact Gerrard plays deeper doesn't mean he does the same role, he tries to play far too many extravagant passes that don't come off.

Yet he has 86.1% pass completion rate....Clearly not that many.

Come back to me when it's in the mid 90's Crimey and not lower than Tom Cleverley's.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

With all this talk of legendary English central midfield players. Why has nobody mentioned Tom Cleverley? Trevor Sinclair? Jermaine Jenas?

SCOTT PARKER

[Hammersmith harrier]

With all this talk of legendary English central midfield players. Why has nobody mentioned Tom Cleverley? Trevor Sinclair? Jermaine Jenas?

SCOTT PARKER

Also has a better pass completion rate than Gerrard.

[Crimey]

Depends which Allardyce tactics. I have no problem with going away to a team on form, closing down the spaces they do danger in and picking how and when to go in attack. Who had the better chances today? Who deserved to win that game?

I can talk you all the way through the cons and pros of each manager and why I find the comparison lazy.

Most of all, that was a weakened team. And he managed them as a whole team. I don't think Rodgers could do what Mourinho did today.

I'm not sure when football snobbery began so strongly in this country, but not every part of football is how many passes I can make in front of line of defenders then moan cos they won't let me through.

I totally agree with your last sentence, and have said so over the past few years. I am in full agreement that there are many ways to play football and there is no such thing as the right way of playing. However what I don't agree with is that Mourinho pulled off some tactical masterclass today, in my opinion he put a lot of players behind the ball, there was basically no space there for them to close down anyway. It would have been very interesting to see what would have happened had Gerrard not slipped. I don't think Mourinho would have allowed the Chelsea side to come out of their shell and I imagine it would have ended 0-0, a result that would have done very little for Chelsea.

The weakened team was not weak though. It wasn't his first choice eleven but there was seriously top players in there, Matic is probably one of the best midfielders in the Premier League, two of the best full backs in the league, Ivanovic is fantastic, Schurrle has done well when he has played and Schwarzer, while not playing much this year, was (in my opinion) one of the best goalkeepers in the league last year. Kalas had to be protected and Salah and Ba aren't the best, but Liverpool's side was also weakened, Henderson and Sturridge out, two key players in a small squad. 

Your annoyance with football snobbery is akin to mine with football hypocrisy, I think there is a difference of views amongst fans when a lower-table side uses similar tactics, which is viewed as boring and anti-football when a top side does it, it is called a masterclass. I do think you can provide a masterclass in tactics defensively, but I don't believe that is what Mourinho did today.

[mystiroakey]

With all this talk of legendary English central midfield players. Why has nobody mentioned Tom Cleverley? Trevor Sinclair? Jermaine Jenas?

SCOTT PARKER

ok seriously no one was close to Gaza.

[The Special Juan]

Mourinho's the greatest defensive manager I've ever seen (that's a genuine compliment, not a backhanded one). The way he sets up his team and ensures every single player has a role is pretty marvellous.

However, it's very, very boring. It's one of the main reasons I wouldn't have him at United; football, for the fans, is about enjoyment (as someone correctly said). I couldn't pay to watch that every week. Liverpool have been a revelation this season and I hope they go on and win it still.

[Crimey]

Scholes could pull off the hollywood passes like Gerrard and with far greater success but he excelled at keeping the ball moving something Gerrard cannot do, that was the key to our success. Scholes dictated the pace of the game depending on the circumstance and allowed the attacking players to do their thing, the scooped pass against Milan to set up Rooney was both majestic and genius.

That is exactly what Gerrard has been doing this year. For most of Gerrard's career it wasn't his job to do that, he played either behind the forward or on the right of midfield where he could come up with something special, score goals and get assists. When Scholes played similar positions he definitely wasn't as good as Gerrard was, now Gerrard has been moving deeper he hasn't scaled the heights of Scholes but in the short time he has been playing there he has been no slouch, probably the best player of his kind in the Premier League this year.

Scholes has never played on the right of midfield (somebody by the name of David Beckham played there) and he was in behind the striker for about one season right at the beginning of his career, he was a dictator who burst forward when his legs allowed him to. In his later career he dictated slightly deeper without the bursts forward but he's always been a one or two touch player.

The fact Gerrard plays deeper doesn't mean he does the same role, he tries to play far too many extravagant passes that don't come off.

Yet he has 86.1% pass completion rate....Clearly not that many.

Come back to me when it's in the mid 90's Crimey and not lower than Tom Cleverley's.

I wasn't suggesting his pass-rate was exceptional, just that at 86.1% I'm not sure he can be playing too many extravagant passes that don't come off, it would be much lower if he was. Cleverley also has no assists. I would rather Gerrard played five balls that did nothing for one that led to a goal, then a hundred passes that do nothing.

[mystiroakey]

milner loves a link up. so underated and under played its criminal.

[Duty281]

With all this talk of legendary English central midfield players. Why has nobody mentioned Tom Cleverley? Trevor Sinclair? Jermaine Jenas?

SCOTT PARKER

ok seriously no one was close to Gaza.

My grandfather always used to rave about Bryan Robson, and the night he dominated Maradona.

[Crimey]

Mourinho's the greatest defensive manager I've ever seen (that's a genuine compliment, not a backhanded one).  The way he sets up his team and ensures every single player has a role is pretty marvellous.  

However, it's very, very boring.  It's one of the main reasons I wouldn't have him at United; football, for the fans, is about enjoyment (as someone correctly said).  I couldn't pay to watch that every week.  Liverpool have been a revelation this season and I hope they go on and win it still.

I do think he can set his teams up fantastically and defend very well, creating a very good tactical display. However I also think he lacks imagination and has regressed as a manager. He's been given the kind of players most managers can only dream of, and yet very rarely uses that attacking flair effectively. I understand that he's only after results, but I think when you stand him up against the best managers of all time, he will fall short because of his lack of adventure.

[Guest]

With all this talk of legendary English central midfield players. Why has nobody mentioned Tom Cleverley? Trevor Sinclair? Jermaine Jenas?

SCOTT PARKER

ok seriously no one was close to Gaza.

My grandfather always used to rave about Bryan Robson, and the night he dominated Maradona.

Fantastic player was Robson. Injury prone but a great driving midfielder.

Your uncle Freeky also raves about the man.

[Crimey]

milner loves a link up. so underated and under played its criminal.

Glad he's getting some first-team football close to the World Cup. Would rather he went than Lampard or Cleverley.

[AberdeenSteve]

If we are talking about Mourinho and his defensive tactics. Surely the night of his Champions League success with Inter Milan at Barcelona is similar to the way he plays now? He was hailed a genius then, and he still is a football genius.

He knows how to shutdown teams, surely that is the way football works? Make sure the other team doesn't score and win? I know people will argue that football should be played more freely and openly but at the end of the day, the stats and the trophies are what is remembered. Mourinho has loads of them.

[Hammersmith harrier]

Gerrards passing and composure on the ball isn't good enough to play the deep lying role effectively against better teams, I hate stats but 86% for a supposed great passer is pretty average.

Those who excel in the role like Scholes, Pirlo, Xavi, Alonso don't give the ball away because they don't try too much, this could be down to Rodgers tactics but if he wants Gerrard to play deep long term he will get exposed.

[mystiroakey]

This is a horrible game...

well played ince though

[Dolphin Ziggler]

Depends which Allardyce tactics. I have no problem with going away to a team on form, closing down the spaces they do danger in and picking how and when to go in attack. Who had the better chances today? Who deserved to win that game?

I can talk you all the way through the cons and pros of each manager and why I find the comparison lazy.

Most of all, that was a weakened team. And he managed them as a whole team. I don't think Rodgers could do what Mourinho did today.

I'm not sure when football snobbery began so strongly in this country, but not every part of football is how many passes I can make in front of line of defenders then moan cos they won't let me through.

I totally agree with your last sentence, and have said so over the past few years. I am in full agreement that there are many ways to play football and there is no such thing as the right way of playing. However what I don't agree with is that Mourinho pulled off some tactical masterclass today, in my opinion he put a lot of players behind the ball, there was basically no space there for them to close down anyway. It would have been very interesting to see what would have happened had Gerrard not slipped. I don't think Mourinho would have allowed the Chelsea side to come out of their shell and I imagine it would have ended 0-0, a result that would have done very little for Chelsea.

The weakened team was not weak though. It wasn't his first choice eleven but there was seriously top players in there, Matic is probably one of the best midfielders in the Premier League, two of the best full backs in the league, Ivanovic is fantastic, Schurrle has done well when he has played and Schwarzer, while not playing much this year, was (in my opinion) one of the best goalkeepers in the league last year. Kalas had to be protected and Salah and Ba aren't the best, but Liverpool's side was also weakened, Henderson and Sturridge out, two key players in a small squad. 

Your annoyance with football snobbery is akin to mine with football hypocrisy, I think there is a difference of views amongst fans when a lower-table side uses similar tactics, which is viewed as boring and anti-football when a top side does it, it is called a masterclass. I do think you can provide a masterclass in tactics defensively, but I don't believe that is what Mourinho did today.

If that was the first time Mourinho had done that, maybe I'd agree. But he was won plenty of games and ties under big pressure using very good defensive work. I say it again, Rodgers couldn't get a team doing that. You don't just sit a load of men back and see what happens, you have to choose the right passes, choose the right distance to close, the right time to let runners move and take new runners. which spaces need closing. You then have to react to every decision the attacking side makes.

On top of that, you have to counter. And Chelsea did. Again, the best chances were Chelsea's.

On the weakened side. Terry, Cahill, Cech, Hazard, Willian (for the majority), Oscar all notable absentees. All would have started. Ivanovic playing a rare central defence appearance, a Premier League debutant, the majority squad players not starters. It was a notably weakened side.

The difference, of course, is intent and context. I was fine with us going to Chelsea and defending like our lives depended on it because we needed the points, we weren't on form, we couldn't take them on play by play. I am not comfortable with doing that at home or against any team outside the top 4/5.

Equally, it is dull, like Chelsea were midweek, when the intent isn't there to even counter. And Chelsea did today. Matic carried the ball wonderfully out, Schurrle and Salah spread the wings, Ba ran in behind or used strength, and fatty go up to support attacks. Mourinho knew as well as we all do that Chelsea had to win that game to be in with a chance of winning the league.

I'd imagine much of the plan was to prey on the fact Liverpool start strong but do seem weaker in the second half. We'll never know because they didnt need to.

[skyeman]

Too much is made of a Players  total league titles, when comparing players. It admittedly shows staying power, and an extended period as a Class player, but its not like comparing majors or or grand slams, which a player wins all on his lonesome.

But you can't compare them, one is a team sport and the other is an individual sport. Chalk and cheese.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

Bryan Robson   my first ever favourite player

[The Special Juan]

Mourinho's the greatest defensive manager I've ever seen (that's a genuine compliment, not a backhanded one).  The way he sets up his team and ensures every single player has a role is pretty marvellous.  

However, it's very, very boring.  It's one of the main reasons I wouldn't have him at United; football, for the fans, is about enjoyment (as someone correctly said).  I couldn't pay to watch that every week.  Liverpool have been a revelation this season and I hope they go on and win it still.

I do think he can set his teams up fantastically and defend very well, creating a very good tactical display. However I also think he lacks imagination and has regressed as a manager. He's been given the kind of players most managers can only dream of, and yet very rarely uses that attacking flair effectively. I understand that he's only after results, but I think when you stand him up against the best managers of all time, he will fall short because of his lack of adventure.

True. Chelsea used to hammer other teams on occasion (think Villa and Wigan). They don't really do that anymore.

[The Special Juan]

If we are talking about Mourinho and his defensive tactics. Surely the night of his Champions League success with Inter Milan at Barcelona is similar to the way he plays now? He was hailed a genius then, and he still is a football genius.

He knows how to shutdown teams, surely that is the way football works? Make sure the other team doesn't score and win? I know people will argue that football should be played more freely and openly but at the end of the day, the stats and the trophies are what is remembered. Mourinho has loads of them.

IMO that Inter match was a fluke. Pep mugged him several times in the Clasico's with his Barca team.

[Guest]

Mourinho's the greatest defensive manager I've ever seen (that's a genuine compliment, not a backhanded one).  The way he sets up his team and ensures every single player has a role is pretty marvellous.  

However, it's very, very boring.  It's one of the main reasons I wouldn't have him at United; football, for the fans, is about enjoyment (as someone correctly said).  I couldn't pay to watch that every week.  Liverpool have been a revelation this season and I hope they go on and win it still.

I do think he can set his teams up fantastically and defend very well, creating a very good tactical display. However I also think he lacks imagination and has regressed as a manager. He's been given the kind of players most managers can only dream of, and yet very rarely uses that attacking flair effectively. I understand that he's only after results, but I think when you stand him up against the best managers of all time, he will fall short because of his lack of adventure.

True.  Chelsea used to hammer other teams on occasion (think Villa and Wigan).  They don't really do that anymore.

See Arsenal for details.

[The Special Juan]

I also think Liverpool were shown up for their lack of squad depth today. They have something like 13 good players, the rest are either youth players or plain terrible (Aspas). Unless they invest in the summer and buy 5 squad players, European football will take its toll and I'd be very surprised to see them back in the top 4 next season.

[kingraf]

To be fair Arsenal lost 6-3, 6-0, 5-1 against the big four away... which looks like massacre even in tennis terms.

[AberdeenSteve]

[The Special Juan]

Mourinho's the greatest defensive manager I've ever seen (that's a genuine compliment, not a backhanded one).  The way he sets up his team and ensures every single player has a role is pretty marvellous.  

However, it's very, very boring.  It's one of the main reasons I wouldn't have him at United; football, for the fans, is about enjoyment (as someone correctly said).  I couldn't pay to watch that every week.  Liverpool have been a revelation this season and I hope they go on and win it still.

I do think he can set his teams up fantastically and defend very well, creating a very good tactical display. However I also think he lacks imagination and has regressed as a manager. He's been given the kind of players most managers can only dream of, and yet very rarely uses that attacking flair effectively. I understand that he's only after results, but I think when you stand him up against the best managers of all time, he will fall short because of his lack of adventure.

True.  Chelsea used to hammer other teams on occasion (think Villa and Wigan).  They don't really do that anymore.

See Arsenal for details.

I forgot about that. Mourinho had something there to prove though, didn't he?

[The Special Juan]

To be fair Arsenal lost 6-3, 6-0, 5-1 against the big four away... which looks like massacre even in tennis terms.

Big 4 6-3, 6-0, 5-1 ret. Arsenal. Love it.

[CFCNick]

Mourinho's the greatest defensive manager I've ever seen (that's a genuine compliment, not a backhanded one).  The way he sets up his team and ensures every single player has a role is pretty marvellous.  

However, it's very, very boring.  It's one of the main reasons I wouldn't have him at United; football, for the fans, is about enjoyment (as someone correctly said).  I couldn't pay to watch that every week.  Liverpool have been a revelation this season and I hope they go on and win it still.

We don't play like that every week though.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

I also think Liverpool were shown up for their lack of squad depth today.  They have something like 13 good players, the rest are either youth players or plain terrible (Aspas).  Unless they invest in the summer and buy 5 squad players, European football will take its toll and I'd be very surprised to see them back in the top 4 next season.

They'll buy players. Rodgers can be questioned in the transfer market slightly, but he won't be in the bargain bin as much this summer.

[Crimey]

I also think Liverpool were shown up for their lack of squad depth today.  They have something like 13 good players, the rest are either youth players or plain terrible (Aspas).  Unless they invest in the summer and buy 5 squad players, European football will take its toll and I'd be very surprised to see them back in the top 4 next season.

I agree that squad depth is a problem. But I do think that Suso, Borini and Assaidi who are all coming off loans, while not exceptional players are decent squad players to beef up the attacking depth which has been the main issue. I think you bring in two or three players then I think a good go at the top four isn't out of the question. Never going to have the squad depth of Chelsea or City but I would be happy with 18 players that can do a job, think with the loans returning and a couple of others brought in we would have that.

[Sponsored content]