MrExcalibur100

We score a goal and some arseholes started chanting Mourinho instantly. Jesus...

BRANAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!

Azpilicueta at LB again. Jesus wept.

Or maybe Jose's tactics particularly in attack were just really shit. As they've been for majority of his reign.

Courtiois Azpi JT Zouma Rahman Ruben Matic Cesc Willian Remy Hazard

Mourinho's next club? I'm sticking my neck out and going with Valencia.

Cech was the back up keeper to Courtious and was adequately replaced by Begovic, a top class keeper. Falcao was Mourinho's signing, probably done more to do his agent a favour than to help us on the pitch considering how shocking he was at Utd and the Copa America. You know, it's funny. Mourinho normally gets taunted as a chequebook manager. He was given an opportunity to prove otherwise this season and look what happened.

Klopp had all his best players taken from him by the bullies from Bavaria. No parallels to be drawn there, if that's what you're trying to do. Mourinho kept all his best players and was given Pedro in addition. A near world class player. Difference.

Heh, you know what I meant. Roman is the most passionate and dedicated owner in the world by far. That man is 100% Chelsea.

Roman gave the fans what they were clamouring for, you can't blame him if it didn't turn out as planned. Maybe now, he and the board will start making decisions based on rationale and nothing more. You want a manager who has a reputation of being a winner, whose teams play good football and who has a history of trusting young players. If that's what you want, then it's that or nothing. We can't make any compromises anymore and hoping the shoe eventually fits. We had a chance to tick all those boxes with Klopp, but failed to act swiftly.

I hear what you're saying, but don't be silly, now. What Roman has given to this club simply can't be expressed in words.

There are a sea of comments on Mourinho's departure right now, but there is a splendid two way piece that I recommend everybody should take a moment to read. It really does an amazing job in detailing Mourinho's managerial career until now. It's a MUST read for all Jose fans and critics: Part 1 https://www.theblizzard.co.uk/articles/the-devils-party/ Part 2 https://www.theblizzard.co.uk/articles/the-devils-party-part-2/

An good read by Jonathan Wilson for those interested. https://www.theblizzard.co.uk/articles/the-devils-party/

I've seen a lot of brilliant counter-attacking play, not attacking play per se. Mourinho's Madrid were the best counter-attacking team in the world. Chelsea 2004/2005 were a fantastic counter-attacking team. Those teams scored a tremendous amount of goals.But Mourinho didn't install any attacking philosophy in those teams. So it wasn't that surprising to see those teams fall apart so quickly. Madrid went from having the record for goals in La Liga in one season to being a 3rd place, average Madrid side. We went from this super effecient, physically powerful, counter-attacking machine to long balls to Drogba. Over-reliance on Drogba. T

When Liverpool could hardly defend under Rodgers but were scoring a lot of goals, was that the player's job or Rodgers job? Everyone could recognize Rodgers struggled to coach organised attacks and many 'Pool fans suggested he hire a defensive coach. With Mourinho, it's a different standard. With him, the blinders are on. Choose what you want to believe. I believe what I see and I'm fine with that.

Why, thank you.

Holland can say what he wants. It's all words if you can't show if Mourinho and his management staff can't show it on the pitch. We're the most turgid team to watch despite having a collection of the best attackers in the Premier league. So then what the hell are they "working on" exactly? Maybe he's just not good enough at "working on" it and that's one of the reasons he's no longer the manager.

And what does "movement" have to do with being able to build an attacking philosophy? Not much. Movement isn't going to break down a team playing low block for 90 minutes. And besides, movement is but only one facet of building an attacking philosophy like for instance, keeping the defensive line in building an organised defense.

Mourinho's philosophy has always struck me as: "I've already shown you guys how to stop "x" team from hurting us. Go out and beat "x" team. After all, we have more quality than they do and that eventually will tell" It was instructive to listen to Mourinho wax lyrical about all the preparation he had done to ensure our players knew about all the means Leicester could score and win, as he's done several times this season. But was what alarming about Chelsea was not Leicester's goals against us, but how clueless we looked in their final 3rd till they scored! Mourinho hardly ever speaks about that side, aside from some basic stuff here and there. "I told him to make some movement" How can players make movements when there is no space? Or when no one is attacking space? Or when the passing is so slow and ponderous? That's training ground stuff and we have to ask why we hardly ever saw it in almost 3 years.

Very good question, but not that difficult to answer.The point is Mourinho's "all" wasn't good enough, mate. He didn't equip the players with all they needed to succeed. This is how I see Jose Mourinho : Mourinho: Good (1) Very good at organizing a defense though slightly overrated in this regard. (2) One of the absolute best at identifying the weaknesses in the opposition. His attention to detail is unbelievable. Mourinho: Bad (1) Creating attacking concepts and strategies. (2) Lack of tactical flexibility. A bit of a one trick pony (3) Barely ever rotates his preferred team/winning team, and then proceeds to run this group of players to the ground. You're not going to survive at a top club for long with that. And there's only so much the players can do, really. These guys can't teach themselves how to run an attack, the same way they can't teach themselves how to set up defensively. It's the coach that applies his learned skills in training. This is basically what a playing philosophy entails. Another poster has already highlighted the fact that our players are exerting themselves out there. When I watch Chelsea, I don't see a group of players not trying, I see a poorly coached group of players. Mourinho has been at the football club for almost 3 years now. Chelsea have only played decent football for maybe 3 months max. 4 if I'm being generous. Why? Why, despite having some of the best attacking players in the Premier league? Why was Mourinho unable to maintain our style of play in the 1st half of last season? Why do his teams over rely on individuals in attack to make a difference as opposed to a core group of players. Hazard at Chelsea II. Drogba at Chelsea towards the end. Ronaldo at Madrid towards the end. Mourinho can question the passion of the players all that he wants, but he knows deep down he was the one who failed them, not the other way around. He promised "evolution", something he knew he couldn't give us, and failed woefully at it. He should have owned up to his tactical defieciencies instead of questioning their quality, their commitment, their lifestyle, their passion and everything else under the sun.

But he's in the position to coach attacking strategies in training. The fact is that as a coach, Mourinho has shown little evidence he knows how to do that. And this again was his main downfall.

Now watch the real Chelsea emerge. Not instantly, but slowly but surely. Hopefully, we get an interim manager that can coach attacking football.

Thank god you're not the one making decisions at the club!

Cundy, who is extremely close to the players, just said on TalkSport that Mourinho deserves to be sacked. He's bang on.

That's why the board sacked him. Because they don't want us to get relegated. We don't even need the January market that badly. The poison has been removed from the locker room. We will stay up now for sure.