Juan Mata

[Stingray 9,441]

It may or may not be directed towards me. About stars and the research i quoted - it is not a theory. It is actually a paradigm often used by evidence based sport directors in football. In Belgium Anderlecht and Bruges do rely on that research for example. In the case of Club Bruges I even contributed myself.

Just in case you were having your postmodern jab at me.

Cheers.

huh?

I didn't even read this thing you mentioned you said... was it in this thread?

What I meant is the whole 'I wouldn't trade him for this, this and that player' (when we were discussing the other guys in other teams) because 1) it won't happen 2) if one of those guys come here, it doesn't mean they can't play by his side...

I really have no idea what you're talking about, but I'll go back in the thread and try to see. Either way, I can't opinion because I didn't read.... if you want I can give you an opinion on that once I read said post

My bad. I think you can apologize me a bit thinking it - after our recent pub clash.

[Barbara 15,149]

I do agree on this. Mata may not be Messi or Ronaldo like .... The proof of the pudding is in the eating and he delivered brilliantly last season. We can be a powerhouse with Mata in the team. I think this whole point is being polarized beyond reason.

If Mata ever gets 'replaced' by someone else to 'better' the team, it will happen automatically - step by step.

No need to fuss. Also: having one star in a team isn't a sure way to succes. It can be your downfall as well.

This one I read - sort of. I hate this expression 'The proof of the pudding is in the eating' so I admit I stopped reading the moment I read it

I'm picky like that, but I have a few pet peeves, and that expression is one of them, so I sort of predicted the kind of thing that was to come and didn't continue reading (a mistake as you didn't carry a point I though you would).

I do agree with the bold part though.

Exactly. Btw recent research into motivation (Deci and Ryan- on selfdetermination) has indicated that the global team performance drops when you single out - explicitly or implicitly - someone as a 'star'. I quite oppose that very idea actually.

I also believe that part of Mou's succes is exactly this! A hardcore refusal to treat anyone like a star - only focus on the group performance.

Well - food for a future article. I promise.

this one I suppose is the one you meant and I totally missed it. It was probably while I was writing one of the responses...

I sort of disagree about Mou. The way you see him handling Ronaldo and Sneijder in both RM and Inter makes it obvious to me they were treated somewhat differently - but not to a fault. Which is why he was so successful in both. I think he doesn't favor any players because of their reputation over others, and I think he demands the same hard work and effort from all his players and but when they start to play under their usual, he assumes a position I personally defend. With Ronaldo I remember clearly when he stayed a few matches under-performing (some matches not even to his standards, he played 2 or 3 matches horribly to any standards) and people questioned if he was going to be sacked like Sergio Ramos and Casillas had (especially because those two are considered gods to Marca and most of Madrid's press), and Mourinho refused to do it - within reason imo. The same happened with Wesley and Mourinho reacted the same way. Both examples prove that he knows some players are special and even if they don't perform as expected for a few weeks, he shouldn't move them to the bench because you never know when they will explode again and win you the match. Everyone else - except Ozil imo (Mourinho might think the same of him, whereas I don't) - that went through consecutive under-performances were sacked for a streak. In some cases long streaks others just a few matches.

In RM it was so clear that everyone in the team had defending responsibilities - even Karim and Pipita - but Ronaldo didn't have any and a lot of people called Wesley lazy while he was under Mourinho for a similar situation - although he demanded more from Wesley defensively than he demanded from Cris). So I think Mourinho recognizes especial players and may give them more freedom than he does to the rest of the team. I can see him doing the same with Hazard - depending on the formation he uses and he's more patient - others would call complacent - through their downs moments. I can see him doing this with Hazard as well, although maybe not at first - as you can't compare the moment Eden is in his career to the moments Wesley and Cris were when under Mourinho. Both were on their peaks while I feel like Eden is far from it (he's brilliant currently, but I think he'll be much better).

The 'sort of' in my first statement is that I agree that Mourinho is big in team performance, where he demands from every player to do their job and that normally includes teamwork and tackling for everyone (except this one guy because he doesn't need 11 players defending), but he has no problem with setting up teams that favor his best stars.

So I might be interested in reading whatever that research is. I think there are cases of both instances and there's a difference between a team where there's only one brilliant player and the rest is average and a team where there are a few stars, but one is the biggest of all. A star can't carry a bad team, but a special player can carry a team filled with stars (I've seen this so many times, it's what happens to most teams that have those special guys, because they end up leading the rest of the team to perform above their usual as well). I have no doubts Cris has been carrying RM - despite the stellar squad - for a while now and if he leaves, they're fucked. The same can't be said about Barcelona because when you have Iniesta and Xavi on their best, there's no way even Messi can carry a team...

I don't feel like Mata carried us. As I said in a previous post, Cech and Drogba were essential in the CL title and last season all players had ups and downs so I don't think one of them can be responsible for the team success in finishing 3rd and winning EL. It was more like a collective effort (for the good part) and a collective failure to capitalize (capitalize in keeping the start in EPL where we were 6 or 8 points ahead of ManUtd in the beginning and of course, at least going through the group stage of UCL).

[Stingray 9,441]

This one I read - sort of. I hate this expression 'The proof of the pudding is in the eating' so I admit I stopped reading the moment I read it

I'm picky like that, but I have a few pet peeves, and that expression is one of them

Well, that's nice. Skip the parts you don't like and then create your own story as you go along. Aah postmodernism at its finest!

I sort of disagree about Mou. The way you see him handling Ronaldo and Sneijder in both RM and Inter makes it obvious to me they were treated somewhat differently - but not to a fault. Which is why he was so successful in both. I think he doesn't favor any players because of their reputation over others, and I think he demands the same hard work and effort from all his players.

Actually Mou said that litterally in the video on his coaching philosophy.

In this part you seem to equate having a 'star' with giving him a preferential treatment. I agree on this definition. We should NOT have a star in term of special prtection, treatment ..... This was my point exactly. I do think you had a different deinition when agreeing with some on here before. This makes it diffult to debate actually if you change what you mean as you go along. Not a stab, mind you! Just an observation.

I don't feel like Mata carried us. As I said in a previous post, Cech and Drogba were essential in the CL title and last season all players had ups and downs so I don't think one of them can be responsible for the team success in finishing 3rd and winning EL. It was more like a collective effort (for the good part) and a collective failure to capitalize (capitalize in keeping the start in EPL where we were 6 or 8 points ahead of ManUtd in the beginning and of course, at least going through the group stage of UCL).

I take it here you see a star of a team as someone that carries the team? Ok. But that is a star in a fans perspective, not IN the team.

This is also where I very much disagree. Mata was crucial in our last campaign. This is not a personal opinion but a fact. He contributed most. In figures, stats, recognition, .... every thing. He was only surpassed a bit by Hazard at the end. Which is no suprise after such a long season on the one hand and Hazard picking up steam on the other hand.

[Barbara 15,149]

Well, that's nice. Skip the parts you don't like and then create your own story as you go along. Aah postmodernism at its finest!

Actually Mou said that litterally in the video on his coaching philosophy.

In this part you seem to equate having a 'star' with giving him a preferential treatment. I agree on this definition. We should NOT have a star in term of special prtection, treatment ..... This was my point exactly. I do think you had a different deinition when agreeing with some on here before. This makes it diffult to debate actually if you change what you mean as you go along. Not a stab, mind you! Just an observation.

I take it here you see a star of a team as someone that carries the team? Ok. But that is a star in a fans perspective, not IN the team.

This is also where I very much disagree. Mata was crucial in our last campaign. This is not a personal opinion but a fact. He contributed most. In figures, stats, recognition, .... every thing. He was only surpassed a bit by Hazard at the end. Which is no suprise after such a long season on the one hand and Hazard picking up steam on the other hand.

I honestly can't understand what you meant in the bold...

I meant that if a guy is special he will receive special treatment under Mourinho, as Ronaldo and Sneijder did... the most special in our team imo is Hazard and when he's ready (close to his peak and during his peak) I have no doubts he will have different treatment from Mourinho in the both instances I explained exhaustively in my post: defensive obligations and patience/complacency on bad performances' streaks. How does this go against whatever I said previously, I fail to understand, but I'd love for you to clarify. In another thread though as I think this is going off topic in a JM thread. Just realized that JM stands both for Mata and Mou

And please, do you expect Mourinho to give all his secrets in his vids about coaching?

as for the last part that does belong here:

Stats can help a lot, but they don't define everything in sports like football. There are guys with better stats than Cris - guys that are really bad, not only in comparison, but in general. Reason why I rarely use them. But even if I use them, you can't ignore Hazard's stats, so it means it was a collective effort - more from certain players than the rest, but still it wasn't one guy making us win the matches - especially because I consider last season more of a failure than a success for reasons I could also discuss in another thread.

That said Mata contributed a lot, I never took it away from him. I just said he didn't carry the team. Meaning that if we didn't have him we would have done terribly... I don't think that's the case. He was MIA in some matches - some of them important matches - as well as Eden has been in some, our defense in others, etc, etc.

This is the exaggeration that comes in that I roll my eyes at (the exaggeration, not you or your opinion). Just because I said I don't believe he carried the team, it doesn't mean he wasn't the biggest contributor.

[Stingray 9,441]

So you do think preferential treatment is ok for stars. The vid was about Mou teaching his philosophy to other trainers ( it is repeated in articles as well) the core concept is NO ego's, no preferential treatment (which does NOT mean you cant have a personalised way of handling individuals) the group always comes first.

Yes i believe that was genuine.

[robsblubot 3,595]

Mata can be a brilliant attacking midfielder and at the same time not help at all when defending. And it's not like he could do it if the manager asked him to, he just doesn't have the tools for the job (not even work rate is there). That's a deficiency in Mata's game, and that's the difference between him and say Iniesta, or before them a Zidane who are/were far more complete players.

Now, like you all say, it's up to the Manager to find out how to accommodate his players with their virtues as well as their deficiencies.

However, I am NOT optimistic we can, or Mourinho can, accommodate both Hazard and Mata (plus a striker) because they are both pretty fucking horrible at defending. Yes, they are amazing attacking players, but that doesn't help us much when we don't have the football--say when we play City.

It's wishful thinking when ppl say that if we get this or that player to replace Mikel, all our midfield problems will be solved. I'm not a fan of mIkel because I just don't see much quality in his game, especially the so important finesse (the final/decisive touch). But replacing him won't solve the lack of defending, in numbers, that we sometimes suffer from.

[BleedsBlue 1,549]

10m+Mata or Luiz for Rooney really made me LOL.Its so cute to see United trying to play mind games with Jose.

[Barbara 15,149]

So you do think preferential treatment is ok for stars. The vid was about Mou teaching his philosophy to other trainers ( it is repeated in articles as well) the core concept is NO ego's, no preferential treatment (which does NOT mean you cant have a personalised way of handling individuals) the group always comes first. Yes i believe that was genuine.

I believe part of that is genuine (what he says in those vids).

To look back at how he handled those two players in both teams and how he treated the rest, only a blind can't see there was a degree of special treatment. It is a fact, not an opinion... go see how many times both of them didn't start under Mourinho - except for physical issues. Take a lot at Ronaldo's tackling stats or better: watch their matches.

He won't ignore if they stop to work hard, if they're late to training, if they miss training, if they deliberately don't put effort in their matches. Of course he won't ignore that stuff, but sub par performances? Pffft... He overlooked both in ways he didn't with the rest of the team. And I can say that because I am a fan to both teams and I followed both teams closely in the years Mourinho was there - except RM last year because I was really sad about what they did to Mou there and the constant attacking on him bothered me and it was making me dislike RM and I won't allow a player, a coach or whoever to come between my love for the team, so I took a step back, ignored the media and Perez for the most part and watched less matches. It was saddening to watch what happened there and it's even more saddening to keep seeing what certain players are doing to that club. They fail to realize the club is bigger than them. They think the club is them currently and I can't with this shit, so I'm sort of ignoring some of the ridiculous stuff coming from Madrid now. But I'm sure about the special treatment both Wesley and Ronaldo received under Mourinho in the instances I talked about. So not only I'm telling you that he treats a certain type of players differently, but that I support that in the way he does that.

I also remember how he dealt with Balottelli (far from how he handled Cris and Wesley). I had so many laughs on those two while they were on Inter. funny - and tragic - stuff. Good times.

10m+Mata or Luiz for Rooney really made me LOL.Its so cute to see United trying to play mind games with Jose.

That was laughable especially for Mata. How does Rooney is worthy Mata + 10m? How? But then again, I'm far from being a Rooney fan.

[Stingray 9,441]

So you say yes but no. Warm but cold, you mean one thing and then switch again ... How fickle. Sorry im too old for that i guess. Lets agree to disagree.

[Barbara 15,149]

So you say yes but no. Warm but cold, you mean one thing and then switch again ... How fickle. Sorry im too old for that i guess. Lets agree to disagree.

I guess you're tired, not old

I never stated preferential treatment about everything. I kept repeating, putting in Italic and bold what I really meant. I said he treated Ronaldo and Wesley different from the rest when it came to what he demanded from them defensively and how he overlooked the slumps they had. I was so clear in all posts about that...

Then I made a point - because it seemed necessary to make you understand - about the things Mourinho didn't treat them or anyone else differently: commitment, effort, hard work, etc...

now if you can't separate those two instances of different treatment, well, mate, when you're back from your holiday we talk again, but I repeatedly (and tiredly) said the same thing over and over and over.

here it is:

I sort of disagree about Mou. The way you see him handling Ronaldo and Sneijder in both RM and Inter makes it obvious to me they were treated somewhat differently - but not to a fault. Which is why he was so successful in both. I think he doesn't favor any players because of their reputation over others, and I think he demands the same hard work and effort from all his players and but when they start to play under their usual, he assumes a position I personally defend.

Both examples prove that he knows some players are special and even if they don't perform as expected for a few weeks, he shouldn't move them to the bench because you never know when they will explode again and win you the match. Everyone else - except Ozil imo (Mourinho might think the same of him, whereas I don't) - that went through consecutive under-performances were sacked for a streak. In some cases long streaks others just a few matches.

In RM it was so clear that everyone in the team had defending responsibilities - even Karim and Pipita - but Ronaldo didn't have any and a lot of people called Wesley lazy while he was under Mourinho for a similar situation - although he demanded more from Wesley defensively than he demanded from Cris). So I think Mourinho recognizes especial players and may give them more freedom than he does to the rest of the team.

I meant that if a guy is special he will receive special treatment under Mourinho, as Ronaldo and Sneijder did... the most special in our team imo is Hazard and when he's ready (close to his peak and during his peak) I have no doubts he will have different treatment from Mourinho in the both instances I explained exhaustively in my post: defensive obligations and patience/complacency on bad performances' streaks.

To look back at how he handled those two players in both teams and how he treated the rest, only a blind can't see there was a degree of special treatment. It is a fact, not an opinion... go see how many times both of them didn't start under Mourinho - except for physical issues. Take a lot at Ronaldo's tackling stats or better: watch their matches.

He won't ignore if they stop to work hard, if they're late to training, if they miss training, if they deliberately don't put effort in their matches. Of course he won't ignore that stuff, but sub par performances? Pffft... He overlooked both in ways he didn't with the rest of the team.

In all those parts I talked about the same thing, but somehow you seem to see me talking about different things. But then again you thought I was taking jabs on you earlier when I didn't even read your post to start with, so maybe I should give up. Yeah, I might as well do that now. Also I'm sure it's becoming tiring for everyone reading. Just like the thing in the pub became the other day. So I might avoid discussions with you from now on.

[Stingray 9,441]

Im not tired at all. I am enjoying the sun.

I just wanted to say your arguments 'adapt' as the discussion progresses. Like now and like was the case in the Hazard discussion and the Mata one before this one. It makes a nice discussion very difficult. I am not a mindreader, so if i misunderstood, it is because of lack of clarity or consistency Barbara. Nothing more.

[Barbara 15,149]

Im not tired at all. I am enjoying the sun.

I just wanted to say your arguments 'adapt' as the discussion progresses. Like now and like was the case in the Hazard discussion and the Mata one before this one. It makes a nice discussion very difficult. I am not a mindreader, so if i misunderstood, it is because of lack of clarity or consistency Barbara. Nothing more.

it's not adapting... it's called admit to making a mistake, being convinced of something else, or avoiding stupid discussions. not many are capable of both and I fail on them many times, as right now seems to prove so nicely.

I stood by my point that Mata is overrated (but agreed with Dion that showcasing Mata match against Brazil was a mistake - although I still think he under-performed and the team was better - despite hopeless - after he was subbed). I think Mata is good, I've been telling this from the beginning, but he's not brilliant in my book. And I agreed with the guys that said maybe there aren't many players better than him in the position he plays, opposite to many better midfielders in general (so I was wrong in my first statement and was unfair and harsh on him). I stood by my point that Mourinho treated Ronaldo and Sneijder differently about two things.

I'm tired of discussing with you... I read enough threads in this place to know when to stop discussions with certain members. I'm stopping this one now. if you think it's because I change my opinion too often, or because I avoid confrontation, good for you. I'm stopping because it's annoying the heck out of me.

[Stingray 9,441]

Its nice to see you edited your previous posts to accomodate your point. Lol. End of discussion.

[Barbara 15,149]

Its nice to see you edited your previous posts to accomodate your point. Lol. End of discussion.

FFS Tom I didn't edit my previous posts to change what I wrote. I edited two posts to add things (one to add the part of Mata part (that I don't think he carried the team) and the other to add the quotes from my previous posts - that are UNEDITED btw). I didn't delete one line from my posts or changed them.

You want to disagree me, just fine, but don't lie or assume things that are untrue.

And that's why I applauded to Jason's posts and why everyone else dropped the discussion but you. There's respect coming from those people and they don't make things personal (like starting a discussion along the lines of postmodern jabs that were supposedly aimed on them). I can't say the same about you and I'm disappointed, so you lost my respect right there.

If you want to have your little discussions and then brag on the threads about having members banned, go ahead and do that with someone else. I'm not here for that. I'm too old for certain things.

Going into a stupid argument twice the same week, I could overlook, but downright accusing me of something I didn't do, I can't.

[kellzfresh 7,229]

get a room guys

[Dion 2,476]

Aren't they a beautiful couple? They're having their first fights, how cute.

[Stingray 9,441]

FFS Tom I didn't edit my previous posts to change what I wrote. I edited two posts to add things

You want to disagree me, just fine, but don't lie or assume things that are untrue.

brag on the threads about having members banned,

1. So you edited. Period. You added stuff. So i did not lie at all.

2. I didnt brag. I made a joke about it in the pub. I tend to do that.

Sorry if I called your bluff - apparantly thats a no go on the forum you visit. You take it badly i guess. I never made a personal comment (the postmodern followed by is a joke), you do it almost in every post now.

So i will not reply any more. Im sure you will want the last word. Just put me on the ignore list considering how much I bother you.

To every one else sorry for the extensive off topic.

[Stingray 9,441]

Aren't they a beautiful couple? They're having their first fights, how cute.

Its more a divorce with a hefty law suit