Chelsea in pole position for Guardiola

[RamiCFC9 258]

The fact many are considering in actually having Pep over here over RDM is at the highest order cringe worthy and plastic.

There is no plastic only successful type personality and failure type personality, loser.

[Kezza 1,965]

There is no plastic only successful type personality and failure type personality, loser.

:doh: :doh:

Thats all I can put down..Just WOW.

[Azpinator 2,325]

He might not have promoted Xavi, Iniesta and Messi but he took them up an extra few levels, he made them what they are.

Xavi and Iniesta were reguarly on the bench under Rijkaard, including the 2006 CL final when only Iniesta came on.

Messi was a young talent under the Dutchman, but it was Pep who made him the worldbeater he is today.

Don't get me wrong i want us to stick with RDM, but this myth going around that Pep was an lucky passenger on the Barca train is worse than the myth that Drogba was crap in his first two season's at Chelsea, the guy is genius, period.

Xavi was regularly on the bench? Really? Wow. Apart from Xavi, after the 2006 final, all three players were regulars, particularly in Rijkaard's final season.

We'll see if he's truly a genius when he manages another club.. You might as well say that he was the one that invented Barca's style of playing, not Cruyff.

[RamiCFC9 258]

:doh: :doh:

Thats all I can put down..Just WOW.

Well u can fukoff aswel.

[didierforever 7,349]

pep over rdm!!! hmmm.... NOT FOR A FUCKING MILLION BUCKS....

[OneMoSalah 8,887]

Xavi was a regular on the bench? Really? Wow. Apart from Xavi, after the 2006 final, all three players were regulars, particularly in Rijkaard's final season.

We'll see if he's truly a genius when he manages another club.. You might as well say that he was the one that invented Barca's style of playing, not Cruyff.

This. If Rinus Michels (man known for creating the idea of Total Football) didn't go to Barca, Cryuff probably wouldn't have ended up there and then you could say neither would Van Gaal have or Rikjaard. Effectively meaning Pep's team wouldn't suit the philosophy as much as they wouldn't have been brought up playing that sort of football in their academy so yeah... the Dutch influence in that club was at least 20 years of work which gave Pep a set of players tactically and technically good enough to try and recreate Total Football. Barca don't even play total football, its tiki taka which has much more emphasis on keeping the ball moving rather than the players interchanging positions to confuse the other team whilst keeping a good solid shape.

[Tomo 21,751]

Xavi was regularly on the bench? Really? Wow. Apart from Xavi, after the 2006 final, all three players were regulars, particularly in Rijkaard's final season.

We'll see if he's truly a genius when he manages another club.. You might as well say that he was the one that invented Barca's style of playing, not Cruyff.

Speaking of his final season, look at Barca they were a mess, 3rd in the league, 10 points behind Villareal, nearly 20 behind Real, Deco, Ronaldinho and Eto'o's (Thuram and Zambrotta to lesser extent too) ego's going into overdrive.

Pep got rid of 4 of those 5 players, Eto'o only survived due to a change off attitude. Pep made the decision to build his side around Iniesta, Xavi and Messi, something that paid off handsomely, not to mention his decision to promote Busquets and Pedro.

Crediting anyone other than Pep for what he done at Barca is like giving Ranieri all the credit for what Mourinho did for us, just because he signed a few off the players.

[Strike 7,527]

Speaking of his final season, look at Barca they were a mess, 3rd in the league, 10 points behind Villareal, nearly 20 behind Real, Deco, Ronaldinho and Eto'o's (Thuram and Zambrotta to lesser extent too) ego's going into overdrive.

Pep got rid of 4 of those 5 players, Eto'o only survived due to a change off attitude. Pep made the decision to build his side around Iniesta, Xavi and Messi, something that paid off handsomely, not to mention his decision to promote Busquets and Pedro.

Crediting anyone other than Pep for what he done at Barca is like giving Ranieri all the credit for what Mourinho did for us, just because he signed a few off the players.

the thing that's holding us back is this moral obligation to give di matteo a chance. he's been doing well so far and i think if di matteo can keep this up he should be kept in charge but imo, guardiola is the better Long-term plan.

[Leif 6,006]

If Di Matteo had never played for us before, would we be getting all these same people dismissing the idea of Guardiola coming in?

My point is - It's fine if you want Di Matteo to stay and not get Guardiola in. Di Matteo is doing a good job. But you can't call fans 'plastic' for wanting the guy who's managed possibly the greatest team ever ahead of the guy who's managed West Brom and MK Dons.

Just because Di Matteo won the Champions League doesn't mean he's a great manager or that he's right for us.

Ljupoko Petrovic won the Champions League with Red Star Belgrade once. It doesn't mean he's instantly a great manager though.

I believe Di Matteo is the kind of guy who'll get us playing as a great team with a good spirit.

I believe Guardiola is the kind of guy to turn our players who are potentially world-class (Hazard for example), into world class, and change the philosophy of the club into a more positive one.

I'm confident that with Di Matteo in charge, we'll never see Kalas, Feruz, Chalobah, McEachran etc. making the impact they could potentially make.

Hazard, for example, (in my mind) will never be world class with Di Matteo as manager. I'm positive.

That said, I'm fine with either of them as manager.

Also, I believe that a lot (not all) of the people who say "I don't want that Tika-Taka bullshit at Chelsea" are just in denial. Barcelona play and have played some of the most beautiful football ever.

You can't expect us to be the 'rough and tough' Chelsea we used to be when we had Drogba, Ballack, Essien (in form) etc.

We now have quick, agile, small and nimble players. Under Di Matteo though, they look like headless chickens as we don't seem to be going in any particular direction.

[Wavy Crockett 190]

rather go for Mou

[RamiCFC9 258]

If Di Matteo had never played for us before, would we be getting all these same people dismissing the idea of Guardiola coming in?

My point is - It's fine if you want Di Matteo to stay and not get Guardiola in. Di Matteo is doing a good job. But you can't call fans 'plastic' for wanting the guy who's managed possibly the greatest team ever ahead of the guy who's managed West Brom and MK Dons.

Just because Di Matteo won the Champions League doesn't mean he's a great manager or that he's right for us.

Ljupoko Petrovic won the Champions League with Red Star Belgrade once. It doesn't mean he's instantly a great manager though.

I believe Di Matteo is the kind of guy who'll get us playing as a great team with a good spirit.

I believe Guardiola is the kind of guy to turn our players who are potentially world-class (Hazard for example), into world class, and change the philosophy of the club into a more positive one.

I'm confident that with Di Matteo in charge, we'll never see Kalas, Feruz, Chalobah, McEachran etc. making the impact they could potentially make.

Hazard, for example, (in my mind) will never be world class with Di Matteo as manager. I'm positive.

That said, I'm fine with either of them as manager.

Also, I believe that a lot (not all) of the people who say "I don't want that Tika-Taka bullshit at Chelsea" are just in denial. Barcelona play and have played some of the most beautiful football ever.

You can't expect us to be the 'rough and tough' Chelsea we used to be when we had Drogba, Ballack, Essien (in form) etc.

We now have quick, agile, small and nimble players. Under Di Matteo though, they look like headless chickens as we don't seem to be going in any particular direction.

This.Especially the part where you highlight developing players into world class.Guardiola is at the very best doing that with the likes of SAF and Wenger.Also Guardiola will operate at different level compared to RDM.Pep will manage the whole club while RDM is just a coach.

p.s. To prefer RDM over Pep is ok, BUT to dismiss Guardiola's achievements is pure ignorance reaching to the level of idiotism.

[didierforever 7,349]

I'm confident that with Di Matteo in charge, we'll never see Kalas, Feruz, Chalobah, McEachran etc. making the impact they could potentially make.

Hazard, for example, (in my mind) will never be world class with Di Matteo as manager. I'm positive.

this is a very harsh analysis on rdm considering the facts : bertrand's development. i mean 2 years ago the thought that cole was leaving would have had all of shittin in our pants but now we simply state that "bertrand will fill that hole while pva will be no.2".

[TheCount 146]

Also, I believe that a lot (not all) of the people who say "I don't want that Tika-Taka bullshit at Chelsea" are just in denial. Barcelona play and have played some of the most beautiful football ever.

You can't expect us to be the 'rough and tough' Chelsea we used to be when we had Drogba, Ballack, Essien (in form) etc.

We now have quick, agile, small and nimble players. Under Di Matteo though, they look like headless chickens as we don't seem to be going in any particular direction.

Ah here, football is a game of opinions, and your entitled to yours, but i personally cant think of anything more boring then tika-taka and to say its beautiful is just ridiculous imo, if you ask anyone who dosent like football why they dont like it, they'll say "endless short passing, slow pace and faggots falling over" now that describes barca, why on earth would i like to see that?,this is also a huge factor of why people think modern football is shit. Im not a plastic fan if chelsea were to play that way i'd still support them but not respect them, in the diving regard i mean, one of the main reasons for my dislike of barca is they dont try and play like men they have the talent but instead of becoming a great side they play soft, if were going to go try and emulate them then why cant we at least try and be agile and fast but still be the rough and tough side we always were, also i think to glorify a side that goes into a match with only the attitude to score and no defend is pretty stupid, might as well watch street football with all its tackiness, football is meant to be a tactical game, and balance variation is key. Not attacking blindlessly. Theirs plenty of other games where theirs big score and tons of excitement to keep you entertained if you want that.

[BlueLyon 9,359]

Am i the only one that thinks Mou is the last person to coach this team? He just doesnt fit this team of 'kids' and the style we want to play.

Either Rdm or Pep. And I rate Mou very highly, but he loves to play experienced players in counter attack style with strong defence. His glory days at Chelsea when he was young and had young Terry, Drogba and Lamps along him, are gone unfortunely. Big mistake we let him go back then.

[Funkyflashman 187]

Ah here, football is a game of opinions, and your entitled to yours, but i personally cant think of anything more boring then tika-taka and to say its beautiful is just ridiculous imo, if you ask anyone who dosent like football why they dont like it, they'll say "endless short passing, slow pace and faggots falling over" now that describes barca, why on earth would i like to see that?,this is also a huge factor of why people think modern football is shit. Im not a plastic fan if chelsea were to play that way i'd still support them but not respect them, in the diving regard i mean, one of the main reasons for my dislike of barca is they dont try and play like men they have the talent but instead of becoming a great side they play soft, if were going to go try and emulate them then why cant we at least try and be agile and fast but still be the rough and tough side we always were, also i think to glorify a side that goes into a match with only the attitude to score and no defend is pretty stupid, might as well watch street football with all its tackiness, football is meant to be a tactical game, and balance variation is key. Not attacking blindlessly. Theirs plenty of other games where theirs big score and tons of excitement to keep you entertained if you want that.

This is a pretty weak argument. Barcelona are glorified for being the most successful side of all time and they certainly didn't achieve that with a weak defense They defend with the ball at their feet, which requires immense skill and teamwork. The less the opponent has the ball, the less opportunities they have to score. In this respect Barca play the purest defense of anyone anywhere.

They also do not attack blindlessly. They may pass the ball around very quickly, but the actual speed of the build up is very patient and cautious. They absolutely do not career towards goal in numbers with no regard for defense.

Now whether it is boring or not is a different argument and I respect your opinion on that front, but to say Barca mindlessly attack is doing a gross disservice to Guardiola, Barcelona and their style of play.

[TheCount 146]

Am i the only one that thinks Mou is the last person to coach this team? He just doesnt fit this team of 'kids' and the style we want to play.

Either Rdm or Pep. And I rate Mou very highly, but he loves to play experienced players in counter attack style with strong defence. His glory days at Chelsea when he was young and had young Terry, Drogba and Lamps along him, are gone unfortunely. Big mistake we let him go back then.

Yes and no, the team atm defo dosent fit his style, but wherever he goes it isnt long till he "fixes" it, i wudnt say kids either i mean he creates "young" squad wherever he goes its just he like them to become a core.

I agree tho big mistake letting him go.

This is a pretty weak argument. Barcelona are glorified for being the most successful side of all time and they certainly didn't achieve that with a weak defense They defend with the ball at their feet, which requires immense skill and teamwork. The less the opponent has the ball, the less opportunities they have to score. In this respect Barca play the purest defense of anyone anywhere.

They also do not attack blindlessly. They may pass the ball around very quickly, but the actual speed of the build up is very patient and cautious. They absolutely do not career towards goal in numbers with no regard for defense.

Their defense is weak, its always been in this current incarnation, ya can dress it up whatever way ya want but barca's defense is weak, the only thing i admire is the pressure,

Your second point also dosent do much in the way to disprove my claims its boring to watch and as said before they do attack attack attack as they say.

Also the point of their diving and cheating cannot be ignored.

[Reddish-Blue 2,513]

Yes and no, the team atm defo dosent fit his style, but wherever he goes it isnt long till he "fixes" it, i wudnt say kids either i mean he creates "young" squad wherever he goes its just he like them to become a core.

I agree tho big mistake letting him go.

Their defense is weak, its always been in this current incarnation, ya can dress it up whatever way ya want but barca's defense is weak, the only thing i admire is the pressure,

Your second point also dosent do much in the way to disprove my claims its boring to watch and as said before they do attack attack attack as they say.

Also the point of their diving and cheating cannot be ignored.

Definitely agree. Barca's defence is pretty weak but it's covered up by their excessively high possession of the ball.

I mean if you can retain the ball for 85+% of the game, the other team has limited chances to break through & score a goal.

[Spike 12,049]

Definitely agree. Barca's defence is pretty weak but it's covered up by their excessively high possession of the ball.

I mean if you can retain the ball for 85+% of the game, the other team has limited chances to break through & score a goal.

Am I the only one that considers high possession football to be highly defensive? I mean one of the main aspects is to refuse the other team the ball, through neat and tidy passing and aggressive pressing. That sounds pretty defensive to Spike. It's a paradox that one of the most attacking styles is also one of the most defensive.

[TheCount 146]

Am I the only one that considers high possession football to be highly defensive? I mean one of the main aspects is to refuse the other team the ball, through neat and tidy passing and aggressive pressing. That sounds pretty defensive to Spike. It's a paradox that one of the most attacking styles is also one of the most defensive.

But its not really being defensive, it just has the illusion of being defensive, take barca vs celtic or even us, but for the handiness of having the facts off the top of my head we'll go celtic vs barca, now barca had 955 passes and 81% possession, sound good? it certainly deos is it defensive? well your not letting the other team have the ball so i suppose it is, but they still conceded 2 goals both times from a simple one pass-one goal attack so for all their illusion of being defensive, they weren't actually being defensive at all, they were just attacking using their possession. As i said already you can dress it up all you want but their not really being defensive. That's not saying a defensive team cant concede but the point is if they were more balanced, it wouldn't of happened.

[Kezza 1,965]

Man, i couldnt think of anything worse than sitting watching us at the top of the box, fart arseing around with shitty passes while the other team just sits in the box..YAAWWWNNN!!!

Barca made over 900 passes, wooooo 900 passes, thats a shit load of passes. Its effective, but just soo boring!! Whoever thinks its exciting football, I feel for you. Actually, its not very effective, as TheCount mentioned, they conceded 2 lol. Tika-taka can stay in Spain.