The Mourinho Thread

[Henrique 9,133]

20% possession in the first half for Real Madrid at home to Bayern Munich. That's TWENTY PERCENT of the ball AT HOME. This is a Madrid team that has technically brilliant footballers all over the field (faaaaar more than we do) and they still have to resort to defending extremely deep and counter-attacking. Hope that puts things into perspective for some.

I hope you and everyone that liked your post will understand that this comparison does not make sense. Bayern has a ball possession based game (unlike Atlético), despite defending for most part of the game, Real still were VERY dangerous in the counter, while we barely really created any chances. Real had 9 attempts, 7 on target (Neuer made some good defenses while Curtois was only a passenger), while we had 5 attempts and 3 on target.

Its pretty hard to imagine Real having the same tactics facing Atletico.

[Fernando 6,500]

Mourinho in 2010: Playing a weakened team is ‘unacceptable’

Chelsea manager Jose Mourinho admitted after his side 0-0 draw with Atletico Madrid that he would like to field a reserve team in their top of the table Premier League game at Liverpool on Sunday.

With his second-placed side five points adrift of leaders Liverpool with only three games left, Mourinho is clearly prioritising next week's Champions League semi-final second leg at home against Atletico over their slim Premier League title hopes.

Asked on ITV Sport if he would select a weaker team against Liverpool, Mourinho replied: "I think I will but it's something we have to speak about internally. It's not a decision a manager can make on his own."

Funny how times, and attitudes, change. Back in 2010, shortly after taking over as manager of Real Madrid, Mourinho was involved in a blazing row with Sporting Gijon counterpart Manuel Preciado after Preciado appeared to do precisely the same thing.

In September 2010, Preciado made eight changes for a midweek clash at Barcelona, then made nine changes in the following game as Sporting tried to cope with three matches in seven days.

Sporting lost the clash at the Camp Nou 1-0, and Mourinho was furious that Preciado had not played all his regular starters against Real's title rivals noting that: "you can't do this in England."

"A team shouldn't give away a game cheaply," said Mourinho about Sporting's team selection.

"They should play to the maximum every match. You can't do this in England because you get punished. Let's see if they do it against us.

"If they play in the Cup with their first team and against us with their second team, I would be grateful. "

The late Preciado, who died in 2012, was furious with Mourinho's comments at the time and hit back saying:

"It could just be a bad joke or it could be a provocation for the Barcelona coach," he said.

"But if he is saying what he really thinks, I think he is despicable, and a bad professional colleague.

"I don't like it at all. If Madrid don't teach him respect, I'll show him. We deserve the same respect that he has.

"To say that Sporting, who have killed themselves to win promotion and stay in the top flight, would give up on a game... Who the hell does he think he is?

"I don't know the guy because he comes from another galaxy. I haven't won the titles he has, but I have won promotions with teams and won games. I know how to win and lose.

"He's used to winning but that will pass. He will lose. If you spit up in the air, it eventually falls back down again."

The circus continued to roll on with Real Madrid then releasing a statement condemning Preciado's rebuttal saying that Mourinho had made his comments in an effort to promote the "sporting spirit" that should be present in every match and to "keep the competition clean."

The Spanish Football Federation even went so far as to investigate the comments from all parties, and while both coaches escaped without punishment, all Liga managers were told to "moderate their statements" in the wake of the row.

The two coaches eventually resolved their difference and Mourinho was one of the first to pay tribute to Preciado when he tragically died of a heart attack in 2012.

"Manolo was always an honourable opponent, who I got to know well when he came to visit us in March," Mourinho said in an open letter.

"He had everything that I like in a person and in sportsmen: character, openness and the courage to fight against blows. We have been left by a football figure and above all by a very special person. My memory of him will be heartfelt and permanent."

https://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/pitchside-europe/mourinho-2010-playing-weakened-teams-unacceptable-121515648.html

[BlueLyon 9,359]

I dont think we played same football type. Two completely different matches.

I meant if we would play same style.

[The Chels 2,502]

i think the answer is obviously yes

More offensive? Yes (I don't think it's possible to be any less). Conservative still? Extremely, and in my opinion perhaps excessively.

@RichJolly

Chelsea's CL semi-final scores under Mourinho: 0-0, 0-1, 1-0, 0-1, 0-0. 1 goal scored in 480 minutes (inc extra time).

[Henrique 9,133]

@Fernando

As I said before, only british press and the majority of Chelsea's fans still give a damn for what Mourinho says. He just says what is the best for his team at some point.

[Henrique 9,133]

More offensive? Yes (I don't think it's possible to be any less). Conservative still? Extremely, and in my opinion perhaps excessively.

@RichJolly

Chelsea's CL semi-final scores under Mourinho: 0-0, 0-1, 1-0, 0-1, 0-0. 1 goal scored in 480 minutes (inc extra time).

Thats really interesting, and in all of those matches the adversary wasn't really stronger, actually in 05 and again in 07, Chelsea was by far the strongest side, specially in 05, when the difference between Liverpool and Chelsea in PL was almost 40 points.

[Sheva. 5,373]

IMO (which I know I might get blasted for by some on here) we showed AM a bit too much respect. The line up we sent out there was okay, the defensive strategy we employed was impressive but we were horrible going forward on the counter. There's no denying that we could've been a lot more adventurous going forward on Tuesday night.

We didn't need to play "attractive football" (whatever your definition of that is) but we were far too conservative I think.

I think Schurrle should have started instead of Ramires, there's really no need for 3 DM's and a defensive winger lol. Not to mention Willian who always plays so defensively also. But Mourinho didn't trust him for a big away CL game.

If Hazard was fit and we had Matic, we simply won't have been that defensive - so in that regard, Jose's hands were a bit tied.

[Blue Armour 4,336]

It's Jose' word against theirs, obviously he was being sarcastic but can they prove it? They'll charge him anyway but I find it ridiculous.

Technically he never said anything insulting about them, so I'd like to see how the FA can prove otherwise. The mongs are probably just trying to ruffle Mourinho's feathers.

And is this any surprise? With United on the wane (for now at least), the FA would no doubt want to promote their next biggest item (in terms of league titles and fan-base) Liverpool

[Rmpr 8,977]

No, it isn't the same. Real did that against a possession based, tiki-taka side in Bayern Munich, everyone knows that you sit deep and counter against a Pep side. Real were brilliant on the counter, committing 4/5 men forward. Us on the other hand whenever we did get the chance to counter only committed about 2 men forward. Plus, Atletico Madrid don't even play a possession based game.

IMO (which I know I might get blasted for by some on here) we showed AM a bit too much respect. The line up we sent out there was okay, the defensive strategy we employed was impressive but we were horrible going forward on the counter. There's no denying that we could've been a lot more adventurous going forward on Tuesday night.

We didn't need to play "attractive football" (whatever your definition of that is) but we were far too conservative I think.

I absolutely agree. I was saying this on the live game thread!

At the time I wanted Salah (who I had forgotten was cup tied) to be subbed in for Rambo so we could have more speed/dribbling ability and actually be dangerous in the counters.

0-0 was not that good of a result for what the game turned out to be. Our first half was sublime, but when everyone realised Atletico were piss poor going foward and wouldnt score (at around the 50-60min mark), Mourinho could have very well tried to comeback with a win (imo)...

But whatever, we will beat them at Stamford Bridge and go to Lisbon. I'm pretty confident about it!

[The Chels 2,502]

Thats really interesting, and in all of those matches the adversary wasn't really stronger, actually in 05 and again in 07, Chelsea was by far the strongest side, specially in 05, when the difference between Liverpool and Chelsea in PL was almost 40 points.

Indeed. Jose has lost 5 out of his 7 semi-finals thus far, and I can't help but wonder if he should adopt a less conservative approach.

Our aggregate score in the 3 CL semis with Jose — 1-2 (second leg against Atletico still to be included)

Our aggregate score in the 3 CL semis without Jose — 8-6

Interestingly in our 4 meetings with Liverpool in the CL knockout stages, we lost twice (both with Mourinho) and won twice (both without Mourinho).

[The Skipper 20,593]

I dont see any kind of tik-taka in Bayern game, they are a completely different animal when compared to Barcelona. They play a lot more with their wingers and full backs, and they try a lot more aerial balls. They just have a possession based game, but I just think the tiki-taka thing became an overused word these days.

But I agree about the rest. You don't need to be ultra-conservative. There are many ways to win a match, you dont't have to decide between being ultra-defensive or having a possession based game. Real Madrid and Chelsea had completely different strategies. While Real was there to win in the counter attack, it was clear Mourinho wanted a 0-0 from the beginning.

I agree with you in a sense that it isn't traditional Barcelona/Cruijf tiki taka, but IMO the essence of the tiki taka is still there. It's not Barcelona tiki taka but it's a variant - Pep has played people like Muller or Gotze as a false nine for Bayern before so the essence of the system is still there to be found in some variance. When Mandzukic is on it obviously changes to a more aerial game for them - but the idea is still there - defending with the ball and attacking with it via short patient passing, possession play however as you said they're more direct in a sense that Robben and Ribery carry the ball more thus making it a slightly more direct version.

Apart from that the rest of your post is spot on.

[The Skipper 20,593]

If Hazard was fit and we had Matic, we simply won't have been that defensive - so in that regard, Jose's hands were a bit tied.

I don't believe his hands were tied at all, he had good options in Oscar and Schurrle who everyone knows are more than capable of effectively contributing to the defensive part of our game but could do something going forward. We basically played with 4 defensive minded central midfielders, and our most attacking option in midfield, Willian, was practically back defending as well, it was way too conservative.

Even if he did start the game conservatively, once it was pretty obvious that Atletico did not really have the finesse at all to break us down he should've perhaps brought on a more attacking option in Oscar or Schurrle for Ramires - he was only forced to because JT got injured and then still the approach was to sit back very deep, can't really remember seeing Schurrle joining the attack once.

As I said before IMO we gave Atletico way too much respect. We could've easily stolen an away goal if Mou allowed more men to be committed forward on the counter in the second half. He's too conservative in CL semis in general, but we'll hopefully beat these at the Bridge.

[Madmax 9,219]

20% possession in the first half for Real Madrid at home to Bayern Munich. That's TWENTY PERCENT of the ball AT HOME. This is a Madrid team that has technically brilliant footballers all over the field (faaaaar more than we do) and they still have to resort to defending extremely deep and counter-attacking. Hope that puts things into perspective for some.

Pssh, Chelsea are ruining football, didn't you get the memo? Keep up, man.

[The only place to be 11,313]

As I said before IMO we gave Atletico way too much respect. We could've easily stolen an away goal if Mou allowed more men to be committed forward on the counter in the second half. He's too conservative in CL semis in general, but we'll hopefully beat these at the Bridge.

You don't know that. Sorry if you feel like I'm going to 'blast' you for your opinion, but bear in mind it is just your opinion. Jose clearly didn't want to lose the tie in the first leg but keep us very much in it when we'll have our most potent attacking threat back in the side. Now we've got home advantage and can set up to be a bit more attacking having stopped the leaders of La Liga from scoring against us (apparently breaking down teams who set up to defend is tough.....who knew?).

Even if he did start the game conservatively, once it was pretty obvious that Atletico did not really have the finesse at all to break us down he should've perhaps brought on a more attacking option in Oscar or Schurrle for Ramires - he was only forced to because JT got injured and then still the approach was to sit back very deep, can't really remember seeing Schurrle joining the attack once.

He should've should he? Why? Why risk losing a 0-0 result to maybe get a goal against one of the best defences in Europe marshalled by one of the best keepers in the world?

And he should've done this after our keeper was replaced by a 41 year old making his debut in the knockout stages of the Champions League and before or after we lost our skipper and defensive lynchpin?

No he shouldn't have done that...he could've done but why? That's just not how Jose thinks and it's worked out pretty well for him so far.

[The only place to be 11,313]

I hope you and everyone that liked your post will understand that this comparison does not make sense. Bayern has a ball possession based game (unlike Atlético), despite defending for most part of the game, Real still were VERY dangerous in the counter, while we barely really created any chances. Real had 9 attempts, 7 on target (Neuer made some good defenses while Curtois was only a passenger), while we had 5 attempts and 3 on target.

Its pretty hard to imagine Real having the same tactics facing Atletico.

Real also had Benzema and Ronaldo to lead their counters, with Alonso and Modric to start them off.

Real Madrid are in a completely different stage of development from us, in no small part thanks to Mourinho.

[The Skipper 20,593]

You don't know that. Sorry if you feel like I'm going to 'blast' you for your opinion, but bear in mind it is just your opinion. Jose clearly didn't want to lose the tie in the first leg but keep us very much in it when we'll have our most potent attacking threat back in the side. Now we've got home advantage and can set up to be a bit more attacking having stopped the leaders of La Liga from scoring against us (apparently breaking down teams who set up to defend is tough.....who knew?).

He assured that by going as conservative as he could, which I didn't have a problem with to start, but it was when it was clear that Atletico just wasn't going to break us down that he could've perhaps afforded to commit more men going forward on the counter to grab an away goal, that doesn't mean I wanted us to switch to an attacking approach; all I'm suggesting is that on the counter we should've worried Atletico a lot more.

I'm not disputing the way Jose set up the team, as I said in my previous post, defensively we set up very well, but it was on the counter that we were way too conservative - committing two men forward was pathetic. Yeah sure we don't have Hazard but in my opinion, Oscar, Schurrle and Willian are all good enough players to worry Atletico on the counter. Committing at least one or two men extra on the counter attack wouldn't have hurt. You don't need to commit that many players to defend against Atletico, they aren't that good going forward.

Atletico are leaders in the La Liga but it isn't due to their goal scoring ability, which is what you would've been made to believe had you just watched that game and the way we approached the whole game. Atletico are top due to their pragmatic system which is very similar to ours, not due to their "amazing" attacking abilities.

He should've should he? Why? Why risk losing a 0-0 result to maybe get a goal against one of the best defences in Europe marshalled by one of the best keepers in the world?

And he should've done this after our keeper was replaced by a 41 year old making his debut in the knockout stages of the Champions League and before or after we lost our skipper and defensive lynchpin?

Why? Contrary to the popular believe on here, in my opinion a 0-0 doesn't make it that much favourable to us. We still have to go out there and beat Atletico by scoring against them. Yes, we have the home crowd advantage but all Atletico need is a goalscoring draw, which they are very capable of. Atletico can be as difficult to break down as ourselves, so if they grab a goal it'll be even harder for us because we need to score ourselves if we want to go through, unless Jose is planning on a penalty shoot out.

No he shouldn't have done that...he could've done but why? That's just not how Jose thinks and it's worked out pretty well for him so far.

Not in CL semi finals.

[The Mak 4,459]

I don't believe his hands were tied at all, he had good options in Oscar and Schurrle who everyone knows are more than capable of effectively contributing to the defensive part of our game but could do something going forward. We basically played with 4 defensive minded central midfielders, and our most attacking option in midfield, Willian, was practically back defending as well, it was way too conservative.

Even if he did start the game conservatively, once it was pretty obvious that Atletico did not really have the finesse at all to break us down he should've perhaps brought on a more attacking option in Oscar or Schurrle for Ramires - he was only forced to because JT got injured and then still the approach was to sit back very deep, can't really remember seeing Schurrle joining the attack once.

As I said before IMO we gave Atletico way too much respect. We could've easily stolen an away goal if Mou allowed more men to be committed forward on the counter in the second half. He's too conservative in CL semis in general, but we'll hopefully beat these at the Bridge.

I'm not so sure. Atletico are basically us with a decent striker but, like us, they still look clueless without space to play. I think Mourinho was so conservative because he knew that if we did to Atletico what the small teams do to us, they would not score.

More importantly, committing more men forward and/or having the likes of Schurrle on instead of Ramires would've dramatically increased the chances of us getting into a 'you attack, we attack situation'. If that happened, we would inevitable lose due to their advantage of Costa.

While I don't 100% agree with what Mourinho did, I understand it completely.

[The only place to be 11,313]

He assured that by going as conservative as he could, which I didn't have a problem with to start, but it was when it was clear that Atletico just wasn't going to break us down that he could've perhaps afforded to commit more men going forward on the counter to grab an away goal, that doesn't mean I wanted us to switch to an attacking approach; all I'm suggesting is that on the counter we should've worried Atletico a lot more.

But wouldn't a change in tactics have possibly led to Atletico finding it easier to break us down?

Our counter was led by Torres and our player of the season was injured. In the return leg there's a chance that both Hazard and Eto'o are back. Why risk it?

I'm not disputing the way Jose set up the team, as I said in my previous post, defensively we set up very well, but it was on the counter that we were way too conservative - committing two men forward was pathetic. Yeah sure we don't have Hazard but in my opinion, Oscar, Schurrle and Willian are all good enough players to worry Atletico on the counter. Committing at least one or two men extra on the counter attack wouldn't have hurt. You don't need to commit that many players to defend against Atletico, they aren't that good going forward.

Maybe Jose sees a link between the way a team defends and the way it transitions into attack?

Why? Contrary to the popular believe on here, in my opinion a 0-0 doesn't make it that much favourable to us. We still have to go out there and beat Atletico by scoring against them. Yes, we have the home crowd advantage but all Atletico need is a goalscoring draw, which they are very capable of. Atletico can be as difficult to break down as ourselves, so if they grab a goal it'll be even harder for us because we need to score ourselves if we want to go through, unless Jose is planning on a penalty shoot out.

PSG were also supposed to score against us if I remember correctly. Contrary to popular belief amongst some on here, Jose is a pretty good coach. It's not just the home crowd, it's the possibility of having some of our better players back and the expectation that Atletico might adjust their tactics as well. I guarantee that if we had drawn the first leg 0-0 then certain people would be writing our obituaries already, but the fact is we're very much still in this tie despite having Jose in charge.

Not in CL semi finals.

If you actually want to criticise the CL record of a guy who has been in more semi-finals than anyone else and has the chance to become the first guy in history to win 3 of the fuckers then maybe you've run out of things to say.

Maybe it's time to learn Spanish, sign up to the Atletico forum and pronounce how the problem all season has been an inability to break down teams who defend (who knew??).