The Mourinho Thread

[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??).

[The Skipper 20,593]

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.

We're basically saying the same thing. I understand what he did as well and certain aspects of how we played were fine, but even the smaller PL teams commit more men forward than we did against them. Honestly, committing 3 or 4 men forward on the counter instead of 2 doesn't suddenly make us completely susceptible at the back. We'd still have 7/6 men behind the ball which is fine.

You seriously don't need 10 men behind the ball for the majority of the game against Atletico.

[The Skipper 20,593]

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

It's barely a change of tactic, it's simply about committing more men forward when we get the ball.

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?

Our counter was led by Torres (who did a decent job considering he had no one else up there with him) because decent counter attacking players like Schurrle and Oscar were left on the bench. It's hardly risking the tie committing a few more men going forward on the counter attack to increase the chances of grabbing an away goal. This does not translate into us going for an all-out attacking gung ho approach.

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

I think everyone does, but you seriously have to be kidding yourself if you think we'd be so defensively vulnerable if we committed a couple more men going forward on the counter attack. Our transition into attack was poor because of that very reason.

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.

And they nearly did, Cavani had a golden chance but lucky for us he didn't put it away and we punished him. I didn't dispute the fact that we're in this tie, of course we are, if you read what I said again I said that people are overstating the advantage we have. It's still advantage us, but only slightly.

Plus, Atletico aren't PSG. They are far more adept at sitting deep, defending and hitting teams on the counter, and they'll punish us for it too. Just to reiterate, as I said above, it is advantage Chelsea due to us obviously getting back some key players but it's slight.

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??).

I'm not criticising him, merely stating facts. If you think that winning only 2 out of 7 CL semi final ties in total means that he's done a good job in these circumstances then yes, I have run out of things to say.

[The only place to be 11,313]

It's barely a change of tactic, it's simply about committing more men forward when we get the ball.

Right....but wouldn't some of those same players be involved in defending as well?? Or are we going to call a timeout when we lose possession and bring on the defensive unit?

Our counter was led by Torres (who did a decent job considering he had no one else up there with him) because decent counter attacking players like Schurrle and Oscar were left on the bench. It's hardly risking the tie committing a few more men going forward on the counter attack to increase the chances of grabbing an away goal. This does not translate into us going for an all-out attacking gung ho approach.

Decent. Not good, not excellent....decent. OK.

I'm not sure Oscar has even been a decent counter-attacking threat since the game away to Southampton on January 1st.

I think everyone does, but you seriously have to be kidding yourself if you think we'd be so defensively vulnerable if we committed a couple more men going forward on the counter attack. Our transition into attack was poor because of that very reason.

I think the risk simply wasn't worth it, especially when you lose your first-choice keeper and then your defensive lynchpin and also have a second leg to play. You're also looking at the possibility of a player on a yellow card being slightly out of position and having to make a tackle whilst running back towards goal. Again, why risk it?

And they nearly did, Cavani had a golden chance but lucky for us he didn't put it away and we punished him. I didn't dispute the fact that we're in this tie, of course we are, if you read what I said again I said that people are overstating the advantage we have. It's still advantage us, but only slightly.

Plus, Atletico aren't PSG. They are far more adept at sitting deep, defending and hitting teams on the counter, and they'll punish us for it too. Just to reiterate, as I said above, it is advantage Chelsea due to us obviously getting back some key players but it's slight.

I could give a fuck about the advantage we might have when the most important thing is that we're not at a disadvantage going into it.

Someone once said that Atletico are more adept at sitting deep, defending and hitting teams on the counter....and they'll punish us for it too. Well if we're chasing the game in the second leg from the off surely that plays into their hands doesn't it? As it is both teams probably need to score, and we'll hopefully have some key attacking pieces back who were missing in the first leg.

But it's good to know we're still in the tie. I'll go and get my shirt off the barbie.

I'm not criticising him, merely stating facts. If you think that winning only 2 out of 7 CL semi final ties in total means that he's done a good job in these circumstances then yes, I have run out of things to say.

Do you know how many teams have won CLs back to back? None.

It's actually quite a difficult trophy to win, and sometimes quality and skill means nothing. I've even heard of some teams fluking their way to a victory in the competition.

But Jose has been in the last five CL semis. He's actually got there more than anyone else and his record is comparable to Fergie's in terms of actually going through. You may think you're 'stating facts' (which of course absolves you of actually having to say anything vaguely committal) but what you're actually doing is regurgitating statistics without applying any context or meaning to them.

In light of that I find much to agree with in your final sentiment.

[bushman 2,043]

To those who think Jose should tire his squad ahead of the Wednesday important game by playing his aces in this meaningless game against liverscums.

The Guardian is reporting that Chelsea has given Jose the green light to field a completely changed line-up.

Jose´s plans were discussed with all & given the all-clear by owner Roman. Fuck you Liverpoops.

[DanAdibi! 106]

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

Eye bleeding performance from Jose. Master class from Carlo. Media ~ never fail to amaze me.

[Special Juan 27,089]

Defend like that in the second leg and we go through, because we will score at home.

[bushman 2,043]

Defend like that in the second leg and we go through, because we will score at home.

I do not think Jose will open it much, but I believe Hazard, Samuel are playing & these two will be the difference.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Defend like that in the second leg and we go through, because we will score at home.

I think whoever gets the first goal at the Bridge goes through. If we get it, I'm confident we can keep them out for as long as we want, but if they get it, I don't think we have enough power up front to get two goals against their defense. Honestly, it would be torture, but I can see this going to pens.

[Special Juan 27,089]

I think whoever gets the first goal at the Bridge goes through. If we get it, I'm confident we can keep them out for as long as we want, but if they get it, I don't think we have enough power up front to get two goals against their defense. Honestly, it would be torture, but I can see this going to pens.

I'm really confident, I always am on big nights when we know what we have to do. The Jose factor, our attitude and the crowd being right behind the team tells me it will be our night.

[Stats 6,980]

To those who think Jose should tire his squad ahead of the Wednesday important game by playing his aces in this meaningless game against liverscums.

The Guardian is reporting that Chelsea has given Jose the green light to field a completely changed line-up.

Jose´s plans were discussed with all & given the all-clear by owner Roman. Fuck you Liverpoops.

It is not meaningless. It may seem unrealistic but would you have predicted City to drop points against Sunderland? I don't think so. They have a dfficult game against Palace without Toure and possibly Silva. They can drop points there and at Everton. Opens the gateway for us. Now if we beat Liverpool 2 points behind and they have to go to Palace and from what I have seen Liverpool struggle against Palace. They certaintly will not find it easy to go to Selhurst Park and win. We should not give up. While we are in we are in it. I doubt we will do it but there is a chance and knowing the PL anything can prove possible until the final game.

[bushman 2,043]

It is not meaningless. It may seem unrealistic but would you have predicted City to drop points against Sunderland? I don't think so. They have a dfficult game against Palace without Toure and possibly Silva. They can drop points there and at Everton. Opens the gateway for us. Now if we beat Liverpool 2 points behind and they have to go to Palace and from what I have seen Liverpool struggle against Palace. They certaintly will not find it easy to go to Selhurst Park and win. We should not give up. While we are in we are in it. I doubt we will do it but there is a chance and knowing the PL anything can prove possible until the final game.

It´s meaningless from Chelsea´s point of view.

[The Skipper 20,593]

Right....but wouldn't some of those same players be involved in defending as well?? Or are we going to call a timeout when we lose possession and bring on the defensive unit?

That obviously goes without saying? But if you think that we'd be so defensively vulnerable if Torres had support from two more guys on the counter and if you think we simply can't risk that because Atletico are so dangerous going forward then bravo, because I don't. We're just going to have to agree to disagree on that one here.

Decent. Not good, not excellent....decent. OK.

Yes, decent, considering he was up there on his own. It might have been good or excellent if he had a couple of players that supported him when going forward on the counter.

I'm not sure Oscar has even been a decent counter-attacking threat since the game away to Southampton on January 1st.

Oscar has generally been good in Europe for us. This would've been a decent game for him to play in.

I think the risk simply wasn't worth it, especially when you lose your first-choice keeper and then your defensive lynchpin and also have a second leg to play. You're also looking at the possibility of a player on a yellow card being slightly out of position and having to make a tackle whilst running back towards goal. Again, why risk it?

Schwarzer is going to play at the Bridge too, does that mean we should also go as cautious as we did in Spain? Of course not. And I'm 100% certain Jose won't go as cautious either. He isn't a bad goalkeeper. Yes, he isn't highly experienced in the CL but he's still a good goalkeeper. We lost JT at around the 70th minute mark, so I don't think including him in your analysis is relevant because we could've still committed more men on the break before that. If Jose went this conservative after the injury but before that he at least tried to allow the players to counter attack better by committing a few more forward on the counter then fine, I wouldn't say anything because that's perfectly understandable, but that wasn't the case.

I could give a fuck about the advantage we might have when the most important thing is that we're not at a disadvantage going into it.

Well you're wrong if you think we don't have any sort of disadvantage because the away goal rule is clearly there for all to see. If you were an Atletico fan or rather yet, if we were at the Bridge in the first leg and we played out a 0-0 draw would you say that we have no advantage at all going to the Vicente Calderon with the away goal rule there? Of course you wouldn't.

Someone once said that Atletico are more adept at sitting deep, defending and hitting teams on the counter....and they'll punish us for it too. Well if we're chasing the game in the second leg from the off surely that plays into their hands doesn't it? As it is both teams probably need to score, and we'll hopefully have some key attacking pieces back who were missing in the first leg.

But it's good to know we're still in the tie. I'll go and get my shirt off the barbie.

You don't have to patronise me on that, can we not just debate as two intelligent Chelsea fans? I'll say it once again, I seriously don't think committing an extra two men going forward on the counter whilst the rest of the team remain deep would make us so vulnerable that Atletico would punish us. They aren't that great going forward when there's still that many men behind the ball. We'd have enough men to close off any spaces Atletico might attack whilst the rest of the team that went forward on the counter come back and recreate the shape we had started the game with. Simple.

Do you know how many teams have won CLs back to back? None.

It's actually quite a difficult trophy to win, and sometimes quality and skill means nothing. I've even heard of some teams fluking their way to a victory in the competition.

But Jose has been in the last five CL semis. He's actually got there more than anyone else and his record is comparable to Fergie's in terms of actually going through. You may think you're 'stating facts' (which of course absolves you of actually having to say anything vaguely committal) but what you're actually doing is regurgitating statistics without applying any context or meaning to them.

In light of that I find much to agree with in your final sentiment.

Apparently say anything that doesn't remotely praise Mou on here and you're instantly seen as the enemy by some. You don't need to remind me of his achievements, we're not discussing his ability as a manager in the CL as a whole. Of course it's a difficult trophy to win, that's not the debate here at all, but to say he usually does well in the CL semi finals isn't correct. I'm not knocking Jose in any way, just stating the fact that he has lost five of his seven CL semi final ties. I'm not talking about winning CLs back to back, I'm talking about his CL semi finals record. That's not knocking him as a manager or knocking his CL record, it just is what it is. You can't try and spin it and say he's done well in CL semi finals because he hasn't.

It's how in the same way he's won every CL final he's been part of. That means he does well in CL finals. I don't know why you're trying to spin it into me saying something sinister or bad about Mourinho.

The original discussion was about people comparing Real's result with ours and I was trying to convey that we were way too conservative to even compare the two results/performances; we parked the bus, they had a true counter attacking approach; we were away, they were at home; they created plenty of chances to bed the game, I can't even remember us creating a chance on goal; they have a complete team, we don't. They were two complete different scenarios.

It has now somehow conveyed into a unnecessary discussion between us both, you think that Mourinho's plan was 100% perfect and has given us a great advantage and no disadvantages, whilst I think that his plan was very good defensively, but that we could've played better on the counter, not as conservative - instead of sending just Torres and maybe Willian or Ramires forward, we could've sent one or two more because Atletico aren't good enough to punish us with the rest of our team sitting deep - if we leave back 6 men for a few seconds we really won't be as open as you're trying to portray we'd be - and that could've perhaps nicked us an away goal because I think Atletico are capable of grabbing an away goal at ours themselves. I think it's best we just leave the discussion where it is because it's spiralling into a needless, repetitive argument now.