ITV inexplicably pretending Mourinho is a plucky underdog who's had to work with limited resources and a small squad at Chelsea, when they've got the wealth of Russia behind them, and 27 players out on loan.
ITV's commentary was so pro-Chelsea tonight that it was embarrassing. I know the media all love Mourinho and usually favour the English teams in the Champions League but it really does get nauseating.
On the flip side, it's tactical, calculated, pragmatic football.
And that wins you trophies in the long term.
It doesn't have to be that way. The Barcelona team under Guardiola swept all before them in breathtaking style. Liverpool look like winning the league and they've been the most exciting English team to watch in years. City played attacking football when they won the league. Even Ferguson (as much as I hate him) instilled a mainly attacking ethos into his Manchester United teams. Ancelotti won the league with Chelsea scoring over 100 goals in the season.
With the resources Chelsea have, there should be no need to play '19th century fottball' as it is known. The reality is that Mourinho is a negative, cynical manager who is portrayed as a genius by the media because he gives them good interviews.
The Barcelona semi of years ago was it nil nil the first game in the nou camp
In 2012 the first game was at Bridge and finished 0-0 iirc
Anyway good result for both teams tonight I'd think. An away goal for Atletico and Chelsea need to get 2, while Chelsea know a home win and they're in the final
Makes for a fascinating second leg but I fancy Chelsea
Dire, dire game though but Chelsea won't give a toss
My want for Mourinho at United is always kept in check by games like that.
Horrible, negative, cynical football.
To be honest, it's just Mourinho playing to his advantage
He knows his strike force isn't great, his best bet would be playing it defensively and hoping to clinch a winner, what else is he to do? Key players missing and poor forwards
It's defensive master class, it's boring, but it's all he's got
I'm sure he'll try adding more effective attack options in the Summer mind
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).
Pretty pathetic and for anyone to try and claim its because he has no strikers I would say history shows he plays these semi final games as cautious as possible regardless who he has in the side.
Don't know why Chelsea are being praised so much in their performance. They needed to win more than Madrid did, but all they did was park the bus. Chelsea are top team with big players. How can expect to gain respect in world football with the likes of Barca and Madrid with their negative tactics.
In 2012 the first game was at Bridge and finished 0-0 iirc
No it was 1-0. It's why they were already through before Torres scored that goal.
The 2009 one was though before it finished 1-1 at SB.
Still cannot buy into this rubbish about Mourinho the master tactician. In the 2007 CL semi final he claimed that only one team played to win and it wasn't the team who had a goal ruled out for offside in et and who actually won 1-0 on the night.
Because the mourinho love-in we have in this country will never stop.
It's funny. because the Spanish press hate him for all his antics. Picking a spat with their World Cup winning captain probably didn't help to be fair.
No it was 1-0. It's why they were already through before Torres scored that goal.
Still cannot buy into this rubbish about Mourinho the master tactician. In the 2007 CL semi final he claimed that only one team played to win and it wasn't the team who had a goal ruled out for offside in et and who actually won 1-0 on the night.
Four defenders, Luis and Mikel in midfield sitting in front and Ramires and Willian playing as secondary full-backs. They basically had 8 at the back.
they were basically playing with 3 defensive midfielders, lampard was as deep as luis and mikel a lot of the time and with the defensive wingers either side, very uninspiring...
Don't know why Chelsea are being praised so much in their performance. They needed to win more than Madrid did, but all they did was park the bus. Chelsea are top team with big players. How can expect to gain respect in world football with the likes of Barca and Madrid with their negative tactics.
They will not give an ounce of a crap if they end up winning the trophy
It's a results business
I'm sure Greece are awful upset people criticised their Euros victory a decade ago
It wasnt long ago that west ham got a 0-0 at Stamford Bridge and Mourinho was moaning about how negative West Ham were. The guy is a joker as he is exactly the same.
i fancy atletico to not just get the score draw but win the second leg, terry and cech injured, lampard and mikel suspended, hazard half fit, there team is pretty decimated for the second leg.
Yep and Roman wanted more. He was desperate for Guardiola but blew it by his continuation of sacking Managers which Pep stayed well clear of.
It's funny that he ended up signing up his nemesis then. I'm sure Abramovich was less than happy to have to go crawling back to Jose but then neither party had many other options. Mourihno has burned so many bridges and made so many enemies that it'll be hard to know where he goes once his usual two to three seasons are up.
Comments
ITV's commentary was so pro-Chelsea tonight that it was embarrassing. I know the media all love Mourinho and usually favour the English teams in the Champions League but it really does get nauseating.
It doesn't have to be that way. The Barcelona team under Guardiola swept all before them in breathtaking style. Liverpool look like winning the league and they've been the most exciting English team to watch in years. City played attacking football when they won the league. Even Ferguson (as much as I hate him) instilled a mainly attacking ethos into his Manchester United teams. Ancelotti won the league with Chelsea scoring over 100 goals in the season.
With the resources Chelsea have, there should be no need to play '19th century fottball' as it is known. The reality is that Mourinho is a negative, cynical manager who is portrayed as a genius by the media because he gives them good interviews.
In 2012 the first game was at Bridge and finished 0-0 iirc
Anyway good result for both teams tonight I'd think. An away goal for Atletico and Chelsea need to get 2, while Chelsea know a home win and they're in the final
Makes for a fascinating second leg but I fancy Chelsea
Dire, dire game though but Chelsea won't give a toss
He parked the bus, train and plane.
Pulis teams do that every week.
To be honest, it's just Mourinho playing to his advantage
He knows his strike force isn't great, his best bet would be playing it defensively and hoping to clinch a winner, what else is he to do? Key players missing and poor forwards
It's defensive master class, it's boring, but it's all he's got
I'm sure he'll try adding more effective attack options in the Summer mind
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).
Pretty pathetic and for anyone to try and claim its because he has no strikers I would say history shows he plays these semi final games as cautious as possible regardless who he has in the side.
Four defenders, Luis and Mikel in midfield sitting in front and Ramires and Willian playing as secondary full-backs. They basically had 8 at the back.
Because the mourinho love-in we have in this country will never stop.
No it was 1-0. It's why they were already through before Torres scored that goal.
The 2009 one was though before it finished 1-1 at SB.
Still cannot buy into this rubbish about Mourinho the master tactician. In the 2007 CL semi final he claimed that only one team played to win and it wasn't the team who had a goal ruled out for offside in et and who actually won 1-0 on the night.
It's funny. because the Spanish press hate him for all his antics. Picking a spat with their World Cup winning captain probably didn't help to be fair.
You're right!
they were basically playing with 3 defensive midfielders, lampard was as deep as luis and mikel a lot of the time and with the defensive wingers either side, very uninspiring...
I did just edit, the 2009 semi was 0-0 at the Nou Camp.
They will not give an ounce of a crap if they end up winning the trophy
It's a results business
I'm sure Greece are awful upset people criticised their Euros victory a decade ago
I meant 2012 alright could've sworn it was a draw!
If the stupid silver goal hadn't existed they might not have though but that's by the by.
They joke about Messi not being able to do it against Stoke but he may as well have done when playing a Mourinho side.
The difference being, Greece were plucky little underdogs, they played in the only way they could.
Chelsea don't have that excuse, they have spent and do spend a total fortune, when you spend that much money you expect more.
Yep and Roman wanted more. He was desperate for Guardiola but blew it by his continuation of sacking Managers which Pep stayed well clear of.
Ha cheers!
Missed an accent over the "e" apparently but in my defence I can't do them on my laptop
It's funny that he ended up signing up his nemesis then. I'm sure Abramovich was less than happy to have to go crawling back to Jose but then neither party had many other options. Mourihno has burned so many bridges and made so many enemies that it'll be hard to know where he goes once his usual two to three seasons are up.