Jose Mourinho Vs. Claudio Ranieri

[Chelsea_Smile]

Jose Mourinho Vs. Claudio Ranieri
Who is the better manager?

Jose has got us 5 points from the last 3 games (9 points possible) and scored only one goal. Im certain Claudio Ranieri would have got us at least six points from the last 3 games and we would have scored more than one goal.

Chelsea were a joy to watch under Claudio when we played attacking football but now we play the most boring football I’ve seen Chelsea play since David Webb was manager. Jose Mourinho has no loyalty and he quickly walked out on Porto and if he had any integrity he would have stayed at Porto. But he came because of Romans money pure and simple and he has no loyalty to Chelsea Football Club. Claudio is a great manager and is doing really well with Valencia this season. We should get Claudio Ranieri back as the manager as the players seemed to like him more and Chelsea didnt play such boring football.

[jankballs]

Man you should call yourself Chelsea Frown...

Ranieri probably should not have been fired, I agree there. Last season was successful and he should have had another year to build on that success.

But I think JM is doing a good job. I think he will remail loyal cuz he wants to win and we have the money and team to keep winning. Anyway if we do not win it will be the club getting rid of him not vice versa.

JM would have been a fool to turn down Chelsea. He established greatness at FC Porto, but would have been stupid not to use that success to get out of Portugal. He has a WAY WAY better chance of continuing success on a rich EPL team like Chelsea.
Also he has shown some loyalty by bringing a handful of FC Porto players with him and playing them even though many English fans would rather see their favorites in.

I agree the football has not been the most exciting, but we are 2nd in the league and have been a lucky bounce or a blown call away from being in 1st.

Also the defense has been absolutely phenomenal.
Defense CAN bring championships.

[nicephoras]

Claudio may not deserved to have been fired, but he certainly tinkered his way out of a job. What the HELL were Veron and Huth doing on the field in Monaco? Also, Claudio's predilection for Italian based players failed to pay off badly.

P.S. For all the people complaining about Mourinho's tactics - who here remembers the two legs against Stuttgart last year? Now, be honest. Who was awake for both legs?

[adri]

Chelsea were a joy to watch under Claudio when we played attacking football but now we play the most boring football I’ve seen Chelsea play since...

bullbullbull.

if you followed Chelsea last season (i have my doubts), you'd know that Chelsea under Ranieri set records for single goal wins in the premiership. also that they had back to back goaless draws midseason vs. poor boro & everton sides.

you also fail to mention that Mourinho won the Champions League last year, as well as at least 4 other major trophies
in the past two years while Claudio won nothing.

i love Claudio as much as any other blues fan but Seriously Jose IS the better coach.

[christosap]

i wasn't happy seeing Ranieri go, i thought under the circumstances he conducted himself pretty well, but the writing was on the wall all season and if he had any chance of staying the monaco game put an end to that.

if chelsea are playing like this and haven't gelled by christmas then by all means go for the throat, until then have patience. i think Robben will play a very big part in this team and he is entertaining to watch.

[Chelsea_Smile]

bullbullbull.

if you followed Chelsea last season (i have my doubts)

I go to the games which is more than you do. I doubt you have ever seen a game of real football. Without the gayboy helmets and the pads :D I been following Chelsea when we had players and managers that you would never have heard of. I haven’t seen Chelsea playing this boring football since David Webb was manager.

Chelsea under Claudio would have won 2 of the last 3 and got 6 points which is better than 5. They would have scored goals.

Jose Mourinho got lucky with Porto. He won't ever win anything as a manager again. He was a sh1tty footballer when he played and he never won anything and now he is an overrated manager. He thinks playing mindgames with Duff and the players is going to work when all he is doing wasting time. People talk about it will all be better when Chelsea have Gelled? Chelsea gelled a long time ago under Claudio now we have a new batch of mercenaries brought in by Jose Mourinho including the most overrated right back in the world. Jose Mourinho is lucky in that inherited this team form Claudio Ranieri. Everybody says Kezman is great but there is no way he is better than Forrssell.

[Hurley]

Jose Mourinho got lucky with Porto.

Winning a UEFA Cup and a Champions League in two years is not luck.

He was a sh1tty footballer when he played and he never won anything and now he is an overrated manager.

He was not a footballer. You dont need to be a great football player to be a great coach, and he learned with the best as an assistant coach of Bobby Robson and Louis Van Gaal in Barcelona. He won a UEFA Cup, a Champions League and three domestic titles in two years, how do you expect him to be rated?

Everybody says Kezman is great but there is no way he is better than Forrssell.

:rolleyes:

[illuminatus]

Everybody says Kezman is great but there is no way he is better than Forrssell.

I agree with you about Chelsea playing really boring stuff given their squad quality, and i also think Ranieri wouldn't have done worse with this team (he might even have done better), but that is unfair on Kezman. He's a very sharp instinctive scorer and i think he deserves his fair share of starts. Drogba and Gudjohnsen haven't proven to be that prolific either.

[christosap]

I go to the games which is more than you do. I doubt you have ever seen a game of real football. Without the gayboy helmets and the pads :D I been following Chelsea when we had players and managers that you would never have heard of. I haven’t seen Chelsea playing this boring football since David Webb was manager.

Chelsea under Claudio would have won 2 of the last 3 and got 6 points which is better than 5. They would have scored goals.

Jose Mourinho got lucky with Porto. He won't ever win anything as a manager again. He was a sh1tty footballer when he played and he never won anything and now he is an overrated manager. He thinks playing mindgames with Duff and the players is going to work when all he is doing wasting time. People talk about it will all be better when Chelsea have Gelled? Chelsea gelled a long time ago under Claudio now we have a new batch of mercenaries brought in by Jose Mourinho including the most overrated right back in the world. Jose Mourinho is lucky in that inherited this team form Claudio Ranieri. Everybody says Kezman is great but there is no way he is better than Forrssell.

i'm done, all of got to say is ********** off troll, there is no way in hell your a chelsea fan, your bitter and obviously know dick about the game.

[nicephoras]

I agree with you about Chelsea playing really boring stuff given their squad quality, and i also think Ranieri wouldn't have done worse with this team

Again, do you people watch the games? We were accused of playing catenaccio sometimes under Ranieri last year. :rolleyes:

[nicephoras]

I go to the games which is more than you do. I doubt you have ever seen a game of real football. Without the gayboy helmets and the pads :D I been following Chelsea when we had players and managers that you would never have heard of. I haven’t seen Chelsea playing this boring football since David Webb was manager.

So you missed the two legs against Stuttgart then?

Chelsea under Claudio would have won 2 of the last 3 and got 6 points which is better than 5. They would have scored goals.

Really? Last year Chelsea under Claudio failed to get a point at Villa. Or three points at Brum.

Jose Mourinho got lucky with Porto. He won't ever win anything as a manager again.

:confused: Wow, Nostradamus's sock puppet.

He was a sh1tty footballer when he played and he never won anything and now he is an overrated manager.

What's his playing ability got to do with it? Some of the worst managers are those that were excellent players. Eriksson has done well everywhere he's gone, and he wasn't a great player.

He thinks playing mindgames with Duff and the players is going to work when all he is doing wasting time. People talk about it will all be better when Chelsea have Gelled? Chelsea gelled a long time ago under Claudio now we have a new batch of mercenaries brought in by Jose Mourinho including the most overrated right back in the world.

We gelled under Claudio a long time ago? Tell me, was that gelling complete when were bringing on Robert Huth as a right back in Monaco?

Jose Mourinho is lucky in that inherited this team form Claudio Ranieri.

Anyone would be lucky to inherit this team. Duh.

Everybody says Kezman is great but there is no way he is better than Forrssell.

That remains to be seen. At the moment, I think Kezman is desperate for a goal. Once that comes, hopefully he will stop pressing. Also, lets hope it will be easier for him to score once Robben comes back.

[Dr_Intoxicated]

Claudio may not deserved to have been fired, but he certainly tinkered his way out of a job. What the HELL were Veron and Huth doing on the field in Monaco? Also, Claudio's predilection for Italian based players failed to pay off badly.

P.S. For all the people complaining about Mourinho's tactics - who here remembers the two legs against Stuttgart last year? Now, be honest. Who was awake for both legs?

To be fair there has been quite a bit of tinkering this season under JM. There have been several midfield lineups, the CB rotation and a couple of changes up front.

Also Huth was brought on on Saturday to replace replace Duff, I must admit to a smile when that happened.

[illuminatus]

Again, do you people watch the games? We were accused of playing catenaccio sometimes under Ranieri last year. :rolleyes:

I thought Chelsea looked pretty good last year actually, once they got into their stride about halfway through the season. Lampard was scorching, and Gudjohnsen, Mutu, Duff and Gronkjaer were taking turns to show their brilliance. I definitely didn't hear anyone complaining about Chelsea being boring then... only this year. For example Soccernet's Insider doing a report on the last game that was scathing in it's criticism. I'm not trying to troll, but i don't agree with what you said here. Correct me if i'm wrong though.

[Andy Bennett]

Chelsea under Claudio would have won 2 of the last 3 and got 6 points which is better than 5. They would have scored goals.

There's no way of knowing how we'd have done.

As for your other points about how good Mourinho was as a player... who the hell cares. He's not going to play for us, is he. Also, how do you know he's playing mind games with Duff. How do you know he hasn't sat down on several occasions and had a good long talk to Duffer and found out that Duffer wasn't feeling particularly confident? How do you know that JM hasn't seen him in training and felt it better to build his confidence up before starting him. Answer to both - you don't.

I've questioned several of JM's decisions, particularly the purchase of Tiago because I didn't, (and still don't), think that we needed him... but this all-encompassing maundering on about everything under the sun is pretty pathetic bearing in mind that we've haven't lost a game yet and are lying second in the league.

I, for one, realise that we are playing in a different style and it's going to take time for the players to adapt. Maybe you should just wait a bit before hurling yourself from the nearest available tall building.

[Andy Bennett]

For example Soccernet's Insider doing a report on the last game that was scathing in it's criticism.
The thing people need to understand is that most sports journalists know precisely ********-all about the game. The problem in the game against Middlesborough was that they packed the defence stringing 5, sometimes more, across midfield and never ventured further forward than the halfway line. It doesn't matter how good you are that's going to be difficult to break down.

The truth is that, even playing against that method of play, Drogba hit the bar and should have scored at least one of the several heading opportunities he had. That would have had us winning 3-0 instead of 1-0. It would also have meant that they would have left bigger gaps for us to break in to as the game went on.

I think all this stuff about us playing defensively is pure crap. We did in the first game ManU when players were finding their feet but that hasn't been the case now for quite a few games.

In any event, without wishing to be unkind, maybe your attention should be turned towards the problems with Madrid where, by the looks of things, the 'lunatics have taken over the asylum'.

[Andy Bennett]

Also Huth was brought on on Saturday to replace replace Duff, I must admit to a smile when that happened.
Yeah, but that's only when he's not out on loan to the German national side. :)

[nicephoras]

To be fair there has been quite a bit of tinkering this season under JM. There have been several midfield lineups, the CB rotation and a couple of changes up front.

Also Huth was brought on on Saturday to replace replace Duff, I must admit to a smile when that happened.

:) I felt the same way. But that change actually made sense in the dying moments of the game.

[illuminatus]

The thing people need to understand is that most sports journalists know precisely ********-all about the game.

It wasn't actually my intention to use that article to proclaim that Chelsea is boring (not that i didn't disagree with what was said in it), but i was just using it to point out to nicephoras that i'm only really starting to see people criticize Chelsea's style now and not last season.

The problem in the game against Middlesborough was that they packed the defence stringing 5, sometimes more, across midfield and never ventured further forward than the halfway line. It doesn't matter how good you are that's going to be difficult to break down.

The truth is that, even playing against that method of play, Drogba hit the bar and should have scored at least one of the several heading opportunities he had. That would have had us winning 3-0 instead of 1-0. It would also have meant that they would have left bigger gaps for us to break in to as the game went on.

I think all this stuff about us playing defensively is pure crap. We did in the first game ManU when players were finding their feet but that hasn't been the case now for quite a few games.

I didn't think it was Middlesbrough's lack of desire to attack, rather their inability to create worthwhile posession in midfield, that led them to have no shots on goal. Boro were shocking, which made Chelsea's inability to tear them apart all the more strange.

In any event, without wishing to be unkind, maybe your attention should be turned towards the problems with Madrid where, by the looks of things, the 'lunatics have taken over the asylum'.

Mind you, I've already said my piece on my team in the Madrid forums. :rolleyes: I'm just here commenting on the English games i watched this weekend. I agree with you that it's too early to make any sort of predictions on what will happen with this team next, but Chelsea v Boro was a very disappointing game to watch. I'm having much more fun arguing here than i was watching it..

[nicephoras]

I thought Chelsea looked pretty good last year actually, once they got into their stride about halfway through the season.

Well, that's the time that we lost the league, actually - our usual winter swoon. When we lost to a Cheyrou goal at home, for instance. :rolleyes:
If you get most people's opinions, our two best stretches were the CL wins over Arsenal (we definitely outplayed them in the CL) and October, when we were firing on all cylidners before the stupid international break. (5-0 at Newcastle, for instance.) Our best form was not mid-season.

Lampard was scorching, and Gudjohnsen, Mutu, Duff and Gronkjaer were taking turns to show their brilliance.

Which team are you talking about? Mutu started well, then faded badly. He was well nigh useless the second half of the year. And Gronks........so wildly inconsistent. Lampard was better last year, but I think we can give him a bit more time. :)

I definitely didn't hear anyone complaining about Chelsea being boring then... only this year.

Really? (http://soccernet.espn.go.com/report?id=143390&cc=5901)

Chelsea sneaked into the Champions League quarter-finals with a muted goalless draw with VfB Stuttgart at Stamford Bridge.

Blues boss Claudio Ranieri fielded a defensive 4-5-1 formation despite having emphasised the need for goals on the eve of the game.

For example Soccernet's Insider doing a report on the last game that was scathing in it's criticism. I'm not trying to troll, but i don't agree with what you said here. Correct me if i'm wrong though.

But that soccernet insider was upset at our lack of fluency not the lack of attacking intent. We dominated the match territorially. Lack of fluency is the indication that we've yet to gel and that Gallas can't put in good crosses from the left.

[johno]

I didn't think it was Middlesbrough's lack of desire to attack, rather their inability to create worthwhile posession in midfield, that led them to have no shots on goal. Boro were shocking, which made Chelsea's inability to tear them apart all the more strange.

Excellent points... look at Liverpool... would you say that they were defensive against us? Nope, they just got shut down/played a poor game and could get nothing going... When you dont have the ball a striker will drop back to apply pressure, if you rarely have the ball it makes no sense for your wingers to be much futher than the half line... playing defensively is a by product of being dominated.

In both of Man's recent matches the same thing happened... look at the first half against pool. Utter domination by United and Pool usually had Cisse (offside) chasing long balls. They found some shape and then were able to commit more numbers ahead in attack (because they had possesion) and things happened for them... of course one could say things happened because they put more men into attack, but that is not true, its pointless to go down field if you wont get the ball. Possession is everything unless you are talking counter attacks.

The same thing happened with Spurs, Defoe might have had 4 touches in the first half, that equals no chances, however in the second Spurs saw more of the ball and he got touches as did other players and chances were created... having possesion is the basis for attack, if you dont have the ball you are not playing football, you are at a cross country meet.