SAF's CL record actually isn't that bad

VorZakone

What would Kenny G do?
Joined
May 9, 2013
Messages
38,309
There seems to be this sentiment that SAF should have won more CL's with Man Utd but that notion is likely based on his long tenure with the club.

However, when you look deeper into it, it's actually not that bad. In fact, it's actually quite good on the contrary. The European Cup was rebranded to the Champions League so I'm taking 1992 as the starting point and 2013 as the end point because SAF retired in 2013. Note: English clubs were banned for a while after Heysel.

These are the CL winners from 1992 to 2013.
- Real Madrid, Barcelona, AC Milan (3)
- Bayern, Man Utd (2)
- Liverpool, Inter, Marseille, Dortmund, Ajax, Chelsea, Juventus, Porto, Marseille (1)

Only 3 clubs have won more CL's than SAF between 1992 - 2013. And the difference is literally 1 CL. Talk about fine margins.

And let's face it, Barcelona between 2009 and 2011 were immense. Hardly shocking to lose 2 finals to the likes of Xavi, Iniesta (who were winning international tournaments for fun in the same period) and Messi.

When you take participation in a final as the metric, then only 2 clubs have reached more finals (AC Milan & Juve). Bayern are equal, losing it in 2010 and 2012. Real and Barca have reached 1 final less but thanks to their 100% win record they've won 1 more.
 
Last edited:
I think that because the CL ends up being a knock out competition a better metric is finals made. With that perspective then SAF did pretty good.

But I also think he's the best manager of all time and any criticism of him is just ABU sour grapes. feck 'em.
 
Dwazza Gunnar Solskjær said:
I think that because the CL ends up being a knock out competition a better metric is finals made. With that perspective then SAF did pretty good.

But I also think he's the best manager of all time and any criticism of him is just ABU sour grapes. feck 'em.
Click to expand...
Interestingly, between 1992 and 2013 SAF reached more finals than Real Madrid. But Real has a 100% win record. Same for Barca, also 3 finals with a 100% win record.
 
Last edited:
bondsname said:
Haven't Real Madrid won it 4 times and Liverpool twice?
Click to expand...
Nope. Liverpool's 2nd win was 2019. Real won it in 1998, 2000 and 2002. Next win was in 2014 which was after SAF's retirement.
 
It just shows how hard it is to win the cup in his era.

We should have won more but little incidents like Rooney getting injured and Rafael v Bayern, the disallowed goal v Porto and being unlucky v Dortmund in about 97 cost us. Plus that ridiculous sending off of Nani v Real. Although that was quite early in the competition.

That's before the obvious barce finals. And even then it was unlucky Chelsea lost to them in the semi in controversial circumstances for one of them. We'd have had a lot more of a chance v them.
 
Yes the difference is just 1 UCL but SAF was the manager throughout that time while the other clubs had various other managers, therefore those other managers had won multiple UCL while taking charge for a shorter spell of time and also with teams considered less great than United.

Jupp Heynckes for example reached the UCL final ever year (3 times) he managed a team in the tournament other than his last with Bayern when he came in mid season to replace Anchelloti.

The excuses given can be named by every club really, bad decisions and losses in matches when the team shouldve won happen to everyone. Jupp himself can say he should have 3 UCL and another final had things gone his way.

Overall SAF did have a decent (not good) UCL record considering the amount of years he was managing a team considered to be amongst the best in Europe. He still won it twice though (and reached two more finals), which puts him in high standing in history and shouldn't knock him down from being the greatest manager ever, but yes on terms of European records there are other managers who have done better than him.
 
hasanejaz88 said:
Yes the difference is just 1 UCL but SAF was the manager throughout that time while the other clubs had various other managers, therefore those other managers had won multiple UCL while taking charge for a shorter spell of time and also with teams considered less great than United.

Jupp Heynckes for example reached the UCL final ever year (3 times) he managed a team in the tournament other than his last with Bayern when he came in mid season to replace Anchelloti.

The excuses given can be named by every club really, bad decisions and losses in matches when the team shouldve won happen to everyone. Jupp himself can say he should have 3 UCL and another final had things gone his way.

Overall SAF did have a decent (not good) UCL record considering the amount of years he was managing a team considered to be amongst the best in Europe. He still won it twice though (and reached two more finals), which puts him in high standing in history and shouldn't knock him down from being the greatest manager ever, but yes on terms of European records there are other managers who have done better than him.
Click to expand...
According to Wiki, there are only 2 managers with more CL wins: Ancelotti & Zidane. If you include the European Cup, then it's 3 (Paisley adds to the list).

And it's pretty hard to rebuild teams and turn into them into CL caliber over and over again. Whatever metric you take, SAF's records are solid and those with more wins whether clubs or managers only have marginal numerical superiority. Ancelotti, Paisley and Zidane have also won only 1 more CL, though I realise Ancelotti and Zidane are still managing.

Zidane's record for his age is ridicilous though.
 
97, 03 and 10 were particularly painful since we would have a great chance in the final had we reached it.

02 loss against Leverkusen and the utter farce in his last year against Madrid hurts though.
 
The infuriating thing is that we've come so close to winning more. We had to contend with a once in a life time Barca team and that freak Nani red against Bayern. I wonder what the record would look like if you simply look at CL final / semi final appearances and not just wins, because lets face it any CL win (even ours in 99, 08, Barca 09) involves a huge amount of luck.
 
Teja said:
The infuriating thing is that we've come so close to winning more. We had to contend with a once in a life time Barca team and that freak Nani red against Bayern. I wonder what the record would look like if you simply look at CL final / semi final appearances and not just wins, because lets face it any CL win (even ours in 99, 08, Barca 09) involves a huge amount of luck.
Click to expand...

Do you mean the Rafael red vs Bayern in '10 or the Nani red against Real in '13 (both changed the tie respectively of course)?
 
NotoriousISSY said:
Do you mean the Rafael red vs Bayern in '10 or the Nani red against Real in '13 (both changed the tie respectively of course)?
Click to expand...

Sorry yes, the Rafa red vs Bayern although the Nani red was up there too. The Rafa one we were 3-1 up and were comfortably better than Bayern through out the first half but the red changed the tie completely. In the Madrid tie we were still better but it might still have gone either way even without the red is what I remember.
 
Winning the Cup Winners Cup in 1991 was as big of an achievement as any. Beating that Barca side, who went on to win the European Cup the following year was massive thing.
 
The Bayern one feels like more of a lost chance, though the Real one was more infuriating. Bayern thrashed Lyon in the semis, and we would've done the same. Final was Jose's Inter, a formidable team, but their strength was soaking up pressure and hitting on the counter attack which would have been ok, since with Vidic and Rio etc we could sit back too. Their attack was very good: Sneijder, Eto'o, Milito, Maicon - but Barca and Bayern were soft defensively and we wouldn't have been. A decent chnce for United even though Inter would have been favourites.

The Real game would have been his first ever win over them, and would have been done with an underdog but disciplined team. OTOH, next round was Dortmund who tore through Real and final was against that scary Bayern team, so it doesn't feel like a lost chance.
 
Teja said:
Sorry yes, the Rafa red vs Bayern although the Nani red was up there too. The Rafa one we were 3-1 up and were comfortably better than Bayern through out the first half but the red changed the tie completely. In the Madrid tie we were still better but it might still have gone either way even without the red is what I remember.
Click to expand...

The Bayern one feels like more of a lost chance, though the Real one was more infuriating. Bayern thrashed Lyon in the semis, and we would've done the same. Final was Jose's Inter, a formidable team, but their strength was soaking up pressure and hitting on the counter attack which would have been ok, since with Vidic and Rio etc we could sit back too. Their attack was very good: Sneijder, Eto'o, Milito, Maicon - but Barca and Bayern were soft defensively and we wouldn't have been. A decent chnce for United even though Inter would have been favourites.

The Real game would have been his first ever win over them, and would have been done with an underdog but disciplined team. OTOH, next round was Dortmund who tore through Real and final was against that scary Bayern team, so it doesn't feel like a lost chance.
 
I'm the early years did the critisism he get reside from lack of winning it or more competing? I could be wrong but pre 2006 wasn't there only one semi outside of 99?

From an outside perspective I felt he was often caught flat footed tactically (Ancelotti especially had the beating of him) as coaches on the continent were at that point bigger sticklers to detail and exposed weaknesses in ways the teams in England couldn't.

But to his credit he learned and fixed those issues in his last period as a manager, 1 win, 2 runners up, 1 semi and 1 quarter is a superb record by any standards.
 
Zidane winning 3 CLs in 2.5 years as manager has made everyone look a lot worse than they are.

Still, SAF was far from a tactical expert in these ties and often got things wrong. Fans can point to United getting unlucky in some ties but for such a long period of time luck evens itself out.
 
I believe comparing SAF record in Europe to the rest of the continent is unfair a better comparison would be to other teams in England, lets look at City's dominance in the league for the past 3 years and even before Pep they never reached a final, Liverpool with a great team got knocked-out by not a great version of Atletico this year, Chelsea won the CL when they were dire in the PL and lost a final against United, (lets keep Arsenal out of the conversation). The format of the FA competitions never helped English club in Europe, there is no winter break, FA cup replays, extra competition with the league cup it's such a disadvantage for clubs in England.

SAF unlike other managers had to rebuild teams over and over again and stay dominant in a competitive league unlike La Liga, Bundesliga. With a change of luck we could have won at least 2 extra CL (Porto still hurts), as we faced arguably the best team in club history twice in the finals (Barcelona). I always believed the narrative that SAF was out of his depth in Europe when I was younger but when thinking about it more he was really great he has the highest number of European trophies (7) tied with Ancelloti when you include the Aberdeen titles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Invictus
It's crazy how lucky he was in the two finals he won. Don't get me wrong, the seasons were absolutely fantastic, but the way in which we beat bayern that day and the fact that Terry was literally one penalty away from destroying our hearts...

I kinda wish he had won a dominant final.
 
Peyroteo said:
Zidane winning 3 CLs in 2.5 years as manager has made everyone look a lot worse than they are.

Still, SAF was far from a tactical expert in these ties and often got things wrong. Fans can point to United getting unlucky in some ties but for such a long period of time luck evens itself out.
Click to expand...

SAF was excellent tactically.

No he's not the best tactician ever, but he was still excellent.

This myth of him not being that great in that regard needs to die.
 
One thing to remember is that, over the years of Sir Alex competing in the Champions League as ManUnited manager, He's had like one or two times where his club was the best (even that is arguable), players wise. And in games of such tiny margins, players quality matter a lot. Average managers would automatically lose by default because of this reason alone. Another thing is luck, being one of the best among 5 or 6 is much different than being one of the best out of 2 or 3. Not mentioning the draws, injuries, another club having one in a generation talent that could create magic out of thin air, etc.

After seeing how the other top managers failed here, We know how tough of a job it is. They cannot even get into the Champions League consistently for god sake. And if Sir Alex did very very well here with historical figures like Cleverley and Gibson then that should be enough indicator to see how He was a great tactician without even having to bring up his Champions League records. But just to add a few examples that everyone knows about, to remind you not to be a spoiled, ungrateful child :
  1. Park vs Pirlo : Pirlo only touched the ball several times
  2. Welbeck vs Madrid : scored, excellent all-round performance
  3. Nani vs Madrid (second leg) : caused a goal, was unlucky with the red card
Look at those and tell me He's not a good tactician. In the case of 2 and 3, those (at the time) average and unfavored players would have sent us to progress further in the Champions League if not for idiot refereeing. Even Jose said it himself. I'm pretty sure those three were only a tiny portion of his other great tactical decisions in CL. But dear me, stop being such a spoiled little child will ya? We're not even in the CL right now and you're complaining about the lack of CL domination during Fergie's reign. Are you mad? fecking hell blud. I'm sick of it Robbie.
 
Last edited:
VorZakone said:
According to Wiki, there are only 2 managers with more CL wins: Ancelotti & Zidane. If you include the European Cup, then it's 3 (Paisley adds to the list).

And it's pretty hard to rebuild teams and turn into them into CL caliber over and over again. Whatever metric you take, SAF's records are solid and those with more wins whether clubs or managers only have marginal numerical superiority. Ancelotti, Paisley and Zidane have also won only 1 more CL, though I realise Ancelotti and Zidane are still managing.

Zidane's record for his age is ridicilous though.
Click to expand...

I'd argue otherwise. It's harder for managers to jump in and win rather than a manager who's managing for 10 over years having the whole team built to his idea and the whole train moves according to him alone.

He's still saf to me, but i think managing a team long term is an advantage rather than otherwise.

Managing passion and maintaining hunger aside
 
Sky1981 said:
I'd argue otherwise. It's harder for managers to jump in and win rather than a manager who's managing for 10 over years having the whole team built to his idea and the whole train moves according to him alone.

He's still saf to me, but i think managing a team long term is an advantage rather than otherwise.

Managing passion and maintaining hunger aside
Click to expand...
I believe it can be more difficult - unless you're managing Madrid and Barcelona who always have the best European talent, purely because you have to go through 3-5 year spells to getting your team back to being absolutely at their very best.

I guess it depends on the move you make. In the case of Mourinho for example he kept moving to better or different pastures when things went tits up. That I think is easier, having that option to pick a strong team at just the right time to suit your career.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
I believe it can be more difficult - unless you're managing Madrid and Barcelona who always have the best European talent, purely because you have to go through 3-5 year spells to getting your team back to being absolutely at their very best.

I guess it depends on the move you make. In the case of Mourinho for example he kept moving to better or different pastures when things went tits up. That I think is easier, having that option to pick a strong team at just the right time to suit your career.
Click to expand...

Well i disagree. When you jump to new team you need to adapt, learn about your team, know your players and all. It wasnt a walk in the park either.

And saf has the advantage of always buying the player he wants, not being bound by dof or board politics. He also has the advantage of being unsackable virtually his player has no other way but his way.

It's like playing football manager. You're at your best after a few years and having the team built to your liking. It's hard to be at saf shoe but when you're there things are working in your favour
 
Sky1981 said:
Well i disagree. When you jump to new team you need to adapt, learn about your team, know your players and all. It wasnt a walk in the park either.

And saf has the advantage of always buying the player he wants, not being bound by dof or board politics. He also has the advantage of being unsackable virtually his player has no other way but his way.

It's like playing football manager. You're at your best after a few years and having the team built to your liking. It's hard to be at saf shoe but when you're there things are working in your favour
Click to expand...
It's also about convenient to be able to jump ship to new pastures.
 
Dancfc said:
I'm the early years did the critisism he get reside from lack of winning it or more competing? I could be wrong but pre 2006 wasn't there only one semi outside of 99?

From an outside perspective I felt he was often caught flat footed tactically (Ancelotti especially had the beating of him) as coaches on the continent were at that point bigger sticklers to detail and exposed weaknesses in ways the teams in England couldn't.

But to his credit he learned and fixed those issues in his last period as a manager, 1 win, 2 runners up, 1 semi and 1 quarter is a superb record by any standards.
Click to expand...

Yep I agree. I think when people criticize his European record it was more for the period between 93 and 2006 when we only reached one final.

After that, his record in the lead 7 years is very good with one win and 2 runners up.
 
Sky1981 said:
Well i disagree. When you jump to new team you need to adapt, learn about your team, know your players and all. It wasnt a walk in the park either.

And saf has the advantage of always buying the player he wants, not being bound by dof or board politics. He also has the advantage of being unsackable virtually his player has no other way but his way.

It's like playing football manager. You're at your best after a few years and having the team built to your liking. It's hard to be at saf shoe but when you're there things are working in your favour
Click to expand...
Its an advantage in team building but staying relevant and competitive is probably the hardest for any manager. Just look at LVG, Capello, Wenger, Mourinho,
 
I have been watching football since 2004, and more often than not its usually the best side with the best quality that wins it. The reason manutd and SAF didn't win it more often was simple. We never consistently had the best team in europe. I felt in my watching years as a utd fan only during 2006-2009 we had the best team in europe.

In 2007, injuries to Vidic and Rio cost us against Milan. In 2008, we won it. 2009 we were close against Barca and with some good chances and that game just didn't go well for us. However since then we had 4 seasons (till SAF retirement) and we were never good enough to win it we got to another CPL final due to luck of draws in 2011.

In those last 4 years, we never replaced Ronaldo and Tevez, Scholes was also shot physically, in every thread we were crying for CMs and attacking players that would control the play along and be match winners and the likes of Ozil, Silva, Toure, Aguero, Robben, Ribbery, Vidal, Sneijder and Benzema to name a few were moving for reasonable amounts but we had this no value rhetoric.

Furthermore our defence was also aging. Evra was no longer his usual self, there was no settled Rb.

Compare this to Madrid and Barca of years they won they usually had world class players all over the field and importantly control over midfield this is where games are won and lost.

Best example is Milan their last best side which was complete and world class got them champions league in 2003 then got them to another final (Istanbul) and another win in 2007.

You can blame luck and draws all you want. 8 times out of 10 the best teams win and for others red card and offsides etc work against you.
 
Luke1995 said:
It's crazy how lucky he was in the two finals he won. Don't get me wrong, the seasons were absolutely fantastic, but the way in which we beat bayern that day and the fact that Terry was literally one penalty away from destroying our hearts...

I kinda wish he had won a dominant final.
Click to expand...
What difference would that have made? A win is a win

I would rather wish we had won more scrappy finals than win the ones we did 4 or 5-0.
 
SAF should have won one more CL.
2001/2002 - very narrow defeat to Bayer Leverkusen in 1/2 on away goals. Roy Keane should have played in the final.
2003/2004 - referee's mistake against Porto in 1/8. And then who knows, maybe we could win that year. The draw was certainly friendly, although Lyon, Depor and Monaco were no jokes at that time. This CL season was very strange.
2009/2010 - stupid Rafael's red card and again defeat on away goals against Bayern. Plus Rooney's injury, but we were still dominating them till red card. And certainly would have got to the finals that year and who knows... still the most heartbreaking defeat for me as a United fan.
2012/2013 - SAF outclassed Mourinho tactically, MU dominated and Real did not have a single chance... till again the stupid red card. Bayern were monstrous that year, but who knows, maybe we would have been lucky one more time.
 
Luke1995 said:
It's crazy how lucky he was in the two finals he won. Don't get me wrong, the seasons were absolutely fantastic, but the way in which we beat bayern that day and the fact that Terry was literally one penalty away from destroying our hearts...

I kinda wish he had won a dominant final.
Click to expand...

And how incredibly unlucky perhaps....playing that Bayern side in 99 with Keane and Scholes suspended, they had a full strength team we were always going to need luck. We were never going to dominate that game with the midfield available to us. The 08 final we should have been 3-0 up before Lampard scores the luckiest goal I’ve ever seen.
 
It's criminal that we didn't win the 2004 CL or the 2008 FA Cup.

Criminal.
 
The record isn't to bad. We were consistent up to a point but we didn't always have the luck. We lost ties we should have won. If the great dane stayed maybe we'd have defended it better in 2000 or if Ronaldo never left when he did. I think that was huge for Madrid, as they got to play a peak Barcelona and it's different when it's a team from your country but so many ties we missed so many chances but also fate went against us that Year porto won it after we had a good goal disallowed and again. Could go on all day. We've not always had the best refs either.....I think our business model hurts us and isn't really designed to dominate.

We can never enjoy it. Even when we win it their has to be Drama. People look at the 99 final and say we were lucky but we more then held our own in the group stages.
 
His early years (eg mid 90s) also saw us being handicapped due to the foreign rule (3 max?). Obviously this affected every team, but (maybe its bias) it seemed to affect United more (Im sure Irish was seen as foreign). It meant we could never play our best 11 iirc (I still remember Barca humbling us 4-0 when we had to play some of the youngsters). Although that probably saw a shift towards more of the youth which benefited us in 99.

I think the dortmund semi final was annoying as we missed chance after after in that.
But I feel like we only had a chance again until that Porto loss (scholes offside, howard spill last minute). - and that was the Leverkusen game which we went out on away goals (Forlan chance cleared off the line as well)

From then on we got better as a whole. Milan away we were without pretty much most of our defence (and im sure Vidic just came back from injury and was pushed into the team which didnt help).

Teja said:
In the Madrid tie we were still better but it might still have gone either way even without the red is what I remember.
Click to expand...

Whilst true in terms of going either way, I think that was one of the best performances of the season until that red. Madrid looked lost. However when that red happened, Jose pounced, I remember him bringing on Modric straight away, and with Welbeck moving out wide to plug the gap (instead of harassing their midfield), it created more space. Modric changed the game. (Even after the red we had chances and should have had a penalty). Crazy infuriating game.
 
I think that SAF's underwhelming CL record is down to three main issues

a- the EPL slow recovery to the ban. There were a time when the Serie A could easily outspend and outshine the EPL. The situation was so silly that United struggled to match the salary of Batistuta who was at the time playing for Fiorentina (ie the equivalent of Everton)
b- Edwards made it quite clear in an interview that the club's main priority was always that of balancing the books and winning the EPL. The CL was a bonus.
c- Pep's Barcelona rise to prominence.
 
FCAES_7 said:
I believe comparing SAF record in Europe to the rest of the continent is unfair a better comparison would be to other teams in England, lets look at City's dominance in the league for the past 3 years and even before Pep they never reached a final, Liverpool with a great team got knocked-out by not a great version of Atletico this year, Chelsea won the CL when they were dire in the PL and lost a final against United, (lets keep Arsenal out of the conversation). The format of the FA competitions never helped English club in Europe, there is no winter break, FA cup replays, extra competition with the league cup it's such a disadvantage for clubs in England.

SAF unlike other managers had to rebuild teams over and over again and stay dominant in a competitive league unlike La Liga, Bundesliga. With a change of luck we could have won at least 2 extra CL (Porto still hurts), as we faced arguably the best team in club history twice in the finals (Barcelona). I always believed the narrative that SAF was out of his depth in Europe when I was younger but when thinking about it more he was really great he has the highest number of European trophies (7) tied with Ancelloti when you include the Aberdeen titles.
Click to expand...

Why do you believe that it is unfair to compare his record to the rest of the continent?

We were unlucky in some years not least facing that great Barca side in 09 and 11 but he got team selection and tactics wrong in both of those games.

SAF got us to 4 CL finals and apart from a period in the first half against chelsea in 08 we were shit in all 4 finals. We should definitely have won another CL under him, he had the players to do it but too often got it wrong tactically.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.