Mark_GrumpyLion
Full Member
One of the best games of the season, unlucky to get Mourinio'd. Gives me hope for next year though!
g = window.googletag || {}; googletag.cmd = googletag.cmd || []; window.googletag = googletag; googletag.cmd.push(function() { var interstitialSlot = googletag.defineOutOfPageSlot('/17085479/redcafe_gam_interstitial', googletag.enums.OutOfPageFormat.INTERSTITIAL); if (interstitialSlot) { interstitialSlot.addService(googletag.pubads()); } });
Wow... you're as harsh as harsh ca be! You seem to indicate that Mourinho is far better than Van Gaal. On head to head's you can have an argument, but if one were to see how we've fared against the top four sides, we've done better than Chelsea. So in effect, Van Gaal should have more "Class and Ability" than Mourinho?Completely as I expected.
We had the monopoly on the ball, but there never was any question on who's gonna win the game. I think it tells well the difference (on both class and ability) Mourinho and Van Gaal have.
Aye. It's like saying Di Matteo proved he was better than Pep in 2012 semi.I love the 'this game proved Mourinho is better than LVG' posts.
One game in which they scored one goal and we dominated posession proves that?
If one of our chances got into goal they wouldnt be saying that.
But some here adore Mourinho too much..
Yup. Truly ridiculous.Aye. It's like saying Di Matteo proved he was better than Pep in 2012 semi.
Van Gaal has more class than Mourinho. He is a football purist, and not that he only wants to win, but wants to win by dominating the match. All clubs he served played like this.Wow... you're as harsh as harsh ca be! You seem to indicate that Mourinho is far better than Van Gaal. On head to head's you can have an argument, but if one were to see how we've fared against the top four sides, we've done better than Chelsea. So in effect, Van Gaal should have more "Class and Ability" than Mourinho?
People need to get a grip around here. Some of the comments are akin to that of some wishy-washy children who are struggling with puberty.
Let's be logical.
- We played the system with a team that's never been played in that particular set up.
- Without Carrick and Blind, you see that we are more vulnerable at the back and less effective circulating the ball.
- We weren't able to capitalise on the chances created. We created a fair few. People need to go watch the match again.
- This was not the team that smashed the previous 6 opponents. A sudden last minute change can create doubt in our play, and that was evident going forward.
- Despite all this, we restricted them two moments. Which is an achievement.
Now ask yourselves this. If the team plays like this from game 1 next season, with more quality in the team and more depth, wouldn't be logical that we would have a bigger impact than what we saw on Saturday? We had to move our best striker to midfield and play another who just doesn't seem to fit in England. Without the injuries, I am confident that we would have had far more chances than what we saw.
Take all the points in view next time and think - Are we getting better? Yes. Are we perfect? No. Do we Need players? Yes. Can we win at Stamford Bridge next year? Yes! Of course, results can go both ways, but we can fight these boys now. We can stand up to the big leagues with our own football.
Watching us dominate Liverpool at Anfield, after they had been on an unbeaten run is the stuff of potential champions. It means that the football is effective. When we perfect it and when we buy the right players, we'll be far superior to what we've been so far.
That's not what happened though. We created plenty of chances imo, such as that early Rooney chance. We were just unlucky not to finish a few today, and had that early one gone in, the game would have been a lot different. So tactically, I reckon Van Gaal got it spot on, except for starting Falcao. But that was always a gamble, so no blame attached to him there.Van Gaal has more class than Mourinho. He is a football purist, and not that he only wants to win, but wants to win by dominating the match. All clubs he served played like this.
Mourinho is the better manager though. He has won more trophies than Van Gaal, and when he plays Van Gaal, he wins. Both on this match, and on the final in 2010, he defeated Van Gaal on basically the same way. Sit deep, let the other team has as much of ball as they want but don't allow them to create anything. And then hit them in the break.
Mourinho has never transformed teams he'd gone to though, he's never brought any sort of philosophy. He's managed to install winning mentality into his players and win with ready made teams but he's never gone through building from scratch process. Van Gaal has laid grounds for what happened 3-4 years later at Barcelona and Bayern, he seems to be doing the same in Manchester now - Mourinho hasn't done anything of a sort. When he leaves the club usually needs to find a completely new direction because Mourinho does not think long term. Doesn't necessarily mean one is better than another, they're just completely different and serve different purposes. Mourinho is far more likely to win you trophies while van Gaal is more likely to build you a team and lay foundations for future success.Van Gaal has more class than Mourinho. He is a football purist, and not that he only wants to win, but wants to win by dominating the match. All clubs he served played like this.
Mourinho is the better manager though. He has won more trophies than Van Gaal, and when he plays Van Gaal, he wins. Both on this match, and on the final in 2010, he defeated Van Gaal on basically the same way. Sit deep, let the other team has as much of ball as they want but don't allow them to create anything. And then hit them in the break.
Not really. Only Madrid was a ready made team. He built the teams that won trophies for Porto, Chelsea and Inter.Mourinho has never transformed teams he'd gone to though, he's never brought any sort of philosophy. He's managed to install winning mentality into his players and win with ready made teams but he's never gone through building from scratch process. Van Gaal has laid grounds for what happened 3-4 years later at Barcelona and Bayern, he seems to be doing the same in Manchester now - Mourinho hasn't done anything of a sort. When he leaves the club usually needs to find a completely new direction because Mourinho does not think long term. Doesn't necessarily mean one is better than another, they're just completely different and serve different purposes. Mourinho is far more likely to win you trophies while van Gaal is more likely to build you a team and lay foundations for future success.
We created 2 chances. One at the beginning, and then Falcao's chance. They also hit the bar later. But from the moment they scored, it looked to me that they were in total control (or at least as much in control as you can be by having 30% of the ball). We had the ball, but there was nothing that we could do with it.That's not what happened though. We created plenty of chances imo, such as that early Rooney chance. We were just unlucky not to finish a few today, and had that early one gone in, the game would have been a lot different. So tactically, I reckon Van Gaal got it spot on, except for starting Falcao. But that was always a gamble, so no blame attached to him there.
Bold statement that...We had chances, Rooney and Falcao could easily have put their 2 chances away on another day. Its obvious though the likes of Mata and Fellaini need Carrick who can pass inbetween the lines instead of Rooney who plays it out to the wing, although I thought he did well bringing in a bit of composure.
I watched the full match in the 'cold light of day', on Sunday. I thought we won a lot of breaking ball; I thought a draw would have been a fair result. And yes, anyone could have won. Pity about their goal, it was well taken, but avoidable. Foul call prior to it debatable.Watching the highlights, I think we were really unlucky to lose this one.
Mourinho said: "Control their direct football to Marouane Fellaini and control the wingers from making crosses on the inside foot.
"Wait for a mistake and score a goal. We were able to make their important players disappear. Nobody saw them. They were in our pockets."
Discussing the instructions on Monday, handed down last weekend, Zouma told Chelsea's website: "I had to stay with Fellaini because we knew he is on fire at the moment.
"He has scored a lot of goals so I had to keep an eye on him, and I think I did it well. I had to be physical with him and stay close to him.
"The game was very difficult. The most important thing was that we had one chance and we scored. We defended very well. Manchester United didn’t have many chances to score. We stayed compact."
Speaking immediately after the victory at Stamford Bridge, Mourinho saluted the efforts of the 20-year-old Frenchman and said: "I told Zouma I want the game to be 10 against 10, I didn’t want the game to be 11 against 11.
Mourinho can say all he wants but we had a lot of success in that Fellaini/Young/Shaw axis. Infact most of the chances came from that left wing. Our crossing was just poor on the day on top of the finishing.A bit more from Mourinho and Zouma -
Tactical genius.
It was a close game whatever. They got / created 1 great chance and scored, we created 2 maybe 3 and didn't take them.I don't agree with the notion that Mourinho outthought Van Gaal and that his tactical plan was flawless. It wasn't like our counter-attacking, defensive tactics against Barca in 08 (after Scholes scored) where they couldn't create shit. We created chances but didn't take them. Had Rooney not gone so nonchalantly about his finish in the first half and buried it, Mourinho's genius plan would have been outdone immediately. Imo you can control games while having 1/3 of possession but it wasn't the case there. They couldn't live with our passing, esp in the first half. they were visibly trying to dispossess us some 40 yards out from their goal but we ran rings around them. He got lucky with that imo. What he did well was nullifying Fellaini so he should get credit for that. And we had 3 very good chances in the second half.
He always plays with a target man, Falcao was our only striker since he wanted Rooney in midfield for 'balance'. If he had more options to move Rooney up top I doubt Falcao would've stayed on.The only concerns I have about the Chelsea game is that Louis kept Falcao on for the entire match and brought on Di Maria far too late. Out of mercy I can't argue too much with starting Falcao, but at some point early in the second half he needed to come off. We were after all, in full chase mode against a double-parked bus in the second half and there was no reason to have Rooney sit as far as back as he did.
Mourinho has been astoundingly arrogant post game, about his "Genius" plan to nullify Fellaini.I don't agree with the notion that Mourinho outthought Van Gaal and that his tactical plan was flawless. It wasn't like our counter-attacking, defensive tactics against Barca in 08 (after Scholes scored) where they couldn't create shit. We created chances but didn't take them. Had Rooney not gone so nonchalantly about his finish in the first half and buried it, Mourinho's genius plan would have been outdone immediately. Imo you can control games while having 1/3 of possession but it wasn't the case there. They couldn't live with our passing, esp in the first half. they were visibly trying to dispossess us some 40 yards out from their goal but we ran rings around them. He got lucky with that imo. What he did well was nullifying Fellaini so he should get credit for that. And we had 3 very good chances in the second half.
I submit that Louis did have an option to play Rooney up top, which was to have Fellaini sit back into midfield with Herrera.He always plays with a target man, Falcao was our only striker since he wanted Rooney in midfield for 'balance'. If he had more options to move Rooney up top I doubt Falcao would've stayed on.
That's a midfield you're never going to see under van Gaal tbh. He always has 2 defensively good players there: usually the 6 and 8. In our normal midfield the 8 (Herrera) is less defensive but the 10 (Fellaini) defends more than normal for a van Gaal team and therefore he still has his balance.I submit that Louis did have an option to play Rooney up top, which was to have Fellaini sit back into midfield with Herrera.
Fellaini is not a naturally gifted deep lying midfielder, but once we saw that he was being man-marked Louis could have easily have Fellaini be the one to drop back and Rooney push forward. Simple!
But I, in all truth, proposed this starting XI before the game:
De Gea
Valencia Smalling McNair Shaw
Herrera Fellaini
Mata Di Maria Young
Rooney
I still like it and maybe we'll see that against Everton.
The entire world knew that Jose, who has 9.5 fingers around the prem trophy and nothing else to play for, was going to sit and counter on us. Injuries, form, United's form, relative league position, Jose's nature, etc. There was no need to have Rooney sit back to defend against a sustained Cheslea attack that was never going to come.
The circumstances of this match were particularly unusual.That's a midfield you're never going to see under van Gaal tbh. He always has 2 defensively good players there: usually the 6 and 8. In our normal midfield the 8 (Herrera) is less defensive but the 10 (Fellaini) defends more than normal for a van Gaal team and therefore he still has his balance.
Last match we missed both our 6, the only other defensively good midfielder we have is Rooney. He's also the only backup for Herrera or Fellaini. That's why van Gaal plays him there, he wants balance and control over the midfield. Fellaini, as we've seen, is much better in a role further up the pitch - our whole gameplan for him is based around that, moving him back in the middle of a game would ruin that.
Di Maria can be very effective in midfield, but it will mean we lose control since he's too sloppy (that's just how he is - not complaining). He has only played on the wings for a while now and I think that is where he will stay. If he moved Rooney out of midfield we'd be too lightweight for van Gaal. He could've chosen to take that risky approach but I think he didn't want to lose our control over the midfield (and thus over the game).
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
This.If Rooney started upfront we'd have won that game. I don't want to see Falcao in the starting lineup against Everton
Ludicrous. Who were you planning to play in the midfield position that Rooney occupied?This.
If the circumstances of the match were different and we "needed" the win, Rooney would have started up front. But as it was the match was essentially a dead rubber so we had the luxury of starting Falcao for what surely has to be the very last time, and playing Rooney as a holding mid.
Mike Dean