Barcelona v Real Madrid Copa Del Rey Quarter Final 2nd leg

Originally Posted by Jerry the Berry

As good a manager Mourinho is, he's failed to get an accepatble level of discipline in this Madrid team. I know it's part of the culture of the club to be somewhat 'theatrical' but some of the play acting last night was beyond a joke. Ramos, Pepe, Casillas and Diarra should be ashamed of themselves.

Porto under Mourinho were a lot worse, so I imagine the manager is happy with it. Also, they know Barcelona will try every trick possible to get an advantage, so they behave in the same way.

Originally Posted by borsuk

exactly the same thing could be said of almost any coach ffs. they're all 'happy' to play nice football, the question is if they do it.

the acid test is on the pitch and for real, given the weakness of the rest of la liga, in the games against barca. in these (is it 10 times he's played barca now?) mourinho's tactics against barca haven't just been defensive, they've been negative in every way: timid, refusing to entertain, dirty and cynical, and i think he deserves criticism for that. on the other hand, i thought they were brilliant last night and i give him full credit for the aggressive team selection and approach, it made for fantastic entertainment and they should have won the game comfortably. we'll see if he does the same in the league game.

There are managers - the likes of Michels, Menotti, Santana, Cruyff, Sacchi, Zeman, Van Gaal, Bielsa, Guardiola... - who have a philosophy of how to play that they seek to impose regardless of the nature of their team, of the opponent, and of the situation. If their idea of how to play fails, then they will fail with it. Gasperini's spell at Inter this season is, I think, a good contemporary example of this.

There are other managers who are more pragmatic. They will alter their tactics and their manner of playing completely as they feel the situation demands; they care only about the result, and not so much, if at all, about the manner in which the result is obtained.

Mourinho is, in my view, probably the best contemporary exponent of this latter approach. He is entirely happy to play extremely defensive, aesthetically poor football (the most obvious example would be Inter's performance at the Camp Nou in their Champions League winning season, where he was happy to give up entirely on keeping possession of the ball, simply so that his players would remain properly positioned) if he thinks this is the best way to achieve the desired result, just as he is to play on the counter with all the emphasis on direct, rapid transitions, or to play an expansive, intricate, possession oriented game with a high defensive line (as Madrid have for most of this season, even switching at times to a Ajax style 3-3-1-3 to best facilitate this).

So although you might see a Mourinho team play somewhat like a Bielsa team, for instance, you would never a Bielsa team play as Inter did at the Camp Nou. That, to me, is the big difference.

This was the basic point I was making in my prior post and, frankly, I don't see where the disagreement is based on what you've written above.

Originally Posted by The Watcher

Porto under Mourinho were a lot worse, so I imagine the manager is happy with it. Also, they know Barcelona will try every trick possible to get an advantage, so they behave in the same way.

Possibly so, it's a close call though. I just think that with the better standand of players he has now, he should have them more disciplined.

Originally Posted by Serenity Now

There are managers - the likes of Michels, Menotti, Santana, Cruyff, Sacchi, Zeman, Van Gaal, Bielsa, Guardiola... - who have a philosophy of how to play that they seek to impose regardless of the nature of their team, of the opponent, and of the situation. If their idea of how to play fails, then they will fail with it. Gasperini's spell at Inter this season is, I think, a good contemporary example of this.

There are other managers who are more pragmatic. They will alter their tactics and their manner of playing completely as they feel the situation demands; they care only about the result, and not so much, if at all, about the manner in which the result is obtained.

Mourinho is, in my view, probably the best contemporary exponent of this latter approach. He is entirely happy to play extremely defensive, aesthetically poor football (the most obvious example would be Inter's performance at the Camp Nou in their Champions League winning season, where he was happy to give up entirely on keeping possession of the ball, simply so that his players would remain properly positioned) if he thinks this is the best way to achieve the desired result, just as he is to play on the counter with all the emphasis on direct, rapid transitions, or to play an expansive, intricate, possession oriented game with a high defensive line (as Madrid have for most of this season, even switching at times to a Ajax style 3-3-1-3 to best facilitate this).

So although you might see a Mourinho team play somewhat like a Bielsa team, for instance, you would never a Bielsa team play as Inter did at the Camp Nou. That, to me, is the big difference.

This was the basic point I was making in my prior post and, frankly, I don't see where the disagreement is based on what you've written above.

there is no disagreement in terms of what mourinho does. i think we disagree in whether we see it as something admirable or not.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0C0m6pPouQ