Only cos it's you. You've become the forum Lucas
Rafa
- Thread starter 6TimesaRed
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Only cos it's you. You've become the forum Lucas
Hence obsessed.
Wouldn't surprise me if he in the future gives me shit for using letters. "Look at that trolling cunt using letters, who does he think he is".
At least you can't get subbed at half time
What proof have you got that we need an attacking approach? And even if that's true, did these attacking examples we need to follow all do so at the cost of no defensive organisation whatsoever? I really don't think that's true at all, is it?
What I meant (did I even say it btw?) by 'safe' is a rounded coach who can organise a team as efficiently as possible so as to get the most out of its resources. That doesn't mean defensive, or cautious. It means, for example, recognising that a team of limited means simply *must* be competent in all areas of the pitch, because it simply won't have the funds to employ the brilliant attackers a more flamboyant team needs. It means recognising that you get more return from making the defence solid and keeping the attack just decent than you do from concentrating everything in attack.
I'm basically talking about a pragmatic approach, rather than the kind of grander visionary sort of thing you're pushing, because I think that might suit our needs better right now. We've got the resources to have a very decent team, either the third or fourth best in the country, with a focus on very good young players, that in time will mature into the best team in the country. I'm saying we might no longer need any alchemy to get them playing like more than the sum of the parts: we just need someone to organise them efficiently and to see them through the maturation process as smoothly as possible, because the danger with someone more maverick like BR is that he's a gamble: there's an upside that isn't much better than the upside of the 'safe' (say, finishing 2nd with amazing football instead of third with just good football) but a downside that is really really bad (say finishing 6th having conceded 60 goals instead of 4th with 40 goals).
In short, the argument is: we're on our way. Everything is in place. Why do we need a rather unpredictable genius type in charge when he can't really help the process that much but can surely hurt it?
Good post as per but I'm less convinced than you that Rafa wouldn't have had us overcoming that Barca side or its current Real equivalent. Milan in the 2005 CL Final, and arguably one or two of the sides we beat on the way there, were at a similar level IMHO.
I'm not saying I want Rafa back - like most on here I'm happy to stick with Brendan. I am saying, though, that Brendan could do well to pursue a *somewhat* more balanced approach which pays more attention, or at least more effective attention, to getting the defence right.
Well, I think I could point to every title winning team in England over the past five years with one exception as evidence of the need for an attacking ethos. That once exception being City under Mancini and, if there's going to be an exception, I think a team with a 200 trillion transfer value would be the exception. I reckon the same is true for the CL - Madrid last year would be the only possible exception and they were still a reasonably attack focused team.
What evidence do you have that a team without an attacking ethos is going to be successful in winning the league (or CL) anytime soon?
What evidence do you have that a team without an attacking ethos is going to be successful in winning the league (or CL) anytime soon?
Considering I was getting hounded to ban you, I didn't see it as a problem to share that with other mods
You're right, but what JJ is saying (I think) is that Rodgers needs to be able to take a more pragmatic approach at times, we need to tighten up as well and that shouldn't necessarily have a knock on effect on our attacking play - there are enough attacking sides who *can* defend.
When we got beat by Chelsea at home and Rodgers was asked if he would ever play that way, he said "never". His commitment to good entertaining football can't be faulted, but his stubbornness in showing a willingness to adjust when playing the big boys can. There's only so many times the old "at least we lost trying to win" ethos will wash, when you play the big teams you have to show you can be clever and patient, not how great you are in comparison as an attacking side.
It's almost like he's trying to prove a point, that he can "out attack" them with a squad that's been assembled on the cheap (it hasn't really, lets be honest). We just end up getting picked off most of the time, especially against the sides like City and Chelsea who know how to defend the life out of a game.
Attack the lesser sides, that's where you earn your points and goal difference, but when it comes to the major clubs, we have to be more ruthless and intelligent, even if it means a good old fashioned backs to the wall job.
This is wandering from the point, that what we need right now is a balanced team.
But if you really want to know how we would build an attacking ethos once we were ready to challenge for the title, and accepting as a given that's what we needed, I'd simply say that finding that ethos is nowhere near as hard as you seem to make out. Witness Chelsea this season compared to last, or City last season compared to the one before. It's much more to do with having a squad of excellent players and letting them go out with a certain abandon than building on some years old ingrained philosophy.
Ha - Fair enough mate.
I really hope you're not having a nibble at someone for sharing a PM on open forum. You tried (and failed) to make me look like a cunt when you did exactly that...
They were in cruise control in the second half. They knew they'd done the hard work in the first half and were clearly enjoying taking it easy in the second. What's more, they took their best players off one by one. Let's not kid ourselves here - if they'd needed another goal, they would have scored it.
Difference is he's a mod. You're not, and I don't know about failed.
You really do behave like such a sanctimonious prick on here sometimes. I said things that I stood by. I took them off the site so the rest of the forum didn't have to trawl through them and get involved in our squabble. You also quoted out of context and tried to make me look like I was threatening you but neglected to post what you said to me as well.
So in my eyes you tried and failed. I don't care what you think and your weak attempt at justifying the hypocrisy is, well simply it's weak.
Carry on though, you normally do.
Yeah the way we tore Juventus, Real Madrid and Man Utd apart was awful to watch.
I miss Rafa. There. I said it.
Yeah Modo. You're never fucking wrong and if it looks like you are, resort to that. I'm comfortable with what was said then and what's been said since.
Carry on being a try hard. But don't complain when people bite back from time to time. If you go fishing, you're bound to get a bite once in a while.
Yeah I miss him too. But I do think it's pointless suggesting that we might have done better in Weds if he were in charge.
Ha! Be nice you got an apology...don't hold your breath. Oh and I don't want him banned.
- Status
