Weekend games
- Thread starter Modo
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Twitter?
As in full of Man Utd fans from Bandundu and Kaabong who think Pogba should be made manager.
This cannot be anything seriously considered by match-going United fans.
Pogba as player manager. That would be good.
I would certainly quite enjoy a "Mourinho Out" protest at Old Trafford, unlikely as it would appear to be right now.
Yeah, its probably bs. But would be funny seeing him squirm in a press conference with questions about a protest.
Even more pressure on the massive cunt.
I think he should be given time.
To make an even bigger mess of things.
To make an even bigger mess of things.
15-16: David Moyes´s United first 14 games:
08 victories
03 draws
03 defeats
16-17: Mourinho:
8 victories
2 draws
4 defeats
08 victories
03 draws
03 defeats
16-17: Mourinho:
8 victories
2 draws
4 defeats
And don't forget the classic "Thanks for the Community Shield, Now Fuck Off" thread
Globality
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Globality is the end-state of globalization – a hypothetical condition in which the process of globalization is complete or nearly so, barriers have fallen, and "a new global reality" is emerging.
The term was used in 1998 by author and economist Daniel Yergin in a Newsweek article that described the end-state of the globalization process,[1] and in his book, Commanding Heights: The Battle for the World Economy. Though Yergin was credited with having coined it, the word is in fact much older. William Safire traces the etymology of “globality” in his book No Uncertain Terms[2] and identifies a range of citations as far back as 1942, when it was used as a synonym for “global.” Current use of “globality” as it applies to business – as a description of the current competitive state of world commerce – was not adopted until recently.
The term has been described by William J. Holstein in the New York Times as "a new buzzword [that] doesn’t work — it merely describes trends that have been under way for at least two decades under a very similar name."[3]
Contents
[mce-anchorhide]
Characteristics[edit]
According to all these authors, globality is what comes next after globalization: a new state of worldwide hyper-competition. Sirkin et al. (2008) further detail globality’s three main features as they apply to commerce and business:
Yergin’s chief distinction between globality and globalization is conceptual – he says that former is a “condition” while the latter is a “process.” He describes globality as the end-state of the process of globalization:
In this traditional model of globalization, the flow of commerce was predominantly from West to East and followed established Western business practices.[citation needed]
According to Sirkin et al., globality is a totally different kind of environment – one in which the competitive landscape has changed dramatically. In today’s new phase of worldwide trade and economic development, companies are “competing with everyone from everywhere for everything.” And while there is no ultimate model for success, no surefire strategy for innovation and growth, emerging-market challengers have evolved new management and governance structures that are ideally suited to this new competitive reality.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Globality is the end-state of globalization – a hypothetical condition in which the process of globalization is complete or nearly so, barriers have fallen, and "a new global reality" is emerging.
The term was used in 1998 by author and economist Daniel Yergin in a Newsweek article that described the end-state of the globalization process,[1] and in his book, Commanding Heights: The Battle for the World Economy. Though Yergin was credited with having coined it, the word is in fact much older. William Safire traces the etymology of “globality” in his book No Uncertain Terms[2] and identifies a range of citations as far back as 1942, when it was used as a synonym for “global.” Current use of “globality” as it applies to business – as a description of the current competitive state of world commerce – was not adopted until recently.
The term has been described by William J. Holstein in the New York Times as "a new buzzword [that] doesn’t work — it merely describes trends that have been under way for at least two decades under a very similar name."[3]
Contents
[mce-anchorhide]
Characteristics[edit]
According to all these authors, globality is what comes next after globalization: a new state of worldwide hyper-competition. Sirkin et al. (2008) further detail globality’s three main features as they apply to commerce and business:
- A significant structural shift in the flow of commerce: companies from every part of the world are now competing with each other for “everything” – customers, suppliers, partners, capital, intellectual property, raw materials, distribution systems, manufacturing capabilities, and most important, talent. In this competitive free-for-all, products and services flow from many locations to many destinations.
- A breakdown in the established hierarchy of commercial power and influence: power is shifting away from traditional centers of influence in developed markets in the United States, Europe, and Japan, as companies from rapidly developing economies (RDEs) are quickly assuming leadership positions in global markets, forcing established leaders to compete on new terms.
- The emergence of new business and governance practices better suited to a truly global and decentralized business environment. To compete successfully in a world of globality, established industry leaders from developed markets are being forced to learn from competitors in developing markets. The practices include shifting autonomy and decision making outward to satellite operations; redeploying assets to build commerce within emerging regions; and expanding quickly into new markets to match the speed and scale with which challengers are rising.[citation needed]
Yergin’s chief distinction between globality and globalization is conceptual – he says that former is a “condition” while the latter is a “process.” He describes globality as the end-state of the process of globalization:
The borders that constrained commerce―but also protected companies from the full brunt of competition―are eroding. Governments are retreating from control of the commanding heights of their economies: they are privatizing and deregulating. Barriers to trade and investment are coming down rapidly. Ever-cheaper communications and ever-faster computers, along with the Internet, are facilitating the flow of goods and services, as well as knowledge and information. Increasingly, companies are integrating their global strategies with global capital markets.[this quote needs a citation]
In their book, Sirkin et al. (2008) focus on the business conditions that emerge – and the challenges for management – once the state of globality is established. They distinguish globality from globalization based on the emergence of a new set of competitive dynamics between established leaders from developed economies and challenger companies from developing economies. With respect to global business, they argue that the three fundamental characteristics of globalization were these:- Established industry leaders―known as “incumbents”―from the developed economies of the United States, Europe, and Japan – relocated their manufacturing activities to developing countries in order to lower the cost of production and, accordingly, reduce the price of their goods offered in their home markets.
- The incumbents also began to sell their offerings―usually with few if any modifications for local consumers―into the low-cost markets and enjoyed incremental sales gains, as the consumer economies began to grow in these countries.
- Local companies in developing economies acted primarily as suppliers, jobbers, and local distribution partners, to these established industry leaders.[this quote needs a citation]
According to Sirkin et al., globality is a totally different kind of environment – one in which the competitive landscape has changed dramatically. In today’s new phase of worldwide trade and economic development, companies are “competing with everyone from everywhere for everything.” And while there is no ultimate model for success, no surefire strategy for innovation and growth, emerging-market challengers have evolved new management and governance structures that are ideally suited to this new competitive reality.
So ... this 4-0 drubbing of Manure by Chelsea ...
A few questions as I didn't watch the game:
1) Were Manure THAT bad? Was that the Manure team we basically destroyed after 60 minutes at Anfield?
2) Are Chelsea that good?
A few questions as I didn't watch the game:
1) Were Manure THAT bad? Was that the Manure team we basically destroyed after 60 minutes at Anfield?
2) Are Chelsea that good?
It was a bit of both. They scored after 30 seconds which fucked up any gameplan United may have had
But while Chelsea were good, they were helped by truly abject displays from Smalling, Blind, Pogba, Herrera and Zlatan
And no heroics from De Gea either
How bad were those two?
Pogba didn't seem to know what he was supposed to do and was demolished by Kante and Matic.
Zlatan looked every one of his 35 years
Lovely reading - thanks.
There does at least appear to be something a bit dead in Maureen's eyes these days, as if he's lost some of the old appetite fr the competition, and this report from The Times seems to support that suspicion:
Manchester United’s players have been stunned by José Mourinho’s hands-off and distant approach at Carrington.
The United manager suffered a crushing and humiliating blow on his return to Stamford Bridge on Sunday, as his team’s shabby defending allowed Chelsea to run riot, claiming a 4-0 win that left them down in seventh in the Premier League, six points behind leaders Manchester City.
It can now be disclosed that some members of the United squad have been surprised by some of the Portuguese’s methods at the club’s training ground at Carrington. According to a source close to a senior United player, Mourinho cuts a distant figure, sometimes leaving his assistant, Rui Faria, to conduct training sessions while he watches from a distance or works in his office.
The former Chelsea manager will, according to the source, come out and instruct his players at the start of the session before disappearing to his desk. On some occasions he does not return, leaving the session in Faria’s hands.
It represents a change in practice from his time at Chelsea, where he was hands-on in training sessions. Mourinho’s cold approach to his players in one-to-one situations has also disappointed some United players. Some of them were expecting Mourinho to take a keen personal interest in them, but he has often cut himself off from the rest of the squad.
Some feel they would benefit more from a closer relationship with the 53-year-old — particularly after the treatment they received from Louis van Gaal, his predecessor — but Mourinho is said to prefer to keep his distance from the players.
Good news anyway that some players are already briefing the press about him.
Manchester United’s players have been stunned by José Mourinho’s hands-off and distant approach at Carrington.
The United manager suffered a crushing and humiliating blow on his return to Stamford Bridge on Sunday, as his team’s shabby defending allowed Chelsea to run riot, claiming a 4-0 win that left them down in seventh in the Premier League, six points behind leaders Manchester City.
It can now be disclosed that some members of the United squad have been surprised by some of the Portuguese’s methods at the club’s training ground at Carrington. According to a source close to a senior United player, Mourinho cuts a distant figure, sometimes leaving his assistant, Rui Faria, to conduct training sessions while he watches from a distance or works in his office.
The former Chelsea manager will, according to the source, come out and instruct his players at the start of the session before disappearing to his desk. On some occasions he does not return, leaving the session in Faria’s hands.
It represents a change in practice from his time at Chelsea, where he was hands-on in training sessions. Mourinho’s cold approach to his players in one-to-one situations has also disappointed some United players. Some of them were expecting Mourinho to take a keen personal interest in them, but he has often cut himself off from the rest of the squad.
Some feel they would benefit more from a closer relationship with the 53-year-old — particularly after the treatment they received from Louis van Gaal, his predecessor — but Mourinho is said to prefer to keep his distance from the players.
Good news anyway that some players are already briefing the press about him.
Indeed, because that, in turn, will feed his paranoia that he has a mole in the dressing room and make him even colder towards the players, which will perpetuate the cycle.....
Sounds good to me.
Last edited:
Exactly the sort of behaviour that caused concern towards the end of his second stint at Chelsea; withdrawn, distant, lacking the old intensity.
I wasn't the slightest bit concerned about it. Quite the reverse.
I dont buy the argument that the game plan was destroyed after 30 seconds unless the gameplan was a 0-0 draw. If you want to score you should stick to the plan anyway? And what is better than 89.30 minutes to change the plan?
Just as sorry excuse as the "ghost" goal at Anfield. They needed a goal anyway to go through and he was blaming the ref for letting him keep 11 players on the field while chasing a goal....
Just as sorry excuse as the "ghost" goal at Anfield. They needed a goal anyway to go through and he was blaming the ref for letting him keep 11 players on the field while chasing a goal....
Mourinho is constantly returning to the story of the "ghost goal" at Anfield. This is intensely irritating, as he is forgetting that if the officials had ruled that the ball had not crossed the line, the referee would have awarded a penalty to Liverpool and sent off the keeper. That's why the Chelsea players didn't contest the goal.
I don't find it irritating. I think it's hilarious.
It's such an obvious unhealed wound in his psyche which he picks at every time he mentions it.
Twat that he is.
I also really enjoy watching that Gudjonsen effort fly past the post in the last minute
Really? I still get the screaming heebie-jeebies from it now, just as I do watching the last half-hour of the 90 and all the extra time of the Istanbul miracle.
That's why I love it! Still get the near heart attack feeling for a split-second, but you know that it all works out in the end
Actually, when I was watching that ridiculous Jerzy Dudek double save at the actual final,I laughed then too. It was the only appropriate response
Although the lack of sleep and alcohol intake may have contributed. I spent most of the game laughing or crying in between screaming
Glorious
Ferguson had total control over that vile club. He sort of made it perform and bend to his will. We had something similar with the boot room. But when you give up that control, the club has no option but to fall. They won't understand why, why players feel distant from the manager, why you resort to defensive tactics, throwing money at new players who invariably flop, irrationally blaming the team selection them coming up with excuses when the selection you wanted also flops. There is nothing they can do, just like there was nothing we could do. Loss of control means you're going for a decade long ride to mediocrity.
The good thing is that in the 90's we still had a team capable of winning trophies and keeping us ticking over. We also had Gerrard. Those vile scum have no such players to derive comfort from. They're probably doomed.
The good thing is that in the 90's we still had a team capable of winning trophies and keeping us ticking over. We also had Gerrard. Those vile scum have no such players to derive comfort from. They're probably doomed.
I remember the forum having an end of season review and that Gudjonsen shot winning 'hairiest' moment of the season.
I felt sick as it whistled past the post. I fully expect it to go in every time I see it.
- Status
