blonde poker forum

In this article http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27202641 Andre Schurrle suggests teams are jealous of Chelsea winning.

So let's pretend we are in a parallel universe where Chelsea managed to beat Palace and Sunderland + kept their results against Liverpool and City and are now poised to win the title plus in a good position to reach the CL final.

Would you prefer your team to be like Chelsea, playing ugly, defensive football but having success or to play like Liverpool - providing attacking, attractive and thrilling football, but coming up short in the quest to win the title.

I think U over play the ugly winning football element. They play a certain way in the big games and it's pretty effective. Id rather watch Liverpool no doubt but then I'd also rather beat our rivals than lose

All us Geordies will be in soon voting great football and no trophies  ::)

Yes, the reason people don't want Chelsea to win is because they're jealous. Can't think of any other reason why people may want Chelsea to lose.

(http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/files/2010/02/JohnTerry.jpg)

Indeed

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSjUtsZn80R_wZkW6x4Zd7njbvQdKAyLBohbZv0rjXUqV_fmLTBeg)

I have a different view to you on this, primarily about Jose.  He is a winner, he has character, presence, charm and is tactically as good as they come - and a winner.  I have a lot of love for the man.

I don't like Chelsea, mainly because Terry is a complete and utter tool and a dispicable human being.  They do play some good football at times, I  think it is a) primarily about the way he sets up for big games / big teams b) Tough when you've lost both Oscar and Hazard, have shocking options up front

In answer to your question, I just want my team to win - albeit with a preference for good football.  As a neutral, I'd much rather watch Arsenal at best, Liverpool, Barcelona or the Newcastle team of 1996 :)

If QPR are home to lets say, West Ham and need a point to stay up or lose by one goal, you really got an issue with parking the bus?

For my team, just win. or finish 17th next season

As a neutral watching any game obviously would rather watch style, flair, goals etc etc over anythign else.

No problem with Jose, he takes away teams strengths in big games and produces results. Also fantastic value off the field, and is great news for the "product" and industry around it

 Like Jose despite disliking some of his players, and much of the modern Chelsea

lots of modern football is not black and white in views in my opinion, lots of shades of grey.

Chelski obviously a classic example of this at the very top table.  As a stoke fan we have had exactly the same thing in the past 5 years under Pulis and his departure in the summer was very mixed amongst the fans whatever the media said.  Like tighty said finishing 17th in the EPL is a result for anyone outside of the top 8 every season whatever anyone else tells you.  Leicester fans would have happily finished 17th every season for the past 10 years under a manager like pulis than play good football and have a long gap from the top table.

All of this bar the 17th bit.

Enjoyed the days of 1-0 to the Arsenal more than the fancy dan 3 ft passes that scare the shit out of me when done in our own area tbh. Win, Win, Win. That is all.

My views are pretty much the same as Claypoles.  As a Boro fan some of my favourite footballing memories were of the 1996 Newcastle team......

Joking apart, I have no real issues with Mourinho. although as a group I dislike the Chelsea team and Terry/Cole in particular it isn't really anything to do with the way they play football.  For sure I don't enjoy watching them as much as some other teams but as a football fan I could appreciate how impressive what they did on Sunday was.  

In terms of my own team I have never walked away from a ground having lost but been satisfied that we played good football and I think you would be fairly unusual as a football fan if you felt that.  I am in the small minority of football fans that will applaud an opposing goal if it is exceptional but it doesn't change how much I want my team to win.

Didn't Mourinho's first Chelsea team have the record for scoring the most goals in a season before Ancelotti's Chelsea beat said record ?

Why would anyone not want a manager who builds a team to regularly beat inferior sides 4/5/6-0 then when they play teams close to there level or better than them he tactically gets it spot on an insanely high % of the time ?

The man's a football genius.

When Fergie left I wanted Jose- I think if you asked most Man U fans they'd want him and if for some reason he defected to us now I'd be very pleased

In any given match I'd rather my team won than that they played beautiful football but lost. Over the course of a season, I'd prefer there to be more beautiful wins than losses, and more stylish victories than defeats.

I'd much prefer to have beaten Barca twice in CL Finals playing ugly defensive football than the results we got.

I love watching mourhino's teams. Tactical masterclasses... Nearly all of them.
I love his intense presence and the way he goes about each game. Genius.
Yes would rather watch a team tear another one to pieces with amazing flowing football but ultimately its about doing what is right to win.

If you really love football this isn't boring. It's beautiful. Really really great manager who sets his teams up perfectly its literally like watching art for me. His inter Milan performance against Barcelona is THE best performance I have ever seen from a team in my life.

What a manager!

This. He was the only manager who could stop that team.

As a Newcastle fan I'd like to put Pleno in charge and have both.

But seriously, Jose will be remembered as one of the all time greatest so I don't think people are really making much of a choice between say 'Rodgers style' and 'Jose style'

Jose is undoubtedly a master-tactician but I wouldn't want him to manage my team as I cannot abide some of his classless antics which I already find cringeworthy in opposition. He's not someone I'd like as a dinner companion.

Ideally I'd like my team to play good football and win the odd trophy rather than negative football and win loads, but having the alternative of good footie conditional on no trophies at all seems a bit of an unfair choice.

Option "c" for me.

When it comes to YOUR team, it really is all about winning. Style only really comes into play if you don't meet media/fan/board (delete as applicable) expectations, which in alot of cases are totally unrealistic. Managers like Allardyce and Pulis come to mind, they have undoubtley had successful managerial careers but when they couldn't meet expectations after they had taking a club close to its threshold, how the team plays became an issue. There are plenty of clubs who will take them as they will produce results more often than not.

I am Jose fan, while he is undoubtedly massively arrogant he has certain charm about him imo. As well as being one of the best managers in the game, his tactical preperation for games is brilliant.

I see that four Arsenal fans have voted

as a lpool fan, when hodgson was manager the football was truly dire.

try waking up at 4 am and snorting a big line of mogadon.

istanbul was amazing , special times for supporters, but in general liverpool under rafa were not exactly thrilling.

ok , it was mostly shite.

this season under brendan has been a thrill pretty much week in week out. football on crack most weeks.

if we finish second i will be gutted but so be it.

more of the same next season please.

I do not agree at all. (Usually do tho! :))

You can be a defensive football genius. Many coaches have been.

Putting 9 men behind the ball narrow is not genius at all.

You've never seen AC Milan's great, great sides then. True genius.

juventus 0 liverpool 0 2005.

exception made for truly epic parking of bus.

I'm pretty stunned at the results to be honest.

Maybe 30 years ago I would have thought differently, when QPR had a realistic chance (albeit very unlikely) of winning the top division if everything fell right.

Now when the best I can hope for is a mid table Premier League finish I would absolutely rather watch players like Bowles, Stainrod, Byrne, Taarabt, Sir Les, Marsh, Wegerle and Morrison who lose more than they win than win at all costs.

I don't really care if QPR go up or down any more. I prefer them to win, but it doesn't upset me like it used to when they lose.

I get much of my enjoyment laughing at supporters of the big teams who expect to win every match and moan like hell when they don't.

Football has lost a lot in recent years. It's so boring that only 2 or 3 teams can win the Premier League.

This season has been brilliant purely because of Liverpool and Rodgers approach to football. It's been amazing to watch.

Give me a team that has me on the edge of my seat, scoring wonderful goals and creating beautiful moves over a team who sets out to park two buses and maybe nick a goal on the break.

Maybe I framed the question wrong.

What if it's a choice of being Stoke under Pulis/West Ham under Allardyce and the current Southampton team.

You have a 2% chance going down with the first two or a 20% chance of getting relegated as a Saints fan.

I struggle to understand anyone who answers Stoke or West Ham.

What is the point of supporting a boring team whose ceiling of ambition is coming 12th in the Premier League.

That is the definition of boredom in my eyes, I simply would stop going if I supported either team.

That's a very different question. Southampton obviously the answer to that one, but ask a true Saints fan to answer your original question and 'win ugly' will be a very short-priced favourite.

If you ask the question like that Keith, you probably would get different answers.

If I was Abramovich I'd be deeply depressed to have laundered spent all those billions to be presented with a team who are so negative in the most important games.

At least the sheiks have creative and exciting players (Dzeko aside) at Citeh.

derail but why does everybody use the acronym "citeh" ?

 i find it totally bisarre.

Because there's lots of teams called "City" and "Citeh" identifies them easily?

People like to look cool, though sometimes it has the precise opposite effect.

"Manure" is just as........well, you know. "Chelski" too, I suppose.

i get it now.

teh problem is solved.

It's not an acronym. And as Tikay said, probs just Camel trying to be cool which is bisarre cause he is already cool imo.

soz m8

It's nothing to do with trying to look cool, it's simply that proper fans can't bear to refer to other teams that they see as adversaries by their proper names, ergo spuds, chelski, manure, citeh, liverpoo etc.

Proper fans do not use capital letters for these nicknames either...

As Montgomery Brewster once said, none of the above.... People call them 'citeh' as a piss take on the northern accent, no more no less.

Thank God I am not a "proper fan" then, I'm not sure I could conform to all that stuff.

The thing is I didn't start supporting Norwich because they played wonderful football (though as a kid we were pretty easy on the eye). I supported them because they were my local club and they represented the area I grew up in. Not that I give it much thought but I want success for the club first and foremost because of this and that means winning.

I think i have 2 answers to the same question with 2 heads on.

For me, winning ugly and winning trophies for my team.
Watching Team B vs Team C going for the title, id want the "flair attacking" side to win the league.

This isn't taking into account though, if team b or team c were a team i didnt like.

Sunday's game for example. We (liverpool) got tactically outplayed and had little answer for it. My brother (chelsea) was absolutely loving watching it. I couldn't watch that football week in week out UNLESS it was my team. Then if we win 1-0, or 0-0 when needed, bring it on.

For all our attacking free flowing easy on eye football- if we scored in the first minute in any game. Happy to blow the whistle right there and then.


But when it means less to me as a fan, in that it doesnt hurt as much, im sure id cope better and settle for being entertaining and wouldnt mind the result as much. Not quite there yet, and not sure i ever want to be if im honest.
Football its complicated!

In football, as in horse racing, & so many other things........

Handsome is as handsome does.

When you play poker, would you rather be thethe guy who is perceived to be the best or the guy that makes the most money?

For me it's not close.

Not a big fan generally but

Look at Willian he was a lazy so and so in the Ukraine and considered an excellent player but more of a luxury one.

Covered more yards than anyone the other night and can only presume that is at least partly down to Mourinho getting him to focus

Was play shit and win nothing an option?

:)

lol happy days. really enjoyed that more than i should have.

on a (as serious as you can be note once you stop laughing),

how much was sunday at anfield a jose nuthugging masterclass now?

he had very little chance of winning prem, played a very strong team of first choice players 3 days before a champions league semi final at stamford bridge. if he rested some of his players he would probably be looking forward to a final in lisbon.

now he wins sweet F.A all this season

special one?

i dont think so. should never have gone back. if he wins nothing again next season all its doing is taking away from his past ( truly impressive) achievements.

Using the poker analogy..

For supporters of most teams in the Premier League if you liken a season to a poker tournament the absolute best that's going to happen is a min cash.

You have zero chance of making the final table let alone winning the thing.

Isn't that a bit bloody boring?

poker wise ,as a low stakes recreational player, i can beat sit and goes pretty comfortably if i can be bothered churning them out.
 i cant be bothered because i dont enjoy them. way to monotonous.

i play large field tourneys. very low stakes. and mostly i enjoy them a lot.

unless you are playing for a living, then surely it makes more sense to play what you actually enjoy than what you can make a bit of profit from.

at the low stakes i am very confident in stating that the vast majority of players are not getting much fun out of it.in fact lots of the players probably hate it and get stressed when they lose. been there myself. not in a rush to go back.

my mate plays similar tourneys to me and blinds down playing like a nit. always moans.

i get in loads of flips and often get huge stacks and spew it all off, once in a while get a decent bink.

i know who enjoys it more whatever the end result.

drunk, rambling again, point is that unless you are a proffesional, dont worry to much if you are losing a few quid.

or if your football team is shite and you have lost a semi final.

at home.

I'll let Mitch answer that one...

Just showed how results orientated football supporters are.

Gerrard doesn't slip, the game likely finishes 0-0 or we win. Mourinho fked it and BR has "got one over on him".

He does slip however, and Chelsea nick and goal and Mourinho is a tactical genius.

Last night's game shows how "special" JM really is imo.

genuinely lol'd. wp.

It would hurt more if we deserved to win, but we didn't so no complaints here. Athletico were the better team - good luck to them in the final. Football was the winner last night.

The irony being you're being results oriented

Will admit I was very surprised to see he's lost his last four CL semi finals.

Confirmed all media hype, man's a clown.

The posts by people like Baron and Alex on Mourinho really are very stupid though.

He studied and worked his way up from the very bottom. He worked as a PE teacher, youth team coach, interpreter for the late Bobby Robson, scout and assistant manager.

Then he took over a small Portuguese club and took them to their highest ever league finish before winning the league, UEFA cup and champions league with Porto!!

Then he came to Chelsea and we won the league for the first time in 50 years with something like 95 points.

Following that, he took over at Inter Milan and won the League and Italian cup.

Then he won the copa del rey in his first season at Real Madrid and the League in the following year.

Since Chelsea replaced him, we have had 8 managers, including Carlo Ancellotti, Guus Hiddink, Rafa Benitez and Luis Felipe Scolari and not a single one of them did as good a job as Mourinho.

To say he makes the team play boring football is fine but two bitter Liverpool fans insulting the man's talent is just rediculous.

I believe it is 1 win from 8 Semi finals with Chelsea, and 3 goals scored in total.

@Greeky: I'm not sure what makes you think that Porto is "a small Portuguese club" as they are one of Portugal's "big three", founded in1893, and have never been relegated from their top division which was formed in 1933.

They have won 67 Portuguese domestic league titles including five in a row from 1994/5 to 1998/9. They also won the Champion's League in 1987 and 2004.

Ralph, my wording was poor but it wasn't Porto I was alluding to when I said he took a small portuguese club to their highest finish. I'd wiki'd it now and it was a team called União de Leiria.

When Porto won it in 2004 no-one expected that they would.

Sorry mate, just reread your post and understand how you meant it now.

No denying Jose's a serious achiever, but I simply don't appreciate his act.

Yeah I can understand that people don't like his antics. The same way I can understand people don't respect Terry for some of the things he's done.

Giggs, Suarez, etc... all these people fall into the category of people who you can argue deserve little respect for some of their antics.

However, at their jobs they are all amongst the very best.

I grew up watching a Celtic team that wasn't the most successful in the clubs history.  Over the last 10 years or so we have been pretty successful both on and off the park but I hate the brand of football we play, I want panache, pace, passing etc regardless of who we play.  I long for the days of the Tommy Burns team that played silky football.  Even more so now when Celtic are running away with the league. 

   

this post is quite funny from a Liverpool fan now, after you guys drew against Palace. Don't think that would ever happen from 3-0 up under Mourinho.

Mourinho's qualities as a manager are indisputable, as Greekstein summarised. How anyone can limit his tactical abilities to putting '9 men behind the ball', 'parking the bus' etc is beyond me. For certain games there is a right way to go about getting the result, there's no better manager in the last ten years at managing matches to get a result than Mourinho. I remember United playing Barcelona away in the Semis of 2009 Champions League. We barely came out of our half, stayed behind the ball, ground out a 0-0 then won 1-0 from a Scholes moment of inspiration. Our approach at home after we scored was identical to the away leg and Fergie clearly realised we couldn't just go at them or we'd be carved open.
Pleno summed it up earlier well, beautiful football isn't just about loadsa goals and a gung-ho approach. Outwitting an opponent who have superior players through intelligent tactics should be celebrated.
The Chelsea performance against Liverpool was Mourinho at his best, reducing Liverpool to running out of ideas/feeding Gerrard with 30 yard half chances, while stinging them on the break.

Saying that playing narrow and deep isn't genius is stupid? Oh ofc, by the insight of a Chelsea fan who knows best obv. Give me a break.

Mourinho is obviously very good at his job. I just don't see the good old fashioned (and totally fair enough) smash n grab, as a sign of genius. Anyone who wants to use that game to support their claim of his greatness needs to watch more football.

I agree. But setting a side up to not score and stifle the opposition isn't difficult. I do it most Sundays. Scoring is much harder.

The issue is around doing it as your first 8 types of tactic. Let me rephrase, the Chelsea I once saw with Duff, Robben and also a little of Joe Cole played some amazing, amazing football with real tactical genius (see Barca game and some of the subtle changes he made). Chelsea vs Liverpool a few weeks ago, not what I would call genius. Simple as really.

Also, anyone who watched Italian football under Saachi, Capello, Lippi, Ancelotti etc will see that brilliant destructive football has been around (and more effective) way before Mourinho. He's great at it - no doubt. But he's not exactly a pioneer. And it's not even his best weapon. See the list of CL semis where is hasn't worked. What is it 3 goals in the last 7? You see when he faces better sides than Liverpool he's not so genius is he?

Surely a guy with that much at his disposal at the likes of Inter, Real etc could build something similar to Chelsea in 2005? Ruthless and truly brilliant. Or did he just inherit a side with some great players in it that time?

Tough to say. All I know is he'll beat a City side twice next season (even though by CL standards they're pretty bad), probs win the league playing this way and be hailed as the second coming of Christ I'm sure.