Currently the best coach in the world??

robert wrote:As a side note Bluey, why don't you rate Ancellotti?

Cesc wrote:I've gone for Jose Mourinho.

He is one of the younger managers on the list, but his achievements in the game in his reasonably short career have been sensational. You know he is a great manager when he delivers two European trophies in two years with a club that doesn't have major resources. Tactically he got things pretty much spot on.

Domestically unbeaten at home in his three years at Chelsea, I think under Mourinho they lost one game at home in his time there. And that was down to an unfair red card in the first half. Okay people will always use the money argument in putting a downer at his time at Stamford Bridge, but he still delivered two Premierships. How many times have we seen clubs spend fortunes and have nothing to show for it once the season is over?

Italy or Spain is next for him, I wouldn't be surprised if he mastered those league quickly.

bluenine wrote:I do rate him, but not among the best in the world. Ancelotti plays a very rigid in this tactics, and was a very poor coach in his previous stints. What turned Ancelotti fortunes as a coach was his only major stroke of tactical genius - the use of creative Pirlo as a deep midfielder. That was brilliant, I will admit, he invented this role in the modern game and now many teams employ this tactic... But ifi you look at Ancelotti tactically and sucess wise in the pre-Pirlo era, he was quite ordinary... failed miserably at Parma, and was quite ordinary and trophyless at Juventus, and hardly impressive in his first season at Milan. The Pirlo formation worked, but I didn't see any tactical genius apart from that, and he has been carried by the pure footballing genius of Kaka and Sheva so many times.

He just does not have the tactical genius or managerial acumen of Prandelli or Spaletti, who I believe are at another level, similar to Capello and Lippi.

Mancini for example, is at the stage of his career that Ancelotti was when he was at Parma/Juve.... and so far, Mancio has shown a much steeper learning curve, more willingness to experiment and change when the situation requires, and seems to be much more inspirational to his team than what Ancelotti was at Parma/Juve. If I have to predict, Mancio will turn out of be a better manager than Ancelotti by the time these two retire.

robert wrote:As a side note Bluey, why don't you rate Ancellotti?

bluenine wrote:I do rate him, but not among the best in the world. Ancelotti plays a very rigid in this tactics, and was a very poor coach in his previous stints. What turned Ancelotti fortunes as a coach was his only major stroke of tactical genius - the use of creative Pirlo as a deep midfielder. That was brilliant, I will admit, he invented this role in the modern game and now many teams employ this tactic... But ifi you look at Ancelotti tactically and sucess wise in the pre-Pirlo era, he was quite ordinary... failed miserably at Parma, and was quite ordinary and trophyless at Juventus, and hardly impressive in his first season at Milan. The Pirlo formation worked, but I didn't see any tactical genius apart from that, and he has been carried by the pure footballing genius of Kaka and Sheva so many times.

He just does not have the tactical genius or managerial acumen of Prandelli or Spaletti, who I believe are at another level, similar to Capello and Lippi.

Mancini for example, is at the stage of his career that Ancelotti was when he was at Parma/Juve.... and so far, Mancio has shown a much steeper learning curve, more willingness to experiment and change when the situation requires, and seems to be much more inspirational to his team than what Ancelotti was at Parma/Juve. If I have to predict, Mancio will turn out of be a better manager than Ancelotti by the time these two retire.

robert wrote:As a side note Bluey, why don't you rate Ancellotti?

.....
It was very important to find a balance between positively utilising all emotions [reference to importance of the match for Russian footy mentioned earlier on] & a business-wise, realistic approach. A good example of that were the trainingsessions, in which we practised the so-called 0-1 scenario, which were questioned by the Russian media. According to the Russian media, you shouldn't think about defeat, otherwise it would become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

At a moment like that I tend to become extra-professional. It would have been very easy to shout to everyone we were going to win easily, but that gives people false hope. You make them happy with an 'air castle'

We didn't do that, what we did is work very hard on all possible situations, we could end up in during the match. So also the 0-1 scenario. This is was it was like: we would immediately sacrifice a defender for a mobile agrresive striker & increase the pressure. Within 15 minutes a 2nd substitution would follow, with which we would try to get the crowd [even more] behind us. This was about bringing Spartak Moscow's top goalscorer Roman Pavluchenko, the ideal man to fire up the crowd.
.....

Alive and Kicking wrote:I voted Wenger, because Arsenal are having a surprising season so far. The mayonnaise between new players and old players has worked well. In addition, lot's of people were stating that this was the end of an area when Henry left, after the departures of Vieira, Lunjberg, Pires, Wiltord, Cambell, etc. Another thing, is that on average Arsenal players are relatively young, so this makes this accomplishment even better.

jonathan de guzman wrote:

http://www.telesport.nl/columnstopsporters/2358241/___Hiddink__Spelers_voeren_0-1_scenario_perfect_uit.html?p=7,2

Alive and Kicking wrote:I voted Wenger, because Arsenal are having a surprising season so far. The mayonnaise between new players and old players has worked well. In addition, lot's of people were stating that this was the end of an area when Henry left, after the departures of Vieira, Lunjberg, Pires, Wiltord, Cambell, etc. Another thing, is that on average Arsenal players are relatively young, so this makes this accomplishment even better.

Axeslammer wrote:

jonathan de guzman wrote:

http://www.telesport.nl/columnstopsporters/2358241/___Hiddink__Spelers_voeren_0-1_scenario_perfect_uit.html?p=7,2

Great article

Nice to read stadium attendances in Russia already have gone up 20%, looks like they're really gonna wake the sleeping giant

Axeslammer wrote:

Alive and Kicking wrote:I voted Wenger, because Arsenal are having a surprising season so far. The mayonnaise between new players and old players has worked well. In addition, lot's of people were stating that this was the end of an area when Henry left, after the departures of Vieira, Lunjberg, Pires, Wiltord, Cambell, etc. Another thing, is that on average Arsenal players are relatively young, so this makes this accomplishment even better.

So you vote for Arsene because after a number of underperforming years it finally clicks....and *now* that's all up to the manager ?!

Biggest load of bollocks I've ever read, if Arsene was a Great manager (and that's what we're talking about here : the best of the best) he'd not have had those underperforming years.

I'll do you one better though : the best thing that happened to Arsenal was that Henry left and that was *despite* Wenger wanting him to stay on.

Alive and Kicking wrote:

You are talking bollocks! Isn't the topic about the current best coach? I know Wenger is not the best coach in the world but as I said they are now doing really well, despite the departure of their key player, Henry.

Axeslammer wrote:

Alive and Kicking wrote:

You are talking bollocks! Isn't the topic about the current best coach? I know Wenger is not the best coach in the world but as I said they are now doing really well, despite the departure of their key player, Henry.

You're an idiot and you and I both know that.

You've simply voted for current best team and assume it's down to the manager that they're doing well, while all the evidence points to the fact that they're doing well *despite* the manager.

Well, tell me who's responsible for the team? You fat retard! Is the team playing well because the people selling sausages in the stands are backing the players?

A team playing well = good manager, a team playing poorly = bad manager. Simple as this.

The fact that you still think that Henry leaving was bad for Arsenal shows just how clueless you are.

Yeah right, I never said that Henry departure was bad for Arsenal, show me when. Back at the time, I said I believe his departure could be beneficial for the team and that some of his team mates, such as Van Persie, would be able to express themselves more. I never said that Arsenal would suffer from his departure.

What I mentioned previously concerned what medias and people thought in general.

Henry leaving = best thing to happen to Arsenal in the past 5 years