Real Madrid CF 2012/13

Jaime wrote:CONVOCATORIA

Porteros: Casillas, Diego López y Adán.
Defensas: Varane, Albiol, Coentrão, Carvalho, Nacho y Fabinho.
Centrocampistas: Kaká, Özil, Xabi Alonso, Essien, Modric, Callejón y Di María.
Delanteros: Cristiano Ronaldo, Benzema e Higuaín.

Lesionados: Marcelo, Sergio Ramos, Arbeloa
Fuera por decisión técnica: Pepe

Hlebagone wrote:And Luis was saying he was a success at Madrid just a couple of weeks ago

EMP wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:And Luis was saying he was a success at Madrid just a couple of weeks ago

He was a success at Madrid. He helped to break Barcelona's domination of La Liga, winning the title with a points record. He got Madrid to three successive CL semi-finals after previous failures. However, he did not achieve that alone. His refusal to credit others and treatment of some players and indeed the club is disgraceful, but let's be honest - he was far from a failure at Madrid and was successful to a degree if not ultimately a total success that a ten European Champions Cup or CL would have been.

Hlebagone wrote:

EMP wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:And Luis was saying he was a success at Madrid just a couple of weeks ago

He was a success at Madrid. He helped to break Barcelona's domination of La Liga, winning the title with a points record. He got Madrid to three successive CL semi-finals after previous failures. However, he did not achieve that alone. His refusal to credit others and treatment of some players and indeed the club is disgraceful, but let's be honest - he was far from a failure at Madrid and was successful to a degree if not ultimately a total success that a ten European Champions Cup or CL would have been.

A manager who leaves the club in such acrimonious circumstances can't be seen as a success. He failed in his objective to win the CL, and the club took a marked step back in his final season.

And look at the squad - CL semi-finals is the norm. Comparing this team with previousMadrid failures is redundant. It's a far superior team.

blutgraetsche wrote:Worms, I just tell it like it is, you're a shitstain on this forum and always have been. There would be absolutely nothing missing if you weren't around. That's not being mean, that's just some necessary dose of realism, otherwise you continue to believe that you provide anything relevant to the forum. And I'm not talking about the fact that nobody likes you, as this is no popularity contest.

And you're indeed thick because otherwise you would have understood days, if not weeks, ago that I never argued about Dante being better than Boateng and fuck knows who, but that foreign players / their positions at Bayern & Dortmund could be more than adequately replaced by German players, with the exception of LB.

EMP wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:And Luis was saying he was a success at Madrid just a couple of weeks ago

He was a success at Madrid. He helped to break Barcelona's domination of La Liga, winning the title with a points record. He got Madrid to three successive CL semi-finals after previous failures. However, he did not achieve that alone. His refusal to credit others and treatment of some players and indeed the club is disgraceful, but let's be honest - he was far from a failure at Madrid and was successful to a degree if not ultimately a total success that a ten European Champions Cup or CL would have been.

blutgraetsche wrote:You still don't understand that Hummels would have been Dante's 'replacement', not Boateng or Badstuber. Besides, Dante didn't even play in the return leg vs. Barca.

Seriously, that's the definition of thick.

Cristiano wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:

EMP wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:And Luis was saying he was a success at Madrid just a couple of weeks ago

He was a success at Madrid. He helped to break Barcelona's domination of La Liga, winning the title with a points record. He got Madrid to three successive CL semi-finals after previous failures. However, he did not achieve that alone. His refusal to credit others and treatment of some players and indeed the club is disgraceful, but let's be honest - he was far from a failure at Madrid and was successful to a degree if not ultimately a total success that a ten European Champions Cup or CL would have been.

A manager who leaves the club in such acrimonious circumstances can't be seen as a success. He failed in his objective to win the CL, and the club took a marked step back in his final season.

And look at the squad - CL semi-finals is the norm. Comparing this team with previous Madrid failures is redundant. It's a far superior team.

EMP wrote:

Cristiano wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:

EMP wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:And Luis was saying he was a success at Madrid just a couple of weeks ago

He was a success at Madrid. He helped to break Barcelona's domination of La Liga, winning the title with a points record. He got Madrid to three successive CL semi-finals after previous failures. However, he did not achieve that alone. His refusal to credit others and treatment of some players and indeed the club is disgraceful, but let's be honest - he was far from a failure at Madrid and was successful to a degree if not ultimately a total success that a ten European Champions Cup or CL would have been.

A manager who leaves the club in such acrimonious circumstances can't be seen as a success. He failed in his objective to win the CL, and the club took a marked step back in his final season.

And look at the squad - CL semi-finals is the norm. Comparing this team with previous Madrid failures is redundant. It's a far superior team.

It is not redundant if part of the reason that it is a far superior team is that the players he brought in to compliment those already there are his choices. Does he get no credit for improving that team and the effect of that improvement? Finance is is a moot point (I know you didn't refer to it, but it is part of the overall context in which his tenure should be judged compared to others) as Madrid were hardly an inactive club for previous managers or shy in backing managers in the transfer market. You can argue about whether that makes him relatively speaking a success or not, but what he inherited and the previous record is relevant as it is the context for his efforts in charge of the team. Otherwise his tenure is judged in a vacuum.

EMP wrote:

Cristiano wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:

EMP wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:And Luis was saying he was a success at Madrid just a couple of weeks ago

He was a success at Madrid. He helped to break Barcelona's domination of La Liga, winning the title with a points record. He got Madrid to three successive CL semi-finals after previous failures. However, he did not achieve that alone. His refusal to credit others and treatment of some players and indeed the club is disgraceful, but let's be honest - he was far from a failure at Madrid and was successful to a degree if not ultimately a total success that a ten European Champions Cup or CL would have been.

A manager who leaves the club in such acrimonious circumstances can't be seen as a success. He failed in his objective to win the CL, and the club took a marked step back in his final season.

And look at the squad - CL semi-finals is the norm. Comparing this team with previous Madrid failures is redundant. It's a far superior team.

It is not redundant if part of the reason that it is a far superior team is that the players he brought in to compliment those already there are his choices. Does he get no credit for improving that team and the effect of that improvement? Finance is is a moot point (I know you didn't refer to it, but it is part of the overall context in which his tenure should be judged compared to others) as Madrid were hardly an inactive club for previous managers or shy in backing managers in the transfer market. You can argue about whether that makes him relatively speaking a success or not, but what he inherited and the previous record is relevant as it is the context for his efforts in charge of the team. Otherwise his tenure is judged in a vacuum.

blutgraetsche wrote:Why would he play alongside Dante when Dante is a Brazilian you genius? I said that every foreign player could be replaced by a German (bar Alaba), which means that a "best of" team of Dortmund and Bayern without their foreign players (basically what Löw has at his proposal, not even mentioning the other clubs) would have more than enough individual class for a title challenging international team. You still go on about Dante and Ribery being better without understanding this simple fact and yet get mad when I call you thick. How is that not thick?

Thickness incarnated.

Jaime wrote:

EMP wrote:

Cristiano wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:

EMP wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:And Luis was saying he was a success at Madrid just a couple of weeks ago

He was a success at Madrid. He helped to break Barcelona's domination of La Liga, winning the title with a points record. He got Madrid to three successive CL semi-finals after previous failures. However, he did not achieve that alone. His refusal to credit others and treatment of some players and indeed the club is disgraceful, but let's be honest - he was far from a failure at Madrid and was successful to a degree if not ultimately a total success that a ten European Champions Cup or CL would have been.

A manager who leaves the club in such acrimonious circumstances can't be seen as a success. He failed in his objective to win the CL, and the club took a marked step back in his final season.

And look at the squad - CL semi-finals is the norm. Comparing this team with previous Madrid failures is redundant. It's a far superior team.

It is not redundant if part of the reason that it is a far superior team is that the players he brought in to compliment those already there are his choices. Does he get no credit for improving that team and the effect of that improvement? Finance is is a moot point (I know you didn't refer to it, but it is part of the overall context in which his tenure should be judged compared to others) as Madrid were hardly an inactive club for previous managers or shy in backing managers in the transfer market. You can argue about whether that makes him relatively speaking a success or not, but what he inherited and the previous record is relevant as it is the context for his efforts in charge of the team. Otherwise his tenure is judged in a vacuum.

Leo Beenhaker got the team to 3 European Cup semifinals as well. Look he had a record breaking league season and that was great. He won the Copa del Rey which I appreciate that he took it seriously as opposed to most other managers that were quite happy to exit early. He might even win another one. But Jose came here to win and specifically win the CL. Anyone who does not understand that really doesn't understand Jose, Florentino, or Real Madrid. Jose even said it himself in his very first press conference: "Pero lo más bonito, bonito, bonito no es entrenar o jugar en el Real Madrid. Lo bonito, bonito, bonito es ganar en el Real Madrid. Y ésta es mi motivación."

EMP wrote:Also you forget that Mourinho had to contend with the effects of the Curse. As we quite liked Beenhaker, he got an easy ride It had been decreed before the ink was even dry on Mourinho's contract by the Custodians of the Curse that he would not be allowed to win the CL as that was in your interests. If he had won it his head would have inflated to such a size that he would never get out of the door of the Bernabeu and you would have been stuck with him for life. You can thank us later.

EMP wrote:

Jaime wrote:

EMP wrote:

Cristiano wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:

EMP wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:And Luis was saying he was a success at Madrid just a couple of weeks ago

He was a success at Madrid. He helped to break Barcelona's domination of La Liga, winning the title with a points record. He got Madrid to three successive CL semi-finals after previous failures. However, he did not achieve that alone. His refusal to credit others and treatment of some players and indeed the club is disgraceful, but let's be honest - he was far from a failure at Madrid and was successful to a degree if not ultimately a total success that a ten European Champions Cup or CL would have been.

A manager who leaves the club in such acrimonious circumstances can't be seen as a success. He failed in his objective to win the CL, and the club took a marked step back in his final season.

And look at the squad - CL semi-finals is the norm. Comparing this team with previous Madrid failures is redundant. It's a far superior team.

It is not redundant if part of the reason that it is a far superior team is that the players he brought in to compliment those already there are his choices. Does he get no credit for improving that team and the effect of that improvement? Finance is is a moot point (I know you didn't refer to it, but it is part of the overall context in which his tenure should be judged compared to others) as Madrid were hardly an inactive club for previous managers or shy in backing managers in the transfer market. You can argue about whether that makes him relatively speaking a success or not, but what he inherited and the previous record is relevant as it is the context for his efforts in charge of the team. Otherwise his tenure is judged in a vacuum.

Leo Beenhaker got the team to 3 European Cup semifinals as well. Look he had a record breaking league season and that was great. He won the Copa del Rey which I appreciate that he took it seriously as opposed to most other managers that were quite happy to exit early. He might even win another one. But Jose came here to win and specifically win the CL. Anyone who does not understand that really doesn't understand Jose, Florentino, or Real Madrid. Jose even said it himself in his very first press conference: "Pero lo más bonito, bonito, bonito no es entrenar o jugar en el Real Madrid. Lo bonito, bonito, bonito es ganar en el Real Madrid. Y ésta es mi motivación."

That means that relatively speaking he was a success, but in terms of his overall mission he was not. He was not a total success or a total failure - he was somewhere in between, leaning nearer to your view because he did not deliver the big prize. It depends on what is considered success or not.

Also you forget that Mourinho had to contend with the effects of the Curse. As we quite liked Beenhaker, he got an easy ride It had been decreed before the ink was even dry on Mourinho's contract by the Custodians of the Curse that he would not be allowed to win the CL as that was in your interests. If he had won it his head would have inflated to such a size that he would never get out of the door of the Bernabeu and you would have been stuck with him for life. You can thank us later.

Hlebagone wrote:

EMP wrote:

Jaime wrote:

EMP wrote:

Cristiano wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:

EMP wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:And Luis was saying he was a success at Madrid just a couple of weeks ago

He was a success at Madrid. He helped to break Barcelona's domination of La Liga, winning the title with a points record. He got Madrid to three successive CL semi-finals after previous failures. However, he did not achieve that alone. His refusal to credit others and treatment of some players and indeed the club is disgraceful, but let's be honest - he was far from a failure at Madrid and was successful to a degree if not ultimately a total success that a ten European Champions Cup or CL would have been.

A manager who leaves the club in such acrimonious circumstances can't be seen as a success. He failed in his objective to win the CL, and the club took a marked step back in his final season.

And look at the squad - CL semi-finals is the norm. Comparing this team with previous Madrid failures is redundant. It's a far superior team.

It is not redundant if part of the reason that it is a far superior team is that the players he brought in to compliment those already there are his choices. Does he get no credit for improving that team and the effect of that improvement? Finance is is a moot point (I know you didn't refer to it, but it is part of the overall context in which his tenure should be judged compared to others) as Madrid were hardly an inactive club for previous managers or shy in backing managers in the transfer market. You can argue about whether that makes him relatively speaking a success or not, but what he inherited and the previous record is relevant as it is the context for his efforts in charge of the team. Otherwise his tenure is judged in a vacuum.

Leo Beenhaker got the team to 3 European Cup semifinals as well. Look he had a record breaking league season and that was great. He won the Copa del Rey which I appreciate that he took it seriously as opposed to most other managers that were quite happy to exit early. He might even win another one. But Jose came here to win and specifically win the CL. Anyone who does not understand that really doesn't understand Jose, Florentino, or Real Madrid. Jose even said it himself in his very first press conference: "Pero lo más bonito, bonito, bonito no es entrenar o jugar en el Real Madrid. Lo bonito, bonito, bonito es ganar en el Real Madrid. Y ésta es mi motivación."

That means that relatively speaking he was a success, but in terms of his overall mission he was not. He was not a total success or a total failure - he was somewhere in between, leaning nearer to your view because he did not deliver the big prize. It depends on what is considered success or not.

Also you forget that Mourinho had to contend with the effects of the Curse. As we quite liked Beenhaker, he got an easy ride It had been decreed before the ink was even dry on Mourinho's contract by the Custodians of the Curse that he would not be allowed to win the CL as that was in your interests. If he had won it his head would have inflated to such a size that he would never get out of the door of the Bernabeu and you would have been stuck with him for life. You can thank us later.

Very few things in life are a total success/failure. It's all relative. People tend towards an extreme so life doesn't become excruciatingly tedious.

"Are you hungry?"
"well, in relative or absolute terms"
"relative"
"No. I had breakfast this morning, and some people haven't eaten in days. Compared to them, I'm not hungry"

Nevertheless, I am hungry.

I judge Mourinho to be a failure for what he has achieved with the squad he has, the decline from his 2nd - 3rd years, the acromonious manner in which he is leaving Madrid, and the standards that he set for himself.
This failure is relative. He could have failed to a greater extent, but it remains a failure.

Jaime wrote:

EMP wrote:Also you forget that Mourinho had to contend with the effects of the Curse. As we quite liked Beenhaker, he got an easy ride It had been decreed before the ink was even dry on Mourinho's contract by the Custodians of the Curse that he would not be allowed to win the CL as that was in your interests. If he had won it his head would have inflated to such a size that he would never get out of the door of the Bernabeu and you would have been stuck with him for life. You can thank us later.

True, true. But hey we are giving you back Albiol so just keep the curse pointed at those f*ckers who swiped Jordi Alba, deal?

Jaime wrote:CONVOCATORIA

Porteros: Casillas, Diego López y Adán.
Defensas: Varane, Albiol, Coentrão, Carvalho, Nacho y Fabinho.
Centrocampistas: Kaká, Özil, Xabi Alonso, Essien, Modric, Callejón y Di María.
Delanteros: Cristiano Ronaldo, Benzema e Higuaín.

Lesionados: Marcelo, Sergio Ramos, Arbeloa
Fuera por decisión técnica: Pepe

Super Mourinho wrote:

Jaime wrote:CONVOCATORIA

Porteros: Casillas, Diego López y Adán.
Defensas: Varane, Albiol, Coentrão, Carvalho, Nacho y Fabinho.
Centrocampistas: Kaká, Özil, Xabi Alonso, Essien, Modric, Callejón y Di María.
Delanteros: Cristiano Ronaldo, Benzema e Higuaín.

Lesionados: Marcelo, Sergio Ramos, Arbeloa
Fuera por decisión técnica: Pepe

Don't mess with the boss

I'm guesing there is some behind the scenes stuff that has forced Mourinho into getting fired. I blame the club.
Actually I don't quite get the argument because if Perez and Mourinho both want out then there should be no problem with the clause in the contract unless Perez wants Mourinho's next club to pay up.