Mourinho Is A Funny Lad.

Where were Chelsea before 2 years ago?!

http://www.marca.com/edicion/marca/futbol/1a_division/real_madrid/es/desarrollo/680751.html

2nd?

Sorry i meant in the CL.

he´s right though TM the truth hurts

typical frank tavern, a biased comment..

luisgarciahedrinkssangria wrote:typical frank tavern, a biased comment..

nah thats called a wind up theres a huge difference

quick translation frank plz

He's saying he doesn't think RM should be a top seed based on their recent CL performances. He also doesn't think Man. Utd. and Arsenal should be top seeds. He then goes on to whine about how the coefficients and seedings only favour clubs with a long history and status, and Chelsea are a club with "recent history" and so they always suffer.

Well what do you expect Jose? Why don't we just give you the CL trophy, rather than bother with all these midweek matches through to May?

Didn't Ranieri get as far in his season with Abramovich's millions as Mourinho has?

saintgoingmarching wrote:Didn't Ranieri get as far in his season with Abramovich's millions as Mourinho has?

Yeah. But they lost to a dodgy team (who Mourinho's men battered 3-0). Mourinho's side lost to one of the greatest in the history of European football.

Where were we in the CL 2 years ago?

Semi final might be the answer.

saintgoingmarching wrote:Didn't Ranieri get as far in his season with Abramovich's millions as Mourinho has?

We have gone out to the winners on both occassions under JM though.

kasnani wrote:He's saying he doesn't think RM should be a top seed based on their recent CL performances. He also doesn't think Man. Utd. and Arsenal should be top seeds. He then goes on to whine about how the coefficients and seedings only favour clubs with a long history and status, and Chelsea are a club with "recent history" and so they always suffer.

Well what do you expect Jose? Why don't we just give you the CL trophy, rather than bother with all these midweek matches through to May?

He's right though (imo). Seedings should be about how good your team currently is, rather than what they've achieved in the past.

OK, Arsenal should be in the top seed as they finished RU last season, but deffo not Madrid.

and competition has got harder

S4P wrote:

kasnani wrote:He's saying he doesn't think RM should be a top seed based on their recent CL performances. He also doesn't think Man. Utd. and Arsenal should be top seeds. He then goes on to whine about how the coefficients and seedings only favour clubs with a long history and status, and Chelsea are a club with "recent history" and so they always suffer.

Well what do you expect Jose? Why don't we just give you the CL trophy, rather than bother with all these midweek matches through to May?

He's right though (imo). Seedings should be about how good your team currently is, rather than what they've achieved in the past.

OK, Arsenal should be in the top seed as they finished RU last season, but deffo not Madrid.

Don't want to bring up the same argument again, but the basic question is how you define "current" - UEFA thinks it's 5 years, Chelsea fans think it's 2-3 years, Villa fans think it's 20/30 years, it all depends on perspective.

Seedings are bollocks.

They serve only to keep the rich teams rich. They should get rid of them all, both at international and club level.

celtic urm
from 1967 to 1968 would do fine

@ TM
i wouldnt take anything Mourinho says seriously. He is a joker.

traductor

Distinguished Dutchman wrote:traductor

Nice

Obispo wrote:

saintgoingmarching wrote:Didn't Ranieri get as far in his season with Abramovich's millions as Mourinho has?

Yeah. But they lost to a dodgy team (who Mourinho's men battered 3-0). Mourinho's side lost to one of the greatest in the history of European football.

Which one are you refering to?

Distinguished Dutchman wrote:

Obispo wrote:

saintgoingmarching wrote:Didn't Ranieri get as far in his season with Abramovich's millions as Mourinho has?

Yeah. But they lost to a dodgy team (who Mourinho's men battered 3-0). Mourinho's side lost to one of the greatest in the history of European football.

Which one are you refering to?

Well, if he's talking about European history, out of Liverpool and Barcelona, the answers obvious my friend

kasnani wrote:

S4P wrote:

kasnani wrote:He's saying he doesn't think RM should be a top seed based on their recent CL performances. He also doesn't think Man. Utd. and Arsenal should be top seeds. He then goes on to whine about how the coefficients and seedings only favour clubs with a long history and status, and Chelsea are a club with "recent history" and so they always suffer.

Well what do you expect Jose? Why don't we just give you the CL trophy, rather than bother with all these midweek matches through to May?

He's right though (imo). Seedings should be about how good your team currently is, rather than what they've achieved in the past.

OK, Arsenal should be in the top seed as they finished RU last season, but deffo not Madrid.

Don't want to bring up the same argument again, but the basic question is how you define "current" - UEFA thinks it's 5 years, Chelsea fans think it's 2-3 years, Villa fans think it's 20/30 years, it all depends on perspective.

I don't think a single Villa fan would argue that. They might argue their club has a long and successful history which is fair enough. Take a snapshot of a team five years ago. How many players are left in that team today? Celtic got second seeding because in 2002 they did well in the UEFA (CL losers) Cup (in which performances are grossly over-rated by FIFA). That sort of anomoly is daft.

Rosy wrote:

kasnani wrote:

S4P wrote:

kasnani wrote:He's saying he doesn't think RM should be a top seed based on their recent CL performances. He also doesn't think Man. Utd. and Arsenal should be top seeds. He then goes on to whine about how the coefficients and seedings only favour clubs with a long history and status, and Chelsea are a club with "recent history" and so they always suffer.

Well what do you expect Jose? Why don't we just give you the CL trophy, rather than bother with all these midweek matches through to May?

He's right though (imo). Seedings should be about how good your team currently is, rather than what they've achieved in the past.

OK, Arsenal should be in the top seed as they finished RU last season, but deffo not Madrid.

Don't want to bring up the same argument again, but the basic question is how you define "current" - UEFA thinks it's 5 years, Chelsea fans think it's 2-3 years, Villa fans think it's 20/30 years, it all depends on perspective.

I don't think a single Villa fan would argue that. They might argue their club has a long and successful history which is fair enough. Take a snapshot of a team five years ago. How many players are left in that team today? Celtic got second seeding because in 2002 they did well in the UEFA (CL losers) Cup (in which performances are grossly over-rated by FIFA). That sort of anomoly is daft.

I meant UEFA not FIFA although they are even worse with their World Cup seedings which date back so far that some of the players are collecting their old age pensions.

S4P wrote:
Well, if he's talking about European history, out of Liverpool and Barcelona, the answers obvious my friend

Depends if you talk about just the CL or all European competitions.