Is football just about winning?

It’s only ‘entertaining’ if you win. Who walks away from a 3-2 defeat and thinks ‘doesn’t matter we lost, what an entertaining game!’ Bollox. Fans boo. You walked out pissed off - aside from this, for 99% of teams, entertainment is not in there hands, so much depends on the opposition, refs decisions and other variables, a manager can’t just click his fingers and tell his players to go out there and ‘entertain’ whatever that means.
It’s all down to winning, some games you will win in style other times you have to grind it out.
We couldn't grind one out in the late 90's with a full packet of viagra.
 
Football is about putting the ball into your opponents net. If you can do that better than they can then I think they call that winning. But the oft-heard phrase from yore 'One-nil to the Arsenal' typified what the game had become, and there's been many an Italian coach who would look upon a 1-0 where preventing the opposition from scoring was a classy performance.

Few teams that I have seen have managed the kind of start we have. Indeed, you have to go back to the 1890's to find another example of a goal-scoring avalanche! Teams have never had the quality, performance, skills and talent to perform, seemingly game after game, with such attacking intent.

Naturally, most fans would love to win a majority of their games but not every team can have a KdB, a David Silva, a Jesus, a Raheem and a Leroy, grafted on to a mean defence and protected by a Ferny, and all propped up with a pretty fair goalie!

It should have been eight, it should have been eight, we're lucky bastards, it should have been eight.
 
My post was actually like a response to Pep's comment about winning trophies.

Obviously I want to win trophies, but I'm more personally interested in users answering the direct question I posted "Does the one trophy you win at the end overcome the hours of boredom you had to go through?"

Obviously I'm ecstatic about the current results and playstyle, my post is also a criticism of Mourinho's approach of win at all cost football.
Not to sure that Mourinho was wanting to win at all costs, looked more like avoid losing at all costs. ( And if Coutinho had been awarded the penalty he wouldn't have succeeded in that)
The trouble is that not many teams can win and if you don't and you are playing poor football it really does suck the enjoyment out of the game, look at Pearces last season.
I think most supporters for a while would accept dull football for a trophy , look at Chelseas winning the CL but if you don't then win you have nothing left to enjoy. I enjoyed a lot of the football we played last season even though we won nothing in the end.
I'd have loved to win the CL when we lost to Real Madrid and would have accepted the rather dull football we played had we won but the loss was made far worse by the football we played in the 2nd leg.
 
Its easy to sneer at Mourinho type football whilst we are doing quite well whilst playing breathtaking football. But go back ten years and I'd have snapped your hand off to win a trophy playing horrible minging Pulis football, I just wanted that f**king banner tearing down.
 
Personally I'd rather finish 2nd playing the way we do, than 1st playing like the rags. It is supposedly entertainment after all. So to me it's not just about winning but I can understand why our owners, players and manager might see it differently.

Of course best of all wold be to win trophies playing the way we do.
We have to win trophies i feel otherwise it means nothing and is such a wasted period in our history. If we don't win the league when we are this good, then it means we are going to crumble and based on what we've seen so far this season that would be a travesty. Playing 10 / 15 games at this level isn't what great teams do, and i think this team can become a great team, maintain this level over a period of time and watch the trophies flood in. Imagine the feeling we all will have in May if we have played some great football yet we watch the rags lift the prem.
 
Collymore is a woman beating cretin who has to make up for his growing irrelevance by rattling cages with comments he doesn’t actually believe himself.

He’s a knob
 
You cannot actually have a Faustian bargain where your swap for entertainment guarantees success, but if you want to look at how your attitude is look at which manager amongst the other top clubs you would like.
When Chelsea were having success under Mourinho were you one of quite a few on here who wanted him?
If we didn't have Pep which manager would you rather have? Would you prefer Klopp or Peg ? Peg has won far more but Klopp won quite a bit with Dortmund, there is no question as to which manager plays the more entertaining football with fewer resources
 
Yes it is. Mourinho played some gash football last season, but won 3 trophies (yes, it is official, the Charity Shield is now a trophy!). The majority of Rag fans have bought into his 'style'. Even though they've put some goals past a couple of teams this season, there are times they've been turgid, but it's glossed over. If he goes on to win the league, and we retain our style but finish behind them, then he has won - there's really no other way to look at it.

Arsenal played some stunning football for years, but finished behind the Filth, and all that is spoken about is Ferguson's trophies. Newcastle were stunning to watch that season they finished behind the Scum - no one really talks about them, it's all about who won. It's a results game. If we finish second to them, then it really doesn't matter how attractive we've been. Nice if you're a fan, you get to watch great football, but the Rags get the open top bus parade and the accolades.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.