Hiddink Vs Mourinho

[pardoe]

Whos decides if hughes gets sacked Monsour or Kad

This is a good question.

I think talk of Hughes leaving is ridiculous, but were results and performances not to improve, i just couldn't see anyone making that decision.

Sheikh Mansour's the owner, but we're one of hundreds of pies he's got his finger in. I doubt he really wakes up worrying too much about our latest draw.

Khaldoon's his eyes and ears here, but he too only spends a little time around the club, and seems to have built up a close relationship with Hughes. I think he wants to be seen as a fair guy, and we all think he is. I couldn't see him deciding we should change manager.

Gary Cook is Executive Chairman. The fuss he's made of reshaping the club, though, and the reality that Hughes leaving could also mean the end of his time at the club, i just don't see it happening. I don't think he's a strong enough character to stand up to Hughes, should he ever need to.

I honestly think that Hughes has until at least the end of the season, and i think that's the right call, even if it ends up looking like we won't qualify for Europe.

 

[lee-mcfc]

being realistic i say hiddink

 

[skybluepete]

i hope hughes can do the shit but im just not sure but what i do kmow is hiddinks football is easier on the eye,more entertaining and just as effective as jose he is also tactically cute. mourinho football is pretty boring to watch but his mind games wiv taggart would be wicked.my choice would be hiddink

 

[Dyed Petya]

Well, I am a Manc ex-pat based in Russia. I watched every Russian qualifying game and both legs of the play off against Slovenia. I remain unchanged in the view that the guy is one of the top coaches in world football. Would you care to explain why you differ, noting that in one off games even Mercer and Allison had some disasters?

Because Hiddink has won nothing of any interest at club level, with the exception of a CL in the 1980s, the Dutch league with the only club in Holland at the time, and the FA Cup with a Chelsea team that was the best squad in the world.

If you have a team with Akineev, Zhirkov, Semak, Arshavin and Pavyulchenko, and you don't finish second in a group whose rivals are Azerbaijan, Finland, Wales and Liechtenstein, then you are doing something terribly, terribly wrong.

His main achievement is the semis of Euro 2008, with probably the fourth best team. Oh, and he did okay with South Korea in one World Cup.


Simple way of determining this, the question we should ask of every candidate - what have they won in club football?

You conveniently omit Germany, who won the group. It basically came down to the match between the two in Moscow to decide first and second place. Russia lost it but were robbed. They were poor in Slovenia in the second leg of the play off (though hit by a shocker of a decision to send off the centre forward just into the second half when they were starting to come back into the game), but what really undid them was a lack of concentration to gift Slovenia a goal late in the first leg when Russia were 2-0 up and cruising.

And in Hiddink's favour is this. Scolari was ditched by Chelsea last season on the back of a run of 4 wins, 5 draws and 3 defeats (two convincingly to United and Liverpool) in 12 league games. Hiddink took them over and won 34 points in 11 games without signing a player, plus won the FA Cup and was knocked out of the CL on away goals thanks to a last minute Barca strike after Chelsea had suffered some of the worst refereeing in modern memory.

I know you have your Hitzfeld agenda that you want to push and I agree - he has won more in club football than Hiddink. But let's stick to the facts, shall we?

 

[moomba]

We've had some crap managers, the worst of which was Sven

Are you kidding?

 

[moomba]

So, can I assume from your last statement that you are intimately familiar with Guus' tactics and progression at Australia and South Korea? That you regularly watched 90 minutes of his matches, and was impressed with the tactical decisions he made against other opponents?

I was, but it wasn't just the tactics, it was the fight and desire that Australia showed that was a hallmark of Hiddinks reign.

He took Australia (who are the ONLY team in their region) to a Second Round of the World Cup. He took South Korea to fourth when he had Home advantage and every other team was struggling due to the climate and elevation of the stadiums.

Australia is part of the Asian confederation now, but back then it wasn't just a matter of getting through Oceania, there was also a playoff against Uruguay to qualify for the World Cup (for the first time in 30 odd years), and then getting through to the next round against Japan, Brazil and Croatia was no mean feat at all.

If not for a dodgy penalty decision against Italy in the last minutes of the game we could well be talking about quarters and semi's as well.

 

[simon23]

I wonder how many games into the reign of eiother hiddink or Mourihnio before a small section of our "loyal support" turns on them.....id guess they would get slightly longer than MH due to the facts that neither are ex utd players!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[smiles]

i think jose is more trouble than he's worth. Hiddink has a history of taking under-dog teams and getting them to punch above their weight. Imagine if our squad were playing better than their worth?!

 

[Maineblue]

I wonder how many games into the reign of eiother hiddink or Mourihnio before a small section of our "loyal support" turns on them.....id guess they would get slightly longer than MH due to the facts that neither are ex utd players!!!!!!!!!!!!!

18 months isn't exactly a short period of time in football sorry to say and before anyone says but Ferguson got yada yada that rarely happens in football these days and as I've said before I'm happy for two seasons as long as I'm seeing progress maybe off it but not on(pitch) where it ultimately matters.

 

[Marvin]

It's true that Hughes is still building his own team, and that there are bound to be setbacks.

What alarms me is the set-up of the team where we seem to be squeezing all the attacking talent we have into the starting 11, at the expense of the team. And furthermore when it's not working out he wont change the formation, and then he repeats the mistake in subsequent games

A new team will not have the fluency of long-standing teams like Arsenal and Chelsea, even if they have the same individual talent, but Hughes is adding to the problems by playing too many forwards. Bizarrely after last season, we do better away from home because we don't play such an adventurous game.