Rafa has the class

[Swagger]

Steven Gerrard is noted for the accuracy and power of his shooting, and he blasted a hole in Chelsea's armour-plating on the night Liverpool reached their second Champions League final in three seasons. 'Jose Mourinho has been a credit to English football,' Gerrard said. 'He makes us laugh.'

 

Upstairs at Anfield, at just the time Gerrard was speaking at pitch level, Mourinho was being gently ribbed by journalists over his ludicrous claim that Chelsea had been the only team trying to win, perhaps aware that his little-big-man persona had suddenly lurched from Napoleon Bonaparte to Charlie Chaplin. Sir Alex Ferguson had correctly admonished Mourinho earlier in the week for being disrespectful to opponents and unnecessarily personal about individuals, but in the long run Gerrard's comment will hit harder and hurt more. The one thing inspirational leaders cannot survive is comedy. As any former England manager will readily attest, you have had it once you become a figure of fun.

 

Just as goals change games, results alter reputations. Indeed, results make or break reputations. One disappointing note in all the tributes to Alan Ball last week was the suggestion by some that he was not actually a great player, just a driven individual who made up for his lack of natural talent by sheer hard work. What gives reporters the right to pontificate on these matters I do not know. We should judge footballers by their results, ditto with teams and managers.

 

Ball won a World Cup medal by playing the game of his life in the final at the age of 21. End of story. Permanently great. Those who would split his achievement into fractions, like skating judges awarding marks for technical ability and artistic merit, miss the point. The result is all that counts. Should Liverpool win a second European Cup in three years in Athens this month it will unquestionably put anything recently achieved by Manchester United or Chelsea in the shade.

 

Forget United's one appearance in the final in Ferguson's 20-odd years of trying, forget Chelsea's inability to advance past the semis, forget Fergie and Mourinho, and Arsene Wenger, too. Rafael Benitez suddenly looks like the best manager in England, if not Europe, and should he manage another against-the-odds victory in the final he will become the greatest of all managers. Because two European Cups in your first three seasons at a club is the sort of achievement that demands respect, no questions asked. Not even Bob Paisley's success was that dramatic, and he was not exactly new to Liverpool, nor operating in a foreign country, nor reaching European finals with players such as Djimi Traore and Bolo Zenden. And if Liverpool beat Milan again, and it remains a big if after the Italians' superb semi-final displays, it is going to look much more impressive in the record books than beating Monchengladbach, FC Brugge or Malmo. Yes, I know the last was Brian Clough.

 

Mourinho can moan all he likes, and he probably will, about Liverpool shirking in the league and saving their best for Europe. He has a point, for in their respective domestic leagues this year's Champions League finalists are a whopping combined total of 46 points off the pace. So perhaps the Champions League is not the most reliable guide to the best teams in Europe. Perhaps it is turning into a competition for specialists, something teams are beginning to concentrate on at the expense of their domestic form. But it does happen to be a trophy all the big teams want to win. Did Chelsea want to reach the final? Yes. Did they manage it? No. Will Liverpool fans enjoy being in a seventh European Cup final when Manchester United have managed two and all the London clubs between them have reached one? What do you think? History does not always record what we want it to record. History simply records who won and who lost.

 

And after the last two weeks of history, Benitez and Liverpool are the big winners, Mourinho and Chelsea the big losers, with United somewhere in between. Should United manage a league and Cup double it would go a long way to making up for their massive disappointment in Europe where, until the San Siro, they had been playing so well and simultaneously crank up the pressure on Chelsea. Mourinho has always been sackable, because that's the kind of regime under which he works, though should he finish the season with just the Carling Cup and a reputation as a sour loser Roman Abramovich would at least have some justification for ending the relationship. Mourinho has not played the Andriy Shevchenko situation particularly well, admittedly a tricky task when the player has been so underwhelming, and in the past couple of weeks managed to mislay his charm tablets and come up with some crass public pronouncements instead.

 

'What he said about Cristiano Ronaldo's background and class was out of order,' Ferguson said. 'We haven't fallen out, I quite enjoy the dialogue between us and I think Jose will still be around to continue it next season, but I just felt I had to respond to some of the stuff he was coming out with.'

 

The suspicion that the wheels are close to coming off at Chelsea was only heightened when the club gagged Mourinho this weekend. United did a press conference on Friday and have another one tomorrow. Chelsea did nothing at all, presumably on the basis that the best plan when in a hole is to stop digging. No manager, no players, not a peep. Liverpool just carried on with their normal arrangements as if nothing out of the ordinary had happened.

 

Ferguson is not sure at this stage whether United's visit to Stamford Bridge on Wednesday will turn out to be the title decider. 'I'm not counting my chickens, I don't think that's a wise thing to do,' he explained. 'I always said there would be twists and turns in the run-in and there have been. I hope there are no more to come, but you never know. It could be we have to go to Chelsea and be decisive.'

 

One thing Ferguson and Mourinho will be able to agree upon, once they have patched up their differences over Ronaldo, is that the best way to reach a Champions League final is to lose interest in your domestic league at a fairly early stage. And try not to lose key personnel at the business end of the season. United's went to Milan with a patched-up defence, Chelsea played at Anfield without Ricardo Carvalho, Michael Ballack and Shevchenko. 'I'm fairly certain Chelsea bought Ballack and Shevchenko with the Champions League in mind, then neither of them played in the semi,' Ferguson said.

 

The United manager is full of praise for Benitez - 'Two Champions League finals in three years is a fantastic achievement' - though he finds his success explicable enough. Indeed, there is more than an echo of what Mourinho has been saying in Ferguson's assessment, though he manages to sound much more complimentary. If Mourinho needs a crash course in subtlety, he could do worse than to read on and learn from the master.

 

'Sometimes in athletics you see athletes prepare themselves for one tournament a year,' Ferguson said. 'I think Rafa made his mind up in January that he wasn't going to win the league and that Europe would have to be his target. Getting knocked out in the FA Cup early possibly helped as well. So he knew his target, and his preparation tactically has been very, very good. There's nothing wrong with that approach, it requires patience from everyone, from the board down to the fans, and it requires courage to do it. But this season Liverpool could see as early as September or October that they were not going to win the league, whereas we were in the melting pot.

 

'You can't turn opportunities down, we had to keep going for both. It should be a good Champions League final, though, because both teams will be 100 per cent fresh. No question about that, there will be no issues of tiredness. We didn't even bother to send anyone to watch AC Milan in their last two games, because in one they rested nine players and in the other six. Liverpool did the same thing last Saturday against Portsmouth. It doesn't bother me, it's part of the job. You hope you can handle what's in front of you, but we found Milan much fresher and better prepared than we were. If I'd had a few more players available I might have been able to freshen up my team too, unfortunately we've had some unusual injuries at a bad time and I've been having to use the same players. We were tired and we went out.'

 

Brilliant. But if neither Liverpool nor Milan will be tired in Athens, who is going to win? A fan who gatecrashed the post-match press conference at Anfield on Tuesday made the point that as long as the media keep writing Liverpool off, the team will keep proving them wrong. Hard but fair, perhaps, except this branch of the media tipped Liverpool for the title this season, only to be proved completely wrong well before Christmas. So you will understand if I go with Milan for the final. They were easily the best team in the last four and have a powerful desire to blot out the memory of Istanbul.

 

Fergie, as befits a cautious Scot and a diplomatic one, is sitting on the fence. 'Liverpool are hard to beat,' he said. 'They will set out to be hard to beat in the final. Milan have got fantastic quality and in Kaka and Seedorf they have a couple of special players, but there's two teams with different styles and it's a very difficult game to call. I wouldn't put a penny on it.'

 

Here

[Guest Portly]

It's true that the London-based media have consistently written Liverpool off. They just don't get it.

 

The morning after the draw for the last 16 of the Champions League in 2005, there was a studio discussion about it on BBC Radio 5 Live. The football journos in the studio spent all the time talking about the prospects for Chelsea and Arsenal.

 

"Of course there's Liverpool as well" said the programme presenter.

 

"Oh, Liverpool are only in the last 16 to make up the numbers" said one of the learned hacks.

 

I have noticed the same phenomenon this season, and I think it is probably helpful to us - it takes all the pressure off us.

[Guest Prongsy]

That's a good article.

[Scally Bob]

They've always written us off because we're not English, we're Scouse. They just don't get it and I don't care. Even in the seventies and eighties we got no credit whatsoever.

 

But that's a good article. It must have choked Ferguson saying that.

 

Back on our perch Fergie!

[aka Dus]

Better article by Dion Fanning in the Sindo :

 

 

THAT WAS THE WEEK : Benitez gamble exposes folly of Mourinho's ego

 

WHEN Pepe Reina saved Geremi's penalty at Anfield last Tuesday night, Rafael Benitez, already sitting in the lotus position signifying utmost serenity, glanced at his watch.

 

What could the penalty kicks be keeping him from? Perhaps he had arranged a dinner appointment with his friend Steve McClaren, who, it must be stated again, was offered as a role model for Benitez last January. McClaren, one journalist said, was an example of what could be achieved by victory in the Carling Cup and encouraged Benitez to be more like his pal.

 

Benitez was said to have erred in allowing Arsenal - for whom those games in January represent the season's highpoint - score nine goal in two games, primarily by selecting Jerzy Dudek. This was a strategic error, some pundits warned. Victory in the cups buys a manager time, they said, before going on to call for Benitez's head, ignoring the fact that he had won the FA Cup and the European Cup in his first two seasons.

 

For a few months at least, Benitez may not have to listen to people telling him to be more like his buddy Steve McClaren.

 

Indeed a friend and astute observer of contemporary mores says he has only once doubted Benitez and that was when he learned of his friendship with McClaren. He had a brief crisis of faith before realising that Alex Ferguson was best friends with Howard Wilkinson and Arsene Wenger often dined in the finest Parisian restaurants with Gerard Houllier. Every great man has his dirty little secret.

 

In fact, Benitez was not dining with McClaren, whose Carling Cup victory with Middlesbrough is unlikely to save him if England lose to Estonia next month, after the game but with the new owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett.

 

Each time Gillett and Hicks visit Anfield, they leave gasping breathlessly, "We knew this was big, but not this big." On Tuesday night, there must have been no point of reference for their experience. Every other game they had seen - Barcelona, Arsenal - at least could be said, maybe tenuously, to have some connection with the civilised sporting behaviour they are used to (as both men own ice hockey teams, this argument may be flimsy).

 

But Liverpool-Chelsea has become a clash of cultures, a war against the global ambitions of an empire. A fight, as it appeared at Anfield on Tuesday night, for football's soul.

 

The best thing about Tuesday's game was that it made no room for the neutral; there was nothing for the sponsors, the corporate diners to take from the game except that the two teams - and their supporters - didn't like each other. If AC Milan played the most glorious football of the week, Anfield was a throwback in every sense to a time when games appeared to matter more.

 

Some commentators have commended Chelsea for deciding in August that they would attempt to win all four trophies. This is rather like praising Hitler for invading Russia. It is a sycophantic attempt to cosy up to the megalomaniacal dreams of the hubristic. Chelsea, as Rick Parry, so rightly pointed out, need to win a lot of trophies to justify their investment but towards the end, their ambitions, or at least those of Jose Mourinho, were not so much global, as petty.

 

At the start of the season, Mourinho said he wanted a close title race but when he had it, when Manchester United failed to beat Middlesbrough, he ducked out of the fight, resting players for the games against Newcastle and Bolton so he could keep his players fresh for Liverpool.

 

Mourinho is entitled to some sympathy for the manner in which his position at Chelsea will become untenable over the summer, but he too is a bully, a man who has abused his position, accusing Stephen Hunt this year of attempting to seriously injure his goalkeeper and, surreally, going on to criticise the local ambulance service.

 

So it is not always the desire to unite his squad which makes him say what he says. When Mourinho claims Chelsea were the better team on Tuesday, it is not an attempt to unite his dressing room, but the denial of a crushed man.

 

Benitez toyed with him, wound him up and detecting the fatal sensitivity of the narcissist understood what his comments would do to the Chelsea manager.

 

But Benitez's row with Mourinho was a gamble and, like many things the Liverpool manager does, an indication that he is not as negative or cautious a manager as some claim.

 

Xabi Alonso - who has been disappointing for much of the season - was ruthlessly dropped. Alonso has failed in recent important matches to keep the ball in midfield so Benitez decided if he wanted somebody to give the ball away in the centre of midfield, he might as well play Steven Gerrard. Gerrard responded with probably his best game against significant opposition - not including Andorra, of course - in that position.

 

Now Benitez has raised the expectations at his club once again. They could have already celebrated Carling Cup victory this season, but Benitez demands more and has raised the bar for a club which must now beat Milan in the European Cup final to have a successful season. It may even be enough to save Benitez's job.

Edited May 6, 2007 by aka Dus

[abc]

This nonsense about playing for one trophy came out from Mourinho and everyone's picked up on it.

 

We got a horrible fixture list at the start of the season, but still at one point in January looked like we could stage a comeback being something like 3 or 5 points behind Chelsea, and about 10 or so behind United. IMO the derby match at home wrecked any dreams we had of a late surge. And the Newcastle away match just put it all to bed.

 

I'm glad someone pointed out that Mourinho rested important players for the Bolton match. And even more so that it made no difference in the CL. But still, it reeks that Man Utd are gonna win the league this season, much as I dislike Mourinho...

[Earl Hafler]

Rafa is the new Makelele.

 

Pundits falling over themselves to tell the story of the under appreciated Spaniard. Alan Hansen will be at it on MOTD soon. " Fergie, Mourinho, Wenger are all great managers...but Rafa is the one "

[liverbird04]

Rafa is one of the most misunderstood managers in the premier league ,the media just do not know how to take him, some of the criticism he has taken during his time at Liverpool has been unreal. Its accepted wisdom that he's boring and cautious oh and only plays with one striker upfront (apparently)..what on earth will they write in the summer if purchase the likes of tevez and/or Villa?

 

On a different note anyone catch this crock of s**** ?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1951

 

 

Liverpool have seriously pissed off the journos by getting through to another final .

Edited May 6, 2007 by liverbird04

[Gomez]

This nonsense about playing for one trophy came out from Mourinho and everyone's picked up on it.

 

This is very true, the press are all saying thet mourinho has lost his charm and is sounding petty, yet they are quick to pass off his excuses as fact. They are still as toady as they ever where to him and fergison.

 

You'd think we rested players all season in the league to suppliment our CL run, this flys in the face of the facts and dismisses our fantastic group performance, a much harder group than arsenal or man u, and we still were the first English team to qualify by 2 whole matches. We even put out reserve teams once we'd qualified.

 

We failed to win the league because of two reasons.

1. We bought too many players in the summer, this led to a slow start and by the time they gelled (some of them still haven't) we were too far behind. Man u by contrast bought only one and were off to a flyer. We didn't really have a choice though, we needed a lot - hopefully this summer we'll go for one or two big players and not 4 or 5.

 

2. Man have had a spectacular season, they've had a lot of help and a lot of luck, but ronaldo has been the difference for them.

[smithdown]

"And while you may be a hostage to fortune after Liverpool?s astonishing comeback in Istanbul those two years ago, the final has the potential to be a dull affair."

 

"We should at least now get a decent FA Cup final without managers needing to nurse players through ahead of Athens."

 

 

Haha!

 

What a plum.

[aka Dus]

Rafa is one of the most misunderstood managers in the premier league ,the media just do not know how to take him, some of the criticism he has taken during his time at Liverpool has been unreal. Its accepted wisdom that he's boring and cautious oh and only plays with one striker upfront (apparently)..what on earth will they write in the summer if purchase the likes of tevez and/or Villa?

 

On a different note anyone catch this crock of s**** ?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1951

Liverpool have seriously pissed off the journos by getting through to another final .

 

Ian Ridley! LOL. Wycombe Wanderer's own George Gillette.

[psl]

Ian Ridley! LOL. Wycombe Wanderer's own George Gillette.

 

I think he did really well in that article. He managed not to mention Tony Adams once.

[aka Dus]

I think he did really well in that article. He managed not to mention Tony Adams once.

 

My mistake, it was Weymouth that he applied all the years of knowledge, expertise, and passion accumulated in years of distinguished journalism.

 

Did he ever get that biog of GH out? Or did GH getting sacked scupper his alternative a*** licking.

[smithdown]

My mistake, it was Weymouth that he applied all the years of knowledge, expertise, and passion accumulated in years of distinguished journalism.

 

 

Wasn't Steve Claridge his pick as player/manager there? A fine choice, we'd all agree.

[IgPig]

Ian Ridley! LOL. Wycombe Wanderer's own George Gillette.

 

 

he was/is close to Houllier I believe?

Edited May 6, 2007 by Post Kuytal Glow

[Rimbeux]

Rafa is one of the most misunderstood managers in the premier league ,the media just do not know how to take him, some of the criticism he has taken during his time at Liverpool has been unreal. Its accepted wisdom that he's boring and cautious oh and only plays with one striker upfront (apparently)..what on earth will they write in the summer if purchase the likes of tevez and/or Villa?

On a different note anyone catch this crock of s**** ?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1951

Liverpool have seriously pissed off the journos by getting through to another final .

 

 

That's come stright from the Chelsea communications office, he's one of them, we know that. With all these pieces though, there are sides being taken, light being shone only in certain directions

[Romario]

Better article by Dion Fanning in the Sindo :

 

 

 

QUOTE

THAT WAS THE WEEK : Benitez gamble exposes folly of Mourinho's ego

 

WHEN Pepe Reina saved Geremi's penalty at Anfield last Tuesday night, Rafael Benitez, already sitting in the lotus position signifying utmost serenity, glanced at his watch.

 

What could the penalty kicks be keeping him from? Perhaps he had arranged a dinner appointment with his friend Steve McClaren, who, it must be stated again, was offered as a role model for Benitez last January. McClaren, one journalist said, was an example of what could be achieved by victory in the Carling Cup and encouraged Benitez to be more like his pal.

 

Benitez was said to have erred in allowing Arsenal - for whom those games in January represent the season's highpoint - score nine goal in two games, primarily by selecting Jerzy Dudek. This was a strategic error, some pundits warned. Victory in the cups buys a manager time, they said, before going on to call for Benitez's head, ignoring the fact that he had won the FA Cup and the European Cup in his first two seasons.

 

For a few months at least, Benitez may not have to listen to people telling him to be more like his buddy Steve McClaren.

 

Indeed a friend and astute observer of contemporary mores says he has only once doubted Benitez and that was when he learned of his friendship with McClaren. He had a brief crisis of faith before realising that Alex Ferguson was best friends with Howard Wilkinson and Arsene Wenger often dined in the finest Parisian restaurants with Gerard Houllier. Every great man has his dirty little secret.

 

In fact, Benitez was not dining with McClaren, whose Carling Cup victory with Middlesbrough is unlikely to save him if England lose to Estonia next month, after the game but with the new owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett.

 

Each time Gillett and Hicks visit Anfield, they leave gasping breathlessly, "We knew this was big, but not this big." On Tuesday night, there must have been no point of reference for their experience. Every other game they had seen - Barcelona, Arsenal - at least could be said, maybe tenuously, to have some connection with the civilised sporting behaviour they are used to (as both men own ice hockey teams, this argument may be flimsy).

 

But Liverpool-Chelsea has become a clash of cultures, a war against the global ambitions of an empire. A fight, as it appeared at Anfield on Tuesday night, for football's soul.

 

The best thing about Tuesday's game was that it made no room for the neutral; there was nothing for the sponsors, the corporate diners to take from the game except that the two teams - and their supporters - didn't like each other. If AC Milan played the most glorious football of the week, Anfield was a throwback in every sense to a time when games appeared to matter more.

 

Some commentators have commended Chelsea for deciding in August that they would attempt to win all four trophies. This is rather like praising Hitler for invading Russia. It is a sycophantic attempt to cosy up to the megalomaniacal dreams of the hubristic. Chelsea, as Rick Parry, so rightly pointed out, need to win a lot of trophies to justify their investment but towards the end, their ambitions, or at least those of Jose Mourinho, were not so much global, as petty.

 

At the start of the season, Mourinho said he wanted a close title race but when he had it, when Manchester United failed to beat Middlesbrough, he ducked out of the fight, resting players for the games against Newcastle and Bolton so he could keep his players fresh for Liverpool.

 

Mourinho is entitled to some sympathy for the manner in which his position at Chelsea will become untenable over the summer, but he too is a bully, a man who has abused his position, accusing Stephen Hunt this year of attempting to seriously injure his goalkeeper and, surreally, going on to criticise the local ambulance service.

 

So it is not always the desire to unite his squad which makes him say what he says. When Mourinho claims Chelsea were the better team on Tuesday, it is not an attempt to unite his dressing room, but the denial of a crushed man.

 

Benitez toyed with him, wound him up and detecting the fatal sensitivity of the narcissist understood what his comments would do to the Chelsea manager.

 

But Benitez's row with Mourinho was a gamble and, like many things the Liverpool manager does, an indication that he is not as negative or cautious a manager as some claim.

 

Xabi Alonso - who has been disappointing for much of the season - was ruthlessly dropped. Alonso has failed in recent important matches to keep the ball in midfield so Benitez decided if he wanted somebody to give the ball away in the centre of midfield, he might as well play Steven Gerrard. Gerrard responded with probably his best game against significant opposition - not including Andorra, of course - in that position.

 

Now Benitez has raised the expectations at his club once again. They could have already celebrated Carling Cup victory this season, but Benitez demands more and has raised the bar for a club which must now beat Milan in the European Cup final to have a successful season. It may even be enough to save Benitez's job.

 

pathetic as always.

Edited May 6, 2007 by Romario

[Lee W]

Better article by Dion Fanning in the Sindo :

QUOTE

THAT WAS THE WEEK : Benitez gamble exposes folly of Mourinho's ego

 

WHEN Pepe Reina saved Geremi's penalty at Anfield last Tuesday night, Rafael Benitez, already sitting in the lotus position signifying utmost serenity, glanced at his watch.

 

What could the penalty kicks be keeping him from? Perhaps he had arranged a dinner appointment with his friend Steve McClaren, who, it must be stated again, was offered as a role model for Benitez last January. McClaren, one journalist said, was an example of what could be achieved by victory in the Carling Cup and encouraged Benitez to be more like his pal.

 

Benitez was said to have erred in allowing Arsenal - for whom those games in January represent the season's highpoint - score nine goal in two games, primarily by selecting Jerzy Dudek. This was a strategic error, some pundits warned. Victory in the cups buys a manager time, they said, before going on to call for Benitez's head, ignoring the fact that he had won the FA Cup and the European Cup in his first two seasons.

 

For a few months at least, Benitez may not have to listen to people telling him to be more like his buddy Steve McClaren.

 

Indeed a friend and astute observer of contemporary mores says he has only once doubted Benitez and that was when he learned of his friendship with McClaren. He had a brief crisis of faith before realising that Alex Ferguson was best friends with Howard Wilkinson and Arsene Wenger often dined in the finest Parisian restaurants with Gerard Houllier. Every great man has his dirty little secret.

 

In fact, Benitez was not dining with McClaren, whose Carling Cup victory with Middlesbrough is unlikely to save him if England lose to Estonia next month, after the game but with the new owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett.

 

Each time Gillett and Hicks visit Anfield, they leave gasping breathlessly, "We knew this was big, but not this big." On Tuesday night, there must have been no point of reference for their experience. Every other game they had seen - Barcelona, Arsenal - at least could be said, maybe tenuously, to have some connection with the civilised sporting behaviour they are used to (as both men own ice hockey teams, this argument may be flimsy).

 

But Liverpool-Chelsea has become a clash of cultures, a war against the global ambitions of an empire. A fight, as it appeared at Anfield on Tuesday night, for football's soul.

 

The best thing about Tuesday's game was that it made no room for the neutral; there was nothing for the sponsors, the corporate diners to take from the game except that the two teams - and their supporters - didn't like each other. If AC Milan played the most glorious football of the week, Anfield was a throwback in every sense to a time when games appeared to matter more.

 

Some commentators have commended Chelsea for deciding in August that they would attempt to win all four trophies. This is rather like praising Hitler for invading Russia. It is a sycophantic attempt to cosy up to the megalomaniacal dreams of the hubristic. Chelsea, as Rick Parry, so rightly pointed out, need to win a lot of trophies to justify their investment but towards the end, their ambitions, or at least those of Jose Mourinho, were not so much global, as petty.

 

At the start of the season, Mourinho said he wanted a close title race but when he had it, when Manchester United failed to beat Middlesbrough, he ducked out of the fight, resting players for the games against Newcastle and Bolton so he could keep his players fresh for Liverpool.

 

Mourinho is entitled to some sympathy for the manner in which his position at Chelsea will become untenable over the summer, but he too is a bully, a man who has abused his position, accusing Stephen Hunt this year of attempting to seriously injure his goalkeeper and, surreally, going on to criticise the local ambulance service.

 

So it is not always the desire to unite his squad which makes him say what he says. When Mourinho claims Chelsea were the better team on Tuesday, it is not an attempt to unite his dressing room, but the denial of a crushed man.

 

Benitez toyed with him, wound him up and detecting the fatal sensitivity of the narcissist understood what his comments would do to the Chelsea manager.

 

But Benitez's row with Mourinho was a gamble and, like many things the Liverpool manager does, an indication that he is not as negative or cautious a manager as some claim.

 

Xabi Alonso - who has been disappointing for much of the season - was ruthlessly dropped. Alonso has failed in recent important matches to keep the ball in midfield so Benitez decided if he wanted somebody to give the ball away in the centre of midfield, he might as well play Steven Gerrard. Gerrard responded with probably his best game against significant opposition - not including Andorra, of course - in that position.

 

Now Benitez has raised the expectations at his club once again. They could have already celebrated Carling Cup victory this season, but Benitez demands more and has raised the bar for a club which must now beat Milan in the European Cup final to have a successful season. It may even be enough to save Benitez's job.

 

pathetic as always.

 

You've surpassed yourself !!

[Romario]

You've surpassed yourself !!

??

[Lee W]

??

 

http://www.ynwa.tv/forum/index.php?s=&...t&p=1745719

[Romario]

http://www.ynwa.tv/forum/index.php?s=&...t&p=1745719

Eeer I was highlighting from that post. That's where I read it from. This is not a romario so don't get too excited.

Edited May 6, 2007 by Romario

[Lee W]

Eeer I was highlighting from that post. That's where I read it from. This is not a romario so don't get too excited.

 

 

Errrrr..okay.