Art Morte wrote:Football is a game of two halves, they go on to win this game in the second half and this thread is useless. Should wait at least until the end of the game before making these kind of threads, imo.

Although there's no denying that they haven't started the season like a title contender should.

RedOranje wrote:It's a problem that's been two seasons coming, IMO.

They had a fantastic side under Mou, but it was a side built with an eye on immediate (and not long term, sustained) success and one built to play a specific way. When Mourinho left it put Inter in a position where they were always likely to struggle a bit before they recovered, and the subsequent managers did not help the situation (though the lack of board support did not, in turn, help the managers).

Rafa attempted to move Inter to a new system in both training and playing without having the players to do so. He asked for funding to buy such players, but even when that was not forthcoming he refused to emulate Mou's style out of stubbornness. Leo and Gasperini, similarly, have tried to implement their own ideas on an Inter side that is built, even still, with the eye on a very specific style of play. The owners, in hand, have only exasperated the situation with their constant change of managers and seemingly inconsistent manner of handling transfer funds.


That's my read on it, anyway.

RedOranje wrote:It's a problem that's been two seasons coming, IMO.

They had a fantastic side under Mou, but it was a side built with an eye on immediate (and not long term, sustained) success and one built to play a specific way. When Mourinho left it put Inter in a position where they were always likely to struggle a bit before they recovered, and the subsequent managers did not help the situation (though the lack of board support did not, in turn, help the managers).

Rafa attempted to move Inter to a new system in both training and playing without having the players to do so. He asked for funding to buy such players, but even when that was not forthcoming he refused to emulate Mou's style out of stubbornness. Leo and Gasperini, similarly, have tried to implement their own ideas on an Inter side that is built, even still, with the eye on a very specific style of play. The owners, in hand, have only exasperated the situation with their constant change of managers and seemingly inconsistent manner of handling transfer funds.


That's my read on it, anyway.

babun1024 wrote:
Red, Liverpool's tactics look outdated to me at the moment What's the problem?

There is nothing more heart-wrenching than seeing a once great man brought low, whether by hubris, by cruel fate, by greed, by weakness. Or, in Luis Figo's case, by hair dye. Never does Bill Hicks's observation that advertising is the "ruiner of all things good" ring more true than when presented with the sight of the former Barcelona and Real Madrid winger sitting in what seems to be a Lisbon Wetherspoons with a gang of friends who look like fawning adulterers, talking in a troublingly sonorous baritone and throwing his voice like some sort of nickel-and-dime ventriloquist.

It is a disturbing sight not simply because it raises a number of key existential issues – when was the last point that Figo's jet-black hair was natural? Do his friends really call him "Figo"? – but because a man once valued at £38.5 million by Real Madrid cannot possibly need the money. Does Figo believe so ardently in Just For Men's effectiveness that he was prepared to leave his dignity at the door for fifty big ones and a lifetime supply of Raven Black? See? Advertising. The ruiner of all things good.

Figo's head-paint evangelism, though, may turn out to be rather fortuitous. He may, you see, need rather a lot of Just For Men's strongest polish if, as is being suggested in Italy this morning, Inter Milan president Massimo Moratti ignores the claims of Delio Rossi and Claudio Ranieri and elects him to fill Gian Piero Gasperini's boots as the club's manager. Their fourth manager, to be precise, in the last 15 months.

To recap: Gasperini replaced Leonardo at San Siro this summer, after a fairly chaotic appointment process which involved Inter being linked with every top class manager in Europe but singularly failing to approach any of them. It has not, needless to say, turned out well. Inter lost four of the five competitive games they have played under Gasperini, most recently at newly-promoted Novara, a team that cost less combined than Javier Zanetti, Inter's evergreen, side-parted captain, spends on combs in an average six-month period.

As is the manager's lot, Gasperini paid the price, though in truth he stood little chance: Inter's squad is ill-equipped to play his favoured 3-4-3, prompting Gazzetta dello Sport this morning to suggest it was the equivalent of asking Andrea Bocelli to sing like Snoop Dogg. Likely to be unsuccessful. No matter. Gasperini was duly relieved of his duties on Wednesday morning.

Moratti, though, is missing the big picture. As with Gasperini, so with Leonardo, or his predecessor Rafael Benitez. All are better managers than their spells at San Siro suggest. The problem is not the men Moratti has sacked. The problem is the man he is trying to replace.

Inter, it is fairly obvious, are still coming to terms with the legacy left to them by Jose Mourinho. Not simply because of the trophies he won, the standards he set, in his glorious, fevered, combative, exhilarating two years in Italy, but because of who he is and what he does. Mourinho is no guarantee of long-term success. He is not the man for tomorrow, he is the man for today. He is the night before. Inter are dealing with the morning after.

It is not to denigrate Mourinho's gifts to accuse him of short-termism. That is what he does, and he does it better than anyone. Take his signings at Inter in the summer of 2009, before his last, silver-laden season: Diego Milito, Wesley Sneijder, Samuel Eto'o. Hardly building for the future. He rarely used Inter's young talents – Davide Santon remains the most obvious – and even his training methods were designed to produce results simply for that one campaign. His successors found a squad short on conditioning, thanks to Mourinho's rigid adherence to a training plan short on stamina work.

It does not simply apply in Italy. Take the players he signed at Chelsea – not the ones he inherited, the ones he signed: Scott Sinclair, Lassana Diarra and Slobodan Rajkovic aside, he built a team for the present day. There was no long-term interest in youth, no scouring the globe for young talent in an attempt to safeguard the future of the club. He has done it at Real Madrid, too. He is immediate satisfaction for clubs starved of success. He is no visionary. Mourinho brought players at their peak to Stamford Bridge, and left it to his successors to deal with the downturn. Whoever succeeds Sir Alex Ferguson or Arsene Wenger will not have the same problem.

No wonder both Chelsea and Inter have struggled to cope with the Mourinho hangover. Chelsea have been through five managers in the four years since he left. Inter, evidently less patient, less picky, are already on their fourth. Figo, currently behind the scenes at the club, may now pick up the baton. His advertising career may be short lived. He will be grey soon enough.