• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Jose Mourinho - SACKED

Jordinho said:
They can isolate when at home. I really don't see they had to stop coming to the training ground as long as they went straight home again. In fact, it would probably be best if someone got the virus now and spread it to the rest of the team while football is on hold. Get that immunity sorted.
Click to expand...
That worked out well for Boris.
 
scaramanga said:
That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. All a vaccine does is trigger the body to make antibodies - if a person cannot create antibodies for the virus, the vaccine can't trigger that.

</layman>
Click to expand...
I don't get you here scara? Who is saying that a person cannot create antibodies for the virus?
 
Modric THFC said:
More evidence that the more money you have the more you think you are exceptional and the rules dont apply to you.

I've said before in the this thread that Mourinho has a history of not giving two fudges about player health and welfare.
He will make you play through injury against advice, he will bring you back too early, he will publicly shame you into playing.
He will go to war with his own medical team.
And now he will flout the law and put your health and your family's health in danger.
Click to expand...

So.....Are you a fan of Jose or not?
 
scaramanga said:
The post I quoted suggested that our own antibodies might not lead to long term immunity but a vaccine might. That's not how I understand it.
Click to expand...

Probably just me not being clear as to what I heard/understood.

Have the virus. Produce anti-bodies. ‘Naturally’ produced anti-bodies may last long-term or only shorter term - it is an unknown at this stage. Naturally acquired immunity might die out.
Vaccine becomes available. Vaccine can be given (multiple times if necessary over the years) to produce/maintain/‘top-up’ immunity (as per other vaccines that have a time-limited effectiveness and need to be repeated (boosted) every few years). So yes, we might need a vaccine to help us maintain a long term immunity. Having the virus doesn’t of itself necessarily give us that.
Key is having the vaccine available before any natural immunity dies out (if that proves to be the case).
Bottom line - can’t rely on a natural long-term herd immunity at this stage due to lack of knowledge.

It was guest on the Today programme some time during the week. Not sure if I could find it again now given that one way or another the virus is pretty much the topic of every segment every day on the programme.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
Probably just me not being clear as to what I heard/understood.

Have the virus. Produce anti-bodies. ‘Naturally’ produced anti-bodies may last long-term or only shorter term - it is an unknown at this stage. Naturally acquired immunity might die out.
Vaccine becomes available. Vaccine can be given (multiple times if necessary over the years) to produce/maintain/‘top-up’ immunity (as per other vaccines that have a time-limited effectiveness and need to be repeated (boosted) every few years). So yes, we might need a vaccine to help us maintain a long term immunity. Having the virus doesn’t of itself necessarily give us that.
Key is having the vaccine available before any natural immunity dies out (if that proves to be the case).
Bottom line - can’t rely on a natural long-term herd immunity at this stage due to lack of knowledge.

It was guest on the Today programme some time during the week. Not sure if I could find it again now given that one way or another the virus is pretty much the topic of every segment every day on the programme.
Click to expand...
Ah, yes. If the plan is to continually dose the vaccine then I can see how that would make a difference.
 
scaramanga said:
Ah, yes. If the plan is to continually dose the vaccine then I can see how that would make a difference.
Click to expand...
FWIW judging by studies of SARS-CoV epidemic, the Immunoglobulin G should provide immunity for about 3 years after infection. So would guess vaccination will provide similar protection and need topping up when a new strain of coronavirus spreads.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1245975438176014336
 
scaramanga said:
Ah, yes. If the plan is to continually dose the vaccine then I can see how that would make a difference.
Click to expand...

SteveAWOL said:
FWIW judging by studies of SARS-CoV epidemic, the Immunoglobulin G should provide immunity for about 3 years after infection. So would guess vaccination will provide similar protection and need topping up when a new strain of coronavirus spreads.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1245975438176014336
Click to expand...

Possibly it will become something given less regularly than the flu jab (annual) but more often than the bacterial pneumonia jab (once a decade)?
 
Mikey10 said:
Possibly it will become something given less regularly than the flu jab (annual) but more often than the bacterial pneumonia jab (once a decade)?
Click to expand...
That would be quite an operation. The flu jab isn't given to a lot of people - would this be for everyone?
 
scaramanga said:
The post I quoted suggested that our own antibodies might not lead to long term immunity but a vaccine might. That's not how I understand it.
Click to expand...

Will my own antibodies to Mourinho's tossy character be enough to give me long-term immunity? Is there a vaccine I can take? Asking for a friend.
 
He’s not self-isolating though, is he? He’s just chosen to share accommodation with colleagues during the lockdown. He’s still out and about holding impromptu training sessions (well, one session, but if the media can exaggerate so can I) and wishing Dele a happy birthday from the other side of the street.
 

It's a decent, quick look at our early tactics under Mourinho, with examples from our games. TLDR:

1) Our 4-2-3-1 shifts to a 3-2-4-1 in possession, which is pretty much what we see in games. Left-back shifts into the middle, Aurier moves up to the wing, double pivot stays deep, forwards push up.
2) Approach is to separate midfield and attack, to create space in the middle that forwards can drop into and then play it forward into spaces left by defenders that follow them into the middle.
3) Our problem is playing out of the press - we get into decent positions to do so, but players are making wrong decisions.
4) We also lack width on the left, since left-back moves into the middle, and Sonny usually drifts in. This needs fixing by instructing player on the left to stay on the wing, but its hard when you have a mercurial player like Sonny out there.
5) Defensively, we don't press much anymore - our Passes Per Defensive Action under Mourinho is 12.49, meaning we allow 12.49 passes per defensive action attempted. Higher than at any point under Poch.
6) We still press, but it's situational - on the flanks, and in the event of a miscontrol. Aim is still to transition quickly using pacy forwards.
7) Mourinho's general plan is to sit deep, crowd the middle and then hit on the counter. Theoretically, it's sound.
8) The issue is, players aren't covering their half-spaces behind them, and on occasion, they still move forward to press on instinct, leaving spaces behind because the lines become disjointed.
9) This leads to awful situations of players running at our defence in plenty of space.
10) On the whole, Mourinho is improving the shape and general approach of the team - but more time is needed, and defensive/concentration issues have to be ironed out in training.

Elements of it also dovetail with this interesting (long) analysis by Spielverlagerung on the pressing traps available to a 3-4-3 -

https://spielverlagerung.com/2020/0...ing_wp_cron=1586507633.1949219703674316406250

...which basically shows how the 3-4-3 is one of the most adaptable formations for effective pressing, and is used by Liverpool (among others) to great effect. One thing the articles points out is that the 'standard' 4-2-3-1 with one holder and one mover struggles against the press of a 3-4-3, but if both of the players in the pivot sit ahead of the center backs, the pressing team is suddenly vulnerable because the striker cannot cover both pivots by himself, and thus a central midfielder must move up to cover the second pivot player, which creates a chain reaction and opens spaces in the middle.

In the video above, Mourinho's shown using a double pivot just like this, with Winks + one other to cover. That formation seems like the right one to use in light of the present pressing zeitgeist, and clearly it's something we're trying to implement.

I guess the point of all this is simple - Mourinho knows what he's doing. It's not his tactics that are the issue here, and he's not some outdated fool trying to play 'long ball'. The guy is a genuinely world-class manager, whatever his flaws - with a support team inclusive of coaches at the forefront of the 'new wave' of tactical ideas, like Joao Sacremento.

Poch also knew what he was doing - GHod, how I miss him. But the problem was not with him, and it isn't with Mourinho. Our problem is the players. That will need to change with some relentless drilling over the summer, or whenever football starts up again.
 
This tactical analysis is also an early indicator of our priorities for the summer, I would suggest.

The first and by far the most important addition that *has* to be made is a defensive midfielder, to sit alongside one of Winks/Lo Celso/Ndombele. This one is absolutely essential, and nothing else can happen until that's sorted.
I don't think it's actually necessary to have some world-class all-rounder (although it would help) - the advantage of tactics that involve sitting deep is that you can have a fairly limited player in the destroyer role, as long as he's a) press-resistant, b) tactically astute, c) a leader on the field to coordinate the defensive block, and d) able to play accurate long passes to set players away in transition.

There's only one player I can think of who would fit, be cheap and ticks all the boxes. That's Matic. I think he will be a priority in the summer, if he's available.

The second addition that would be useful is, I would suggest, a center-back who is equally comfortable playing at left-back. If the tactic is to shift the left-back into the center when in possession to create a three-man backline, having an actual center-back who is also mobile enough to play on the left will help with defensive solidity, and allow Davies to be rotated. It also kills two birds with one stone, as this left-footed player can be played alongside Alderweireld in the middle as a traditional center-back when necessary.

Nathan Ake is one of those players. Lisandro Martinez at Ajax is another one. Malang Sarr at OGC Nice is another one. Options available here.

The other useful additions would be a) a backup for Kane, and b) a right-back more reliable than Aurier. Backup for Kane is fairly self-explanatory - there are options available here, including Artem Dzyuba (represented by Mendes) and Giroud on free transfers.The right-back is just icing on the cake - Aurier is functional, if also functionally brain-dead. If there's space after clearing the deadweight, finding a right-back better than Aurier would signal a successful window if the other priorities have been addressed. Nordi Mukiele, Tyler Adams, Nelson Semedo, Max Aarons, Thomas Meunier on a free - there are options here.

If we address those areas, we'll improve as a team. And, theoretically, the whole lot could cost less than 50m combined if you were being really cheap. Matic won't cost much if United want to sell him. Dzyuba and Meunier can be had on frees. Only the center-back might cost a bit, and the top end would probably be Ake at or around 40m.

We don't have to buy big. But we do have to buy smart.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back