BEAUTIFUL article on Moaninho...
Pulled this from here... LINKY
You'd almost think he was a Liverpool fan...
Not so much men of war, more like spoilt kids
The Portuguese antagonists Jose Mourinho and Cristiano Ronaldo need to grow up...
Rod Liddle
SO, WHICH of the two whining, arrogant Portuguese has the moral high ground, do you suppose — Jose or Cristiano? Is there an objective method by which this terribly corrosive dispute might be settled? Or should we just turn down the sound when they appear on our television screens and remind ourselves that we sidled up to Portugal in the first place, all those years ago, only because we both, justifiably, hated the Spanish?
Jose Mourinho has suggested that there is a conspiracy a) not to award penalties against Manchester United and b) not to give them to Chelsea. He is beginning to sound like one of those Arabs who believe that Jews organised 9/11 and the British secret service killed Princess Diana. Mourinho was apparently incensed that his side were not given a penalty against Newcastle last week: the fact that the supposed foul took place nearer the centre circle than the goalline did not assuage his sense of grievance; penalties should be awarded to Chelsea even when they’re clearly not penalties, he seemed to imply, just to even things up a bit.
Cristiano Ronaldo, who evinces a state of priapism in BBC commentators whenever he runs through his repertoire of stepovers, swallow dives and smirks, begged to differ. Of Mourinho, he said: “The whole world knows how he is,” adding that the Chelsea boss was unable to accept defeat.
Mourinho then yelled liar, liar, pants on fire, began dribbling down the front of his jacket and stamped his feet in petulant rage. “If Ronaldo says it is a lie penalties were not given against United, then he is lying. If he is a liar he will never reach the level he wishes to reach.” Well, in fairness, he hasn’t done too badly so far, Jose. Better, you might argue, than Arjen Robben anyway.
I suppose the mistake we make is in taking these ravings seriously, from either of them. Talented though Ronaldo is, he seems to think there is nothing wrong in either diving or attempting to get opposition players sent off.
Mourinho, meanwhile, is equally talented — and equally repellent. He seems to be, these days, as mad as a box of frogs, with his endless conspiracy theories and persecution complex. It’s all a clever act, his admirers suggest, a cunning ploy to divert attention. Maybe, but as an excuse, it didn’t work for Charles Manson and I don’t think it works for Jose.
Let’s take the whole thing seriously, for a moment, this strange business about the penalties. If you look at the statistics, you will see there is a broad correlation between position in the Premiership and penalties both awarded for and against any team. By which I mean that, generally speaking, the top teams tend to be given more penalties and have fewer awarded against them, whereas with useless teams, the reverse is true.
That much you might expect; good teams tend to be on the attack rather more. Bad teams tend to hang around in their own penalty area, looking forlorn and hacking out at foreign wingers.
But the correlation is far from perfect. The most richly rewarded team this season has been Arsenal (eight penalties) — and that’s without Robert Pires. They are followed by Everton (seven), Villa (six) and Liverpool and Newcastle with five a piece. Both Manchester United (four) and Chelsea (three) come well down the list — so it is hard to level an accusation of favouritism one way or the other. As for penalties awarded against teams, the list is headed — as you would expect — by most of the relegation candidates, your Watfords, Wigans and West Hams. Manchester United once again appear mid-table. Chelsea, however, have given away only one and thus rank as one of the three luckiest teams in the league, along with Newcastle United and Liverpool. So, in other words, Mourinho could not be more wrong. If you assume both Chelsea and Manchester united dominate matches to a similar degree, you would expect the penalty stats to be pretty much equivalent — but they are not. Chelsea come off better, by some margin.
Nor is there a correlation between the noise and fervour of the crowd and the awarding of penalties. Arsenal, whose home games are played against the backdrop of an almost total hush, get more penalties than Portsmouth and West Ham, where there are proper noisy fans screaming abuse for a full 90 minutes.
So Mourinho is wrong. I don’t doubt for a moment that Middlesbrough were cheated at Old Trafford last weekend (just as they were cheated by a typical Ronaldo dive in the FA Cup, for which he should have been booked or sent off or smacked about a bit, one of the three); but the statistics simply do not support his case. There is no conspiracy to hand Manchester United the title, even if he is absolutely correct in his underlying assumption that the vast majority of neutrals loathe Chelsea with a passion that borders on religious fundamentalism.
You'd almost think he was a Liverpool fan...
Not so much men of war, more like spoilt kids
The Portuguese antagonists Jose Mourinho and Cristiano Ronaldo need to grow up...
Rod Liddle
SO, WHICH of the two whining, arrogant Portuguese has the moral high ground, do you suppose — Jose or Cristiano? Is there an objective method by which this terribly corrosive dispute might be settled? Or should we just turn down the sound when they appear on our television screens and remind ourselves that we sidled up to Portugal in the first place, all those years ago, only because we both, justifiably, hated the Spanish?
Jose Mourinho has suggested that there is a conspiracy a) not to award penalties against Manchester United and b) not to give them to Chelsea. He is beginning to sound like one of those Arabs who believe that Jews organised 9/11 and the British secret service killed Princess Diana. Mourinho was apparently incensed that his side were not given a penalty against Newcastle last week: the fact that the supposed foul took place nearer the centre circle than the goalline did not assuage his sense of grievance; penalties should be awarded to Chelsea even when they’re clearly not penalties, he seemed to imply, just to even things up a bit.
Cristiano Ronaldo, who evinces a state of priapism in BBC commentators whenever he runs through his repertoire of stepovers, swallow dives and smirks, begged to differ. Of Mourinho, he said: “The whole world knows how he is,” adding that the Chelsea boss was unable to accept defeat.
Mourinho then yelled liar, liar, pants on fire, began dribbling down the front of his jacket and stamped his feet in petulant rage. “If Ronaldo says it is a lie penalties were not given against United, then he is lying. If he is a liar he will never reach the level he wishes to reach.” Well, in fairness, he hasn’t done too badly so far, Jose. Better, you might argue, than Arjen Robben anyway.
I suppose the mistake we make is in taking these ravings seriously, from either of them. Talented though Ronaldo is, he seems to think there is nothing wrong in either diving or attempting to get opposition players sent off.
Mourinho, meanwhile, is equally talented — and equally repellent. He seems to be, these days, as mad as a box of frogs, with his endless conspiracy theories and persecution complex. It’s all a clever act, his admirers suggest, a cunning ploy to divert attention. Maybe, but as an excuse, it didn’t work for Charles Manson and I don’t think it works for Jose.
Let’s take the whole thing seriously, for a moment, this strange business about the penalties. If you look at the statistics, you will see there is a broad correlation between position in the Premiership and penalties both awarded for and against any team. By which I mean that, generally speaking, the top teams tend to be given more penalties and have fewer awarded against them, whereas with useless teams, the reverse is true.
That much you might expect; good teams tend to be on the attack rather more. Bad teams tend to hang around in their own penalty area, looking forlorn and hacking out at foreign wingers.
But the correlation is far from perfect. The most richly rewarded team this season has been Arsenal (eight penalties) — and that’s without Robert Pires. They are followed by Everton (seven), Villa (six) and Liverpool and Newcastle with five a piece. Both Manchester United (four) and Chelsea (three) come well down the list — so it is hard to level an accusation of favouritism one way or the other. As for penalties awarded against teams, the list is headed — as you would expect — by most of the relegation candidates, your Watfords, Wigans and West Hams. Manchester United once again appear mid-table. Chelsea, however, have given away only one and thus rank as one of the three luckiest teams in the league, along with Newcastle United and Liverpool. So, in other words, Mourinho could not be more wrong. If you assume both Chelsea and Manchester united dominate matches to a similar degree, you would expect the penalty stats to be pretty much equivalent — but they are not. Chelsea come off better, by some margin.
Nor is there a correlation between the noise and fervour of the crowd and the awarding of penalties. Arsenal, whose home games are played against the backdrop of an almost total hush, get more penalties than Portsmouth and West Ham, where there are proper noisy fans screaming abuse for a full 90 minutes.
So Mourinho is wrong. I don’t doubt for a moment that Middlesbrough were cheated at Old Trafford last weekend (just as they were cheated by a typical Ronaldo dive in the FA Cup, for which he should have been booked or sent off or smacked about a bit, one of the three); but the statistics simply do not support his case. There is no conspiracy to hand Manchester United the title, even if he is absolutely correct in his underlying assumption that the vast majority of neutrals loathe Chelsea with a passion that borders on religious fundamentalism.