Rafael Benitez Discussion Thread

Struggling to see the problem....He had more than enough to play the same type of football at Chelsea but didnt and lost the dressing room due to his style and management technique.

No way. He never had their respect because of the likes of Terry and the the cu*ts who were there playing for them whilst Rafa was with us.

I personally thought he did remarkably well there considering it was always going to be a poisoned chalice.

No way. He never had their respect because of the likes of Terry and the the cu*ts who were there playing for them whilst Rafa was with us.

I personally thought he did remarkably well there considering it was always going to be a poisoned chalice.

And his style of football?

Struggling to see the problem....He had more than enough to play the same type of football at Chelsea but didnt and lost the dressing room due to his style and management technique.

The problem is City, Barca and Madrid have the funds to buy an 'allstar' team and play the most attractive style possible.

At Chelsea he was the Interim manager. I dont believe it was the agenda to play 'attractive' football. I believe he got them qualified for the CL (when he took over they were off the pace) and won them a trophy while facing hostility from chelski fans.

Im not sure where youre getting he lost the dressing room from? Sounds like pure revisionist history to me.

Don't be daft mate nobody is denying Benitez won La Liga twice with Valencia (and the UEFA Cup), it's not an opinion it's a fact. I'm merely trying to introduce a little reality into the discussion, as when people are left to their own devices on our former manager sometimes they can get carried away with themselves and start inventing history. A couple of weeks ago we had Benitez winning three trophies when he was our manager (not the two which he did), and left unchecked people can bury themselves in mouth foam and silliness.

Benitez did an excellent job as Valencia manager*. As I've mentioned before however, in both the previous seasons before he arrived they'd reached the Champions League final under Hector Cuper so they were hardly mugs. In at least one of the seasons they won the title neither Madrid nor Barca made it into the top two (Deportivo La Coruna were second from memory**) so I think it's fair to summise neither were historically at their best. That doesn't matter though, because as I say he did an excellent job*.

The point (if there ever is one) here was when the inference was made that any moneybags club looking for a manager in the close season would be fools not to employ Benitez as he is THE outstanding candidate. It's a matter of opinion obviously, but I think recent history would indicate that there are other alternatives. No doubt the Benitez fan club on here may be correct and he may land another top European job, but then again he may not.

No trophies for the last four seasons at Liverpool leaving us in our lowest finish for years in the league, taking Chelsea from 2nd to third in the league but winning the Europa League (as well as matching his achievement in the World Club Cup with us), followed by two seasons at Napoli where he's taken them 2nd to 3rd in the league but won the Italian Cup last season (with obviously the cup competitions this season still to play for), with their people making it clear they will be looking for a new manager next season. It's not a terrible record by any means (and there is certainly kudos in his achievements with us and Valencia a decade or so ago), but the best there is available? We'll see.

A couple of other points. If he ever were appointed our manager again (and if we completely stupidly were to sack our current manager I hope it DOES happen) I'd provide far better backing for HIM than many of our fans do our current manager.

The asterisks:

*I said it twice. Please re-read these sentences again and again if you're a mouth-foamer.

**I mean it when I say "from memory". I must have had this discussion 50 times.

Mourinho has spent more money than anyone in history and with ancellotti and Guardiola has been in charge of the strongest squads in history. Pellegrini can't win la liga but wins the epl in his first go. Ancellotti wins in his first year. Mancini?. Avram grant got to CL final with chelsea.

You run down rafas achievements with second string squads like napoli, Valencia and us and big up Mourinho. That mick is crazy. Chelsea from second to third?

C'mon mick are you sure about your motives

Mourinho has spent more money than anyone in history and with ancellotti and Guardiola has been in charge of the strongest squads in history. Pellegrini can't win la liga but wins the epl in his first go. Ancellotti wins in his first year. Mancini?. Avram grant got to CL final with chelsea.

You run down rafas achievements with second string squads like napoli, Valencia and us and big up Mourinho. That mick is crazy. Chelsea from second to third?

C'mon mick are you sure about your motives

And the guy who took over Chelsea Err di matteao (sp) won the champions league....Rafa took over same side and failed so how do you work that out?

And the guy who took over Chelsea Err di matteao (sp) won the champions league....Rafa took over same side and failed so how do you work that out?

Are you serious. Chelsea were as good as out of the champions league when Rafa took over

He had more than enough to play the same type of football at Chelsea but didnt and lost the dressing room due to his style and management technique.

He lost the dressing room because he had the bollocks to drop the Racist when he wasn't performing.

And the guy who took over Chelsea Err di matteao (sp) won the champions league....Rafa took over same side and failed so how do you work that out?

Eh? Rafa had one CL match whilst he was their manager - and won 6-1 at home. He did what was asked of him, the rest was down to mathematics and Juve's match with Shakhtar. In the end it boiled down to Shakhtar going through because of the head-head away goals ruling. So it had F**k all to do with Rafa. Di Matteo himself came out with a statement saying that he took full responsibility.

And what of "his style of football?". Nobody and I really do mean nobody wins in an uglier style more than Maureen.


And just to reiterate what I said previously - a Chelski statement  said: "The owner and the board believe that in Benitez we have a manager with significant experience at the highest level of football, who can come in and immediately help deliver our objectives."

Mick doesn't think Rafa really won la liga twice, madrid weren't strong then nor barca apparently. Simeone didn't beat the barca of 2009-2011. Madrid were focused on the CL last year. Rafa beat a madrid side with Ronaldo Zidane Figo etc.

Mick will never give credit it to him. He will say its because people overrate Rafa, yet mick loves Mourinho and surely that mans achievements can be attributed to factors other than genius. Simeone has done a great job, one thing though. He manages to get a slightly lesser squad to punch above its weight in part due to aggression and desire. I don't know if that will translate to man city's overpaid superstars

That's bit unfair on the job Simeone did with Atletico last season. Not that points totals are a big indicator of anything, but Atletico picked up 90 points last year. Barca and Real both finished with 87. In Rafa's two league-winning seasons, Valencia picked up 75 and 77 points, respectively. In Simeone's second season at Atletico in 12-13, they finished 3rd with 76 (Barca won the league with a whopping 100 points).

Beyond that, if you want to add the context of Real focusing on (and winning) CL last year and Barca not being as strong as the 09-11 teams, then you need to add context to La Liga in 01-02 and 03-04.

In 01-02, Real won the CL -- which they did last season, as noted -- and finished 3rd in the league. They went 4-4-4 in their opening 12 fixtures and managed to make up enough ground to sit at the top of the table, but went 1-3-1 in their last 5 matches (none against Valencia). During those last 5 matches, they went from 1st to 2nd to 3rd, finishing on 66 points. Barca, on the other hand, were consistently inconsistent and endured a poor poor season by their standards, finishing 4th with 64 points. (Deportivo finished second on 68 points, if anyone was wondering.)

In 03-04, Barca were coming off a 6th place finish (Valencia finished 5th the season before -- championship hangover!) and had a fairly disappointing first half of the season in which they were sitting in 12th at the start of January. Things started to really click under Rijkaard, but they simply had too many points to make up with Rafa securing the league with 3 fixtures remaining. Real, meanwhile, had a terrible second half of the season, winning only 8 of their last 19 and losing 6 of their last 7, including a 5-match losing streak that was then a new club record. Barca were 2nd on 72, Real 4th on 70.

What Rafa did was still a massive achievement, mind you, especially winning the UEFA Cup and league double in 03-04. I just think that if you want to hack down what Simeone accomplished at Atletico, you've got to do the same elsewhere.

You run down rafas achievements with second string squads like napoli, Valencia

Hardly! Valencia lost in 2 consecutive Champions League finals in the two season before Rafa took over. They had a very solid team. 

That's bit unfair on the job Simeone did with Atletico last season.

I was providing an alternative opinion in the same way Mick does with Rafa, of course Simeone has done an excellent job.

Hardly! Valencia lost in 2 consecutive Champions League finals in the two season before Rafa took over. They had a very solid team.

Squad is what I talk about. Rafa said the Valencia team he inherited from Cuper was very well set up. It was probably the closest he has come to having a decent squad, but he had Aimar, Ayala, Carew, Vincente, Aurelio and Baraja as the best players. If you look at the second string you are getting thin. Madrid had Casillas, Macca, Makalele, Figo, Zidane, Roberto Carlos, Hierrera, Raul, Helguera, Guti etc. Barca had De Boer, Reizeiger, Xavi, Cocu, Kleivert, Rivaldo, Luis Enriques etc. If you check the squads out you see the difference.

That was the closest he's had to a competitive squad. The difference between our squad, even when we had great first 11 whom he bought most of, and Chelsea and Utd and then City and even Arsenal was stark. We always had to sacrifice to buy more. WHen Hicks and Gillett came in we were done for so when Mick says we finished in our lowest position he isn't being fair.

As for Napoli he has a squad that needs to gel further to beat Juve because he's made a lot of changes and if he has one more year I reckon he'll do it. Mourinho and Ancellotti are coroporate managers. They exploit a massive financial advantage. The teams they manage will win anyway.

I think Vulcan should start a Mourinho thread, he's clearly obsessed with the Chelsea manager. How he got onto talking about Mourinho from my post about Simeone I'll never know.

Like most of his kind, he is completely unable to accept that it is possible to realise Benitez is a good manager, but at the same time not see the need to erect an alter in your front room and worship at it every morning. This has always been the part that has baffled me most about the cult following Benitez managed to engender at Liverpool.

Benitez clearly is a nice bloke whose "heart is the right place" etc etc. I'm even prepared to accept that "he gets us" (largely because it's a sufficiently non-sensical statement to not bother yourself arguing about). Equally, had he left Liverpool after two seasons then I think the job he had done up to that point would have been a brilliant one, by anyone's measure. But he didn't, he stayed and with a team which had won the Champions league and the FA cup in the previous two seasons, and was filled with "top top players" in their prime, he won no more trophies for four seasons. During those four seasons we challenged for the title once. This diminished the overall job he did, and leaving us in 7th place in the Premiership, having gone out in the group stages of the Champions League (which was almost unheard of for seeded English teams back then) and quickly out of the Europa league, the fall was IMHO from "exceptional" to decent. Not awful, not poor, but decent. Not enough to make me get the prayer mat out, but decent.

At Chelsea he took over a team which was in second place in the league I think, and from memory they were four points off the top. His disciples on here predicted a cabinet full of trophies. The reality though was that such was the bile he had to deal with, that was never realistic. They were already out of the Champions league when he arrived, but went on to win the Europa League which was an excellent effort. They really ought to have won the Carling Cup when the draw fell apart in front of them, but defeat 2-0 to Swansea over two legs in the semi final left the Welshmen to win the final 5-0 against Barnsley or someone equally ridiculous. They finished up third in the league, a mile behind the winners and became only the second European club this last decade or so not to win the World Club Cup thing (no prizes for guessing who the other team were). Overall verdict? Pretty decent considering what he had to deal with. Not fantastic, not amazing, but pretty decent.

Inter Milan? Charitably I'll not go there but suffice to say it didn't go well.

Napoli? Took over a team which challenged for the title the previous season and in his first two go's has been out of it by Christmas. Finished 3rd last time and I reckon they will this. Eliminated from the Champions league play offs by Bilbao (who didn't then make it out of the group) but had a good win in the Europa league the other night. Won the Italian Cup last season, as well as the Doha charity game in the Italian Christmas break. Verdict? Pretty decent again, particularly if they can win a trophy this time.



So there it is, in my opinion. An excellent job at Valencia, followed by periods of excellence and lots of decent efforts, with only one embarrassing calamity. Good manager? Definately. Worthy of building a monument to? Not in my opinion no.
And as was my original point, if I was in charge at Man CityI'd be looking at Diego Sineone.

Simeone, eh? The bloke that a) can't speak English, and b) can't get a side to defend corners properly in cup finals when the chips are down. So I wouldn't exactly be banging a door down looking for him to coach my club tbh.

I agree with most of your points in this thread on an "astute tactician" who hasn't won a European Cup in 10 years, and trails in 15-20 points down the table regardless how much funds or few he has available, as a matter of course. If Napoli won't put up with it like we had to, you can guess how long City will.

So what you're in effect saying Mick is that even at Inter Milan for six months and Chelsea for six months he didn't win the league or the Champions league so he failed, well that is a bit harsh. IMHO Mick it engenders a sense of bias in the reader.

So what you're in effect saying Mick is that even at Inter Milan for six months and Chelsea for six months he didn't win the league or the Champions league so he failed, well that is a bit harsh. IMHO Mick it engenders a sense of bias in the reader.

I'm not saying that, "in effect", nor literally nor metaphorically. What I AM saying, is exactly what I've written. I don't think what I've written is difficult to understand, nor is it ambiguous. If you either can't or won't understand what I'm saying and are determined to take an alternative meaning to my comments that's up to your good self. No doubt we've both got better things to do than argue about it. Anyway I've had abet on the football this arvo so I'll leave it with you. As always, no hard feelings and good luck.

I'm not saying that, "in effect", nor literally nor metaphorically. What I AM saying, is exactly what I've written. I don't think what I've written is difficult to understand, nor is it ambiguous. If you either can't or won't understand what I'm saying and are determined to take an alternative meaning to my comments that's up to your good self. No doubt we've both got better things to do than argue about it. Anyway I've had abet on the football this arvo so I'll leave it with you. As always, no hard feelings and good luck.

He's had an early Sunday bevvy Mick, if it wasn't a forum you'd carry on what you were doing an take no F***ing notice.

So what you're in effect saying Mick is that even at Inter Milan for six months and Chelsea for six months he didn't win the league or the Champions league so he failed, well that is a bit harsh. IMHO Mick it engenders a sense of bias in the reader.

You're hardly the most objective man when it comes to Rafa though mate, so to tell Mick he's being bias, it's difficult to take that seriously.

All Mick has done is provide an objective view but some reason saying Rafa is 'decent' isn't enough for some, it has to be 'he's the greatest manager who ever lived and Mourinho is a fraud' (because for some reason it's impossible to leave Jose out of the discussion when talking about Rafa).

Squad is what I talk about. Rafa said the Valencia team he inherited from Cuper was very well set up. It was probably the closest he has come to having a decent squad, but he had Aimar, Ayala, Carew, Vincente, Aurelio and Baraja as the best players. If you look at the second string you are getting thin. Madrid had Casillas, Macca, Makalele, Figo, Zidane, Roberto Carlos, Hierrera, Raul, Helguera, Guti etc. Barca had De Boer, Reizeiger, Xavi, Cocu, Kleivert, Rivaldo, Luis Enriques etc. If you check the squads out you see the difference.

Yeah Valencia had a solid team but Rafa made some key signings that pushed them over the edge. Someone like Mista (whose goalscoring ability completely fell off once Rafa left for us) for example.

Those Barca and Real squads had loads of talent, but at the same time, that was the era when Real was buying one mega name with huge marketing potential each year and not really building a cohesive squad (e.g., David Beckham in the 03-04 season, NOT signing Ronaldinho because he was "too ugly" for Real Madrid, etc.). That was something of a transitional period for Barca with de Boer, Reiziger, Cocu, Luis Enrique, etc. all over 30 at the time of Valencia's second title. Rivaldo was 30 too when he left in 2002. Barcelona's 03-04 squad was rebuilt and they improved upon it to win the league in 04-05. (Side note: I highly recommend Sid Lowe's book "Fear and Loathing in La Liga." It dishes out all the background crap going on at both clubs during this period.)

Benitez is better than Mourinho PERIOD. If anyone believes the opposite should consider re-evaluating their opinion.Same Mourinho went trophyless last year with almost a whole year in charge of a fairly expensive squad at Chelsea.As for our man 4 years without a trophy at liverpool is a fact but what also should be noticed the amount of bench strength we had as compared to others.We only had a top first 11 that too in his second last season.Add Hicks and Gillet plus Rick Parry to his problems.Im not saying he is the best but some posts here really undermine the man.

Benitez is better than Mourinho PERIOD. If anyone believes the opposite should consider re-evaluating their opinion.

I think it would be extremely easy to argue the opposite without stretching your brain too much mate.

The end result is that RAFA did a fantastic job as our boss under the difficult  circumstances of b***ard owners we had during his tenure. He stuck to the task of keeping this club at the top, not many managers would of put up with twit and tw*t like RAFA did.

Simeone, eh? The bloke that a) can't speak English, and b) can't get a side to defend corners properly in cup finals when the chips are down. So I wouldn't exactly be banging a door down looking for him to coach my club tbh.

Any top club in Europe would seriously consider Simeone if they were looking for a manager. You are entitled to your opinion, but it is clearly 'eccentric'.

Yeah Valencia had a solid team but Rafa made some key signings that pushed them over the edge. Someone like Mista (whose goalscoring ability completely fell off once Rafa left for us) for example.

Those Barca and Real squads had loads of talent, but at the same time, that was the era when Real was buying one mega name with huge marketing potential each year and not really building a cohesive squad (e.g., David Beckham in the 03-04 season, NOT signing Ronaldinho because he was "too ugly" for Real Madrid, etc.). That was something of a transitional period for Barca with de Boer, Reiziger, Cocu, Luis Enrique, etc. all over 30 at the time of Valencia's second title. Rivaldo was 30 too when he left in 2002. Barcelona's 03-04 squad was rebuilt and they improved upon it to win the league in 04-05. (Side note: I highly recommend Sid Lowe's book "Fear and Loathing in La Liga." It dishes out all the background crap going on at both clubs during this period.)

Sounds like a good book. I liked the way Valencia played then like a machine.

You're hardly the most objective man when it comes to Rafa though mate, so to tell Mick he's being bias, it's difficult to take that seriously.

All Mick has done is provide an objective view but some reason saying Rafa is 'decent' isn't enough for some, it has to be 'he's the greatest manager who ever lived and Mourinho is a fraud' (because for some reason it's impossible to leave Jose out of the discussion when talking about Rafa).

Mick has history. He has posted many times saying Jose is "the best end of". I always found that a little odd for a liverpool fan. Or even for an objective fan who has seen one manager re define the term outspend.