well, alex ferguson was actually sacked by st mirren; the only club that hold the distinction of sacking him.
rumour had it that this was due to an authorised payments to player. ferguson battle his way but still losing.
and he moved to aberdeen where he picked up a few trophies.
his stint at manchester united is legendary though..... managers of his time comes and gone but he stayed.
there is one ocassion back in early 90s where the fan was calling for his head when he decided to sold kanchelskis, the guvnor and hughes to make way for the fergie's fledgings... but he proved 'em wrong by winning the bpl.
while other successful manager get sacked, ferguson stay! and that show a high level of consistency.
the argument; he is being at the right club at the right moment... ok, but if he doesn't show that kind of results,
will he stay?

del bosque won the around 4 international level competition and err....3 domestic cup(correct me if i am wrong)
before he was sacked!
with such a good records, besiktas placed a high hope on del bosque. yet he 'phailed'! and get the boot.
the argument; his success with real madrid was done with a set of galacticos ; zidane, ronaldo, figo and co even though makalele was actually the holding player! he was dully sold to chelsea cuz' he can't sell shirts and real madrid was never the same without him!
lets see what del bosque can do with spain national team. he supposed to take over from aragones after the euro
competition, is it?

btw, trapps , ancelotti along with england's current coach does hold a very good records!

The World Cup is indeed a coveted prize and I have to agree that it's probably the biggest honour a manager can be bestowed with. The issue I have with using the World Cup as a gauge is that is it a one off tournament and as such, even rookie managers like Klinsmann can look good by taking over an already strong side. Who knows, they may have won it with someone else in charge or they may have done worse? In any case, is it fair to say that Klinsmann is a good manager? The jury is still out if you ask me. It's too soon to tell.

The challenge international managers have is that there is always an on-going tug-o-war between club and country. Often, international managers don't have the luxury of having all players available to train together fur a long period of time. Then again, I find this argument moot as most international managers with the exception of small sides like Luxemborg, Lithuania , Macedonia, Andorra and like face a similar dilemma. That being said, I believe the key factor of success for international managers is selecting the right group of players and getting them to play cohesively. You can get lucky and you can have one good tournament even if your team is driven solely by star power. Don't get me wrong, I'm not belittling the role of an international manager but when you are in charge of a side like Brazil, you have a wealth of talent at your disposal and I do believe that in a one-off tournament, you can get lucky and progress really far. Notable exceptions may be like when Gus Hiddink brought and unfancied side like Korea to the World Cup semi's (though there was a hugh amount of controversy surrounding that achievement). He is one manager whom I rate by the way. Did very well with Ajax in the Champions League and also took Australia to the World Cup Finals. He is one manager who may not have won as many trophies as some of the names mentioned, but has taken unfancied sides far in major tournaments.

It is almost the same with players at the World Cup really. I mean players like Toto Schilacchi, Davor Suker and Oleg Salenko have won the Golden Boot before but made no real progress after. Salenko scored 4 against Cameroon!

I guess the point I am trying to make is, I do think it's tougher to achieve sustained domestic success than it is to succeed in one-off tournaments. Granted international tournaments only come about every few years and you have few opportunities as a manager. All i'm saying is that it's easier to get lucky in cup tournaments than it is in the league. I'm not saying it's not tough but one is easier than the other if you ask me.

Liverpool fans may raise and eyebrow and suggest that I'm belittling our clubs achievements in the Champions League but it's not easy to reach 2 finals and 1 semifinal in 4 season so there is an amount of consistency here. That being said, we weren't consistent enough of 38 domestic league matches.

This post has been edited by Duke Red: Jun 10 2008, 01:10 PM

I did say Roy Keane is another good manager.He saves sunderland and promoted them to BPL...

Steve Coppell did the same with Reading. Keep in mind that Keane did bring in a lot of players which was helped by the Nial Quinn led Irish Consortium. Let's see how they do in their second season.

coppell did well too..but after sidwell leaves them, the whole team loses confident...hope they do well in championship.

that is why i mentioned, to look for the best, we should look for managers who have achievements in both intenational AND domestic level..

i am definitely not going to pick any WC bluntly..for example, scolari..he did win the WC, but his records at club level is nothing..i will never say raymond domenech is great although he is a runners up of WC, bcoz his record at club level is zero..

and all of us should note that lippi took over the italy national team helm in 2004, juz after trappatoni stepped down, and he guided them throughout the whole qualifying campaign which spanned for 2 years..in this 2 years, national team coach can face many problems, such as injuries to their key players, mass media in their country and many more..he didnt managed the italians right before WC, he started from scratch, from tactics to mentality in the team, right after the euros, as the following quotes may explain more clearly...



and finally, he won WC, a feat that nobody can have any doubt in..

plus that with his club achievements..



he also brought a sleeping giant to the league glory..similar to fergie..
he failed once at inter milan though during 1999-2000 season..

This post has been edited by matyrze: Jun 10 2008, 02:25 PM

TS read back all your post. All reference are with SAF. Thats why we know you were saying SAF has the black checkbook.



TS, pls read back your post



THE CONCLUSION? .......................

I'm MU supporter

But i vote Arsene Wenger.... He is expert because he build whole entire team!

Arsene Wenger for sure. No doubt about it.

btw i m mu supporter

good points, but we are looking at lippi here. if you were to say klinsi then yes i am skeptical about him being a good manager, he had a good run but thats it. the issue of it is that lippi won them all, the most important prize in football and the other leagues. which puts the point the manager who won almost everything and thats no easy task.

the thing also is that to coach a national team, you would go 2 years or maybe more without a title that takes of the amount you can collect in a normal season in a club. you have the chance to win back to back in the club, and perhaps a CL and if you are really good back to back CL. you cant do that in the international team.

if winning 1 league cup = 1 WC, i feel that its not justified. you are after all talking about the WC. theres tons of luck in any competition, really as much as you can get lucky in the WC, we can get unlucky in domestic leagues too. say for example you have your key players injured in the xmas season of the epl, or the final few matches to untie the 1st and 2nd place or the other way have them come to life in important points of the season.


which posts the better question, how do we valuate the WC?

I'm interested in hearing the opinions of those that voted for Wenger.

I have no doubt that he has built a talented young squad whilst spending less than the other top clubs. He even brought Patrick Viera and Thierry Henry to England and turned them into superstars. The thing is this, he had the money to spend especially in the summer but chose not to. Was this a wise choice? Would a better manager have thought it appropriate to bring in a star or two to shore up the squad and give them some experience given that they were challenging on all fronts? Sure spending less and ensuring you're still up there with the but it could also mean you didn't make wise decisions. In the end, it's not about how much you save for the club, it's about how much revenue you bring in.

Let's face it, what do we all remember in the end? Some will remember the way managers like Shankly changed the fortunes of a club lingering in the 2nd division like Liverpool. Was he our most successful manager? No, that honour belongs to Mr. Bob Paisley. Shanks however provided the foundation for that success, he rebuilt not just the team but he also instilled values in the club that linger on till today. He changed the way the team trained, the way the team thinks, he instilled a winning mentality in them. At the same time he cherished the clubs greatest asset, it's fans. This is why so many of us still talk about him.

Now stories like the above are heart warming but let's face it, how many similar stories are there? Today, people remember results. Did Wenger inherit a poor squad from Bruce Rioch? In his only season, Rioch took Arsenal to a 5th place finish in the league, and with that came UEFA Cup qualification. Arsene Wenger did inherit a team who were solid at the back (Dixon, Keown, Adams, Bould, Winterburn) and which also consisted of one Dennis Bergkamp, David Platt, David Seaman and Ian Wright. In his first season in charge and with the addition of Patrick Viera, Wenger took Arsenal to 3rd in League, just missing out of Champions League qualification. My point is, he didn't exactly inherit a crap squad and turned their fortunes around. He built on one with solid foundations and with the addition of several young and up and coming stars, prepped them for the future. There is lies the problem; Arsenal have come close to dominating the Premiership much like Liverpool did in the 70's/80's and much like how Man Utd are currently doing but they have not enjoyed sustained success, with the exception of the FA Cup. They have not dominated Europe which all great clubs have. Please don't take this as an insult, it's just a comparison.

Will Wenger always be building a team for the future, and never focusing on the present? Will he in time, be remembered as a great manager unless he wins more silverware? I'm sure most will answer with an empathic, "yes!" but what if another comes along and wins more silverware? Will Wenger be remembered as the one who laid the foundation? Will his name echo in eternity along with the other great managers?

My point is that unless you make a deep impression on the foundations of the club, you must have silverware to have any credibility. I'm not saying Wenger is a failure, he has won titles but he has however yet to enjoy any sustained success. Arsenal do play good football and I do enjoy watching them but the only thing that will linger in the memories of football fans, is what they will have achieved under Wenger.

---

Added on June 10, 2008, 4:53 pm

The thing about luck is that I feel a team generally gets a fair share of both good and bad luck over the course of 38 games. The more games you play, the less luck plays a part. As for my take on injuries, I feel it's the role of the manager to ensure they have sufficient cover. It is foreseeable that at some point of the season, you will be missing a couple of players through injury, international duty, fatigue, or even family grievances. The lucky manager is one that has prepared for these situations. The unlucky one was the manager that took the risk of not having ample cover. Mourinho took a big risk by selling Robert Huth, leaving John Terry and Ricardo Carvalho as the only real centrebacks in his first team. When injury beset the team, he even had to play Essien at centreback. Was he unlucky or did he just not prepare?

I actually don't analyse the World Cup too much to be honest. It's too short a tournament to claim that teams did or did not perform because of injuries or whatever. I watch it for it's entertainment value. It comes across like more of a car show than a motorsports event to me. Teams go there, parade their stars and wait for buyers to call up after the tournament.

This post has been edited by Duke Red: Jun 10 2008, 05:11 PM

Refering to him keeping his job in a top 4 club despite the lack of trophies?

he is among the great ones, but although his team has great potential n only built with youngsters, he can't seem to get trophies to his name..
so for that matter, i would say, Jose Mourinho > Arsene Wenger..

but i voted for Sir Alex Ferguson, bcuz his achievement over the years is something really great and it is not so easy to achieve..

for international managing, i think guus hiddink is very influential..

This post has been edited by JuNz-V: Jun 10 2008, 05:44 PM

wenger's squad doesn't cost a bomb, he assemble a squad made up of talented but underperforming youngsters.
he does have a good eye for a gem. buying on cheap and selling on high price but he could learn a thing from aulas.
flamini; one of arsenal's most improved player off to milan for free.

one thing we does remember about wenger is that he fielded an entire team made of foreign nationality in bpl. beautiful football doesn't always show results. effective play is more synonymous with modern game.

btw, arsenal's trophy collection under him isn't something to shout about either.
3 bpl title and 4 fa in 10 years is comparable with mourinho's 2 bpl title and another 2 league cup + 1 fa in his short stint at chelsea; albeit, on the highly expensive assembled squad. ranieri never win any....

sometimes, winning trophies is the only thing that matters to be acknowledged.. if not, what would they be fighting for?

who plays the sexiest football?
who spends the less on a squad?
who save the team from bad times?

no offense to any team, just some examples..
better example, will be from j.mourinho's leadership on chelsea..
they played ugly but effective football with a bunch of world-class players they are able to purchase..
but, only thing that matters, they are the Champions few years back, does anything besides the Champions title matters in the history books?

This post has been edited by JuNz-V: Jun 10 2008, 05:56 PM

Well, many ppl with many opinion...

If you ask me who is the best mgr in spoting talent, Arsene Wenger. Fergie actually has his right hand man Carlos to spot the player for him.
If you ask me who is the best mgr who know how to handle pressure, Fergie.
Best tactical mgr, Jose Morinho.

There are no practical way to judge who is the best mgr. So in the end, the person won most trophies is the best.

Bora Milutinović also great. He gets to train so-so player and so-so country until can reach exceptional level of the respective place he trained.

I didn’t vote, but I’ll reply.

I don’t see a problem with not spending because spending is just another policy. Arsenal trains, Arsenal doesn’t spend like other clubs. And I have no idea why being thrifty is overdramatized. Pressing needs have been and are continually addressed at Arsenal i.e voids left by established players are filled with upcoming youngsters and the move to Emirates from Highbury to keep pace in monetary terms. About your claim for the need of experienced players, let’s have another clear look at the vastly experienced players at Wenger’s disposal; Lehmann, Gallas, Toure,Gilberto Silva, Rosicky, Hleb and to a certain extent Van Persie. All these players have undeniable mettle and experience. Do they not have enough experience? It’s not exactly Wenger’s fault players get injured (Rosicky, Van Persie) and run out of form due to international commitments (Lehmann, Toure and Gilberto Silva).

I’m sure you would claim that a better manager would’ve seen the injuries coming, so here’s the retort. Buying rigged and untalented local/mecurial foreign personnel would inevitably serve to flood the squad and drown the promising prospects. Would you rather produce a kneejerk reaction and delve into the transfer market for risky deals than to watch the likes of Fabregas, Walcott and Denilson flourish? I know I don’t and I’m glad Wenger didn’t. Don’t forget Arsenal is facing debts without the backing of sugar daddies like the rest of the big four have, we're forced to be prudent.

Under Graham and Rioch, Arsenal didn’t exactly flourish bar a few scrappy sporadic titles and a League Cup. If you call an alcoholic and aging backline solid foundation, I can’t really think of a sane reply for you. I wouldn’t call it solid foundation, I’d call it bringing the best out of good players because Wenger had to contend with players’ personal problems, an aging squad and a dull football team all in his first few seasons as Arsenal’s manager. Based on this alone, I scoff at incredulous claims aimed at Wenger and his “apparent lack” of man management skills.

Wenger has built 2, and almost 3, in the mould of last season’s squad, title winning squads over the course of 12 years; Overmars/Petit, Vieira/Henry, and almost Fabregas/Adebayor. Plus he brought Arsenal it’s first Champions League final together with the memorable unbeaten season. He is already a great manager in Arsenal’s history.

I iterate this again, Wenger changed the club philosophical with his early regimes, earned us trophies/an unbeaten run and brought us to the Emirates. If this isn’t laying the foundation, I have no idea what is.

I'll stop short of debating the polls because some want trophies, others want traditions; subjectivity.

Seriously, I dun think the best manager should SOLELY depends on the numbers of the trophy won....
Others factors should come in consideration when we choose the best manager.
The number of trophies cant prove anything.Different era different level of gameplay.
I did like to mention years years ago, there is not much talented players that good in silang2 kaki like ronaldo.
Now, we have whole bunch of thems.The game standards varies by years.Hence, there is no such thing as BEST MANAGER cos HE WON THE MOST TROPHIES

and there is no way you can compare a club achievement with an international squad achievement.
World Cup undoubtedly is way way more difficult than BPL..
and dun tell me you going to compare Scottish league with BPL...no offence..but not the same standard..

hence, no point of arguing who is the best manager when the conditions isnt that fair to any other manager.

I did say the 1st Malaysian manager that able to bring Malaysia to world cup to be the best manager

Can I?

This post has been edited by Jason_T: Jun 10 2008, 10:07 PM

Everyone has their own opinion, there is point slating someone else because they disagree with your opinion.