[acid911]

No, I don't agree with the conclusion that Flamini's performances depend on his playing time, and once again Ancelotti is unreasonable.

Pato never dissapointed, he's totally a different page. But guys...with that kind of attitude Milan/Ancelotti would have soon to develop a 12 or 13 man-on field strategy. I mean, it can't be that everything summs up to the - "Gourcuff should have played more and Flamini should have played more"...

Of course it's not that simple. Never is. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif) But Carlo's the head coach, and the responsibility had to fall somewhere. As they say, with great power, comes great responsibility. Carlo being the numero uno in team selection, he should have done better. Of course, people, fans and media will come for him. Not Leonardo. Not Ibrahim Ba. Not the physio.

The least he can do is stand up to his mistakes. His mistakes. The players have to answer for theirs.

[Devillito]

No, I don't agree with the conclusion that Flamini's performances depend on his playing time, and once again Ancelotti is unreasonable.

IMHO, it certainly is dude. When you play, it will build up your confidence and you will see which area you need to improve upon. You will understand your teammates better and you will know how to handle the game's pressure. Some things needs experience on the field itself rather than strategy in a study room. But when you have a little of playing time, your confidence will diminish. You will find it hard to find the "tune". You will choke, succumb to the game's pressure. That's why Gourcuff can excel atm. Well, my two cents of course!! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Fillipo Simone]

Nope, I still don't agree. Pato reach a low, Carlo benched him. Pato came from the bench and showed up, even in the last 15 or 10 minutes. Then Carlo considered him a starter again. That's what it takes IMO. If Flamini fails to show up in the last 10 or 15 minutes, why should he in the whole 90?

Does players are professionals for M's sake! They aren't just a bunch of whino's and primadonna's. Confidence is mainly overrated these days.

[acid911]

Pato can't be compared with Gourcuff and/or Flamini. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sleep.gif) He scores one, two goals and he's back in the contention. If not, the fans and media will scream to include him because he's in good nick. Let's try this with Pirlo, Gattuso, Seedorf, Ambrosini, Ronaldinho, Beckham, Emerson, even Favalli, and then we'll talk. A striker takes one good minute to score and he's more than back, while a midfielder or defender has to show his worth through an extended period of time.

The last goal in the Fiorentina game that Pato scored, was all Beckham's making. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/huh.gif) He had the ball, kicked it but then missed it, got it back again instantly (through luck, yes), and then passed to Janku who gave it to Pato all the while both the teams were getting back. Pato took his shot and scored. Sure you have your opinion, and I respect that, but there may yet come a time when we'll regret all this. When all of our midfield regulars retire (all are above 30), when we have new guys who aren't gelled together, and everything in the midfield will fall like a deck of cards in an earthquake!

Do you think Cesc would have risen to the top had Wegner done to him what Carlo does to young players? Or someone else for that matter. Nope. Pato was and always will be a special case. Besides, I don't like to compare goalscorers with the players in engine room or goalkeepers. My honest, and humble $0.02.

[acid911]

Oh, and I'd highly suggest getting the highlights of that goal and seeing how well Beckham played on that one. He started before the defender, and then accelerated enough to get past him and kick the ball to Janks. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif) Point is, things like these don't always happen, and midfielders always need special care and time to assert themselves on a game. Beckham, of course, can't be compared to Flame or Gorky.

[Devillito]

Pato can't be compared with Gourcuff and/or Flamini. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sleep.gif) He scores one, two goals and he's back in the contention. If not, the fans and media will scream to include him because he's in good nick. Let's try this with Pirlo, Gattuso, Seedorf, Ambrosini, Ronaldinho, Beckham, Emerson, even Favalli, and then we'll talk. A striker takes one good minute to score and he's more than back, while a midfielder or defender has to show his worth through an extended period of time.

+1 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/96.gif)

[acid911]

+1

Thank you. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) I like Carlo very much too, but it's hard for me to deny that he's not playing with player's careers. Intentionally or otherwise. I hope things work out, though, and we develop our own young players, as well as make superstars out of the ones we buy!

[han2503]

Nope, I still don't agree. Pato reach a low, Carlo benched him. Pato came from the bench and showed up, even in the last 15 or 10 minutes. Then Carlo considered him a starter again. That's what it takes IMO. If Flamini fails to show up in the last 10 or 15 minutes, why should he in the whole 90?

Does players are professionals for M's sake! They aren't just a bunch of whino's and primadonna's. Confidence is mainly overrated these days.

Like acid said, you can't compare a midfielder, especially like Flamini to a striker.

This post has been edited by han2503: Jan 21 2009, 02:17 PM

[Fillipo Simone]

Hey, I didn't start the comparison! It was my response to Zee, he mentioned Pato.

I don't tend to compare different positions. But there is a parallel. You see if one show's off or not, no matter if he scores or not.

As for french players and Carletto...could be true. Dhooraso, Gourcuff, Flamini,...(Henry)
Then again, he had a good relationship with Zidane, Pedros, Thuram,...

[acid911]

Then again, he had a good relationship with Zidane, Pedros, Thuram,...

Legends. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sleep.gif) Or at the very least, established players. I'm 100% sure, and never for one instance implied that he's a racist, but these guys were near the top. I'm sure if Gourcuff was 32 years old, and had been in Milan for 6-7 years, he'd be starting ahead of the next youngster day in and day out. And it's certainly not too much to ask of a coach to develop and give confidence to young players. Well okay, develop is not the right word, but at least give a chance, give them a sense of security, bring out the best of them.

I just want the best for the club. Not the present, the future too. The problem lies not with Carlo the person. It's Carlo that coach that comes off as an elitist. He only likes to play his favorites, players who are proven talents, big name players, elite players of sorts. It's not a bad quality to have, being elitist. But too much of everything is never good.

[acid911]

And oh, ever noticed the friends of Carlo? Emerson, Seedorf, Brocchi, Kaladze, Zidane, Cafu, Serginho, and others. These are the guys that always had a warm relationship with the coach. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif) The closest to him. And all of them elite, established, experienced and old players.

I'm sure even Ancelotti will agree he's not good with young players. Some coaches are, some not.

[Fillipo Simone]

Well, Thuram wasn't quite a legend back then and he still was young, while Pedros,..well. I think Daniel Bravo played also for Parma while Ancelotti was coach, but yes, he was a veteran then. On the other hand, soon as Ancelotti took over at Juventus, players like Blanchard and Deschamps were sold.

But I don't agree that Ancelotti cannot handle young players. He proved it in Parma, Juventus, and Milan also.

Anyway, I don't wanna start another Carletto debate. Just think Flamini's problem is beyond the obvious "not enough playing time" level.

[acid911]

Just think Flamini's problem is beyond the obvious "not enough playing time" level.

Fair enough! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) Like I said these things are not as simple as black and white.

This post has been edited by acid911: Jan 21 2009, 03:13 PM

[han2503]

Hey, I didn't start the comparison! It was my response to Zee, he mentioned Pato.

I don't tend to compare different positions. But there is a parallel. You see if one show's off or not, no matter if he scores or not.

As for french players and Carletto...could be true. Dhooraso, Gourcuff, Flamini,...(Henry)
Then again, he had a good relationship with Zidane, Pedros, Thuram,...

I don't think zd was comparing them as players and how they effect the game. He was comparing their situations, ie, when Pato was not being given enough playing time last season in order for Pippo to start people were already starting to label him as the next overrated Brazilian. Because whenever he came on for the last 10 minutes of matches he couldn't really find his feet. And for a midfielder it's even harder to come into a game and make a difference, because a striker comes on, doesn't do anything but manages to score a goal he's a hero, where as a midfielder needs to come on get into the rythem of the game and impose himself on the pitch, it's a much tougher ask.

Flamini was playing well at the start of the season, one of our most impressive performers, but when Ambro and Rino were both availble he got dropped. Because that's how Carlo works. Picks teams based on seniority, age and favouritism.

Henry was another one of those player that you could say was an overlooked youngster by Carlo, in order for Carlo to play a young player he has to have an obvious talent that you can't deny, like Kaka, if not Carlo won't give him the chance, Henry at the time was a winger at Juve, but still the talent was all there. But Carlo couldn't recognise it. And wouldn't give him the chance on the pitch to establish himself and see where he's more comfortable playing.

This post has been edited by han2503: Jan 21 2009, 04:07 PM

[acid911]

Top post, han! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/king.gif)