Porto - Inter

[J zanetti]

That said, I agree Mancini needs to drop the 4-5-1 once and for all.

Too stubborn, too damn proud, and too bloody inexperienced to do so!

 

[Ziyad]

I think the inclusion of both Pizzaro and Veron is to please both,i guess he really likes both at the expense of the team results.I just hope he doesnt use it until it works once at the expense of better results til that point.

I hope Pizzaro becomes better than Veron but right now i prefer Veron in the big games.For one he defends better this season and even allows Cambiasso to go upfront more.Still I dont see why rotating them based on form,injury and fatigue is the criteria here instead of jeporadizing the results.I know other coaches would luv such a headache of choices.

Anyways this is a match that I dont mind losing out of our coming schedule,I am sure we can make it up here...not that same in SerieA games coming up.

 

[forzacambiasso]

I respect Mancini a lot, however I'm really pissed off with his decision to play Veron and Pizzaro at the same time ........... what was he thinking wasn't the Palermo game enough and on top of that he played Cruz as a lone striker for God's sake I feel he really let us fans down on this occassion,trying to satisfy his ego while jeopardizing the teams ambitions.

 

[kova9]

I'm very disappointed about defeat,but I am more disappointed about how we lost..I don't like Mancini's idea to switch the winning team to 451 and leaving Recoba on bench!!! I can't forgive him that..Our only on-form striker is still not playing regulary like he should..and you are talking abou incosistency..Its about not playing!!!

 

[primo-inter]

FOUR F-CKING TIMES...

Euroderby 2: 4-5-1... LOSE.
away to Messina: 4-5-1... LOSE.
away to Palermo: 4-5-1... LOSE.
away to Porto: 4-5-1... LOSE.

MANCIO, get it through your damn head. 4-5-1 = LOSE.

4-4-2 = annihiliation of opponents.

 

[interista7]

FOUR F-CKING TIMES...

Euroderby 2: 4-5-1... LOSE.
away to Messina: 4-5-1... LOSE.
away to Palermo: 4-5-1... LOSE.
away to Porto: 4-5-1... LOSE.

MANCIO, get it through your damn head. 4-5-1 = LOSE.

4-4-2 = annihiliation of opponents.

You're right man..
I hope will never play with this formation again this year..

 

[DISCO ZZANG]

Still have a fit of anger to Mancini's terrible formation and stupid set-piece stuation defence. already phucking repeat 3times stupid mistake.

200000000000times never understand Mancini. Feel a surge of anger.......

 

[primo-inter]

..and another thing, where are all the Materazzi lovers now?

Sure, he can put a few good performances together against teams like Treviso, Lecce, Livorno and Chievo. But against world class teams he gets shown up for the average player he truly is.


Anway, this defeat is forgiveable because we're still in a very comfortable position in this group, 1st and 2 points ahead of everyone, then 3 points clear of the team that just defeated us. You know why we are 3 pts ahead of Porto? We won all our previous matches playing 4-4-2, now playing 4-5-1 our points-lead over Porto has been halved...well, enough complaining from me about the match.

Against Udinese we will be better in 4-4-2.

Now it's time to go have a shower, sleep, wake up fresh and forget about this nightmare performance.

 

[Handoyo]

I personally am tired at repeating this again and again. I don't know whether I'm correct or wrong but you have to see Mancini's reasoning here.

Adriano, as the whole world has known, arrived late from Brazil, had a light training session on Monday and played against Venezuela on that day. Do you think he's match-fit for Porto?

Recoba arrived a day late from South America, had a light training session on Sunday and played against Livorno on Sunday. Do you think he's fully-fit for Porto?

Martins suffered from a knee injury and was unavailable.

Of course, it is possible to risk either Adriano or Recoba to play against Porto but considering that we have a more important game against Udinese in the weekend and the fact that can afford to lose this game, is it a risk worth taking? Hence, Mancini only has one striker, Cruz, perfectly fit for this game. Or are you suggesting that he should have used Germinale or Momente to partner Cruz?

Anger is fine, if not recommended, after a disappointing loss. But if you just lambast Mancini blindly for using 4-5-1 without analyzing his reasoning, I think it's unfair to Mancio. I personally think that it's more appropriate to say that Mancini had no choice for this match rather than say that Mancini was experimenting. Obviously, he's been guilty of that in the past but for me, not in this match.


Hand:stress:yo

 

[Raineri]

I agree with Handoyo, we have to understand that Mancini wanted to rest Recoba and Adriano for Udinese game. Was that right decision? Imo it was. We have 'win or bye bye scudetto' game at sunday. So it's quite risky to play Adriano and Chino in game that we afford to lose. The thing i didn't understand was that Mancini tried Pizarro&Veron in midfield again. We've all seen where it goes, our loss. We could have played with two DM's, cause CZ was back.. Well, it's pointless to speculate anymore, game is played, Porto won, we just have to put this behind us and concentrate on Udinese match.

 

[J zanetti]

I personally am tired at repeating this again and again. I don't know whether I'm correct or wrong but you have to see Mancini's reasoning here.

Adriano, as the whole world has known, arrived late from Brazil, had a light training session on Monday and played against Venezuela on that day. Do you think he's match-fit for Porto?

Recoba arrived a day late from South America, had a light training session on Sunday and played against Livorno on Sunday. Do you think he's fully-fit for Porto?

Martins suffered from a knee injury and was unavailable.

Of course, it is possible to risk either Adriano or Recoba to play against Porto but considering that we have a more important game against Udinese in the weekend and the fact that can afford to lose this game, is it a risk worth taking? Hence, Mancini only has one striker, Cruz, perfectly fit for this game. Or are you suggesting that he should have used Germinale or Momente to partner Cruz?

Anger is fine, if not recommended, after a disappointing loss. But if you just lambast Mancini blindly for using 4-5-1 without analyzing his reasoning, I think it's unfair to Mancio. I personally think that it's more appropriate to say that Mancini had no choice for this match rather than say that Mancini was experimenting. Obviously, he's been guilty of that in the past but for me, not in this match.


Hand:stress:yo

Naah! I will not buy that Han ;-) You certainly have a point by mentioning several facts. Though I believe he could have risked a bit more.

After all Chino was on fire against Livorno, and when you also consider Chinos situation in the club he would have loved to take the opportunity again and show his worth in Porto. Further, we only need 2 strikers who will start the game in Udine. Surely Mancini could have started with the one he most likely wanted to bench for that game.
If not that, I’d rather play with someone like Figo upfront, or even a Primavera player as long as we keep our 4-4-2 formation. His tinkering did cost us the game. I would not mind him trying different formations, but only when the game is truly worthless. When we have the ticket to the next round the he can start messing about.

Also note that I’m saying all this despite the fact that I, like the majority of interisti consider the Udine game 10 times more imp that last nights showdown in Porto.

 

[Handoyo]

After all Chino was on fire against Livorno, and when you also consider Chinos situation in the club he would have loved to take the opportunity again and show his worth in Porto. Further, we only need 2 strikers who will start the game in Udine. Surely Mancini could have started with the one he most likely wanted to bench for that game.

If Recoba was indeed judged by Mancini and the physios to be fit for both yesterday's and Udinese's match, then I would blame Mancini for using only Cruz last night. But right now, I think the best assumption would be to consider that Mancini thinks that Recoba is unfit to play both matches. After all, Ashkan, when was the last time Recoba managed to start 3 matches consecutively? Judging by his past physical problems and the recent heavy outings Il Chino had had in the past week, I would say that Recoba is not fit for both the Porto & Udinese match.

If not that, I’d rather play with someone like Figo upfront, or even a Primavera player as long as we keep our 4-4-2 formation. His tinkering did cost us the game. I would not mind him trying different formations, but only when the game is truly worthless. When we have the ticket to the next round the he can start messing about.

I personally think that using a player in a position he's uncomfortable of or using a Primavera player who has not trained with the first team at all would be as risky as trying the 4-5-1, despite Mancini's & Inter's past experience with the formation.

Also note that I’m saying all this despite the fact that I, like the majority of interisti consider the Udine game 10 times more imp that last nights showdown in Porto.

I hope and think that Mancini thought the same when he prepared the starting line-up last night. And hence, he took the decision of resting his current best possible offensive partnership, Adriano - Recoba, so that both players can be fit against Udinese.


Handyo

 

[J zanetti]

I hope you are right, and that Mancini had the same reasoning as you have. I somehow doubt it though!

Anyway, I, myself am very much against using players out of their usual position. But based on Mancini previous experience with this formation while playing both Veron and Pizarro in the same line up I just hate to see us playing 4-5-1.

Lets hope we can put things behind us with a win in Udine where we usually have difficulty to get the ideal result.

 

[Ziyad]

I would like to believe that rationale Han.I hope Mancio was thinking that way but one thing bothers me is that why did he elect to use BOTH of our playmakers then and not just one ?

Wouldnt it be better to use one and rest one for the coming match ahead.I mean why risk both in that game when another more important one is coming up.

I think the truth is somewhere in there when Mancio thought he could risk experimentation in this one.

 

[Pravesh]

I personally am tired at repeating this again and again. I don't know whether I'm correct or wrong but you have to see Mancini's reasoning here.

Adriano, as the whole world has known, arrived late from Brazil, had a light training session on Monday and played against Venezuela on that day. Do you think he's match-fit for Porto?

Recoba arrived a day late from South America, had a light training session on Sunday and played against Livorno on Sunday. Do you think he's fully-fit for Porto?

Martins suffered from a knee injury and was unavailable.

Of course, it is possible to risk either Adriano or Recoba to play against Porto but considering that we have a more important game against Udinese in the weekend and the fact that can afford to lose this game, is it a risk worth taking? Hence, Mancini only has one striker, Cruz, perfectly fit for this game. Or are you suggesting that he should have used Germinale or Momente to partner Cruz?

Anger is fine, if not recommended, after a disappointing loss. But if you just lambast Mancini blindly for using 4-5-1 without analyzing his reasoning, I think it's unfair to Mancio. I personally think that it's more appropriate to say that Mancini had no choice for this match rather than say that Mancini was experimenting. Obviously, he's been guilty of that in the past but for me, not in this match.


Hand:stress:yo

Handoyo, you really made a good point there. Lets hope that Mancini made the change in our tactic coz of that reason. In that case, I would be happy with the changes. Good point !

Udinese game (in other words - SERIE games) is/are more important for us AT THE MOMENT !!

:star:

 

[Handoyo]

I would like to believe that rationale Han.I hope Mancio was thinking that way but one thing bothers me is that why did he elect to use BOTH of our playmakers then and not just one ?

Wouldnt it be better to use one and rest one for the coming match ahead.I mean why risk both in that game when another more important one is coming up.

I think the truth is somewhere in there when Mancio thought he could risk experimentation in this one.

This, I didn't agree with Mancini as well. But I guess it is because Pizarro & Veron were the only offensive-oriented midfielders that we had. Cambiasso has a very good offensive quality but nowhere near the two. Another reason could be that Mancini couldn't use C.Zanetti yet since he wasn't fully match fit. I don't think I heard about Il Martello playing any training match or for the Primavera team at all.


Handyo

 

[Frisko]

I'm not saying DON'T blame Mancini because of the 4-5-1, you're more than entitled to do so. But how can you fill 9 pages with only Mancini bashing, when the 4-5-1 formation did create several incredible chances that THE PLAYERS MISSED (look at number of shot off target ffs!) and the goals we conceded were shots deflected?

It's ok to criticise Mancini (you should also remember that his choice of playing 4-5-1 was surely affected by the strikers travelling around the world on NT duty, I mean Adriano looked VERY tired even playing 20 minutes), but you just can't focus on that and that only.

Veron made an IDIOTIC challenge to give Porto the free kick for the 2nd goal. Figo hit the post with a header from 2 yards with an empty goal. Cordoba made some bad challenges. Favalli and Cambiasso collided stopping each other from scoring, again with an empty goal.

I don't like playing the blaming game, but it seems that your focus is totally on Mancini, and that's just wrong.

 

[snake]

Sorry Frisko, even I cant back u up here.

Its obvious when we play that shitty hole called the 4-5-1, we really end up losing 2 players! the first player we lose is the strikers partner, and then we lose pizarro in the middle cause when he plays next to veron he doesnt know what the hell is doing and he reminds me of Emre at those times!

I agree wit a few other posts around here, as soon as a team becomes physical in the midfield we start being out played and out run. Sadly Cambiasso doesnt have that strength when it comes to those situations, or the partners to help. I wont even mention Solari.

Samuel was the only good player out there, Cordoba was shit, man he needs to ge back in the middle. Where are you capitano.

And bloody hell, You know something is wrong when you have somebody like Cruz starting so many games for you.

 

[Jimmy]

I think we only had one chance on goal when we used only one striker. It was the chance that Cruz had. The rest came when we had subbed in a striker.

If we only had Cruz as the natural striker, than we should have played a Barca 98 lineup. Figo as a right flanked forward and Solari on the other flank. They both played as midfielders, so Cruz got no support and was marked out completely, and it also made the spaces between defence and midfield to be ridiculous.

Yes, we were unlucky. But we faced a non-impressive Porto who still manages to win 2-0 and we played like crap, regardless of our missed chances.

4-5-1 is a horrible formation, and so is playing Veron and Pizarro together.

 

[Fabio]

Why is it there is always one Mancini defender here?

Fabio