Managers that produced the sexiest football ever seen live

[blue blood]

to quote thracian from a previous topic "I want results with style. Very few managers have achieved that in England but Bill Nicholson, Bill Shankly, Bobby Robson, Don Revie, Bob Paisley, Matt Gillies, Luca Vialli, Brian Clough, Sir Alex Ferguson, Arsene Wenger, Kevin Keegan and a few others have shown it is possible."

this leads me onto a new topic, which manager/team in world football have you seen live, that has produced the best quality (sexy, easy on the eye) football ever.

my vote goes to arsene willy puller's invincibles

[JoeyB]

Arsenes football is very sexy.

but i must say the other day i watched some Ajax football and that was awsome

[blue blood]

la liga has a very high technical standard for the purists 2

[The Reverend]

to quote thracian from a previous topic "I want results with style. Very few managers have achieved that in England but Bill Nicholson, Bill Shankly, Bobby Robson, Don Revie, Bob Paisley, Matt Gillies, Luca Vialli, Brian Clough, Sir Alex Ferguson, Arsene Wenger, Kevin Keegan and a few others have shown it is possible."

this leads me onto a new topic, which manager/team in world football have you seen live, that has produced the best quality (sexy, easy on the eye) football ever.

my vote goes to arsene willy puller's invincibles

Shouldnt this be in general sport?

But anyway, i'd say Wenger (mainly because im too young to remember a lot of the others).

Arsenal play some very nice football.

Manure play nice football aswel though so Sir Alex aswel.

Not forgetting Rob Kelly

[Wezleylowski]

Az Alkmaaaaaar

[Head Honcho]

Easy

Fabio Capello's AC Milan team of the early 90's

[Kilworthfox]

Bryan Robson when he was bangin Claire Tomlinson?

[blue blood]

Easy

Fabio Capello's AC Milan team of the early 90's

remember george weahs goal, from his own box all the way, possibly the finest solo goal

[l444ry]

I couldn't give a damn about "sexy" football. As long as a team wins then that's fine by me. In many ways television has made too many people assume any old crap team can adopt the styles of the best teams in the world and win as well. How many times has it been written on this forum. Not only is this a fantasy it also shows complete stupidity to think it can be done (and win trophies).

You can't have it both ways. In the 70's Jimmy Bloomfield created a side which was almost unanimously accepted as entertaining. But what trophies did he bring home. Then take Martin O'Neill's side which, although acknowledged as battling outfit, were branded as long-ball spoilers. Bugger fantasy football, just win. It's the only thing that matters in my opinion.

[The Reverend]

I couldn't give a damn about "sexy" football. As long as a team wins then that's fine by me. In many ways television has made too many people assume any old crap team can adopt the styles of the best teams in the world and win as well. How many times has it been written on this forum. Not only is this a fantasy it also shows complete stupidity to think it can be done (and win trophies).

You can't have it both ways. In the 70's Jimmy Bloomfield created a side which was almost unanimously accepted as entertaining. But what trophies did he bring home. Then take Martin O'Neill's side which, although acknowledged as battling outfit, were branded as long-ball spoilers. Bugger fantasy football, just win. It's the only thing that matters in my opinion.

I agree that winning football matches is key, but we watch football to entertained aswel - thats why they are paid so much and why we love football so much.

[blue blood]

I couldn't give a damn about "sexy" football. As long as a team wins then that's fine by me. In many ways television has made too many people assume any old crap team can adopt the styles of the best teams in the world and win as well. How many times has it been written on this forum. Not only is this a fantasy it also shows complete stupidity to think it can be done (and win trophies).

You can't have it both ways. In the 70's Jimmy Bloomfield created a side which was almost unanimously accepted as entertaining. But what trophies did he bring home. Then take Martin O'Neill's side which, although acknowledged as battling outfit, were branded as long-ball spoilers. Bugger fantasy football, just win. It's the only thing that matters in my opinion.

you are missing the point, the thread is to discuss the most sexy football seen, does not matter if it is winning football, just football for the conesseur.......we can start a new thread on that 1, long ball never got turnip taylor anywhere.

the greatest managers of all time have/had the ability to create sexy winning football.

[l444ry]

I agree that winning football matches is key, but we watch football to entertained aswel - thats why they are paid so much and why we love football so much.

Yes, Mickey. But would you feel better leaving the Walker's after playing well and losing or playing rubbish but winning? The trouble with too many supporters is that even if Leicester won 3-0, they should really have won 5-0.

[l444ry]

you are missing the point, the thread is to discuss the most sexy football seen, does not matter if it is winning football, just football for the conesseur.......we can start a new thread on that 1, long ball never got turnip taylor anywhere.

the greatest managers of all time have/had the ability to create sexy winning football.

No, only about six promotions, runners-up in the old Division One and F.A. Cup finalists with as unfashionable club that it is possible to think of. Also, when he left they faded into oblivion until Boothroyd joined and gained success doing the same thing.

Also, I'm not missing the point - just putting my slant on this topic.

[blue blood]

No, only about six promotions, runners-up in the old Division One and F.A. Cup finalists with as unfashionable club that it is possible to think of. Also, when he left they faded into oblivion until Boothroyd joined and gained success doing the same thing.

Also, I'm not missing the point - just putting my slant on this topic.

fair enough. my point to call him turnip taylor is in reference to his england days

[Head Honcho]

remember george weahs goal, from his own box all the way, possibly the finest solo goal

This one

http://youtube.com/watch?v=bt49QZwpru4&amp...ted&search=

[blue blood]

This one

http://youtube.com/watch?v=bt49QZwpru4&amp...ted&search=

thats the 1!!!! my o my what a solo! brings back memories of c4's football italia, what was it GGGGGGGGGGOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLAAAAAAAAAAAAATTTTTTTTTTTTTZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[Thracian]

I couldn't give a damn about "sexy" football. As long as a team wins then that's fine by me. In many ways television has made too many people assume any old crap team can adopt the styles of the best teams in the world and win as well. How many times has it been written on this forum. Not only is this a fantasy it also shows complete stupidity to think it can be done (and win trophies).

You can't have it both ways. In the 70's Jimmy Bloomfield created a side which was almost unanimously accepted as entertaining. But what trophies did he bring home. Then take Martin O'Neill's side which, although acknowledged as battling outfit, were branded as long-ball spoilers. Bugger fantasy football, just win. It's the only thing that matters in my opinion.

Lots of managers have won things with quality football - in fact it is generally the best way to win things at each and every level, professional, semi-professional and amateur.

And anyone at any level can take inspiration from the best teams.

One Loughborough side I recall went two years without defeat playing one and two touch football, scoring stacks of goals and winning every single trophy they contested including one final 6-0.

Their ideas came from Eric Worthington (still to be found on the net) who took his inspiration from the best in the game. City's top notch side of the time used to regularly have a kick about in Eric's garden! Pass? That "two years" team used to keep the ball for minutes at a time quite regularly emphasising that it can be attempted and achieved at any level.

Winning is not the only thing that matters. Football should be a celebration, an expression of joy and skill by all who take part. To win without style and panache is to insult or dilute the game. It gives no lasting satisfaction whatsoever.

Gillies' Leicester side of the 60's was wonderfully entertaining and for us to reach FA Cup Finals and win the League Cup during that era was a marvellous achivement.

Look what Forest won and how well little Ipswich did. The examples are endless and, as I say, at all levels.

Simply being combative and organised will only get you so far for the most part.

It's true poor players won't win anything but it amazing how capable apparently ordinary players become when properly inspired and when people show some belief in them and put the right people around them.

So often football teams take on a character that is from within itself and the influences around them.

If those influences are entirely positive, entirely committed to a belief and entirely committed to each other it is extraordinary what can be achieved. Ipswich and Leeds epitomised all that at one time, as did Forest.

Among the best though for total football: Cruyff's Ajax, Di Stefano's Real Madrid, Shankly's Liverpool, Busby's Manchester United, Wenger's Arsenal, Nicholson's Spurs, 60's Chelsea, Revie's Leeds, Paisley's Liverpool, Keegan's Newcastle and Ferguson's United.

[l444ry]

Lots of managers have won things with quality football - in fact it is generally the best way to win things at each and every level, professional, semi-professional and amateur.

And anyone at any level can take inspiration from the best teams.

One Loughborough side I recall went two years without defeat playing one and two touch football, scoring stacks of goals and winning every single trophy they contested including one final 6-0.

Their ideas came from Eric Worthington (still to be found on the net) who took his inspiration from the best in the game. City's top notch side of the time used to regularly have a kick about in Eric's garden! Pass? That "two years" team used to keep the ball for minutes at a time quite regularly emphasising that it can be attempted and achieved at any level.

Winning is not the only thing that matters. Football should be a celebration, an expression of joy and skill by all who take part. To win without style and panache is to insult or dilute the game. It gives no lasting satisfaction whatsoever.

Gillies' Leicester side of the 60's was wonderfully entertaining and for us to reach FA Cup Finals and win the League Cup during that era was a marvellous achivement.

Look what Forest won and how well little Ipswich did. The examples are endless and, as I say, at all levels.

Simply being combative and organised will only get you so far for the most part.

It's true poor players won't win anything but it amazing how capable apparently ordinary players become when properly inspired and when people show some belief in them and put the right people around them.

So often football teams take on a character that is from within itself and the influences around them.

If those influences are entirely positive, entirely committed to a belief and entirely committed to each other it is extraordinary what can be achieved. Ipswich and Leeds epitomised all that at one time, as did Forest.

Among the best though for total football: Cruyff's Ajax, Di Stefano's Real Madrid, Shankly's Liverpool, Busby's Manchester United, Wenger's Arsenal, Nicholson's Spurs, 60's Chelsea, Revie's Leeds, Paisley's Liverpool, Keegan's Newcastle and Ferguson's United.

I don't disagree with much of what you say Thracian, but time moves on. In days gone by most supporters knew their team's place in football and mainly accepted it. Teams could play their football without as much pressure and most supporters had a sense of realism.

But wall to wall saturation televised football and radio phone-in's have created a new breed of supporter. It has made everbody a football "expert." We could all do better than this manager or that player. Of course, this is total nonsense but it doesn't stop them criticising for the most minute or stupid thing.

This has created an intolerable pressure on managers to get results at the expense of "entertainment". It's easier to get results the Harry Bassett, Graham Taylor or George Graham route than the Ossie Ardiles way. Until supporters get real, survival football will continue, like it or not.

[MC Prussian]

What kind of a question does contain the two terms "sexy" and "football" in the same sentence?

I don't need fooking arousements per game, I want wins and/or a team that is a threat to every other competitor in this (or even the next-highest) league.

[Thracian]

I don't disagree with much of what you say Thracian, but time moves on. In days gone by most supporters knew their team's place in football and mainly accepted it. Teams could play their football without as much pressure and most supporters had a sense of realism.

But wall to wall saturation televised football and radio phone-in's have created a new breed of supporter. It has made everbody a football "expert." We could all do better than this manager or that player. Of course, this is total nonsense but it doesn't stop them criticising for the most minute or stupid thing.

This has created an intolerable pressure on managers to get results at the expense of "entertainment". It's easier to get results the Harry Bassett, Graham Taylor or George Graham route than the Ossie Ardiles way. Until supporters get real, survival football will continue, like it or not.

Media pressures and monetary pressures have increased immensely but, my life, managers/coaches have a financial cushion today that their predecessors would have killed for.

Rob Kelly gets a years salary when he goes - probably enough to live on for a lifetime - so why he or any other manager should be afraid of playing attacking football I've no idea.

And survival football will, as you say, continue because there are always going to be unimaginative, misguided managers working for unimaginative, misguided employers.

But please don't associate me with the likes of Ossie Ardiles. Just because he was a skillful player and believed in skillful football didn't qualify him to be a manager and certainly not the sort of manager I would ever have appointed.

Sir Alex Ferguson is my kind of manager, or, Bill Shankly or, almost certainly Roy Keane. Three harder task managers you couldn't imagine. Competitive through and through. But people with a vision and with the sort of inspirational personality which inspires even cynical footballers to respond and to elevate themselves into being something special.

Ardiles was never my idea of an inspirational manager. It is no use being able to play a bit if you don't first get the ball. You make a mistake if you consider my ideal of exciting, entertaining football as being somehow akin to being a soft touch.

Those great teams I've mentioned had particular people in their side, Norman Hunter, Paul Reaney, Tommy Smith, Dave Mackay and many others - hard cases who would go through a wall to get a football - but who could play some when they had it.

[The Reverend]

Yes, Mickey. But would you feel better leaving the Walker's after playing well and losing or playing rubbish but winning? The trouble with too many supporters is that even if Leicester won 3-0, they should really have won 5-0.

Well its opinions again isnt it.

Some people would rather leave the Walkers having lost 2-3 (having been thoroughly entertained) than watch a boring 1-0 win. At the end of the day, footballs about entertainment (and money).

But i dont disagree - i think 'effective' football should be used by teams like us.

[Thracian]

Well its opinions again isnt it.

Some people would rather leave the Walkers having lost 2-3 (having been thoroughly entertained) than watch a boring 1-0 win. At the end of the day, footballs about entertainment (and money).

But i dont disagree - i think 'effective' football should be used by teams like us.

Attacking football IS the most effective - as gets demonstrated time and again - it just takes nerve to play it.

Do you think I advocate attacking football cos I like losing?.

I want Leicester to ditch the current approach cos its exactly the sort of shit that has turned us into a footballing nothing.

How many seasons do you have to watch it to be convinced?.

[moseeds]

Why are so many people equating attacking and attractive football with losing? It's not as though all the relegated teams attacked and mesmerised their way down.

At best those teams that do set out to entertain achieve success and at worst they retain mid-table mediocrity. Leicester is doing neither and instead flirts with relegation playing the most dour and mind numbingly boring form of the beautiful game.

What would you say if someone asked you for 30 quid every week to sit through a rubbish movie? All we're asking for is a little bit of passion and entertainment!

[Geo V]

Easy

Fabio Capello's AC Milan team of the early 90's

Miserly defence with players like Baresi is one thing but for me they never played really sexy football. it was good to watch but a bit pedestrian for me.

Despite the obvious Arsenal under Wenger and Man Utd with Cantona, Giggs, Kanchelskis, Sharpe and the rest. I`d go for Keegans Newcastle in the year that they somehow managed to throw away the title when leading by a mile and it all went wrong with the "I`d lov it" Keegan burst (classic ). Keegan had footballers everywhere within his squad and that was ultimately there downfall because they couldnt defend. Players like Ginola, Beardsley, Ferdinand and Asprilla in particular were a joy to watch as a neutral so good knows what it would have been like to witness week in week out as a supporter.

Brazil in the 1982 World Cup were also quality to watch with Zico, Socrates, Eder, Falcao and the rest. I was only 10 at the time but they were class but once again, like Wengers Arsenal and Keegans Newcastle, they ultimately were losers!

[Bloomer]

Mario Zagallo, wone the world cup twice as a player and produced possibly the best world cup winners ever in 1970. Fantastic players given the opporunity to play football they way they wanted to play. Brilliance first.tactics maybe.