MUFC still doing the same, nothing change leh.
-
hi all,
just started this topic after watching how MUFC played Reading.
MUFC has not changed much, the only strategy is still counter-attack.
I remembered JoseM once was able to neutralize this by putting 6-7 players behind the ball whenever MUFC get the ball and AC Milan doing the same in the two legs of the UCL semis by guarding Ronaldo and Rooney out of the game.
And from then till now, MUFC has not shown any improvements or change leh.
Maybe, to me, someone who doesn't see it obviously.
Our minus (-)s
a) We don't have a creative play maker like Arsenal who can link and plug all the strings,
b) or a inspirational captain who can win matches on his own like Gerrard..
c) We are suddenly quite exposed when coming to set plays.
Of course, we have many (+)s,
1) Tevez is fantastic in keeping the ball, I think given his size, he has awesome lower body strength. But time and time again, he is trying to find rooney.
2)Our "rock"-solid defence
3)Our number one's outlet -> Rooney or Ronaldo to spark the team.
4) OwenH to protect the backline.
In short, we have not taken a leap in terms of quality or for that matter, tactically advance to a new level.
For example, take chelsea when Jose came in, there was a "uplift" in terms of tactically sense and general performance. You can see Lampard, JCole suddenly moving to the next level.
Just felt that MUFC has "stagnated".
Yes, counter-attack is plentiful to watch. But stop Rooney and Ronaldo, and things seems to hit a wall.
Even against Reading, they seems to deploy the same, counter-attack to counter MUFC's counter. I feel it is just that Reading did not have the quality/luck to match or else they would have punctured MUFC many times.
Is this the same old story like what we experienced against Milan?? Has MUFC become predictable? -
ya even my dad sae manutd die die always same method same method...
haix...
-
As long as it brings a win, im happyOriginally posted by Sienx:ya even my dad sae manutd die die always same method same method...
haix... 
But i guess thats the idea SAF has, in the near future when we have a new Manager, who knows, things might just change for the better. -
I want Jose Mourinho come leh
-
i think thats the style of SAF?
-
i feel you my boy..
kind of similar sentiments..
But one thing I seen which have improved over the years.. The MU players are playing harder.. They are closing in on the opponents faster then before which is a good thing cos it will reduce the ability of the opponents to be creative.. But defend against set-pieces are a real suspect.. West Ham did that easily..
Ronaldo, he doesn't seem to be a big match player hmm.. But his touches and shots are improving from time to time..
Anderson, this guy breaks through defence with his dribbling which is something MU didn't have for quite a while.. Have to watch out for this guy.. He has the most potential..
Hargreaves is superb but injury proned..
Carrick I feel at times he is too slack.. Hopefully he can improve on becoming more aggresive.. He was suppose to be the next Keano.. Still not showing it yet..
Rooney and Tevez are brilliant.. But to win, we need a Nistelrooy kind of player.. Constant goals bam bam bam! Torres was the perfect answer but as they say shiet happens.. Huntelaar looks like the closest I can think of.. -
Strange thread i would say... rather silly actually...
Every match they play in the epl, i usually see them attacking their opponent's goal so i don't really understand whats the problem with it...
Whats with the "the only strategy is still counter-attack " ?
How about moving the ball around the pitch fast, playing with wingers and overlapping full-backs? These are also well thought out strategies mind you. It don't come about out of nothing... Well organized defence: whether its man marking or area marking... These are also well planned strategies...
Which match are you referring to when they don't take the game to the opponent and only depend on counter-attacks?
There is nothing wrong with using counter-attacks, its just another strategy that they employ to their advantage. With players like Rooney, Ronaldo and Tevez... why shouldn't they make the full use of it? The only reason the TS may seem to think that it's the only strategy could be because they are good at it, and they get many important goals from it... therefore probably misses the rest that isn't obvious to him...
I honestly don't know how many can't tell the obvious difference between last season and this, But for me, one very obvious difference is Tevez. Tevez arrival has made their attacking a lot more different compare to last season. This season they are faster, move the ball on the ground much more and quicker too... And we are seeing more back-heels and stylish pass between the 3 of them too not to mention the quick one two between themselves... We are also seeing more of Evra playing as an attacking wing-back this season compare to Heinze last season who was much slower and don't go up as much... Even Brown is going up more often nowadays...Our minus (-)s
Answer to
a) We don't have a creative play maker like Arsenal who can link and plug all the strings,
b) or a inspirational captain who can win matches on his own like Gerrard..
c) We are suddenly quite exposed when coming to set plays.
Of course, we have many (+)s,
1) Tevez is fantastic in keeping the ball, I think given his size, he has awesome lower body strength. But time and time again, he is trying to find rooney.
2)Our "rock"-solid defence
3)Our number one's outlet -> Rooney or Ronaldo to spark the team.
a) We have 3 in Rooney, Ronaldo and Tevez...
b) Just ask how many times have Rooney & Ronaldo won us matches? Answer could be much more than Gerrard for Pool.
c) These is just an assumption when you think too much about the West Ham match...
Some people make too much about their West Ham game... If they keep playing that picture over and over in their mind all the time, then i guess they have forgotten about the whole season... As at present, they have the best defensive record in the epl, concede the least goals too. So if this is really the case, then i don't think this record could be set... If this still isn't good enough, then what is? After that WH game, many read too much into it... Birmingham came used the same tactics thinking they can profit from it but got nothing. Then Aston Villa tried to use that same strategy of sending high balls into the box with their set-pieces having one of the tallest striker Carew in their side... and still got nothing out of it. WH got lucky thats all... Sometimes it pays off but more of the time they don't...
Anyway, i just feel the a,b,c seem to be direct contradictions to the 1,2,3, ...
And I think the term "stagnated" would better suit Liverpool rather than United... And i think pool fans may also agree if they are being honest cos after winning the CL... they have not improve and maybe even became worse since...
There is no need to be too cynical... Its not as though they are not even in the challenge for the epl title. MUFC have change their game this season in some ways... Its just that some of us are not observant enough...
-
if it works for 19 years..
why not? -
Yup, same thing for the red devils every year.
-
Silly?? watch it..
I am not only focusing on the west ham game but over the many years I have watched MUFC.
If MUFC is so successful like most would say for the past 19 years, why can't they dominate Europe then? How many European Cups? 1?2?
Yes, counter-attack works, but what happen at Milan? When the opposing players are able to man-mark our catalysts (Ronaldo or Rooney) and MUFC seems lost at sea...
Tevez?? I do admire Tevez, but I would say 80% of his pass would go for Rooney and vice versa, creating at times over play. And with that, Ronaldo will try instead to create his own, cutting in from the wings and going for his shots.
Against teams will lesser quality, MUFC run amok, but how about astute and experienced teams?
Zocoss, what I am trying to say, is the players change, the problem is the style has not.
Overlapping runs, come on, Irwin and Nevilles have been doing that.
Before Giggs, there were Lee Sharp, Jesper Olsen, Andrei i Kanchelskis, even Karel Poborsky, Paul Parker, Viv Anderson...
Same formula every time and thus, becoming predictable.
lastly, Yes, Rooney, Ronaldo and Tevez have won us matches, but Gerrard has hold the European Cup once and been to Finals twice. He has performed on the big stage..
Well, I am just trying to see the whole big picture..
P.S. Since when I talk about West Ham? -
Its quite unfair to say that Man Utd's only strategy is counter-attack. No doubt they generally profit more from counter-attacks than from a game where they have territorial possession (Newcastle and Roma fans may beg to differ unfortunately) but that's not their only strategy.
When you do not have the ball, the team is expected to keep it tight in defence. Once possession is regained, a lot depend on how the manager wants to play the next move. Do you commit players to counter or just punt the ball to some tall bloke in the corner flag? The team that SAF develops is either quick in thought (looking for the incisive pass) or quick in pace (Giggs, Ronaldo) and it executes counter-attacks effectively.
In a game where they have territorial possession, they have players to spray passes to open up the opposing defence. Granted their movement are not as wonderful to watch as Arsenal's and they also currently lack Scholes, they still manage to knick in goals. Between Tevez, Rooney and Ronaldo, they can conjour up goals without any assistance from the other team-mates. The overlapping runs do create space for these players to exploit and more often than not, Man Utd are at their most effective when their full-backs are playing well.
Are Man Utd predictable? Milan beat Man Utd last season only because of Kaka. Kaka singlehandedly ran them to ground but that was largely due to Man Utd's lapse in concentration in marking him. Had Kaka been marked out as effectively as Rooney and Ronaldo had been, the outcome might have been different. With the Man Utd trio, the element of unpredictability is back in Man Utd's court. In addition, there is Anderson to contend with. I think the team looks better than the 99 treble winning team. My only gripe is that Ronaldo still falls short of being a team player. His obsession in scoring goals (from all angles and under all sorts of situations) has starting to become a liability. -
Well just hope consistency can be maintained..
-
It seems that winning the CL is the gauge you use to being consider successful... But let me just say that if you care to take a closer look at the past few winners, not many were successful in their domestic league the time they won the title. Barcelona were probably considered the best team in Europe by many in the last 3 yrs yet do they go on to win 3 CL titles? Liverpool, were not the best side for the last 5 yrs and yet they won the CL in 2005. The gunners under Wenger themselves are considered the top 2 English team over the last decade and yet they have not won the CL. So do you consider them an even less successful team to Pool overall?Originally posted by iceFatboy:Silly?? watch it..
I am not only focusing on the west ham game but over the many years I have watched MUFC.
If MUFC is so successful like most would say for the past 19 years, why can't they dominate Europe then? How many European Cups? 1?2?
Yes, counter-attack works, but what happen at Milan? When the opposing players are able to man-mark our catalysts (Ronaldo or Rooney) and MUFC seems lost at sea...
Tevez?? I do admire Tevez, but I would say 80% of his pass would go for Rooney and vice versa, creating at times over play. And with that, Ronaldo will try instead to create his own, cutting in from the wings and going for his shots.
Against teams will lesser quality, MUFC run amok, but how about astute and experienced teams?
Zocoss, what I am trying to say, is the players change, the problem is the style has not.
Overlapping runs, come on, Irwin and Nevilles have been doing that.
Before Giggs, there were Lee Sharp, Jesper Olsen, Andrei i Kanchelskis, even Karel Poborsky, Paul Parker, Viv Anderson...
Same formula every time and thus, becoming predictable.
lastly, Yes, Rooney, Ronaldo and Tevez have won us matches, but Gerrard has hold the European Cup once and been to Finals twice. He has performed on the big stage..
Well, I am just trying to see the whole big picture..
P.S. Since when I talk about West Ham?
My point is winning the CL takes not just a good team, it also has other factors to consider like Luck on the pitch and off it with injuries to important members of the team, Timing, Fatigued and others... Though its a great achievement to win the CL but i have to tell you that not always the best team wins it...
Ok and since you mention about Milan... I don't agree that Milan were the better team last season... They are a good side but they were also fortunate that they met United on a day when they didn't have a first team back 4 for that match... If you saw losing Vidic for the match against Bolton was already telling how about losing him, Rio Ferdinand and Neville? It's far worse don't you agree... Even Heinze had to move into centre-back instead of his usual left side... These are important factors that could effect the outcome of the match. Perhaps you may have forgotten but Rooney and Ronaldo together they scored 3 goals against Milan... The problem was they couldn't depend on a makeshift defense to show for their good work.
The 2nd leg was no difference... Rio and Neville were missing too and an unfit Vidic was rush back due to not enough defensive cover... These are important factors too but it happens like i have said luck and timing was not to their advantage instead Milan without any other title to challenge for could rest their whole team the weekend before the United matches... Just like Liverpool did in 2005... There is nothing wrong with that, i belief if United wasn't fighting for the epl title which they won and many United fans would rather prefer they would have done the same and not risk fatigue to the team members...
Just ask yourself with players like O'Shea and a last yr Brown in defence and Fletcher in midfield... you can't expect too much... These players aren't even taking to the field in their normal weekly epl matches and yet they started. Evra had to play right-back in the 1st leg... Clearly anyone could tell they were short of players for both legs during that period... and they still had to balance it with their epl challenge.
I just felt your assessment of things are too simplistic... Ronaldo isn't a big match player? Did you watch how he played for Portugal at the World Cup? He was their best player, he was considered for the Young player of the Tournament If not for his then diving behaviour he would have won the Young player of the Tournament at the World Cup instead of Podolski who is clearly isn't in Ronny's league...
How about his performance against Roma? He ran the Roma defence to the ground... They were so frighten of him each time he gets the ball... and where is Roma? Above AC Milan last season and even this current one... This season they met Roma again and it was Rooney's goal that settle that match... The 2nd leg don't even have to mention, United sent a reserved team out and got a draw... CL games are consider big matches... How about he won them the difficult away match against Sporting Lisbon 0 - 1 in the 1st leg and scored in injury time in the return to give United a 2 - 1 win? If these aren't big matches, then i don't know what else is to you and some...
Well, since you say you are just trying to see the whole big picture.. I would suggest you take a step back and see from a further angle and not zero in on a small portion... If their play still seem "stagnated" to you, then i have nothing else to say only I rather they are "stagnated" at this level rather than changing to long balls to a lone striker and waiting for the knock downs. I think Gerrard would have wish Pool to have "stagnated" rather than "improve" to their present day style... Or what Newcastle fans would give had their football "stagnated" and not changed from 10 yrs ago...
P.S. Since when did I say you talk about West Ham? -
the kaka issue could have been resolved if we had OWEN HARGREAVES.This man's the one we needed since keane left us.This fellow tracks back,tackles,intercepts very well.Pit ourselves agst milan again now with hargreaves,we may fare better.But i do agree a lot regarding the ronaldo issue.He can't do much once he is marked out by ppl like gattuso,who constantly disturbs his opponents with his tactical fouls,kicking and tackling.What ronaldo can improve on may be his vision and passing.He has to learn this from our ever green Ryan Giggs.Look at him now,he only has a bit of pace left in him for the past few seasons,but with his vision,passing and great crossing,he still contributes to the team consistently.Ronaldo has to be humble and learn from veterans such as giggs and scholesOriginally posted by JLennon:Its quite unfair to say that Man Utd's only strategy is counter-attack. No doubt they generally profit more from counter-attacks than from a game where they have territorial possession (Newcastle and Roma fans may beg to differ unfortunately) but that's not their only strategy.
When you do not have the ball, the team is expected to keep it tight in defence. Once possession is regained, a lot depend on how the manager wants to play the next move. Do you commit players to counter or just punt the ball to some tall bloke in the corner flag? The team that SAF develops is either quick in thought (looking for the incisive pass) or quick in pace (Giggs, Ronaldo) and it executes counter-attacks effectively.
In a game where they have territorial possession, they have players to spray passes to open up the opposing defence. Granted their movement are not as wonderful to watch as Arsenal's and they also currently lack Scholes, they still manage to knick in goals. Between Tevez, Rooney and Ronaldo, they can conjour up goals without any assistance from the other team-mates. The overlapping runs do create space for these players to exploit and more often than not, Man Utd are at their most effective when their full-backs are playing well.
Are Man Utd predictable? Milan beat Man Utd last season only because of Kaka. Kaka singlehandedly ran them to ground but that was largely due to Man Utd's lapse in concentration in marking him. Had Kaka been marked out as effectively as Rooney and Ronaldo had been, the outcome might have been different. With the Man Utd trio, the element of unpredictability is back in Man Utd's court. In addition, there is Anderson to contend with. I think the team looks better than the 99 treble winning team. My only gripe is that Ronaldo still falls short of being a team player. His obsession in scoring goals (from all angles and under all sorts of situations) has starting to become a liability. -
Indeed. Man Utd can only hope that Hargreaves remain injury free. As for Ronaldo, it won't be surprising to know if it had been SAF who instructed him to be more selfish and direct in his game.Originally posted by F.raon.I.R:the kaka issue could have been resolved if we had OWEN HARGREAVES.This man's the one we needed since keane left us.This fellow tracks back,tackles,intercepts very well.Pit ourselves agst milan again now with hargreaves,we may fare better.But i do agree a lot regarding the ronaldo issue.He can't do much once he is marked out by ppl like gattuso,who constantly disturbs his opponents with his tactical fouls,kicking and tackling.What ronaldo can improve on may be his vision and passing.He has to learn this from our ever green Ryan Giggs.Look at him now,he only has a bit of pace left in him for the past few seasons,but with his vision,passing and great crossing,he still contributes to the team consistently.Ronaldo has to be humble and learn from veterans such as giggs and scholes -
I agree that Man U is predictable.
If teams can successfully choke up the midfield, we are screwed.
But if they are not able to, they are screwed.
The best is when we are able to quickly adapt with situation. Man U usually takes awhile (sometimes too long to adapt tactically). -
Ronaldo? I did not mentioned him.
Sadly, I still feel on that day when Milan met MUFC, they were the better side in knowing how to use what they got and neutralize what MUFC put on the plate, agree?
Roma above Milan?? Well, that's a new topic on its own.
I do agree, no side is "complete" to be able to have all the necessary players to change tactically whenever they need. Even the great Dutch team with total football weren't able to dominate on the world stage.
Winning the local league is important, but yes, winning the European Cup to me is really the defining point. Ask any major clubs, and I believe most will agree winning the league is important but winning the European Cup is special. Btw, how do you define a major club or european powerhouse? By the domestic league titles?? One example, Lyon, practically invincible in their league, but do you consider it a major european powerhouse? or for that matter, Celtic/Rangers FC?
Well, the yardstick is different in our opinion..
Yes, to be fair, all things have to be in your favor to win the cup.
So if your main striker is out, do you put up a white flag?
You still have to play to what you got , right?
Anyway, let's the masses decide.. -
Well, if there is a stats count on how many times, the balls are pumped to Ronaldo or Rooney, you can then see clearer..Originally posted by JLennon:Its quite unfair to say that Man Utd's only strategy is counter-attack. No doubt they generally profit more from counter-attacks than from a game where they have territorial possession (Newcastle and Roma fans may beg to differ unfortunately) but that's not their only strategy.
When you do not have the ball, the team is expected to keep it tight in defence. Once possession is regained, a lot depend on how the manager wants to play the next move. Do you commit players to counter or just punt the ball to some tall bloke in the corner flag? The team that SAF develops is either quick in thought (looking for the incisive pass) or quick in pace (Giggs, Ronaldo) and it executes counter-attacks effectively.
In a game where they have territorial possession, they have players to spray passes to open up the opposing defence. Granted their movement are not as wonderful to watch as Arsenal's and they also currently lack Scholes, they still manage to knick in goals. Between Tevez, Rooney and Ronaldo, they can conjour up goals without any assistance from the other team-mates. The overlapping runs do create space for these players to exploit and more often than not, Man Utd are at their most effective when their full-backs are playing well.
Are Man Utd predictable? Milan beat Man Utd last season only because of Kaka. Kaka singlehandedly ran them to ground but that was largely due to Man Utd's lapse in concentration in marking him. Had Kaka been marked out as effectively as Rooney and Ronaldo had been, the outcome might have been different. With the Man Utd trio, the element of unpredictability is back in Man Utd's court. In addition, there is Anderson to contend with. I think the team looks better than the 99 treble winning team. My only gripe is that Ronaldo still falls short of being a team player. His obsession in scoring goals (from all angles and under all sorts of situations) has starting to become a liability. -
Sorry but I fail to see your point. How do stat counts on pumping balls to Ronaldo or Rooney make things clearer? Are you saying that opposing sides see that as a form of predictability and therefore by snuffing them out, they snuff Man Utd?Originally posted by iceFatboy:Well, if there is a stats count on how many times, the balls are pumped to Ronaldo or Rooney, you can then see clearer.. -
in a way, I believe that was how Milan negate MUFC during the semi-finals of UCL.Originally posted by JLennon:Sorry but I fail to see your point. How do stat counts on pumping balls to Ronaldo or Rooney make things clearer? Are you saying that opposing sides see that as a form of predictability and therefore by snuffing them out, they snuff Man Utd? -
Strategies are not dead one. If you die die stick to one strategy.. see Liverpool's state. How many games have they won? Because they lack of players who are creative. If you zoom in, how many games they won needed Gerrard or Torres?
My point is, Counter-Attack is only a general term to describe our style of play over the years. We need lots and lots of creativity in the players to comprehend with strategies.
If people bring in the issues of Kaka, then I think he or she is too naive liao. Yes, he might have run the show against us during the UCL semis last season. But how many domestic games they need to sacrifice to allow Kaka to that? The total UCL games you play over the campaign probably only around 18 or 20 games? That is not even half of the total domestic games a team plays. Don't forget Kaka is afforded to be rested in their pathetic league performance. How many times do Ronaldo and Rooney gets to rest?
Just like Liverpool, it takes a moment of brilliance(Gerrard, Torres?) to win a particular game, but you need more than just brilliance to win the league. Which strategy is more effective then? Strategies that win you leagues or strategies that wins you a game by a game? -
Err... your first post Mr... "stop Rooney and Ronaldo, and things seems to hit a wall."Originally posted by iceFatboy:Ronaldo? I did not mentioned him.
Sadly, I still feel on that day when Milan met MUFC, they were the better side in knowing how to use what they got and neutralize what MUFC put on the plate, agree?
Roma above Milan?? Well, that's a new topic on its own.
I do agree, no side is "complete" to be able to have all the necessary players to change tactically whenever they need. Even the great Dutch team with total football weren't able to dominate on the world stage.
Winning the local league is important, but yes, winning the European Cup to me is really the defining point. Ask any major clubs, and I believe most will agree winning the league is important but winning the European Cup is special. Btw, how do you define a major club or european powerhouse? By the domestic league titles?? One example, Lyon, practically invincible in their league, but do you consider it a major european powerhouse? or for that matter, Celtic/Rangers FC?
Well, the yardstick is different in our opinion..
Yes, to be fair, all things have to be in your favor to win the cup.
So if your main striker is out, do you put up a white flag?
You still have to play to what you got , right?
Anyway, let's the masses decide..
Well, i guess you can't seem to see the importants of losing your first team defence as a serious problem and blame the strikers instead...
Roma above Milan?? Yes... No need a new topic on its own, We can always mention it here... The serie A table is there for everyone to see... Last season's as well as the current one that is going on right now... Roma recently just beat AC Milan in their league meeting and in AC's home turf somemore if i am not wrong...
I am not sure about you but myself and a few other united fans i know would gladly go for the EPL title to the CL anyday... Serious! Even this season.
The EPL is no longer the same as the EPL of 10 yrs ago... Its as difficult to win it as it is with the CL. Perhaps more difficult. Beating the likes of Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool to the title is far more gratified than beating the likes of Lyon, Roma or even Barcelona. Cos the CL is after all a cup tournament that is played on certain months and weeks. And the 2nd tier teams in the EPL like the Everton, the Man city or Aston Villas are as hard to beat these days.
There is no point in winning the CL and losing in your domestic league. You will only fully focus on the CL if you are out of the running for the EPL title like Liverpool in 2005 or AC Milan last year.
Its silly to compare the French league title to the EPL title... or even the Scottish league. Cos the difference between the top 1 or 2 is huge and the rest of the club hardly have enough money to buy a player that cost more than $5m or maybe that amount could be their whole budget for that season. In the epl, even the likes of Sunderland can spend $20m on new players.. But you won't see this with the French of Scottish leagues. The EPL title also come with the biggest prize money. Maybe even more than the CL if you win it... Just being in the EPL could get your club $30 - $40 million pounds already and qualifying for the CL? $10 million. So you see, the CL is a bonus to the top clubs.
Given a choice, beating the likes of the Arsenal, the Chelsea and the Liverpools to the EPL title would be the best prize. And i belief many would share the same sentiments... Pool have not won the EPL for like what, coming to 15 - 20 yrs i think and i belief they would gladly exchanged that CL title for an EPL one if they had a choice. Pool have proved that winning the CL isn't exactly too difficult... But winning the EPL is another matter altogether.
EPL depends a lot on consistency... whereas Cup, as they say depend on your luck with the draw and the timing... -
I agree. Cup-games specialists are probably teams like Milan, Liverpool...Originally posted by zocoss:Err... your first post Mr... "stop Rooney and Ronaldo, and things seems to hit a wall."
Well, i guess you can't seem to see the importants of losing your first team defence as a serious problem and blame the strikers instead...
Roma above Milan?? Yes... No need a new topic on its own, We can always mention it here... The serie A table is there for everyone to see... Last season's as well as the current one that is going on right now... Roma recently just beat AC Milan in their league meeting and in AC's home turf somemore if i am not wrong...
I am not sure about you but myself and a few other united fans i know would gladly go for the EPL title to the CL anyday... Serious! Even this season.
The EPL is no longer the same as the EPL of 10 yrs ago... Its as difficult to win it as it is with the CL. Perhaps more difficult. Beating the likes of Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool to the title is far more gratified than beating the likes of Lyon, Roma or even Barcelona. Cos the CL is after all a cup tournament that is played on certain months and weeks. And the 2nd tier teams in the EPL like the Everton, the Man city or Aston Villas are as hard to beat these days.
There is no point in winning the CL and losing in your domestic league. You will only fully focus on the CL if you are out of the running for the EPL title like Liverpool in 2005 or AC Milan last year.
Its silly to compare the French league title to the EPL title... or even the Scottish league. Cos the difference between the top 1 or 2 is huge and the rest of the club hardly have enough money to buy a player that cost more than $5m or maybe that amount could be their whole budget for that season. In the epl, even the likes of Sunderland can spend $20m on new players.. But you won't see this with the French of Scottish leagues. The EPL title also come with the biggest prize money. Maybe even more than the CL if you win it... Just being in the EPL could get your club $30 - $40 million pounds already and qualifying for the CL? $10 million. So you see, the CL is a bonus to the top clubs.
Given a choice, beating the likes of the Arsenal, the Chelsea and the Liverpools to the EPL title would be the best prize. And i belief many would share the same sentiments... Pool have not won the EPL for like what, coming to 15 - 20 yrs i think and i belief they would gladly exchanged that CL title for an EPL one if they had a choice. Pool have proved that winning the CL isn't exactly too difficult... But winning the EPL is another matter altogether.
EPL depends a lot on consistency... whereas Cup, as they say depend on your luck with the draw and the timing...
I would take domestic league over CL anytime too -
I think this article somehow suits this thread, decided to paste it over here
. But sometimes newpaper article and interview not zhun one 
SHORT AND SHARP
In the absence of the conventional 'big and small' striker partnership, Manchester United's 'small and small' strike-force of Wayne Rooney and Carlos Tevez continue to confound critics with their swashbuckling style and goals. DAVID LEE asks The New Paper's football analyst TOHARI PAIJAN why and how it works.
MY 'Anything But United' (ABU) friends never fail to laugh at the 'Midgets from Manchester' when they attempt a header at goal. Not a pretty sight when Carlos Tevez's and Wayne Rooney's necks are stretched to the maximum but yet still restricted like turtles. Of course my friends are eventually silenced by the inevitable United onslaught.
What makes this 'short' strike-force tick?
Tohari: Why would they need a big guy when Ryan Giggs, Cristiano Ronaldo, Rooney and Tevez all possess sublime skills?
Technically, they are able to open up any defence. After half a season, Tevez has already forged such a telepathic understanding with the other attacking players in United, and it shows in the buildup to so many of United's goals this season.
Describe United's pattern of attacking play so far.
Tohari: The amazing thing is, they are so unpredictable. It is absolute hell for any team to defend against the Red Devils.
When you expect Giggs to dribble, he'll pass. When you expect Ronaldo to pass, he'll shoot. When you expect Tevez to cross, he'll cut inside and play a one-two with Rooney to score.
How do you defend against such an unpredictable attack?
Sir Alex Ferguson gives them the freedom to express themselves on the field, switching around positions and play.
You look at all the other teams, they have a fixed form. With Man United, you can only expect the unexpected. Opponents can't read them at all.
How are Arsenal's and Chelsea's attacks different from Man United's then?
Tohari: Arsenal do have some variation in their attack. Now, with a genuine fox-in-the-box in Emmanuel Adebayor, the Gunners can also rely on their overlapping fullbacks to whip in the crosses from the flanks.
This is some form of unpredictability, although it can't be compared to Man United's level.
Chelsea's style is more rigid. Pass the ball to the wingers Joe Cole and Shaun Wright-Phillips and they'll pump it in for their big strikers.
They don't care if they don't play pretty. If 1-0 brings them three points, then so be it, that's their mentality.
On the other hand, it has always been Man United's tradition to win and entertain.
What does the future hold then for United's opponents and for football fans who have the same views as my friends?
Tohari: They had better beware. Ronaldo, Rooney and Tevez are still in their early 20s. They can only get better.
Ronaldo has cut down on his showboating, using his intelligence and trickery to become more direct to aid United's attack.
Rooney also has a better control of his temperament now and Tevez has already struck up such camaraderie with the rest of them.
Nani may replace Giggs and with the ability to exploit any space offered to them, I fear the worst for any team facing them in the future.
http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/sports/story/0,4136,154196,00.html