Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:Benitez has only managed 3 points more than Chelsea all season, and that's in a season where Chelsea deemed the first manager as not up to the required standard. But many people on here seem to think that 3 point margin is enough for Benitez to be rated higher than Hiddink, but they don't consider Hiddink taking 2 points more than Benitez to be worthy?
I was making the point that 2 points is nowhere near significantly better. And the judgement of a manager should be about how much he has got from the resources available to him. IMO, Hiddink still inherited a high quality squad that gave him an advantage over Benitez. That he managed 2 more points in that timeframe is about right, particularly considering Liverpool lost their best player for a while during it. This reason I think Benitez deserves more recognition is because he has managed to put in a genuine title challenge with a weaker squad than his rivals.
Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:Liverpool outperformed Chelsea when Chelsea were managed by Scolari. Chelsea outperformed Liverpool when Chelsea were managed by Hiddink.
Benitez has been at Liverpool for 5 years. If he hasn't managed to get the strength in depth to challenge for the title than that's his fault.
Easy to say when being bankrolled at a loss by a billionaire enabled your team to do it. For the normal clubs it's more difficult.
Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:I was being sarcastic again at the notion of lauding someone as being the best player in that position but needing to do a name check on him.
Which is relevant to any of my posts how?
