Liverpool FC Forum

Posted: **Fri Feb 06, 2004 8:59 pm**

Peter Kenyon has put the spotlight on Ranieri again after an interview with 'The London Evening'. Kenyon wants a return on the clubs investment. I actually feel sorry for Ranieri, there will always be pressure on him until Chelsea win the premiership or CL, and fairly so but is one season enough. Can u buy success so soon? Has Ranieri used Roman Abramovich's generous transfer kitty well? Is he a good manager?

Posted: **Sun Feb 08, 2004 12:14 pm**

i think Claudio Ranieri is an excellent manager, he hasn't spent his generous transfer allowance as well as he could have, but then Chelsea aren't a famous enough name that the best players are just going to flcok to them because they can afford to sign them. Overall I would rank him amongst the top 5 managers in the Premiere League, and the top 10 in Europe

Posted: **Sun Feb 08, 2004 12:26 pm**

I think Chelsea have huge pulling power now...something close to Real Madrid(not that close... but close). Ranieri has the potential of signing any player who wants to find a new club.

Posted: **Mon Feb 09, 2004 2:33 pm**

i think David Pleat is better than him ,
give Pleaty 50 mill and see what he could do ,
he would have won the premiership by now , and the FA cup.

Posted: **Tue Feb 10, 2004 2:06 pm**

I think Chelski had a huge amount of money BUT were unable to buy the kind of quality you need to win the title. Championship winning sides are usually assembled over a number of years not months. Instead of being patient and selective, Chelski paid over the odds for some good to average players - Johnson and Bridge are good players but are they really worth around £6m? Was Veron really worth the £14m (?) they paid manu?!?!?! Truth is, for all the money Chelski spent the likes of manu and Arsenal still have better players (Henry, Scholes, rvn, Giggs, Campbell, Pires, Ljungberg, Vieira.......) than most of those acquired by Chelski

Chelski tried to sign one or two of Arsenal and manu's players, but were not successful. Had Ranieri got his first choices then who knows. We may never know what Ranieri's "best XI in the world" is or how close he got to signing any of them

Posted: **Tue Feb 10, 2004 6:41 pm**

I think Chelski had a huge amount of money BUT were unable to buy the kind of quality you need to win the title. Championship winning sides are usually assembled over a number of years not months. Instead of being patient and selective, Chelski paid over the odds for some good to average players - Johnson and Bridge are good players but are they really worth around £6m? Was Veron really worth the £14m (?) they paid manu?!?!?! Truth is, for all the money Chelski spent the likes of manu and Arsenal still have better players (Henry, Scholes, rvn, Giggs, Campbell, Pires, Ljungberg, Vieira.......) than most of those acquired by Chelski

Agree. Spent money on good players but paid for stars.

Posted: **Wed Feb 11, 2004 9:44 pm**

Ranieri is a good manager no doubt about it, even when he had hardly nothing to spend last season he got Chelsea into 4th and the season before they reached the Cup Final.
A lot of people forget that Ranieri always hasnt had money to blow at Chelsea, Ranieri has worked wonders at debt ridden clubs and clubs in turmoil during his managerial career.

Roberts

Posted: **Thu Feb 12, 2004 2:02 am**

hes rubbish , and he cant even speak english ,
he knows he wont be here that long , why bother?
he speaks like a swedish o pear, with a dangly puppets head ,
like captin scarlett without the string showing

Liverpool FC Forum

Claudio ranieri - Is he a good manager?

Claudio ranieri - Is he a good manager?