Why is SAF not criticised like Pep for lack of UCL wins?
I often hear the argument that Pep is a fraud and didn’t win enough UCL. I found he won only 3.
Apparently he is not great enough because he won 1 Ucl in 10 years. People can have their opinions and I respect that. Because of this many people put SAF above him in terms of who is better.
However I have never seen people criticise SAF for winning 2 UCL in 27 years. United were the big dogs during 90’s and was the richest or second richest club during his entire tenure. Money wasn’t the issue and no one challenged what he was doing. Yet United was never the top dog in UCL.
I believe SAF to be the 3rd greatest after pep and carlo but he can easily be considered the best. However, it irritates me when people consider him flawless.