Football nº 10

[Hereward]

why would Ronlado leave the best team in the woprld to join the best team in erm Madrid I guess

seems unlikely

Because Spain is sunny? :unsure:

PS Good to see you after all this time, Beren!

[john]

It's a forty minute flight away from his mother. That's one of the reasons he was talking it up last year. Plus he needs a few more big wads of cash to nestle his winner's medals in.

The game itself was another impressive United display. Totally professional all the way through, and made all the right moves at the right time, which Arsenal didn't. It is a shame for Darren Fletcher. I've never been a big fan of his, but this season he's been great. And there was some crappy refereeing all the way through that game - you're supposed to give free kicks for fouls, not because someone fell over.

I thought the top three qualified automatically this year. Or is that only coming in next year?

No, that's right. The top three in the top three leagues are in the group stages. So it looks like a harder road for Arsenal europe wise but Liverpool are safe enough unless there's a huge cock-up.

[Alcibiades]

Man... on nights like tonight Danny Baker is really annoying. If there wasn't any big games, then fine, his schtick is fun. But on a big european night, I want to hear what fans have to say about the game.

[Alcibiades]

Absolutely gutted....

Chelsea employed the only strategy that would give them a chance against what everyone considered a superior squad. They played very well for 180 minutes, and came within a hair's breadth of pulling it off.

Some atrocious refereeing saw a player sent off who shouldn't have been, and no spot kicks given that should have been.

Absolutely gutted...

[BLU-RAY]

Yeah, really a brutal way to lose. I'm glad I wasn't watching.

OTOH, it says something that with, what, 25-30 minutes of time with a man advantage, we not only couldn't ice it with a second goal, but actually let them score.

[Alcibiades]

Yeah, really a brutal way to lose. I'm glad I wasn't watching.

OTOH, it says something that with, what, 25-30 minutes of time with a man advantage, we not only couldn't ice it with a second goal, but actually let them score.

I know I know... There is a limit to how much I can blame the officiating or fortuna. Chelsea had chances to score again (damn sight more than Barcalona), and a man advantage for a while.

[Mathis]

Damn, what a shocking peformance by the ref. At the very least two penalties not given for Chelsea and then he goes and sends off Eric Abidal for sweet fuck all.

I honestly thought that Ballack was going to deck the ref after he waved away the appeals for handball against Eto'o. And then Drogba going up to camera and shouting 'its a fucking disgrace!' :lol: The monkeys in the studio apologised for the language but it was after 9pm at that point so why do they care?

I'm not sure how I feel about Barca going through. On the one hand they have been sublime for most of the CL, on the other they only managed one shot on target in the whole game. Either way I fancy Man U to beat them in the final.

Last year Chelsea were weak on full backs and Ronaldo and Rooney gave them fits. Now Barca will be without Alves and Abidal, leaving Sylvinho and I don't know who, is Oleguer still there? Barca will be open to wide play.

The only concern for Utd will be the absence of Fletcher and the never ending injury to Hargreaves. But I think they will be able to keep enough of the ball to weather the storm.

I can't wait.

Edit: I can't believe I forgot to mention Essien's goal. The man is a beast. He can play anywhere in midfield as well as anyone in the world. For years people talked about Gerrard being sacrificed on the altar of his own versatility before finding his niche behind Torres. Essien has been equally ill treated.

[Jon AS]

Bwahahaha! I think the last time I cheered so hard for a "neutral" team was for Manchester United in 1999. The referee wasn't particularly good, though both potential penalties for Chelsea were the sort of "soft foul" that rarely is awarded with one in the first place (of course, giving a free kick outside the penalty box instead isn't exactly by the book either) but Abidal's red card was a joke. The most shocking thing about the game was actually the German commentator, quite possibly the most biased commentary I've ever heard on German TV. The guy must have put a lot of money on Chelsea going through, or maybe he just likes to imagine he's best buds with Michael Ballack.

Now Barca will be without Alves and Abidal, leaving Sylvinho and I don't know who, is Oleguer still there?

Oleguer is at Ajax and looking at Barca's squad I don't see at first glance whom they'll be fielding as replacement, probably a centre back who'll focus on defense. This might be good for the game as a whole, because now Manchester United might be inclined to attack instead of playing defensively.

[Padraig]

Edit: I can't believe I forgot to mention Essien's goal. The man is a beast.

Poor guy had an air shot for the Barcelona goal. Shows how random football can be.

[The hairy bear]

An exciting match. Not exactly beautiful, but I don't think I've experienced as much tension for years.

I'm glad Barça won. Not only because I'm a supporter, but also because "cowardice" should never be rewarded. Chelsea was playing in his own field, with one extra player, and still renounced to control the ball.

I'm already eager to watch the final!

[Horza]

An exciting match. Not exactly beautiful, but I don't think I've experienced as much tension for years.

I'm glad Barça won. Not only because I'm a supporter, but also because "cowardice" should never be rewarded. Chelsea was playing in his own field, with one extra player, and still renounced to control the ball.

I'm already eager to watch the final!

Denying Barca space and hitting them on the counter is cowardice now?

As a neutral I was for Barca by default as I would have had to go on a killing spree in the event of another ManU-Chelsea final and that would have interfered with several aspects of my life in a detrimental way.

Having said that it was hard to see how they were going to score for most of the game. Alves was rubbish out wide and Hiddink had the middle of the park striated with blue and was able to lunge down Barca's left flank thanks to the acres of space created by Messi cutting inside - Barca stifled a lot of those but there was still plenty of danger.

Ironically enough it was Barca who mustered the grit and determination to ride it out and score, I would have only given one PK: Pique's handball. There wasn't much in the other two, and given the total ridiculousness of Abidal's send off it looked like a wash.

Here's hoping the finalists avoid controversy and may the best team whose name doesn't end in 'ited' win.

[kiko]

Hurray! Another snore fest avoided. Go Barca! Now I will probably even watch the final

[Paddy]

Ironically enough it was Barca who mustered the grit and determination to ride it out and score, I would have only given one PK: Pique's handball. There wasn't much in the other two, and given the total ridiculousness of Abidal's send off it looked like a wash.

Really?

1: Alves fouled Malouda at least once before they got to the box, however, Malouda still had the advantage, therefore rightly, play should continue.

Malouda's advantage ended when Alves man-handled him to the ground from behind. This was a foul.

Alves was inside the penalty area and Malouda was inside the penalty area, with the possible exception for one of his feet, but only at the very start of the foul.

Therefore a penalty kick should have been awarded.

2: This is the one I'm most doubtful about. Abidal definitely pulls Drogba's shirt and I feel that it was enough to be a foul.

I suppose it's a matter of judgement; some people will feel that it wasn't enough to cause Drogba to go down and thus not a foul.

My response there would be "then why pull his shirt at all?". The defender had no reason to do it other than to unfairly disadvantage his opponent and therefore it was a foul, clearly within the box and a penalty kick should have been awarded.

3: I don't think anyone can, or is, arguing that that Pique's handball was not a penalty. What amazes me is that both the referee and the assistant referee (who should have been in a perfect position to view the incident) did not give it.

I think it is this decision that has lead to the "conspiracy" accusations that are going about.

4: Eto'o makes himself big like a goal-keeper with his arms in the air and turns his back on the shot. The ball strikes the underside of his right arm, away from his body and is thus deflected away from goal.

He was positioned well within the penalty area when he deflected the ball with his arm. Therefore a penalty kick should have been awarded.

I agree with pretty much everyone that Abidal should not have received a red card. I do not think there was a foul there.

I think Chelsea were done.

As a United fan, right now, I'm actually really glad to be facing Barcelona in the final. If I only look at the 4 games of the semi-finals, I believe that United can defend as well as Chelsea, if not better and I am convinced that United will be better at retaining the ball than Chelsea were.

United are more clinical finishers and more ruthless than either Barcelona or Chelsea and I think that Barcelona's defence are not good enough to stop United on the counter attack for an entire match.

Barcelona's attacking play has yielded great rewards for them this season, but their defence is lacking and after seeing them play against a decent defence in Chelsea and come up with no invention or cutting edge, I think we can contain them more than they can contain us.

That's United in current form. That could change in the intervening three weeks though.

[Celtigo]

I really don't have a problem with the Eto'o hand ball if only for the fact that, as someone said upthread, it struck him fairly close to the body and looked like it made contact with part of the shoulder/torso as well. Throw into the late late time period in the game and I just couldn't make that call (same reason the call for Italy-Australia in 06 was crap). The commentators who said his back was turned are focusing on the irrelevant. You can't jump at someone taking a shot with your arms outstretched as wide as possible with no repercussions. If it had hit him in the forearm it would be a different scenario.

For that reason the Pique handle had to be a PK. I suppose there could be some weak justification that the ball went to his arm and not vice versa, but if you're that liberal with hand ball rules there should have been nothing stopping Lampard or Alex from running at Iniesta's "winner" with arms stretched wide like a keeper as long as they kept them static.

With Barca losing so much of a back group that was always the weak link anyway, Man U might have a field day. If anything I'm hoping for a high scoring affair.

[ljkeane]

As a United fan, right now, I'm actually really glad to be facing Barcelona in the final. If I only look at the 4 games of the semi-finals, I believe that United can defend as well as Chelsea, if not better and I am convinced that United will be better at retaining the ball than Chelsea were.

I don't think United will be as willing to put so many men behind the ball though and you don't have as strong a midfield defensively as Chelsea, just because Barca struggled so badly to score against Chelsea does not exactly mean that they will against United.

Having said that I do think United will cause the Barca defence more problems than Chelsea although the lack of a powerful centre forward like Drogba might have an effect.

[Paddy]

I really don't have a problem with the Eto'o hand ball if only for the fact that, as someone said upthread, it struck him fairly close to the body and looked like it made contact with part of the shoulder/torso as well.

As I see it, it strikes the underside of his upper arm, deflecting it.

Throw into the late late time period in the game and I just couldn't make that call

When the offence occurred is irrelevant. I haven't seen anything about it in the rules.

I know you're not saying it is, but I'm just making the point to be clear.

Just a little clip I've just seen from Sky Sports News (the clip is on the front page of http://www.football365.com) about the Darren Fletcher suspension... I don't know how much credit to give to a "Sky Sports understands...", but they are saying that "senior UEFA refereeing officials were happy with the decision because after making contact with the ball, Fletcher caught Fabregas, preventing the Arsenal captain from getting to the ball."

If that's right then WTF? How many times have I seen players fall over because of a collision with another player, but it's not a foul because the tackling player got the ball?

Absurd.

[Paddy]

I don't think United will be as willing to put so many men behind the ball though and you don't have as strong a midfield defensively as Chelsea, just because Barca struggled so badly to score against Chelsea does not exactly mean that they will against United.

No, it does not mean that it's a foregone conclusion, but I do believe that United are stronger defensively than Chelsea.

Don't underestimate United's midfield. It wasn't just our back 4 that brought us that 11 clean sheet streak.

United also put plenty of men behind the ball. They did it against Arsenal, often leaving only 1 player in an advanced position, but able to break with speed. Whether they'll be the same against Barcelona, I dont know.

[polishgenius]

I'm hoping that we'll line up the same as we did on Tuesday, with poor ol' Fletcher replaced by Tevez. It'll weaken the midfield a little bit but Anderson, now on form, is a wrecking ball all by himself anyway, and it'll allow us to defend right from the front and take good advantage of the weak defence - plus Ronaldo's plenty powerful enough to be putting pressure on them. Plus if we have to we could just do what Chelsea did then batter them on the break better than Chelsea did.

[Celtigo]

As I see it, it strikes the underside of his upper arm, deflecting it.

When the offence occurred is irrelevant. I haven't seen anything about it in the rules.

I know you're not saying it is, but I'm just making the point to be clear.

If that's right then WTF? How many times have I seen players fall over because of a collision with another player, but it's not a foul because the tackling player got the ball?

Absurd.

What I'm saying with the timing of the foul is that when its a close call, which I think the Eto'o decision was, a good referee probably knows there is a fare chance the decision he makes could be technically incorrect. For right or wrong in many sports there is tendency to let borderline or questionable calls go as the game gets into the late stages. Its not ideal, but the idea is better to let free play decide it then the referee make a decision.

Having said all that I don't think Barca could really have been upset if Eto'o had been called. 4th times a charm and all that.

As an former right/center back, I've never understood the "law" that dealt with permissible contact and how much follow through was allowed if you won the ball/got there first, other than most Refs have no idea what legal shoulder to shoulder contact is.

[john]

United have been prone to defensive blunders too, especially when a game is being driven by the other team. And Fletcher is a key component of the defence-to-attack midfield, i don't see any potential replacements being able to fill the role as well as him. Using Tevez or Berbatov (a 30 million quid striker who might get a run on if he's lucky :P) means playing a different system and probably being flatter, which Barca are better equipped to deal with. Still, ManU are nothing if not adaptable.