Honestly, I don't see Chelsea getting past Barca on this one. In fact, I don't see NO TEAM in Europe getting past Barca at this stage. Maybe in a final, any one team can beat another, but, in two games? I eh so sure 'bout dat. However....stranger things have happened, but this is a matchup where I turn neutral.......somewhat.
Essien hadda handcuff messi like he did gerrard for chelsea to win, granted Barca have waaaay more attacking weapons than Liverpool. First game at Nou Camp 2-1 barca. 2-0 Chelsea at the bridge.... Blues back in the final vs Man U.
Essien hadda handcuff messi like he did gerrard for chelsea to win, granted Barca have waaaay more attacking weapons than Liverpool. First game at Nou Camp 2-1 barca. 2-0 Chelsea at the bridge.... Blues back in the final vs Man U.
You on some serious drugs.
Mes que un club !
Let's get this started. ;D
Arguably the two best remaining teams in the CL - Sad when you see the Finals played, before the actual finals.
C'mon CHELSEAAAAA!!!!!
Let's get this started. ;D
Arguably the two best remaining teams in the CL - Sad when you see the Finals played, before the actual finals.
C'mon CHELSEAAAAA!!!!!
Horse, yuh real jump the gun dey boy.
Do the thing properly nuh boy. Put the stats, who playing where first, stats on past matchups a lil picture or a youtube link.
Yuh jes gone wild and make thread.
Essien hadda handcuff messi like he did gerrard for chelsea to win, granted Barca have waaaay more attacking weapons than Liverpool. First game at Nou Camp 2-1 barca. 2-0 Chelsea at the bridge.... Blues back in the final vs Man U.
You on some serious drugs.
Honestly, I don't see Chelsea getting past Barca on this one. In fact, I don't see NO TEAM in Europe getting past Barca at this stage. Maybe in a final, any one team can beat another, but, in two games? I eh so sure 'bout dat. However....stranger things have happened, but this is a matchup where I turn neutral.......somewhat.
Aye, stop acting like a punk b!tch! Who yuh backing?
Don't take the 'neutral' cop-out.
State your allegiance!
:D
Watch Guss do this thing. Michael Essien is the man and Drogba firing.
Watch Guss do this thing. Michael Essien is the man and Drogba firing.
they cloning essien o wah? is 5 danger men coming at allyuh. chelsea ent have speed so i ent fraid them. barca not hard to score against though. so we will see how this play out.
ashley cole dead oh gosh messi and alves in yuh tail.......can anyone say highlight reel?
Watch Guss do this thing. Michael Essien is the man and Drogba firing.
they cloning essien o wah? is 5 danger men coming at allyuh. chelsea ent have speed so i ent fraid them. barca not hard to score against though. so we will see how this play out.
ashley cole dead oh gosh messi and alves in yuh tail.......can anyone say highlight reel?
How many clean sheets Barca have this season again?
Honestly, I don't see Chelsea getting past Barca on this one. In fact, I don't see NO TEAM in Europe getting past Barca at this stage. Maybe in a final, any one team can beat another, but, in two games? I eh so sure 'bout dat. However....stranger things have happened, but this is a matchup where I turn neutral.......somewhat.
Aye, stop acting like a punk b!tch! Who yuh backing?
Don't take the 'neutral' cop-out.
State your allegiance!
:D
:rotfl: Basket doh hold no effin' water!! :rotfl:
I eh hadda state shyte!!
Like you spendin' too much time wit DieHard. Jes so yuh callin' people out dey name?!
Yuh lucky ah doh cuss woman in public. Ah woulda treat yuh like de undercover manu fan dat yuh is!!
Yuh f**ker!
How many clean sheets Barca have this season again?
Have luck dey chelsea men, but Utd is the only team that could stop Barca.
This side will beat Barca.
Petr Cech
Branislav Ivanović, Alex, John Terry, Ashley Cole
José Bosingwa, Michael Essien, Frank Lampard, Florent Malouda
Nicolas Anelka, Didier Drogba
Subs - Joe Cole, Michael Ballack, John Obi Mikel, Deco, Salomon Kalou, Ricardo Carvalho, Paulo Ferreira, Franco Di Santo, Juliano Belletti and Ricardo Quaresma.
I think Chelsea needs to put pressure on Cech, give de back up keeper a few games and get Chec back into de game.
Lionel Messi, Thierry Henry, Yaya Touré, Carles Puyol, Sylvinho, Xavi and Samuel Eto is realy trouble though.
This go be a big game.
This side will beat Barca.
Petr Cech
Branislav Ivanović, Alex, John Terry, Ashley Cole
José Bosingwa, Michael Essien, Frank Lampard, Florent Malouda
Nicolas Anelka, Didier Drogba
Subs - Joe Cole, Michael Ballack, John Obi Mikel, Deco, Salomon Kalou, Ricardo Carvalho, Paulo Ferreira, Franco Di Santo, Juliano Belletti and Ricardo Quaresma.
I think Chelsea needs to put pressure on Cech, give de back up keeper a few games and get Chec back into de game.
Lionel Messi, Thierry Henry, Yaya Touré, Carles Puyol, Sylvinho, Xavi and Samuel Eto is realy trouble though.
This go be a big game.
Bosingwa has been a defensive liability, but on a whole Chelsea's defending has been woeful in the past two games so not sure if it could get any worse than that.
I wouldn't be surprised if Deco get a run out against his former team from the start. He was supposed to be injured, but I see him sweat for Portugal the other day, so I expect him to be ready in two weeks. He could prove the foil to Barca quick counter strikes, because he's the one Chelsea player who can hold the ball skillfully and let others make their runs, whether it's an overlapping Bosingwa, Drogba and Anelka doing their thing up front, or Lampard cutting across the back of the two strikers. I also think Kalou will start ahead of Malouda in this game. Problem is Kalou is hit or miss, so it might just open up the opportunity for Obi Mikel.
Lucky escape: Barcelona star Alves glad he didn't sign for European Cup rivals Chelsea
By Sportsmail Reporter
Last updated at 2:31 PM on 17th April 2009
Barcelona star Dani Alves has kicked off the Champions League phoney war by insisting he is glad that he missed out on a move to Chelsea.
The Brazil defender, considered by many the best right-back in the world, was the subject of bids from Stamford Bridge before Barca signed him from Sevilla last summer.
And with his club set to meet the west Londoners for a place in the European Cup final, the 25-year-old told Spanish newspaper Marca: 'I was close to signing with Chelsea but luckily it didn't happen and I moved to a team that suits me perfectly
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/04/17/article-1171250-045C8640000005DC-648_468x403.jpg)
'When I decided to come to Barcelona it was because they were starting a new project. I like challenges in life and Barca had gone two years without winning any trophies.'
Chelsea travel to the Nou Camp for the semi-final first leg on Tuesday, April 28 before the return match at Stamford Bridge eight days later.
Alves said: 'I am convinced that we are going to give people something to speak about, in the Champions League. Barca are always amongst the favourites thanks to their football and their greatness.
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/04/17/article-1171250-046EB926000005DC-940_233x356.jpg)
Turnaround: Coach Pep Guardiola has transformed Barcelona
'We are a step closer from our target, which is to make the final in Rome. What we must do is achieve a great work at home and then qualify up there. Barcelona are going to be a very tough adversary for Chelsea.'
And the free-kick special has his eye on winning the competition, as well as the Spanish League and Cup with Barca.
'The Treble is a real possibility,' he said. 'Dreams cost nothing. We will see what we can achieve.
'It goes through our heads that we could win nothing. But we must crown this season with titles. If not three, then two. Football is not so unfair that we would win nothing. I'm sure that Barca will get something.'
Chelsea - vs -Arsenal= That is the Final
Winner- Chelsea.
barca not hard to score against though.
Anybody for $20 beers, check meh.
clearly this is the more entertaining of the two semi-final matchups now that the teams are set.:rotfl: :rotfl:u make laugh they acb.u half right though.
This is the dream final that UEFA would wish for.
The best team in England and the best team in Spain battling it out for Europe's premier prize.
clearly this is the more entertaining of the two semi-final matchups now that the teams are set.:rotfl: :rotfl:u make laugh they acb.u half right though.
This is the dream final that UEFA would wish for.
The best team in England and the best team in Spain battling it out for Europe's premier prize.
This side will beat Barca.
Petr Cech
Branislav Ivanović, Alex, John Terry, Ashley Cole
José Bosingwa, Michael Essien, Frank Lampard, Florent Malouda
Nicolas Anelka, Didier Drogba
Subs - Joe Cole, Michael Ballack, John Obi Mikel, Deco, Salomon Kalou, Ricardo Carvalho, Paulo Ferreira, Franco Di Santo, Juliano Belletti and Ricardo Quaresma.
I think Chelsea needs to put pressure on Cech, give de back up keeper a few games and get Chec back into de game.
Lionel Messi, Thierry Henry, Yaya Touré, Carles Puyol, Sylvinho, Xavi and Samuel Eto is realy trouble though.
This go be a big game.
Bosingwa has been a defensive liability, but on a whole Chelsea's defending has been woeful in the past two games so not sure if it could get any worse than that.
I wouldn't be surprised if Deco get a run out against his former team from the start. He was supposed to be injured, but I see him sweat for Portugal the other day, so I expect him to be ready in two weeks. He could prove the foil to Barca quick counter strikes, because he's the one Chelsea player who can hold the ball skillfully and let others make their runs, whether it's an overlapping Bosingwa, Drogba and Anelka doing their thing up front, or Lampard cutting across the back of the two strikers. I also think Kalou will start ahead of Malouda in this game. Problem is Kalou is hit or miss, so it might just open up the opportunity for Obi Mikel.
Don't see the point of starting Deco in a game like this.
If Chelsea is going to win this, it won't be by outskillsing Barca or by any form of creativity, magic or individual brilliance.
Its better to play a tight 5 man midfield to stifle Barca's creativity and the supply line (Xavi/Iniesta) to the front 3. Then use their physical advantage in the form of Drogba/Anelka/Ballack on the offensive end to pound Barca into submission. Set pieces will be crucial and the long ball could be effective as Marquez/Puyol have shown to be susceptible. Play to your strengths, use power, pace and intensity.
The biggest problem is that left side of Chelsea's defence. Messi and Alves raiding down that side at Ashley Cole would have been bad enough but he's suspended for the first leg. If Ivanovic plays there, then Essien would have to always be coming back to help him out or it could be a repeat of the Del Horno shambles of years gone by. If I was coach I would even consider taking the chance and put Essien at left back as a buffer and start Obi Mikel in the middle.
For me this is my dream final.
Two of my favorite teams going head to head, although I favor Chelsea slightly for this one, but whatever the outcome I will be backing the winner of this tie to take the whole thing.
Quietly confident that Barca could be in for a long night if Chelsea forces Barca to adopt to Chelsea's style of play, rather than their free flowing attack.
Shaka just predict Barca wins 3-1
No streams or wha?
Barca 4-0.
Barca 4-0.
In yuh flickin dreams fella. De Blues ressin ah solid 2 in deh cont!! Is either we win or ah draw!
Chelsea Yellow kit look sweet though.
The writing is on the wall. Chelsea's days are numbered.
The writing is on the wall. Chelsea'sfixeddaysminutes are numbered.
The writing is on the wall. Chelsea's days are numbered.
Welcome to civilization Toppa :)
But I know you crossing back to the next side this weekend.
The writing is on the wall. Chelsea's days are numbered.
That's 2 crazy yellow card now.
1st one Alex never touched Messi, dive and Alex get a yellow.
2nd one Ballack hit the bal and take Henry he get a yellow.
game going boring
Waaaay. Marquez...
game going boring
Cos only one team playing.
I just waiting for the dam to break.
No streams or wha?
any l inks for the game!!!!!!?
could look at it two ways:
1. Barca dominated, but the end result must be frustrating at the half - already evident from the constant whining to the ref. Definitely had more chances - not better chance(s) - and failing to capitalize
2. Chelsea is sticking to their game plan, evident from their team selection and formation. Even the colour of the uniform is a clue that they essentially park a bus with every single man defending - inculding Drogba.
Essien and Malouda have been non-existent in the roles they have been asked to play because they're not playing wide unless they're defending.
Lampard has been woefully out of position many times BUT he has been busy with Iniesta who is just turning and ghosting Chelsea players at will.
Good job by Ballack and Obi Mikel to contain. Obi Mikel have alot of good touches so far, but Ballack keeps getting set up by Essien short plays.
Cech is looking a bit nervous, but Terry is marshalling the defence well so far.
Drogba shouldve scored that one goal TWICE and hopefully will not rue those chances at the end of the 2nd 45. Needs to stop rolling around the ground and get up and get on with the game. Already don't have much numbers up front, so he need to pick it up a bit.
Wouldn't be surprised to see Belletti, Anelka or even Kalou starting the 2nd, or coming on 10 mins in.
If Chelsea is such ah big side, why dem playing so? Man talking about game plan, a team costing more than a small country should show dem could play too. Just sitting down and absorbing pressure is a cowardly approach. That sort of tactic should be left to teams that know they have very little to offer and will be seriously outclassed. This is the first time I ever see a Guss Hiddink team play in this manner.
Barca 4-0.
In yuh flickin dreams fella. De Blues ressin ah solid 2 in deh cont!! Is either we win or ah draw!
You rel funny.
If Chelsea is such ah big side, why dem playing so? Man talking about game plan, a team costing more than a small country should show dem could play too. Just sitting down and absorbing pressure is a cowardly approach. That sort of tactic should be left to teams that know they have very little to offer and will be seriously outclassed. This is the first time I ever see a Guss Hiddink team play in this manner.
Barca betta smarten upIf Chelsea is such ah big side, why dem playing so? Man talking about game plan, a team costing more than a small country should show dem could play too. Just sitting down and absorbing pressure is a cowardly approach. That sort of tactic should be left to teams that know they have very little to offer and will be seriously outclassed. This is the first time I ever see a Guss Hiddink team play in this manner.
so u want chelsea to go out and play barca game?
steups
Go chelsea.... allyuh go bus the net just now
If Chelsea is such ah big side, why dem playing so? Man talking about game plan, a team costing more than a small country should show dem could play too. Just sitting down and absorbing pressure is a cowardly approach. That sort of tactic should be left to teams that know they have very little to offer and will be seriously outclassed. This is the first time I ever see a Guss Hiddink team play in this manner.
You serious....they playing a nice game. Everyone saying defensive, but it's not parking the bus. They giving the ball back to Barca and alet them play. Chelsea is picking their time in going forward.
If Chelsea is such ah big side, why dem playing so? Man talking about game plan, a team costing more than a small country should show dem could play too. Just sitting down and absorbing pressure is a cowardly approach. That sort of tactic should be left to teams that know they have very little to offer and will be seriously outclassed. This is the first time I ever see a Guss Hiddink team play in this manner.
You serious....they playing a nice game. Everyone saying defensive, but it's not parking the bus. They giving the ball back to Barca and alet them play. Chelsea is picking their time in going forward.
:rotfl:
If Chelsea is such ah big side, why dem playing so? Man talking about game plan, a team costing more than a small country should show dem could play too. Just sitting down and absorbing pressure is a cowardly approach. That sort of tactic should be left to teams that know they have very little to offer and will be seriously outclassed. This is the first time I ever see a Guss Hiddink team play in this manner.
You serious....they playing a nice game. Everyone saying defensive, but it's not parking the bus. They giving the ball back to Barca and alet them play. Chelsea is picking their time in going forward.
If Chelsea is such ah big side, why dem playing so? Man talking about game plan, a team costing more than a small country should show dem could play too. Just sitting down and absorbing pressure is a cowardly approach. That sort of tactic should be left to teams that know they have very little to offer and will be seriously outclassed. This is the first time I ever see a Guss Hiddink team play in this manner.
If Chelsea is such ah big side, why dem playing so? Man talking about game plan, a team costing more than a small country should show dem could play too. Just sitting down and absorbing pressure is a cowardly approach. That sort of tactic should be left to teams that know they have very little to offer and will be seriously outclassed. This is the first time I ever see a Guss Hiddink team play in this manner.
You serious....they playing a nice game. Everyone saying defensive, but it's not parking the bus. They giving the ball back to Barca and alet them play. Chelsea is picking their time in going forward.
:rotfl:
who is de Manure fan?If Chelsea is such ah big side, why dem playing so? Man talking about game plan, a team costing more than a small country should show dem could play too. Just sitting down and absorbing pressure is a cowardly approach. That sort of tactic should be left to teams that know they have very little to offer and will be seriously outclassed. This is the first time I ever see a Guss Hiddink team play in this manner.
You serious....they playing a nice game. Everyone saying defensive, but it's not parking the bus. They giving the ball back to Barca and alet them play. Chelsea is picking their time in going forward.
:rotfl:
Aye gun from here nah yuh blastid undercover ManUre fan
It looks like Alves more pre-occupied with things other than playing the way he is capable of playing. All the pressure on Barca to produce, Chelski doen't have to do shite!
It looks like Alves more pre-occupied with things other than playing the way he is capable of playing. All the pressure on Barca to produce, Chelski doen't have to do shite!
If dey doh have to do shit, why alla dem standing up infont the goal?
Lampard playing real shyte.
Barca really need to try and shoot a couple earlier, see if that helps open some space behind the defence. Chelsea doing a good job in keeping Barca out in front of them. Let's see if Krkic can make a difference when he comes on. No gaffes from Cech so far.
They try that in the first half...did not work too well for them (Barca).
What a shyte call on Ballack.
He leave it and Messi would have had a tap in.
If Chelsea score now it serve Barca right.
If Chelsea score now it serve Barca right.
Nah Chelsea eh do that bad. United had line/walls, Chelsea had group bid difference.
:devil: :devil: :devil: :devil:
Result oriented game plan, not bad.
What ever happened to Messi, Iniesta and Xavi?
Nah Chelsea eh do that bad. United had line/walls, Chelsea had group bid difference.
If Chelsea is such ah big side, why dem playing so? Man talking about game plan, a team costing more than a small country should show dem could play too. Just sitting down and absorbing pressure is a cowardly approach. That sort of tactic should be left to teams that know they have very little to offer and will be seriously outclassed. This is the first time I ever see a Guss Hiddink team play in this manner.
It looks like Alves more pre-occupied with things other than playing the way he is capable of playing. All the pressure on Barca to produce, Chelski doen't have to do shite!
If dey doh have to do shit, why alla dem standing up infont the goal?
The shot isn't to score per se, it is to force Chelsea to step up so they can play it behind them. Basically like the one Krkic now miss.
The fact that Ballack didn't get a second yellow or the fact that the ref gave it a foul? While he played the man I felt that Iniesta played for the card rather than go on to get the ball.
90 minutes (minimum) to play now. Chelsea should be satisfied with the result. I thought they defended well without playing negative football. You always felt like they were looking for a quick counter attack. Barca were a little too intricate in their (now predictable) short passing against a tightly packed defence. Some more crosses and longer range shots to try and draw Chelsea out might have been a welcomed change.
Looking forward to see how the 2nd leg progresses in London. Will Chelsea open up more? Will Barca try to play more defensively? I still think it's Barca's tie to lose, but obviously Chelsea are in a good position.
did messi get subbed of 2nd half? ::)
-------------
under all the old talk, all the men who defending chelsea tactics was bashing Utd last year for doing a better job at it.
Watch them big up they side now.
90 minutes (minimum) to play now. Chelsea should be satisfied with the result. I thought they defended well without playing negative football. You always felt like they were looking for a quick counter attack. Barca were a little too intricate in their (now predictable) short passing against a tightly packed defence. Some more crosses and longer range shots to try and draw Chelsea out might have been a welcomed change.
Looking forward to see how the 2nd leg progresses in London. Will Chelsea open up more? Will Barca try to play more defensively? I still think it's Barca's tie to lose, but obviously Chelsea are in a good position.
given the 2 superb chances created in injury time, it can't be that predictable :)
It can be frustrating to watch at times, but Barca falls into that school of teams that (appears to) believe in the way they play and hardly change unless they are under pressure. Today, they stuck with it and eventually opened up Chelsea at the death. Both Bojan and Hleb should have scored. Some teams seem like that and that can often yield wonderfual results and plaudits, other times, it's frustrating. Didn't see the game..but based on the description of the chances Bojan and Hleb missed it seems like Barca was justified in continuing with the 'it's only a matter of time' game-plan. they'll need something different now that Chelsea is in the driver's seat
they'll need something different now that Chelsea is in the driver's seat
If Chelsea is such ah big side, why dem playing so? Man talking about game plan, a team costing more than a small country should show dem could play too. Just sitting down and absorbing pressure is a cowardly approach. That sort of tactic should be left to teams that know they have very little to offer and will be seriously outclassed. This is the first time I ever see a Guss Hiddink team play in this manner.
Agreed. Some serious bitch football dey from so called "big side" chelsea.
Tactical my ass. They play like T&T in Germany 2006. T&T knew we was outclassed and play how we had to play to be competitive. Guess Chelsea felt the same way in this match. "Big side" doh play so doh.
they'll need something different now that Chelsea is in the driver's seat
Yuh really feel Chelsea in de driver's seat?
they'll need something different now that Chelsea is in the driver's seat
Yuh really feel Chelsea in de driver's seat?
Hell yeah Chelsea in the driver seat. Chelsea played low and Barcelona defender still had problems with Drogba, no serious penetration in the middle and contained Messi and Henry on the side. Come on.
90 minutes (minimum) to play now. Chelsea should be satisfied with the result. I thought they defended well without playing negative football. You always felt like they were looking for a quick counter attack. Barca were a little too intricate in their (now predictable) short passing against a tightly packed defence. Some more crosses and longer range shots to try and draw Chelsea out might have been a welcomed change.
Looking forward to see how the 2nd leg progresses in London. Will Chelsea open up more? Will Barca try to play more defensively? I still think it's Barca's tie to lose, but obviously Chelsea are in a good position.
given the 2 superb chances created in injury time, it can't be that predictable :)
It can be frustrating to watch at times, but Barca falls into that school of teams that (appears to) believe in the way they play and hardly change unless they are under pressure. Today, they stuck with it and eventually opened up Chelsea at the death. Both Bojan and Hleb should have scored. Some teams seem like that and that can often yield wonderfual results and plaudits, other times, it's frustrating. Didn't see the game..but based on the description of the chances Bojan and Hleb missed it seems like Barca was justified in continuing with the 'it's only a matter of time' game-plan. they'll need something different now that Chelsea is in the driver's seat
Neither of those two chances were the result of that "intricate passing game" though. An argument could be made for the thru ball to Hleb, but not the cross to Krkric from Alves.
NOw i am all for tactics and game plan but,How can a side that is labeled as a big side play another side and have 10 men behind the ball from minute 1. its getting boring now. manu did it last year now chelsea. damn i want to see football. i was telling all the chelsea fans if chelse doesn't sit deep and counter they will get serious licks, only 2 "english teams can go toe to toe with barca, arsenal and liverpool. the others have to resort to this unattractive thing. too bad one of those freekicks didnt go in,cause it seems like all chelsea players wanted to trade shirts with the barca players b4 90 mins.
win or lose i really hope chelsea come out and play football next game
they'll need something different now that Chelsea is in the driver's seat
Yuh really feel Chelsea in de driver's seat?
Hell yeah Chelsea in the driver seat. Chelsea played low and Barcelona defender still had problems with Drogba, no serious penetration in the middle and contained Messi and Henry on the side. Come on.
Onus on Chelsea is to WIN at home. In order to WIN, they have to SCORE....something that they've had trouble doing pretty much the 2nd half of the season. IMO, Chelsea is under more pressure than Barca in the return leg. Heaven help them if they have to play catch up at all, because then they'll be fodder for Barca.
Neither team is "MY TEAM" but I am a fan of good football. I hate to see a team that has the calibre of players as Chelsea does play BITCH FOOTBALL. It's not necessary and it betrays a mindset of basic insecurity. Some might call it "smart". Not me. For me, it's cowardly.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Chelsea play for penalties from the kick off in the return leg. If dat is how yuh "win" at dis level....keep yuh "win". I admit I have zero emotional investment in either side so "winning" isn't paramount for me as it would be say for T&T. For me, the team that actually plays football instead of trying to deny the opposition of playing football would be my preference.
.NOw i am all for tactics and game plan but,How can a side that is labeled as a big side play another side and have 10 men behind the ball from minute 1. its getting boring now. manu did it last year now chelsea. damn i want to see football. i was telling all the chelsea fans if chelse doesn't sit deep and counter they will get serious licks, only 2 "english teams can go toe to toe with barca, arsenal and liverpool. the others have to resort to this unattractive thing. too bad one of those freekicks didnt go in,cause it seems like all chelsea players wanted to trade shirts with the barca players b4 90 mins.
win or lose i really hope chelsea come out and play football next game
U jus sour yuh shit side couldn't capitalize. For all the talk bout big side doh play so allyuh talkin shit. Big side does play so. the difference with a big side and a small side playing like that is the big side can much easier execute it correctly and sustain. That is the reason why when Sunderland did it at ManUre they failed. That's the reason why despite our best efforts the warriors didn't succeed against england @ WC06. So doh talk no shit in allyuh ass. All who talkin dat shit only vex because despite the 4-0 and all other jackass predictions, Barca come away with a 0-0 draw at home. Barca will suck salt in de bridge. Ah hope allyuh eh run from allyuh crow (fuh all those who was touting Barca's unstopable form). 50 Straight games they score ah goal and overmatched (as some ah allyuh made it seem) Chelsea (De small side) held them scoreless. Yeah Barca form rell sick boi!! :rotfl:
They will get 3 in dey cont in de bridge mark my words!!!!
Seen. I hear yah. Like I said, I didn't see the game. But you actually lending to my argument that they not all that perdictable :) At the same time, I was really talking of their 'intricate passing game' as the general manner of play, and not the direct source of all goalscoring opportunities. Barca scores lots of goals off individualism, crosses, long balls, dead balls, shots from distance..etc, while still playing a fast paced short passing game. My point was that they don't usually abondon their general style or philosophy even if the actual goalscoring opportunities come from varied types of play.
they'll need something different now that Chelsea is in the driver's seat
Yuh really feel Chelsea in de driver's seat?
dude.NOw i am all for tactics and game plan but,How can a side that is labeled as a big side play another side and have 10 men behind the ball from minute 1. its getting boring now. manu did it last year now chelsea. damn i want to see football. i was telling all the chelsea fans if chelse doesn't sit deep and counter they will get serious licks, only 2 "english teams can go toe to toe with barca, arsenal and liverpool. the others have to resort to this unattractive thing. too bad one of those freekicks didnt go in,cause it seems like all chelsea players wanted to trade shirts with the barca players b4 90 mins.
win or lose i really hope chelsea come out and play football next game
U jus sour yuh shit side couldn't capitalize. For all the talk bout big side doh play so allyuh talkin shit. Big side does play so. the difference with a big side and a small side playing like that is the big side can much easier execute it correctly and sustain. That is the reason why when Sunderland did it at ManUre they failed. That's the reason why despite our best efforts the warriors didn't succeed against england @ WC06. So doh talk no shit in allyuh ass. All who talkin dat shit only vex because despite the 4-0 and all other jackass predictions, Barca come away with a 0-0 draw at home. Barca will suck salt in de bridge. Ah hope allyuh eh run from allyuh crow (fuh all those who was touting Barca's unstopable form). 50 Straight games they score ah goal and overmatched (as some ah allyuh made it seem) Chelsea (De small side) held them scoreless. Yeah Barca form rell sick boi!! :rotfl:
They will get 3 in dey cont in de bridge mark my words!!!!
dude i need to know what drug yuh taking. from yuh text i gather that its cheap and very potent :rotfl:
now i am a football fan b4 i am a barca fan. that was not a game of football .chelsea was a team with star players playing real coward. i want them to play so at the bridge and see if they n get boo off the pitch by their own fans
they'll need something different now that Chelsea is in the driver's seat
Yuh really feel Chelsea in de driver's seat?
Hell yeah Chelsea in the driver seat. Chelsea played low and Barcelona defender still had problems with Drogba, no serious penetration in the middle and contained Messi and Henry on the side. Come on.
Onus on Chelsea is to WIN at home. In order to WIN, they have to SCORE....something that they've had trouble doing pretty much the 2nd half of the season. IMO, Chelsea is under more pressure than Barca in the return leg. Heaven help them if they have to play catch up at all, because then they'll be fodder for Barca.
Neither team is "MY TEAM" but I am a fan of good football. I hate to see a team that has the calibre of players as Chelsea does play BITCH FOOTBALL. It's not necessary and it betrays a mindset of basic insecurity. Some might call it "smart". Not me. For me, it's cowardly.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Chelsea play for penalties from the kick off in the return leg. If dat is how yuh "win" at dis level....keep yuh "win". I admit I have zero emotional investment in either side so "winning" isn't paramount for me as it would be say for T&T. For me, the team that actually plays football instead of trying to deny the opposition of playing football would be my preference.
How much goals we score in the last 4 or 5 games?! The way you state this you'd swear the blues in ah drought.
they'll need something different now that Chelsea is in the driver's seat
Yuh really feel Chelsea in de driver's seat?
Hell yeah Chelsea in the driver seat. Chelsea played low and Barcelona defender still had problems with Drogba, no serious penetration in the middle and contained Messi and Henry on the side. Come on.
Onus on Chelsea is to WIN at home. In order to WIN, they have to SCORE....something that they've had trouble doing pretty much the 2nd half of the season. IMO, Chelsea is under more pressure than Barca in the return leg. Heaven help them if they have to play catch up at all, because then they'll be fodder for Barca.
Neither team is "MY TEAM" but I am a fan of good football. I hate to see a team that has the calibre of players as Chelsea does play BITCH FOOTBALL. It's not necessary and it betrays a mindset of basic insecurity. Some might call it "smart". Not me. For me, it's cowardly.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Chelsea play for penalties from the kick off in the return leg. If dat is how yuh "win" at dis level....keep yuh "win". I admit I have zero emotional investment in either side so "winning" isn't paramount for me as it would be say for T&T. For me, the team that actually plays football instead of trying to deny the opposition of playing football would be my preference.
How much goals we score in the last 4 or 5 games?! The way you state this you'd swear the blues in ah drought.
Last 5 home games for Chelflee ;D
0-0 against Everton
4-3 against Bolton...Bolton? WTF!!
1-0 against Man City...a nex weak defence
2-1 against Wigan
0-0 against Hull...relegation side
And again....daz HOME games eh... "BIG SIDE" ent? ;D
for the sake of clarity, lets make some key distinctions between this game and the man utd v barcelona 2nd leg game from last season.
1. Man Utd were the favorite in that game and being lauded as playing the best football on the planet. Chelsea was a rank underdog in this one.
2. Man Utd were at home at Old trafford, Chelsea is away at Barca.
3. Barcelona was in free-fall domestically and the team was disjointed. The Barca team today is the world's best.
4. This was the 2nd leg where the result was on the line, not the 1st leg where the play is almost always more measured and tentative.
So man like sammy et al need to hold dey horse trying to get that bly. All the points above and yet still Man Utd came out last year and played the brand we saw from Chelsea today.
I'm not trying to be a hypocrite. Chelsea played some ugly stuff today and personally its not what I like to see.
But there's no need to try to exonerate the anti-thesis of football that Manchester played last season while they were in the driver's seat by comparing it with Chelsea this game. Apples and oranges.
Chelsea played to a game plan; a plan that recognized Barcelona as technically the better team and the need to use their advantage in the physical department, and they executed it perfectly. This a great result for them going into the second leg. And for all their brilliance, Barcelona still showed weakness today.. They got frustrated too easily and put off their game. I find they look kinda nervous and let their rhythm get upset when they coulda take their time and break Chelsea down.
On to the next leg...
what happen, yuh google button doh pick up champs league or wha?
which part the Liverpool 4-4 play?
did latas pick de local based players for training yet ???
they'll need something different now that Chelsea is in the driver's seat
Yuh really feel Chelsea in de driver's seat?
Hell yeah Chelsea in the driver seat. Chelsea played low and Barcelona defender still had problems with Drogba, no serious penetration in the middle and contained Messi and Henry on the side. Come on.
Onus on Chelsea is to WIN at home. In order to WIN, they have to SCORE....something that they've had trouble doing pretty much the 2nd half of the season. IMO, Chelsea is under more pressure than Barca in the return leg. Heaven help them if they have to play catch up at all, because then they'll be fodder for Barca.
Neither team is "MY TEAM" but I am a fan of good football. I hate to see a team that has the calibre of players as Chelsea does play BITCH FOOTBALL. It's not necessary and it betrays a mindset of basic insecurity. Some might call it "smart". Not me. For me, it's cowardly.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Chelsea play for penalties from the kick off in the return leg. If dat is how yuh "win" at dis level....keep yuh "win". I admit I have zero emotional investment in either side so "winning" isn't paramount for me as it would be say for T&T. For me, the team that actually plays football instead of trying to deny the opposition of playing football would be my preference.
How much goals we score in the last 4 or 5 games?! The way you state this you'd swear the blues in ah drought.
Last 5 home games for Chelflee ;D
0-0 against Everton
4-3 against Bolton...Bolton? WTF!!
1-0 against Man City...a nex weak defence
2-1 against Wigan
0-0 against Hull...relegation side
And again....daz HOME games eh... "BIG SIDE" ent? ;D
what happen, yuh google button doh pick up champs league or wha?
which part the Liverpool 4-4 play?
I was being kind.
You do realize if that score is replicated for the return leg, Chelflee is OUT!
But we all know it won't be. Chelflee will be playing for penalties from the dressing room. ;D
I was being kind.
You do realize if that score is replicated for the return leg, Chelflee is OUT!
But we all know it won't be. Chelflee will be playing for penalties from the dressing room. ;D
Wha penalties boy outside wid dat eh!! We will buss deh gullet in de Bridge!! We eh ha no problems scoring (especially at home) and we know how to frustrate dem. On top ah dat no Puyol and Marquez dong de middle!!!
I was being kind.
You do realize if that score is replicated for the return leg, Chelflee is OUT!
But we all know it won't be. Chelflee will be playing for penalties from the dressing room. ;D
Wha penalties boy outside wid dat eh!! We will buss deh gullet in de Bridge!! We eh ha no problems scoring (especially at home) and we know how to frustrate dem. On top ah dat no Puyol and Marquez dong de middle!!!
Good luck bro. Allyuh go need it. 8)
I was being kind.
You do realize if that score is replicated for the return leg, Chelflee is OUT!
But we all know it won't be. Chelflee will be playing for penalties from the dressing room. ;D
Wha penalties boy outside wid dat eh!! We will buss deh gullet in de Bridge!! We eh ha no problems scoring (especially at home) and we know how to frustrate dem. On top ah dat no Puyol and Marquez dong de middle!!!
Good luck bro. Allyuh go need it. 8)
Ah sure plenty people thought we was gettin we ass buss at Nou Camp too and we woulda need luck. Jus be ready fuh allyuh crow when Barca get dismantled at the Bridge. Xavi will eat dat shit he talk bout being the better league too
I was being kind.
You do realize if that score is replicated for the return leg, Chelflee is OUT!
But we all know it won't be. Chelflee will be playing for penalties from the dressing room. ;D
Wha penalties boy outside wid dat eh!! We will buss deh gullet in de Bridge!! We eh ha no problems scoring (especially at home) and we know how to frustrate dem. On top ah dat no Puyol and Marquez dong de middle!!!
Good luck bro. Allyuh go need it. 8)
Ah sure plenty people thought we was gettin we ass buss at Nou Camp too and we woulda need luck. Jus be ready fuh allyuh crow when Barca get dismantled at the Bridge. Xavi will eat dat shit he talk bout being the better league too
Hope fuh your sake yuh side make it thru. Nex ting we have to issue amber alert fuh yuh ass if allyuh lorse... ;D
Gus is big coach fellas. Barca met a big side today. Watch Gus tactics at the bridge.
Drogba and Anelka up front. Chelsea vs Arsenal final
"Anti football" gets the intended result...good game overall- a nail biter.
I still think Barca will come away from this one on top- will be difficult with a weakened defense, but they have enough fire power to do it. What people seem to take forgranted is that Barca is a tactically precise team as well...and they can defend....
Chelsea will most likely not park the bus at S.Bridge so the game will be more open and I think Barca will win that battle. Wasn't expecting a big victory for Barca in this one, but I thought they had enough to sneak one (or maybe two) past...On another day, Eto'o's one on one, Bojan's free header in the six, and Helb's break away would have yielded at least one goal....To their credit, Chelsea stood firm at the back, and in the 1st 45 they could have exploited Barca's only error and....that would have made the game even more interesting. (Drogba could count that as a big miss)...
Chelsea kept numbers around the ball, and Cech made some big saves...that pretty much sums it up...
On to the next round....
Nah Chelsea eh do that bad. United had line/walls, Chelsea had group bid difference.
You serious....they playing a nice game. Everyone saying defensive, but it's not parking the bus. They giving the ball back to Barca and alet them play. Chelsea is picking their time in going forward.
What a shyte call on Ballack.
I agree that big teams don't play that way.
However, Chelsea defensive game was in the middle of the field not in the defensive end really. Chelsea happy in letting Barcelona have the ball why did they not make Chelsea pay for that? Chlesea still had the best chance of the game.
You really think Chelsea could not go at Barcelona? Look from the 30 minute in the 1st and the 75" in the 2nd and see the difference and ability in Chelsea being able to take the game to Barcelona.
Barcelona for their ability should have palyed faster, they were to methodical in their build up. Almost everyting they did you could see it coming.
Say what, we will see at Stamford Bridge.
Barcelona slam Chelsea tactics after draw
Wed 29 Apr, 02:44 PM
BARCELONA (AFP) - Barcelona coach Pep Guardiola reacted angrily at what he saw as the referee's leniency towards English side Chelsea's physical approach in their 0-0 Champions League semi-final first leg match.
Chelsea went away with mission accomplished after they stood firm against a barrage from Barcelona at the Camp Nou and become the first side this season in the competition to stop Barca from scoring at home.
As expected Barca took the game to Chelsea and enjoyed the vast majority of the possession but they were unable to find a way through to goal for the first time at home this season in the competition.
Petr Cech made a couple of important blocks from Samuel Eto'o and substitute Alexandr Hleb but too often they were restricted to strikes from distance.
"It is difficult to play against a team which doesn't want to play football," stormed 37-year-old Guardiola, who has worked wonders with the side since replacing the sacked Frank Rijkaard for this season.
"It was a game in which Chelsea had five defenders and the ball was always Cech to (Didier) Drogba and then backwards and forwards again.
"The result was fair, though, because neither side scored but there is something wrong when we ended up with the same number of yellow cards as they did and yet they committed 20 fouls compared to seven," added the former Barcelona and Spain playmaker.
Guardiola, who cleared out stars such as Deco and Ronaldinho last summer, believed that German star Michael Ballack was fortunate to have remained on the pitch.
"Chelsea played very physically and I thought it was scandalous that (Michael) Ballack did not receive a second yellow card for a foul on (Andres) Iniesta on the edge of the area," said Guardiola.
"That is something you would expect in any normal game during the season and it is these small details which did not go our way which will end up deciding the tie.
"Referees need to take an overall look at games and if that had happened then he would have seen that we were not the team which was fouling and we were looking to play football.
"Anyone looking at the match will know there was only one team looking to attack, we were always looking for a goal but Chelsea are a good side who have been together for a long time and won trophies.
"We now have to go to Stamford Bridge, play the football we always play and try and win."
The Barca players were similarly forthright with Xavi Hernandez complaining: "so that is what the English call fair play," while Toure Yaya also hit out at Chelsea's tackling.
"It was a difficult game and some of their tackles were outrageous while we would just touch a player and there would be a free-kick or a booking. We now have to go there (Stamford Bridge) and get a win, the tie is still not decided," said Toure, who was one of those booked.
Barca were also dealt a blow with the news that centre-half Rafa Marquez is set to miss the rest of the season after picking up what appears to be a serious knee injury. His replacement Carles Puyol will also be absent from the return leg through suspension after accumulating his third yellow card.
Eto'o, who it has been denied is subject to a 40million pound bid from Manchester City, said that there was hope for Barcelona as playing at home Chelsea will now have to come out and attack.
"We had all the chances," said the Cameroon marksman.
"I would imagine they won't be able to play in the second leg like they did tonight by sitting back in their half.
"We will see how they are going to approach it. We will try and score the goal that we need to get us to the final."
Chelsea coach Guus Hiddink, though, praised the character of his players for the way they stood firm and prevented Barca's star-studded forward line from scoring.
"This was a good result but the tie is not decided yet and we have another very hard game ahead of us. It was not an easy match to play and we will have to improve in some areas for the next game but overall I am happy as we defended very well," said Hiddink, who won the what was then the European Cup as coach of PSV Eindhoven in 1988.
"Barca keep the ball very well and so it meant we had to defend a lot but we defended very well and I have to praise (John) Terry for his courage. They put us under a lot of pressure but we never yielded and we managed to neutralise the threat from (Lionel) Messi."
Chelsea skipper Terry conceded that Barcelona had had the majority of the chances but was delighted to have come away with the draw.
"We stayed very tight at the back," said Terry, whose missed penalty in last year's final handed victory to Manchester United.
"It was a fantastic performance and to not concede a goal is delightful. Hopefully going back to the Bridge we can use that to our advantage."
Kind of agree with Pep.
I understand the school of thought that football is all about winning, and you therefore need to employ all your resources in a manner that gives you the best shot at winning- and hence the tactical aspect of the game gains alot of importance as seen yesterday...
But I'm more from the purist school and Chelsea's approach to the game took away from the pureness of it, and I think it's kinda lame- I understand if you're Nobody F.C. with a bunch of unskilled players who lack quality, and the only way you could imagine to grind out a result is to park the bus, and hope for rare openings & mistakes...but when you're a so-called big side like Chelsea with a multi-million dollar roster of skilled professional football stars boasting to be a top 4 team in what is supposed to be the dominant league in Europe, a performance like that comes off as an uncharacteristic admission of inferiority.
Chelsea might go on to win the 2 legged tie, but unless they play Barca off the park in the next leg, if they do get the favorable result at the bridge, I'd be hard pressed to contend that the better team won.
Kind of agree with Pep.
I understand the school of thought that football is all about winning, and you therefore need to employ all your resources in a manner that gives you the best shot at winning- and hence the tactical aspect of the game gains alot of importance as seen yesterday...
But I'm more from the purist school and Chelsea's approach to the game took away from the pureness of it, and I think it's kinda lame- I understand if you're Nobody F.C. with a bunch of unskilled players who lack quality, and the only way you could imagine to grind out a result is to park the bus, and hope for rare openings & mistakes...but when you're a so-called big side like Chelsea with a multi-million dollar roster of skilled professional football stars boasting to be a top 4 team in what is supposed to be the dominant league in Europe, a performance like that comes off as an uncharacteristic admission of inferiority.
Chelsea might go on to win the 2 legged tie, but unless they play Barca off the park in the next leg, if they do get the favorable result at the bridge, I'd be hard pressed to contend that the better team won.
Specifically, tell me how Chelsea played that brought the game into disrepute?
Kind of agree with Pep.
I understand the school of thought that football is all about winning, and you therefore need to employ all your resources in a manner that gives you the best shot at winning- and hence the tactical aspect of the game gains alot of importance as seen yesterday...
But I'm more from the purist school and Chelsea's approach to the game took away from the pureness of it, and I think it's kinda lame- I understand if you're Nobody F.C. with a bunch of unskilled players who lack quality, and the only way you could imagine to grind out a result is to park the bus, and hope for rare openings & mistakes...but when you're a so-called big side like Chelsea with a multi-million dollar roster of skilled professional football stars boasting to be a top 4 team in what is supposed to be the dominant league in Europe, a performance like that comes off as an uncharacteristic admission of inferiority.
Chelsea might go on to win the 2 legged tie, but unless they play Barca off the park in the next leg, if they do get the favorable result at the bridge, I'd be hard pressed to contend that the better team won.
Kind of agree with Pep.
I understand the school of thought that football is all about winning, and you therefore need to employ all your resources in a manner that gives you the best shot at winning- and hence the tactical aspect of the game gains alot of importance as seen yesterday...
But I'm more from the purist school and Chelsea's approach to the game took away from the pureness of it, and I think it's kinda lame- I understand if you're Nobody F.C. with a bunch of unskilled players who lack quality, and the only way you could imagine to grind out a result is to park the bus, and hope for rare openings & mistakes...but when you're a so-called big side like Chelsea with a multi-million dollar roster of skilled professional football stars boasting to be a top 4 team in what is supposed to be the dominant league in Europe, a performance like that comes off as an uncharacteristic admission of inferiority.
Chelsea might go on to win the 2 legged tie, but unless they play Barca off the park in the next leg, if they do get the favorable result at the bridge, I'd be hard pressed to contend that the better team won.
Specifically, tell me how Chelsea played that brought the game into disrepute?
Kind of agree with Pep.
I understand the school of thought that football is all about winning, and you therefore need to employ all your resources in a manner that gives you the best shot at winning- and hence the tactical aspect of the game gains alot of importance as seen yesterday...
But I'm more from the purist school and Chelsea's approach to the game took away from the pureness of it, and I think it's kinda lame- I understand if you're Nobody F.C. with a bunch of unskilled players who lack quality, and the only way you could imagine to grind out a result is to park the bus, and hope for rare openings & mistakes...but when you're a so-called big side like Chelsea with a multi-million dollar roster of skilled professional football stars boasting to be a top 4 team in what is supposed to be the dominant league in Europe, a performance like that comes off as an uncharacteristic admission of inferiority.
Chelsea might go on to win the 2 legged tie, but unless they play Barca off the park in the next leg, if they do get the favorable result at the bridge, I'd be hard pressed to contend that the better team won.
Kind of agree with Pep.
I understand the school of thought that football is all about winning, and you therefore need to employ all your resources in a manner that gives you the best shot at winning- and hence the tactical aspect of the game gains alot of importance as seen yesterday...
But I'm more from the purist school and Chelsea's approach to the game took away from the pureness of it, and I think it's kinda lame- I understand if you're Nobody F.C. with a bunch of unskilled players who lack quality, and the only way you could imagine to grind out a result is to park the bus, and hope for rare openings & mistakes...but when you're a so-called big side like Chelsea with a multi-million dollar roster of skilled professional football stars boasting to be a top 4 team in what is supposed to be the dominant league in Europe, a performance like that comes off as an uncharacteristic admission of inferiority.
Chelsea might go on to win the 2 legged tie, but unless they play Barca off the park in the next leg, if they do get the favorable result at the bridge, I'd be hard pressed to contend that the better team won.
Specifically, tell me how Chelsea played that brought the game into disrepute?
Brought the game into disrepute?
If you disagree with what I said, then go ahead and tell me why, but don't put words in my mouth then play like you askin' me some irrelevant question that I should answer.
WHERE WAS ALL THIS OUTCRY WHEN MANU DID THE EXACT SAME THING AGAINST AN EVEN LESSER BARCA SIDE LAST YEAR FROM AN EVEN BETTER POSITION THAN CHELSEA IS IN THIS YEAR?
90 minutes still to play. too much is being made of the tactics used in the first 90 minutes. regardless of how everyone feels about the different styles of play..i believe that each team is a very pragmatic, proessional outfit and neither is out to entertain for entertainment's sake. Barca's more attractive style is what they consider the best way to win - the end goal. if they didn't think so, they would not play that way. The aesthetics of their game is a nice by-product of a philosophy that is still intended to win trophies first and foremost. Chelsea did what they had to do over 90 minutes.
Let's wait and see how the 2nd 90 minutes goes. Only after that will you get the full picture of what each team is capable of. Then the praise and criticism can begin. real judgement passing and we are still to see what Barca does away from home and what Chelsea does at home...
Anyway..I trying to study de Superclasico and I still drawn to this thread. Presha!
Go BARCA!
WHERE WAS ALL THIS OUTCRY WHEN MANU DID THE EXACT SAME THING AGAINST AN EVEN LESSER BARCA SIDE LAST YEAR FROM AN EVEN BETTER POSITION THAN CHELSEA IS IN THIS YEAR?
Firstly I dunno what outcry you're talking about- just an observation...no need to be so dramatic (yes and that means also unlocking yuh caps key :D).
Secondly I actually didn't watch the 1st leg of the Man U - Barca semi last year...the score got leaked to me before I could watch so I didn't bother....The return leg that I watched wasn't really comparable to last nights game in my opinion- Man U was on the back foot alot because they scored early, and were naturally pressed for long periods of the game (that's typical)...but it didn't look like a game where they intended to park the bus and frustrate from the opening minute.
Thirdly I'm not sure if it matters that Man U employed a similar approach. It doesn't change a thing, nor my opinion. I used Chelsea as the example naturally because it's the most recent case. A wounded, undermanned and in turmoil Real Madrid went to the Camp Nou earlier this season and had to absorb tons of pressure too...it was clear that they employed a reasonably conservative strategy- they lost and it was unanimous that they were clearly outclassed (even their ex-coach admitted it before the game) so in the end the point was moot...In Chelsea's case I think it was a bit different. Unless they were genuinely outclassed (which I don't agree with, and I'm sure every Chelsea fan on here would deny) I would have liked to see them open up a bit more- I don't see what all the fuss is about.
Kicker, I don't think the performancec comes off as an uncharacteristic admission of inferiority when Barca was/ is being crowned as the best team on the planet.
Barca has won nothing yet. They're gaining plaudits for their style of play, not actual superiority. That comes from results at the tail end of the season.
Chelsea was the underdog yesterday, and regardless of whom Barca played in the semis - they would have been favoured to win. No-one believed Chelsea could get a result at Camp Nou EXCEPT for Chelsea fans, and they were written off as inferior before the game.
Except for the part about Barca being favorites..that's a huge exaggeration. But that's normal for the underdog. It amkes a positive result even sweeter.
It's a good thing the game was played, because now the questions are being asked whether the Barca team is well-tempered, disciplined or athletically superior to outwit Chelsea.
Yesterday's showcase was epitomized from the outset by expectations but Chelsea went in with a game plan, and they executed. Barca went in with a game plan and could not execute.
I think for some people, the question is...why that plan? for others, the result speaks for itself
I also get what you're saying about winning is everything versus joga bonito .... but it is the results that matter, not necessarily how you come to those results that will measure the accomplishments of the team.
I think that's exactly what kicker was saying in the beginning. And exactly why it's ridiculous to use the hype of Barca being 'the best team in the world' as a reason for Chelsea being such rank outsiders. barca isn't even certaint to win la Liga
Take for example, the Arsenal team that we will see today. They currently play the most aesthetically pleasing brand of football in the EPL, but what recent silverware do they have to show for that?
Much has also been made about the Chelsea payroll as though Chelsea is the only side with a multi-million dollar payroll that has approached Barca with a defensive mindset. Well the payroll was well worth it, because regardless of their formation or tactics, the millionaires earned their salaries and a bonus last evening because they followed instructions and stuck to what they were told to do. They sat back and let Barca overpass, while they surged forward on the counter-attack.
Chelsea will undoubtedly be more attacking at Stamford Bridge, and if Chelsea scores first, expect the superior talent at Barca to panic, quake and complain alot more - because they ran into a impermeable wall in Camp Nou, and they know it will be replicated 10-fold at The Bridge if Chelsea are one up.
Nah Chelsea eh do that bad. United had line/walls, Chelsea had group bid difference.You serious....they playing a nice game. Everyone saying defensive, but it's not parking the bus. They giving the ball back to Barca and alet them play. Chelsea is picking their time in going forward.What a shyte call on Ballack.
This is why nobody could take you serious when yuh talk about being objective. Last Year (http://www.socawarriors.net/forum/index.php?topic=35403.msg419804#msg419804) you was the chief in condemning United when barcelona had all the ball. Now Chelsea play a game where they actually have fewer chances and commit more fouls than United and it is suddenly a different ball game.I agree that big teams don't play that way.
However, Chelsea defensive game was in the middle of the field not in the defensive end really. Chelsea happy in letting Barcelona have the ball why did they not make Chelsea pay for that? Chlesea still had the best chance of the game.
You really think Chelsea could not go at Barcelona? Look from the 30 minute in the 1st and the 75" in the 2nd and see the difference and ability in Chelsea being able to take the game to Barcelona.
Barcelona for their ability should have palyed faster, they were to methodical in their build up. Almost everyting they did you could see it coming.
Say what, we will see at Stamford Bridge.
And this is a classic.
Best chance? Yeah right. But even if you going with that delusion, last year United had a penalty, yuh can’t get a better chance than that yet they didn’t get no credit from you.
If Chelsea could go toe to toe with Barcelona, why didn’t they?
Last year yuh was using the fact that three Barca players had Tevez running ina circle by the corner flag (http://www.socawarriors.net/forum/index.php?topic=35522.msg421410#msg421410) as an example of Barcelona's superior play. Now intricate passing and ball possession is a problem for Barcelona.
Serious question yuh does really believe what yuh does be talking? You really believe that what Chelsea play was in any way better then what United play last year?
Kind of agree with Pep.
I understand the school of thought that football is all about winning, and you therefore need to employ all your resources in a manner that gives you the best shot at winning- and hence the tactical aspect of the game gains alot of importance as seen yesterday...
But I'm more from the purist school and Chelsea's approach to the game took away from the pureness of it, and I think it's kinda lame- I understand if you're Nobody F.C. with a bunch of unskilled players who lack quality, and the only way you could imagine to grind out a result is to park the bus, and hope for rare openings & mistakes...but when you're a so-called big side like Chelsea with a multi-million dollar roster of skilled professional football stars boasting to be a top 4 team in what is supposed to be the dominant league in Europe, a performance like that comes off as an uncharacteristic admission of inferiority.
Chelsea might go on to win the 2 legged tie, but unless they play Barca off the park in the next leg, if they do get the favorable result at the bridge, I'd be hard pressed to contend that the better team won.
Specifically, tell me how Chelsea played that brought the game into disrepute?
Brought the game into disrepute?
If you disagree with what I said, then go ahead and tell me why, but don't put words in my mouth then play like you askin' me some irrelevant question that I should answer.
How the question irrelevant? Just say you don't want to answer. YOu make some general comments and I just ask you for something more specific as to why you (the purist) felt that the tactic Chelsea employed was "cheating" or inferior.
Kind of agree with Pep.
I understand the school of thought that football is all about winning, and you therefore need to employ all your resources in a manner that gives you the best shot at winning- and hence the tactical aspect of the game gains alot of importance as seen yesterday...
But I'm more from the purist school and Chelsea's approach to the game took away from the pureness of it, and I think it's kinda lame- I understand if you're Nobody F.C. with a bunch of unskilled players who lack quality, and the only way you could imagine to grind out a result is to park the bus, and hope for rare openings & mistakes...but when you're a so-called big side like Chelsea with a multi-million dollar roster of skilled professional football stars boasting to be a top 4 team in what is supposed to be the dominant league in Europe, a performance like that comes off as an uncharacteristic admission of inferiority.
Chelsea might go on to win the 2 legged tie, but unless they play Barca off the park in the next leg, if they do get the favorable result at the bridge, I'd be hard pressed to contend that the better team won.
Specifically, tell me how Chelsea played that brought the game into disrepute?
Brought the game into disrepute?
If you disagree with what I said, then go ahead and tell me why, but don't put words in my mouth then play like you askin' me some irrelevant question that I should answer.
How the question irrelevant? Just say you don't want to answer. YOu make some general comments and I just ask you for something more specific as to why you (the purist) felt that the tactic Chelsea employed was "cheating" or inferior.
There you go again putting words in my mouth. First yuh come with disrepute...lol...Now cheating and now inferior tactics. I never said they employed inferior tactics..nor said anything about cheating. I said that such tactics in my opinion take away from the "pureness" of the game (in a manner of speaking of course)- and such a performance comes off like meaning in my opinion it appears to be an admission of inferiority (I know they're not admitting such- I even started by saying that I understand the rationale behind the tactical approach- which it clearly was)..I'm saying on it's face, it comes off that way.
I'm not sure what really needs explaining there...or why I need to review the specifics of the game to try and prove anything- If you saw the game you'd know exactly what I'm talking about even if you don't agree....and quite frankly I don't really care that much.
Kind of agree with Pep.
I understand the school of thought that football is all about winning, and you therefore need to employ all your resources in a manner that gives you the best shot at winning- and hence the tactical aspect of the game gains alot of importance as seen yesterday...
But I'm more from the purist school and Chelsea's approach to the game took away from the pureness of it, and I think it's kinda lame- I understand if you're Nobody F.C. with a bunch of unskilled players who lack quality, and the only way you could imagine to grind out a result is to park the bus, and hope for rare openings & mistakes...but when you're a so-called big side like Chelsea with a multi-million dollar roster of skilled professional football stars boasting to be a top 4 team in what is supposed to be the dominant league in Europe, a performance like that comes off as an uncharacteristic admission of inferiority.
Chelsea might go on to win the 2 legged tie, but unless they play Barca off the park in the next leg, if they do get the favorable result at the bridge, I'd be hard pressed to contend that the better team won.
Specifically, tell me how Chelsea played that brought the game into disrepute?
Brought the game into disrepute?
If you disagree with what I said, then go ahead and tell me why, but don't put words in my mouth then play like you askin' me some irrelevant question that I should answer.
How the question irrelevant? Just say you don't want to answer. YOu make some general comments and I just ask you for something more specific as to why you (the purist) felt that the tactic Chelsea employed was "cheating" or inferior.
There you go again putting words in my mouth. First yuh come with disrepute...lol...Now cheating and now inferior tactics. I never said they employed inferior tactics..nor said anything about cheating. I said that such tactics in my opinion take away from the "pureness" of the game (in a manner of speaking of course)- and such a performance comes off like meaning in my opinion it appears to be an admission of inferiority (I know they're not admitting such- I even started by saying that I understand the rationale behind the tactical approach- which it clearly was)..I'm saying on it's face, it comes off that way.
I'm not sure what really needs explaining there...or why I need to review the specifics of the game to try and prove anything- If you saw the game you'd know exactly what I'm talking about even if you don't agree....and quite frankly I don't really care that much.
.....as far as the caps is concerned, ah was too lazy to go back and change de whole ting so ah jes change the first letters from lower case, if yuh ketch meh drift. ;)
Now I eh no Chelsea fan (MAN U !!) but i really dont understand some of these comments . There are different styles of football and its not news that Barca and Arsenal play the most aesthetically pleasing brand. But once you support a team , you support the team no matter if their brand is great on the day or not. Look at us Trinis. When we played Sweden , did we turn off the tv in disgust when we basically camped in our half for the whole game? No , we cheered every tackle , every off the line clearance , every save. My point is fans will watch their team whether the brand is the best to watch on that day or not. I am sure that this extends to fans who are watching a team that isnt "their " team .. Everybody loves an underdog. And on the day Chelsea were the underdog , based mostly on the fact that they were playing away from home.
Also, what makes a brand better? Because it is pretty ? If something is pretty but ineffective does that not make it inferior in some aspects?
Kicker, I don't think the performancec comes off as an uncharacteristic admission of inferiority when Barca was/ is being crowned as the best team on the planet. Chelsea was the underdog yesterday, and regardless of whom Barca played in the semis - they would have been favoured to win. No-one believed Chelsea could get a result at Camp Nou EXCEPT for Chelsea fans, and they were written off as inferior before the game. It's a good thing the game was played, because now the questions are being asked whether the Barca team is well-tempered, disciplined or athletically superior to outwit Chelsea.
Yesterday's showcase was epitomized from the outset by expectations but Chelsea went in with a game plan, and they executed. Barca went in with a game plan and could not execute.
I also get what you're saying about winning is everything versus joga bonito .... but it is the results that matter, not necessarily how you come to those results that will measure the accomplishments of the team. Take for example, the Arsenal team that we will see today. They currently play the most aesthetically pleasing brand of football in the EPL, but what recent silverware do they have to show for that?
Much has also been made about the Chelsea payroll as though Chelsea is the only side with a multi-million dollar payroll that has approached Barca with a defensive mindset. Well the payroll was well worth it, because regardless of their formation or tactics, the millionaires earned their salaries and a bonus last evening because they followed instructions and stuck to what they were told to do. They sat back and let Barca overpass, while they surged forward on the counter-attack.
Chelsea will undoubtedly be more attacking at Stamford Bridge, and if Chelsea scores first, expect the superior talent at Barca to panic, quake and complain alot more - because they ran into a impermeable wall in Camp Nou, and they know it will be replicated 10-fold at The Bridge if Chelsea are one up.
Kicker stop bleddy taking Barca side in anything or bigging dem up in any kinda roundabout way for meh please... >:(
Classico dis weekend.... so dey is ultimate sh!t for de time being!1
Level toots.... Crapalona...
we could come back to who playing nice football and which league is de best etc next week tuesday
please and thanks.... before ah burst ah damn blood vessel
... bout you kinda agree with pep... gimme ah damn chance
Chelsea being one of the big teams in the EPL should not resort to that type of strategy (and I is a Chelsea man, eh!) T&T against sweden......we are the smallest nation to ever play in a World Cup. We did what would have been prudent of us and STILL got an even better result than expected. Our tactics were justified, Chelsea's weren't.
Kicker, I don't think the performancec comes off as an uncharacteristic admission of inferiority when Barca was/ is being crowned as the best team on the planet. Chelsea was the underdog yesterday, and regardless of whom Barca played in the semis - they would have been favoured to win. No-one believed Chelsea could get a result at Camp Nou EXCEPT for Chelsea fans, and they were written off as inferior before the game. It's a good thing the game was played, because now the questions are being asked whether the Barca team is well-tempered, disciplined or athletically superior to outwit Chelsea.
Yesterday's showcase was epitomized from the outset by expectations but Chelsea went in with a game plan, and they executed. Barca went in with a game plan and could not execute.
I also get what you're saying about winning is everything versus joga bonito .... but it is the results that matter, not necessarily how you come to those results that will measure the accomplishments of the team. Take for example, the Arsenal team that we will see today. They currently play the most aesthetically pleasing brand of football in the EPL, but what recent silverware do they have to show for that?
Much has also been made about the Chelsea payroll as though Chelsea is the only side with a multi-million dollar payroll that has approached Barca with a defensive mindset. Well the payroll was well worth it, because regardless of their formation or tactics, the millionaires earned their salaries and a bonus last evening because they followed instructions and stuck to what they were told to do. They sat back and let Barca overpass, while they surged forward on the counter-attack.
Chelsea will undoubtedly be more attacking at Stamford Bridge, and if Chelsea scores first, expect the superior talent at Barca to panic, quake and complain alot more - because they ran into a impermeable wall in Camp Nou, and they know it will be replicated 10-fold at The Bridge if Chelsea are one up.
I hear you... yuh hadda understand, I'm a neutral unlike you so I'm not as married to Chelsea's tactical mastermind as you are...and yuh not telling me anything I don't already know....I just woulda liked to see a more end to end battle ...or an attempt at such- doh get me wrong I thoroughly enjoyed the game because I love football, and I like the tension of a nailbiter even if it ends goalless...
If it were my squad playing like Chelsea did in that game, I'd outwardly stand by them (though deep inside I'd have preferred if they could go toe to toe with Barca in a more open affair, but I probably wouldn't admit it due to pride ;D )...so iz no scene. End of day like you say the intended result was achieved...and Champions league football (except for the final) in a way is not "pure" (in quotes of course) football- it's 180 (or 210 minutes) played in two different settings where you have to balance out certain factors in a marathon as opposed to just going for broke in the 90 min sprint so naturally tactics will play a bigger role depending on the matchups...and I'm pretty sure that Chelsea will play a more open game in the return leg..... so it is what it is.
I'm not sure why people are getting so defensive and worked up over this one...it's just observations and opinions- still plenty of the game to play.
Now I eh no Chelsea fan (MAN U !!) but i really dont understand some of these comments . There are different styles of football and its not news that Barca and Arsenal play the most aesthetically pleasing brand. But once you support a team , you support the team no matter if their brand is great on the day or not. Look at us Trinis. When we played Sweden , did we turn off the tv in disgust when we basically camped in our half for the whole game? No , we cheered every tackle , every off the line clearance , every save. My point is fans will watch their team whether the brand is the best to watch on that day or not. I am sure that this extends to fans who are watching a team that isnt "their " team .. Everybody loves an underdog. And on the day Chelsea were the underdog , based mostly on the fact that they were playing away from home.
Also, what makes a brand better? Because it is pretty ? If something is pretty but ineffective does that not make it inferior in some aspects?
Chelsea being one of the big teams in the EPL should not resort to that type of strategy (and I is a Chelsea man, eh!) T&T against sweden......we are the smallest nation to ever play in a World Cup. We did what would have been prudent of us and STILL got an even better result than expected. Our tactics were justified, Chelsea's weren't.
What's even better, Barcelona had their best on the field and could not figure it out. Tactically in terms of results Barcelona got outplayed, and outcoached.
What's even better, Barcelona had their best on the field and could not figure it out. Tactically in terms of results Barcelona got outplayed, and outcoached.
Unless you are trying to say that Barca made no clear cut chances, then the first sentence simply isn't true. True Barca didn't carve them up for 90 minutes, but Chelsea is a top class team. Barca made enough openings that if they had won it would not have been undeserved. Either one of Eto'o, Bojan, or Hleb should have done much better. That 2nd sentence is a bit of an exaggeration. When one team comes out and defends most of the game, they haven't outplayed anyone, nor has their coach outcoached anyone. Not any team can pull off what Chelsea did, but that's not because of the tactical nous on display. For one, it was a 0-0 stalemate. Consider this...if Chelsea's tactic was to play attacking football and they went head to head with Barca, both teams made the same number of chances and the match ended in a 0-0 tie, we would say the game was even. Both team neutralized each other. So exactly how does it make sense to say that if one went into a defensive shell from the first minute, barely attacked on the counter, to then claim they outplayed the opponent with the same 0-0 tie. Chelsea was effective and got a decent result. Barca could not break them down enough times to get the goal they wanted. But they also prevented Chelsea from creating any chances of their own (except for Marquez' moment of madness) on the counter and forced them to defend for practically the whole game, preventing the chance for a dreaded away goal. Result..stalemate. Anyway...I understand that's your opinion. No disrespect, just sharing mine.
with regards to the men who take umbrage with my assertion that Barcelona is the best team in football right now..
can you only make this judgement based on titles? is it impossible for you to grade the best team on the planet at any given point before the season is over?
Personally, I watch enough serie A, EPL, La Liga and Bundesliga ball for the season to be able to make that straightforward conclusion. I doh need to wait to see who win a Champions League to then come and say well that side is the best. This is a cup competition in which the best team doesn't necessarily win.. too many variables...
No team in the world right now is playing on Barcelona's level and I say that without reservation.. Offensively, I haven't seen anything like it in a long time.. Defensively they are imperious and the entire team presses at a high intensity, which is why they win the ball back so quickly..
Seriously fellahs.. I done realize what underlying all this... ignorance!!
men who cant acknowledge this Barca side is men who does watch predominantly EPL ball.
Probably the same men who could rate Van Der Sar and Reina as the best goalkeepers in the world and forget to mention ah Julio Cruz.. Or the men who was seriously rating Berbatov at the same level or better than Ibrahimovic... Or men who unable to appreciate just how good Andres Iniesta is this year.
I even see a man go as far as to say "Barcelona could only beat shitty La Liga teams", when the quality is woefully lacking outside the EPL top 4. Allyuh feel Aston Villa and Everton could run with Sevilla/Atletico Madrid?? Thats not even mentioning the glut of very poor teams in the lower half of the league, namely West Brom, Hull, Stoke, Sunderland, Bolton, Blackburn, Wigan who play only something resembling football.
anyhow... ah done rant...
What's even better, Barcelona had their best on the field and could not figure it out. Tactically in terms of results Barcelona got outplayed, and outcoached.
Unless you are trying to say that Barca made no clear cut chances, then the first sentence simply isn't true. True Barca didn't carve them up for 90 minutes, but Chelsea is a top class team. Barca made enough openings that if they had won it would not have been undeserved. Either one of Eto'o, Bojan, or Hleb should have done much better. That 2nd sentence is a bit of an exaggeration. When one team comes out and defends most of the game, they haven't outplayed anyone, nor has their coach outcoached anyone. Not any team can pull off what Chelsea did, but that's not because of the tactical nous on display. For one, it was a 0-0 stalemate. Consider this...if Chelsea's tactic was to play attacking football and they went head to head with Barca, both teams made the same number of chances and the match ended in a 0-0 tie, we would say the game was even. Both team neutralized each other. So exactly how does it make sense to say that if one went into a defensive shell from the first minute, barely attacked on the counter, to then claim they outplayed the opponent with the same 0-0 tie. Chelsea was effective and got a decent result. Barca could not break them down enough times to get the goal they wanted. But they also prevented Chelsea from creating any chances of their own (except for Marquez' moment of madness) on the counter and forced them to defend for practically the whole game, preventing the chance for a dreaded away goal. Result..stalemate. Anyway...I understand that's your opinion. No disrespect, just sharing mine.
Did they not have their best players on the field? Who else they have on the bench to come and get something done, Bojan came on with time. Who Gudjonson?
What's even better, Barcelona had their best on the field and could not figure it out. Tactically in terms of results Barcelona got outplayed, and outcoached.
Unless you are trying to say that Barca made no clear cut chances, then the first sentence simply isn't true. True Barca didn't carve them up for 90 minutes, but Chelsea is a top class team. Barca made enough openings that if they had won it would not have been undeserved. Either one of Eto'o, Bojan, or Hleb should have done much better. That 2nd sentence is a bit of an exaggeration. When one team comes out and defends most of the game, they haven't outplayed anyone, nor has their coach outcoached anyone. Not any team can pull off what Chelsea did, but that's not because of the tactical nous on display. For one, it was a 0-0 stalemate. Consider this...if Chelsea's tactic was to play attacking football and they went head to head with Barca, both teams made the same number of chances and the match ended in a 0-0 tie, we would say the game was even. Both team neutralized each other. So exactly how does it make sense to say that if one went into a defensive shell from the first minute, barely attacked on the counter, to then claim they outplayed the opponent with the same 0-0 tie. Chelsea was effective and got a decent result. Barca could not break them down enough times to get the goal they wanted. But they also prevented Chelsea from creating any chances of their own (except for Marquez' moment of madness) on the counter and forced them to defend for practically the whole game, preventing the chance for a dreaded away goal. Result..stalemate. Anyway...I understand that's your opinion. No disrespect, just sharing mine.
Did they not have their best players on the field? Who else they have on the bench to come and get something done, Bojan came on with time. Who Gudjonson?
elan. at no point did I say Barca didn't have their best on the field. what really going on? you actualy read my post?
What's even better, Barcelona had their best on the field and could not figure it out. Tactically in terms of results Barcelona got outplayed, and outcoached.
Unless you are trying to say that Barca made no clear cut chances, then the first sentence simply isn't true. True Barca didn't carve them up for 90 minutes, but Chelsea is a top class team. Barca made enough openings that if they had won it would not have been undeserved. Either one of Eto'o, Bojan, or Hleb should have done much better. That 2nd sentence is a bit of an exaggeration. When one team comes out and defends most of the game, they haven't outplayed anyone, nor has their coach outcoached anyone. Not any team can pull off what Chelsea did, but that's not because of the tactical nous on display. For one, it was a 0-0 stalemate. Consider this...if Chelsea's tactic was to play attacking football and they went head to head with Barca, both teams made the same number of chances and the match ended in a 0-0 tie, we would say the game was even. Both team neutralized each other. So exactly how does it make sense to say that if one went into a defensive shell from the first minute, barely attacked on the counter, to then claim they outplayed the opponent with the same 0-0 tie. Chelsea was effective and got a decent result. Barca could not break them down enough times to get the goal they wanted. But they also prevented Chelsea from creating any chances of their own (except for Marquez' moment of madness) on the counter and forced them to defend for practically the whole game, preventing the chance for a dreaded away goal. Result..stalemate. Anyway...I understand that's your opinion. No disrespect, just sharing mine.
Did they not have their best players on the field? Who else they have on the bench to come and get something done, Bojan came on with time. Who Gudjonson?
elan. at no point did I say Barca didn't have their best on the field. what really going on? you actually read my post? i am saying that to claim they could not figure it out is not entirely true. I say that cuz of the three clear chances they should have done better with. If Barca was held to only half chances or no clear chances, I would have agreed with you
What's even better, Barcelona had their best on the field and could not figure it out. Tactically in terms of results Barcelona got outplayed, and outcoached.
Unless you are trying to say that Barca made no clear cut chances, then the first sentence simply isn't true. True Barca didn't carve them up for 90 minutes, but Chelsea is a top class team. Barca made enough openings that if they had won it would not have been undeserved. Either one of Eto'o, Bojan, or Hleb should have done much better. That 2nd sentence is a bit of an exaggeration. When one team comes out and defends most of the game, they haven't outplayed anyone, nor has their coach outcoached anyone. Not any team can pull off what Chelsea did, but that's not because of the tactical nous on display. For one, it was a 0-0 stalemate. Consider this...if Chelsea's tactic was to play attacking football and they went head to head with Barca, both teams made the same number of chances and the match ended in a 0-0 tie, we would say the game was even. Both team neutralized each other. So exactly how does it make sense to say that if one went into a defensive shell from the first minute, barely attacked on the counter, to then claim they outplayed the opponent with the same 0-0 tie. Chelsea was effective and got a decent result. Barca could not break them down enough times to get the goal they wanted. But they also prevented Chelsea from creating any chances of their own (except for Marquez' moment of madness) on the counter and forced them to defend for practically the whole game, preventing the chance for a dreaded away goal. Result..stalemate. Anyway...I understand that's your opinion. No disrespect, just sharing mine.
Did they not have their best players on the field? Who else they have on the bench to come and get something done, Bojan came on with time. Who Gudjonson?
elan. at no point did I say Barca didn't have their best on the field. what really going on? you actually read my post? i am saying that to claim they could not figure it out is not entirely true. I say that cuz of the three clear chances they should have done better with. If Barca was held to only half chances or no clear chances, I would have agreed with you
Ok I get what you saying. For me figuring it out is scoring and winning the game. I get what you saying.
Sammy thaks for your big contribution. Man United game done yet?
Probably the same men who could rate Van Der Sar and Reina as the best goalkeepers in the world and forget to mention ah Julio Cruz..
Look how simple you are in your understanding of tactics. If you or anyone could watch what Chelsea do and directly compare it to Man UNited, have to be basic in football. Why no one coming down on big Barcelona in not knowing how to adapt to different teams. So every team have to play a certaing way for Barcelona to show what they have? Come on grow up.
I will educate you here a little.
Man United had 2 major lines of confrontation with no outlet vs Barcelona a year ago. They were on the back foot and absorbing pressure.
Chelsea on the other hand had one major line of confrontation that being the back 4. The midfield was used to stifle play down the middle, not be reactive and absorb pressure. Chelsea midfield was pro active in forcing Barcelona wide to what supposed to be their strong points. However, Barcelona could not use the flanks effectively for a number of reason. Messi and Henry start points were to deep, the full back got good cover from the center backs thus minimizing the space behind the fullback, crossing the ball would have been to Chelsea adavntage and Chelsea mids and defenders kept runner from making proper runs into the box.
Now again Man United upon winning the ball had little or no options a year ago. Chelsea had various outlets on winning the ball. The thing that confusing you all into thinking that it was all defensive was that they really had no reason to use the outlets much. Drogba remained high and mobile keeping the Barcelona defense in place, and have them unsure about joining the attack. This also created less option for Barcelopna in the middle of the field as their support fron the back was limited. Malouda and Essien was also outlets on the side, therefore Barcelona had to be very careful about how they push on.
Chelsea deployment on the field was in such a manner that if needed they could have stepped up their game and press Barcelona back (like if they went down a goal, which never happened). The last 15 minutes in each half showed how easily Chelsea could have gotten forward. They (Chelsea) was just happy to let Barcelona have the ball, but won the ball in specific positions and turn them back. This is not the same as man UNited defending deep inside their half with no distinct option to go forward whenever they wanted.
So Mr. JDB no one have to take me serious on this board cause as soon as the thread get to indepth tactics analysis men does start cussing, calling people names or just abandon the thread. You all making all these general tactical observation but not looking at the game within the game. The little nuances, the tweaks that seperate a set of tactics from another.
What's even better, Barcelona had their best on the field and could not figure it out. Tactically in terms of results Barcelona got outplayed, and outcoached.
Look how simple you are in your understanding of tactics. If you or anyone could watch what Chelsea do and directly compare it to Man UNited, have to be basic in football. Why no one coming down on big Barcelona in not knowing how to adapt to different teams. So every team have to play a certaing way for Barcelona to show what they have? Come on grow up.
I will educate you here a little.
Man United had 2 major lines of confrontation with no outlet vs Barcelona a year ago. They were on the back foot and absorbing pressure.
Chelsea on the other hand had one major line of confrontation that being the back 4. The midfield was used to stifle play down the middle, not be reactive and absorb pressure. Chelsea midfield was pro active in forcing Barcelona wide to what supposed to be their strong points. However, Barcelona could not use the flanks effectively for a number of reason. Messi and Henry start points were to deep, the full back got good cover from the center backs thus minimizing the space behind the fullback, crossing the ball would have been to Chelsea adavntage and Chelsea mids and defenders kept runner from making proper runs into the box.
Now again Man United upon winning the ball had little or no options a year ago. Chelsea had various outlets on winning the ball. The thing that confusing you all into thinking that it was all defensive was that they really had no reason to use the outlets much. Drogba remained high and mobile keeping the Barcelona defense in place, and have them unsure about joining the attack. This also created less option for Barcelopna in the middle of the field as their support fron the back was limited. Malouda and Essien was also outlets on the side, therefore Barcelona had to be very careful about how they push on.
Chelsea deployment on the field was in such a manner that if needed they could have stepped up their game and press Barcelona back (like if they went down a goal, which never happened). The last 15 minutes in each half showed how easily Chelsea could have gotten forward. They (Chelsea) was just happy to let Barcelona have the ball, but won the ball in specific positions and turn them back. This is not the same as man UNited defending deep inside their half with no distinct option to go forward whenever they wanted.
So Mr. JDB no one have to take me serious on this board cause as soon as the thread get to indepth tactics analysis men does start cussing, calling people names or just abandon the thread. You all making all these general tactical observation but not looking at the game within the game. The little nuances, the tweaks that seperate a set of tactics from another.
What's even better, Barcelona had their best on the field and could not figure it out. Tactically in terms of results Barcelona got outplayed, and outcoached.
You are talking level tata.
Read almost any report of the game and you will see that the consensus opinion is not that this was any unique tactical masterpiece by Chelsea. It was simply unambitious, defensive football. The parallels between the two games are uncanny yet you see this vast difference that, unsurprisingly, paints Chelsea in a favourable light.
This talk about Chelsea being able to attack "if they decided to" is dotish. If Chelsea was that capable why not play and go back to Stamford bridge with an advantage?
The talk about United not having options last year is also a pile. You were very happy to post game stats last year, well if you lookat the same stats you weill see that United had more chances than Chelsea had. Clearly their options with the ball were not as limited as you trying to make people believe now.
Like I say your objectivity is nil. The fact that you trying to say that this was some tactical masterpiece by Chelsea whereas United last year was negative is just ridiculous. At least I could give Chow credit for calling a spade a spade. And I repect Filho and Kicker for always calling it as they see it even though their respective Spanish sides have been on the wrong end ion recent years.
The funny thing is when Barca went out last year after playing pretty football and failing to create clear chances you laud them as playing brilliant football. This year they get outplayed and outcoached.
ah dont want to get drawn into allyuh bacchanal but barca this year is better on all counts than the barca team last year except 4 one area. free kicks.
Kicker stop bleddy taking Barca side in anything or bigging dem up in any kinda roundabout way for meh please... >:(
Classico dis weekend.... so dey is ultimate sh!t for de time being!1
Level toots.... Crapalona...
we could come back to who playing nice football and which league is de best etc next week tuesday
please and thanks.... before ah burst ah damn blood vessel
... bout you kinda agree with pep... gimme ah damn chance
f**k the ref was watching??
(http://www.sport.es/vivo/recursos/fotos/foto_359/foto_359461_CAS.jpg)
Barcelona-Chelsea referee says he was right not to dismiss Ballack
- Michel Platini was 'very satisified' with me, says Stark
- German official admits game had 'difficult moments'
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 29 April 2009 19.35 BST(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Football/Pix/pictures/2009/4/29/1241026616493/Wolfgang-Stark-001.jpg)
Wolfgang Stark shows the yellow card to Chelsea's Michael Ballack. Photograph: Alberto Estevez/EPA
Wolfgang Stark, the referee in last night's semi-final first leg between Barcelona and Chelsea, rejected criticisms of him from the Barcelona camp, saying that the Uefa president, Michel Platini, had even congratulated him.
"Platini was in Camp Nou and after the match he sent me a message indicating he was 'very satisfied' with my performance," said Stark following the Champions League semi-final first leg.
The German official admitted that the game had had its difficult moments but said "that's normal" and he had not had to deal with "ugly scenes and serious fouls".
As for Michael Ballack's foul on Andrés Iniesta which Barcelona felt deserved a second yellow card, Stark, 39, said: "I didn't show a card simply because for me there was no reason to. What he committed was a normal foul, and I punished that foul with a free-kick."
"What would you take on a desert island?" asks Carles Rupiérez. "You could always go to Didier Drogba for suggestions. He had 89 minutes to think about it last night, 89 minutes to choose a book, a CD, to go for a mobile phone or a Swiss army knife or a lighter to make fires. Every now and then Piqué or Márquez visited him as they went to collect some strange object his team-mates occasionally sent his way, always by air mail."
There was some praise for Chelsea. Terry was described by one paper as "impeccable". Sport admitted that "Bosingwa stopped Messi without resorting to fouls". And even if there was talk of Barça's "ethical superiority", plenty of commentators pointed out that Hiddink has no obligation to play in a particular way.
Mostly, though, the praise was grudging. Or simply absent. "Chelsea were more of a wrecking company than a football team," El Periódico complained. "Mean-spirited, dull, destructive," said Sport. El Mundo Deportivo talked of "a recital of rough play". Ballack was "slow, badly positioned and always whining," said La Vanguardia; "Alex had no problem just hoofing the ball." All of it was aided by a referee who was attacked as "horrible", "disastrous", a "disgrace"; "all that talk of fair play and then there's none," Xavi complained.
"Hiddink, good old Guus, was winding us up," ran AS's match report. "He said 'it's going to be an open game with lots of goals because Barcelona attack and so do we'. He must have been talking about the second leg." He certainly wasn't talking about the first – a game in which La Vanguardia pointedly described Didier Drogba as an island in a wide open sea, miles from anywhere, utterly isolated.
"What would you take on a desert island?" asks Carles Rupiérez. "You could always go to Didier Drogba for suggestions. He had 89 minutes to think about it last night, 89 minutes to choose a book, a CD, to go for a mobile phone or a Swiss army knife or a lighter to make fires. Every now and then Piqué or Márquez visited him as they went to collect some strange object his team-mates occasionally sent his way, always by air mail."
"Hiddink, good old Guus, was winding us up," ran AS's match report. "He said 'it's going to be an open game with lots of goals because Barcelona attack and so do we'. He must have been talking about the second leg." He certainly wasn't talking about the first – a game in which La Vanguardia pointedly described Didier Drogba as an island in a wide open sea, miles from anywhere, utterly isolated.
"What would you take on a desert island?" asks Carles Rupiérez. "You could always go to Didier Drogba for suggestions. He had 89 minutes to think about it last night, 89 minutes to choose a book, a CD, to go for a mobile phone or a Swiss army knife or a lighter to make fires. Every now and then Piqué or Márquez visited him as they went to collect some strange object his team-mates occasionally sent his way, always by air mail."
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
classic stuff...