Chelsea v Barca 2nd Leg

mil1lion said:

You'd also forget that this is a Spurs forum, yet a number of people are unhappy that the glorious football won last night.

Click to expand...

That isn't the issue though because there was no glorious football. Where's the glory? If Barca had beaten Chelsea by clear goals and played as they can and have played in Spain, then most especially non-Chelsea fans here and most with their heads screwed on would hold their hands up. But that isn't what happened. Barca tried to play as they have done but were stifled until a ball broke to Iniesta and he scored a wondeful goal.

True in the first leg, they played similarly but created chances. However, other than Bojan's miss, most were saved or stopped by Chelsea. Isn't that good football? I like watching good defending as I do attacking. The term 'good football', I use it I admit, has become a term to represent passing, attacking football. But why not admire Chelsea's style to? Or at least accept that others do and live and let live- I know you did and are just dropping off a one liner here!

There is a lot of mania on this thread and lots of people are summing up simplistically; Barca best team=deserved to win. Ref shit=Chelea robbed. Drogba=twat. Chelsea missed chances=deserved to lose (curious argument that could be labelled for Barca in the first leg). It is a combination of all those things, but I don't see why so many Barca fans here, as is their wont, are getting so defensive in their victory and lacking the mere humility to suggest that they got a bit lucky and weren't at their best.

Instead they win by hook or by crook and it is all 'aren't we wonderful'. That is exactly, in part, why they are not liked in Spain- the arrogant, self-congratulating holier than thou attitude which makes them sore winners and sore losers. A lot of teams aren't much better, and you seldom see a Freddie-Brett Lee moment in football, but Barca are the epitome of it sometimes.

Coyboy said:

The second one in the first half was a definite penalty. So you would have given one penalty- that would have been enough.

Click to expand...

If they scored it

spursphil said:

So Chelsea feel robbed?
Now they know how Marks & Spencer's felt when John Terry's mum popped in!

Click to expand...

:grin:

Coyboy said:

The second one in the first half was a definite penalty. So you would have given one penalty- that would have been enough.

Click to expand...

Only if they scored it and even then it would only have been 2-1 because Barca would have a goal from the Henry penalty in the Camp nou which you obviously must agree with and then with Iniesta's goal it 's 2-2 and Barca still go through. You can't have it both ways.


I've just seen Gary Megson on sky and he said that chelsea played like Bolton do against he top clubs in the Prem so why when they do it is it tactical genius and when Bolton do it it's bad for the game?

worcestersauce said:

:grin:



Only if they scored it and even then it would only have been 2-1 because Barca would have a goal from the Henry penalty in the Camp nou which you obviously must agree with and then with Iniesta's goal it 's 2-2 and Barca still go through. You can't have it both ways.


I've just seen Gary Megson on sky and he said that chelsea played like Bolton do against he top clubs in the Prem so why when they do it is it tactical genius and when Bolton do it it's bad for the game?

Click to expand...

I am not having it both ways. There was enough of the tie left for Chelsea to have come back into it and but when they were denied the penalty- had Lampard scored, has he missed much- would have killed the tie. I admit that goals change games and complexions, as I assume your post sarcastically implies, but the very number of penalties Chelsea should have got and the generic poor refereeing is what has caused anger.

I am not convinced that the Henry incident was as clear as Pique's handball, Alves' push and Abidal's foul on Drogba.

Dougal said:

If they scored it

Click to expand...

Ok, how many has Lampard missed?

worcestersauce said:

:grin:



Only if they scored it and even then it would only have been 2-1 because Barca would have a goal from the Henry penalty in the Camp nou which you obviously must agree with and then with Iniesta's goal it 's 2-2 and Barca still go through. You can't have it both ways.


I've just seen Gary Megson on sky and he said that chelsea played like Bolton do against he top clubs in the Prem so why when they do it is it tactical genius and when Bolton do it it's bad for the game?

Click to expand...

That is a very good point made by megson

The fact is throughout the 180 minutes chelsea played like bolton and everyone give them credit. It just proves barca is the better of the two teams. Without Hiddink chelsea would be lost

Coyboy said:

But Barca are by far the best team in Spain and Chelsea are the third best here. Of course Barca are superior to them attacking wise but they would struggle to match Liverpool or Chelsea themselves throughout an entire season against strong defensive sides and I think United are a far better team. Not a far better attacking force, few if any are, but a team- better keeper, much better defence and better defensive midfielders.

The flip side and more pertinent comparison to your comment is Liverpool against Real Madrid. They anihilated them. The Spanish League, having always been dominated by Madrid/Barca, is becoming weaker and weaker. It probably is a second but certainly a distant second for overall quality and competitiveness.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't say Barca are by far the best in Spain, because Real Madrid have been winning a lot under Ramos. But theres definitely a split between Real Madrid and Barca with the rest of the League now. But i dont think its as simple as Spains 1st against Englands 3rd best teams. Chelsea are genuine Title contenders on a yearly basis now, and its a dissapointing season from their standards. Much like it was for Barca last season or AC Milan even. But they are definitely one of the very best in England. But styles clash in football to make for various games. Barca clearly struggled against that style, but they could have more joy against Utd. Even though Utd are 1st in the Premier League, they play a style thats more open and better for Barca.

I dont like the comparisons of English and Spanish football though. They are two very different Leagues with different styles of football. I'm sure that if Barca or Real Madrid were in England, they would have squads more suited to the English game. I think its more to do with the English game being more suited to winning games in Europe now. The likes of Barca and Real Madrid (or even Inter and Juve) aren't used to the physical side of the English game, and they're struggling more and more in the Champions League now. But technically Spanish football is better than English football. It just so happens that the powerful side of the English game is more effective against the technical Spanish game.

Spanish football is more pleasing on the eye, but English football is more effective.

mil1lion said:

I wouldn't say Barca are by far the best in Spain, because Real Madrid have been winning a lot under Ramos. But theres definitely a split between Real Madrid and Barca with the rest of the League now. But i dont think its as simple as Spains 1st against Englands 3rd best teams. Chelsea are genuine Title contenders on a yearly basis now, and its a dissapointing season from their standards. Much like it was for Barca last season or AC Milan even. But they are definitely one of the very best in England. But styles clash in football to make for various games. Barca clearly struggled against that style, but they could have more joy against Utd. Even though Utd are 1st in the Premier League, they play a style thats more open and better for Barca.

I dont like the comparisons of English and Spanish football though. They are two very different Leagues with different styles of football. I'm sure that if Barca or Real Madrid were in England, they would have squads more suited to the English game. I think its more to do with the English game being more suited to winning games in Europe now. The likes of Barca and Real Madrid (or even Inter and Juve) aren't used to the physical side of the English game, and they're struggling more and more in the Champions League now. But technically Spanish football is better than English football. It just so happens that the powerful side of the English game is more effective against the technical Spanish game.

Spanish football is more pleasing on the eye, but English football is more effective.

Click to expand...

If you are talking about style chelsea werent even playing their normal style their objective was just to stop barca from playing. I predict that manu will employ similar tactics in the final so barca have to find some way to create an open game. Not even manu stand a chance against barca in that type of game

Coyboy said:

Ok, how many has Lampard missed?

Click to expand...

Guarantees nothing. Keane was great at pens and then missed a few in a row for seemingly no reason at all. All hypothetical.

This sundays match between Arsenal and Chelsea has been sponsered by Kleenex.

... because they're all wankers.

mil1lion said:

I wouldn't say Barca are by far the best in Spain, because Real Madrid have been winning a lot under Ramos. But theres definitely a split between Real Madrid and Barca with the rest of the League now. But i dont think its as simple as Spains 1st against Englands 3rd best teams. Chelsea are genuine Title contenders on a yearly basis now, and its a dissapointing season from their standards. Much like it was for Barca last season or AC Milan even. But they are definitely one of the very best in England. But styles clash in football to make for various games. Barca clearly struggled against that style, but they could have more joy against Utd. Even though Utd are 1st in the Premier League, they play a style thats more open and better for Barca.

I dont like the comparisons of English and Spanish football though. They are two very different Leagues with different styles of football. I'm sure that if Barca or Real Madrid were in England, they would have squads more suited to the English game. I think its more to do with the English game being more suited to winning games in Europe now. The likes of Barca and Real Madrid (or even Inter and Juve) aren't used to the physical side of the English game, and they're struggling more and more in the Champions League now. But technically Spanish football is better than English football. It just so happens that the powerful side of the English game is more effective against the technical Spanish game.

Spanish football is more pleasing on the eye, but English football is more effective.

Click to expand...

I think Madrid's rise is testament to the weakness of the league, other than Barca and one or two others. Ramos, an excellent manager in Spain, has steamrolled other teams which points to a lack of competitiveness which is surely a benchmark of quality or technique. You will get the odd Espanyol reverse at the Camp Nou but they are getting few and far between but I think the English league has more unpredictability and entertaining vigour to it.

I agree they are different leagues and you make an excellent point that were they in this league, Madrid and Barca would have players to that end- and the money as the Old Firm would. But you can still compare them and for me, the English league is by far the best because of the diversity and mix of qualities- it is not only about strength and physical attributes, it is technically as good as anywhere else (and not just owing to foreigners), it brings in the greater crowds, it has better defences and the top teams, Arsenal excepted who are far behind the others, have suceeded in merging such attributes.

It may seem simplistic but Chelsea are the third team in England and Barca the winners-elect there and though their styles are vastly different, Barca struggled to overpower them, left spaces open at the back and were lucky to get by. But for the away goals rule, which I don't support, who knows what would have happened?

I recommend viagra to both teams. It'll get them further than a semi.

Dougal said:

Guarantees nothing. Keane was great at pens and then missed a few in a row for seemingly no reason at all. All hypothetical.

Click to expand...

Oh look who brings in the Irishman. I think we can say in all probability Lamps would have scored and besides, there were more than one legitimate penalty appeals.

Both leagues are differently, and its clear to see that the sky four in the premier league are also up there with the best in the CL too.

The PL is strong, fast and hard hitting. Many a technically gifted player can struggle with the physical impact the premier league has on them, but many do play very well here. In fact, most of those technical players have helped make the PL what it is.

Comparing the leagues, because of 4 english teams and 2 spanish teams is nonsense.

Go through the whole league, there is a gap between Man Utd, Liverpool and Chelsea. Then you have Arsenal on their own. Then there is a gap between them and Villa/Everton.

Then there is the chasing pack.

If English teams were also dominating the Uefa Cup, I'd argue that the PL is stronger throughout, but no english teams are dominating that, so the top teams are dominating the lot, which proves even further how far Spurs actually are behind, cos not only are we having to catch the English Elite, we are effectivly chasing Europes Elite, which makes the challenge even tougher.

Barca for all their fantastically beautiful football, struggled against a very defensive and physically posing Chelsea. Understandably, its exactly why teams struggle against the likes of Stoke and Bolton (someone mentioned Gary Megson's comment).

It's a valid tactic to defend, and to stop the superior oppenent from playing. I do find it funny, how many a fan are saying its great tactics, but I remember it like yesterday when we apparently parked the bus, and it was shockingly bad football (I've reminded them).

But, thats what happens with football fans, you defend your team with blind love/passion.

Technically, Spain are much better than England - country wise, and possible League wise. Spain gave England a master class in our match, in how to play the ball properly and effectively.

As I said earlier, Man Utd, are the best team in the UK, without a doubt. They are great technically, they have depth in squad, thet have a fantastic defence, cracking midfield, that can fight and play, and are as devestating as Barca in attack (look at Utd's break away goal against Arsenal on Tue).

It should be set up to be the final of all finals (at least until we get there!!!!!)

Coyboy said:

Ok, how many has Lampard missed?

Click to expand...

Brits always miss when it's most important, you know it!

You always seem to forget that;

When you say that the Premiership as so much stronger than all other leagues......it SHOULD be; the top4 in England are currently stronger than most out there. When it comes to places from 5 and down the rest seem as good or better many times. Just look how the English clubs always have to leave the UEFA-Cup when it gets close to the finals. Why is that? Couldn't be that they's so much better than the rest, could it?

Best thread for a long time! Some so called Spurs supporters pain for Chelski is just hilarious.

Coyboy said:

I think Madrid's rise is testament to the weakness of the league, other than Barca and one or two others. Ramos, an excellent manager in Spain, has steamrolled other teams which points to a lack of competitiveness which is surely a benchmark of quality or technique. You will get the odd Espanyol reverse at the Camp Nou but they are getting few and far between but I think the English league has more unpredictability and entertaining vigour to it.

I agree they are different leagues and you make an excellent point that were they in this league, Madrid and Barca would have players to that end- and the money as the Old Firm would. But you can still compare them and for me, the English league is by far the best because of the diversity and mix of qualities- it is not only about strength and physical attributes, it is technically as good as anywhere else (and not just owing to foreigners), it brings in the greater crowds, it has better defences and the top teams, Arsenal excepted who are far behind the others, have suceeded in merging such attributes.

It may seem simplistic but Chelsea are the third team in England and Barca the winners-elect there and though their styles are vastly different, Barca struggled to overpower them, left spaces open at the back and were lucky to get by. But for the away goals rule, which I don't support, who knows what would have happened?

Click to expand...

I do agree about the English League overall being better. I dont think the gap is quiete as big as you do, but its definitely the more competitive. I certainly cant see an English team win about 15 games back to back in the EPL, like Real Madrid did in La Liga. But La Liga is generally more open than the Premier League and thats the way Barca are suited. I reckon if Barca played a few more English teams this year, they would learn a lot more ways to win than they do in Spain. They simply haven't been tested as much as they were against Chelsea and for once they looked short of ideas. But your right about the English game having more mixture in styles and quality. Which is probably why the English teams have found it easier to adapt to the Champions League over the past few years. Barca dont have many different ways of playing, and all of them are in an attacking sense. Arsenal are the only side in England like that really.

For me it was simply a case that Barca haven't had enough practice so to speak, against that type of opponent. So its difficult for them to evolve in Europe.

Coyboy said:

Oh look who brings in the Irishman. I think we can say in all probability Lamps would have scored and besides, there were more than one legitimate penalty appeals.

Click to expand...

Just happened to be a handy example of the point I was proving :wink:

Almost feel sorry for Chelsea...almost. But then I see Drogba and I laugh and laugh and laugh and laugh and laugh and...well, you get the idea.

Bonjour said:

That's the bottom line really.


Chelsea: Complete and utter cockmasters.

Click to expand...

Yep

kcmei said:

Its a disgrace that some fans make threats to murdering someone just because they lost. Just because they are chelsea doesnt mean decision wont go against them. I have a feeling that the ref would resign and hopefully things will cool down soon.

Click to expand...

Wouldn't be the first time. Ask Anders Frisk.

I'll say it again, I couldn't give a shit how unlucky they were, how many bad decisions they got, which was and wasn't a penalty or who played the better football.

A club supported by scum and anything bad that happens to them, such as the events of last night are fucking hilarious and fine by me.

Fuck them and fuck the horse Roman Abramovich rode in on.