It was a different incident to the one I was thinking about then
I don't remember the one you're on about
UEFA Champions League/Europa League 17/18/19 April *** Spoilers ***
- Thread starter Cosimo
- Start date
It was a different incident to the one I was thinking about then
I don't remember the one you're on about
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 10,113
- Location
- Gibraltar
I suppose beating barca will give chelsea some of that history they crave
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Jun 2010
- Posts
- 12,538
- Location
- London
Chelsea had a period where they could have pushed for a second, but they didn't and it was fairly obvious in the 2nd half it would be a case of if they could keep the score at 1-0.
There is no way that they'll get a 0-0 at the Nou without some miraculous luck (which does happen), but you wouldn't put it past Chelsea scoring there too. They've done it before, after all.
There is no way that they'll get a 0-0 at the Nou without some miraculous luck (which does happen), but you wouldn't put it past Chelsea scoring there too. They've done it before, after all.
I suppose beating barca will give chelsea some of that history they crave
Its only Liverpool fans that talk up history as their future is so bleak
Di Matteo to win the CL then get sacked by Abra
If Di Matteo wins even 1 trophy this season I can't see how RA can possible sack him. What will happen though if he does stay is Chelsea will start next season **** and then he'll be sacked
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 10,113
- Location
- Gibraltar
Its only Liverpool fans that talk up history as their future is so bleak
Trophy in the bag and a final to play. Yes the future is so bleak
It was a different incident to the one I was thinking about then
I don't remember the one you're on about
Selective memory
As i don't remember yours either.Also Pigeon, not sure if serious, Drogba was a complete embaressment and Chelsea defended alright but easily could have conceeded 2 at the very least if Barca were finishing slightly better than Liverpool do.
I have to say well done to Chelsea tonight, but please ask Drogba to stop the acting please
He's what 32 now? And done it for all the time he's been at Chelsea, he isn't going to stop now
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 41,546
- Location
- Cornwall
Everyone expected Barcelona to smash them so to limit them to 2 or 3 clear chances, not concede an away goal and actually win the game is a fantastic result and one they thoroughly deserved. Could say it was a typical Liverpool European performance
but they were really poor / slow / lazy compared to how they can play...
Everyone expected Barcelona to smash them so to limit them to 2 or 3 clear chances, not concede an away goal and actually win the game is a fantastic result and one they thoroughly deserved. Could say it was a typical Liverpool European performance
15 shots on target, there were a lot more then 2/3 'clear chances' as you say
Have you watched Chelsea this season? Did you see the way they played only 9 days ago against Fulham? Do you think this Chelsea side are even comparable to Jose's Inter in terms of squad strength and quality of players? To beat the greatest football team in history and keep the greatest football player in history so quiet for most of the game is deserving of the acclaim they will be getting in the next couple of days. And let's not forget that the goal Chelsea scored was absolutely brilliant - one any team would be proud of.Chelsea didn't 'try and win' they 'tried not to lose' and everything else was a bonus
The "anti-football" was necessary to keep the Barcelona attack so quiet. If Chelsea went for it more they'd have undoubtedly conceded more, clearer chances, and given how close Barca came with Chelsea doing everything they could to not concede, who's to say even a slightly more gung-ho approach doesn't turn the result from 1-0 to 1-2 or 1-3? Going for a second that may still not guarantee progress could alternatively lead you to conceding a couple that almost certainly mean you're out. Some people are talking as if Barcelona's backline were there for the taking tonight - Chelsea didn't squander chances and relied upon an absolutely world class piece of play to get their goal.
In an ideal world there would be more teams on the level of Barcelona that could match them by playing constant, attacking football. As it stands the only team even close to Barcelona's level is one that can never play them (Spain), so to beat them you are going to have to employ tactics that do more to negate their strengths than play to your own. If Chelsea end up getting past Barcelona and into the final, will you really be more critical of their approach than you were to the one taken by Arsenal last year? Or United in the final? Or even Jose's Real Madrid? All of whom were eventually ripped apart and well-beaten.
They got the result. If you don't like the way they did it, that is entirely your problem and not Chelsea's.
And how many of them were blocked on the edge of the box? A tactic it was pretty obvious the Chelsea team had worked on. "15 shots on target" yet Cech had two saves to make all game.15 shots on target, there were a lot more then 2/3 'clear chances' as you say
Last edited:
Good result for Chelsea, worked their socks off and got a bit of luck but Barca were unspectacular and could have no complaints about the result. Top level football is about taking your chances.
Drogba was rather embarrassing but again, Barca could have no complaints - they are usually much worst.
Drogba was rather embarrassing but again, Barca could have no complaints - they are usually much worst.
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Jan 2008
- Posts
- 2,218
I have to say I very much enjoy these chess type of games. Call me boring but I enjoy watching a great tackle being made the same as seeing a wonderful worked goal. Another game which also was a great watch was when Jose Inter played Barca. I personally admired how Inter were setup that night, but of course you have to execute the plan which I also believe Chelsea did tonight. I would never call this anti football.
Yes I have
unfortunately Yes I did see them against Fulham, I also saw them against Spurs, what's your point?
I didn't make the comparison to Inter? I said that they didn't defend like Inter did, which they didn't.
I'd also argue about the definition of 'best ever' in that paragraph too
No, Anti football is 'never' necessary. If Chelsea went for it more, they could also have gotten more goals themselves, their counter attack for the goal was very good, as I said. That old chesnut, 'well if they attacked more they might have lost by more' they could also have gotten more goals, by that logic.
Yes, in an ideal world teams would play football on the floor, not like Stoke, but this type of football is abundant in English football, which has been very slow to adapt to how the game has evolved.
Yes, which for teams might be to 'attack' Barcelona or 'Defend and counter', examples being Arsenal and Real Madrid.
I'm critical of any team, in any league who turn up to just defend, do nothing with the ball. It's not at all enjoyable, doesn't do 'English' football much good to be honest, Chelsea are better then that.
I've not really said it's anyone else's problem? Regulars on here know, I'm a football purest, they know I'm a bit of a **** about how football should be played. Football, shouldn't be played to this negative extreme.
They also hit the post twice, what's your point? They missed numerous clear chances. What's your point? haha
People don't agree with me, I don't mind. It makes for interesting debate.
What about the one that hit the bar ...the one that hit the post ... the one where Cole made the goal line clearance.
What game were some people watching LOL.