It seems to be you're digging a never ending hole here.
You're comparing the Leeds team of the 60's to Chelsea's CL final?
UEFA CHAMPIONS LEAGUE FINAL ... Bayern Munich v Chelsea ... *** Spoilers ***
- Thread starter Cosimo
- Start date
It seems to be you're digging a never ending hole here.
You're comparing the Leeds team of the 60's to Chelsea's CL final?
We got promoted playing bad football for long parts of the season, we started to play much better football under Dave Jones.
What do people find hard to understand, I'm sounding like a record player stuck on repeat. I'd rather see my side, play good football, have a positive footballing ethos then play terrible football and win things.
No, are you being obtuse on purpose?
I said, quite a while ago that Chelsea were the new Leeds. They played on the same night against Barcelona (Chelsea) as Leeds did and played in a similar fashion and got a result.
I drew comparisons to the way that Chelsea and AVB got along and how Leeds and Clough got along.
Now, do you feel that these two examples are fair comparisons?
Not denying you started playing better football when Dave Jones came along, but just rationalising that if someone said to you "Megson will get you promoted playing like this but Jones will get you playing more attractive stuff, but you'll stay down... and stay down next season too whilst also running financial risk due to two years of lost Championship income and having to sell your higher earning players" you'd endorse Dave Jones' hire?
No, because Leeds were a great footballing aside, Chelsea didn't play football really in the final but were setup perfectly for an away team. They contained, frustrated BM and countered and in the end got the win so it was a great tactical win.
Clough got 1 win in his time at Leeds, even AVB was better than that.
Clough got 1 win in his time at Leeds, even AVB was better than that.
We wouldn't have ran finical ruin, we have an owner with money and we have a high crowd turnover. We don't have ~many players earning a lot, we shipped most of them off.
I'd rather have a manager like Dave Jones at the helm, then someone who played terrible football. C'mon is it really that difficult to understand?
I'd rather have a manager like Dave Jones at the helm, then someone who played terrible football. C'mon is it really that difficult to understand?
Chelsea didn't set up perfectly, their tactic ~only worked because of Bayerns inept finishing. Chelsea didn't 'win' the game in 90 minutes, or indeed 120 minutes. Bayern lost.
Chelsea scored more set pieces then Bayern when it matted on penalties.
They got ~lucky with their tactics, why does the fact that Chelsea won, make them beyond criticism?
Again, you've missed the point I was making, but I think it's on purpose. So meh.
OK, so finances aside, give the option you'd rather stay in League One?
How about if guaranteed promotion back to the Premier League was on offer after 2 seasons with Megson's team playing awful stuff, but flirting with relegation from League One was on offer after 2 seasons under Dave Jones - but playing some really crafty football at times. Genuine question (not meaning to sound pedantic!) just interested by how much you'd value success - success determined by league position, as opposed to attractive football.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2004
- Posts
- 17,074
- Location
- Shepley
Reaction in the German press is fantastic if you've not seen it yet, I thought I was bitter. 
Reaction in the German press is fantastic if you've not seen it yet, I thought I was bitter.
Well to be honest if it was Barca that got beaten in the CL final, i think the Spanish media would be having a field day as well
. Cant blame the German press for villifying Bayern, Bayern by all intents and purposes should have nailed the game shut but didnt take advantage of the chances they had but equally on the other hand Chelsea defended well against all their chances. Still in shock as to how Bayern lost, much like the shock i felt when Barca were dumped out in the previous round.
1261st post in this thread & Chelsea are Still Champions.
LOL seriously what did you expect by the end of the thread, Chelsea wouldnt be champions??
Yes yes we know as you have said it about a million times now
. Fact is they won it albeit by penalties but if anything, Bayern have a lot to answer for, the amount of pressure they had on the Chelsea goal was crazy and had their chances been taken then it would have been 4-5 goals to maybe 1 Chelsea goal. But sadly it didnt happen that way, wasnt their night especially after Robben missed that penalty :/Looking at the stats on SSN, wish they would STFU about Chelsea winning the CL as im getting a headache listening to it
but the amount of shots they had on goal compared to Chelsea was staggering but that doesnt count for toffee as they only got the one goal in normal time. It was similar to Barca's stats against Chelsea in the previous round, one sided towards Barca but like Bayern failed to convert their chances and Chelsea converted theirs.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2008
- Posts
- 25,195
- Location
- Lorville - Hurston
Well to be honest if it was Barca that got beaten in the CL final, i think the Spanish media would be having a field day as well
Chelsea defended well yes but Bayern had like 4-5 clear cut chances that should have gone in.
In other words, Chelsea's defence was breached various times
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2004
- Posts
- 17,074
- Location
- Shepley
My favourites are:
and
One paper also points out that Bayern had more shots on target than they did in any of their other games in the CL this season, including the 7-0 win over Basel.
and
One paper also points out that Bayern had more shots on target than they did in any of their other games in the CL this season, including the 7-0 win over Basel.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2008
- Posts
- 25,195
- Location
- Lorville - Hurston
My favourites are:
and
One paper also points out that Bayern had more shots on target than they did in any of their other games in the CL this season, including the 7-0 win over Basel.
haha sweet
Which is why i said Bayern didnt take advantage of their clear cut chances, had those 4-5 chances gone in the game would have been dead and buried and we all could have lolled at Chelsea and their negative tactics. But sadly lady luck was on their side just like it was when they knocked Barca out in the previous round.
Chelsea defended well for all the pressure they had coming from Bayern, like i said above it was similar to Barca when Barca were pounding Chelsea's goal and couldnt get the goals to kill off Chelsea in the first tie. Second tie Barca were going through until they decided to ease off and let Chelsea back in the game.
My favourites are:
and
One paper also points out that Bayern had more shots on target than they did in any of their other games in the CL this season, including the 7-0 win over Basel.
Oh right, i thought the German press were villifying Bayern, they probably are but tbh it sounds like sour grapes...fact is Bayern didnt put enough goals past Chelsea...had they done?? the game would have been over by 90mins in favour of Bayern i would imagine.
Tbh they need to let it go now
, its done and over with...fact is Chelsea won with their 'negative' tactics...tactics that won them the CL cup unfortunately.The manner of Chelsea's victory was fairer than Bayern getting to play the game in their own back yard. Let's all blame Chelsea because Bayern couldn't make full use of home advantage 
.
I do get how sometimes football can seem to be completely unfair, but the bottom line is games are decided by goals scored, that's it. And if at the end of normal play there's no result, it goes to penalties if there has to be a winner. Balance of play, attacking intent etc etc, it counts for exactly nothing. Just be happy that the best and most successful teams usually are the ones that manage to blend attack with defence, but don't cry outrage on the odd occasion the underdog manages to pull off the victory through sheer determination and of course their fair share of luck.
.I do get how sometimes football can seem to be completely unfair, but the bottom line is games are decided by goals scored, that's it. And if at the end of normal play there's no result, it goes to penalties if there has to be a winner. Balance of play, attacking intent etc etc, it counts for exactly nothing. Just be happy that the best and most successful teams usually are the ones that manage to blend attack with defence, but don't cry outrage on the odd occasion the underdog manages to pull off the victory through sheer determination and of course their fair share of luck.