And the big question remains How did Chelsea beat Barcelona??? Chelsea did the unthinkable on Wednesday, the odds at the bookies had them to win at 1 to 6!!! Not only that but they won by a score of 1-0. Now this means a lot, they are actually favorites to qualify, why? Because of the the 1-0 scoreline...They score one and Barca needs 3. Rest assured that Di Matteo's tactics would slightly be altered to get the killer away goal. Was it luck? Was it park the bus? Whatever it was Chelsea stands on the verge of a historic upset. However this all might be rendered mute and Barca as the rest of the world is surely gonna destroy Chelsea at the return. I for one think Chelsea will kill the giant. I do also think that Barca is way overrated, and against Milan they had to win by means of 2 Penalties!!!Now which ref would give Barca 2 penalties at home???and one is heavily disputed!!! Opinions?
Again with this. You think penalties are not looked for with in this case Messi did and Nesta had to resort to that to stop a goal? The score was 3-1 too either way and Milan had like 1 shot on goal. About the Chelsea game, it was a combination of defense , parking the bus w.e you want to call it and yes a little luck. Barca missed a lot of sitters and Chelsea managed to score from that 1 goal opportunity that came precisely from a Barca's mistake.
Chelsea won by getting tactics right; they sat deep but quickly counterattacked when they had the chance. The played every forward ball to Drogba and took advantage of his ability to harry the Barca defense. I think it's a bit of an exaggeration to say Barca missed a bunch of sitters. Maybe one, but most of their shots were contested. I don't think Cech made any saves that were in the category of top drawer saves; they were ones you would expect him to make, bearing in mind he's an elite keeper. Drogba had an excellent game, that was a key. His hold up play provided breathers to the Chelsea defense and when he did get a scoring chance, he was clinical (in particular he kept it low). They also were able to frustrate Messi. I'm beginning to wonder if Barca's dependence on Messi is becoming a weakness. They way Chelsea were able to crowd him with 4-5 defenders (almost like that photo of six Belgian defenders around Maradona), Messi should have been able to find open players. But I don't think any of Barca's attackers are anywhere near Messi's level (as opposed to 2009 when they had Henry and Eto). The return leg will be a challenge but a 1-0 scoreline is indeed a good one to take to the away leg in the UCL. I just hope that Barca won't again be bailed out by the referees.
Well 2 Barca losses last week, but 2 totally different types of losses. The Chelsea loss really was down to luck IMO. Chelsea played as well as they could but they didn't really "solve" Barca any more than Osasuna did when they beat Barca a couple of months back. Real Madrid OTOH outplayed Barca. It had nothing to do with luck.
Chelsea got their tactics right. Maybe a little luck, but Drogba's goal was no luck. Barca where also lucky not to concede more than one goal. Busquets and Fabregas were weak links in Barca's midfield I think they lost possesion more then any other player. Honestly I think the whole midfield had a bad game (compared to how they usually play). However anything can happen especially in Camp Nou. If Guardiola plays his cards right he can get an upset. I think Di Mateo should play the same line up with the exception of Mata who should be switched with either Essien or Torres(Contrary to popular belief I think he still has it).But I'm leaning towards Essien cause I think they should just park the bus and hope Drogba gets another goal scoring oportunity.
it doesn't mater, the fact is that is Referee done its job with loyalty than every thing going fine in UEFA semi final 2nd leg http://dailysportstime.com/football...gue-barcelona-vs-chelsea-semi-final-2012-live http://dailysportstime.com/football...a-semi-final-live-score-champions-league-2012
Barcelona still had 70% possession against Real Madrid. The only major difference was Barcelona had less clear chances. Madrid didn't create much more than Chelsea did.
You're going to have a lot of possession when you pack the team with midfielders and have a game-plan of passing sideways for 90 minutes. I don't think it's a coincidence that since Fabregas went to Barca, they've started to play like Arsenal.
Chelsea pretty much gave up their rights of having possesion when they played with 10 defenders inside their box, literally. Good tactically but as an spectator it will result in a single team passing the ball to each other, this logically creating less chances since it will be clogged with Chelsea players.
It's also the fault of Barca. They totally concentrate of one aspect of the game and force the opponent to react on this tactic. There is a coherence, that matches like that "only" happens if Barca plays. So it's always easy to blame the opponent team but Barca's style is the reason why many see them as most boring team on earth.
No Chelsea beat them fairly, again Barca got the refs & UEFA on their side, but guess what Chelsea this time with 10 men (red card was not a red card) and against all odds with another pk, however Messi Missed this time, did the impossible. Congrats Chelsea and goodluck in the final!!!
I think they won by getting an interim coach....; last and only other time they played in the final (in Moscow) was with an interim coach as well! Without kidding; they defended like a sponge, had little luck and counter attacked at full speed, exposing a weak Barcelona defense and weak goalie. Barcelona also had no plan B, which should have been a tall forward who could have headed some of the crosses into the net.
Barca a bit unlucky hitting posts many times in the 2 legs. Chleski have 10 big guys behind the ball. P Cech was very good. Lampard and Terry was dirty!
Yes one can argue there were some theatrics involved, but I guarantee you 99% would have done the same. Actions like this should be punished since It was an off the ball aggresion. Terry messed up, he knows he did.
Indeed they did, by conceding silly goals in both Stamford Bridge and the Nou Camp when they should have slowed down the pace of the game. And Guardiola is to blame for not reigning his players in. Had he killed the first half in London instead of looking for a goal this would not have happened: At the end, Barcelona attacked with, count them, ten men (ten men? WTF?). Torres announced the same move two times before the 90 minutes were up, but the third time during overtime was the charm. Chelsea deserved to go through., no question...
he had another spat with fab, which some might have taken the wrong way. some dickhed on either the guardain or indy or one of the ridiculous english papers had a head line saying 'revealed' the truth to fabregas lampard feud' and then talked some nonesense about an incident in 2008. im sure as a chelsea fan your aware of the incident way way back, when lampard was on the ground i think, and fabregas comes up and just spits a large gobfull into his face. after that, lamps has every right to want to smack the crap out of the buck tooth midget imo.
Sounds familiar. Of course, no OTHER footballers have ever had a physical confrontation, have they... As you say, typical dimwitted journo bullshit!
How did Chelsea beat Barcelona??? Guerrilla style. Restecp to Di Matteo's tactics...10 men against a attacking superior team, putting your strikers as upcoming left and right back.