did barca really win

Both the ref and Chelsea were shameful, Barca was playing with a man down for over 30 minutes and Hiddink takes out Drogba

 

Chelsea created the most clear cut chances over both legs and had the most clear penalty claims.

 

Wow, a lot of discontent Chelsea fanatics out there. As a Barça fan let me tell you, you were robbed tonight as we were robbed last week when you end the game with 11 players (oh, you might have forgotten that Ballack shouldn't have played this game). You might also have forgotten Ballack's handball on the first minutes of tonight's game and how a red card was given for an obvious dive by Anelka.
And most importantly, you might have forgotten that you played against 10 players, had a million chances and weren't able to score one. So, yes I am glad that your dear Chelsea went down. Too bad it didn't happen earlier to save me the embarrasment of seeing your pathetic performance at the Camp Nou (and how is it fair that they play first at Camp Nou?).
So, my dear Chelseos go to the pub, get sickly drunk, flail and lament and move on.

Cheers,

 

Do you really believe that? In the spirit of competition, can it not be objectively argued that the team that advanced today had more will to win over 2 legs?

 

Are you serious. Chelsea had better chances to score over both legs anyone can see that. Not even mentioning the clear penalties.

Valdes was man of the match and saved Barcelona.

 

Re: Will the match official of the Chelsea......

Referee was bad but let's not talk "fix" or bias. He was roundly bad for both Barca and Chelsea.

 

They're dominant because they have the money. That's it, all, finito, thanks for playing.

That makes them the best, as a matter of definition.

Why do you think we keep seeing the English sides all but knock each other out of the CL in the knockout stages every year?

That said, that should be dealt with with restricting domestic leagues of how many foreign players they have, not just some blatant official fixing the match -- and then probable international bans for the conduct afterward -- to make a disgrace out of the CL.

 

Compare what Madrid and Inter spend compared to Arsenal and Liverpool and they still get nowhere.

Thanks for playing.

 

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner. I just emphasized the key point.

 

I prefer to make the distinction, within the context of competition, between relying on incidents to sway in your favor in order to win and instead trusting your God given talent to influence a game.

I think its hypocritical to hear complaints from English football enthusiasts about the "incidental" when the intellect says: the team that advanced was ultimately the more daring between the two. After all, that kind of thinking is what shaped English football to the level of prominence it is now. Just look at Manchester Uniteds mass appeal as an example.

We can argue about game specs all day but I tell you this, over 180 minutes I strongly doubt that Chelsea garnished any brownie points from neutrals, or at least more than they already had in the last two weeks simply because they were the least inspiring. And for that reason Chelsea isn't getting my sympathy this time around.

 

You're confusing Possesion with Chances.

Barcelona barely created any clear chances over both legs compared to Chelsea.

 

And if they had played more assertively, they might've given up three in Barcelona and made this game irrelevant.

As it was, they were the only team this year to go to Barcelona and emerge with a clean sheet.

 

Welcome to why I believe the NFL in the United States is rigged. Happens all the time.

 

Friend, they were the more daring team and they get the popular vote from neutral pundits. You're trying to simplify something that can't be simplified; cup competition football is a gigantic canvas of grey areas and can only be analyzed subjectively. This isn't major league baseball where everything is quantifiable to a tee.

 

They created one chance, and that was their goal.

That was the one thing which concerned me about Chelsea -- Barca had 2/3 of the possession for most of the game, and, really, it was all about if Barca was going to get one real chance, because that was all they were going to need, especially with the fix being in with the officiating.

Chelsea were not getting a second goal.

 

UEFA have had the away goal rule for decades and only now are we questioning it due to Chelsea fans' sour grapes?

That is the rule. Live with it.

 

Chelsea were not getting a second goal eh? Had 3 or 6 chances not been blatantly stopped by Barca handballs/fouls, we would've put the ball in the net, simple as that.

 

Italy held Spain to a draw in the Euro's and where did that get them?

 

And give me a break about the officiating. The game was so fixed that official felt it prudent to give Abidal a totally unnecessary red card? Nah. The ref was just bad. To both teams.

 

You're presuming he's actually a "decent referee". Given today's performance, I can't agree with that.

 

You know what they say: It's not the crime that exposes it, but the coverup.

(The red was abysmal -- if anything, red for the dive.)

 

yes it is. they both were. if you are are eto and decide to turn around spastically then you better have your hands tucked. his arms were flying around and yes any part of the arm is a hand ball. if they were tucked it should a no call cuz the ball played the arms but his arms were out therefore he played the ball whether it was intentional or not.