If someone who started this thread wasn't a(n): 1) Everton fan 2) Man U fan 3) AC Milan fan 4) fan of an AC Milan player Then I would give it some credability.
Actually the best game of the tournament was: PSV 3-1 AC Milan. Speaking of which, Milan were so clearly owned in that game (like against Ajax in 2003) - that had they gone on to win it, they would have been completely undeserved champions. (like in 2003) Out of all the teams Liverpool deserved the most and are so rightful champions.
Why wouldn't AC Milan deserved it if they had won? Liverpool do deserve their victory but why would they deserve it out of all teams?
Because if had been what a team deserved the final would have been Psv vs Liverpool instead of Milan vs Liverpool. Of course, everyone here rubbishing Liverpool keeps bleating on how much Milan deserved the trophy forgets how much they were outplayed by the dutch men... why? Because it's Psv.
exactly you can't say liverpool were lucky when all teams need luck and milan cetianly did when they got completely outplayed by PSV thats football ,why is there all this moaning against liverpool ?
I don't know if you've watched that game again. What is remarkable about it is that Milan were dominant for about 15 minutes. And curiously they didn't score when they were dominant. The rest of the half was pretty even. Milan scored very early, Liverpool hit back with two or three well saved shots, Milan had a goal called back for offside, Liverpool countered. Then in the last 5 minutes of the half, Milan hit Liverpool twice with classic counter-attacking goals. It went in 3-0 at the half and while none of the goals were lucky or anything like that, 3-0 was harsh given the play. In the second half, Milan started well and then retreated when they didn't get the 4th goal. Hamann's influence became more pronounced and Liverpool became more dominant. Then 3 goals in 6 minutes, but there was more than that. After Alonso scored the 3rd, Milan did not reassert themselves, rather it was Liverpool who kept coming forward. Riise had a rasping shot from the left barely parried by Dida. And Garcia (I think), maybe Smicer, had another that went just wide. Then Liverpool settled back, undone, so to speak, from the psychological effect of coming back from 3 down. They became more conservative (what we have we hold), believing that not conceding a 4th was more important than scoring a 4th. Milan did come forward more in the last 25 minutes, but their attack and Liverpool's was contained quite well by the respective defenses. Liverpool had long stretches playing keep-away in the middle of the park - not that they turned this into scoring chances, but Milan were left chasing shadows for periods at a time. Sure a close call here and there, but the last 25 minutes of the game was kind of a phony war. In extra-time Milan did come out with guns blazing and Liverpool struggled to contain them for the first 5 or 7 minutes of the first half, but then both sides reverted to type, with Milan definitely being the more dangerous. The second half of extra time saw Liverpool being a little more adventurous, but only by playing it to Cisse from deep and then following on for the pass. Milan still looked good, but dominant was a stretch. And Liverpool looked comfortable on the ball. The remarkable double-save by Dudek was, I think, the only save he made in the second half of extra time, maybe even the whole of extra-time. And the game finished with a free to Liverpool at the edge of Milan's area. Dominant is a much over used word, certainly in this context.
We meet again! And what do you know. I also have the 1983 European Cup final on video. In fact, it's the first match I ever videotaped! Just a week ago I watched it again. You won't like me saying this, but Hamburg were very deserved winners on the night as well as for the season. Jurgen Groh was perhaps the standout player for HSV in Athens that evening. It was a major heartbreak for Juventus to have had lost that final. They were coming off losing Serie A to Roma, and it was no secret that during this time having never won the European Cup was a tremendous gap that annoyed club officials more than anything and they were virtually obsessed with trying to win that trophy. (Much like my Barcelona at the time too ) During the close season, Juve had to listen to Roma officials saying that they were going to bring the European Cup back to Italy, going to be the first Latin club in fifteen years to win the tournament, on and on. In the end, Juve's CWC triumph was probably nothing compared to the joy they experienced watching Roma lose the European Cup final in their own stadium. To finally be called European Champions a year later was a huge burden off "The Old Lady's" back. Unfortunate that their victory was overshadowed that night in Heysel. From a footballing standpoint, unfortunate too that the long-serving veterans Zoff and Bettega were no longer around when they lifted the trophy. As for the topic of this thread, has anyone ever seen the '86 Steaua-Barcelona final? A one-sided affair where the best team by far lost.
I saw it live on TV back in 1986, but the only thing I remember is Dudacam's glorious performance in the penalty shoot-out.
I don't mind that you say that Hamburg were deserving winners. As long as you say nothing derogatory about Juve with any evidence. There have been a few people who have been like that. What stood out about Groh's performance in the Athen's final? Actually, I'm not satisfied with fact Roma lost in 1984. Usually I'm just happy when an Italian team wins a trophy in Europe regardless of who wins, even Inter, which I hate the most out of all Italian teams. It doesn't mean that I don't appreciate winning the 1984 Cup Winners' Cup. A European trophy is a European trophy. In 1985, Juve became the first team to win all the trophies available to a European team and they did it in an eight-year period. It would have been been a fitting tribute to win the European Cup for Zoff and Bettega in their final match but at least Zoff managed to win the most important trophy of them all, the World Cup. I haven't seen the 1986 European Cup Final but judging from that scoreline, it was the worst final ever. I wouldn't rate the Steaua team of 1986 as the worst winners ever. In fact, they had a better team in 1989 when they lost to AC Milan.
PSV outplayed Milan, that's pure fact but when you look at AC Milan's list and the way they played throughout most of the tornament, they would have been just as deserving as Liverpool. I'm not taking anything away from Liverpool but to say that AC Milan aren't a team who deserves to win the CL considering that they're not a very negative team, that's daft. Don't use streotypes to debate that AC Milan are a negative team, if that is your thought on Milan.
I know that this comes from completely out of "les bleus" (or is it le bleu?) but I'd say the worst team ever to lift the European cup is............ MARSEILLE in 1993 Marseille had decent team that year and they did beat AC Milan in the final but their win was overshadowed by match fixing scandals that saw their efforts severly discredited. I'm not sure if they had their championship stripped away but this disgraceful sportsmanship imo deserves the "worst team ever to left the European cup" award.
Ball handling, mainly. He seemed very confident throughout. On the movement leading up to the goal, Kaltz feigned a cross from the right. As he began moving back towards midfield, he touched the ball a bit too hard. He ran to get it, but Groh arrived at the same time and seemed to take the ball away from Kaltz. You can see Kaltz telling off Groh, and Groh simply waved him away. A bit funny when you see it. Groh then passed to Magath who dribbled forward and scored the winner. Shortly afterwards, Cabrini was running with a HSV player chasing him. He back-heeled to try and beat the defender, but behind him Groh had been trailing the play. Groh took Cabrini's back-heeled attempt, took a couple of steps forward, and as Cabrini tried to win the ball back, Groh gave him a taste of his own medicine by back-heeling the ball back to the teammate who had been beaten in the first place. You can hear the HSV supporters in the stadium cheer loudly when the play was made. In the second half, Groh was fed a through ball (I think by Magath) and with only Zoff to beat, Groh lifted the ball over the keeper and just over the bar. I don't know if that helps any. I suppose you'd have to see the whole match yourself to appreciate how well Groh played that night. I must admit that I hated Juve with a passion during the early 80s because of the many star quality players they had. As mentioned before, in '83 they had 6 from Italy's World Cup winning side, a seventh (Bettega) who likely would've been in Spain '82 had he not been injured, and in Platini and Boniek perhaps the finest players France and Poland have ever produced. Juve don't bother me much nowadays. Real Madrid is the team I now love to hate. Steaua appeared to want to play for penalties right from the beginning. Barca had many chances to score and I've always felt that had Barca scored Steaua would've been exposed. I've never seen the '89 final in full, but I'm almost willing to say the this match backs me up. Once Milan got their first goal, the floodgates opened. Steaua were forced to chase for an equalizer and it allowed Milan to do whatever they wanted. I need to find a copy of this match just to be sure, though.
First, I find this tread to be comical...then I find this post, where numerous hilarious nuggets are mentioned "PSV3-1 Milan" as best game of the tournament....right . As a Milan fan, the final was heartbreaking, but I knew to the neutral fan, and of course to Reds fans, it was a great game. Having said, the Chelski-Barca match at Stamford Bridge was the match of the tournament. Hec, I'd say that home and away tie was the best and most dramatic series in Champions League history (albeit only since its existence since 1992). Next, we get to the part where Milan would have been underserved champions. Oh geez...not only for how we played this year, but also because of our games versus Ajax in 2003....two years ago...(i know, very logical argument), where apparently we were walked off the park. Last I checked, Ajax couldn't score at home, and they almost had the away goals rule work in their favour in San Siro when they just couldn't defend well enough for Pippo's goal(okay Jon Dahl Tomasson got it, but it really was Inzaghi's injury time goal). And you hold that against us Give me a break. What short attention spans our Dutch and Dutch loving club fans have....when Lyon clearly dominated PSV in both legs in their quaterfinal tie, save for the terrible finishing from Wiltord, Nilmar, Gavou, and Frei in both legs. If we are going on statistics, it should have been Lyon (best offense) versus Liverpool (best defense) in the Champions League final, but oh whoa is me....that didnt happen because other fans like Borruma willed it to not happen. Please. Last but not least, the very topic of this thread. Liverpool deserved to win it, yes, even against my beloved Milan, because they did what they had to do, from the First Round, all the way through to the final to get the result they needed. Whether it was playing for penalty kicks in the overtime of the final, to trying to squeeze in three goals against Olympiakos in their last group game, Benetiz did what he was good at....make average players into a championship team. In a way, he was fortunate that the team didn't overextend themselves in both Premiership and Champions League games...otherwise, I don't think he would have had success in the latter. The players would have been just too tired and exhirted in too many "do or die" games. You can debate all you want about if Liverpool won it, or Milan lost it, or that Chelski or Barca were still the best teams in the competition (hell, I'll throw in PSV too just to please some people ), but the Reds played by the rules and did what they had to do. Now what I do actually think is a valid argument and that would be better placed in another thread is a debate to have the current system used of having clubs other than the champions of each league qualify (current Champions League format) to only just the Champions of each league (old European Cup), a revival of a Cup Winners Cup (since nobody really cares about thier national cup competitions, or just a big scrapping of the Uefa cup and just have clubs qualify for a bigger, yet more watered down European cup. Under the old European cup format, Liverpool wouldn't have deserved this years cup, because they didn't win last year's Premiership. But then again, neither would Milan in 2003, since they didn't win Seria A in 2002. Likewise, a second division club like Alemannia Achen, who qualifed for the Uefa Cup this year because they made the German Cup final last year could do a Greek Euro 2004 and shut up shop playing negative soccer in a newly revised Champions League, where if you get a certain league place or make a domestic cup final, you qualify. In my view, with the way the current Champions League set up, we leave it open for a team to play mediocre in one competition but reserve their strenghth for another. In essence, cherrypicking and an unclaimed title of "Best club of Europe"...really, could you really claim that Liverpool was the best club in Europe this year, when Chelsea, Bayern (okay...and PSV) did the Double, Lyon won the French League four years straight, and Juve and Barca winning their leagues handily. On the other hand with the old European Cup system, with no group games but a knock out system with ties of David and Goliaths early on with upsets here and there and then more evenly matched clubs facing off later on, it was more dramatic while having less games on the football calendar. But you would have your Skonta Riga vs Real Madrid matches early on...very competitive, eh? THose are topics we should all be talking about. But go ahead and be my guest and continue. BTW...when Red Star Belgrade won in 1991, they played a dreadful final (probably the worst one ever) against Marseille, but they were deserved champions based on the way they played earlier on in the tournament. Prosinecki and Savicevic were genius, and even Pancev could score back then (as well as the ever infamous Mijalovic with his free kicks). p.s. Also another interesting side comment.....even though Liverpool will be priveledged to play in the many competitions afforded to Uefa Champions, with the FA Cup, League Cup, European Super Cup, the World Club Championship (two games possible now) AND the 05-06 Champions League campaign that begins for them in July, they will be seriously dead on their legs come January. And really, no serious winter break. (i know Sven got something, but you really need at least 2-3 weeks off in the winter). With Reds fans anxiously awaiting a Premier League title, it would have been extremely classly for Liverpool to just ignore the Champions League this year, give the slot to Everton (who was denied European Cup entry for 1986 because of Heysel) and the Anfield club would come out as gracious and probably more enegized for the spring games for the Premiership, while also competing for the earlier prizes of European Supercup and the World Club Championship. Throw in the fact that Gerrard and Carragher are likely to play for England in the World Cup, and they are going to be dead tired come June with their current fixture schedule. Just my opinion....
Pancev was a very good player but he wasn't the same when he went to Inter. That squad also had the Romanian sweeper Belodedici and as well as Vladimir Jugovic in that team. Bad timing by Stojkovic. He went to Marseille in the previous year.
Um, it was 3-3. Milan only really created only 2 CLEAR cut chances in the game more than Liverpool. Not much else really. Liverpol's defence coped admirably from the second half onwards.