Hmmmm I seem to recall that Liverpool actually won there 2-1 a couple of years back.......and that was despite going a goal down early on.
Re: Will the match official of the Chelsea...... They did not do anything not usually seen on the pitch when red card is handed out. What Drogba did was disgraceful.
On what planet? From the link below: http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...enyon-we-must-sell-before-we-buy-1608508.html Lampard, Terry, Drogba and Ballack all earn more than 100k GBP per week, while IIRC Essien, Cole and Cech also all earn more than any other Arsenal player (depending on Gallas' wages. I think 80k per week is highest on Arsenal). http://www.sportingo.com/football/a...r-earners-premier-league-salaries-out-control http://www.footballchatter.com/forum/premiership-general-chatter/16999-players-wages.html That's why Flamini, Cole and others left - Because Arsene Wenger has kept the wage scale low in order for the club to remain profitable without incurring debts from operating costs. But I don't begrudge Chelsea (or anyone, for that matter) for buying talent. I'm disgusted they're permitted to continue to operate at a significant annual deficit in order to maintain the appearance of being so big a club, just because their owner (who achieved his wealth immorally) can take the loss. Meanwhile some clubs who aren't endowed with anything close to sugar daddies find themselves in/facing administration while trying to operate the club as a legitimate business. Witness Leeds downfall from trying a similar approach to spending their way into perennial contender status. If anything my ire is directed at the powers that enable such financial excess, in the meantime I can't favor the club one iota until they're disposed of their outside funding support. Edit: I know the links above aren't the most recent data, but they're close enough considering the roster changes since then. Either way, ManU and Chelsea are comfortably spending more than Arsenal and Pool, and waaaaaaay more than other Premiership clubs.
Planet earth But what about the other major European teams? That's what I was on about. And I agree with you that it's wrong for teams to operate under such massive debt.
We know apart from Bayern, which is pleading for financial restraints, German clubs can't match EPL wage scales, and arguably only the biggest from La Liga and Serie A could come close or think of exceeding: Madrid, Barca, Milan, Inter, Juve. (Roma & Lazio?) Those that could have the established global marketing pull to allow such expenses, but even then I'm fairly confident Chelsea tops them all. (If someone could prove to me otherwise, please do so and I'll stand corrected.) Regardless of how much they're spending by comparison, I'm not saying they're cheating but agree the rules should be amended. One time investments to help a club or to build facilities I can accept, but not the leveraging of basic operating expenses. If you can't function as an independent business operation at the EPL level then you shouldn't be allowed to be there. That's my complaint, to say nothing of RA's history.
I hope you feel likewise about clubs that can rent a publicly provided stadium for a below market rent, get a stadium built with taxpayer's money, or which can sell their training ground under "interesting" terms to clear their debt.
Ironically the first-time Alves got in a decent cross it resulted in Barca's only goal. But I think Alves' crosses is a prime illustration that Barca had an off night. People will use these two games against Chelsea as "proof" of how poor La Liga is, but the fact is Barca simply played better in most (all?) of their La Liga games this season. I doubt it. The whining will continue for at least 3 years. Gloryhunters have a problem with their teams losing. It's because you have an agenda against Barca, so it just seems like that. Agreed. Far fewer people would watch or even care about a Man Utd - Chelsea final.
You could argue that they are allowed to play better in La Liga as teams there generally do not approach games like Chelsea did. Having said that, you cannot use one semi final as evidence of anything relating to overall league standards. If you wanted to argue that La Liga has declined, you could look at the poorer UEFA Cup showing of Spanish teams this season compared to previous years, but again that is really too small a sample to say definitively. If it becomes a trend, however, then it may be an indication to that. I'm more inclined to think of it as a one off and expect to see a better showing next season (and probably from England and Italy as well).
Re: Will the match official of the Chelsea...... Amen. His antics had zero impact on the result. It did give the world media another opportunity to give soccer another black eye.
Re: Will the match official of the Chelsea...... Why? His side were cheated out of a place in the CL Final. He reacting accordingly in the heat of the moment. He has since issued an apology. Deal with it.
Re: Will the match official of the Chelsea...... Damn, I'm agreeing with Teso pretty much on everything these past few days.
Re: Will the match official of the Chelsea...... [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1UihUqHKbU"]YouTube - all possible chelsea penalties vs barca[/ame]
Re: Will the match official of the Chelsea...... Fair enough, but there are alot of unwritten rules applied in football. Only losers point to the literal words of the rulebook. Another example of an unwritten rule is that for a foul to be called inside the box, there requires more contact than the minimum amount of contact that is required for a foul to be called in the rest of the pitch. IOW, what Alves did to Malouda is only a foul outside the box. Fact is, none of those incidents (apart from the Pique handball) would be called in the middle of a crucial match more than half the time. So they're basically shouts for a penalty and nothing more.
You could, but that argument only gets you so far. For example, it doesn't explain Alves' poor crosses when no Chelsea player was around him. It doesn't explain Xavi's poor corners either.
Re: Will the match official of the Chelsea...... You need to deal with the fact that they were not cheated, ballack should have been red carded in the first leg, the ref missed a penalty shout for barca in the first game, and abidal was wrongfully red-carded. If anything it all evened out in the end. And even if they felt cheated, drogba's reaction was uncalled for, whether you like it or not.
Re: Will the match official of the Chelsea...... Having no affiliation or loyalty to either team, my take is there was only one clear penalty (pique's handball). Toure fouled the player outside the box but his tackle afterwards was not a clear-cut penalty that would be given under most circumstances. The other ones were questionable, but they also would not be given most of the time, especially in such big games. The fact is there are some questionable calls but when taking into account the no-call for barca's pk in the first leg, ballack no red card, and abidal's miscall red card, then it starts balancing out more.
Exactly, chelsea do deserve some credit, but it is also the barca players did not play like themselves (even when not under pressure). Alves' crosses were awful, xavi and iniesta did not control the tempo as well nor pass as effectively, and etoo and messi were absent most of the match.
So it was down to poor crossing from Alves and poor corners from Xavi that Barcelona created zero chances in the first 91 minutes of the game? Several aspects of Barcelona's game (and to be honest they're not famous for set pieces and crosses) were off, but that doesn't explain the subdued performances of Eto'o and Messi - two thirds of the most prolific attack in world football this year who contributed next to nothing in the second leg.
Re: Will the match official of the Chelsea...... Why not? A penalty is a penalty regardless of how crucial the match is - referees might make allowances for cards for players on a suspension, but they should call every foul. Suggesting otherwise is questioning their integrity.
Re: Will the match official of the Chelsea...... I agree entirely. Chelsea deserved to be in the finals (assuming they score at least one of the two PK they should have been awarded). I don't think replays should be put in, but I think a second on-field ref would help without cluttering up the field.
The second part is true, but Barcelona knew that Eto'o and Messi would be more subdued in the middle coming into the second leg, so they passed the ball to Dani Alves more often to cross the ball. He overhit every single cross except for the last cross that led to the Barca goal. I don't know why he was so bad, but Barca's failure to do more in the attack can literally be blamed mostly on Alves. He also screwed up the times he tried going more into the middle.
Re: Will the match official of the Chelsea...... Chelsea were clearly cheated. Try showing some objectivity for a change. You have plenty of 'affiliation or loyalty' to one of the teams so do not claim otherwise. The rest of your post indicates someone who either: (a) did not watch the game, (b) does not understand the rules of the game, or (c) is biased. Take your pick.
Re: Will the match official of the Chelsea...... Tell me what affiliation i have to the club? You being a premier league fanboy, your opinion is as usual worthless.