You think that Zidane intentionally hit the crossbar with his PK - despite the fact that a panenka's success depends entirely on the keeper having dived, and there's no real reason for the ball to even come close to the crossbar? You also think that Zidane picked out the exact tiny location on the underside of the crossbar that would allow the ball to come down inches behind the line instead of on the line, and hit that spot to the centimeter? Both of those seem absurd. I don't think that Zidane is dumb enough to deliberately gamble with the crossbar in a World Cup final. And he's a human being, not the Terminator. Anyway, I know it's off topic, but the love for Zidane's 2006 PK is something that I get irrationally irritated about years later. The only real difference between Zidane's bungled PK and Baggio's notorious miss in 1994 was dumb luck; both were clearly mishit.
No he did not intend to hit the crossbar... but he had the balls to even attempt it, knowing what he knows about the game and situation, and it worked. That's all. As I said, at this level the dividing line is very fine, but that's just how it goes sometimes. Genius and clown are not separated by all that much in these specific kinds of scenarios. Well just so we're talking about the same thing, surely you'd at least agree that Zidane's hit & Baggio's were not mishit to the same degree? Zidane hit a graceful chip, which admittedly could have made him look bad after the fact if it were not in fact on target, but it was on target. Which has to matter. In fact, it going in off the post makes it even better, not worse. Whereas Baggio completely skied it. Those aren't the same in execution, even though the success/failure fine line applies to both. The difference between them is not necessarily just "dumb luck".
Funny thing is, if Puli were a bit luckier, his stats would be remarkably different. After today, Keylor Navas is entering the convo for Best GK Ever. Not kidding.
No, it clearly makes it worse. If you watch Zidane after the PK, he seems to look to the ref before celebrating. Understandably, because a ball just over the line might be disallowed pre-goal-line tech (just ask Frank Lampard). Zidane didn't only get lucky that the ball barely snuck in- by cutting it close, he created a possibility that a goal might be wrongly denied. How could that possibly be better than a more competent panenka, which leaves nothing to chance once the keeper has guessed wrong?
You seem to really take this personally for some reason, so we don't have to get that into it since we just disagree... but I'll just say in my opinion it's better for the same reason any ball in off the post, or exactly in the corner of the goal is better that one which is not; it gives the impression of a greater degree of accuracy. Especially with a chip shot, which is all about accuracy. The resulting appearance is that he can cut it that close and still score, he can hit it that accurately.
i think you are attributing a degree of precision which is frankly beyond human capabilities. the crossbar challenge in your framing should be a speck of dust
Being or looking cool isn't necessarily about underlying reality, it's about appearance. I'm glad you brought up the crossbar challenge, since the very concept of such a competition supports my point... that putting the ball within inches of failure, yet succeeding, is impressive. That's the whole idea. It doesn't mean someone could hit the crossbar every time or is that mechanically precise, and it doesn't mean Zidane even meant to hit the crossbar. However the appearance is such that if he said he was aiming for the underside of the crossbar, and hit it that perfectly, there's nothing you could say to prove otherwise. That's the fine line. That's why it's impressive.
Away goals don’t matter when you win by shutout! Sorry, one of my pet peeves. but think about it...it’s better to win 3-1 on the road than 2-0.
3-1 may well be better but it's not as good as 3-0 and either way you have to score 3 away goals so the argument is a little mute to be honest. Of course It does mean that even if Chelsea score an early goal in the return leg it won't change the fact that they will need three goals to advance but it does mean that they'll need more than two to take the tie into extra time - so scoring again won't be a complete waste of time! :-D
Always fun to read the hometown media reports: “Pulisic crashed down the right wing and let go a tremendous blistering shot that—of course—hit the crossbar...” https://theprideoflondon.com/2021/04/09/goal-line-ghost-costs-chelsea-porto-win/
Jorginho is hilarious. has an open pass to CHO on the wing, but backpasses to Azpilicueta and orders him to pass to CHO.
Pulisic knocked down trying to line up a shot, but retains possession playing it wide from his backside.
Pulisic shot on goal saved; clearance after rebound doesn't make it out of the box, passed in to Havertz, who finds the far post from a tough angle just 8' out. 1-0 Chelsea.
GOAL! Great team play and Havertz makes a little cutback pass to CP open 8 yards out - roofs a 6 yard blast near post!
This is the Chelsea I was waiting to see all season. Love what I’m seeing from this front line, haven’t actually played many mins together in this setup.