[Champions League] Chelsea 1-0 JUVENTUS (02/25/09) (3 Viewers)

Esteban

Senior Member
Mar 6, 2005
5,365
We weren't satisfied with the result. We obviously weren't. We did everything to equalize.
You can say that we couldn't do it because we're not good enough, or because Chelsea defend very well, or maybe a little bit of both, but we certainly weren't satisfied with 1:0.
That's why I said kind of satisfied, of course you're not entirely satisfied losing. We weren't sacrifising EVERYTHING in order to grab an equalizer either, players were still tracking back.
 

Buy on AliExpress.com

Snoop

Sabet is a nasty virgin
Oct 2, 2001
28,186
Because Capello could never win in Madrid, with his squad of insanely better talent, for example.

Capello's squad required last gasps of errant balls against Bremen to keep us alive.
True he was lucky against Bremen, and he did pass Real Madrid btw :p but still I don't see Ranieri doing anything better than Capello in CL not that I am complaining about it, but he is no better, he is still at second stage and could be eliminated from a team that I doubt they are going to make the final..
 

only-juve

Senior Member
Jan 5, 2008
7,451
but we could get Pana/Villarreal/Inter. On our day we can certainly beat any of them
Probably but i can't see this team winning this year's CL. This team is really hungry for a title but we simply don't have the quality of players that can give us that extra push for titles. Credit to the players and ranieri (did a decent job) but not to the board....
 

JCK

Biased
JCK
May 11, 2004
125,395
Not the way you put it. But if you see the amount of times we've been aging chase the ball against teams like BATE and then fail to create a decent amount of chances is a serious problem. You just stated one extreme.
We won our group, the way I presented it is no longer extreme. It is absolutely not my problem if you don't want to look at it this way.
 

A_LAcki

Senior Member
Dec 23, 2002
3,560
Poor passing and a very good Chelsea defense is what I was watching! Some things I want to mention
Chiellini has to learn, how to pass the ball. He was awful today.
Molinaro was begging for that red card. We were very lucky.
SHAME that Camo is injured again!

But lets face it: We have been playing against the last years finalist, who hasn't lost a home-game in Europe for 16 games now.
I take the result and think we have still every chance to still qualify. Anyboby who says the opposite is simply ignoring the reality!
 

Snoop

Sabet is a nasty virgin
Oct 2, 2001
28,186
I'm not sure about that.... it was expected Chelsea to start better than us because they're playing home and the tempo was really predictable in the 1st half.

Now the question is, can Chelsea handle the tempo in the 2nd leg?
why the hell you changed your avatar? :D
 

Luca

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2007
12,751
No need to go gung ho.

1-0 us takes it to extra time.

Just play to win.
But it's obvious that our 4-4-2 doesn't work against teams that play a 4-3-3, even ranieri admitted it, but I don't know what else we could do, I guess we're kinda stuck if guus plays a 4-5-1 which has two very mobile wingers/strikers.
 

Mark

The Informer
Administrator
Dec 19, 2003
97,675
In the end, you need to score. If you don't but still manage to create chances it won't take you in the next round or give you 3pts if your playing in the league BUT it shows that you can "box" with the other club and it gives you hope for the return leg.

Execution is the key word and that will take us to the next round. Let's concentrate, leave the nerves in the dressing room and make those key plays.

We have the will and "balls", now it's time to put it in the f*ckin' net.
 

Alen

Ѕenior Аdmin
Apr 2, 2007
54,023
We can't handle the tempo, their high line and closing down, it's just what Italian teams aren't used to, I was suprised how inter responded.
I don't really follow EPL much but this Chelsea does look less pacey than Arsenal or Liverpool 3-4 years ago. That might be the reason why we could handle them better than the flying Arsenal for example. So, to sumarize, i don't think Chelsea's tempo was so high.

But this Chelsea is physically much stronger than that Arsenal. Drogba on on end, the defenders on the other, and strong guys like Ballack and Mikel in the center make it harder for us to take advantage of our main quality, and that's primarly our physical strenght.

It will be tough but Roma did beat them 3:1 after losing 0:1 in London. Yeah, group stages are different, you play for points, you don't care about the aggregate, but it still says that Chelsea are beatable by 2 goals difference.

FORZA JUVE
 

JCK

Biased
JCK
May 11, 2004
125,395
I never said Chelsea were "passing more", whatever that means. What I did say was that they were troubling us more through making more incisive moves in on us.

If you want to go by your statistics, then either way, we both lose 1-0. :pumpkin:
It is obvious that they will trouble us more, we were trailing since the 11th minute and we had to push higher and thus leave more grass. They did trouble us more but they didn't create more. They did trouble us more but their passing game wasn't any better than ours.

And as I said, that's all because were conceded very early in the game.
 

aman

Junior Member
Feb 9, 2004
349
What I'm worried about, especially after reading Hiddink's comments, is that Chelsea are going to improve their game before the second leg. Let's make sure we do too.
 

C4ISR

Senior Member
Dec 18, 2005
2,362
Our tempo in Turin will need to be much higher.

If Camo is out, we should switch to a trident. Nedved and Marchionni on the counter isn't good enough for Europe. We can manage in Italy, but against a pacey team like Chelsea (in comparison to us), we should play Del Piero behind Trez and Amauri.

Where was Seba today btw?
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 3)