[EU] Champions League 06/07 (22 Viewers)

denco

Superior Being
Jul 12, 2002
4,679
These ratings are by Daily mirror, its amazing how we watch matches and have differring opinions about player performances. Watch out especially for what Lampard got compared to Makele. Carragher and Gerrard's ratings way too high
LIVERPOOL
JOSE REINA: 7
Tremendous save from Drogba in the first half showed his mettle. The two keepers on the pitch last night are probably the best pair in the Premiership.

STEVE FINNAN: 7
Assured performance at right-back, his presence in the side gave Liverpool more balance and more penetration in attack, as he supported Pennant well.

JAMIE CARRAGHER: 9
The rock on which Liverpool is built. He produced some crunching early tackles, and one sinew-tearing stop to stamp his authority on the game.

Advertisement

DANIEL AGGER: 7
Not a bad finish for a centre-half was it? As it was, he battled manfully with his tormentor Drogba and displayed the touch of class he possesses.

JOHN ARNE RIISE: 7
Steady performance, his role was to shadow Kalou and ensure the opponents didn't break swiftly. Still managed to get forward to supply useful crosses.

JERMAINE PENNANT: 6
Got the better of his mate Ashley Cole in the early exchanges, and took the upper hand. His crosses were a real threat on his best game for the club.

STEVEN GERRARD: 8
At the heart of everything. You could see from the look on his face that if his side were to go down, then it would be fighting. Clever free-kick for Agger goal.

JAVIER MASCHERANO: 7
Again looked so nervous in his passing in the early part of the game. But his attitude is spot on and never stops working. The pace was a little frenetic for him.

BOLO ZENDEN: 7
Genuine bafflement when his name appeared on the team sheet after last week. But he started brightly and a lot of Liverpool's game flowed through him.

Advertisement
DIRK KUYT: 8
You can't fault his work rate, which was nothing short of staggering. He so nearly got what he deserved when a crashing header struck the bar.

PETER CROUCH: 7
Found it difficult against John Terry, but still managed to break the shackles to bring the best out of Petr Cech when he rose well to head down a Pennant cross.

SUBSTITUTES
Xabi Alonso for Pennant 78min,
Craig Bellamy for Crouch 106min,
Robbie Fowler for Mascherano 118min.
NOT USED: Daniele Padelli, Alvaro Arbeloa, Sami Hyypia, Mark Gonzalez.

CHELSEA
PETR CECH: 6
Will be unhappy with the marking on Agger's goal. Cech made a brilliant stop with his feet from Crouch in the second half. Great save from Kuyt header.

PAULO FERREIRA: 6
Solid defensively but gave the ball away and wasted crossing opportunities whenever he got forward. A disappointing game. He is not good enough.

MICHAEL ESSIEN: 6
Missed a good first-half chance when he headed wide from point blank range. Looks fairly solid in defence but Chelsea really miss him in midfield.

JOHN TERRY: 7
Was solid as Chelsea's captain and defensive rock. Limited the threat of Crouch and Kuyt and protected Petr Cech's penalty box. Did not lose a tackle.

ASHLEY COLE: 6
Booked for a foul on his big mate Jermaine Pennant - and had a great duel with the Liverpool winger. Cole won early on but Pennant became dangerous.

JOHN OBI MIKEL: 7
Gave away too many fouls and was careless with some of his passing. But his physical presence gave Liverpool problems. One of their better players.

CLAUDE MAKELELE: 4
Veteran midfielder was clumsy and no longer dictates the game. A really disappointing night for the Frenchman who looks increasingly past his best.

FRANK LAMPARD: 7
Spent most of his night on defensive duties and Chelsea missed his attacking threat. Worked hard, put in some good dead balls but was shut out well.

JOE COLE: 6
Was very lucky not to get booked after a couple of reckless challenges and that would have ruled him out of the final. Cole could not get in the game.

DIDIER DROGBA: 6
Had a good sight of goal - but fired straight at Pepe Reina. Drogba destroyed Liverpool in the first leg but the Chelsea danger man was kept fairly quiet.

SALOMON KALOU: 5
Really poor and struggled all night. Still looks like a work in progress when this game was all about having proven quality and class. He has neither.

SUBSTITUTES:
Arjen Robben for Joe Cole 98min,
Shaun Wright-Phillips for Kalou 107min,
Geremi for Makelele 118min.
NOT USED: Carlo Cudicini, Khalid Boulahrouz, Lassana Diarra, Wayne Bridge
 

Ahmedios

Senior Member
Nov 11, 2006
5,107
Some teams seem to be better equipped for Cl than others like Real madrid, Milan and Liverpool so you cannot discount them whilst some no matter how well they perform do not do well generally in Cl like Barcelona, Inter and sadly our very own Juventus.
Generally, I agree with the presence of some teams in Europe who are more ready for continental competitions more than the others. But when it comes to Juve, as far as I watched, our records in the Champions league aren't that bad. Since 1996 till 2006, we reached the final in 1995/96, 1996/97, 1997/98 and 2002/03, winning it only once in 1995/96. Also, we reached the semi-final in 1998/99 and the quarter final in 2004/05 and 2005/06.

The thing that still pains me the most is losing three finals in such a short period of time. If we won just two of them, our CL record would have been changed completely.
 

denco

Superior Being
Jul 12, 2002
4,679
Generally, I agree with the presence of some teams in Europe who are more ready for continental competitions more than the others. But when it comes to Juve, as far as I watched, our records in the Champions league aren't that bad. Since 1996 till 2006, we reached the final in 1995/96, 1996/97, 1997/98 and 2002/03, winning it only once in 1995/96. Also, we reached the semi-final in 1998/99 and the quarter final in 2004/05 and 2005/06.

The thing that still pains me the most is losing three finals in such a short period of time. If we won just two of them, our CL record would have been changed completely.
But thats the crutch of the matter, we have been to i think 8 finals or thereabouts and only won it twice, once on penalties and the other by a penalty in an ill fated match. Barcelona with their history have won it just twice too, ditto for manu united. Compare that to Liverpool who have just lost 1 final and won it 5 times, Milan have wonit 6 times, Real Madrid 9 times
 

Ahmedios

Senior Member
Nov 11, 2006
5,107
But thats the crutch of the matter, we have been to i think 8 finals or thereabouts and only won it twice, once on penalties and the other by a penalty in an ill fated match. Barcelona with their history have won it just twice too, ditto for manu united. Compare that to Liverpool who have just lost 1 final and won it 5 times, Milan have wonit 6 times, Real Madrid 9 times
I know, but this still has nothing to do with these team; Juventus, Barcelona and ManUtd being well equipped or not, because simply, they're already.

I may regard their lack of winning the CL titles to the circumstances of the finals themselves, thus, we've to go back in time to discuss every final as a separate case.
 

Jun-hide

Senior Member
Dec 16, 2002
2,068
I don't disagree with your general premise. I think they are absolutely true. In fact, I also believe match-up is just as important factor as some of the more obvious ones. Its so obvious that Liverpool is far inferior to Barca in almost every respect but in retrospect, their rough style ideally suited to defend the attacking flair of Barca players.

But when it comes to mediocre teams doing really well in Europe last 3 years or so, the format is biggest single reason for the explanation. Any team can beat any team on a given day, and Liverpool not being one of strong contenders, IMO, and benefited from this system far more than say ManUre, Inter, Barca, and indeed Chelski. When we reached the final, we had to qualify from a group that included Manchester United, and Depor to just earn the right to play Barca, Real, and Milan. Nobody wil tell me that a team group of Galatasary, PSV, Bordeaux is anywhere near as good as those teams we had to play to reach the final.

When unknown teams did well in Europe before the change in format, they had to be pretty awesome that just did not have name recognition. Teams like Bayer had world class players throughout their team, with likes of Berbatov, Ballack, Ze Roberto, Placente, Lucio, Sneider, Nowotny, Ramelow, etc. Nowadays a team of Park, van Bommel, Lee, Farfan, Hesselink, Cocu, Alex or Bellamy, Crouch, Pennant, or Morientes, Rothen, Bernadi, Givet, are good enough to take you last 4 with some luck and good form.[/QUOTE]Seriously what time scale are you talking about? The Bayer team that got to the final did so in 2002 and thats just 5 years ago with the Monaco team you besmirched did so just 2 years later than Bayer so I am not sure I understand your point. I do not think its the format or anything like that , its more luck of the draw. This year's Cl has been a debacle in terms of quality but that could be attrubuted to a number of reasons. Some teams have underachieved in this competition mainly Barcelona. The world cup hangover for some players has not helped. Another factor is nowadays we all seem to know as much as the managers as we do the players, even referees are becoming household names.In the future ywe might even start to know names of linesmen, if that happens, then i stop watching the sport. Years ago, i never knew names of referees, and i didnt want to know but now we all know their names.
You talk chelsea, you are mainly talking about Mourinho becos there are no players there that really excite you , you talk Liverpool its more of the tactics of Benitez with only Gerrard ben worth talking about. Last year's at least had some great players in the final like Etoo, Ronaldinho,Laarsson, Henry, Deco, Xavi, Henry , Fabregas etc
At least in today's game we have players that can play, like ronaldo, seedorf, rooney, nesta, kaka and Pirlo
Some teams seem to be better equipped for Cl than others like Real madrid, Milan and Liverpool so you cannot discount them whilst some no matter how well they perform do not do well generally in Cl like Barcelona, Inter and sadly our very own Juventus.
It does not help either when countries like scotland are allocated 2 teams in Cl, France and Portugal incredibly are allocated 3 with Greece and Turkey.
Of the teams offered 4 teams only Epl can produce 4 teams that can cope with both Cl and domestic league in the same season and they are manu, liverpool, chelsea and arsenal. In Italy only Milan, Inter and Juventus can do that. In spain Barcelona and Real Madrid with Valencia can cope

denco,

It is just a matter of statistics - there is nothing special about it. If you are not an outstanding team, then it is better to play less match than more, because on an any given day any team can beat any other team. Milan could loose to likes of AEK, but that hardly means they are inferior to the Greek squad. Good teams are defined by their consistency, and the matter of fact is Liverpool are 13 points behind Chelski, with the latter game in hand. Spin it all you want with the squad being more suited for CL, squad depth etc, Chelski is superior to the Pool when it come down to the last bone. Liverpool could possibly be a Champions of Europe and yet they might finish whooping 20 points behind ManUre at the end of season. That is serious inferiority, and Liverpool simply isnt great team at all.

Since the change of format, more and more less recognised teams are making it to latter stages. That is fact. Depor, Monaco, PSV, Villareal, Porto, Liverpool have all made it past last 8 in last three years. And simply law of averages suggests that for less talented teams their chances are greater playing less matches, which is what CL format has exactly done by eliminating the second group stage, and replacing that with two legged knock-out stage. So teams have to play 4 less games to make the CL final. It may not sound a lot, but believe me, if those 4 teams means playing 2 more games with Real, Barca, Lyon, Inter, Roma, Juve etc, I tell you that 6 pointer might look awfully hard.

Liverpool progressed to the final by beating Barca on away goal, Chelski on penalities, and playing poor PSV team who were out of form. So apart from PSV tie, Liverpool has failed to demonstrate clear superiority in terms of point differentials. That means their are at the knife-edge of qualifying or not qualifying in group stage - but more importantly that means they might earn the right to play in the last 8 against, not PSV, but Inter, Valencia or Bayern, followed up with Milan, Chelski, ManUre in the Semis. This is exactly why poor teams are finding it easier to progess to the latter stages of competition in last 3 years than in the past. There is simply no second chance for big teams to cover their off day. When Bayer progressed into finals, they qualified a group containing Juve, Depor and Arsenal, and beat Liverpool, ManUre. And eventually gave great Madrid team a run for their money in the final. Current Liverpool team, Porto & Monaco 2003, are nowhere near that standards.
 

Stu

Senior Member
Jul 14, 2002
17,557
These ratings are by Daily mirror, its amazing how we watch matches and have differring opinions about player performances. Watch out especially for what Lampard got compared to Makele. Carragher and Gerrard's ratings way too high
Skysports ratings were more accurate. They gave Lampard 4. That's hilarious how the Mirror say it was Pennant's best game for Liverpool and yet they give him a 6.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 22)