[EU] Champions League 2008/2009 (47 Viewers)

Alen · May 7, 2009

Chelsea weren't camping in their penalty box when Barcheatlona were reduced to 10 men. They were pressuring them in midfield or in Barca's own half of the pitch.
Belletti got the ball many times on the wing. He even found himself to take a dangerous shot on Valdes' goal.
They just didn't push hard up front and now people will say that they parked the bus in front of their goal. :howler:

Sadomin · May 7, 2009

Alen said:

It helps them retain their mental image of Barca being the saviours of football while Chelsea are nothing other than lumberjacks.

sateeh · May 7, 2009

Alen said:

Well fair enough, you have your reasons

and i don't think its fair comparing messi's game against ronaldo's. Ronaldo was playing against a bunch of wussies ( sorry fred, but your mob pissed me off) while messi was playing against a machine.

I was just watching the local champions league review and the local pundit absolutely slated Hiddink about his tactics. Although the guy doesn't like tactical teams he is a huge fan of Hiddink (as most people, pundits, and even the football federation personnel) and his opinion is that lucky Guus had it all wrong. He couldn't take advantage of the one man advantage and instead of trying something new with the barca defense stuttering.

Amaurisimo · May 7, 2009

There is not doubt that Chelsea been done hard by referee, however don't forget that they are also partially to blame for their risky game plan. As i said before, my biggest critic would be negative approach by Gus and instead of trying to push bit more, or even play as they played until than, he took best Chelsea attacker..

I remember now Monaco-Chelsea game , when Monaco player was sent off, and CR subbed defender for midfielder in order to finish off the game, and that gamble cost him game, career.

Gus did not have to make Drogba change, he is at fault 100% no matter how great he is

Amaurisimo · May 7, 2009

sateeh said:

on all points here. Messi was constantly surounded by 2-3 players, not giving him any space..I like Ronaldo very much , but than again i don't think he would be able to do anything more against Chelsea defenders, if not much less..

As one player said, Arsenal - Man U, was a game man against children

Bisco · May 7, 2009

Amaurisimo said:

There is not doubt that Chelsea been done hard by referee, however don't forget that they are also partially to blame for their risky game plan. As i said before, my biggest critic would be negative approach by Gus and instead of trying to push bit more, or even play as they played until than, he took best Chelsea attacker..

I remember now Monaco-Chelsea game , when Monaco player was sent off, and CR subbed defender for midfielder in order to finish off the game, and that gamble cost him game, career.

Gus did not have to make Drogba change, he is at fault 100% no matter how great he is

was'nt drogba subbed bec he was injured? at least thats what i thought to be honest.

Amaurisimo · May 7, 2009

he was not injured..he was simulating more than anything else. That is his game...
Drogba was also visibly upset by substitution..

Maybe they gave him wrong size jacket too

bianconero · May 7, 2009

Alen said:

It was just over a year ago that most papers, fans and experts were saying the same thing about Ronaldo: "He can't perform in the big games.", "He never produces in the important game." etc...

Lion · May 7, 2009

Messi is only 21 years old. Alen will regret those words soon enough.

swag · May 7, 2009

Alen said:

But if they had actually tried to legitimately score there, the second leg would have been quite different as well.

I think that's a bit of scapegoating. Chelsea didn't come to Camp Nou to win -- they came just to survive. And when they played at Stamford, they didn't play to finish off their opponent -- they played just to nick them off.

Chelsea's gameplan was wholly flawed all along, because the club in both legs opted to play tight and hope for the best rather than to play to win. They were too timid and showed Barca too much respect.

C4ISR · May 7, 2009

JCK · May 7, 2009

swag said:

But if they had actually tried to legitimately score there, the second leg would have been quite different as well.

I think that's a bit of scapegoating. Chelsea didn't come to Camp Nou to win -- they came just to survive. And when they played at Stamford, they didn't play to finish off their opponent -- they played just to nick them off.

Chelsea's gameplan was wholly flawed all along, because the club in both legs opted to play tight and hope for the best rather than to play to win. They were too timid and showed Barca too much respect.

Yet if you ask others (those who cream their pants only by hear the name Barca) you ought to give Barca that much respect.

Alen · May 7, 2009

Here is some interesting info.

How much did they pay for their players?

BARCELONA

x said:

Barcelona has 10 out of the 22 players produced by their youth system, 5 of which play in the starting XI (this is remarkable).
They paid €0 for goalkeepers, €94 million for the defenders, €37 million for midfielders, €60 million for attackers.

Chelsea

x said:

Chelsea have only Terry from their own youth school. They also signed some players on free transfer. They paid €10.3 million for goalkeepers, €89.8 million+Gallas for defenders, €117.1 million for midfielders, €61.2 million for attackers.

Manchester United

x said:

Manchester have 7 youth players in the team and 2 more free transfers. They paid €6.15 for the goalkeepers, €68.2 millions for the defenders, €117.9 for the midfielders, €75.3 millions for the attackers

Juventus

x said:

We paid €52.68 million for the goalkeepers, €20.75 million for the defenders, €79.9 million for the midfielders and €57.25 million for the attackers.
Nedved and Buffon cost almost half of the total sum we paid for these 23 players.
4 players played in our youth teams (for De Ceglie we even had to pay to get him back), Molinaro and Chiellini were co-owned with other teams, while 5 were brought here on free transfer.

STARTING XI
Chelsea €194.9 million+ William Gallas
Manchester United €193.3 million
Juventus €157.55 million
Barcelona €112 million

TOTAL:
Chelsea €278.45 million+Gallas+Di Santo
Manchester United €267.55 million
Juventus €210.58 million
Barcelona €191 million+Pique

* All the numbers are in euro. Pound-Euro exchange rate at the time of the transfer was used to get some of the numbers in euro.
These are only the transfer fees paid for the players, without counting their wages.

Alen · May 7, 2009

bianconero said:

Yes, and Messi may also do better than this next year or after two years or after 5 years.
Right now though.......

Albertmare · May 7, 2009

Shyne said:

:rofl2:

damn , i laughed my arse off , thanks buddy , those stuff relaxing me after some stressed weeks :tup:

swag · May 7, 2009

JCK said:

Barca is beatable. And a club like Chelsea should have been wise enough that with their serious resources, they are one of the few qualified not to fear anyone all that terribly much. Chelsea's most dangerous enemy is usually themselves, and they proved it again over two legs.

Fred · May 7, 2009

swag said:

You could argue that point yes.

Trigger said:

This for me, was fatal. I am positive that if Chelsea attacked Barca when they were a man down, they would have scored and finished the game off, but Hiddink was too much of a pussy and he has himself to blame for that.

Alen said:

You're normally one of the most neutral posters around, but this post has so much bias, Badass would feel jealous.

Barca has been playing free flowing attacking football for the whole tournament, but a couple of games they don't, and all of a sudden you make it sound like they're the most boring team ever, knee jerk? absolutely.

Second, yes Barca were ineffective, yes they were clueless and just passed the ball round with no purpose, but that was only because Chelsea didn't come to play football. They played with 3 or 4 layers, and it was impossible to play attacking football against such tactics. I'm not saying its wrong to play the way Chelsea did, but when Barca don't produce the breathtaking football they usually do against such a team, you kinda forgive them for it. At least they tried to entertain their fans.

Third, first you were saying that the game against Liverpool was basically two teams with horrible defensive lines that made the silliest of mistakes and that it wasn't an entertaining game whatsoever, now its a spectacle??

Fourth, I never thought Ronaldo was a choker in the big games, i always argued against that idea. But to now say that Messi is a choker is just absurd, did you not see his game against Real? Did you not see him against Bayern? Did you not see him against Man Utd last season? Did you not see how he destroyed Chelsea in 2006? He was marked by 3 men yesterday, kudo's to Chelsea for knowing their limitations. Plus if Messi was playing against a defense that consisted of such mediocrity like Gibbs, Toure, Djourou and Silvestre he would have done much more than C.Ronaldo did.

Alen said:

He did play as a winger, but his primary task was tracking back and helping in defense, if Hiddink wanted to attack he would have put on Kalou like he always does. The only time he plays Belletti as a winger is when he wants a hard worker and an extra man in defense when needed.

Alen · May 7, 2009

Fred said:

I enjoyed that match. There is no chance i ever said that Chelsea-Liverpool wasn't entertaining.
Did you maybe confuse me with Red who said that he'd rather watch a 0:0 with good defense than 4:4 with awful defense?

And that comment about Messi was an obvious (at least i thought so) hit at those who kept saying how Ronaldo, Henry or Ibra are chokers. The : seven : smiley should have been the clue. :smile:
What is a choker? Who is a choker?
If a player plays amazing football through out the year and can't do much when 2-3-4 fantastic defensive players are marking him, is that player a choker? I don't think so.
Because if it is, then everyone's favorite Messi is just as much of a choker as Zlatan and Ronaldo.

king Ale · May 7, 2009

sateeh said:

But who are the the players Messi has played against them in the entire season? Villareal defenders? Even the Arsenal "bunch of wussies" could beat the shit out of them in the past round. Real Madrid defenders? Sevilla's? Bayern's? Name me the decent defensive teams Messi has played against them this season and I'll accept he's a better player than CR. In 180 minutes against the FIRST team you'd call a "machine", Messi was off if not the worst player of Barca. La Liga teams are utter jokes when it comes to defend. Ronaldo indeed is a better player than Messi. More complete, more stable and in a better physical form.

Alen · May 7, 2009

But he's an arrogant diver, and a choker, and he loves men.
Messi on the other hand never dives, he's so humble and he also helps the elderly pass the street.

[EU] Champions League 2008/2009 (47 Viewers)

Ѕenior Аdmin

Senior Member

Day Walker

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

✮✮✮

King of Tuz

L'autista

Senior Member

Biased

Ѕenior Аdmin

Ѕenior Аdmin

Idea Maker

L'autista

Senior Member

Ѕenior Аdmin

Senior Member

Ѕenior Аdmin

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 47)