do you think the teams who played in the final deserved to be in the final?

Or do you think, other teams deserved those placs more?

Im not asking whether you think that other teams would have made it a more entertaining final, just if those were the two that deserved to be there?

Chelsea v AC Milan. The two best sides in this year's competition.

It's no mean feat making the final, especially twice in three years for both sides, they both made it and both deserved to be there.

My favourites to reach the final were AC Milan and Chelsea.

But Liverpool went through the campaign well and knocked out both Barcelona and Chelsea. I think they got there deservedly.

Read the question again,how were Chelsea one of the best teams in this years competition when we beat Barca and Chelsea

Liverpool and Milan certainly deserved to contest the final without doubt,any team who knocks out Barcelona and Chelsea deserves to be in the final and likewise with Milan for beating Man Utd and Bayern

You beat Chelsea on pens. The game of football was a 1-1 aggregate draw and even your own man Benraul unwittingly admitted that Chelsea were the better team over both legs (he said the second game wasn't much tighter than the first - work it out). You had all your main players fit whilst Chelsea had several big injuries, but they still played better.

As for Barca, you drew 3-3 on aggregate. Chelsea beat them over both home and away games 2-1 on aggregate. Chelsea topped a group which featured not only the Catalans but a very dangerous Werder Bremen. Your group was p!ss easy. You beat a p!ss poor PSV side in the quarters without their best player (Alex) whilst Chelsea banged out Valencia, beating them in their own stadium to qualify.

Chelsea were more deserving.

Sorry mate but we beat Chelsea,whether you like it or not winning on penalties still counts as beating the team,we also beat Barca in the Nou Camp,Chelsea could only manage a draw there,and how can Chelsea have beaten Barca 2-1 on aggregate when they drew 2-2 in the Nou Camp?

ok well we new Johlado was going to say we shouldnt be in the final that obvious. But, why do you not consider Milans place?

reasons i will raise.....

1 - Cheats - match fixing- should not even be in the competition. I can imagine had that been Liverpool that would be the first thing people would be saying.

2 - If we had an easy group, they had an easier one. Lille, athens and anderlect! Teams they beat on route, Bayern and United, had harder groups so by your reckoning they should be more deserving to be there than Milan.

Just take Johaldo's comments with a pinch of salt like i do,jealousy must really be annoying for some people

Here,here

My two were Chelsea v Milan

Hate to point out, but we beat Barca 2-1 away and lost 1-0 at home, you've come up with two extra goals from somewhere...also Chelsea were better than us in the first game but we were certainly the only team trying to win in the second - despite what Jose may have said after the game. Seeing as Chelsea's situation didn't change after we scored (they still just needed a goal and we'd have needed three to go through) they were surprisingly negative - whereas we had a goal disallowed for offside incorrectly and were undoubtedly the most adventurous side. Also, lets face it, Chelsea were lucky against Valencia - even after Barca scored, we didn't look like losing. Talking of Barca, not only did we teach them a lesson in their backyard, but in the first half at Anfield we had a shot off the line, Riise hit the upright, as did Sissoko. Basically, I'm only sensing you think we didn't deserve to be there because you don't like Liverpool, not through any factual analysis.

And injury-sminjuries! When you've got the money Chelsea have there is NO excuse for not having strength in depth - none whatsoever. Sure, Benitez has spent a fair bit - but he's brought in some quality, some quantity, players like Zenden and so forth were never bought to set the world alight, they were bought to plug gaps. If Chelsea choose to spend their summers getting players like Sheva for 30million, that's their perogative. When you have a budget like Liverpool have had the past few seasons, then you have to try to bring in quality for cheap, sometimes it works, sometimes not, but at the end of the day Benitez tried to build a squad, not just a first team.

Also, look at ACs group - not the hardest - but what can you do? You can only play who you're drawn against. Beating Barca and Chelsea and pushing AC all the way is an awesome feat, as is two finals in three years. Mourinho goes on about getting the sack if he hadn't have won the Prem in three years, but frankly if a manager has spent as much as Mourinho has and didn't bring home the Champions League in three years, their ultimate aim, then I'd certainly ship him out. Real Madrid used to spend silly, silly money but at least they brought home Europe's most important cup.

I'll stop for now, feel free to discuss Johaldo8, maybe Bluenose can join in with his Daily Star-esque viewpoint?

I also agree Chelsea And Milan.

Ps cowboy operator...
Your avatar is so uncanny with your name.

cowboy operator, very good post.

Billy, quick question, do you believe Milan should be in the final, even though they should not even be in the competition cos of their match fixing?

I don't agree on any team in it that are not champions or second place of their league.

Now a quick question for you.

Do you believe you have the right to say you've won it five times as you lot have also cheated?

1 - Milan cheated in their own domestic league. Therefore, they should be punished in that league in my opinion. No one complained that Milan that allowed to play in this year's tournament did they? I don't think any complaints were lodged anyway. Besides, you asked the question "were the two right teams in the final?" and the answer I gave is based purely on a footballing perspective.

2 - You both had easy groups and waltzed through them but Milan beat a very dangerous Munich side in their own stadium and also knocked out Man Utd very convincingly. Two of the tournament favourites. And because they actually beat them (not winning on penalties) and deserved to beat them, you can't really argue that Munich or Man Utd were more deserving.

Cowboy, quite right, Barca and Liverpool drew 2-2 on aggregate, not 3-3.

I actually predicted that Liverpool would knock out Chelsea (check the thread out). Chelsea were going flat out for all four trophies, your players were a lot better conditioned as the rest of your season was long over so you could rest them, Chelsea had some big injuries (any team no matter how much money has been spent will miss their big players) and also you had the second leg at Anfield. When I consider all these factors, I'm surprised Liverpool were totally inept at Stamford Bridge, creating only one chance (and that was really a half chance - brilliant shot by SG). Chelsea created far more opportunities and deserved to be 2-0 up going into the second leg. The second leg was tighter, cat and mouse. I disagree with Mourinho that Chelsea were better on the night, I thought it was about even steven. But when you look at the performance of both teams over both legs, there's only one deserving winner, from an honest neutral point of view. If it went to the judges' scorecards and not penalties, most would say Chelsea were better over the two games. But it didn't and Liverpool won the shootout.

How were Chelsea lucky against Valencia??!! Explain that please

Liverpool deserved to beat Barcelona, I haven't disputed that at all. All I said was that you drew on aggregate. Chelsea also deserved to beat Barcelona and actually beat them on aggregate 2-1.

Chelsea winning the league back to back is a bigger achievement than winning the Champions' League. But when you're expected to challenge for everything, and the teams you play in the Champions' League are only focussing on that competition becayse they've been eliminated from everything else, then the opposition have the advantage. So it proved with both semi finals.

Mourinho throwing jibes at Rafa about not winning the prem title and getting the sack is all mind games. But I'll say this: at the start of last season, Rafa Benitez said his squad was ready to mount a serious title challenge. It didn't happen. He has failed in that respect. Failed in the FA Cup too, losing at home to Arsenal. The Champions' League was the last chance to save the season and they also blew that. What are the excuses?

It's another trophyless season for England most successful club. That is the bottom line from from 2006-07. It's 17 years and counting since Liverpool last won the title. Next season, with Hicks and Gillet behind him, Rafa will have no excuses not to mount a serious challenge for the title in my opinion.

i raised the cheat issue only to counter Billy's pathetic argument of saying Liverpool are cheats, that is all. But i do agree with him that the Champions League should only be for the champions of their respective leagues. But it is not now-a-days, so maybe it should be called something else?




well we beat a very dangerous Barcelona side in their own stadium and ended up doing it quite convincingly in the end as Cowboy Operator has pointed out. We also knocked out Chelsea. These 2 teams are arguabley the 2 best teams in Europe.

You always come back to the penalty argument. Implying that if you win on pens, you are some how less worthy of winning. Maybe, if for the 120mins you just defend, defend, defend i can see your point, but we have not done that. Against Chelsea at Anfield we were the only team that looked capable or even looked like trying to score.

We ended up winning on pens but thoroughly deserved the win. If Chelsea are not capable of taking their chances, or even making chances, then they dont deserve to be there.

lol, who are these judges with scorecards? All the papers, everyone on here, every Chelsea fan i have spoken to have all admitted they were not the better team and we deserved it. Its just you that dont think so.



Chelsea did not play Barcelona in a aggregate situation, that is completly pointless point to raise. The group stages are so different from the knock out stage. Away goals dont count there.



i pretty much agree with the rest of this.

The excuse that he can have for this seasons failures is that the team is not good enough to be in a final of a champs league final, yet they still played well. No one expected us to be there. At the end of the day, we are not good enough, as the league table proves, but hopefully it will be different next year. The expectations will be much bigger, so failure will be a lot worse. hopefully it will not ocme to that.....

You said that the second game wasn't much tighter than the first. This is an accidental admission that Chelsea were more better than Liverpool in the 1st leg than Liverpool were better than Chelsea in the second leg. I've said this already and you know it Most people said Liverpool were more deserving on the night. I think if you judged both games, and scored both team's performance then Chelsea were more deserving. But we'll agree to disagree on this. Round and round in circles.

I raised the Barcelona games because Cowboy used it as a reason why Liverpool deserved to reach the final. I only countered this by saying that Chelsea also played them twice and were more successful than Liverpool.

in a completly different context though. they did not have to take into consideration away goals etc. Or if they lost them would be eliminated. They had other games to make up those points, but they did indeed also do very well Vs Barca.

We might as well leave it i reckon. we both have our opinions and neither of us are going to be swayed so there we go. I bet everyone will be happy seeing this thread die off now.