now lets have a view from the referees angle.

you cant have video refs for things like that

Yeah maybe a slight bit harsh. But I really did exepect alot more form attacking players. Giggs looked very tired, Carrick went missing for large parts of the game, the 2 full backs didnt get forward enough & whenever Brown did get forward he didnt track back fast enough & got caught a few times, Flectcher pfffffft & it was the same old story with the PFA & FW player of the year lots of step-overs no end product.

Besides Rooney,Schooles & the CB's the rest of the team didnt look intrested in winning the game. I would have liked to have seen Smith come on sooner, I think he would have put alot more pressure on the Chelsea back 4 & would have approached the game with a better attitude than some of the other players.

Ryan Giggs never mentioned the supposed "foul" by Essien - he dismissed that and instead talked of the goal standing. Now, if he doesn't recall the "foul" how can you say it was a foul? All he talked of was the goal standing, which we all know (unless you're an idiot) was a foul on the keeper due to Giggs' momentum follwing through the keeper.

Bottom line: 11 matches between that old bag eyed cnut and Mourinho.
6-1 to Mourinho. Up yours!!

Y would Giggs talk about wanting a penalty when he shaould have had the goal???

Are u a Chelsea fan or what? U certainly seem to show more of an interest than u do Spurs. Even in a discussion like this u constantly back up Chelsea, no matter what the situation. Maybe u r just an argumentative sort of person because u certainly aren't right.

Exactly!!! He should have scored the goal!! But he bottled it, missed an absolute sitter

PS - I'm Spurs through and through but I'm also an ABMU fan.

We must be the biggest fanbase in the World.

It's nice to know that even as big rival north London clubs we can unite on this

Back to topic; Ronaldo. Another disappointing game. I said in the Kaka or Ronaldo thread that one of the big differences between the two is decision making. Ronaldo is a goal greedy little git. On about 88 minutes, he cut inside Bridge (I think) and shot at goal but missed by a distance. If he got his head up, he'd have seen Carrick only a few yards in front of him in acres of space. But that the's problem. He's too selfish to pass, he'd rather do it himself. Had he passed, it would be very likely that we'd be discussing a United double. Poor decision making.

Brilliant
By the way, Jose looked very handsome yesterday. I love him with that suit.

What a shite game never lived up to the hype but at least utd never won the double.

would you have wanted the first game of Wembley to be a dull, boring affair like yesterday, or a cracking 3-3 like last season that ended in penalties?

Also, did you not think that both teams were waiting for penalties due to their lack of penetrative forward play in the 90 mins and also extra time?

To be totally honest, I'd rather yesterday's game be the first Wembley final over last season's. For all the excitement and drama of last season, the game wasn't won.
Yesterday's was. Sure, from an entertainment point of view, the West Ham Liverpool game was far better, but, like I keep harking back to in the penalties thread, Drogba settled it with a goal - and in my opinion, that's the aim of the game. To score more goals than the opposition.

No I don't. Otherwise we wouldn't have seen Drogba scoring the winner would we? The first half was drab but at least the tempo picked up in the second half and the game did become a bit more stretched. It was very cat and mouse and it was always going to be, but when you consider United's poor record at penalties, and Chelsea losing to you guys recently and against Charlton in the league cup last season, I don't think either team would have been that confident from 12 yards.

[quote="Johaldo8"]
To be totally honest, I'd rather yesterday's game be the first Wembley final over last season's. For all the excitement and drama of last season, the game wasn't won.
Yesterday's was. Sure, from an entertainment point of view, the West Ham Liverpool game was far better, but, like I keep harking back to in the penalties thread, Drogba settled it with a goal - and in my opinion, that's the aim of the game. To score more goals than the opposition.


thats fair enough mate, i understand your reasons for the choice of haivng yesterdays game over last seasons, but have a guess, im going to pick at the other part.



So you say that neither teams were playing for penalties cos Chelsea scored. Well hold on a second. In the Champions League semi-final 2nd leg at Anfield, Liverpool hit the woodwork, had a goal disalowed and had more efforts at goal than both United and Chelsea yesterday yet you think Liverpool were playing for penalties. That does not make sence to me. Liverpool have done well in penalty situations over recent years, but there is as much chance of losing on pens as winning, and i know we would have rather won it in normal time without pens. You can never be 100% sure you will win the shoot out, its 50/50. I am bringing this up again because i see this as double standards.

Good point, and I'll admit that I'm winding you Liverpool fans up a bit with the penalty merchant claims. You did have opportunities to score against Chelsea but I'll stick by my opinion that Liverpool are a negative team. I have more respect for Chelsea's win yesterday than Liverpool's victory last season. You are very good at penalties and Rafa is happy to settle games this way.

I'll finish my response now (I was watching the Ugly Betty re-run - sad eh?! ).

Liverpool played for penalties against Milan two years ago - they recovered from 3-0 down and had Milan on the ropes, but instead of delivering the knockout blow they retreated and waited for spot kicks in my opinion. In the Chelsea game several weeks back, although Liverpool did have opportunities against Chelsea, they were largely counter attacks and the priority was to hold for the draw. I can understand that approach as a Chelsea goal would have meant curtains. But it doesn't change my view that the better team over two legs lost the tie on penalties.

if neither teams win it has to be settled that way, and unfortunately or fortunately depending on which way you look at it, a few of our games have come down to that. But not always because of negative tactics. I mean, its not that negative to score 3 V AC Milan, or 3 V West Ham. I would like to see us more adventurous, but we have not always had the players to do so, so hopefully next year we will be more attacking, especially away from home, as at Anfield, there is nothing wrong with our attacking play IMO.

But you cant honestly think that Rafa goes into each cup game thinking "i want to win this on penalties", that is ludacrus. He would do everything in order for us to win out right, but sometimes you can try as hard as you can, but to no avail. Penalties, for me, and most people, is the only way to then decide a game.

1 last thing, why do you have more respect for Chelsea winning yesterdays game than Liverpool's victory over West Ham?
Also, do you have the same amount of respect for Liverpool's 2-1 win over Arsenal in the FA Cup as Chelsea's victory yesterday?

Liverpool play to their strengths and have reaped their rewards.

I don't think they are negative whatsoever. Benítez's tactics are often really well worked and when the team play to their strengths they can beat anyone and win the biggest competition, which has been proven.

That final yesterday was far worse than the Liverpool V West Ham final - even an idiot can realise that.

Every bit. Loved that game. The Michael Owen cup final. In fact, I have even more respect for Liverpool than Chelsea yesterday because they were clearly the worser team, yet managed to score the goals to win the match, and did it from a losing situation.

I think that Liverpool are a negative team, no question about that. They're certainly not in Man Utd's, Arsenal, or even Chelsea's league for providing sustained periods of attacking football.

I agree that maybe it's because you don't have the players. All I'm saying is that it is negative. Closing down space is the first priority, in my opinion. Nothing wrong with that, you play to your strengths as J said. All I'm saying is that it is a negative approach.

fair doos. The only reason i bothered to mention all of this in this thread was because of what you said in the Champions League thread. How we just wanted pens and played for pens as that was not true, cos from using that logic i could quite easily say that about United or Chelsea yesterday. But otherwise we pretty much agree with everything.

2005 CL Final won on Penalties...

Last Year's FA Cup Final won by penalties

Liverpool's chance to play this years CL final was won on penalties.

Now Milan will put you in your place

Now you know how we felt after the match at Anfield