Come on mate you have to face facts, we were out played, but we did just enough ..

Not really true. Sticky said they were the best in the world. Their domestic form certainly suggests they are world beaters - and the media purported them as such beforehand.



Ahh Crabster. You seem to be underestimating my thinking as incredibly simplistic - when i say we weren't the better side, i didn't mean because we didn't attack relentlessly, i meant because we were the worse side. Which we were. We were very sloppy throughout - our touch and passing was shocking and we struggled to retain possession, or carve chances out even when served on a platter (through Inter mistakes). Of course i don't expect us to go "gung ho", i'm not stupid. But you do have to exert your chosen gameplan expertly, regardless, if you want to base whether you go through on your own performance; as it happens, it wasn't based on our performance, it was based on the fact that Julio Cruz and Ibrahimovic are crap finishers (on the night). Our fragmented defensive line offered them 4 glorious chances to score, and that's not what you want at all when defending a 2 goal lead - 3 of them were as good as one-on-ones, whilst the other was from about 3 yards out. When defending and hitting on the counter-attack you need to be flawless in defence and offer them scraps, half-chances, not clear-cut chances to score their needed amount two times over. We played on very thin ice and you can't disagree that on another night it could have been oh so different. Also, we killed them off only after the sending off - that was the only point we looked composed, and even then they still had a couple of extremely good chances immediately after.

It was a decent performance indeed, but we certainly rode our luck - and that's not something you set out to rely on before the match has been played. It was in Inter's hands and they lost that tie, THAT'S why we were not the better team on the night.

It's neither.

Inter just didn't play to their best, and were unlucky to have lost Materazzi in the first leg. Maybe it could've been different, but then again, maybe not. Liverpool are superb in the Champions League, and seem to overcome almost anyone despite most predictions.


Inter were very, very, very unlucky to have two players sent off though.

I wouldnt call it an english domination yet. To dominate you gotta win it, and in last 20 years only two english teams won the CL, once each one, Man Utd and Liverpool. Come close but lose in the final isnt dominate

Oh god, the tripe people are spouting about Inter is unreal.

To judge them on two games is pathetic. Two games in which they got a player sent off in each.

Oh and Gobati, what you said takes the biscuit. You said Inter only won the league because they beat the lesser teams, but never the top teams.

What a joke that is. They've beaten Milan in the last 3 games against them. They've lost just once to a top 4 teams in Italy in the least two years. That was to Roma.




''Say what you like about the red card - Inter Milan up until our matches hadn't lost a match this season... They boasted that statistic not because they roll over and let teams win, regardless of sendings offs, but a team that is resolute, determined and solid. We scored 3 past them when they couldn't score 1; we deserved progression just as much as they did.''

Against us that was the same. Losing 3-0 on aggregate to Liverpool is no disgrace when you consider the decision that went against them, and effectively ended any chance of them winning the first game, and then overturning the deficit in the second one.

They were NOWHERE NEAR their best against us, but in the first leg they certainly were not bad. They were resolute, and were holding us for most of the game despite being a man down. Even when we scored it was quite lucky, as the ball deflected over the 'keeper.

Oh and people seem to forget the team Inter were forced to field against us in the second leg. They are quick to criticise them, but never say anything about them having to play their 5th and 6th best centre backs. FIFTH AND SIXTH!!!!

Imagine if we had to do that. It would be Hobbs and Arbeloa. We would have no chance. It would be even worse for Arsenal. I don't even know who their 6th choice centre back is, but he would play alongside either Sagna or Djourou (not sure which of the two is 5th choice).

Actually, Materazzi, Cordoba, Chivu and Samuel are ahead of them. They were Inter's 5th and 6th choice centre backs.


We were lucky. Who knows how it would've turned out if we weren't lucky, but at least we played really well in the first leg. If i was an Inter fan though i would be incredibly [beep!] off. Everything went wrong for them. The sending off's ruined it for them, they were missing centre backs, and Cruz and Ibrahimovic who have been so good for them this season, didn't perform.

Sticky, I disagree with you. I don't think Inter were such a great team. Same with Real Madrid
Being the first in your league doesn't mean there aren't teams somewhere else that can beat you with not many problems.

So you consider Milan a big team... in Italy Milan is nothing more than an average team, the only big teams in Italy at the moment are Inter and Roma. Inter beat us in the home game (but you have to consider we've played 10 men most of the game) but lose in the Italian Supercup and got a last minute draw some weeks ago after the undeserved double yellow for Mexes. They've 6 points of advantage made of victories against Siena and Reggina and recently they often needed some help from the refs to cope even with them, that's it. Isn't strange that every year they seem an unstoppable power in Italy and then when they face Villarreal, Valencia or Liverpool they magically disappear from international competition?

As I said before Liverpool faced Inter in their worst moment of form and with lots of injured mainly in defence but this doesn't justify them. Outplayed in Anfield Road, incapable to score in San Siro, that's enough

Right, before anyone starts, I know Celtic are poor and they play in a sh*t league but lets stay on topic.

Italian football is a dying force. Long gone are the days where Juve, AC & co dominated the European scene. Italians showed they are not the superr power they used to be. Inter are walking away with the Serie A but when you look at their team, they are vastly overrated. Ibrahimovic, arguably their best player, has a pretty poor goal scoring record throughout his career and I read yesterday that he has 20 goals for Inter, 10 being penalties. Hardly a goal machine to strike fear into opponents, a la Torres.

I think Liverpool fans are looking into this far too much. They played Italys best team. No where near Europe's best though

Yup, that was last season when we beat Barcelona.

Ben, sorry lad but you do talk some rubbish at times

Gee, i forgot how childish you are. I won’t bother replying to your posts in the future.

Oh here we go

Don't worry, i'll stop. Bluenose told me how much i hurt your feelings last time you were here and made you leave. I wouldn't want to do that again.

It matters little now but I disagree. OK, Liverpool started the match at Anfield well, particularly the first 20 minutes, but in the 10 minutes before the dismissal (on the half hour), Inter were looking comfortable. They had weathered the early Liverpool pressure and started to have more time on the ball. But even after you had the man advantage, Inter still more than held their own until their best player on the night -Cordoba - went off injured. And even then, it took a deflected Kuyt goal to open the scoring. You got lucky three times one could argue. So I think it would be foolish for anyone to say that Liverpool are a better team than Inter based on these two games. Had Carragher or Alonso got sent off in either match, I'm certain Inter would be in the quarter finals. C'est la vie. That's the way the cookie crumbled and fair play to you - it's not your fault Inter were hard done by.

I'm just in agreement with Sticky T that the luck ran with Liverpool, not Inter.

You could argue though that it made things harder for us to score once Materazzi had been sent off. After that they clearly just decided to settle for a 0-0 and got everyone behind the ball... Had they had 11 men they wouldn't have done that - the game would've been more open and Torres had already shown he was getting the better of Materazzi anyway. Of course, there's a greater chance they could've scored as well.

I still don't think the second red card was particularly harsh though. The first incident was where the ball had gone and Burdisso swiped out, kicking Kuyt - which you could argue is a straight red anyway. Whilst the second was where both Lucas' and Burdisso's feet were high, the ball was taken away by Lucas, Burdisso missed him with his foot but caught him with his trailing leg (i think). The red in the first leg was extremely harsh but this one doesn't compare.

Time frame = 93 minutes

You funny

I knew i wouldn't be able to stick to it. You're too much of a **** sadly.

Thanks bud but I know you love me really

Your a c*ck.