The conversation started around the term "underdog". To my mind, an underdog is someone who is expected to probably lose and it's a surprise of some proportion if they don't. Neither we nor Chelsea could be considered in that vein going into a game. Who is generally the better team wasn't really the point.
I wouldn't put us as favourites based on the season form between the two clubs. i'd put it very close. chelsea have dominated portions in midfield which is worrying but they are **** up front. I can't call it, much depends on team availability. If I was asked to call a CL final between city and liverpool I'd have to go by the two league games and not the cup team city put out. it'd be also very very close. we'd love city to be made favourite of course. two league draws, both 2-2. Being underdogs is easy for fans but its largely irrelevant to the teams themselves IMO.
I wouldn't call either side a underdog because it is close. Not 'evens', close with us a very VERY slight favourite.
Tbh, I wouldn't call us underdogs against anyone these days. Perhaps not favourites against City or Real, for instance - but the term brings to mind someone who is definitely expected to lose, and I don't think we are. We can definitely win any game.
They have to be a neutral 100 though - good luck finding that. It's like all of those GotM votes on MotD. They're so obviously partisan they're meaningless.
