Absolutely, Atkinsons blunder changed the entire dynamic of the game and the mental impact on Spurs (after a season of many bad decisions against us) must have been huge. We must be the unluckiest club around, we have so many comically bad decisions given against us you couldnt make it up. Anyway we can add Atkinson to Webb, Clattenburg, Foy and Wiley (have I missed any out?..... probably) as Referees that have mugged Spurs through unbelievable incompetence (if I didnt know better I`d even suggest corruption).
Er - sorry to intrude - but shouldn't Cech have been sent off when we scored? 1-1 against ten men? Maybe that would have made a difference? And that nice John Terry, eh? Admitting after the match it wasn't a goal. I seem to recall that he went chasing after the ref at the time to say it WAS! ("We know what you are", eh?)
Let's do a thought experiment - two equally matched teams play a cup tie. Most often one team will win by the odd goal or it will be a draw so each team wins half the time. Now let's give one side a goal they don't deserve. That team now wins all the matches that have been draws as well as half the ones that were won by the other team by one goal. So they now win more than 80% of the time. These were the odds that we were facing after the referee error. To overcome such odds we had to take excessive risks and Chelsea took full advantage. The result says nothing about the relative merits of the two sides
Three chances in a half isn't many Drogs, which is why I said you'd rarely troubled our defence in the first half and Lidl's assessment about them being poor before the ghost goal is off. Mata wasn't in the game except for that chance, just as Modric wasn't, which is why I said he was virtually non-existent in the first half. I wasn't suggesting that we were all over you or anything, just that Lidl's comment didn't ring at all true. To say that we'd have played the rest of the game in the same manner is also rank speculation. You seem unable to understand why Chelsea suddenly started creating chances when we took a man out of the midfield to try and get a goal, for some reason. You know, that goal that never should have been given.
The physical and mental side of the game our interlinked LDL., Players can often get inspired to preform physically better (as a one off) if the game is going their way and it is being played and referee'd in a fair manner. A 'phantum goal' given against any player/team under yesterdays circumstances, inevitably has an inpacts mentally, which in turn effects the physical side of their game. Gallas and King were unfit, granted, but to what level of unfitness.. we here don't know. I'm going to suggest that had that 'Phantum goal' not gone against Spurs, we probably would not be having this debate about an unfit Gallas or King.
Gallas wasn't called unfit and past it when we kept a clean sheet at chelsea and sunderland, granted he isn't what he was, but he hasn't played many games this season so we cant expect him to be at his best every game.
Spot on Chirpy. One of the problems of the refs cock up is that it masks the weaknesses of Spurs which have come to the fore since Harry took his eye off OUR ball. We still have the quality that saw us shine for much of this season but when it comes to crunch time we are toothless.
So nothing much has changed over 40 years, or more. Still haven't got what it takes to stay the course!! Why? I don't know. Maybe it's been this obsession with playing "attractive" football over the years. Well, it's not very attactive to fans to watch their team snatch defeat from the jaws of victory so often, to be attending yet another false dawn! We need a backbone from somewhere.
Disagree. You had the best of the first half but we still were leading. We came out of the blocks in the second, and you were under pressure. Anyway
Actually they had the best of the last 10-15 minutes of the 1st half. Until they point they could barely keep the ball. We didn't create much but looked sharper, calmer and had better ball retention which was agreed on by the commentators.
I watched it as a neutral and obviously goal number 2 was not a goal in the slightest ( although at first glance i did think it was ), but i doubt Spurs would have even scored if the 2nd goal wasn't given, lets face facts Spurs were absouletely awful sunday compared to how they usually play and when Chelsea went 2-0 up they attacked and opened up more to try and get the 3rd to kill the game and Spurs players were still seething and in doing so Spurs finally got some space and managed to get a goal and then Chelsea immediately went back to how they were originally playing at 1-0 and Spurs changed formation and Chelsea then got much more space and Mata got much more of the ball + space and then they destroyed you. I hope you get 4th if Chelsea don't win the Champions League as i like Tottenham more and i feel bad for the players as well because they obviously really like Redknapp and don't know what is going on with him and they obviously aren't focused on the job.
Why are people just taking about the ghost goal? We were clearly cheated by that yes but there were many other factors the ref had a hand in that would have changed the game. Chelsea's 1st goal scorer shouldn't have been on the pitch before he scored based on missed fouls by the ref that would have meant 2 yellows instead of the one, pens we should have had too just to name a few. Chelsea will alwasy claim well we won 5-1 so one goal doesn't make a difference and yes that might have been the case, we'll never know but the fact is they had 12 men on the field.
