While it wasn't pretty to watch, it was terribly effective. With 10 men they did really to draw with Barca at home. However, this wasn't exactly an exciting Champions league to watch was it. Both semi's so far were far from classics. I hope the folllowing games will be more entertaining. I won't hold my breath....
Mega congratulations to Chelsea. The aim of football is to win, and while we all prefer the attacking, free-flowing style, they did what they had to to get the job done. Tactically superb apparently (I didn't watch the match) and I applaud them, and particularly Matteo, for that.
TBH Chelski did an excellent job last night, it was not pretty and made the game quite dull most of the time but it did totally negate Barca, they just kept trying to go through the middle and failing since Chelski had everybody in the box all the time!! Isn't it ironic that Torres scored by not doing his job, he was supposed to be helping out with the defending like Drogba did but because he was wandering about by the half why line he scored and settled it!
Hmm, not stricty true. Wenger player ultra defensive against Barca and was close to getting the result. Barca scored their penalty against us - till then the game was in the balance and even then we could have (and should have) beaten them at the end. very fine margins, but Chelsea and Arsenal played pretty much the same game at the Nou Camp.
i thought Chelsea's defensive display was far more enthralling and footballesque than Barcelona's tippy tappy sideways rubbish. There are many forms to football or it would be boring..defending is every much an art form like attacking is....
I don't get any of this praise for Chelsea. "well done" for being ultra negative ??? WTF ??? How is that worth praise ?? Lets all go back to Italian football in the 80s shall we
Utter bollox. Defending is an art and I appreciate a good tackle as much as a good shot, but all the major rule changes in the game in the last 20 years has been to make the game more exciting. Anti football is TOTALLY against the spirit of the game. 1) Backpass to keeper - outlawed to stop time wasting. 2) No tackle from behind - to protect players - arguably flair players. 3) Keeper 6 second rule - to prevent timewasting. 4) Treatment off the pitch - to prevent time wasting. 5) Offside rule - to favour attackers. None of the rule changes have been made to help defenders or the defence. Bottom line is nobody would pay to watch 2 teams park the bus if this were the norm or acceptable, so why should it be acceptable just because the team are not good enough to beat another team by attacking ? WE may as well shift to 2 points for a win to help reward negative football as well.
next time Arsenal deploy a defensive strategy to get a win and suceed i hope you will discredit your team..instead of seeing it as a great defensive victory...your box is very small if you think that football is only played one way...and it is true goals win matches..that is why Toress got the second due to Chelsea defending like they did.
2 teams didnt park the bus...one tried till thier bollox dropped off in order to score but they didnt have enough know how to break down a defensive unit of two 4's...football is a strategic game and you insult it if you think it is as easy as attack attack...Chelsea played to a tactic and for a team you claim to being ultra defensive they did absolutely amazing to manage to get 2 goals the same amount as the team you bang on about who also managed 2 goals. its as anti football as passing sideways for 30 minutes because you think you are too good to get a direct goal..they got what they desereved..that sideways show bored me..but Chelsea's defending was intriguing....the only 2 0r 3 times Barca did manage to have a decent effort was when they were bloody direct!
Arsenal played negative tactics against Barcelona last season in both games, didnt even have a shot at the Nou Camp lol. 2005 FA Cup final you parked the bus as well.
Wrong - Arsenal player positively at teh Emirates and were the better team. A load of rubbish was spoken about that game because Barca had more possession, but it was Arsenal who had more shots on and off target, more corners, and fully deserved to win the game. At the Nou Camp - yes we played defensively.
There is playing defensively and parking the bus, 2 big bloody differences !!! Arsenal don't know how to park the bus. and Dona Mara - you have no answer to the fact that FIFA have tried to make the game more exciting and entertaining - football is revenue - the Premier League makes bucket loads because the games are entertaining and full of action. Nobody would pay to watch teams park the bus - so making excuses for it runs away from the fact that its not football anyone wants to see, not the public or the law makers.. Its dire, negative and a kop out. Every sport tries to make things exciting in some way, F1 had to battle to win fans back and many are flocking back because the racing is far more fun now than it was 5 years ago - Sky spent fortunes securing the rights to it .. they are not stupid. All the top sportsmen entertain, this is what people want to see. Sport is NOT just about winning, if it were Mourinho would still be boss of Chelsea. If it were Usain Bolt wouldn't clown around so much. If it were Ronnie O'Sullivan and Jimmy White wouldn't have been 2 of the most popular snooker players of their generations - people's champions.
None of those rules were made to stop defensive play, but rather time wasting as you stated three times and the only utter bollocks is when you said tackles from behind are not allowed - they are. As long as you get the ball and it is a clean tackle,then it is perfectly fine. We outscored Barcelona and all of our goals were due to our defensive style. All on the counter, all originating in the air and all coming against the run of play. So ironically it was playing "negatively" that caused the creation and success of our chances. We were the first in the tie to take the initiative to score, we scored when we were behind on aggregate at 2-0 down and we scored to kill the game off at the end. In the second leg at 2-1 down, our super defensive style kept on drawing Barcelona out more and more as the game wore on and it was inevitable that we would eventually be given a 1 on 1 chance with the goalkeeper. Anti-football is not playing defensively. Anti-football is the following - dissent, diving, theatrics, kicking the ball away, time wasting. Aspects that every team are guilty of at some point, including Barcelona. An all out attack without a care for defending whatsoever is not called positive football, it is called being an idiot.
Yaaaaawn. Boring. We all know what anti football is based on what the coaches say who don't like it. We also know you cannot tackle from behind - whether officially outlawed or not - refs will most likely punish a tackle from behind anyway - the rule was originally brought in to stop defenders hacking down strikers/offensive players. Yurilly can you not read ? I suggest you never bother arguing with me because I'll make you look like a clown You say none of the rules were made to stop defensive play, correct, I never said they were I referred to "anti football" and, as you say, time wasting is not defensive it is anti football, I didn't say otherwise The tackle from behind rule has since been "amended" by FIFA but the rule was still brought in and was valid until 2005. Semantics. The point is the rule was brought in to make football more exciting and to not rob the public of seeing the most skilled players being forced out of games due to injury. The rule was intended to promote exciting football. Tell me where parking the bus helps promote exciting football. Anti football IS playing defensively amongst other things, but parking the bus is chief amongst them. So as I said, all the major changes in the rules of football have been made to make football more exciting, not to help defensive football.
Surely the tackle from behind rule is just because it's so dangerous compared to one that they can see coming and avoid/adjust their body. I'm not a Chelsea fan and I thought that match was very exciting. In football you play to your strengths, whilst trying to nullify the oppositions. They nullified Barca (except for the 2 goals) and hit them on the counter. We get that you don't like Chelsea. Go lie down and get over it. Why is Barca keeping the ball all the time and not letting their opponent attack much different? I find that more boring than most other tactics.
You get your arse handed to you in both legs by Barca for going toe to toe with them, we employ different tactics at home and away, and win one and draw the other with two belting goals and ten men for 55 minutes and are now in the final. Guardiola bemoaned their own lack of versatility for not being able to win either game, and that speaks volumes to me.
No we didn't, we beat them at the Emirates going toe to toe with them Now think about that for a second .. we beat the best team in the world - the 2010/2011 team being widely regarded as the best club side of all time - going toe to toe with them, beating them at their own game. It doesn't matter that they beat us ... WE BEAT THEM playing THEIR game. Gave me much satisfaction and we didn't have to resort to playing anti football to beat them. The tackle from behind is dangerous but I am talking about the discussion I heard when the tackle was outlawed - many professionals in the game repeated the same thing, why should we be robbed of having the skilful players because this sort of tackle maims them week after week. The rule was not brought in to help defenders or defending
