I'll give you the perseverance. However, as has been pointed out in another posting, to basically rely on your opposition missing their chances, and their penalties, is no strategy at all. It's just incredible luck!
That's not how it was set-up. The strategy was to defend (we did) and to either catch them on the break (we didn't) or to nail the set pieces (we did). Seriously, how can you think a team at this level was sent out just to capitalise on luck? Beggars belief that you can truly think that. As pointed out by me already the penalty in open play was SAVED it was not missed. This particular penalty was saved by a top class goalie using his SKILL. If you think that it was luck fine. Just remember that next time Gomez or Cudicini pulls off a heroic save that it was good old lady luck and not an ounce of skill. Strangely I can't imagine a top-flight goalie punting for a transfer telling his potential owners that his role contains not a shred of skill it is all down to happen-stance. Just can't imagine that at all. Maybe you also think that the superbly weighted Mata corner and the brilliant header by Drogba was also luck too? And Cole's/Drogba's/Lampard's/Luiz's pen's in the shoot out were luck too. Or Czech's fine saves as well. Here's why CFC deserved to win: http://www.uefa.com/memberassociations/uefarankings/club/index.html It's because they are a damn good team that has performed well at the very top level for the 5 years that the table relates to. They put in the spade work, they took the knocks along the way and bounced back. Maybe Spurs would be a better team if they did the same and not bottle it at the first sign of some real glory for umpteen years. As you can see 4th slot really only exists predominantly by the hard work of MUFC and CFC - not a great contribution from Spurs is there? I really don't want to knock Spurs as they are a decent outfit but some of the crap coming our way is ludicrous. On the luck front: what about that infamous semi with Barca when we outplayed them but they won with their only on-target shot of the game (Iniesta god bless him). That's what the game is about, taking your chances. By some of the rationale shown on here we should have been in that final as clearly Barca were lucky that night. Do we really watch the same sport?
You can rant all you want. Nobody has mentioned anything about saves, so why bring that up? The fact is that you were battered senseless by Barca, and had it not been for them missing an incredible amount of chances in both legs, your " strategy" would have got what it deserved.
Not a rant just stating some facts. Yes was a great double-header with Barca - not a lot of teams beat them. We clearly found a way. That's called smart football, that's why we win trophies. That's why we are one of the most successful EPL teams of the last decade.
Bayern looked very tense to me, and not surprising, a few weeks ago they were on for an historic treble, but they lost the league and domestic cup, so the pressure was on to salvage the season...at home, and the less than composed finishing attempts said exactly that. Chelsea only came into the game when that substitution horrificly backfired. Muller on the bench opened up the MF for Chelsea...how lucky was that!
You call it smart football, and I'll call it unbelievable luck! You only " found a way" because Barca, especially, and Bayern to a lesser extent, somehow between them contrived to miss a hatful of sitters. Your luck can't go on like that forever. Unless you invest heavily in the summer, I think you'll be found out next season.
Yep. You definitely can't form a cohesive argument. Not bothering to reply to you any more. You and Ouch (who is so obsessed with acting like a dick that he even sets up fake accounts and pretends to be a Spurs fan) have said nothing of any substance whatsoever on this thread. Just noise-makers.
I have absolutely no idea why you'd want attention. Personally I've never gone onto another clubs board to chuck around insults (and saying that the only reason to hate Chelsea is bitterness is an insult). Though I've been honest enough to say that the luck Chelsea have had actually does make me a little bitter. To be fair the rest of your post is OK - I agree that defensive excellence is under-rated and everyone like a bit of backs-to-the-walls and sheer effort now and again. But to think that this is what all those hundreds of millions of pounds gets you is a bit crap, isn't it? And just cos all rich, powerful men are dodgy doesn't mean that some are not a hell of a lot "dodgier" than others. I can't imagine the things that Abramovich has done are equalled among the boardrooms of most clubs in the Prem. I just don't see any reason whatsoever to respect Chelsea. I actually have a lot more respect for Arsenal. You don't have to respect a team just cos they won something.
First thought is: Is this not very likely to be Boo AKA Ouch? Why is he still on this thread and not banned? Well - they do seem to be trying to make some points so maybe it's someone else, though the reference to "growing up" and the semi-veiled digs also hint that it's the same person. Anyway - please don't go on about "football's always been about money". It's always been about football money, not gas money or oil money. Teams have never been artificially bank-rolled by sugar-daddies as a rule (Jack Walker being an obvious exception). The effect of people pumping money into football that goes way beyond numbers that football clubs can actually earn is a very dangerous thing that not only makes the playing field uneven but also puts loads of clubs' very existence under threat. Partly the fault of those non-sugar daddy clubs not living within their means but it's no coincidence that clubs over-reaching themselves (as, in fact Chelsea had done massively in the Gullit/Vialli era) has accelerated post-Abramovich. And lastly I just want to point out how funny it is that you say "...if it doesn't buy you success..." rather than the more normal "...bring you success...". Bit of a massive Freudian slip there!
Not a Freudian slip at all (sorry to spoil your fun) - how do you think teams are successful? One key factor is purchasing players. The very act of purchasing players to improve performance and be successful implies that you are buying success surely? And what's wrong with that?
Daniel Levy 15 Nov 2011 Annual Report "Participation in the UEFA Champions League competition and our run to the latter stages has had a significant impact on the Club’s turnover for the year, delivering record revenues of over £163.5m (2010: £119.8m). This allowed us to sustain a larger squad and remain competitive in both the League and cup competitions." That's how football works - you use money to buy success. Which was my point.
Anyway, I'll let you bitter and twisted Spurs fans crack on with it - you are clearly *issed off about yet another miserable season and can't find it in your hearts to congratulate a fellow London team - shame on you. Nonetheless, should you be in with a chance of winning anything next season and providing you are not playing against us I'll still be rooting for you all the way. Good luck guys.
So you really meant to say that pretty football is "Nice to watch but if it doesn't buy you success then what's the point". That's what you meant to say? And you're now saying that you were using the word "buy" literally (cos, apparently, all teams buy success to the same extent as Chelsea). So you meant to say that pretty football could, literally, buy you success? A style of football can buy you success? Cos all teams purchase players? I just... Errr... Hi Boo/Ouch. Your latest persona was a bit more talkey/thinky-seeming but your total lack of making sense blew your cover. See you tomorrow in another guise!
Spurs use money too???! We don't just barter with organic vegetables and fairtrade green tea?! YOU'VE TOTALLY OPENED MY EYES! YES! ALL MONEY IS EXACTLY THE SAME! WHERE IT COMES FROM, HOW IT IS SPENT AND HOW IT IS EARNED! WHAT INSIGHT! WHAT KILLER DISSECTION OF ALL THE POINTS! Night night, Boo.
I forgot to mention the other thing Chelski relied on... relied on scoring from their only corner of the entire game. That is obviously pure skill. I mean Spurs sometimes get 20 maybe 30 corners in a match and don't score any of them (sad but true), whilst Chelski manage to score from 100% of theirs. That is truly efficient football and something we should perhaps try and emulate... not have any corners at all so that the defenders get out of practice of defending, so that we can completely surprise the opposition with one in the last 10 minutes. I will add that to my list of new strategies, in fact it will be top ahead of saving all the penalties and arranging for the opposition to miss all their other chances (ensuring that the woodwork intervenes as appropriate).
@lennypops Read it all back v...e...r...y slowly and you might understand what I was saying. Maybe a friend can help you? We'll have to agree to disagree I think. As already said, I wish you all the best next season and I hope we have a few decent scraps along the way.
