Sorry, I meant double deflected shot that led to the goal. Important distinction there http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2011/apr/07/manchester-united-chelsea-alex-ferguson http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...n-for-all-seasons-with-tactical-triumphs.html http://football-talk.co.uk/18350/chelsea-01-man-utd-rooney-united-edge-blues-fall-short/ Never mind Ginge, just remember that JT says everyone's against you
Good journalism from two respected newspapers, they tell me United won the game on Wednesday Well I never. They also went on to tell me who scored and How United will take a slender lead with them back to OT and how Chelsea pushed them hard in the second half. They also said we had a stone-wall penalty turned down by a weak referee. But not one of them mentions that I can see where United deserved to win the game? Funny That?
I quote Kevin McCarra from the Guardian. "The hard games come easy to this Manchester United side. They outplayed Chelsea at Stamford Bridge and when subjected to sporadic pressure, dealt with it confidently". Did you miss that part?
"The Blues will feel aggrieved that at least one decision did not go their way, and so the next leg could have had an entirely different complexion had one of the spot kicks been converted. But it should not detract from the fact that Chelsea lacked the required vigour and clinical finishing at this stage of the competition." "It is easy to smile when you have outfoxed an opponent as astute as Carlo Ancelotti." "With their main mechanism for instigating attacks thus compromised, Chelsea looked slow and narrow." "The hard games come easy to this Manchester United side. They outplayed Chelsea at Stamford Bridge and when subjected to sporadic pressure, dealt with it confidently." "United, on the whole, had been as capable again as they have been on their travels through this tournament." And I don't see any of them claiming you pushed us in the second half. In contrast: "In a similar narrative to the first half, Chelsea enjoyed heavy spells of possession but failed to carve out the decisive opening." In fact, none of them even state that you deserved a goal. Deserved a penalty maybe, but then a penalty isn't necessarily a goal. I've not seen a single journ say you deserved anything more than you got. Cos you didn't. Even the other Chelsea fans can admit that
i think most pundits / reports say it was a penalty (adrian 'i hate chelsea' durham aside). Therefore we were hard done by on the biggest decision in the whole game. However overall, i think most chelsea fans would agree United probably edged it. However had we got the pen and scored, i think the write ups would have been very different and pointed to a game where a draw was the fair result given the chances created etc. Despite us being below par, the goal aside, we probably had best chances. Goals change games as they say.
I think we can safely discount anything Adrian Durham says! I think if you'd been awarded the penalty and scored the journo's would be split. Some would say it was just reward for creating some decent chances, and some would say it papered over what was a pretty poor performance, that lacked real cutting edge. And personally, I still think the goal we scored and the cross Cech just got a touch to were as good as any of your chances, expect the one that Torres wafted his heel at of course.
Even Adrian Durham said it was a pen. He just said that due to their generally lacklustre approach, and the gamesmanship of Torres, they didn't deserve a penalty ie they didn't deserve a chance to equalise. Apart from Ginger Marks, obviously.
Why do you guys try and reason with someone who is obviously an ABU ? Nice picture of " pussy" by the way Swarbs !
Well yes. When presented with the ball at his feet and a goalkeeper who'd just fallen over, he did very well. Well done Frank
And? it doesn't say you deserved to win either! You didn't hit a post and subsequently had one cleared off the line. Cech as I recall didn't have to make the saves that VDS did, you can believe what you wan't but if you tell yourself its so often enough even you might believe it. The stats speak volumes you edged the first half sure but did bugger all of any significance in the second and you only survived due to a referee probably following Platini's instructions. Yes you got the win but sure as hell didn't deserve it!
Man United were the better team, but the penalty was nailed on. If the referee had done his job correctly, the game probably would have finished 1-1. So basically, despite United pretty much dominating large parts of the match, 1-0 wasn't really fair.
Apart from the fact the foul clearly happened outside the penalty area but hey lets not get bogged down in details.
Oh how United Listen laddie, as an ex referee let me tell you that it was in the area. the offence started on the line but the foul continued some way into the area and Evra did not get any touch on the ball whatsoever. His tackle denied Ramires a certain chance at goal who at the time was in control of the ball. It was also refreshing to see ex referee Graham Poll agree with my take on it. You will never see a more stone wall penalty which even if Evra had not earlier received a yellow card should have seen a straight red. If your going to attempt a wind up at least pick something plausible
Tell you what lets just do away with the 18 yard line. Better still lets just say if you get fouled in the defending teams half, its a penalty. Problem solved.
