With ten men against a team that had 15 consecutive matches in a row, and the best team in Europe. Yes
Ten men in the away leg, I think Chelsea only had 3% or 4% more possession in the home leg with eleven men on the pitch, not that I care too much about possession stats anyway, I prefer to look at chances created as that's what wins games in the long run.
What? What a ridiculous ripost. We beat them with 10 men, whether JT was a **** or not makes no difference
Lol, easy fishing! Praps, but then if you are always focused on having a plan B then your plan A often winds up suffering for it. Which is probably why Chelsea have never managed to balance the PL and CL. In the seasons when you've done really well in the PL your CL campaigns have been a bit embarrassing (knocked out twice by Rafa ) and vice versa when you've managed to do well in the CL, last season being the ideal example. Lots of club have the same issue - Milan, Liverpool and Real have all struggled in their domestic leagues in seasons when they won the CL or reached the final. In contrast, when you focus purely on one approach you are more likely to have success in every area, like Barca and Utd. IIRC Barca and Utd are the only ones to have won the league every time they have won the CL, and every time we have gotten at least to the semi finals in the CL we have also won the league. And the overall results tend to indicate this approach is more successful, as shown by the respective success of Barca and Utd over the last two decades, vs clubs like Milan, Liverpool, Chelsea and even Real.
Agree. Barcelona v United 2008 Shots (on Goal) Nou Camp: Barcelona 20(6) United 7(1) United one shot on goal Old T United 1 Barca 0 Shots (on Goal) United 8(2) Barca 14(3) United had two shots on goal at home. One went in and they parked the bus, versus an relatively ordianry Barca side in disarray under FR. In 2009, Chelsea, versus a much better, Guardiola Barca, at the Bridge: Shots (on Goal) Chelsea 13(4) Barcelona 14(1) My work is done here
Heres an idea Chelsea fans come speak to us when you club has success in both the league and europe in the same season. Its very easy to put all your eggs in one basket, much harder to win it all. We only win the CL when we are league champions, then when we say we are the best of the best, its unquestionable. Otherwise you are just Liverpool mk2
Ah, I love it when Chelsea fans try to rewrite history. Probably because they don't have any 2008 Man Utd vs Barcelona Home Utd 7 chances, Barcelona 9 http://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsleague/season=2008/matches/round=15108/match=301914/index.html Away Utd 6 chances, Barcelona 16 http://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsleague/season=2008/matches/round=15108/match=301911/index.html 2009 Chelsea vs 10 man Barcelona Home Chelsea 9 chances, Barcelona 11 http://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsle...ound=15279/match=302812/postmatch/statistics/ Away Chelsea 3 chances, Barcelona 18 http://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsleague/season=2009/matches/round=15279/match=302809/index.html Utd vs Barcelona Final Utd 11 chances, Barcelona 10 http://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsle.../match=302813/postmatch/statistics/index.html So even against ten men you could only create two more chances than us, and two less than we did in the final, when apparently we were "completely outplayed" by Barcelona with 11 men. And your performance at the Nou Camp was shameful, even by Chelsea standards. Two of your chances came from the same attack, when Marquez failed to deal with...wait for it...a long ball! You can go now
So 1999 does not count then? Obviously before your time: Arsenal won the league in 98 That means you've only won it twice: 68, 08. Liverpool have won it four times then: 77, 78, 81, 84 as Champs. 05 does not count
Oh dear. Were we not Champions of England at the time of winning the champions league in 1999? Quick, delete your post, it never happened.
Here fishy fishy. Funny that you've left out shots on target to suit your argument. And changes shots to 'chances'. Chancer! I included both as a more accurate reflection. Carry on rewriting history and discount shots on target when it suits you. Ronaldo having ten shots from 40 yards in the first ten minutes of the 2009 final does not hide your shame in that game.
I'm embarrassed for both if us. The whole forum knows what you meant. If you continue with your backtracking, then you were not Champs in 68 when you won the EC, City were. As City are now. Agggguerrrro
Yeh I clearly meant we were league champions when we won the Champions League. Doesnt get much clearer than that really. And I am sure the whole forum knew what I meant, it was pretty obvious. The Champions League was the European cup in 68, a rather different competition with the only real similarity being the trophy. Try again.
What can I say? I was going by Psycho's post, the one you "completely agree" with. Here, let's refresh that dodgy memory of yours: Never mind, eh. I'm sure you can console yourself with some more made up stats the next time you're biting (or should that be bitter) on the Utd board
You were clearly wrong about 99, we were league Champion when we won the CL that year. As for 1968, City had won the title that year and we finished 2nd, but we didn't win the Champions League, we won the European Cup Final . EDIT: Kagawa Powa beat me to it. Damn him to hades.
Lol, one league title and you suddenly think you can come into a convo with the big boys. **** off blackburn mk2
