Ref was crap granted, you should of had one stonewall penalty, and we should of had one stonewall penalty, other one for you was 50-50 imo, and Eto should of been sent off. But even taking it into account it's still pretty even, but just like me you can't see into the future so who knows if the teams would of had even of scored the penalties ( Don't forget you had no Gerrard ) or what you'd have done if Eto was sent off. We held on vs Barca with 10 men for like 60 mins so there's no guarantee if Eto had been sent off you'd have scored, even less so considering he's the striker and he's crap and wasted a chance to put us 3-1 up. On the basis of the game the chelsea win as a fair result, for the first time in a while we thoroughly outplayed you and pressed immensely
**** off. He stuck his leg into Lucas and threw himself down. deflect as much as you want, every neutral saw what happened. You're an alehouse team, with an alehouse manager and alehouse tactics.
No Eto'o shouldnt have been sent off grow up. The only person who should have been was Lucas for an assault on Oscar.
Well this alehouse team just totally outplayed your shower of ****e and bagged 3 points, enjoy not finishing in the top four... again!
Assault is a bit much. Oscar's tackle was pretty awful and you can't blame Lucas for having a quite restrained go back.
Yes the one where Lucas completely overreacted? Wasn't awful, just mistimed. People are going way over the top these days, you'd think we weren't watching a contact sport.
I normally defend players and don't want red cards given for just any sliding tackle like some but I'm surprised you can write that one off as nothing.
Awful response. Why bother? Chelsea were better, as Luv said, but the result hinged on Webb, unfortunately.
And again from you. Can I ask what age you are? Disappointing that it seems like only Drogs will actually give a decent response. Ok, I'll simplify things. Your first goal was brilliant and fully deserved. The second was deserved also, and came through the error of Skrtel, then Mignolet. If Webb had given the penalty, it most likely would have been scored; it is reasonable to presume therefore that it would have made the match 2-2. From there on, the match is changed completely. Who knows what would have happened (for either side)? Therefore, whilst we can acknowledge Chelsea were the better side, and Liverpool had a poor first half, we can also recognise that it is very reasonable to say Howard Webb's negligence dictated the result. This is because with the correct decision, it is very likely that the match would not have ended 2-1. Do you understand?
