To be fair I don't think even HIAG would be predicting an Arsenal v Spurs final an hour after we didn't win the semi- final.
This thread is Rover 25 crushingly embarrassing for Tarquin. All that money wasted on boarding school.
I thought Spurs were easily the better team. If Chelsea win the double they will be the weakest team to have done so in Stan's lifetime. English football is at a very low level at the minute.
Not being funny, but have you watched Chelsea much this season? Because that's pretty much what they do, let you have most of the ball but confine you to areas where you can't do much harm. They don't mind conceding possession - Saints had about 60% possession against them at St Mary's for instance - because they don't expect to concede, & they know they didn't need too much of an opportunuty to s ore themselves. Doesn't always work, obviously. A bit of brilliance from Harry Kane and a world class through ball from Eriksson to a bang in form Dele Alli, and Chelsea have conceded 2 for the second time in 2 games. I don't expect them to concede that many for a long time again (though I hope they do on Tuesday). I can't agree that Spurs were the better team. It was a very finely balanced game in which luck played a part. Luck, strength in depth, & experience.
We gifted them their first two. Both from set pieces. Lloris didn't cover his side for the first, and Son diving in two footed on Moses - who was looking for an excuse to fall over - was plain stupid. Their defensive tactics were frustrating, admittedly. But far from entirely successful as the fact that we scored twice from open play and could have had more demonstrates. Probably should have got to Hazard quicker for the third. The fourth was unstoppable. Although if Matic hit that 100 times, 99 would go into rowZ. Ultimately, we should have made more if our dominance, but it just wasn't our day.
I think there's a hangover between them from the Euro abuse thread, let's not bring football into this.
Yep. And if only goals from open play counted, well...you'd have gone to extra time. They restricted you to half chances. Out of those half chances, you created two brilliant goals. I don't think you should have too many regrets.
I wouldn't say that. There were other chances, but we didn't take them. Basically, their two goals from open play were nothing more than half chances, both well taken. You could argue we restricted them to nothing more than that in open play.
Yes, you could argue that. You could also argue that the difference between the two sides was their defending - theirs was relentlessly disciplined, yours was sloppy at times. The one thing you can't argue with is the result.
