EPTChampions League Final 2012 Thread - Page 35
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Timurid
Guyana (French)656 Posts
| ||
|
Sadir
Vatican City State1176 Posts
they totally deserve to win the title, though there was an incredible amount of luck involved: messi, robben penalty...you cant always count ob things like these to happen. Chelsea did what they had to do to win. but dont expect them to pull the same miracles next year bayern played better football, but that doesnt win games. I rellay feel bad for schweinsteiger.... and when heynckes substituded van buyten for muller...I was like..omg why? rarely ends well robben most likely will never shoot penaltys again while playing for bayern....he lost the cl and arguably the bundesliga | ||
|
DragoonTT
3398 Posts
On May 20 2012 07:46 Denzil wrote: Please refer me to these beautiful games, I thought Matteo had made some beautiful tactical defensive displays, almost good enough to rival Gus Hiddinks v Barcalona, what parts of Chelsea's defensive display was ugly? Was it the way we blocked shots? The way we passed the ball out from the back with 1 touch? Ever since Barcelona (and with national teams, Spain) began winning based on tiki-taka - lots of passing and ball possession - people have begun to think that beautiful football can only consist of being the lone team to have the ball, and to make as many passes as possible. No one realizes that tiki-taka is, in fact, a defensive tactic at heart, as it aims to provide as few opportunities as possible to the opponent, and to create overwhelming numbers in case of loss of possession. So by now, "conventional" defensive play against teams with high possession/highly skilled (midfield) players is looked down on, as it doesn't provide the same sense of control over the game that ball possession seems to do. True, Chelsea didn't have a lot of scoring opportunities (both against Barca and Bayern), but they excelled at converting. But Bayern didn't have a lot of good opportunities either, mostly being blocked or offside, and wasting the few shots they managed to aim at the goal. From a defender's point of view, Chelsea did an outstanding job, especially regarding the raw techinal skill the Bayern wingers provide. Reactions to the game, both by german fans and media, are pretty disgusting, claiming oh how superbly Bayern played and how catastrophic Chelsea winning is supposed to be for football, instead of appreciating solid defensive football and teamplay - something Bayern sorely lacks, along tactical variance. Bayern winning would have been great for german football in regard to the UEFA five-year ratings, but I can only applaud Chelsea on their victory. | ||
|
Retric
Germany284 Posts
| ||
|
Timurid
Guyana (French)656 Posts
On May 20 2012 08:05 Retric wrote: I hope Drogba wins Ballon d'or. Messi won it already that shit is fixed. | ||
|
Retric
Germany284 Posts
stupid messi... | ||
|
greggy
United Kingdom1483 Posts
On May 20 2012 08:03 DragoonTT wrote: Ever since Barcelona (and with national teams, Spain) began winning based on tiki-taka - lots of passing and ball possession - people have begun to think that beautiful football can only consist of being the lone team to have the ball, and to make as many passes as possible. No one realizes that tiki-taka is, in fact, a defensive tactic at heart, as it aims to provide as few opportunities as possible to the opponent, and to create overwhelming numbers in case of loss of possession. So by now, "conventional" defensive play against teams with high possession/highly skilled (midfield) players is looked down on, as it doesn't provide the same sense of control over the game that ball possession seems to do. True, Chelsea didn't have a lot of scoring opportunities (both against Barca and Bayern), but they excelled at converting. But Bayern didn't have a lot of good opportunities either, mostly being blocked or offside, and wasting the few shots they managed to aim at the goal. From a defender's point of view, Chelsea did an outstanding job, especially regarding the raw techinal skill the Bayern wingers provide. Reactions to the game, both by german fans and media, are pretty disgusting, claiming oh how superbly Bayern played and how catastrophic Chelsea winning is supposed to be for football, instead of appreciating solid defensive football and teamplay - something Bayern sorely lacks, along tactical variance. Bayern winning would have been great for german football in regard to the UEFA five-year ratings, but I can only applaud Chelsea on their victory. At least someone understands how football works. Thank you. | ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On May 20 2012 08:03 DragoonTT wrote: Ever since Barcelona (and with national teams, Spain) began winning based on tiki-taka - lots of passing and ball possession - people have begun to think that beautiful football can only consist of being the lone team to have the ball, and to make as many passes as possible. No one realizes that tiki-taka is, in fact, a defensive tactic at heart, as it aims to provide as few opportunities as possible to the opponent, and to create overwhelming numbers in case of loss of possession. So by now, "conventional" defensive play against teams with high possession/highly skilled (midfield) players is looked down on, as it doesn't provide the same sense of control over the game that ball possession seems to do. Weve been through this and has already been gone over, this is false. And if anything is a matter of perspective and an apology for teams who choose to play this supposed conventional defense. I have no problem with how the games play out. I may not be entertained by it but as has been reiterated time and time again that there are many ways to play and if one of them involves a bit of luck here and there so be it. Winning is winning. That having been said this nonsense about teams being good in posession translating to defensive possession based play is rubbish. If it were the case those teams would never cross the halfway line, yet they have often all but 2 fullbacks sweeping at the half. So no its not defensive football. It requires an increasingly higher level of skill based on the way teams are reacting to it and is even higher risk seeing as you offer the opponent the length and breadth of your side of the pitch when you lose possession I dont see how that can not be attacking football but whatever, everyone who supports a team thinks they are the protagonist and so they should. Couldnt care less to argue this any further. If I were forced to pick a team today that came out to win rather than not to lose Id would be Bayern and that is what generally upsets people the most. But you need to be pragmatic and understand that Chelsea as a team played within their means and got the results. All that is in order is a congratulation. | ||
|
Fenrax
United States5018 Posts
On May 20 2012 08:03 DragoonTT wrote: Ever since Barcelona (and with national teams, Spain) began winning based on tiki-taka - lots of passing and ball possession - people have begun to think that beautiful football can only consist of being the lone team to have the ball, and to make as many passes as possible. No one realizes that tiki-taka is, in fact, a defensive tactic at heart, as it aims to provide as few opportunities as possible to the opponent, and to create overwhelming numbers in case of loss of possession. So by now, "conventional" defensive play against teams with high possession/highly skilled (midfield) players is looked down on, as it doesn't provide the same sense of control over the game that ball possession seems to do. True, Chelsea didn't have a lot of scoring opportunities (both against Barca and Bayern), but they excelled at converting. But Bayern didn't have a lot of good opportunities either, mostly being blocked or offside, and wasting the few shots they managed to aim at the goal. From a defender's point of view, Chelsea did an outstanding job, especially regarding the raw techinal skill the Bayern wingers provide. Reactions to the game, both by german fans and media, are pretty disgusting, claiming oh how superbly Bayern played and how catastrophic Chelsea winning is supposed to be for football, instead of appreciating solid defensive football and teamplay - something Bayern sorely lacks, along tactical variance. Bayern winning would have been great for german football in regard to the UEFA five-year ratings, but I can only applaud Chelsea on their victory. I do not agree with this analysis at all. They did not excell at converting. A team that is good at converting chances plays similar hard defense as Chelsea but then launches quick counterattacks to punish the forward defense by achieving superior numbers in the opponent's half and thus creating fewer but bigger chances than their opponents. Chelsea did not do that. They did not have a single good attack or counterattack throughout the entire game. If anything, it was the individual class by Drogba, but do not say that they had a good tactic or played a game winning strategy that countered the ball posession style. That claim is ridiculous. It was something like 20-1 corners and Chelsea hit their one, that is not a strategy that will win many games. I would call their win stupid luck, not much else, and I do not think that is a biased point of view. | ||
|
Sated
England4983 Posts
| ||
|
Timurid
Guyana (French)656 Posts
On May 20 2012 08:23 Fenrax wrote: I do not agree with this analysis at all. They did not excell at converting. A team that is good at converting chances plays similar hard defense as Chelsea but then launches quick counterattacks. Chelsea did not do that. They did not have a single good attack throughout the entire game. If anything, it was the individual class by Drogba, but do not say that they had a good tactic or played a game winning strategy that countered the ball posession style. That claim is ridiculous. It was something like 20-1 corners and Chelsea hit their one, that is not a strategy that will win many games. I would call their win stupid luck, not much else, and I do not think that is a biased point of view. Bayern played horrible too. The only difference is that chelsea let them have the ball. | ||
|
greggy
United Kingdom1483 Posts
On May 20 2012 08:23 Fenrax wrote: I do not agree with this analysis at all. They did not excell at converting. A team that is good at converting chances plays similar hard defense as Chelsea but then launches quick counterattacks. Chelsea did not do that. They did not have a single good attack throughout the entire game. If anything, it was the individual class by Drogba, but do not say that they had a good tactic or played a game winning strategy that countered the ball posession style. That claim is ridiculous. It was something like 20-1 corners and Chelsea hit their one, that is not a strategy that will win many games. I would call their win stupid luck, not much else, and I do not think that is a biased point of view. Well I think there's the problem of Ramires and Meireles being suspended, so the quickness and the passing just weren't there. Chelsea did do that against Barcelona - successfully. Yes, there's a fair share of luck involved, no doubt, but people claiming that Chelsea are killing football are just hysterical. And after all, it's not luck if you miss a penalty and no less than 3 sitters in 120 minutes. Bayern simply bottled it. | ||
|
F1rstAssau1t
1341 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/bkNuP.jpg) ^DAT | ||
|
Fenrax
United States5018 Posts
On May 20 2012 08:29 greggy wrote: Well I think there's the problem of Ramires and Meireles being suspended, so the quickness and the passing just weren't there. Chelsea did do that against Barcelona - successfully. Yes, there's a fair share of luck involved, no doubt, but people claiming that Chelsea are killing football are just hysterical. And after all, it's not luck if you miss a penalty and no less than 3 sitters in 120 minutes. Bayern simply bottled it. I do not disagree with Bayern botching it by missing a million chances. I just disagree with the claim that Chelsea had a good strategy for this game. | ||
|
Retric
Germany284 Posts
On May 20 2012 08:24 Sated wrote: Chelsea didn't deserve to win this game, but it's hilarious that they did. That encompasses all my thoughts on this game. EDIT: Oh, and a goalkeeper taking a penalty = awesome. Heynckes should have brought substitute keeper Butt into the game, he scored 3 penalties in europe during his career, all against Buffon (juventus). ^^ | ||
|
greggy
United Kingdom1483 Posts
On May 20 2012 08:33 Fenrax wrote: I do not disagree with Bayern botching it by missing a million chances. I just disagree with the claim that Chelsea had a good strategy for this game. Is there a good strategy for such an occasion? Your (arguably) best counter-attacking midfielder (Ramires) is suspended, Malouda came off injured against Blackburn a few days ago, Meireles is also suspended, the defence is looking shaky as fuck - what do you do? I think I'd do the same thing (even with retrospect, etc.) and just park the bus and hope. Sometimes it works, like tonight. Other times, like WC final, it doesn't. | ||
|
archonOOid
1983 Posts
| ||
|
Malaz
Germany1257 Posts
| ||
|
Timurid
Guyana (French)656 Posts
On May 20 2012 08:47 archonOOid wrote: Robben you lost bayern the trophy! it was gomez. | ||
|
sharkeyanti
United States1273 Posts
| ||
| ||
