Champions League 2011/12

[AZOffaly]

I hope you're not saying I have a chip on my shoulder about it? I'm happy for the likes of Cech, Lampard and a few others that they won it. I'm delighted for Di Matteo.

I don't have a major problem with their approach to be honest, and in fact despite that approach, Barcelona and Munich had more than enough chances to win their respective ties in any case. Chelsea held firm, and did the business, so fair play to them.

[magpie seanie]

Chelsea weren't that pretty to watch and they got a fierce slice of luck to win the last 3 games but I don't remember Man U or the pool waltzing their way to the CL. Smicer's goal, winning on penalties, Terry's miss and the 2 goals in injury time in '99? Time to get the chip off your shoulder, Man United's and Liverpool were as undeserving of their titles if you were to measure them by the current criticism of Chelski's finest.

Injury time is part of the game (as evidenced by Manchester City most recently) and even though United played poorly in that final in '99 they were undefeated in the tournament and scored a record number of goals. Some people only remember the final but forget how good United were in that competition as a whole. Any comparison with the current winners or indeed Liverpool in 2005 is a bit of a joke.

[AZOffaly]

Liverpool in 2005 were very good too Seanie You're just remembering 45 minutes of poor performance.

[trileacman]

I hope you're not saying I have a chip on my shoulder about it? I'm happy for the likes of Cech, Lampard and a few others that they won it. I'm delighted for Di Matteo.

I don't have a major problem with their approach to be honest, and in fact despite that approach, Barcelona and Munich had more than enough chances to win their respective ties in any case. Chelsea held firm, and did the business, so fair play to them.

It's not really directed at anyone in particular.

[trileacman]

Chelsea weren't that pretty to watch and they got a fierce slice of luck to win the last 3 games but I don't remember Man U or the pool waltzing their way to the CL. Smicer's goal, winning on penalties, Terry's miss and the 2 goals in injury time in '99? Time to get the chip off your shoulder, Man United's and Liverpool were as undeserving of their titles if you were to measure them by the current criticism of Chelski's finest.

Injury time is part of the game (as evidenced by Manchester City most recently) and even though United played poorly in that final in '99 they were undefeated in the tournament and scored a record number of goals. Some people only remember the final but forget how good United were in that competition as a whole. Any comparison with the current winners or indeed Liverpool in 2005 is a bit of a joke.

And what about 2008? Miles ahead of this current team?

[AQMP]

Chelsea weren't that pretty to watch and they got a fierce slice of luck to win the last 3 games but I don't remember Man U or the pool waltzing their way to the CL. Smicer's goal, winning on penalties, Terry's miss and the 2 goals in injury time in '99? Time to get the chip off your shoulder, Man United's and Liverpool were as undeserving of their titles if you were to measure them by the current criticism of Chelski's finest.

Injury time is part of the game (as evidenced by Manchester City most recently) and even though United played poorly in that final in '99 they were undefeated in the tournament and scored a record number of goals. Some people only remember the final but forget how good United were in that competition as a whole. Any comparison with the current winners or indeed Liverpool in 2005 is a bit of a joke.

From Wiki:

"Man Utd won the trophy without losing a single game, despite having competed in a group with Bayern Munich, Barcelona and Brøndby plus two highly-rated Italian clubs in the knock-out stages. However, United became champions with just five wins in total, the lowest number of wins recorded by a champion in the Champions League era to date". 

You're right, I had forgotten how good they were!

[tyroneStatto]

Chelsea weren't that pretty to watch and they got a fierce slice of luck to win the last 3 games but I don't remember Man U or the pool waltzing their way to the CL. Smicer's goal, winning on penalties, Terry's miss and the 2 goals in injury time in '99? Time to get the chip off your shoulder, Man United's and Liverpool were as undeserving of their titles if you were to measure them by the current criticism of Chelski's finest.

Injury time is part of the game (as evidenced by Manchester City most recently) and even though United played poorly in that final in '99 they were undefeated in the tournament and scored a record number of goals. Some people only remember the final but forget how good United were in that competition as a whole. Any comparison with the current winners or indeed Liverpool in 2005 is a bit of a joke.

utd rode their luck throughout the campaign in 1999 as well.

2 examples are:

inter should have got about 3 penalties in the san siro but the ref bottled every one of them. fergies pasta jibe about italians seemed to have done the trick.

juventus should have been out of sight at old trafford before giggs scored an injury time goal.  zidane in particular missed a glorious chance to wrap it up.

[EC Unique]

With a prize like the champions league it matters not how you win it. Currently a big shiny cup resides in London and that is all that matters. Fair play to Chelsea.

[Gazzler]

With a prize like the champions league it matters not how you win it. Currently a big shiny cup resides in London and that is all that matters. Fair play to Chelsea.

Probably the most sensible thing you ever posted. Had someone hacked your account?

[AQMP]

With a prize like the champions league it matters not how you win it. Currently a big shiny cup resides in London and that is all that matters. Fair play to Chelsea.

Exactly.  Now time to move on to Chelsea's defence of the title.  Am I right in saying Chelsea will have to go into Round 1 of the qualifying?  Final is at Wembley next year to coincide with 150 years of the FA.

[magpie seanie]

Chelsea weren't that pretty to watch and they got a fierce slice of luck to win the last 3 games but I don't remember Man U or the pool waltzing their way to the CL. Smicer's goal, winning on penalties, Terry's miss and the 2 goals in injury time in '99? Time to get the chip off your shoulder, Man United's and Liverpool were as undeserving of their titles if you were to measure them by the current criticism of Chelski's finest.

Injury time is part of the game (as evidenced by Manchester City most recently) and even though United played poorly in that final in '99 they were undefeated in the tournament and scored a record number of goals. Some people only remember the final but forget how good United were in that competition as a whole. Any comparison with the current winners or indeed Liverpool in 2005 is a bit of a joke.

From Wiki:

"Man Utd won the trophy without losing a single game, despite having competed in a group with Bayern Munich, Barcelona and Brøndby plus two highly-rated Italian clubs in the knock-out stages. However, United became champions with just five wins in total, the lowest number of wins recorded by a champion in the Champions League era to date". 

You're right, I had forgotten how good they were!

Are you seriously suggesting that the 1999 Manchester United team were not that good? Seriously? Have you forgotten they also managed to win a few other trophies (only English team EVER to win the treble)? Chelsea and 'pool finished outside the CL places ffs.

[magpie seanie]

Chelsea weren't that pretty to watch and they got a fierce slice of luck to win the last 3 games but I don't remember Man U or the pool waltzing their way to the CL. Smicer's goal, winning on penalties, Terry's miss and the 2 goals in injury time in '99? Time to get the chip off your shoulder, Man United's and Liverpool were as undeserving of their titles if you were to measure them by the current criticism of Chelski's finest.

Injury time is part of the game (as evidenced by Manchester City most recently) and even though United played poorly in that final in '99 they were undefeated in the tournament and scored a record number of goals. Some people only remember the final but forget how good United were in that competition as a whole. Any comparison with the current winners or indeed Liverpool in 2005 is a bit of a joke.

And what about 2008? Miles ahead of this current team?

Not sure who you are on about but I'd say yes to either scenario. The 2008 United team was excellent (solid defense, Ronaldo and Tevez banging them in) and had to be cos the 2008 Chelsea team was much better than their current team.

[trueblue1234]

FFS Seanie, your comment was about how Chelsea won the CL this year. AQMP was rightly pointing out that United didn't exactly win in style in 99 either yet you didn't desert them then. 

I know this has been a tough year on United fans but your comments smack of sour grapes!!

[magpie seanie]

Amazingly I'm actually quite aware of what I said and what others said but if that's your interpretation maybe you should read back a wee bit. I think I've explained my position and it's not as you have understood it.

As for it being a tough year - not a bit. Tough was when it was 20+ years since a title win and relegation was a possibility.

[trueblue1234]

I don't think I'm the only one reading it the way I explained.