?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Football continued - B. Henderson Asher's Moments of Mirth [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Listen in, listen Ian!

[ website | Flickr ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Football continued [May. 2nd, 2007|10:24 am]
Listen in, listen Ian!
FOOTBALL RANT AHEAD - feel free to skip, it's probably largely incoherent.
I would have used a football icon as a warning, but I don't know how to do
that in an email post.

I mean really, though, was there a single memorable moment from either side
in last night's 120 minutes of hoofball? Was there one moment to bring a
crowd to its feet, to be recalled the next day? No. It was sh1t, and both
teams should be ashamed, but especially Chelsea, who for all their hundreds
of millions of pounds can't seem to find a player capable of entertaining
anyone. Seriously, they're a spent force aren't they? Utterly found out,
and maybe they will win the FA Cup but any champagne they might drink in
celebration of that should taste like ashes in their mouths. I can't
imagine where they go from here. Maybe they'll spend another hundred
million in the summer in an attempt to fashion some sort of unit that
performs when the chips are down - the only reason they've won the league
twice is because nobody challenged them for it, and as soon as we did
they've crumbled away to dust. They're nothing now, and I'll be astonished
if Abramovich is still there in 5 years.
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: demiabeille
2007-05-02 09:28 am (UTC)
I propose that footballers are blindfolded while playing. This would make it much more entertaining!
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: strictlytrue
2007-05-02 09:29 am (UTC)
I thought the Liverpool goals were pretty good (the offside decision on the second one was harsh, I thought), and Reina made some pretty spectacular saves during the penalties.

However, Chelsea were rotten, I agree. They seemed to be playing for penalties, even though I'd have put money on them losing on penalties, at Anfield, against Liverpool, against Reina, from the start. I was surprised to see Lampard score one, mind. I thought the only way he'd get the ball to touch the back of the net was to pick it up and carry it.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ruudboy
2007-05-02 12:43 pm (UTC)
I thought the Liverpool goals were pretty good

Hmm. A set piece, and a rebound from a long shot the keeper should have held. I'm not sure I agree.

I can't remember a chance that came from an actual skilful bit of play opening up either defence in the game - that was the problem.

Anyway, have you seen the pictures of Jupiter?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: strictlytrue
2007-05-02 01:38 pm (UTC)
It was a good set-piece goal though - crafty, cheeky even. I don't remember the second one so well, but it seemed to me that L'pool undid Chelsea's defence well. I grant you the match wasn't a patch on your 7-1 drubbing of Roma, but I agree with azureskies that L'pool were significantly better than Chelsea.

The pictures of Jupiter are ace! Time to wheel out the Carolyn Porco userpic...
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: eyekiller
2007-05-02 09:35 am (UTC)
Well this is what you get when you let two teams of styleless gimboids play together. Two expensive versions of Bolton. I know everyone likes Liverpool with their songs and their scarf waving and their hilarious fans all that but (as I've just said elsewhere) they play ugly bag o sh1te football. And while I don't care *that* much what happens next I'd much rather AC Milan or your lot win it now, for the sake of good football, and so I don't have to see Gerrard's ridiculous cheaters face all over the place again.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: azureskies
2007-05-02 10:51 am (UTC)
Slight irony in using the word "cheater" in the same paragraph as wishing success on the match-fixing, shouldn't-be-in-the-competition-in-the-first-place AC Milan there, but there you go.

I'm not really going to comment too much on the main post in terms of vehemently disagreeing with it, because I'm not a neutral and there's never going to be agreement - and I'd rather just leave you to your opinion rather than starting a row over it. But I will just say that I think Chelsea deserve a lot more criticism than we do. We set out to attack, for the most part - we never really looked keen on just settling for penalties, and we had chances - good chances and a fair few "memorable moments", actually - right up to and during extra time. Yes, we played quite ugly at times - but that's the way that Chelsea force you to play. I completely agree with you that they've been absolutely found out - and that also goes for people like Lampard, who last night demonstrated that he just isn't worthy of the "world class" tag that he thinks he is, because world class players don't bottle it when they need to step up and be counted, something which (I'll grudgingly admit) your boys did last week, and probably will do again tonight.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: eyekiller
2007-05-02 10:58 am (UTC)
AC Milan - yeahbut if they win we won't see anything about it. I take your point about the match fixing cheaters though, and so now mildly prefer Man U.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ruudboy
2007-05-02 12:40 pm (UTC)
See, I think you're being harsh on Bolton there. They sometimes score goals that aren't from set pieces or balls played high into the area.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: offensive_mango
2007-05-02 09:37 am (UTC)
Calm down, dear, it's only a game.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: bonyandidle
2007-05-02 09:46 am (UTC)
Awful, awful game, both teams seemed to spend the entire game hoofing it down the wing and then hoofing it into the middle for one of the 10 defenders or the goalkeeper to clear. As Terry Christian put it, Chelsea spend all that money assembling a squad that reads like the cast of Ben Hur and still can't produce entertaining football. Shame we won't have that ref tonight. I've never seen a ref in the Champions League be so reluctant to book people. We'll probably get some total fascist who'll book Scholes for being ginger.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: offensive_mango
2007-05-02 09:57 am (UTC)
Well, he is *blatantly* ginger.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: burkesworks
2007-05-02 11:59 am (UTC)
Chelsea spend all that money assembling a squad that reads like the cast of Ben Hur

That's as may be, but last night they looked more like Charlton Athletic than Charlton Heston.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: caramel_betty
2007-05-02 12:53 pm (UTC)
We'll probably get some total fascist who'll book Scholes for being ginger.

Well, as offensive_mango says, he is blatantly ginger. And not very cute. And one of the best players in the English game, so it'd be unfair to let him play for too long, obviously. The ref has to be sporting and let the other chaps have a chance, no?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: braisedbywolves
2007-05-02 10:32 am (UTC)
While I don't follow football as much as I used to, isn't this basically what Manchester United have been doing for a decade? Except their money is from fans rather than someone's chequebook.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ruudboy
2007-05-02 12:39 pm (UTC)
Yes, but:

(i)Never to this extent - the amount that Chelsea spend is an order of magnitude more than anyone else.

(ii)As they're spending all that money, they should try and build a team of skilful players that it might be fun to watch, rather than a dour team of cloggers.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: freakytigger
2007-05-02 03:32 pm (UTC)
i. Agree - it's like they've found a cheat code in a computer game. (I like how the FM games have had to actually build in cheat codes to simulate Ambramoviches, though maybe they always did have them.)

ii. Disagree - there's no moral value in entertaining play and sides have absolutely zero obligation to "neutrals". (Playing entertaining football is probably Chelsea's best business strategy, but that's a different matter. Liverpool have different things they can sell the brand on.) Mind you I am someone whose formative sporting TV experiences were the grinding tactical snooker play of Terry Griffiths etc. And also I was absolutely on the edge of my seat during Greece's run to Euro 2004, cheering them on all the way.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: egremont
2007-05-02 11:52 am (UTC)
Did you see Mourinho after the game? 'No-one will remember this game in a few years' time' or something. As strops go, it was quite an oblique one.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ruudboy
2007-05-02 12:39 pm (UTC)
It's fair comment though. No-one will remember it in a few weeks' time probably.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: bonyandidle
2007-05-02 12:44 pm (UTC)
what game is this?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: iamthewitch
2007-05-02 05:08 pm (UTC)
In retrospect I like the old Chelsea better, when they had entertaining footballers but were too amusingly inconsistent to be in any danger of winning anything.
(Reply) (Thread)
From: funnynamehere
2007-05-02 07:55 pm (UTC)
Going by the very few Chelsea fans I know, I think a sizeable minority of them would agree with you.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: funnynamehere
2007-05-02 07:58 pm (UTC)
I do hope so really; I think I'd explode in a torrent of joyous smugness if/when the whole rotton edifice there collapses.
(Reply) (Thread)