Right here goes....
Firstly I didnt see the game, but I have an opinion and watched the highlights.
Barcelona after 40 mins of the game had passed the ball to another of their players FOUR times as many times Chelsea had done so, and had 70% of the possession (or so my dad told me from the stats he saw).
Over the two legs, Barcelona showed why they are the best footballing team in the world at the moment, but failed to produce any clear cut chances, mainly due to the tactical acumen displayed by both players and manager of Chelsea. This is testament to the sheer strength and quality of the Chelsea team as a whole, and how extremely brilliant they are in defending.
However, Chelsea are the worst top 4 English team, when it comes to watching for a bit of entertainment. They play the most direct football out of the top 4 teams, and it isn't anything to admire.
I saw the highlights tonight.
The first shout for a penalty - Malouda -v- Alves, would probably have been given as a foul outside the box. Inside the box it is a different story and Malouda made the most of the incident, diving as if he was auditioning for the screenplay of Platoon. Whats that you say? How can there be different rules inside and outside the box? Well, if you watch football and understand football, you will understand that the ref will not blow up for stupid silly fouls as much when inside the box as he would anywhere on the pitch - that's just how the game goes my friends. If the ref was to blow up on every decision in the box, then the game (of football in general) would be awful.
The second shout for a penalty (Drogblack acting like the asshat he is) was never a penalty. He didnt have control of the ball, his last touch was too heavy, and as soon as he realised that the keeper was going to get the ball he went down. Go back to Cote d'Ivoire you absolute c*nt.
The third shout, was a penalty. Hard luck Chelsea - but hey Abidal's red card was NEVER a red card, and that was by far the worst refereeing decision of the game.
The fourth shout, Eto'o's 'handball' was not a handball. The ball struck him between the inside of his armpit, arm and chest, and that does not constitute as handball.
If Chelsea were any good, they'd have scored a second goal tonight against a Barcelona team that had ten men. But what's that? They couldn't get the ball and create any meaningful attack, and if they did, their strikers were not clinical enough?
If you control possession, you generally are more likely to win. In the case of both legs, Barcelona controlled the possession and tried to play football, the beautiful game, the beautiful way.
They took their ONE chance and they deserve to go through.
As for those who are talking crap about how Barcelona will struggle against United... well I'm afraid that it will be a completely different game to tonight. Man United are better than Chelsea everywhere on the pitch, but Man United's game style is different to Chelsea's and it will suit Barcelona to play against Man United. The battle in midfield will be electric, as both Man United and Barcelona thrive on possession.
How much will the absence of Abidal and Alves effect Barcelona (Marquez missing is not much of an issue, but only made so because both these players are missing)? I honestly don't know. Sylvinho is good enough at left back, but right back is a huge question mark. Of course this is where Manchester United will target as the weakness in the Barcelona team, and with Ronaldo on form it could be extremely difficult, but hey....
