An analysis of the Chelsea-Barcelona match(Based on shads's)

[chronic]

look, first of all, chelsea should of won that. they were cheated out of it.

but whether its because of players "history" they dont get these decisions is another story.

but....

1. chelsea should of had a penalty with the pique handball.

2. the ref was correct about the malouda incident. the first foul was commited outside the box... but ref played on as malouda carried on (hence advantage played) then when he was fouled again the ref blew, so in the rules of football, if no advantage is gained then it goes back to where original foul was commited.

3. Anelka was a prick for getting Abidal sent off. he tripped over himself. i feel as bad for abidal as i do for D.Fletcher.

4. Drogba was going down all the fucking time. i mean, him and C.Ronaldo need to fucking change sports and get into Syncronise Diving. unbelievable at them 2. and the funny thing was Drogba at one point actually rolled around the penalty box like a baby.

5. the eto'o handball im undecided. yes he raised his hands but you do that in order help jump higher (hence the argument of elbowing when jumping for a header) i argue this in alot of prem games so im not being biased here (looks at killa) the ball was struck hard and fast at a close-ish range. but in fairness eto'o had jumped and turned his back so he wasnt even looking (unlike Pique)

6. in the rules of football, yes drogba should of had a penalty for tuggin of his shirt when he went down. but again, this happens ALL the time in the prem league (and in the barca game didnt it with henry?) and hardly EVER gets blown for. and i think chelsea fans know this, but they were looking into more due to all the other decisions against them and were just building up a case for agurments.

7. Chelsea were pretty much ALL over barca. barca struggle against the english teams, cause they grind out tough performances, they can defend tough and they can counter attack. and barca just cant play like that, they need people open at the back to pass there way through. i mean Messi was dead quite, Eto'o heard nothing from him, Iniesta he was running midfield but thats it, getting NO WERE untill the 92nd minuet. Alves was wank, Y.Toure made a couple of tackles but didnt help the attack as much as the defence. But chelsea, drogba (when he was actually on his feet) was making runs getting back to tackle. malouda was up and down that left side like nobodies buisness, terry and alex were clearing all day long, anelka was going good, lampard and essien in midfield were breaking down and startng up play, overall a good team perfromance.

8. those two pricks Drogba & Ballack, no matter what happens in a game you dont go doing that too fucking refs. thats just bang out of order. at one point i thought we was gonna have another Palo Di Canio moment. yes its heat of the moment but come on, who have they been watching? W.Rooney...

9. in the end like Huddink said, yeah you can argue and complain about these decisions but there was a few times when the players should of scored in open play. Drogba chance stick out in my mind at the moment.

meh thats enough of a morning rant. in a nutshell, chelsea outplayed, outthought, outgrinded barca, but where cheated out of it by the ref, and faliure to finish them off themselves.

Now first of all I wanna be clear on this: I am not a suporter of Barcelona ( Even though I was before) nor Chelsea ( I, also, was a chelsea fan before). I just want to give a simple objective opinion about this very controversial game and hear what you have to say about it.


LET'S GET STARTED

1. The piqué handball is a penalty he even admitted it himself BUT since it it happened AFTER THE FAKE RED CARD you can cancel it. But let's be clear, this was definitly a penalty, without any doubt in the world, I would've have called it.

2. Exactly what you said, I just think the referee should have made the advantage sign (if he didn't do it because I dont remember if he did)

3. That is not a red card. I have been a football referee who 4 years now ( for real, no bullshit ) and I would never have given a red card to abidal. Anelka deserved a yellow for the dive though.

4. Yes he was. In the episode involving him and Yaya Touré, they were both wrestling for the battle OUTSIDE of the penalty area and THERE WAS A FOUL but it was outside, when he got in the penalty area, Touré made a magnificient tackle on the hitman. There was a foul, but it was outside the area which means, it was not a penalty.

5. About the Eto'o penalty. As you probably saw it, it was clearly a ball-to-hand- ball and if you look closely at the moment it struck him; it was the at the very intersection of his arm and his back. But that is not why it just isn't a penalty : the real reason is that Eto'o had his back turned when the ball hit his (back-arm) and the Fifa rules are extremely clear on this.

6. Now the shirt holding. First of all, as you said, it happened at the Camp Nou and was not called, was it because of poor refering or simply because this just doesn't get called? By my experience as a football fan, as a regional referee and as a player it's not a penalty BUT it doesn't mean it is not a foul. As we all know, there are fouls that will always (most of the time) be called outside the box but will never be called inside of it. I, for one, think that foul was part of this category. But it doesn't mean that it never gets called, yes on rare occasion it will be called but I dont think that would happen in the second leg of the semi-final of the Champion's League, don't you?

7. About the game, I wouldn't say Chelsea totally dominated. They definitly created more occasions but you could see them not willing to attack as much as they would attack a team like Arsenal. It almost seemed that they still were scared, playing on the counter BUT if it was just about this (not counting the Camp nou match) match without thinking about the fouls or anything, Chelsea deserved to win.....until the very end.
Let me explain:
(A)
Chelsea can only blame themselves for losing this match, they had a lot of wasted opportunities (mostly Drogba's), didn't play as offensivly as they normally would (which is normal since Barcelona has the best striking force in the world without a single doubt) but that is not what really stunned me. At the very end of the match, Hiddink took out Drogba ( I think he was injured) but instead of thinking offensivly (since Barca were 10 at that moment) he puts in belleti...Now let's analyse the situation: Chelsea are at home, 1-0, against a team that has 10 players...why? Why not kill them. It seemed, for me, that Hiddink tought the game was decided at the 72 Minute which is a huge error.
(B)
Concerning Barcelona, it simply was not their day. But, coming back 1-0, with 10 men, away from home, at Chelsea, it simply is amazing. Don't forget that the goal has absolutly nothing wrong with it, it was really a great goal ( Not better then Essien's though)

8. Yes.

9. Yes. I think Drogba was more mad at himself for missing so much opportunies then at the ref though.

10. Let's all remember the first leg. Barca were denied an obvious penalty and Ballack did deserve a yellow card. Both referees were not good BUT they were both horrible for both teams.

And finally
11. I just want everybody to remember ( IF you can) the 2002 World Cup. Gus Hiddink was in charge of a certain team. In 2002 he was in the most controversial matches I have ever seen. South Korea VS Italy ..... and South Korea VS Spain. Now I still remember clearly all the calls that were not called but specificaly when the referee said the ball was over the line and it wasn't in extra time, against Spain. Now I dont know if you all remember but, Hiddink didn't say there was anything controversial about it, that you shouldn't blame referees for their errors and that Italy and Spain should take a long look about their performances before blaming the refeering.


I completly understand if you do not agree with me BUT I have to ask you, before commenting, to read all the post.

Thank you, Kronic.

[DrRapid]

Goof analysis both of you. I know what you mean with the South Korea-Spain match in 2002. That was horrible, so unfair...

[mcZu]

No actually it IS a penalty Ive been reading up on this and its a penalty because HE RAISES HES ARMS if he left them by hes side the ball to hand would be justifyed but because hes raised them making them a obstruction its a penalty.

No it ISN'T, it's quite normal to raise your arms while jumping, yes he shouldn't had had raised his arms like that, but it was unintentional. It wasn't like it was his intention to hit the ball with his hand, so it wasn't a penalty at all. If I remember correctly teh new fifa rules explain that, dunno for sure though...

I pretty much agree with the rest Killa said; however, personaly I'm happy Barca got through.

[chronic]

LET'S GET STARTED

1. The piqué handball is a penalty he even admitted it himself BUT since it it happened AFTER THE FAKE RED CARD you can cancel it. But let's be clear, this was definitly a penalty, without any doubt in the world, I would've have called it.

Disagree...because the "FAKE RED CARD" comes AFTER the SAME PLAYER took Drogba down in the area...result should of been penalty and a red.

2. Exactly what you said, I just think the referee should have made the advantage sign (if he didn't do it because I dont remember if he did)

He doesnt, Its a debateable decision but its exceptable under the circumstances

3. That is not a red card. I have been a football referee who 4 years now ( for real, no bullshit ) and I would never have given a red card to abidal. Anelka deserved a yellow for the dive though.

Anelka clipped his own heels = no dive. As mentioned before he should of been sent off first half tho.

4. Yes he was. In the episode involving him and Yaya Touré, they were both wrestling for the battle OUTSIDE of the penalty area and THERE WAS A FOUL but it was outside, when he got in the penalty area, Touré made a magnificient tackle on the hitman. There was a foul, but it was outside the area which means, it was not a penalty.

There wasnt even a foul. Toure wins the ball.

5. About the Eto'o penalty. As you probably saw it, it was clearly a ball-to-hand- ball and if you look closely at the moment it struck him; it was the at the very intersection of his arm and his back. But that is not why it just isn't a penalty : the real reason is that Eto'o had his back turned when the ball hit his (back-arm) and the Fifa rules are extremely clear on this.

No actually it IS a penalty Ive been reading up on this and its a penalty because HE RAISES HES ARMS if he left them by hes side the ball to hand would be justifyed but because hes raised them making them a obstruction its a penalty.

6. Now the shirt holding. First of all, as you said, it happened at the Camp Nou and was not called, was it because of poor refering or simply because this just doesn't get called? By my experience as a football fan, as a regional referee and as a player it's not a penalty BUT it doesn't mean it is not a foul. As we all know, there are fouls that will always (most of the time) be called outside the box but will never be called inside of it. I, for one, think that foul was part of this category. But it doesn't mean that it never gets called, yes on rare occasion it will be called but I dont think that would happen in the second leg of the semi-final of the Champion's League, don't you?

I agree but the Henry one was made debateable by the fact Henry is half way to the ground before it happens. Im not saying its not a penalty for Henry but there is slight doubt. Give or ungiven its understandable. Drogba was shirt pulled and then taken down by a leg being thrown in that doesnt win the ball....Clear penalty.

7. About the game, I wouldn't say Chelsea totally dominated. They definitly created more occasions but you could see them not willing to attack as much as they would attack a team like Arsenal. It almost seemed that they still were scared, playing on the counter BUT if it was just about this (not counting the Camp nou match) match without thinking about the fouls or anything, Chelsea deserved to win.....until the very end.

Let me explain:
(A)
Chelsea can only blame themselves for losing this match, they had a lot of wasted opportunities (mostly Drogba's), didn't play as offensivly as they normally would (which is normal since Barcelona has the best striking force in the world without a single doubt) but that is not what really stunned me. At the very end of the match, Hiddink took out Drogba ( I think he was injured) but instead of thinking offensivly (since Barca were 10 at that moment) he puts in belleti...Now let's analyse the situation: Chelsea are at home, 1-0, against a team that has 10 players...why? Why not kill them. It seemed, for me, that Hiddink tought the game was decided at the 72 Minute which is a huge error.
(B)
Concerning Barcelona, it simply was not their day. But, coming back 1-0, with 10 men, away from home, at Chelsea, it simply is amazing. Don't forget that the goal has absolutly nothing wrong with it, it was really a great goal ( Not better then Essien's though)

There was nothing wrong with our attacking. People say we didnt enough but forget that

1.As you already mentioned we was playing Barca which ment we are forced to add more to the defensive side of things.

2. If we wasnt attacking enough how did we have 4 penaltys appeal and multiple chances? Not many other teams have as many chances as we had/had tried to create.

8. Yes.

NO. i have already explained in the other thread tho.

9. Yes. I think Drogba was more mad at himself for missing so much opportunies then at the ref though.

Maybe, Id say it played a part in his anger but the fact that 40,000 others witnessed the same injustices with there own eyes it was pretty clear it was mainly with the ref.

10. Let's all remember the first leg. Barca were denied an obvious penalty and Ballack did deserve a yellow card. Both referees were not good BUT they were both horrible for both teams.

Debateable pen as i said before but yeah i agree overall.

And finally
11. I just want everybody to remember ( IF you can) the 2002 World Cup. Gus Hiddink was in charge of a certain team. In 2002 he was in the most controversial matches I have ever seen. South Korea VS Italy ..... and South Korea VS Spain. Now I still remember clearly all the calls that were not called but specificaly when the referee said the ball was over the line and it wasn't in extra time, against Spain. Now I dont know if you all remember but, Hiddink didn't say there was anything controversial about it, that you shouldn't blame referees for their errors and that Italy and Spain should take a long look about their performances before blaming the refeering.

What does that have to do with THIS game? Hiddink also stated that it was the WORST ref preformance hes seen. If you watched the game properly you would know and understand the statement

I completly understand if you do not agree with me BUT I have to ask you, before commenting, to read all the post.

Thank you, Kronic.

Nice thread btw. Was good to debate on it

1. Well...Abidal holds Drog's shirt one way, and Drogba falls the other way. Now Abidal does put his foot somewhere but it really isn't clear where. I think it's a dive. Abidal uses his left leg to try to remove the ball, he slightly touches Drogba's right foot and after a second Drogba falls down. Now after Abidal swings hist foot you can still see Drogba in control for the ball for 1 sec then he falls down. I even thought that Abidal's left foot *walked* on Drogba's right foot but..Drogba was Already going down. It's very difficult analyse all that in live action I think it's a bit similar to the Henry pen, it's debateable.

That's where I saw it :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKcoZoKsCMI

2. Yes

3. You're right but, I don't think that's what MADE it a dive. It's more of his reaction after he fell down. He looks at the referee with his hands up as if he was waiting for something

4. Yaya Touré did draw back Drogba, but I guess it's debateable.

5. Now the Eto'o Penalty (I'm really having a lot of difficulties explaining this now from my point of view because I'm french and I have use specific terms). First of all let's be clear on 2 things : the rule for a handball includes using any part of the body from the tips of the fingers to the shoulder AND to handle the ball deliberately. Now when the ball touched Eto'o, because it Was a ball-to-hand. Yes Eto'o raises his arm, no I don't think he would have had the time to change position, yes I think he wanted to protect his head, and yes it is a human reflex to raise your arm that high even when we, the spectators, see it and think he didn't need to raise them that high. But that's not even what pushes me to say it's not a pen;

(A) The rules clearly say DELIBERATLY which means it most INVOLVE DELIBERATE CONTACT which means the player COULD have avoided the touch but simply choose not to ::: I dont thin'k Eto'o could have avoided the ball and protecting himself at the same time

(B) It means the the player arms were not in a normal position at that time and that the player deliberately continued an initially accident for the purpose of gaining an advantage. ::: Eto'o hands were not in a normal position, but he doesnt continue to gain an unfair advantage, but it's arguable.

(C) Moving your hands or your body instinctiely so you can protect yourself when a fast approaching ball does not constitue deliberate contact unless there is subsequent action to direct the ball or benefit from the ball contacting the hand after the contact has been made. ::: Again, I don't think Eto uses his hands to gain an unfair advantage.

6. Ok

7.
A: Exactly, and I respect that even tho I have to admit, I was waiting for more coming from chelsea but it's perfectly normal.
B: Because, from my opinion, that was Barcelona worst game(Because of Chelsea's great defending ) and Chelsea counter-attacked all the time( Agains Barcelona...who are always attacking) That's why there was so much good occasions. AND, don't forget that Barca were down 1-0, they had to score and the Essien goal, as fantastic as it was, was not planified( I MEAN, shots like that have 1/20 chance to get in)

Why I said Chelsea have only themselves to blame....let me explain. What Chelsea did at Camp Nou was labelled as some people as anti-football. Now I don't think it was the case, Hiddink knew that the only way they would get something outta Barcelona in the Camp Nou was to play like that and he stick to that play untill the very end, that's the where Hiddink made an error. As I said before, the perfect scenario. 1 Up, at home, playing a team with 10 man. Even if it is Barcelona (Record breakers, history makers) they should have, at least, played with the same offensive force as the beginning of the match because no team in the world could have withstood Chelsea's power for longer, especially when they are having one of their best game of the year. I Honestly think that if Hiddink did not make that tactical error, Chelsea would be on the final. He did not push his team forward after Barca when down to 10 men (which In a certain way I can understand since it's barcelona) but that decision (of letting the Catalans more possesion and conceding ground) killed them. It led more pressure on the home team than supposed. Barca had virtually nothing to do anymore since Chelsea refused to attack, the ball kept coming back to barca's half. An exemple?: Piqué was more of an offensive mid at the end of the match (and hes a centre back), if chelsea still worried Barca offensivly, I can guarantee you that he would not have pushed up so much. Chelsea, literally, had not advantage of having an extra man because they refused to use it. That's where they lost the match.


8.YES. It's a shame to act like that, even if it was the final of the world cup, you simply cannot act like that. We are not animals. I read what you said, YES they that was maybe their last chance to be in a Champion's league final, YES they deserved to win( Because let's be clear on this, even If I explain all the ref calls, THERE IS NO WAY IN THE WORLD HE COULD HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT ALL THAT LIVE, which means he had to give AT LEAST ONE penalty to chelsea) YES they still have a sour taste in their match for losing the final last year, which I thought they deserved to win BUT IN NO WAY they should have acted like that. You can show your frustation like John Terry that is normal, they are humans after all and they need to show their emotions, but the running of Ballack was absolutly childish, and Drogba who felt he had to make an impression on the camera as soon as he saw it it simply stupid.

9. With how furious he was, and how he unleashed that anger everywhere, I dont even think he noticed the 40k others.

10. Yes

11. That was to show Hiddink under both circumstances, but I can't agree with his statement. Korea-Italy was worst then this match. He seems to forget easily.