Thursday, May 7, 2009

Unscripted Drama

That is why we watch football. Pure, unscripted drama. The game began a goal that made Tony Yeboah's strikes of old look like childs play, and ended with as well taken a shot as you will see under such immense pressure. In between was a fierce battle, dominated by Barcelona in terms of possession, but dominated by Chelsea in terms of clear-cut chances.

There can be no comparison between the two semi-finals. To conclude from them that Man Utd are leagues ahead of everyone is to neglect the task Man Utd faced after 10 minutes in the second leg - don't concede four goals against a dejected bunch of "babies". What's worse is that people are looking at Cristiano from that game, then looking at Messi against Chelsea and -- treating all things as being equal -- concluding that Ronaldo is the big game player, the best in the world, and so forth. Suffice to say, all things were not equal. In fact they couldn't have been anymore unequal.

To analyse yesterday's game is almost to do it an injustice, but there are a few noteworthy points to be made:

- Valdes didn't put a foot wrong over the two legs, and made some crucial saves that kept Barcelona in the tie. For that he should be applauded.

- Barcelona had a weakened team out yesterday. They were forced to play a world-class holding midfielder in central defense, and replace him with a novice. The absence of a hugely influential player (Henry) also forced their best midfielder out to a less prominent wide position, meaning Barcelona were short two of their usual three midfielders.

- For all the talk of Chelsea's aerial threat, they didn't really threaten in that department at all. Kudos to the Barcelona players for defending well against free-kicks and corners.

- Chelsea should have had one penalty, so should Barcelona (from the first leg). Just because they had four shouts for a penalty doesn't mean anything, and to use it as an excuse is a bit pathetic.

- Drogba cost Chelsea their place in the final. He missed two great chances, one in each leg, and I'm convinced that his pretending to be injured was what made Hiddink substitute him, and thus hand the initiative to the 10 men of Barcelona.

- Barcelona dominated possession even with 10 men. They probably would have done so with 9, such was Chelsea's inability to control this game in an attacking sense.

- Frank Lampard goes missing in big games.

- Chelsea defended brilliantly.

- Messi does not play the game of football for Messi's sake. In our Youtube generation it seems people are disappointed if he doesn't go by three players and slot the ball home in every game. Being tripled marked meant that all he could do was make sure he didn't lose the ball, and hope for some kind of opening. With the headless Eto'o alongside of him it was hard to put an incisive attack together, but the Argentine can claim an assist which put Barcelona through.

- As a mailbox contributor said, lets finally put the Ronaldo v Messi debate to bed. Clearly Iniesta is the best footballer in the world. Eamon Dunphy commented that this whole "best in the world " thing is a cod. He's right in a way. It seems to be a debate invented in the last few seasons, to cater for the ego of Ronaldo. When Zinidene Zidane was playing I don't remember hearing people describe games as Zidane v Pirlo or what have you. Do you ever remember a game where Zidane's reputation of "best in the world" was on the line, as if the sport we were watching was boxing? Football is a team game, and that's one of the reasons Ronaldo was good on Tuesday. He played that way. That's also one of the reasons Iniesta is so good. I couldn't have been happier to see the ghostly playmaker score such a fantastic goal, because his name deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as the other great players of the modern age.

- Eto'o is a liability. I said as much before the game, and he will continue to let the side down in Rome. Quite simply, he's brainless.

There so much more to be said about that one game, and so much to anticipate with regards to the final. As usual, feel free to leave comments below.

4 comments:

Gav said...

I don't think the debate of who is the best player in the world is a new concept. There was a period during Zidane's career when it was very much Zidane vs. Figo for the boasting rights.

Dec said...

Yeah I guess I just wasn't as clued in to football back then. Now that I think of it there was always a debate about Henry/Nistelrooy with regards best in the Premier League which was similar to the Messi/Ronaldo. I guess my point is that Im beginning to dislike them. It forces people to pick sides when picking sides should be what its about.

It's not unlike like Nirvana/Pearl Jam. People think you can only like one of them, but I see no reason not to like both. You're going to have your favourite, but lets spread the love people!

Dec said...

"picking sides SHOULDN'T be..."

Gav said...

My favourite was always the "whose better: Keane or Viera?" debate.