It was rough luck for Chelsea, really - down to ten men on a harsh straight red to Asier Del Horno, they actually managed to take the lead on a pitiful own goal, only to give it back on another own goal and finally lose 2-1 after a nice Eto'o header. On the other hand, I've seen high school soccer fields in better shape than the Stamford Bridge pitch, so maybe it was just karma.
The first 45 minutes were a real slog, as neither team got much going. Chelsea seemed content to sit back on their heels, rarely displaying any sort of nose for the goal, as though they were indeed planning on the 0-0 draw Mourinho had stated he would settle for. Plans didn't change much when Del Horno barreled into Messi in the 37th - a foul, sure; a yellow, maybe. A red? Certainly not when you see it on replay. Either way, though, it's just more fuel for the already quite contentious relationship between the sides, illustrated even further by Chelsea's refusal to kick the ball out of play when Motta was clipped, play so unsportsmanlike it appeared to prompt Mourinho to leave his box to apologize to Rijkaard. Of course, Mourinho being Mourinho, he must have looked at the tape later before determining Messi was an "actor and a cheat" - the replay did make it look like Messi oversold Del Horno's contact more than a little, but I'd love for Mourinho to name me some soccer players who don't do that. Cheating, or just gamesmanship? I don't know. I mean, I think a red card should be determined more by apparent intent than by result - if you go flying in with studs up and you're nowhere near the ball, you might be deserving of a red card whether you actually hurt someone or not. Messi insists he felt like Del Horno was trying to hurt him; I don't think the video really bears that out, while the ref says he feels he made the right decision based on the full-speed play. Being an official has certainly become a much tougher job in the age of instant replay, and especially slow-motion replay - people criticize decisions made based on angles and speeds that the ref is never going to see. Was the red harsh? Yes. But at full speed, can I see why he gave it? Yeah, I guess I can.
Oddly, it was Chelsea who came alive first after the break, with a couple of strong runs from Arjen Robben and, eventually, the setpiece that led to the own goal, though Motta was a real goat in giving that one up. (No surprise he was pulled off seven minutes later.) But Barca started to hit their stride around the time when Henrik Larsson was put in for Motta, and largely dominated the last 25 minutes or so. They ended up with a massive 69-31 edge in possession, along with 23-10 in shots and 9-2 in shots on goal. Had Chelsea had 11 men all game, the outcome would surely have been different - the stats if not the score, though the marking on Eto'o's header might not have been so poor with an additional man out there - but they didn't.
However much they may be running away with the EPL for the second year in a row, Chelsea find themselves up against it in the Champions League once more, and much earlier than last year's semifinals. Were they down 2-1 and going home, you might almost like their chances - but headed to Spain down 2-1? Unless they can pitch a 2-0 shutout at Camp Nou - and Barca haven't lost a 2-0 shutout at home since last February in the Primera - Chelsea are going to have to score at least three goals. On the road. The Blues dropped the first leg 2-1 last year and won the return 4-2 with three goals in the first twenty minutes... but last year, they started on the road and finished at home. Mourinho will need to have a miracle up his sleeve to pull this one off; I think Chelsea's quest for European silverware will have to wait another year.
Thursday, February 23, 2006
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Real-ly bad
I'm not sure I've ever seen a team this loaded look so mediocre. I was expecting Real Madrid vs. Arsenal to be a good game, probably better than the bookmakers did. Arsenal may have been missing a bunch of players through injury, and yet it never seemed to matter.
Aside from a couple of solid shots from Roberto Carlos and a wicked drive from Robinho that happened to be right at Lehmann, Real never seemed to seriously threaten. Certainly the first 30 minutes of the game were all Arsenal; Real snatched the last 15 minutes of the first half, but when the second half started up it was mostly Arsenal again. They just made the Real defense look bad - but then, the Real defense isn't that great. (6-1 at Zaragoza? 6-1 vs. anyone?)
The more impressive part was that Arsenal's makeshift defense managed to keep Real off the board. But few of the Real players seemed on top of their games - in particular, Beckham, Ronaldo, and Zidane were all pretty ineffective. That helped, as did the fact that Arsenal's counterattacks were so successful. Indeed, in spite of Real's stunning 65-35 edge in possession, it never felt like they were the ones dominating the game. Maybe that's because after Thierry Henry's great goal in the 47th, Arsenal no longer seemed as interested in attacking. Yet they were still offered a number of chances due to horrible passing by the Real defense, which committed as many stupid turnovers as you could possibly expect any team to make in any one game.
Time of possession isn't everything, obviously. Arsenal were clearly the better team for at least 75 of the 90 minutes - honestly, had Real scored on one of their late chances (like the ball Ronaldo couldn't quite get to with only a few minutes left), I would have talked about how bad Arsenal's luck was in not winning. Either way, though, they've got their away goal - and with the win, any tie at Highbury sends them through. As Derek Rae was saying, it would be ironic if in one of their weaker Premiership seasons in recent memory - a mere fifth right now (which would be out of the 2006-07 CL), after not having finished worse than second since 1996-97, and not lower than fourth since 1995-96 - Arsenal finally broke through in Europe, where they have notoriously struggled despite their domestic success (and obviously with all those high finishes in the EPL they've had plenty of European chances in the last decade). Indeed it would be - and even more ironic if they did so with all their injury problems. But we'll see what happens - this Real team is certainly loaded enough to win at Highbury if they can get their act together.
Tomorrow's game? Chelsea vs. Barca. I'm even more excited for this one.
Aside from a couple of solid shots from Roberto Carlos and a wicked drive from Robinho that happened to be right at Lehmann, Real never seemed to seriously threaten. Certainly the first 30 minutes of the game were all Arsenal; Real snatched the last 15 minutes of the first half, but when the second half started up it was mostly Arsenal again. They just made the Real defense look bad - but then, the Real defense isn't that great. (6-1 at Zaragoza? 6-1 vs. anyone?)
The more impressive part was that Arsenal's makeshift defense managed to keep Real off the board. But few of the Real players seemed on top of their games - in particular, Beckham, Ronaldo, and Zidane were all pretty ineffective. That helped, as did the fact that Arsenal's counterattacks were so successful. Indeed, in spite of Real's stunning 65-35 edge in possession, it never felt like they were the ones dominating the game. Maybe that's because after Thierry Henry's great goal in the 47th, Arsenal no longer seemed as interested in attacking. Yet they were still offered a number of chances due to horrible passing by the Real defense, which committed as many stupid turnovers as you could possibly expect any team to make in any one game.
Time of possession isn't everything, obviously. Arsenal were clearly the better team for at least 75 of the 90 minutes - honestly, had Real scored on one of their late chances (like the ball Ronaldo couldn't quite get to with only a few minutes left), I would have talked about how bad Arsenal's luck was in not winning. Either way, though, they've got their away goal - and with the win, any tie at Highbury sends them through. As Derek Rae was saying, it would be ironic if in one of their weaker Premiership seasons in recent memory - a mere fifth right now (which would be out of the 2006-07 CL), after not having finished worse than second since 1996-97, and not lower than fourth since 1995-96 - Arsenal finally broke through in Europe, where they have notoriously struggled despite their domestic success (and obviously with all those high finishes in the EPL they've had plenty of European chances in the last decade). Indeed it would be - and even more ironic if they did so with all their injury problems. But we'll see what happens - this Real team is certainly loaded enough to win at Highbury if they can get their act together.
Tomorrow's game? Chelsea vs. Barca. I'm even more excited for this one.
Sunday, February 19, 2006
Snatching a replay from the jaws of defeat
Matches like this one make soccer what it is, and anyone who couldn't appreciate, at the very least, the drama of Micah Richards' last-gasp header will never understand the sport. I'm quite certain I've never screamed that loud, possibly at any sporting event ever, certainly never at another soccer game. It would have been even nicer to see it live, but I studiously avoided all information pertaining to the game until I got home, and so it worked out about the same. My roommate did know the outcome, but he was very good about not saying anything revealing - though when, out of the corner of my eye, I saw him lean in as Barton prepared the corner, I got a mite suspicious.
It was a very frustrating game to watch at times, nonetheless. In fact, it was a very frustrating game to watch for about 94 minutes. For my money - though let's bear in mind that I've only gotten to watch them play so much - City looked as good offensively as they have all season, and this without Andy Cole on the pitch. Samaras looks better every time out, Vassell has blazing speed, and I love the way Riera and Barton move the ball around. It's really astonishing to realize how poor this team has looked on offense at times this season, especially on the road - whenever I watch they seem to move the ball very well. Their passing isn't just technically good, it's fun to watch, inventive and spread out. It's why I watch soccer in the first place - no one wants to see a slog with guys just knocking into each other all over the place.
But as good as they looked on offense for about 100 yards, the last 18 seemed to stymie City for pretty much the whole match. Seemingly wide-open chances went by the wayside, setpieces led to any number of near misses. The stat line says it all: City had 44 shots with seven on goal; Villa had just 18 shots but three were on goal. City also dominated time of possession, 57-43. They simply couldn't put it in. Midway through the first half, I grumbled to Drew, "This is the kind of game they lose 1-0" (remembering the Bolton game in particular). And sure enough, that's how it looked like it would finish - one good Villa counterattack was basically all they needed the whole game. And it nearly held up.
If City can finish just slightly more often, though, they could turn things around. This team has been woefully inconsistent this season, going 8-2-4 at home and 3-2-7 on the road in the Premiership. In this, the first road cup game since the Doncaster debacle, City dominated play throughout the game and would have been exceedingly unlucky to have lost. Sure, Villa are just 15th in the League, but cup games - and FA Cup games in particular - are always different.
I don't want to be confident, because City will surely stumble as soon as I think too highly of them, but it's hard not to like their chances in the March 8 replay. City already beat Villa 3-1 at City of Manchester Stadium back at the end of October, and as noted they've played much better at home than away this year - no home losses since January 4, and of the four home defeats this season, only one came to a team not currently in the top four in the table.
Cautious optimism is the key phrase here. I just hope FSC televises the replay, since there's no way for me to catch a midweek game on the radio, working during the day.
It was a very frustrating game to watch at times, nonetheless. In fact, it was a very frustrating game to watch for about 94 minutes. For my money - though let's bear in mind that I've only gotten to watch them play so much - City looked as good offensively as they have all season, and this without Andy Cole on the pitch. Samaras looks better every time out, Vassell has blazing speed, and I love the way Riera and Barton move the ball around. It's really astonishing to realize how poor this team has looked on offense at times this season, especially on the road - whenever I watch they seem to move the ball very well. Their passing isn't just technically good, it's fun to watch, inventive and spread out. It's why I watch soccer in the first place - no one wants to see a slog with guys just knocking into each other all over the place.
But as good as they looked on offense for about 100 yards, the last 18 seemed to stymie City for pretty much the whole match. Seemingly wide-open chances went by the wayside, setpieces led to any number of near misses. The stat line says it all: City had 44 shots with seven on goal; Villa had just 18 shots but three were on goal. City also dominated time of possession, 57-43. They simply couldn't put it in. Midway through the first half, I grumbled to Drew, "This is the kind of game they lose 1-0" (remembering the Bolton game in particular). And sure enough, that's how it looked like it would finish - one good Villa counterattack was basically all they needed the whole game. And it nearly held up.
If City can finish just slightly more often, though, they could turn things around. This team has been woefully inconsistent this season, going 8-2-4 at home and 3-2-7 on the road in the Premiership. In this, the first road cup game since the Doncaster debacle, City dominated play throughout the game and would have been exceedingly unlucky to have lost. Sure, Villa are just 15th in the League, but cup games - and FA Cup games in particular - are always different.
I don't want to be confident, because City will surely stumble as soon as I think too highly of them, but it's hard not to like their chances in the March 8 replay. City already beat Villa 3-1 at City of Manchester Stadium back at the end of October, and as noted they've played much better at home than away this year - no home losses since January 4, and of the four home defeats this season, only one came to a team not currently in the top four in the table.
Cautious optimism is the key phrase here. I just hope FSC televises the replay, since there's no way for me to catch a midweek game on the radio, working during the day.
Thursday, February 16, 2006
Paging William Styron
This Sunday, the soccer gods really don't like me. Airing live on Fox Soccer Channel at 1 pm is Man City's match against Aston Villa in the fifth round of the FA Cup. Man City! FA Cup! Live at a reasonable time! This would be the first time I've ever watched a City game truly live (if I get to do so), though I did listen to the Doncaster game live (ugh). It's easier during cups, of course, because those games are often at night, whereas regular weekend league games are during the day - and during the day in England means early morning in Chicago, and if you think I'd get up at 6 am on a Saturday when I could watch the game plausibly live that afternoon, you're crazy.
Anyway. Naturally, airing at the same time is the US team in a friendly against Guatemala. Realistically, I am (or should be) more invested in US soccer than in Man City, but once the games don't mean as much, it's harder to care, and Guatemala - with all due respect - is not the most marquee of friendly opponents. Of course, my roommate is not a City fan, so guess which game he'd rather watch?
The obvious solution is to watch the Man City game live, and TiVo the US game for perusal later. But what if I'm not home? So actually, I have the City game set up in the TiVo. If it turns out I'm home on Sunday, then I'll switch it to record the US game and watch City live. If not, I don't miss City, and my roommate gets to watch the US game live anyway. I'd miss it totally in that case, but it's not as big a loss.
Of course, we can't forget how poorly my only previous live experience went, and for their general mediocrity Villa are still a couple notches above Doncaster on overall talent. Let's hope this won't be 90 minutes of my life I'll want back later.
Since we're talking about it, ever-so-quick discussions of the City win over Charlton and the US win over Japan, both by 3-2 scores.
City:
*Nice goal by Samaras. That's why you get a guy that size. But what was that when he was wide open later? He needs to be more aggressive, especially now that he'll probably see more time with Cole down.
*Barton - wow. It's amazing the way this guy has exploded since the transfer flap, and even more amazing how quickly the fans got back behind him. Loved that he charged to the stands while grabbing the front of his jersey - makes me optimistic that Pearce can ink him soon. I just hope this isn't a "playing for a contract" case and once he does sign he suddenly vanishes.
*Another nice win at home. Now can they win on the road? Three road wins all year and two of those were at Birmingham and Sunderland, and those were both in August. The only other was 5-2 at Charlton on December 4. But winning on the road will be required in the FA Cup, and in the European hunt - see this weekend, not to mention the rest of the EPL season.
US:
*Taylor Twellman is awesome.
*The annoying thing about a game like this is when your team is dominating, makes a whole bunch of substitutions, and then looks like crap. The last 15 minutes or so were really quite mediocre, whereas the first 75 were just so fun to watch because of the American dominance.
*Tied with Mexico at #6 in the new FIFA rankings. Yeah, that's more like it. There's no current excuse for the Mexicans to be higher than we are - equal's fine for now.
Anyway. Naturally, airing at the same time is the US team in a friendly against Guatemala. Realistically, I am (or should be) more invested in US soccer than in Man City, but once the games don't mean as much, it's harder to care, and Guatemala - with all due respect - is not the most marquee of friendly opponents. Of course, my roommate is not a City fan, so guess which game he'd rather watch?
The obvious solution is to watch the Man City game live, and TiVo the US game for perusal later. But what if I'm not home? So actually, I have the City game set up in the TiVo. If it turns out I'm home on Sunday, then I'll switch it to record the US game and watch City live. If not, I don't miss City, and my roommate gets to watch the US game live anyway. I'd miss it totally in that case, but it's not as big a loss.
Of course, we can't forget how poorly my only previous live experience went, and for their general mediocrity Villa are still a couple notches above Doncaster on overall talent. Let's hope this won't be 90 minutes of my life I'll want back later.
Since we're talking about it, ever-so-quick discussions of the City win over Charlton and the US win over Japan, both by 3-2 scores.
City:
*Nice goal by Samaras. That's why you get a guy that size. But what was that when he was wide open later? He needs to be more aggressive, especially now that he'll probably see more time with Cole down.
*Barton - wow. It's amazing the way this guy has exploded since the transfer flap, and even more amazing how quickly the fans got back behind him. Loved that he charged to the stands while grabbing the front of his jersey - makes me optimistic that Pearce can ink him soon. I just hope this isn't a "playing for a contract" case and once he does sign he suddenly vanishes.
*Another nice win at home. Now can they win on the road? Three road wins all year and two of those were at Birmingham and Sunderland, and those were both in August. The only other was 5-2 at Charlton on December 4. But winning on the road will be required in the FA Cup, and in the European hunt - see this weekend, not to mention the rest of the EPL season.
US:
*Taylor Twellman is awesome.
*The annoying thing about a game like this is when your team is dominating, makes a whole bunch of substitutions, and then looks like crap. The last 15 minutes or so were really quite mediocre, whereas the first 75 were just so fun to watch because of the American dominance.
*Tied with Mexico at #6 in the new FIFA rankings. Yeah, that's more like it. There's no current excuse for the Mexicans to be higher than we are - equal's fine for now.
Wednesday, February 01, 2006
Team Strike Force
This is why I watch soccer. Barton - despite being booed by the home fans for much of the match - looked phenomenal, backing up his claim of being "110% committed" to City despite the transfer request and seeming like a man who wants both to stay and to prove his self-perceived value. Riera - who I didn't get a good look at in the derby - looked great. Vassell and Cole make me tremendously happy as a striker duo. The three goals were all terrific, and for once I didn't know where they were coming or who scored them ahead of time. All told the offense looked quite crisp, with some brilliant passing, after the first ten minutes or so (it took about that long to find a groove). Granted, Toon frequently looked just miserable on defense, but you take what you can get. It was a terrific game to watch for a City fan; Newcastle supporters must have been ready to hang themselves, by comparison.
Samaras looked like a bull in a china shop, but it was just his first game. More actual practice with the team, and gameplay, and maybe he won't just be barreling into opposing players every time he's near the ball. (One certainly hopes so, considering the transfer fee. If they end up havng to lose other guys - like, say, Barton - because they spent so much on Samaras, I don't know.)
By the way, I love - love - that Pearce put in a loan bid for SWP. I don't think I even would want the guy coming back to Manchester - clearly he's something of a glory hog, so it's his own fault that he's sitting on a bench for the champs rather than starting for a team that could still make Europe if only they could find some damn road consistency - and you have to love Cole and Vassell, even if Cole is 34 and Vassell probably passes too much. (They looked so good today, though. Cole's assist on the Vassell goal... goddamn it was fantastic.) Anyway, the point is this: you have to love Pearce's attitude on that one. I almost feel like he was just doing it to mess with Chelsea.
Samaras looked like a bull in a china shop, but it was just his first game. More actual practice with the team, and gameplay, and maybe he won't just be barreling into opposing players every time he's near the ball. (One certainly hopes so, considering the transfer fee. If they end up havng to lose other guys - like, say, Barton - because they spent so much on Samaras, I don't know.)
By the way, I love - love - that Pearce put in a loan bid for SWP. I don't think I even would want the guy coming back to Manchester - clearly he's something of a glory hog, so it's his own fault that he's sitting on a bench for the champs rather than starting for a team that could still make Europe if only they could find some damn road consistency - and you have to love Cole and Vassell, even if Cole is 34 and Vassell probably passes too much. (They looked so good today, though. Cole's assist on the Vassell goal... goddamn it was fantastic.) Anyway, the point is this: you have to love Pearce's attitude on that one. I almost feel like he was just doing it to mess with Chelsea.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)