This really grinds my gears. Poor old chelsea defend superbly for 90 mins against the best attacking side in the world, with the best attacking player in the world; and people call it "ugly"!
Defending is an art in it's self. And i'd argue it's much harder than being an attacker.
What were they supposed to do, play an attacking formation with 3 defenders and hope they score outscore them? It's so insulting. As someone said on the BBC, "defending is criminally underrated." When was the last time a defender got nominated for player of the year? They get so little credit when they play well, and then get slated when they concede.
This is by no means to say Messi has not deserved the many titles and awards he has received. Because in short, he's a genius. But when a defender outwits him, it's not because the defender has done well. It's because Messi has failed.
Chelsea were superb tonight and deserve so many plaudits for beating Barcelona tactically. Just because you dont have much possession, does not mean you should automatically lose. Nor does it mean that you are inferior attack-wise. In fact, Chelsea had the better strike force and defense as they scored 1 goal and conceded 0 whereas Barcelona scored 0 and conceded 1!
Rant over!!!
Why is defending called "ugly tactics"?
posted on 18/4/12
>>Do you feel no flicker of excitement when your team has been pushed back, and it's only last ditch tackles and blocks keeping you in it?
I usually feel like vomiting.
However the release from the suffering at 93:01 is brilliant.
posted on 18/4/12
5 or 6!! i doubt that. The hypothetical game is too easy. Had Chelsea played Torres, they may have scored 6!! My rather poor example is of course extreme. But we cant tell what may happen on another night. The fact is Chelsea didnt concede and a large part of that is down to great defending
posted on 18/4/12
^And that's the feeling I love. I enjoy United steam rolling teams down. But when we actually get a challenge I feel it kicks our team into a new gear which we very rarely reach otherwise. On a linked side note, that's why I enjoy the rise of City, a new challenge as others are dropping off.
posted on 18/4/12
I wouldn't say Chelsea did anything like that tonight. I genuinely thought they rode their luck tonight. That, plus some bad finishing and some very good defending. I can count the number of 'speedy counter attacks' on the fingers of one finger. And that was riddled with luck...Lampard's blind pass that was inch perfect onto the chest of a runner at speed, Mascherano having a slip, Didier (my 10 year old daughter has a greater pain threshold!) Drogba grubbing a shot and finally Valdez pawing at something I believe he should have done better with.
posted on 18/4/12
^ Sorry... When did I ever say Chelsea did that tonight? When have I been arguing about the Chelsea performance?
I've been talking about defending in general. For the record, I didn't see the match tonight, and it sounds like Chelsea clung on, more by luck than talent.
posted on 18/4/12
United never got any credit despite it taking Barca two goals from outside the box in the second half to beat us at Wembley
All I've heard is about he humiliation etc etc etc
-------------------------------------------
That's just the way it goes Macca. We were never going to be given any credit after being beaten 3-1, even if it was from two fantastic strikes, well Villa's was, we should've defended better for Messi's goal.
Had we won though in the same manner as Chelsea did tonight, I'm sure we would've been given the credit which people are giving Chelsea, although there will always be people who won't give us credit for anything we do, but you'll get that with any club.
This is probably been Chelsea's worst season for quite a few years and this is the best Barcelona team we've ever seen.
They defended as well as they could've done tonight for the most part and yes they rode their luck at times, but it's what any side will have to do when they play Barcelona. You're also going to have to catch them on an off night in front of goal which is what happened tonight. I think Di Matteo set up his team as well as he probably could've done and they managed to get the win at the end of the day.
Not a lot of people expected this Chelsea side to beat Barcelona tonight but they did it.
Credit where credit's due I think.
The result at the end of 90 minutes.
Chelsea 1-0 Barcelona.
posted on 18/4/12
I don't think you can fault Chelsea's tactics tonight. They played the only way they were going to get a result, and got one. Barca were the far superior side and missed some great chances, but that's football.
People use Stoke playing top teams as an example, and it's a valid example - as there is the same gap in class between Barca and Chelsea, and top 4 sides and Stoke. And although it's terrible to watch, credit to Stoke (Chelsea) when they get the result.
Barca have become so good that they've almost made their matches become quite mundane to watch, as other teams are not stupid enough to try and play against them.
It's why I preferred to watch Rijkaard's Barca - not as good, but teams would play against them, thus allowing them to play.
posted on 18/4/12
we defended very well. and its good to see fans from other lubs applauding it.
for what its worth, man utd are regarded much more positively on our board than spurs or liverpool, and I hope you beat pretenders city to the title.
posted on 19/4/12
Fair enough, defending's an art, but attacking is much more so.
Just look at the size of the place you have to get the ball into to score a goal as opposed to cubic metres of empty space you can kick the ball into to avoid it going in your net. And as if that wasn't enough, you put a guy on the line who can even use his hands to keep it out.
There's a reason why attacking football's more appreciated.
posted on 19/4/12
im not sure why chelseas defending is getting applauded.
barce missed so many sitters, hit the post, open goals you name it.
just shows they cant do it on a cold wet windy night in london doesnt it