Kind of a damp squib in the end. Barca's 2 goals in the first half killed it, but I thought they were a joke in the second half. Slowing a game down and seeing it out is one thing, but they were just woeful at times, so sloppy and lazy. Result never really in doubt, but not good to see.
I don't know what people can expect in the game after the event but Barca were asked a question early in this game and they answered it emphatically in the first half.Originally Posted by osarusan
In a game of 4 quarters, they were brilliant in three, I can live with them doddering about in the 4th quarter, with last year's champions wandering about in a fog.
I certainly don't feel at a loss after that semi final, nor does football.
They need to abolish the away goals rule.
Why is that? Very few ties are actually decided on this so-called vital goal.
Forget about the performance or entertainment. It's only the result that matters.
It kills the tension.
Last night it was Real Madrid who had the away goal advantage until Juve drew level in the game and won the tie, totally on merit.
Once Juve drew level in the game, you just knew that the pendulum had firmly swung in their favour. They were as happy as pigs in shíte, revelling in their true vocation in football, defending an advantage in the last quarter of the game.
It's a bit simplistic to just look at the score at the end of a tie and say the away goal didn't decide the tie.
Sure, that may be the case, but the influence it has over the shape a game takes is very obvious.
Off the top of my head, when Torres scored that injury time equaliser for Chelsea away to Barcelona a few years ago. final score: 2-2. Aggregate score: 3-2 chelsea. Game not decided on away goal. I am sure other posters can think of similar examples.
But in reality, Chelsea's away goal was the reason that Torres found himself in 40 yards of space in the final minute. Games not being decided on the away goals rule doesn't mean it isn't a huge factor in how games develop.
Last edited by osarusan; 15/05/2015 at 11:46 AM.
Not sure how that amounts to "killing the tension" though.
You mean to say that all Madrid had to do was score a second, in order to reach a state of total parity in the tie??
Nah, that makes too much sense, it was the away goal that killed the game off.
I'd have thought a scoring system that limits the number of outcomes in which a game can finish in a draw would increase or maintain the tension level in most cases.
I see now that probably the negative comments about the away goal rule were about the Bayern Barca game, my head had already moved to the Camp Nou game. I thought usually the campaign about the away goals rule being rubbish, hits the headlines when an English team gets cruelly beaten in Europe or one's own team loses out that way.
Most probably there are games where a deftly struck away goal at an opportune time has killed the 2nd leg stone dead and most probably there are games where the chance of the away team getting a game changer away goal has kept millions on the edge of their seat --> Chelsea v Barca 2008, Iniesta, God bless his saintly right foot.
And then Bendtner at the Bernabeu in 2011 with that late chance for a totally outplayed Arsenal, denied by a last gasp, tie saving tackle .
Yeah it's wrong to say it kills the tension because that only applies to certain situations, it multiplies the tension in others. That said, I still hate it. It's original purpose was to make teams more offensive away from home I believe, but in truth they're still generally satisfied with a 0-0 and so it only serves to make the home team more cagey about conceding. In my view it's simply unfair losing to a team after scoring as many goal as them, it's just wrong. A penalty shoot-out is a fair resolution I think, even if it's not perfect.
The last eight CL semi finals have now been won by the team playing a home in the first leg, maybe not such a disadvantage after all.
"Yeah it's wrong to say it kills the tension".
The oracle has spoken.
http://www.theguardian.com/football/...ampions-league
Last edited by TheOneWhoKnocks; 16/05/2015 at 1:20 PM.
It adds to the tension in situations where one goal won't just draw a team level, but put them through. Iniesta's against Chelsea is a perfect example of this. Are you actually disputing this? It does kill the tension in other scenarios like when Barca scored their first the other night, I agree with you there. You shouldn't need to be the Oracle to understand these blatantly obvious and barely disputable points.
Wenger's points would hold more weight if they were made in victory, rather than defeat, I think. And yes Arsene, under the current criteria you did actually lose.
I'd regard for what it is, it's just the first differential used to separate teams who finish level in a tie. It's not that good of a method, neither is it that bad of a method. Most probably in european competition, it has outlived its purpose, away games are nowhere near as daunting as they were decades ago, therefore the away goal doesn't hold the same value these days.
I don't think much will change, just some games will be played differently. And some games will go all the way to penalties, which then becomes the final method to separate teams.
Chiellini out of final. That's that I guess
I wouldn't trust Barzagli as far as I could throw him.
I do wonder if there's an element of faith on Juve's side though. I remember Alessandro Nesta getting injured before the 2006 World Cup. Against the odds, Italy went on to win the competition without him. That was at the height of the match fixing scandal. Cannavaro was the man to step up to the plate back then, Bonucci will need that player tonight I'd imagine. Berlin was also the venue for that Italian triumph. So anyway, Barca 3-0
Might be 10-0 the way it looks after ten minutes.
No Somos muchos pero estamos locos.
Barcelona haven't been that much better than Juventus. But that wouldn't fit the Sky Sports narrative, would it?
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks