Celtic v Barcelona | Wednesday | 7:45pm | Sky Sports 2

Ted wrote:

Forest wrote:Meh, nothing special.

Try beating Barcelona in a European final. Nottingham Forest have.

But you had a much better team then than celtic have now, also this is probably the greatest Barca team in history.

Zzonked wrote:

BladeGunner wrote:

That's not a fair comparison. Chelsea spend something like 70 million pounds annually on new players. It is a complete and utter embarrassment for them to play the way they did last year with the money they've spent. Celtic can't even come close to competing financially with Europe's elite, they can only get results in the way that they did today.

It doesn't matter what you spent, just the players you have. Chelsea were clearly inferior to Barca and Bayern, so for them to come out and try and play like they were better just because they spent 70 million would have been silly, completely unpragmatic. They came out with a gameplan that gave them the best chance of winning and executed it.

Forest wrote:Meh, nothing special.

Try beating Barcelona in a European final. Nottingham Forest have.

BladeGunner wrote:

Zzonked wrote:

BladeGunner wrote:

That's not a fair comparison. Chelsea spend something like 70 million pounds annually on new players. It is a complete and utter embarrassment for them to play the way they did last year with the money they've spent. Celtic can't even come close to competing financially with Europe's elite, they can only get results in the way that they did today.

It doesn't matter what you spent, just the players you have. Chelsea were clearly inferior to Barca and Bayern, so for them to come out and try and play like they were better just because they spent 70 million would have been silly, completely unpragmatic. They came out with a gameplan that gave them the best chance of winning and executed it.

The point is that they should have a squad equal to those sides with the money they've spent.

BladeGunner wrote:

Zzonked wrote:

It doesn't matter what you spent, just the players you have. Chelsea were clearly inferior to Barca and Bayern, so for them to come out and try and play like they were better just because they spent 70 million would have been silly, completely unpragmatic. They came out with a gameplan that gave them the best chance of winning and executed it.

The point is that they should have a squad equal to those sides with the money they've spent.

Zzonked wrote:

BladeGunner wrote:

The point is that they should have a squad equal to those sides with the money they've spent.

Maybe they should, but they don't. But I would say that's more of a criticism of the spending/squad rather than their tactics. They would probably have been thumped if they tried to play football against those two teams last year. Just don't think you can expect them to do that for the good of football.

Fair enough that the Celtic comparison isn't fully relevant because they've spent peanuts. It is a great result for them regardless of tactics.

coolhead33 wrote:

BladeGunner wrote:

The point is that they should have a squad equal to those sides with the money they've spent.

Clough couldn't handle the pressure of managing Leeds therefore he is shit.

Anti football did win tonight and cheating lost. It's great that Barcelona didn't win after Song staying on. Anti-football needs to stop though. I know it's in the rules and all that but if both teams decide to play that way then it leads to a shit game. Chelsea shouldn't of done it no matter how bad they were but you can't complain as it's within the rules. It's just not right in my eyes.

Zzonked wrote:

Any Celtic fans who complained about Chelsea should repent.

Those tactics are good though, wish City would play defensive and try and break in big European games or just away games. Haters gonna hate, it works.

AndItsKoren! wrote:

Zzonked wrote:

Any Celtic fans who complained about Chelsea should repent.

Those tactics are good though, wish City would play defensive and try and break in big European games or just away games. Haters gonna hate, it works.

I guess it is worth the risk for smaller teams but for Man City it wouldn't. Gotta remember Barcelona hit the woodwork twice in the first half.

Templeton7|RFC wrote:

Jeezo

Templeton7|RFC wrote:

Jeezo

Kuled wrote:

SBSP wrote:He's not really the type of player that would do a lot of damage against Barcelona.

No one else is either

Templeton7|RFC wrote:

Jeezo

wellz wrote:This match gave me the chills, best game I've watched in awhile

Hitchy wrote:Are those stats legit? Wow