2014/15 UEFA Champions League Thread

Premier League has improved almost too much.

Agreed. Every match is played like a final and it leaves the players too exhausted to be competitive against the rest of Europe's Elite clubs.

Glen Miller wrote:Premier League has improved almost too much.

Keyser Söze wrote:I see Neville the bumboy didn't criticise he darling Courtois for the winning PSG goal. Came out and didn't get anywhere near the corner then couldn't backtrack to his goal line in time to save the goal.

Especially when you consider he did an in-depth analysis of why Mignolet was at fault for Jagielka's goal early in the season.

So because Chelsea drew 3-3 with PSG whereas last season they could only draw 3-3, this means they haven't improved?

PSG played with 10 men for 60 of the 180 minutes. It is embarrassing that Chelsea didn't win comfortably, especially when they went 1-0 ahead with minutes remaining.   Chelsea also reached the semifinals of the competition last season, whereas they only reached the second round this season.

Glen Miller wrote:PSG played with 10 men for 60 of the 180 minutes.

It was actually 90 of the 210 mins but we can't mention that because it doesn't suit RR's narrative.

Edit: Actually I don't understand RRs point at all Ignoring the massive influence playing with 10 men for almost half the tie can have on a team, Chelsea still only achieved the same result as last season And against basically the exact same PSG side bar Luiz. Chelsea supposedly "improved" by bringing in Fabregas, Costa, Matic and Courtois (all of which could stake a claim for their player of the season) yet managed the exact same result.

Yep, you are right, it was NINETY minutes instead of just sixty.    Away from home as well.   It was their attacking talisman who was sent off as well. In the Round of 16 as well.

Keyser Söze wrote:

Glen Miller wrote:PSG played with 10 men for 60 of the 180 minutes.

It was actually 90 of the 210 mins but we can't mention that because it doesn't suit RR's narrative.

Edit: Actually I don't understand RRs point at all Ignoring the massive influence playing with 10 men for almost half the tie can have on a team, Chelsea still only achieved the same result as last season And against basically the exact same PSG side bar Luiz. Chelsea supposedly "improved" by bringing in Fabregas, Costa, Matic and Courtois (all of which could stake a claim for their player of the season) yet managed the exact same result.

The point is that perhaps it's best not to draw conclusions from an extremely small sample of games.  You mention those players brought in - Fabregas and Costa were shit but are still very useful players generally, improving Chelsea without question, and Courtois is not an improvement on Cech, the only benefit Chelsea get from recalling him is a much better reserve goalkeeper.  The idea that they haven't improved because they got the same result against PSG is an utter nonsense.

I may be wrong, but I have gotten the vibes that PSG have struggled slightly this season-they should really be winning Ligue 1 comfortably, yet they are in second.  Chelsea have obviously improved, but the fact remains that they represent the best team the Premier League has to offer by some margin and they couldn't reach the quarterfinals of the CL.  It's hardly an anomaly, either.   City were outclassed at home by Barcelona and Arsenal lost comfortably at home to the 4th placed team in France while Liverpool fell out of an absolute gift of a group.  The Premier League has not improved.

Glen Miller wrote:I may be wrong, but I have gotten the vibes that PSG have struggled slightly this season-they should really be winning Ligue 1 comfortably, yet they are in second.  Chelsea have obviously improved, but the fact remains that they represent the best team the Premier League has to offer by some margin and they couldn't reach the quarterfinals of the CL.  It's hardly an anomaly, either.   City were outclassed at home by Barcelona and Arsenal lost comfortably at home to the 4th placed team in France while Liverpool fell out of an absolute gift of a group.  The Premier League has not improved.

If Chelsea have, to quote you, obviously improved then I don't know why you'd bring it up in this context.  The only point I could possibly see that you would be making from that would be to say that Chelsea haven't improved and are only leading the league due to it being weaker.

City were outclassed to pretty much the exact same degree as they were last season despite Barcelona strengthening, Arsenal were an anomaly, that sort of thing happens in football, and as for Liverpool crashing out at the group stages, what did you seriously expect when the team who've kept England's coefficient respectable for decades don't participate?  There was always going to be a drop in English teams' performance and that particular instance has nothing whatsoever to do with the quality this year.  On the bright side both Chelsea and Mourinho completed their first ever undefeated full campaigns in the Champions League so well done to them.

I should have said that they have only improved relative to other English teams, which doesn't take much doing when the majority of the other contenders declined fairly substantially.  But you really need to stop pushing the myth that they got the same result.  One result kept them in the tournament and sparked mass celebrations on the field, the other result left the fans suicidal and the manager in meltdown.

So are you saying that because of two knockout ties the French league is a better league than the Premier League? I think the fact that PSG and Monaco have done so poor in the league only to win against Chelsea and Monaco show that it can be misleading to read too much into a knockout tie.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:

It was actually 90 of the 210 mins but we can't mention that because it doesn't suit RR's narrative.

Edit: Actually I don't understand RRs point at all Ignoring the massive influence playing with 10 men for almost half the tie can have on a team, Chelsea still only achieved the same result as last season And against basically the exact same PSG side bar Luiz. Chelsea supposedly "improved" by bringing in Fabregas, Costa, Matic and Courtois (all of which could stake a claim for their player of the season) yet managed the exact same result.

The point is that perhaps it's best not to draw conclusions from an extremely small sample of games.  You mention those players brought in - Fabregas and Costa were shit but are still very useful players generally, improving Chelsea without question, and Courtois is not an improvement on Cech, the only benefit Chelsea get from recalling him is a much better reserve goalkeeper.  The idea that they haven't improved because they got the same result against PSG is an utter nonsense.

I personally think Chelsea have improved, but not as much as people say. Even during the "invincibles" talk I was still of the opinion that Chelsea were getting by because of some stellar performances from Fabregas and having a striker to finally tuck in the tap ins, but other than that they have/had a group of players outside their starting 11 that were pretty average, when they had to rotate because of injuries, fatigue or when player were off form the players that came in were pretty shit. I think their early form/performances in the PL were misleading because of how poor the league is. How well you do in the PL is respective of the other teams in it, when PSG came around they had a chance to test themselves against an external factor which also happened to be able to provide a comparison with the Chelsea of last season and as it is Chelsea failed.

2-0 Arsenal win incoming.

2mins and already looking like we'll be lucky not to lose this

Giroud has improved so much in the last year or so.  Great finish.  It amazes me that some people think Arsenal have got worse in the last year.

Arsenal having a heroic comeback that ends in glorious failure.  I'm shocked.

Booooooooooooooooooooo

Massive credit to Ozil he actually tried tonight. Pointed where he wanted the ball, came deep to receive it and was genuinely upset when he didn't get the ball. Not everything he did came off but at least he put in some effort. Looked like he wanted to control the game and be involved.

Walcott was pointless. I think pretty much everyone knows he's most dangerous making those runs from wide into the middle yet he played upfront with Giroud as a strike partner. Don't know whether it was because Monaco squeezed the space or because he's just brain dead but we were probably better off keeping Welbeck on who actually did very well tonight. Monaco are a decent team but we should have blown these scrubs away, makes the 1st leg result look even worse.

Edit: Oh, also forgot to mention that Sanchez was shit tonight. All his workrate was there but he lacked his usual quality and seemed to force it all the time.

Seeing Ozil fighting with Berbatov for the ball in the corner was bizarre.  Like seeing two lambs trying to eat each other.

Keyser Söze wrote:Massive credit to Ozil he actually tried tonight. Pointed where he wanted the ball, came deep to receive it and was genuinely upset when he didn't get the ball. Not everything he did came off but at least he up in some effort. Looked like he wanted to control the game and be involved.

Walcott was pointless. I think pretty much everyone knows he most dangerous making those runs from wide into the middle yet he played upfront with Giroud as a strike partner. Don't know whether it was because Monaco squeezed the space or because he's just brain dead but we were probably better off keeping Welbeck on who actually did very well tonight. Monaco are a decent team but we should have blown these scrubs away, makes the 1st leg result look even worse.

Edit: Oh, also forgot to mention that Sanchez was shit tonight. All his workrate was there but he lacked his usual quality and seemed to force it all the time.

Spot on. I do think Walcott tucked in because of their extremely compact defensive shape but he's basically a worthless player in my eyes. Drastically inferior to Welbeck, Chamberlain and Sanchez with the ball at his feet and can often be a passenger. Ultimately I think it's pointless trying to analyze this piece of shit game beyond pointing out that it's, as is the case every fucking season, indicative of Arsenal's lack of maturity and inability to compete at the highest level.

Ra's al Ghul wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:Massive credit to Ozil he actually tried tonight. Pointed where he wanted the ball, came deep to receive it and was genuinely upset when he didn't get the ball. Not everything he did came off but at least he up in some effort. Looked like he wanted to control the game and be involved.

Walcott was pointless. I think pretty much everyone knows he most dangerous making those runs from wide into the middle yet he played upfront with Giroud as a strike partner. Don't know whether it was because Monaco squeezed the space or because he's just brain dead but we were probably better off keeping Welbeck on who actually did very well tonight. Monaco are a decent team but we should have blown these scrubs away, makes the 1st leg result look even worse.

Edit: Oh, also forgot to mention that Sanchez was shit tonight. All his workrate was there but he lacked his usual quality and seemed to force it all the time.

Spot on. I do think Walcott tucked in because of their extremely compact defensive shape but he's basically a worthless player in my eyes. Drastically inferior to Welbeck, Chamberlain and Sanchez with the ball at his feet and can often be a passenger. Ultimately I think it's pointless trying to analyze this piece of shit game beyond pointing out that it's, as is the case every fucking season, indicative of Arsenal's lack of maturity and inability to compete at the highest level.

No doubt about that. Chamberlain would have certainly started this game had he been fit or at the very least came on for instead of Walcott. I think West Ham was an audition for Walcott to see if he was able to start and game and have a positive impact. He missed too many promising opportunities and I think that worried Wenger and put question marks about his match sharpness. Can't blame Wenger for bringing him on though because he had to change it.

indicative of Arsenal's lack of maturity and inability to compete at the highest level

Sums up that 3rd Monaco goal perfectly. You can say the 1st goal is lucky, the 2nd a spastic moment from Mert, but to concede the last goal in the manner we did just shows a lack of understanding of European football.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:Arsenal having a heroic comeback that ends in glorious failure.  I'm shocked.

It's funny how it's so similar every year.

We improve enough each year to be just the same.

That is actually spot on.

That is actually spot on.

He's so spot on, that you said it twice.

Internet is being a cunt.

You are a waste of space, SRST.