Think that proves how good the EPL is compared to Serie A

luke. wrote:

Pip wrote:Milan will win 2-0 in second leg.

They can't win the tie with 2-0.

I think.

Yes they can

dena wrote:

luke. wrote:

Pip wrote:Milan will win 2-0 in second leg.

They can't win the tie with 2-0.

I think.

The hell? 2-0 win is Milan 2-1 Spurs on agg. w/ an added bonus of two away goals.

Oh shit, completely forgot Milan get away goals too

Fine Shagger wrote:

James ♠ wrote:

dena wrote:Didn't Inter win the European Cup last year though?

Did they play any English teams though?

Thats why I asked in my last post is it simply the Italians can't keep up with Premier League pace.

You're a fucking clown.

It was a question, I couldn't remember. I do remember the game though. That was down to Mourinho, not the pace of the game. Also Chelsea should have had a fair few penalties that game.

mauro=beast wrote:indeed, first half allegri prove he is very tactically naive. he is not experienced enough really but maybe he will learn

the spurs long ball in first 10 minutes making milan look silly but second half milan play pretty well. pato was beast and they should of playing like that for whole game. is pity we will not seeing cassano playing he is such a beast form right now

milan having not many options right now, looking at bench today everyone except pato was a defender

There you go again with you're sly digs. "Long balls"? Seriously, that was a clear tactic implemented pretty effectively. Causing some problems for Milan. Also, they wasn't long balls as they were crossed nearer to the Milan box. I understand were you're coming from with Cassano because he formed a nice partnership with Robinho and Ibra but Spurs were missing Bale who is arguably Spurs best player.

the problem with longball is that if you overuse and it becoming repetitive, the defenders will read it very easy

it show after 30 minutes the longball became to easy for milan defence, aside from goal which was purely created by lennon and over exuberant attacking tactics from milan, crouch did not do anything effective

those "intelligent" longballs became hopeful clearances in second half

luke. wrote:

Pip wrote:Milan will win 2-0 in second leg.

They can't win the tie with 2-0.

I think.

The hell?

luke. wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:

James wrote:

dena wrote:Didn't Inter win the European Cup last year though?

Did they play any English teams though?

Thats why I asked in my last post is it simply the Italians can't keep up with Premier League pace.

Chelsea.

Won with dirty tactics ie. rugby tackling Drogba and fouling Kalou 5 yards from the goal.

rugby tackling someone prevents the whole team from winning? Over the two legs, Inter were the better team.

Fanatic wrote:

mauro=beast wrote:indeed, first half allegri prove he is very tactically naive. he is not experienced enough really but maybe he will learn

the spurs long ball in first 10 minutes making milan look silly but second half milan play pretty well. pato was beast and they should of playing like that for whole game. is pity we will not seeing cassano playing he is such a beast form right now

milan having not many options right now, looking at bench today everyone except pato was a defender

There you go again with you're sly digs. "Long balls"? Seriously, that was a clear tactic implemented and pretty effective. Causing some problems for Milan. Also, they wasn't long balls as they were crossed nearer to the Milan box. I understand were you're coming from with Cassano because he formed a nice partnership with Robinho and Ibra but Spurs were missing Bale who is arguably Spurs best player.

They are long balls though. There is a negative stigma with the word 'long ball' but there is no other way to describe it, Spurs always do this, they play it to the full back, and he launches a diagonal to Crouch who heads it down to a runner, that's how they beat Liverpool at WHL earlier.

Also, don't really agree with James pace comment. Although Milan got beat by pace, that was on a counterattack, the general pace wasnt break neck, the game got quite dull at times, just think Milan were bad.

mauro=beast wrote:the problem with longball is that if you overuse and it becoming repetitive, the defenders will read it very easy

it show after 30 minutes the longball became to easy for milan defence, aside from goal which was purely created by lennon and over exuberant attacking tactics from milan, crouch did not do anything effective

those "intelligent" longballs became hopeful clearances in second half

But, by the second half they weren't really trying to persist with the diagonals.

chiboygeorge wrote:

luke. wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:

James wrote:

dena wrote:Didn't Inter win the European Cup last year though?

Did they play any English teams though?

Thats why I asked in my last post is it simply the Italians can't keep up with Premier League pace.

Chelsea.

Won with dirty tactics ie. rugby tackling Drogba and fouling Kalou 5 yards from the goal.

rugby tackling someone prevents the whole team from winning? Over the two legs, Inter were the better team.

Don't bother. He thinks Ashley Cole is better than Roberto Carlos.

chiboygeorge wrote:

luke. wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:

James wrote:

dena wrote:Didn't Inter win the European Cup last year though?

Did they play any English teams though?

Thats why I asked in my last post is it simply the Italians can't keep up with Premier League pace.

Chelsea.

Won with dirty tactics ie. rugby tackling Drogba and fouling Kalou 5 yards from the goal.

rugby tackling someone prevents the whole team from winning? Over the two legs, Inter were the better team.

But Chelsea should of had a penalty in the first leg. And a dozen in the second leg.

James ♠ wrote:

Fine Shagger wrote:

James ♠ wrote:

dena wrote:Didn't Inter win the European Cup last year though?

Did they play any English teams though?

Thats why I asked in my last post is it simply the Italians can't keep up with Premier League pace.

You're a fucking clown.

It was a question, I couldn't remember. I do remember the game though. That was down to Mourinho, not the pace of the game. Also Chelsea should have had a fair few penalties that game.

very strange why i remember something different?

Fanatic wrote:

mauro=beast wrote:indeed, first half allegri prove he is very tactically naive. he is not experienced enough really but maybe he will learn

the spurs long ball in first 10 minutes making milan look silly but second half milan play pretty well. pato was beast and they should of playing like that for whole game. is pity we will not seeing cassano playing he is such a beast form right now

milan having not many options right now, looking at bench today everyone except pato was a defender

There you go again with you're sly digs. "Long balls"? Seriously, that was a clear tactic implemented pretty effectively. Causing some problems for Milan. Also, they wasn't long balls as they were crossed nearer to the Milan box. I understand were you're coming from with Cassano because he formed a nice partnership with Robinho and Ibra but Spurs were missing Bale who is arguably Spurs best player.

amazing how you find offence by the word longball?

what else do you call those things? even the commentators were calling it long diagonal ball

u want me to call it "intelligent beautiful pass"?

a longball is not a insult, it is a description. longballs from diagonal positions are longballs the same as those from deep mid positions. a crossfield longball is not a cross. a cross is from the biline completely adjacent to the receiver and an early cross is from slightly earlier positions than the adjacent once

if you are finding offence by calling something a longball maybe you to easily trolled by me

chiboygeorge wrote:

luke. wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:

James wrote:

dena wrote:Didn't Inter win the European Cup last year though?

Did they play any English teams though?

Thats why I asked in my last post is it simply the Italians can't keep up with Premier League pace.

Chelsea.

Won with dirty tactics ie. rugby tackling Drogba and fouling Kalou 5 yards from the goal.

rugby tackling someone prevents the whole team from winning? Over the two legs, Inter were the better team.

We could have had 3 penalties.

Score 1 away from home and it's a different tie, score another 1 or 2 at home and we're through.

dena wrote:

Fanatic wrote:

mauro=beast wrote:indeed, first half allegri prove he is very tactically naive. he is not experienced enough really but maybe he will learn

the spurs long ball in first 10 minutes making milan look silly but second half milan play pretty well. pato was beast and they should of playing like that for whole game. is pity we will not seeing cassano playing he is such a beast form right now

milan having not many options right now, looking at bench today everyone except pato was a defender

There you go again with you're sly digs. "Long balls"? Seriously, that was a clear tactic implemented and pretty effective. Causing some problems for Milan. Also, they wasn't long balls as they were crossed nearer to the Milan box. I understand were you're coming from with Cassano because he formed a nice partnership with Robinho and Ibra but Spurs were missing Bale who is arguably Spurs best player.

They are long balls though. There is a negative stigma with the word 'long ball' but there is no other way to describe it, Spurs always do this, they play it to the full back, and he launches a diagonal to Crouch who heads it down to a runner, that's how they beat Liverpool at WHL earlier.

Also, don't really agree with James pace comment. Although Milan got beat by pace, that was on a counterattack, the general pace wasnt break neck, the game got quite dull at times, just think Milan were bad.

Define long? They were more closer to the goal so I wouldn't call them long.

Them getting penalty doesn't mean they will automatically score it.

(polskaGOLA) wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:

luke. wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:

James wrote:


Did they play any English teams though?

Thats why I asked in my last post is it simply the Italians can't keep up with Premier League pace.

Chelsea.

Won with dirty tactics ie. rugby tackling Drogba and fouling Kalou 5 yards from the goal.

rugby tackling someone prevents the whole team from winning? Over the two legs, Inter were the better team.

Don't bother. He thinks Ashley Cole is better than Roberto Carlos.

He is.

dena wrote:

Fanatic wrote:

mauro=beast wrote:indeed, first half allegri prove he is very tactically naive. he is not experienced enough really but maybe he will learn

the spurs long ball in first 10 minutes making milan look silly but second half milan play pretty well. pato was beast and they should of playing like that for whole game. is pity we will not seeing cassano playing he is such a beast form right now

milan having not many options right now, looking at bench today everyone except pato was a defender

There you go again with you're sly digs. "Long balls"? Seriously, that was a clear tactic implemented and pretty effective. Causing some problems for Milan. Also, they wasn't long balls as they were crossed nearer to the Milan box. I understand were you're coming from with Cassano because he formed a nice partnership with Robinho and Ibra but Spurs were missing Bale who is arguably Spurs best player.

They are long balls though. There is a negative stigma with the word 'long ball' but there is no other way to describe it, Spurs always do this, they play it to the full back, and he launches a diagonal to Crouch who heads it down to a runner, that's how they beat Liverpool at WHL earlier.

Also, don't really agree with James pace comment. Although Milan got beat by pace, that was on a counterattack, the general pace wasnt break neck, the game got quite dull at times, just think Milan were bad.

In my opinion, pace is dictated by the ground. Hence the reason when Spurs at home they seem to play at a higher tempo. Spurs played fairly considering the dullness of the Milan crowd.

But that isn't the point. Inter v Spurs = tempo won it. Milan v Man U = tempo won it.

Maybe it is only recently when Italian teams open up a little bit. In the past Italy was defensive, they wouldn't let the other team play at a fast tempo because they would do dirty fouls and pass the ball around the back.

Them 2 ties Italian teams opened up and proved they can't live with the pace.

chiboygeorge wrote:Them getting penalty doesn't mean they will automatically score it.

With Frank Lampard taking it it's almost certain. Especially out of 3. Clutching at straws.

luke. wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:

luke. wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:

James wrote:


Did they play any English teams though?

Thats why I asked in my last post is it simply the Italians can't keep up with Premier League pace.

Chelsea.

Won with dirty tactics ie. rugby tackling Drogba and fouling Kalou 5 yards from the goal.

rugby tackling someone prevents the whole team from winning? Over the two legs, Inter were the better team.

We could have had 3 penalties.

Score 1 away from home and it's a different tie, score another 1 or 2 at home and we're through.

You lost 2-1 away from home and had the away goal. You were in a relatively good position going into the second leg with the away goal and your good home record.

Fanatic wrote:

dena wrote:

Fanatic wrote:

mauro=beast wrote:indeed, first half allegri prove he is very tactically naive. he is not experienced enough really but maybe he will learn

the spurs long ball in first 10 minutes making milan look silly but second half milan play pretty well. pato was beast and they should of playing like that for whole game. is pity we will not seeing cassano playing he is such a beast form right now

milan having not many options right now, looking at bench today everyone except pato was a defender

There you go again with you're sly digs. "Long balls"? Seriously, that was a clear tactic implemented and pretty effective. Causing some problems for Milan. Also, they wasn't long balls as they were crossed nearer to the Milan box. I understand were you're coming from with Cassano because he formed a nice partnership with Robinho and Ibra but Spurs were missing Bale who is arguably Spurs best player.

They are long balls though. There is a negative stigma with the word 'long ball' but there is no other way to describe it, Spurs always do this, they play it to the full back, and he launches a diagonal to Crouch who heads it down to a runner, that's how they beat Liverpool at WHL earlier.

Also, don't really agree with James pace comment. Although Milan got beat by pace, that was on a counterattack, the general pace wasnt break neck, the game got quite dull at times, just think Milan were bad.

Define long? They were more closer to the goal so I wouldn't call them long.

Closer to the goal meaning what exactly? You arent necessary going to try to place it at the penalty spot every time are you?

I don't have to define long to you, everyone knows what a long ball is.

Milan are shit and I'm glad they got done, horrible dirty cunts.

Fanatic wrote:

dena wrote:

Fanatic wrote:

mauro=beast wrote:indeed, first half allegri prove he is very tactically naive. he is not experienced enough really but maybe he will learn

the spurs long ball in first 10 minutes making milan look silly but second half milan play pretty well. pato was beast and they should of playing like that for whole game. is pity we will not seeing cassano playing he is such a beast form right now

milan having not many options right now, looking at bench today everyone except pato was a defender

There you go again with you're sly digs. "Long balls"? Seriously, that was a clear tactic implemented and pretty effective. Causing some problems for Milan. Also, they wasn't long balls as they were crossed nearer to the Milan box. I understand were you're coming from with Cassano because he formed a nice partnership with Robinho and Ibra but Spurs were missing Bale who is arguably Spurs best player.

They are long balls though. There is a negative stigma with the word 'long ball' but there is no other way to describe it, Spurs always do this, they play it to the full back, and he launches a diagonal to Crouch who heads it down to a runner, that's how they beat Liverpool at WHL earlier.

Also, don't really agree with James pace comment. Although Milan got beat by pace, that was on a counterattack, the general pace wasnt break neck, the game got quite dull at times, just think Milan were bad.

Define long? They were more closer to the goal so I wouldn't call them long.

what is this suppose to mean?

dena wrote:

Fanatic wrote:

dena wrote:

Fanatic wrote:

mauro=beast wrote:indeed, first half allegri prove he is very tactically naive. he is not experienced enough really but maybe he will learn

the spurs long ball in first 10 minutes making milan look silly but second half milan play pretty well. pato was beast and they should of playing like that for whole game. is pity we will not seeing cassano playing he is such a beast form right now

milan having not many options right now, looking at bench today everyone except pato was a defender

There you go again with you're sly digs. "Long balls"? Seriously, that was a clear tactic implemented and pretty effective. Causing some problems for Milan. Also, they wasn't long balls as they were crossed nearer to the Milan box. I understand were you're coming from with Cassano because he formed a nice partnership with Robinho and Ibra but Spurs were missing Bale who is arguably Spurs best player.

They are long balls though. There is a negative stigma with the word 'long ball' but there is no other way to describe it, Spurs always do this, they play it to the full back, and he launches a diagonal to Crouch who heads it down to a runner, that's how they beat Liverpool at WHL earlier.

Also, don't really agree with James pace comment. Although Milan got beat by pace, that was on a counterattack, the general pace wasnt break neck, the game got quite dull at times, just think Milan were bad.

Define long? They were more closer to the goal so I wouldn't call them long.

Closer to the goal meaning what exactly? You arent necessary going to try to place it at the penalty spot every time are you?

I don't have to define long to you, everyone knows what a long ball is.

Closer to the goal meaning the balls could be termed as "crosses" rather than long balls.

James ♠ wrote:

dena wrote:

Fanatic wrote:

mauro=beast wrote:indeed, first half allegri prove he is very tactically naive. he is not experienced enough really but maybe he will learn

the spurs long ball in first 10 minutes making milan look silly but second half milan play pretty well. pato was beast and they should of playing like that for whole game. is pity we will not seeing cassano playing he is such a beast form right now

milan having not many options right now, looking at bench today everyone except pato was a defender

There you go again with you're sly digs. "Long balls"? Seriously, that was a clear tactic implemented and pretty effective. Causing some problems for Milan. Also, they wasn't long balls as they were crossed nearer to the Milan box. I understand were you're coming from with Cassano because he formed a nice partnership with Robinho and Ibra but Spurs were missing Bale who is arguably Spurs best player.

They are long balls though. There is a negative stigma with the word 'long ball' but there is no other way to describe it, Spurs always do this, they play it to the full back, and he launches a diagonal to Crouch who heads it down to a runner, that's how they beat Liverpool at WHL earlier.

Also, don't really agree with James pace comment. Although Milan got beat by pace, that was on a counterattack, the general pace wasnt break neck, the game got quite dull at times, just think Milan were bad.

In my opinion, pace is dictated by the ground. Hence the reason when Spurs at home they seem to play at a higher tempo. Spurs played fairly considering the dullness of the Milan crowd.

But that isn't the point. Inter v Spurs = tempo won it. Milan v Man U = tempo won it.

Maybe it is only recently when Italian teams open up a little bit. In the past Italy was defensive, they wouldn't let the other team play at a fast tempo because they would do dirty fouls and pass the ball around the back.

Them 2 ties Italian teams opened up and proved they can't live with the pace.

So then what are you talking about here, you say that Italian teams can't handle the pace, then say the pace is dictated by the ground, then say that the San Siro was dull, which would favor a slow game. Judging by that, the pace of the game was slow (or at least 'not fast') so why bring up pace as a defining result for the game?

Ben wrote:

(polskaGOLA) wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:

luke. wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:
Chelsea.

Won with dirty tactics ie. rugby tackling Drogba and fouling Kalou 5 yards from the goal.

rugby tackling someone prevents the whole team from winning? Over the two legs, Inter were the better team.

Don't bother. He thinks Ashley Cole is better than Roberto Carlos.

He is.

I don't mean currently.

Tell me if i'm wrong James but perhaps you mean that Spurs tried to speed up the game with more fluent passing whereas the Milan players slowed down the game which played into Totenham's hands as everything was played infront of them.

dena wrote:

James ♠ wrote:

dena wrote:

Fanatic wrote:

mauro=beast wrote:indeed, first half allegri prove he is very tactically naive. he is not experienced enough really but maybe he will learn

the spurs long ball in first 10 minutes making milan look silly but second half milan play pretty well. pato was beast and they should of playing like that for whole game. is pity we will not seeing cassano playing he is such a beast form right now

milan having not many options right now, looking at bench today everyone except pato was a defender

There you go again with you're sly digs. "Long balls"? Seriously, that was a clear tactic implemented and pretty effective. Causing some problems for Milan. Also, they wasn't long balls as they were crossed nearer to the Milan box. I understand were you're coming from with Cassano because he formed a nice partnership with Robinho and Ibra but Spurs were missing Bale who is arguably Spurs best player.

They are long balls though. There is a negative stigma with the word 'long ball' but there is no other way to describe it, Spurs always do this, they play it to the full back, and he launches a diagonal to Crouch who heads it down to a runner, that's how they beat Liverpool at WHL earlier.

Also, don't really agree with James pace comment. Although Milan got beat by pace, that was on a counterattack, the general pace wasnt break neck, the game got quite dull at times, just think Milan were bad.

In my opinion, pace is dictated by the ground. Hence the reason when Spurs at home they seem to play at a higher tempo. Spurs played fairly considering the dullness of the Milan crowd.

But that isn't the point. Inter v Spurs = tempo won it. Milan v Man U = tempo won it.

Maybe it is only recently when Italian teams open up a little bit. In the past Italy was defensive, they wouldn't let the other team play at a fast tempo because they would do dirty fouls and pass the ball around the back.

Them 2 ties Italian teams opened up and proved they can't live with the pace.

So then what are you talking about here, you say that Italian teams can't handle the pace, then say the pace is dictated by the ground, then say that the San Siro was dull, which would favor a slow game. Judging by that, the pace of the game was slow (or at least 'not fast') so why bring up pace as a defining result for the game?

When Spurs managed to play at a faster pace it caused Milan problems. Look in the first half, Spurs passed the ball quickly across the ground at times(not very often) but when they managed to they looked dangerous. It would be impossible to play like the constantly in a dull stadium though. Players react to the surroundings. Spurs can only do so much.

luke. wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:Them getting penalty doesn't mean they will automatically score it.

With Frank Lampard taking it it's almost certain. Especially out of 3. Clutching at straws.

I'm clutching at straws? just because someone said it before don't mean you repeat for some stupid reason. No matter who you are taking a PK is 50-50, it's like me saying since Inter are playing Chelsea it's almost certain that Inter will score more than them.

Just admit Inter where better at you on the nights especially at the Bridge. Sneijder!

Fanatic wrote:

dena wrote:

Fanatic wrote:

dena wrote:

Fanatic wrote:There you go again with you're sly digs. "Long balls"? Seriously, that was a clear tactic implemented and pretty effective. Causing some problems for Milan. Also, they wasn't long balls as they were crossed nearer to the Milan box. I understand were you're coming from with Cassano because he formed a nice partnership with Robinho and Ibra but Spurs were missing Bale who is arguably Spurs best player.

They are long balls though. There is a negative stigma with the word 'long ball' but there is no other way to describe it, Spurs always do this, they play it to the full back, and he launches a diagonal to Crouch who heads it down to a runner, that's how they beat Liverpool at WHL earlier.

Also, don't really agree with James pace comment. Although Milan got beat by pace, that was on a counterattack, the general pace wasnt break neck, the game got quite dull at times, just think Milan were bad.

Define long? They were more closer to the goal so I wouldn't call them long.

Closer to the goal meaning what exactly? You arent necessary going to try to place it at the penalty spot every time are you?

I don't have to define long to you, everyone knows what a long ball is.

Closer to the goal meaning the balls could be termed as "crosses" rather than long balls.

Mauro already defined what a cross is, I'm not going to that. You know what a pass is when you see it, a through ball, early cross, deep cross, diagonal, "hit and hope", etc. this is simple stuff. Spurs continually hit long diagonal balls, as seen here at 1:30

Fanatic wrote:

dena wrote:

Fanatic wrote:

dena wrote:

Fanatic wrote:There you go again with you're sly digs. "Long balls"? Seriously, that was a clear tactic implemented and pretty effective. Causing some problems for Milan. Also, they wasn't long balls as they were crossed nearer to the Milan box. I understand were you're coming from with Cassano because he formed a nice partnership with Robinho and Ibra but Spurs were missing Bale who is arguably Spurs best player.

They are long balls though. There is a negative stigma with the word 'long ball' but there is no other way to describe it, Spurs always do this, they play it to the full back, and he launches a diagonal to Crouch who heads it down to a runner, that's how they beat Liverpool at WHL earlier.

Also, don't really agree with James pace comment. Although Milan got beat by pace, that was on a counterattack, the general pace wasnt break neck, the game got quite dull at times, just think Milan were bad.

Define long? They were more closer to the goal so I wouldn't call them long.

Closer to the goal meaning what exactly? You arent necessary going to try to place it at the penalty spot every time are you?

I don't have to define long to you, everyone knows what a long ball is.

Closer to the goal meaning the balls could be termed as "crosses" rather than long balls.

lol!!!!

i think i understand now

so you think when assou ekotto is in milan half, but near the half way line and those deep diagonal balls to crouch who waits at the top of the box is not a longball? maybe you never playing football before? that is a how you say "bread and butter" longball

early crosses are those that are done just before the bi-line at an acute angle. those balls by tottenham were over 30yards+ from that