[the ikara cult]

Originally Posted by Пятхъдесят Шест

Specify.

Well if yr truly neutral you can see that Chelsea play the less attractive football.

[pokkeherrie]

Great thread idea.

I watched most of the game, except for the first 20 minutes or so. Neither team are my favourite and as a neutral spectator it was indeed terribly boring. The fact the I didn't start doing something else must be a good indication of how bored I was today. Nice goal by Drogba though.

[demonrail666]

Can't remember the last time I was entertained during a match involving Chelsea.

[Iain]

Yeah, this game was the first football match I've watched all the way through for ages. I made myself comfy, had a cup of tea by my side, all ready to enjoy what promised to be a fascinating match. It wasn't though, it was quite boring. The highlights included Mark Lawrenson making a tame drugs related joke and having a 'hilarious' dig at John Motsons age. I was pining for the cricket for most of the match.

[Toilet & Bowels]

things must have been bad if the most miserable man in football was the highlight of the entertainment

[Пятхъдесят Шест]

Originally Posted by the ikara cult

Well if yr truly neutral you can see that Chelsea play the less attractive football.

It all depends on what you consider to be attractive football. I don't think there is any standard that makes a team attractive or fun to watch, more so than any other team. Surely Man Utd. play in an exciting style, but that doesn't mean by being a neutral observer I should want them to do well, or play excitingly. Eh, I'd prefer a strike from Drogba or Lampard anyway.

I suppose I'm not very neutral...

[Florya]

What an awful advert for English football that game was. It was being watched by millions around the world and that was the BEST that the supposed top two teams in England could do? Shame on them. Both of them.

Giggs was unlucky not to have been awarded his goal, which was easily over the line, but Droghba's goal was a good'un.

As an Arsenal fan, my ideal result would have some sort of seismic catastrophe that involved the ground opening up and swallowing both teams before slamming shut forever, but there wasn't much chance of that happening.

An extremely dull game, sorely lacking in the passion usually associated with the FA Cup.

Roll on next season when the Mighty Arsenal will conquer all!

[Iain]

Giggs effort wasn't conclusive by any stretch of the imagination was it? They didn't show many replays of it and you couldn't really see from the ones I saw. Certainly looked close though.

[pokkeherrie]

There was one replay that showed it from the other angle where the ball looked like it had crossed the line. But in order for it to be a goal it has to have crossed it completely and you couldn't really tell with Petr Cech lying on top of it. Besides, it wasn't really Giggs sliding the ball over the line but more like Giggs sliding goalkeeper with ball over the line.

[Danny Himself]

Even if it was over the line, Giggs had pretty much fouled Cech to get it over there so it would have been disallowed.

And yay Man U were beaten. I was hoping Fergie would die of a heart attack at the end, but beggars can't be choosers, I suppose.

[Florya]

Originally Posted by pokkeherrie

There was one replay that showed it from the other angle where the ball looked like it had crossed the line. But in order for it to be a goal it has to have crossed it completely and you couldn't really tell with Petr Cech lying on top of it. Besides, it wasn't really Giggs sliding the ball over the line but more like Giggs sliding goalkeeper with ball over the line.

If the ref thought that Giggs had fouled the keeper, why didn't he give a free kick, goal or no goal?
From the replay I saw, the ball, all of it, was over the line. The only person on the pitch that knows for certain is the chelsea keeper, and he's not likely to admit it, now is he?

[pokkeherrie]

well it wasn't so much a foul, because Giggs was already on full speed and couldn't have stopped even if he wanted to. But the fact remains that Cech had the ball saved before the line and then was pushed over it by Giggs' sliding, possibly with the ball all the way over it or not. It looked like it was over it from that second replay, but there's no way the referee could've seen that.

I think it's fair to treat it as he did (Cech saved the ball, so game continues) but he could've also given a free kick I'd say. Surely counting it as a goal would've been the worst decision. Not that I wouldn't like to have seen a Man U goal though. I didn't care much about who was going to win it, but even after the 1-0 I was still hoping for penalties because I didn't really think the game deserved a winner.

Besides, Van der Sar needs all the practice on penalties he can get because that's not really one of his qualities.

[demonrail666]

Goal or no goal, you can't blame any referee for not giving it. The game was just so lacking in passion from both teams.

It's as though both teams wanted to win without actually doing anything to achieve it. And why they left Rooney up on his own for so much of the game totally baffles me.

Last years FA Cup showed what a final COULD be. West Ham, even though they lost, playing like their life depended on it.

[sonicl]

Two points based on what people have said on this page:

1) Chelsea have played bloody boring football all season. I've hardly been to Stamford Bridge this year because on many of the occasions that I went in the early part of the season I left feeling frustration rather than elation.

2) FA Cup finals have a long history of being boring, with neither team being willing to take risks. The exciting matches only come along about once every four or five years.

[fishmonkey]

Originally Posted by sonicl

What about Fishmonkey? He'll be sobbing like a big baby right now.

ok ok i cried. i'm not ashamed to admit it.
its hard to come home from that and sleep under my Man Utd bed clothes.
fair play to you Chelsea, i'm still a little sour so thats about all i'll be sayin about the situation.

the only thing thats gonna make up for this is seeing them SCOUSE BASTARDS getting their little red asses kicked all over Athens on Wednesday night.

[fishmonkey]

Originally Posted by pokkeherrie

Besides, Van der Sar needs all the practice on penalties he can get because that's not really one of his qualities.

ahem...

Man City game?

Van Der Sar is one of the best keepers in the Premiership today, and thats a fact.

[Danny Himself]

Originally Posted by fishmonkey

the only thing thats gonna make up for this is seeing them SCOUSE BASTARDS getting their little red asses kicked all over Athens on Wednesday night.

Sore loser. Maybe if Man U had tried hard enough they'd be in the final themselves.

Poor show, fishmonkey.

[Pookie]

Why do football fans do that pretend aggressive thing?

(No replies saying "what do you mean pretend?" allowed)

[Danny Himself]

Football fans are insecure because in their hearts they know their teams are capable of playing ridiculously shit football.

Except Liverpool.

[pokkeherrie]

Originally Posted by fishmonkey

ahem...

Man City game?

Van Der Sar is one of the best keepers in the Premiership today, and thats a fact.

Oh, he definitely is. Otherwise he wouldn't have been chosen as goalkeeper in the PFA premier league team of the year 2007.

I'll even go further than that and say that even at his age I still rate him as one of the current best in the world. He's probably also the best Dutch goalkeeper in history, but he's not really known as a penalty killer. That's a special quality not every keeper has. I can't think of many moments where he stopped an important penalty, but when I think hard then I can remember a few. The intercontinental cup final with Ajax in 1995, with Holland against Sweden in Euro 2004 and then that one from Vassell (which was poorly taken by the way) against Manchester City that was important for securing the league title. I'm sure there are some more, but the list of penalties and penalty shootouts where he couldn't stop one is much longer I'm affraid.