Some people tend to forget that Ballack deserved a red card in game 1 and Barca deserved a clear cut penalty with the foul on Henry in Nou Camp.
"It's a fucking disgrace!"
Ballack deserved no red card, and even if there was a penalty for Barca, Chelsea deserved 3, for the two hand balls and Alves dragging down Malouda in the box which somehow miraculously resulted in a freekick just outside the box.
And Yaya deserved a clearcut redcard and penalty for dragging back Drogba's arm and shirt when Drogba had him beat and was the last man right infront of goal.
Don't even pretend for an instant that Barca deserve to be where they are, you are just seeing things through retarded color glasses
if anything this asshat deserves to be in the finals, because he's the one who won the game, not barca
Ballack deserved no red card, and even if there was a penalty for Barca, Chelsea deserved 3, for the two hand balls and Alves dragging down Malouda in the box which somehow miraculously resulted in a freekick just outside the box.
And Yaya deserved a clearcut redcard and penalty for dragging back Drogba's arm and shirt when Drogba had him beat and was the last man right infront of goal.
Don't even pretend for an instant that Barca deserve to be where they are, you are just seeing things through retarded color glasses
if anything this asshat deserves to be in the finals, because he's the one who won the game, not barca
Of course Chelsea deserved penalties, it's just that you are some kind of fucking idiot for not understanding how the game of football goes.
I mean, if Barca can get a 1-0 or 2-0 at home in the first game, the return would have gone completely different.
Then Barca could have laid back and gone on the counter like Chelsea did, get out in numbers and just easily outplay them.
I'm not even gonna begin about the luckiest long distance shot in years.
But you obviously don't understand this since you probably never played this game competitvely, and/or have absolutely no insight in it. So which one is it, the first, the second, or both?
Of course Chelsea deserved penalties, it's just that you are some kind of fucking idiot for not understanding how the game of football goes.
I mean, if Barca can get a 1-0 or 2-0 at home in the first game, the return would have gone completely different.
Then Barca could have laid back and gone on the counter like Chelsea did, get out in numbers and just easily outplay them.
I'm not even gonna begin about the luckiest long distance shot in years.
But you obviously don't understand this since you probably never played this game competitvely, and/or have absolutely no insight in it. So which one is it, the first, the second, or both?
Do you mean Iniesta's shot?
Because Essien's was the goal of the season, and yes better than Zidane's goal in 02. Sadly that moment of brilliance is forgotten by the disgraceful referee's performance.
And no matter how bad you think Barca got robbed in the first leg, Chelsea got robbed 10 times worse in the second
You still don't get it. Zidane scoring that way isn't that unusual, Essien doing it is got to do with luck in a bigger way.
wrong.
Essien has high technique and scores great goals his whole career. He doesn't score alot but when he does they are always something special. And no even the great Zidane doesnt score goals like that all the time, not to mention he had no one around him, Michael Essien had a guy right in his face.
You just don't get Michael Essien's game, you probably are one of those idiots who thinks he's all athleticism average skill, wrong he combines world class skill with world class athleticism.
Re: Champions League Final Thread
