[scotttb]

(Original post by Bobifier)
They gained more points under the footballing contest described by the rules of football. In what sense would they not deserve to win?

If a stiker shoots, completely miskicks the ball and it goes in the net does he deserve to score?

[That Bearded Man]

(Original post by Gridiron-Gangster)
Just wondering if people here had actually every watched or participated in Football or any kind of sport prior to Saturday night? If so then you'd know that basic concept of any contest is to win and not concede and take advantage of an opponent's weakness/lapse in concentration.

I'm sure Usain Bolt doesn't think to himself "Maybe I should slow down a little bit to make the race more tighter and exciting a finish". All he's bothered about is running as fast as he can and winning the match.

I don't think Floyd Mayweather or Manny Pacquiao go into their fights thinking "Ok maybe I'll give the fans a bit more entertainment and expose my chin a little. Sure I'll get knocked down a few times and risk losing the amtch despite the fact I could easily outpoint or KO this bum in Round 4 but hey as long as Average Joe has fun then what's the point in winning?"

Seriously.

Yeah Sport is great when it's entertaining and a closely fought affair but how could you get any closer fought or dramatic a contest than on Saturday night? Even to the last penalty kick it was still in the balance but Chelsea edged out Bayern and deservedly won.

Isn't that exactly what Usain Bolt did when he was sitting the 100m record?

[Bobifier]

(Original post by scotttb)
If a stiker shoots, completely miskicks the ball and it goes in the net does he deserve to score?

Yes.

[River85]

(Original post by fosterwho)
Yeah but c'mon, Chelsea was Bayern's bitch for most of the game. Any team who spends most of the match defending doesn't really deserve it. Then they got an 88th minute goal due to a defense error by Bayern.

So Bayern deserved to win, despite making that defensive error and Chelsea taking advantage of it?

Chelsea defended well during the game. Bayern didn't take their chances. When Chelsea had their one real chance they took it. Bayern failed to convert a penalty in extra time (or, rather, Cech saved it) and then Bayern only scored three of their five penalities in the shoot out. Chelsea scored four of their five.

I don't know how this means Chelsea didn't deserve to win. So what if they spent so much time defending? It's part of the sport -to stop your opponent from scoring and then take your own chances. They did that.

[bide_your_time]

They didnt win the game was a draw which they scabbed on penalties. I hope we never see such a negative side playing anti football win it again. Add to the fact there funded by a russian crook and its even worse. Bayern took the game to chelsea and tried to actually win the game rather than sticking 11 men behind the ball and hoping to get lucky. Bayern and German football in general is far better run and superior in almost ever way apart from perhaps quality to the premier league.

[MagicNMedicine]

Chelsea rode their luck a bit but fair play to them. It's like a tennis match where one player has match point and can't take advantage, and the other one hangs in and hangs in and gets one match point and wins.

Bayern were the better side in terms of various 'statistics' but so what?

[FrigidSymphony]

(Original post by River85)
So Bayern deserved to win, despite making that defensive error and Chelsea taking advantage of it?

Chelsea defended well during the game. Bayern didn't take their chances. When Chelsea had their one real chance they took it. Bayern failed to convert a penalty in extra time (or, rather, Cech saved it) and then Bayern only scored three of their five penalities in the shoot out. Chelsea scored four of their five.

I don't know how this means Chelsea didn't deserve to win. So what if they spent so much time defending? It's part of the sport -to stop your opponent from scoring and then take your own chances. They did that.

You defend with your defensive players, not the whole bloody team. Yes, Bayern fuffed up, Robben was a selfish bastard, and is now a noted bottler, etc. Not the best performance by the Germans. But at least it was a performance. All we got from Chelsea was 11 fannies in their own box. It was a one-sided game because the only team that was actually playing football was Bayern. Which is ridiculous. As someone said before, you could get a bunch of huge rugby players and park them in front of the goal so nothing can actually physically go through, but that isn't football- it's sacrificing the beauty of the game for money and glory, and it's pathetic.

[FrigidSymphony]

(Original post by Gridiron-Gangster)
Just wondering if people here had actually every watched or participated in Football or any kind of sport prior to Saturday night? If so then you'd know that basic concept of any contest is to win and not concede and take advantage of an opponent's weakness/lapse in concentration.

I'm sure Usain Bolt doesn't think to himself "Maybe I should slow down a little bit to make the race more tighter and exciting a finish". All he's bothered about is running as fast as he can and winning the match.

I don't think Floyd Mayweather or Manny Pacquiao go into their fights thinking "Ok maybe I'll give the fans a bit more entertainment and expose my chin a little. Sure I'll get knocked down a few times and risk losing the amtch despite the fact I could easily outpoint or KO this bum in Round 4 but hey as long as Average Joe has fun then what's the point in winning?"

Seriously.

Yeah Sport is great when it's entertaining and a closely fought affair but how could you get any closer fought or dramatic a contest than on Saturday night? Even to the last penalty kick it was still in the balance but Chelsea edged out Bayern and deservedly won.

But that's just it. Chelsea weren't like Usain Bolt or Floyd Mayweather- they were the scrawny little kid who gets bullied for being a dip**** and then shows up to school with a gun. Sure, he's the big boy now, but he's still a scrawny dip**** who has nothing on the rest of them.

[River85]

(Original post by FrigidSymphony)
You defend with your defensive players, not the whole bloody team. Yes, Bayern fuffed up, Robben was a selfish bastard, and is now a noted bottler, etc. Not the best performance by the Germans. But at least it was a performance. All we got from Chelsea was 11 fannies in their own box. It was a one-sided game because the only team that was actually playing football was Bayern. Which is ridiculous. As someone said before, you could get a bunch of huge rugby players and park them in front of the goal so nothing can actually physically go through, but that isn't football- it's sacrificing the beauty of the game for money and glory, and it's pathetic.

I actually found much of their defensive football quite beautiful. I'd much rather see an awesome challenge, or interception, than a 30 yard volley.

Playing defensive is still playing football. What else is it? As with most people you really understate the talent needed to defend.

If this was your team who'd done the same in the Champions League would you be saying the same?

The criticism Chelsea are getting from some on here, you'd think they spent the game cheating and diving.

[NDGAARONDI]

(Original post by FrigidSymphony)
it's sacrificing the beauty of the game for money and glory, and it's pathetic.

Then may be don't have the CL that means too much both in terms of prestige and financially rewarding. West Ham signed Tevez against Premier League rules to help avoid relegation and they did just that. Relegation would cost £50m to them. Had relegation not been so costly they may not have cheated. There are better sports where "beauty" is more incremental to their ideals - gymnastics and figure skating, for example. Golf is a good sport for honour too.

[Isometrix]

(Original post by FrigidSymphony)
You defend with your defensive players, not the whole bloody team. Yes, Bayern fuffed up, Robben was a selfish bastard, and is now a noted bottler, etc. Not the best performance by the Germans. But at least it was a performance. All we got from Chelsea was 11 fannies in their own box. It was a one-sided game because the only team that was actually playing football was Bayern. Which is ridiculous. As someone said before, you could get a bunch of huge rugby players and park them in front of the goal so nothing can actually physically go through, but that isn't football- it's sacrificing the beauty of the game for money and glory, and it's pathetic.

The strength of Chelsea's team lies in the defense, Bayern's in their attack. Both teams were playing to their strengths, but one prevailed over the other. No one has the right to dictate how the game should be played to their own taste.

[itravel2004]

Chelsea deserve to win

I'm Chelsea supporter since Zola begin play with The Blue. The 19 May night is certainly an incredible memorable to me as Chelsea crowned as king of Europe first-time of their history.
Some of them will say Chelsea is luckiest team in this particular season with Barcelona hit 4 times post in the semi-final match including Messi fluffing a penalty. The ESPN commentator had six good sense that Chelsea will win right after Robben miss the penalty. It prove eventually when Bayern's Bastian Schweinsteiger hit the post with Bayern¡¯s last penalty kick.
However, being fair to Chelsea, I still believe that deserve to win if you notice how dramatic and unfortunate when they crush out in past season particularly in Season 0405, 0708 and 0809.
Season 0405 semi-final against Liverpool, they lost 1-0 in second legs at Anfield with controversial winning goal in the fourth minute by Luis Garcia.
John Terry decisive penalty kick slip on Luzhniki Stadium when a scored penalty could have won the first time in 2008. The ironman captain slipped in his run-up on turf made treacherous by a torrential downpour and sent his kick against the upright.
Andrés Iniesta's 93rd-minute goal sent ten-man Barcelona into the final on a night of incredible drama in Stamford Bridge on 2009. However, there are total 5 clear penalties which were not given by the referee (Tom Henning Ovrebo) to Chelsea. Once again, Chelsea ended up eliminated on the fourth semi-final defeat in six seasons.
Due to above “unlucky” seasons, I am able to conclude that Chelsea deserve to win this season with luck helps them. They deserve as a King of Europe.

[mel_1991]

Of course they did. They were lucky but it doesn't mean they don't deserve it.

[Banishingboredom]

(Original post by FrigidSymphony)
You defend with your defensive players, not the whole bloody team. Yes, Bayern fuffed up, Robben was a selfish bastard, and is now a noted bottler, etc. Not the best performance by the Germans. But at least it was a performance. All we got from Chelsea was 11 fannies in their own box. It was a one-sided game because the only team that was actually playing football was Bayern. Which is ridiculous. As someone said before, you could get a bunch of huge rugby players and park them in front of the goal so nothing can actually physically go through, but that isn't football- it's sacrificing the beauty of the game for money and glory, and it's pathetic.

It was almost like Bayern were playing a home game wasn't it.
Play a rematch at Stamford Bridge where we'd scored 17 goals in Europe this season and I guarantee it would be a different story.

Or compromise and play at a neutral venue with 50/50 fans, not three quarters of the stadium supporting one team, and a stadium announced who creams himself when one team scores.

The whole set-up of the final was a joke and Chelsea beat every conceivable disadvantage to win. Get over it.

[Gridiron-Gangster]

(Original post by FrigidSymphony)
But that's just it. Chelsea weren't like Usain Bolt or Floyd Mayweather- they were the scrawny little kid who gets bullied for being a dip**** and then shows up to school with a gun. Sure, he's the big boy now, but he's still a scrawny dip**** who has nothing on the rest of them.

What so being scrawny instantly makes someone a dip**** and justifies bullying?

[Noel1001]

I am a Blue fan and have been all my life. Of course we deserved to win. Regardless if Bayern Munich dominated the whole match, all they had to do was to get the job done, which they didn't but we did.

[Noldorin]

(Original post by Marco Dilivio)
From a neutral and honest point of view...Chelsea did not deserve to win it at all.
Played anti football from the first minute and had no intention of playing decent not even good but decent football at all.
Playing with your whole team in your box isnt what a European Champions does and no offence to Chelsea... they are probably the worst champions I've ever seen.

I understand playing to your strengths is one thing but playing 10 players behind the ball is a bit ridiculous the game would still be going on now if there wasnt penalties. You could get 10 big rubgy players and stick them in front of the keeper and i doubt many teams will manage to score tbh. Its not an art or talent to play ultra defensively its just sad

Chelsea's players drogba, lampard, terry, essien, malouda, cole.cech the older guys do deserve a champions league medal for their careers I guess so Im happy they got that but for who Chelsea were I think they should have given the world a better display because Bayern were all over them and the only way chelsea could have scored was a set piece and they did.

Enjoy the victory chelsea fans sorry if I offended anyone but Im just being honest for the sake of football

Well said. I as a neutral also totally agree... the very best thing that could have happened to Chelsea was a penalty shoot-out. And it did.

Anyone who doesn't under stand what "anti-football" or "ultra-defensive" football is can look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-football. And anyone who claims this is what Catenacci football is like is utterly ignorant. Catenacci does not have 10 men behind the ball as it was against Barcelona or even Bayern at times.

Is football a stochastic game? Does luck play a role in many matches? Yes, of course it did. Chelsea had plenty of it, and that's not to say previous winners didn't, but it seemed all the more apparent here. Every person supporting Chelsea's win has claimed that the winner deserves it *because* they won. This is a tautology, not a reason! The inane dismissals of the existence of
"anti-football" and good fortune in matches has been offered no justification. One thing Chelsea did excellently was finishing. They took 80%+ of all chances they had in the Champions League. Should they be commended for this? Absolutely. Should they win the European cup? Of course not.

Football's arrant resistance to change and modernisation, headed by the moron Sepp Blatter and the corrupt FIFA officials, is not helping this game become what it should be. We can ask ourselves what the sport should look like at the professional level, and clearly it falls way short. Not just Chelsea, but many players on many teams are guilty of ludicrous diving, the referees fall for this and do not punish actual physical aggressiveness, and other bad decisions.

If the fans and viewers of professional football no longer think the sport is being played in its genuine spirit and as entertaining as it could be, then clearly there is something wrong with the sport. It needs change. Minor adjustments are fine; Rugby Union has done this numerous times over recent decades, and the sport is a superb and honest one today. The rules, timing system, referees are overwhelmingly fair, and the sport has rules and laws that make it truly enthralling to watch.

Football, go learn your lessons from rugby!

[NDGAARONDI]

(Original post by Noldorin)
Minor adjustments are fine; Rugby Union has done this numerous times over recent decades, and the sport is a superb and honest one today.

Bloodgate 'scandal'?

(Original post by Noldorin)
The rules, timing system, referees are overwhelmingly fair, and the sport has rules and laws that make it truly enthralling to watch.

Football, go learn your lessons from rugby!

I agree.

[Noldorin]

(Original post by NDGAARONDI)
Bloodgate 'scandal'?



I agree.

Indeed, but thankfully that seems to have been a one-off incident (as far as I know). The culprits were caught and punished appropriately... rugby isn't free from chicanery, but it seems to be at a much lower level and all the players/officials know what will happen when they get caught. Just consider the FIFA corruption and scandals in several European and other nations.

In any case, I'm pleased that I've never seen a rugby union match (least of all international) where the losing team does not admit to being outplayed... they seem to always correctly concede that they got some area of their game wrong. That or the match was just *really* close and it was a scrappy contest that either deserved to win.

[NDGAARONDI]

(Original post by Noldorin)
Indeed, but thankfully that seems to have been a one-off incident (as far as I know). The culprits were caught and punished appropriately... rugby isn't free from chicanery, but it seems to be at a much lower level and all the players/officials know what will happen when they get caught. Just consider the FIFA corruption and scandals in several European and other nations.

Well, I don't know about the corruption issues but you could use the Tevez saga as a more definitive proof of an evil of the game. When more and more importance is placed on winning or losing, either in terms of prestige or in pure financial terms, people will seek unfair advantages to benefit from it. Was I surprised to see West Ham sign a player on third party ownership when avoiding relegation meant £50m in the coffers? No. Then you have Portsmouth who managed to make two FA Cup finals, winning one of them, later to be palcedi n administration for cheating at boardroom level. Unlike in Italy where Juventus' titles were stripped and relegation was given, Portsmouth kept their FA Cup and only got given a 10 point reduction. Tbh if I knew what I do now I would never be interested in the sport.