After the final whistle was blown, beyond all the tears and celebrations were claims that it was a night when football had lost; that Chelsea had found a way to destroy the dimensions of football.
I think this is a bit of an over-reaction due to several reasons. First, let me just say that it is understandable to see Tottenham fans shocked and distraught about losing out on Champions League football yet again, especially after having outperformed Chelsea in the Premier League. The UEFA ruling is extremely harsh upon the 4th placed club and its fans, and I’m sure Everton fans will sympathize having gone through the same ordeal in 2005.
Secondly, it is obvious that there has been an overload of football fans wanting their teams to play slick, attacking football similar to Barcelona’s, and I am one of those who encourages such views, but I also like to encourage people to avoid walking into any situation with a blind eye.
What I am suggesting, is using a little tactical guile if you really want to win a game as important as the Champions League Final is not a travesty. When you are playing against a team that is lopsided in attack, and you know that your own team cannot possibly match them going forward, you need to realize that going down playing beautiful football simply isn’t as gratifying as winning a hard fought battle.
In the words of Martin Tyler, “With all football logic, it should not have happened”, but it did, and the reasons were less than barefaced. Yes, Bayern had a plethora of chances and Chelsea didn’t; but such statistics are insignificant when you fail to capitalize. In fact, Bayern almost had as many shots against Chelsea as Barcelona did in both legs combined, yet half the number of goals.
So what is the point in creating so many chances if you aren’t capable of putting the ball in the back of the net? Did Bayern really deserve to win? If they did, then what was the reason for their demise? The common saying in football is that if you win it is because you deserved to and it applies here just as well.
It is clear that both Chelsea and Bayern had a fixed game plan in mind. Chelsea’s was to invite Bayern to attack and pressure them into making mistakes, while Bayern’s was to shoot as sight and unsettle Chelsea at every given opportunity.
Now don’t get me wrong, Chelsea seem like an average team in attack when you compare them to the likes of Barcelona and Bayern Munich, even with the likes of Drogba, Mata and Ramires in the squad, but what separated Chelsea from the two sides was desire and experience, among some much needed luck, which is crucial in the Champions League.
The fact of the matter is that a team with players such as Chelsea’s will always end up showcasing their defensive prowess, so such complaints are futile. Just take Inter’s Champions League win under Jose Mourinho as an example. I’m sure everyone would’ve enjoyed an end to end game, but the way in which Chelsea went from being 3-1 down in Napoli, to winning the competition, endorses a different beauty of the game.
www.footballpundits.co.uk / Twitter: @FPundits / @gauravsardesai
Introducing the neat little app that’ll pay you to view content tailored to your interests:
ThisisFutbol.com are seeking new writers to join the team! If you’re passionate about football, drop us a line at “thisisfutbol.com@snack-media.com” to learn more.