SoxFanInCali said:
I'm not sure because the ref saw the foul and made the decision. Because of that I don't think it can be overturned.
2014-15 Champions League: the Quixotic Quest to Qualify
- Thread starter Titans Bastard
- Start date
- Status
I'm not sure because the ref saw the foul and made the decision. Because of that I don't think it can be overturned.
that was about a karmic-ly satisfying a match as I've ever seen
Did you ever decide which team to root for? I kinda blanked on that. I'd rather root for a shitty team with a shitty owner that's never in Europe than a bunch of whiny entitled simulating pricks. God, what assbags.
Seven Costanza said:
Did you ever decide which team to root for? I kinda blanked on that. I'd rather root for a shitty team with a shitty owner that's never in Europe than a bunch of whiny entitled simulating pricks. God, what assbags.
Zomp said:
You gave Shakhtar too much credit.Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
Yikes. That is a terrible call.deconstruction said:
Great formation and shape here. Credit to Mourinho.SoxFanInCali said:
All 10 outfield players are in this photo.
Everton in the Europa?mgoblue2 said:
In Men In Blazers lingo, he's a big bottom small. Did you know his ass has its own twitter account? https://mobile.twitter.com/EdenHazardsAss/tweetsInfield Infidel said:
SoxFanInCali said:
Exactly. Plus, there is a subtle difference between Simeone's intensity and Mourinho's. In a way, Costa embodied Simeone's take-no-prisoner attitude. Remember, Simeone is the guy who, at the end of the Champions League loss, kicked the ball back at Varane and walked on the pitch after him. So, while non-Atletico fans generally criticized Costa for being a punk, Atletico embraced Costa for the way he reflected Simeone's toughness.
I'm not sure what Chelsea is paying Filipe Luis, and he's surely making more at Chelsea than at Atletico. Nonetheless, I wish Luis stayed -- Atletico needed (needs) him, while he just warms the bench at Chelsea.
Zomp said:
I think if you give any team the scenario of a 30 minute game, following 180 minutes of dead even play at both venues, with the choice of playing it at home or playing on the road with the caveat that any tie of more than 0-0 is a win for the road team, you'd play it on the road 100 times out of 100.
History suggests otherwise. In the past 10 years, 9 ties have gone into extra time. 5 penalties, 3 home wins, 1 away win on away goals (PSG)
I mean, it's not a great sample size, and the home teams in the second leg are typically the better team, but even if you take that data to suggest that you have a 1/9 shot of winning outright despite not scoring more goals then isn't that better than whatever marginal advantage you get by being at home?
To be fair I really just hate the away goal rule regardless.
To be fair I really just hate the away goal rule regardless.
I really don't see it. I'd much rather play that extra period at home than anything else. Plus then the PKs are at home as well. I understand why the away goals rule makes it not a slam dunk, but then isn't that a reason why the away goals rule is awesome? There's nothing about that game yesterday that makes the away goals rule seem worse. Mourinho has worked that rule to his favor mercilessly throughout his career. Having it backfire on him a bit this time is just perfect. And to be honest, the away goals rule kept it a contest. If the away goals didn't break the tie, PSG probably just rolls over.
That data also doesn't control for the effect of the rule -- the away goals rule may cause the home team to play a little more cautiously than it otherwise would, so maybe without it fewer matches would have gone to penalties.
The tournament is set up under the assumption that it is an advantage to play at home in the second leg, given that this is an explicit perk given to group winners in the R16.
You can bet your last dollar that if the directors of clubs like Real, Barca, and Bayern felt that it was a disadvantage to play at home in the second leg, the rules wouldn't be structured that way.
You can bet your last dollar that if the directors of clubs like Real, Barca, and Bayern felt that it was a disadvantage to play at home in the second leg, the rules wouldn't be structured that way.
You don´t get the rules and the influence on the game right, it seems. Nobody, really nobody would pick the 2nd leg as away match.
You have a match tied after 180 minutes, going into extra-time for 30minutes, there will be no away-goal rule that favors your already scored goals (if it´s 1-1 and then 1-1 again, like yesterday, then it is 2-2 tied and both have an away goal, so it is 3-3). Then you have another 30 minutes.
Make a pick for yourself, you have 30 minutes to be played, after 90minutes, your players are running on their last legs, it is a nerve-wracking scene. Do you think the extra-time will be a draw with goals (like yesterday)? Then play away. But nobody would do this. Ask Mourinho and he would pick 100 times the 2nd leg at home, going into a tied extra time. It is an advantage, to play it at home.
It could also mean that the tie was at 4-0 at Paris, then 4-0 for Chelsea and tied 4-4 going into extras. Where do you want it played. 3-1 and 1-3, etc.
The chance of twice the same draw is rather low. And everyone wants to play the 2nd match (with chance for e.t.) at home.
You have a match tied after 180 minutes, going into extra-time for 30minutes, there will be no away-goal rule that favors your already scored goals (if it´s 1-1 and then 1-1 again, like yesterday, then it is 2-2 tied and both have an away goal, so it is 3-3). Then you have another 30 minutes.
Make a pick for yourself, you have 30 minutes to be played, after 90minutes, your players are running on their last legs, it is a nerve-wracking scene. Do you think the extra-time will be a draw with goals (like yesterday)? Then play away. But nobody would do this. Ask Mourinho and he would pick 100 times the 2nd leg at home, going into a tied extra time. It is an advantage, to play it at home.
It could also mean that the tie was at 4-0 at Paris, then 4-0 for Chelsea and tied 4-4 going into extras. Where do you want it played. 3-1 and 1-3, etc.
The chance of twice the same draw is rather low. And everyone wants to play the 2nd match (with chance for e.t.) at home.
Obviously playing the second leg at home is better, since this is such a rare scenario. I'm not arguing that this gives lower seeds a net overall advantage, just that in this rare scenario it becomes incredibly arbitrary, and in this rare scenario I'd take extra time on the road every time. Maybe I don't value home field advantage as much as I should, but I just feel like any time you have a tangible advantage (the ~10% chance of a tie with goals) you take it over the advantage of playing at home. I don't think Chelsea deserved to win because the red card was trash and they're all annoying cocks, but that doesn't mean it isn't an arbitrary-ass way to decide what ultimately was a 3-3 tie. And yeah, Chelsea got a little more time at home, just like the home team in a seven game series. You earn that shit when you're the higher seed.
But again, I really just hate the away goals rule.
But again, I really just hate the away goals rule.
Sorry if this is the wrong place, but do any of you have any ideas for getting Champions League final tickets? DDB Jr. and I will be in Europe that weekend. I've entered the UEFA lottery, but it looks like a long shot. If I wanted to take a shot by joining a couple of the supporters clubs of the teams that look like they have a good chance -- Bayern or Barca -- would that get me a leg up? Not easy to get information about how tickets are allocated.
Pay a lot, a lot, of freakin' money. Your best chance of tickets is paying a shed load to a broker.
Arsenal same starting lineup as the first leg against Monaco (except Monreal instead of Gibbs), which means (1) no Ramsey, (2) Mertesacker and his lack of pace might still be an issue, (3) no Theo.
Probably would not have been my first choice. We'll see how the team performs.
I believe Arsenal will win but have no expectation that we will make up the goal differential and away goals.
Probably would not have been my first choice. We'll see how the team performs.
I believe Arsenal will win but have no expectation that we will make up the goal differential and away goals.
In the abstract, I would have liked to see Ramsey rather than Welbeck. But our chances of qualification are so low either way that I see no reason to risk Ramsey playing 90 minutes so soon after the last match when his health has been do precarious.
Gabriel would have been my choice for CB if fit. I don't see much difference between Mert and Chambers, as both are poorly suited for this game just in different ways.
Gabriel would have been my choice for CB if fit. I don't see much difference between Mert and Chambers, as both are poorly suited for this game just in different ways.
I would've liked to see Rambo, but my friend made a good point that there might be a lot of crosses in this game if Monaco sits deep. We might need that extra man in the box. Or you know, one of the two guys in the box.
I feel like this tie is a race against time.
I feel like this tie is a race against time.
Lets have a go.
We need to score three goals no matter what so we need to take big risks. There is a pretty good chance we get murdered on the counter before our offense even gets clicking but let's see what happens. I'm glad Monreal is back there as he has much better positional sense than Gibbs and I trust him more in the final third if he gets an opportunity to go forward.
We need to score three goals no matter what so we need to take big risks. There is a pretty good chance we get murdered on the counter before our offense even gets clicking but let's see what happens. I'm glad Monreal is back there as he has much better positional sense than Gibbs and I trust him more in the final third if he gets an opportunity to go forward.
Eh, he had nowhere to go. He could have backheeled it, but Monaco had it covered.
How many times are they going to replay an offside call where the ball didn't wind up in the net? Who gives a fuck?
How many times are they going to replay an offside call where the ball didn't wind up in the net? Who gives a fuck?
I'd like to see the ref stay up if someone kicked him in the shin like that -- if that's outside the box, it's probably just a play on.
Oh man it could be 0-2 or 0-3 by now. After a sluggish first 20 minutes, Arsenal have been dominant.
DLew On Roids said:
I know - and i would still toss his salad.
What i love about Scholes is he never uses a three syllable word without having a really good reason.
- Status