Chelsea v Liverpool League Cup 2nd Leg. 27/01/15 7.45pm SS1

phobia2011

wembley anyone?

Sanity_Saviour

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Skrtel was Liverpool's best player and Hazard was Chelsea's IMO.

Terry very good as well

GavRedKing

phobia2011 wrote: »

wembley anyone?

Im on the ticket search as we speak......

Utopia Parkway

Thought Zouma was ropey enough to be honest. Albeit he has the pace to get himself out of trouble when he does make a positional error and he made a few.

blueser

phobia2011 wrote: »

wembley anyone?

Enjoy it. It's a fine stadium (been lucky enough to have been there 3 times in recent seasons). The surrounding areas in the immediate vicinity of the ground aren't the most aesthetically pleasing, but most people going to the ground won't give a flying whatever about that.

viper006

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

And I stand by that. Overall Chelsea the better team tonight and deserved to go through.

Liverpool much better in the first leg but unfortunately it's over 2 legs that counts

Haha take off the blue tinted glasses. Afew times over last few pages I was wondering about afew of the posts if they were trolling pool fans only to see each one was written by you and your serious . Over both legs it was incredibly tight . Liverpool had more than enough missed chances and only have themselves to blame. The fact ur keeper was man of the match twice speaks volume.

Wrongway1985

phobia2011 wrote: »

wembley anyone?

Would love to!!

Demosthenese

Can't argue with the result tonight, very tight game played at times with both teams throwing caution to the wind - which for the first half at least was refreshing for Chelsea to be fair - good cup football - game of few chances but Chelsea took their best chance and Liverpool didn't take theirs ...

Didn't realise Fabregas was on the field until he was taken off injured! Annoymous ... actually thought Ramirez was pretty decent when he came on except he can't finish - gets into great positions.

Enjoyable 90 mins, extra time something to forget.

Nib

To be fair, Liverpool were very unlucky, one more Costa stamp and they would have got a free coffee.

fullstop

Nib wrote: »

To be fair, Liverpool were very unlucky, one more Costa stamp and they would have got a free coffee.

3rd time in the thread...at least

GavRedKing

Costa

The Davestator

The scared look on Gerrards face when he tangled with Costa was the sweetest part for me. He couldn't wait to get out if there quick enough! Also, Skrytel was the dirtiest player all .night ☺

pistolpetes11

The Davestator wrote: »

The scared look on Gerrards face when he tangled with Costa was the sweetest part for me. He couldn't wait to get out if there quick enough! Also, Skrytel was the dirtiest player all .night ☺

Agree on Skertel , had a cheeky look over his shoulder before throwing the elbow up at Courtois

pmy.murphy

grumpymunster wrote: »

Hard game against 12 men

12 men my ass, cough cough Costa cough cough stamping. Although some obviously think thats within the rules

rossc007

Nib wrote: »

To be fair, Liverpool were very unlucky, one more Costa stamp and they would have got a free coffee.

Sanity_Saviour

viper006 wrote: »

Haha take off the blue tinted glasses. Afew times over last few pages I was wondering about afew of the posts if they were trolling pool fans only to see each one was written by you and your serious . Over both legs it was incredibly tight . Liverpool had more than enough missed chances and only have themselves to blame. The fact ur keeper was man of the match twice speaks volume.

Haha one thing you need to learn is that between partisan groups, anything that a member of partisan A says that disagrees with partisan B's status quo is seen as twice as wrong and is proof that they are in the right. This magnifies their emotional reaction and sees the petty emotional-driven responses you saw tonight. there was more Liverpool fans in tonight so in relative terms it's called trolling. its interesting to see who the group turns on.

Then again Liverpool were the better team last Tuesday, Chelsea were the better team tonight I think that's fair to say!

The Davestator

Nothing said about Gerrards attempted head but on Costa on commentar. Sky mist have him signed up for a few years down the line

rossc007

The Davestator wrote: »

Nothing said about Gerrards attempted head but on Costa on commentar. Sky mist have him signed up for a few years down the line

By attempted headbutt do you mean when they where forehead to forehead and Gerrard pushed back?

dobsdave

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

Haha one thing you need to learn is that between partisan groups, anything that a member of partisan A says that disagrees with partisan B's status quo is seen as twice as wrong and is proof that they are in the right. This magnifies their emotional reaction and sees the petty emotional-driven responses you saw tonight. there was more Liverpool fans in tonight so in relative terms it's called trolling. its interesting to see who the group turns on.

Then again Liverpool were the better team last Tuesday, Chelsea were the better team tonight I think that's fair to say!

courtois mom both games, but chelsea better tonight, ha, don't think so

smileyj1987

grumpymunster wrote: »

For what? Put himself about but that is what he is paid for if ref had balls at least two Liverpool players should have seen red and an early pen for us.

Early pen ?

If you want to talk about decisions what about his deliberate stamp on Can ? That was a red card .

What can I say that was a hell of semi final over the two legs and congrats to chelsea on the win. Bad finishing let Liverpool down over two legs but after watching that I had a €20 bet with someone they will finish ahead of Man Utd. Everything is there for Liverpool just the lack of a goal scorer once they get Danny Sturrigde back it should all click and they should be firing on all cylinders.

titan18

GavRedKing wrote: »

I dont know where ye're getting the stamps from, theyre natural movements of foot to the floor, the space where the floor is just happens to be occupied by Skrtel/Can.

Cant do much about that really.

Don't know if this was a joke or not, but I actually agree with it.

monkey9

The Davestator wrote: »

The scared look on Gerrards face when he tangled with Costa was the sweetest part for me. He couldn't wait to get out if there quick enough! Also, Skrytel was the dirtiest player all .night ☺

LOL.

Some amount of bullsh!t in this thread alright.

efb

rossc007 wrote: »

Some, like my work use stamps

SM01

Some awful ****e being posted now (quelle surprise).

Respect to Chelsea, they're superb at finishing a game off in tight circumstances and are winners. The 'nasty' element so often referred to is difficult to take when you're in opposition but if the shoe was on the other foot I'd be content with Liverpool mastering that art if it meant winning competitions. Suarez had it in him and I think he's a superb player.

A very close affair and I was very pleased with Liverpool's showing on the night but they're really hamstrung without a competent striker. It boggles my mind how that and the goalkeeping issue has not been addressed yet (though Mignolet was fine on the night.) Saying that they're playing much better than the dark days of November. Well done Chelsea for winning what was an altogether riveting two-legged tie.

Sanity_Saviour

dobsdave wrote: »

courtois mom both games, but chelsea better tonight, ha, don't think so

You can't seriously think Liverpool were the better team tonight? Even the most biased fan can see that Liverpool were lucky to only lose by one

monkey9

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

You can't seriously think Liverpool were the better team tonight? Even the most biased fan can see that Liverpool were lucky to only lose by one

Lucky to lose by one?? Are you actually for real.

CSF

Chelsea were definitely the better team.

LuckyLloyd

The Davestator wrote: »

The scared look on Gerrards face when he tangled with Costa was the sweetest part for me. He couldn't wait to get out if there quick enough! Also, Skrytel was the dirtiest player all .night ☺

The Davestator wrote: »

Nothing said about Gerrards attempted head but on Costa on commentar. Sky mist have him signed up for a few years down the line

I find these posts to be very articulate.

GavRedKing

The Davestator wrote: »

Nothing said about Gerrards attempted head but on Costa on commentar. Sky mist have him signed up for a few years down the line

One of the articles mentioned it but alluded to it being more of a push as they were head to head.

Always a risky thing to do, going head to head with a player like that.

Sanity_Saviour

monkey9 wrote: »

Lucky to lose by one?? Are you actually for real.

I'm sorry are you taking the piss or did you actually watch the game?

Overall Chelsea had a substantially greater number chances to score than Liverpool as well as a penalty that should have been given which would have likely been a goal. .

What part of that do you disagree with?

5starpool

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

I'm sorry are you taking the piss or did you actually watch the game?

Overall Chelsea had a substantially greater number chances to score than Liverpool as well as a penalty that should have been given which would have likely been a goal. .

What part of that do you disagree with?

You're great craic.

Turtyturd

5starpool wrote: »

You're great craic.

You can tell Chelsea fans don't normally do match threads. :pac:

monkey9

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

I'm sorry are you taking the piss or did you actually watch the game?

Overall Chelsea had a substantially greater number chances to score than Liverpool as well as a penalty that should have been given which would have likely been a goal. .

What part of that do you disagree with?

What is actually wrong with you. You're through to the final, you'd swear you were bitter the way you're spewing this skip junk.

Shanotheslayer

Liverpool should of buried the tie in the first leg. They failed to do so

Chelsea deserved to win the 2nd leg, deserved to lose the 1st leg.

Yet they won the 2nd leg and drew the 1st leg.

What's that saying again? 'Getting results when playing poorly', well they did that in the 1st leg, and got exactly what they wanted.

Should be an interesting final, especially with Spurs bashing Chelsea before.

Will I Amnt

monkey9 wrote: »

What is actually wrong with you. You're through to the final, you'd swear you were bitter the way you're spewing this skip junk.

I don't think 2 or 3 nil would have flattered Chelsea last night. Liverpool didn't look like they were ever going to score and Chelsea had opportunities you would expect a lot better from.

monkey9

After the first leg, I think most of us agreed that we had most likely left the tie behind at Anfield. We should have had the tie virtually wrapped up last week

Last night, Chelsea had more of the play which was to be expected, but we had chances we didn't convert ourselves. Moreno, Coutinho and especially Henderson all should probably have scored but we came up against a top keeper on form who got MOTM in both legs.

Both sides went for it in a thrilling cup semi final over two legs and ultimately Chelsea found a way to win and fair play to them. But to say we were lucky to only lose by one? Leave it out.

Sanity_Saviour

monkey9 wrote: »

What is actually wrong with you. You're through to the final, you'd swear you were bitter the way you're spewing this skip junk.

What are you on about?

Will I Amnt

monkey9 wrote: »

After the first leg, I think most of us agreed that we had most likely left the tie behind at Anfield. We should have had the tie virtually wrapped up last week

Last night, Chelsea had more of the play which was to be expected, but we had chances we didn't convert ourselves. Moreno, Coutinho and especially Henderson all should probably have scored but we came up against a top keeper on form who got MOTM in both legs.

Both sides went for it in a thrilling cup semi final over two legs and ultimately Chelsea found a way to win and fair play to them. But to say we were lucky to only lose by one? Leave it out.

Agree with a lot of that but Liverpool brought their continued problems in converting chances into last night's game; That's Liverpool of late, they don't score much, especially in big games. Chelsea had an off day in the final third.

monkey9

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

What are you on about?

Enjoy the final buddy.

Sanity_Saviour

monkey9 wrote: »

Enjoy the final buddy.

monkey9

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Agree with a lot of that but Liverpool brought their continued problems in converting chances into last night's game; That's Liverpool of late, they don't score much, especially in big games. Chelsea had an off day in the final third.

Yeah, if a fit Sturridge had played, we probably would have been in the final. All ifs and buts, of course. Chelsea are there and that's all that matters.

GavRedKing

The main difference was quality, we possesed more of it when it counted.

Take the goal last night, Poor pass from Balotelli, Hazard gets taken down. Could have easily been avoided.

So the defending of it, it was comical really, Balotelli make sno effort to stop Ivanovic getting away from him and hes one of if not our most dangerous players from set pieces, given him a free header is criminal, rest of the defenders had players marked.

Fast forward a few minutes, similar position and Gerrard has a free kick, the ball is whipped in, better than Willians effort but Chelsea deal with it, time margains. We didnt need to score but it meant we couldnt lose in E.T. unless we shipped 2 goals.

Although part of me is still wondering how under little to no pressure did Henderson miss that chance? He cost his team big time with the blunder last night.

SlickRic

i love the Internet.

Utopia Parkway

Will I Amnt wrote: »

I don't think 2 or 3 nil would have flattered Chelsea last night.

Don't be silly. Of course it would have. Both sides had a very similiar amount of shots on target and efforts on goal. Henderson missed a sitter and Moreno and Coutinho both had one on ones with the keeper. Just off the top of my head.

Thought Chelsea had slightly the better of it especially in the 2nd half but to say they should have won 3-0 is just blather.

Crann na Beatha

This post has been deleted.

spiritcrusher

Sometimes you'd have to wonder do people just enjoy getting needlessly wound up over games. Had either team gone through last night I don't think any one could realistically have any major complaints. Both teams played well over the two games, Liverpool slightly better at Anfield, Chelsea slightly better at SB. The controversial incidents mostly seemed to even themselves out i.e., Costa should've had a penalty but also should've been off the pitch. The key factor was clinical finishing really. Liverpool probably had the most clear cut chances but couldn't convert, a product of both Liverpool's lack of a finisher and Chelsea's impressive bastard of a keeper. The games were tight, they were entertaining, and ultimately won by a single goal in extra time.


Balotelli may be finally finished though. He was atrocious.

Utopia Parkway

spiritcrusher wrote: »

Liverpool slightly better at Anfield, Chelsea slightly better at SB.

Liverpool completely dominated the game at Anfield. It was practically one way traffic. Last night's game was a lot closer. Not that it matters now as Chelsea got through and Liverpool didn't. Ultimately all that matters.

SM01

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

Don't be silly. Of course it would have. Both sides had a very similiar amount of shots on target and efforts on goal. Henderson missed a sitter and Moreno and Coutinho both had one on ones with the keeper. Just off the top of my head.

Thought Chelsea had slightly the better of it especially in the 2nd half but to say they should have won 3-0 is just blather.

Echoing this. Chelsea win by 2 or 3 is utter nonsense. They edged the game but it was a very close match as the result bore out with a singular extra-time goal. Liverpool were profligate with their chances and as GavRedKing said Chelsea had more quality when it counted. It was tight though.

quarryman

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

Liverpool completely dominated the game at Anfield. It was practically one way traffic. Last night's game was a lot closer. Not that it matters now as Chelsea got through and Liverpool didn't. Ultimately all that matters.

So that's a load of horse manure.

Will I Amnt

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

Don't be silly. Of course it would have. Both sides had a very similiar amount of shots on target and efforts on goal. Henderson missed a sitter and Moreno and Coutinho both had one on ones with the keeper. Just off the top of my head.

Thought Chelsea had slightly the better of it especially in the 2nd half but to say they should have won 3-0 is just blather.

For starters, I didn't say they should have won 3-0. Liverpool were Liverpool in the final third. You can give up a load of chances against Liverpool when they have nothing up front, I'm sure you don't need reminding of the United game...
Chelsea let them off the hook through poor choices and finishing. On another day they could easily score a few more, Liverpool need a hatful of chances every game until Sturridge gets back.