|
|
The repercussions from Chelsea’s Champions League semi-final exit are likely to be ongoing and numerable. But in the cold light of day, the morning after the perspiration and exasperation of that fearsome battle with Barca’s boys, Chelsea Football Club should feel a little bit ashamed.
Ashamed of Didier Drogba’s wild outburst on national television? Without doubt. Ashamed of Michael Ballack’s crazed haranguing of Norwegian referee Tom Henning Ovrebo? You’d think so. Ashamed that their players dared suggest that defeat was a result of UEFA conspiring against another all English final? Probably.
Most of all however, Chelsea should be ashamed of their own sense of injustice. There was no injustice at Stamford Bridge on 6th May 2009, it was a victory for football.
Former Chelsea manager Jose Mourinho once famously lambasted Tottenham for ‘parking the team bus’ in front of their goal following a brave defensive effort that brought the Spurs a creditable 0-0 draw at the Bridge. Mourinho’s Chelsea, at their best, were dogged, brave and organised, but never as dour as the team Hiddink steered to within 60 seconds of a second successive Champions League final.
Hiddink is well known for his ability to plot the downfall of world class teams. He is an undoubted master in the art of making sure every underdog has its day. His tactics against Barcelona worked, until the 187th minute. Some people will hail Chelsea’s defensive effort up until that point as a masterclass, but to my mind a goal for Barca was an inevitability, and Chelsea only have themselves to blame for allowing one to be enough to take the Catalans through.
It seemed like sour grapes from the Spanish media when they ridiculed the tactics Chelsea employed in the Nou Camp. To a large extent it was. On that night, the Blues produced a classic first leg away performance, the like of which never used to be frowned upon. Following the second leg and Chelsea’s exit, the likes of leading Spanish sports paper Marca have a point. In front of their own fans and facing a depleted Barca side, Chelsea’s lack of ambition was staggering.
Scoring early clearly affected Chelsea’s mentality, but in many ways, the goal was meaningless. With or without it, Barca only needed a solitary goal to reach the final. And for all their huffing and puffing and failure to get a shot on target in the regulation 90 minutes, when quality players are allowed as much of the ball as Chelsea afforded the visitors, eventually their class will tell.
Iniesta’s goal was stunning. To strike a ball running across the body from a standing start and beat one of the best goalkeepers in the world from 20 yards is truly something special. But to do it when your team has 60 seconds to salvage their European dreams is something else. Over the course of the two legs it was clear that if Barca were to succeed, it would be through a moment of genius from any one of their tremendously gifted, technical players. Were Chelsea to have triumphed, it would have been, as some said, the beast overcoming the beauty.
What astounds me is that Chelsea possess a team of world class players. This wasn’t Barrow taking on Arsenal in the FA Cup, these were experienced internationals simply failing to keep the ball for long periods. Hiddink knew that Chelsea’s direct approach would pay dividends with a goal at some point, particularly given the injury woes at the heart of Barcelona’s defence, but surely he would have expected his team to put the visitors under periods of concerted pressure.
In failing to keep the ball, Chelsea dropped deeper and deeper, with the removal of Drogba, to be replaced by Belletti, partly to blame. Even with the visitors down to ten men and a crucial second goal there for the taking, Chelsea constantly surrendered possession and camped on the edge of their own penalty area.
They got what they deserved. Michael Ballack, a man who arrived at Chelsea with a reputation as one of the best goalscoring attacking midfield players in the world, was stood marking space inside his own penalty area when Iniesta’s shot fizzed past his ear into the top corner. It was the first time in the game that a Barca player had been afforded such space around the penalty area, and why? Because Chelsea undid themselves by obsessively dropping off in a bid to defend for their lives. Ballack simply wasn’t tight enough. Truth be told, he should have been playing keep ball with Anelka, Lampard and Malouda at the other end of the pitch, but with one up front, it never happened.
And so to Drogba. A man who came across as intelligent and charming on BBC’s Inside Sport earlier in the week, who undid all his good work with his shocking tirade in front of Sky’s cameras that even got Richard Keys flustered. Intelligent he may be, but the irony of Drogba’s comments will no doubt be lost on the Ivorian striker. For after all, despite all Chelsea’s failings over the two legs, he wasted two glaring opportunities to put the game beyond Barca.
The refereeing was poor, yes. But conspiracy or ‘disgrace’? No. The two handballs looked penalties, whereas the other two were pretty suspect; Drogba went down a stride too late and Malouda had as much of Alves’ shirt as vice versa. These things happen in football – refereeing decisions are open to interpretation, particularly handball.
But if Chelsea honestly believe that they were cheated out of a place in the final, they need to take a long hard look in the mirror. Barca stuck to their principles, refused to be bullied and achieved reward for their ambition. Beauty overcame the beast.
|
|
|
|