MU - Chelsea [R]
in [World Football]
|
From: Stephen O'Connell on 3 Apr 2010 11:34 "anders t" <anthu_001(a)no_-_spam_.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:miker5l0cjelv9ki29a4n0ciqjqbu8fibd(a)4ax.com... > Quoting Stephen O'Connell in rec.sport.soccer: >>"anders t" <anthu_001(a)no_-_spam_.hotmail.com> wrote in message >>news:8ager51t76epgdirotml2d1pt5c4c9o8fg(a)4ax.com... >>> I hope Abramovich had to pay the linesman a very high premium for that >>> 2-0 >>> goal. >> >>Was that the same linesman that didn't spot the Man Utd goal pushed in by >>the arm, or was it a different official? > > No, but the same one that denied MU a handball PK. Huh? What glasses are you wearing? There was no handball PK for Man Utd. > Domination in separate halves. A draw it should have been. Man Utd dominated for spells in the 2nd half, but they were not the better team over the whole 90 minutes... Chelsea deserved the three points. If Rooney had been playing he might have scored the chances that Berbatov missed, but overall it was a no-show for Utd in the first half that cost them, not bad officiating.
From: Sid on 3 Apr 2010 14:21 * Clément [2010-04-03 08:58] [rec.sport.soccer]: > On Apr 3, 10:25 am, anders t wrote: >> I hope Abramovich had to pay the linesman a very high premium for that 2-0 >> goal. > > It does suck, eh? I'll say it again, there's no good reason for such > goals to stand in football. It's an embarrassment. (I won't comment on > Macheda's goal because I need to see it again). I don't think it was a handball. I replayed it a few times and it appears to come off his upper-right chest/shoulder. Of course, I am a United supporter, so I might have just wanted to see that. > Back to football, Man U's 1st half showing (or no-showing) cost you > the game. Also worth mentioning that 2 players who were subbed in > combined to get Chelsea's 2nd goal, so gotta give Ancelotti some > credit on that one (refereeing mistake aside). True, just like the 2 players who were subbed in combining to get United's first. (one of them accidentally, of course) A draw would have been nice, but we showed nothing in the first half and it is how it is. Sid -- 1234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890 remove the espam bits to mail
From: Benny on 3 Apr 2010 14:53 > Subject : MU - Chelsea [R] > From : no.spam(a)fk.u.com >>> Was that the same linesman that didn't spot the Man Utd goal pushed in by >>> the arm, or was it a different official? >> No, but the same one that denied MU a handball PK. > > Huh? What glasses are you wearing? There was no handball PK for Man Utd. > >> Domination in separate halves. A draw it should have been. > Man Utd dominated for spells in the 2nd half, but they were not the better > team over the whole 90 minutes... Chelsea deserved the three points. If > Rooney had been playing he might have scored the chances that Berbatov > missed, but overall it was a no-show for Utd in the first half that cost > them, not bad officiating. The irony of Man United fans whinging about poor officiating at OT. Unbelievable. 5 wins out of 5 for Carlo against the big three so far. I hope they are as focused against Spurs, the same day Man City host United. -- http://soccer-europe.com Rss feed : http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
From: Google Beta User on 3 Apr 2010 15:21 On Apr 3, 2:53 pm, Benny <Be...(a)soccer-europe.com> wrote: > The irony of Man United fans whinging about poor officiating at OT. > Unbelievable. > > 5 wins out of 5 for Carlo against the big three so far. I hope they are > as focused against Spurs, the same day Man City host United. Is Rooney expected back? Tevez and City'll be well up for that one, the first league game at OT was great. Man United at end of season are painful to watch (as in they cause pain - 5-3 Spurs, Macheda, etc etc.)
From: REDDEVIL6 on 3 Apr 2010 16:07
On Sat, 3 Apr 2010 18:21:15 +0000 (UTC), Sid <sid(a)invalid_nerte.invalid.invalid_net.invalid> wrote: >* Clément [2010-04-03 08:58] [rec.sport.soccer]: >> On Apr 3, 10:25 am, anders t wrote: >>> I hope Abramovich had to pay the linesman a very high premium for that 2-0 >>> goal. >> >> It does suck, eh? I'll say it again, there's no good reason for such >> goals to stand in football. It's an embarrassment. (I won't comment on >> Macheda's goal because I need to see it again). > >I don't think it was a handball. I replayed it a few times and it >appears to come off his upper-right chest/shoulder. Of course, I am >a United supporter, so I might have just wanted to see that. > >> Back to football, Man U's 1st half showing (or no-showing) cost you >> the game. Also worth mentioning that 2 players who were subbed in >> combined to get Chelsea's 2nd goal, so gotta give Ancelotti some >> credit on that one (refereeing mistake aside). > >True, just like the 2 players who were subbed in combining to get >United's first. (one of them accidentally, of course) > >A draw would have been nice, but we showed nothing in the first half >and it is how it is. > >Sid Chelsea dominated the first half and United dominated the second half, there were a few poor ref decisions. Chelsea should have had a penalty when Gary Neville barged in and United should have had a penalty when Park was fouled. The United goal came off Macheda's shoulder/chest and was no hand ball. The second Chelsea goal was way offside. that said Chelsea shaded it overall and were worth the points. |