matty Posted May 2, 2007 Posted May 2, 2007 We wouldn't have needed extra time and penalties last night. You know I'm right.
Tones Posted May 2, 2007 Posted May 2, 2007 But if we had drawn 0 0 we would still have gone through, only without the help of away goals!
ManxRed Posted May 2, 2007 Posted May 2, 2007 We should've lost the first leg 3-0. That would have been better, surely? No. I still haven't got the hang of this...
Bailo Posted May 2, 2007 Posted May 2, 2007 Enter SuperDunce for his scientific version of events...I think last night proved Matty and myself to be awesomely right.
Lee W Posted May 2, 2007 Posted May 2, 2007 I think last night proved Matty and myself to be awesomely right. Aye, of course.
pipnasty Posted May 2, 2007 Posted May 2, 2007 I'm just glad we didn't win the away leg 2-1 - we would be f***ed by now
Tyler Posted May 2, 2007 Posted May 2, 2007 I think that losing 1-0 in the away leg helped in the sense that when we scored last night we kept attacking as it was such a precarious position in that if they scored we would need two. If it was 2-1 last night and we were one up - human nature would have meant we would have started to hang on as they would need two to knock us out
matty Posted May 2, 2007 Author Posted May 2, 2007 I think last night proved Matty and myself to be awesomely right. Don't drag me into this!
Woodsyla Posted May 3, 2007 Posted May 3, 2007 I think that losing 1-0 in the away leg helped in the sense that when we scored last night we kept attacking as it was such a precarious position in that if they scored we would need two. If it was 2-1 last night and we were one up - human nature would have meant we would have started to hang on as they would need two to knock us out Excellent so a 1- 0 away loss > 2-1 away loss > 0-0 away draw
John am Rhein Posted May 3, 2007 Posted May 3, 2007 Excellent so a 1- 0 away loss > 2-1 away loss > 0-0 away draw
Skillz Posted May 3, 2007 Posted May 3, 2007 Please let this thread grow. The last one had me laughing for ages.
£440,000 Posted May 3, 2007 Posted May 3, 2007 Think consensus in last thread was always that a 2-1 defeat away was better than a 1-0 defeat. KEEP MATTY AWAY FROM THE TREASURY!
John am Rhein Posted May 3, 2007 Posted May 3, 2007 Think consensus in last thread was always that a 2-1 defeat away was better than a 1-0 defeat. Buy low, sell high!
sutty Posted May 3, 2007 Posted May 3, 2007 In a strange way, getting beat 1-0 away was a good thing. You know psychologically and stuff.
pipnasty Posted May 3, 2007 Posted May 3, 2007 You know psychologically and stuff. That has me convinced.
Stevie H Posted May 3, 2007 Posted May 3, 2007 In a strange way, getting beat 1-0 away was a good thing. You know psychologically and stuff.i thought not scoring a goal at stamford bridge put us in a commanding position psychologically. chelsea knew that they had to score at anfield.
drdooom Posted May 3, 2007 Posted May 3, 2007 I swore when they missed a penalty as that meant their following penalty takers knew they had to score.
John am Rhein Posted May 3, 2007 Posted May 3, 2007 i thought not scoring a goal at stamford bridge put us in a commanding position psychologically. chelsea knew that they had to score at anfield. If we could have lost 3-0 at Stamford Bridge it would have worked in our favour because Chelsea would have been tempted to sit on their lead at Anfield. As we all know, that never works for top teams, only 'lesser' teams from the lower divisions. I swore when they missed a penalty as that meant their following penalty takers knew they had to score. Zenden putting the first pen away put us at a psychological disadvantage, but fortunately the lads overcame that.
Tosh Posted May 3, 2007 Posted May 3, 2007 (edited) Only Milan got an away goal across the four games Therefore losing 3-2 is better than winning 3-2. Oh yes And losing the first leg is clearly a better strategy than winning it. Edited May 3, 2007 by Tosh
pipnasty Posted May 3, 2007 Posted May 3, 2007 (edited) chelsea knew that they had to score at anfield. They didn't HAVE to score though - only if we did, of course. Jeez, the maths get more and more difficult on this one. Zenden putting the first pen away put us at a psychological disadvantage I think that is when Rafa sat down - he knew it was going to be difficult, especially when Chelsea missed their first which put us in an un-enviable position. Steve Nicol had the right idea in '84. Edited May 3, 2007 by Pipnasty
£440,000 Posted May 3, 2007 Posted May 3, 2007 Maybe we should give Milan a 4-0 headstart this time. That'll fool 'em!
pipnasty Posted May 3, 2007 Posted May 3, 2007 Maybe we should give Milan a 4-0 headstart this time. That'll fool 'em! They'll s*** it
£440,000 Posted May 3, 2007 Posted May 3, 2007 (edited) Zenden putting the first pen away put us at a psychological disadvantage, but fortunately the lads overcame that. Trust Zenden to f*** it up. Edited May 3, 2007 by £440,000
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now