2010 Champions League Final

[improbus]

Bayern vs. Inter

I'm hoping for an entertaining game but am expecting a low scoring affair with neither team really taking too many chances. My best guess, Bayern wins on a ridiculous Arjen Robben goal (haunting his former manager in Mourinho).

Also, a HUGE step forward for soccer with the game on Network TV on the middle of a weekend. More people in the world watched last years final than watched the Super Bowl, this can only help.

[WMR]

What channel and what time? Don't see it on the guide.

[WMR]

Nevermind found it... Fox @ 2:30

[Yachtzee]

Looking forward to the game. Definitely rooting for Bayern. As a side note, Munich is a beautiful city and probably the best city for beer drinking in the world.

[NJReds]

Rooting for Inter ... purely selfish reasons. Currently Italy gets 4 Champions League spots and Germany gets 3. They use a formula to determine how many spots each league gets in the tournament. Italy and Germany are very close now, and if Bayern wins or it goes to penalties, Germany would get 4 spots next year ... Italy 3.

My team, Sampdoria, finished 4th in Serie A this year and their spot in Champions League hangs in the balance today.

[WMR]

Wouldn't a part of you almost be happier with them playing for the UEFA Championship? They'd stand a much better shot of winning it.

edit: That may not be the correct title... I'm talking about the OTHER club championship in Europe.

[WMR]

Hmm.. interesting. It used to be called the UEFA Cup (which is what I knew it as) but is now called 'Europa League.'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Europa_League

[NJReds]

Wouldn't a part of you almost be happier with them playing for the UEFA Championship? They'd stand a much better shot of winning it.

edit: That may not be the correct title... I'm talking about the OTHER club championship in Europe.

More prestige in the Champions League and ownership will be more likely to keep stars Pazzini, Cassano and Palombo if they're in the Champions League.

If you make it to the third round of the Champions League and lose at that point, you then move into the Europa League.

[Joseph]

There are too many leagues for me to even know whats going on.

EPL, UEFA, Champions, MLS

[Yachtzee]

Inter got away with some handballs in the first half. The first one was iffy, but Maicon's was pretty blatant. Can't believe they didn't catch that. Can't complain about Inter's goal though. Milito just got around his guy and got it in. Of course, now Inter appears to be in full catennachio, dropping 6 to the back line and barely pressing Bayern until they get just outside the box.

[reds1869]

There are too many leagues for me to even know whats going on.

EPL, UEFA, Champions, MLS

Yep, because baseball only has one league. ;)

[Yachtzee]

There are too many leagues for me to even know whats going on.

EPL, UEFA, Champions, MLS

That's the cool thing about international soccer. Instead of having an extensive playoff system for domestic leagues (except MLS, which makes allowances for American comfort with a playoff system), the top team during the regular season is the champ, no question about it. Then, depending on the strength of the league, the top 3 or 4 teams qualify for play in international cup tournaments. Would be the equivalent of MLB just naming the top regular season team as the champ and then having the World Series conducted as an international tournament where the division champs of the AL and NL go on to compete against teams from Japan, Korea, Mexico, the DR, Puerto Rico, and Venezuela during the following season. That would be the Champions League.

[Yachtzee]

Ouch, Bayern. Another Milito goal means Inter really has things under control now.

[reds1869]

Inter just took Bayern to school. That was pure dominance. I'm no fan of the Italian style of play, but that was quite impressive to watch.

[Yachtzee]

Inter just took Bayern to school. That was pure dominance. I'm no fan of the Italian style of play, but that was quite impressive to watch.

I wouldn't say they took them to school. Had Maicon been called for that handball and Bayern taken the first goal out of it, Inter would have been forced to move up the field to get that goal back. With Bayern's offense, that could have easily turned things into a 3-2 game with a lot of back and forth. Unfortunately for them, no handball call, Inter gets the first goal and crams their whole team into the back third of the field, sending long balls up to Milito and Sneijder. Bayern has to move everyone up, opening up the possibility that Milito and Sneijder could get through on a long counter and you get a 2-0 result. Even with all that, Bayern still got quite a few shots on goal through and, had fortune smiled upon them, might have been able to tie it up and even take the lead. But it was not to be. Give Bayern a goal or two before Inter scores their second and they could have dropped an extra man back to bottle up Milito to prevent those breakaways.

I would say what impressed me about Inter was that, other than Maicon's blatant handball and Pandev either flopping or fouling his way up and down the field, Inter played a rather clean game. Not saying that Inter is normally a dirty team, but often that style of play leads to a lot more diving and fouling as it is a part of the gamesmanship associated with that style developed in the Italian and Argentinian leagues. I suspect that the Italians will once again play this style in the World Cup, but if they play it the way Inter played today, it will be a lot more palatable than 2006. I will still always prefer the open, attacking style to the defensive "bunker and counter" mentality.

[Betterread]

I wouldn't say they took them to school. Had Maicon been called for that handball and Bayern taken the first goal out of it, Inter would have been forced to move up the field to get that goal back. With Bayern's offense, that could have easily turned things into a 3-2 game with a lot of back and forth. Unfortunately for them, no handball call, Inter gets the first goal and crams their whole team into the back third of the field, sending long balls up to Milito and Sneijder. Bayern has to move everyone up, opening up the possibility that Milito and Sneijder could get through on a long counter and you get a 2-0 result. Even with all that, Bayern still got quite a few shots on goal through and, had fortune smiled upon them, might have been able to tie it up and even take the lead. But it was not to be. Give Bayern a goal or two before Inter scores their second and they could have dropped an extra man back to bottle up Milito to prevent those breakaways.

I would say what impressed me about Inter was that, other than Maicon's blatant handball and Pandev either flopping or fouling his way up and down the field, Inter played a rather clean game. Not saying that Inter is normally a dirty team, but often that style of play leads to a lot more diving and fouling as it is a part of the gamesmanship associated with that style developed in the Italian and Argentinian leagues. I suspect that the Italians will once again play this style in the World Cup, but if they play it the way Inter played today, it will be a lot more palatable than 2006. I will still always prefer the open, attacking style to the defensive "bunker and counter" mentality.
If you define possession time as dominance then Bayern should have won. If you define dominance as the greater number of quality goal opportunities, then Inter was clearly prominent. Sneider and Eto'o put one on goalie chances right at the keeper. Inter could have easily scored 4 or 5. Bayern had only Muller's chance at the beginnning of the second half. That was the only opening Bayern had in the Inter final third. Inter's defense was locked and organized and they played Great. Bayern's center was ripped open about five times - too many for a team of Inter's quality.
As for your unimaginative stereotype of Inter's style of play: the first goal was scored when the Goalie took a goal kick - it was no counter. Milito just outworked the Bayern guy to win the header in the air and then turned and ran around him to receive the give and go from Sneijner and then tucked in a clinical finish. Nothing amazing, just more desire and concentration. Inter totally outplayed, outstrategized and outclassed the class of Germany (well, not really a German team - the stars are from Holland, Croatia, France, etc.).

[Yachtzee]

If you define possession time as dominance then Bayern should have won. If you define dominance as the greater number of quality goal opportunities, then Inter was clearly prominent. Sneider and Eto'o put one on goalie chances right at the keeper. Inter could have easily scored 4 or 5. Bayern had only Muller's chance at the beginnning of the second half. That was the only opening Bayern had in the Inter final third. Inter's defense was locked and organized and they played Great. Bayern's center was ripped open about five times - too many for a team of Inter's quality.
As for your unimaginative stereotype of Inter's style of play: the first goal was scored when the Goalie took a goal kick - it was no counter. Milito just outworked the Bayern guy to win the header in the air and then turned and ran around him to receive the give and go from Sneijner and then tucked in a clinical finish. Nothing amazing, just more desire and concentration. Inter totally outplayed, outstrategized and outclassed the class of Germany (well, not really a German team - the stars are from Holland, Croatia, France, etc.).

Never said Milito's first goal was a counter, and I agree that Milito worked his butt off to get around his marker to receive the return pass from Sneijder for the goal. I said that after Milito's first goal, Inter was content to drop the vast majority of their team into their back third of the field and play the rest of the game content with either a 1-0 finish or maybe pick up another goal on a counter.

If my so-called stereotype of Inter's style after the first goal was scored was unimaginative, then maybe it's because bunkering down into a catenacchio after one goal is unimaginative. After Milito scored, I counted 6 men on Inter's back line for the rest of the first half, with three others sitting 10 yards in front of them. Second half it was more 4 in front, 5 in back, but still for the most part hanging very close to the top of their own penalty area, with the exception of corners.

[Cedric]

I wouldn't say they took them to school. Had Maicon been called for that handball and Bayern taken the first goal out of it, Inter would have been forced to move up the field to get that goal back. With Bayern's offense, that could have easily turned things into a 3-2 game with a lot of back and forth. Unfortunately for them, no handball call, Inter gets the first goal and crams their whole team into the back third of the field, sending long balls up to Milito and Sneijder. Bayern has to move everyone up, opening up the possibility that Milito and Sneijder could get through on a long counter and you get a 2-0 result. Even with all that, Bayern still got quite a few shots on goal through and, had fortune smiled upon them, might have been able to tie it up and even take the lead. But it was not to be. Give Bayern a goal or two before Inter scores their second and they could have dropped an extra man back to bottle up Milito to prevent those breakaways.

I would say what impressed me about Inter was that, other than Maicon's blatant handball and Pandev either flopping or fouling his way up and down the field, Inter played a rather clean game. Not saying that Inter is normally a dirty team, but often that style of play leads to a lot more diving and fouling as it is a part of the gamesmanship associated with that style developed in the Italian and Argentinian leagues. I suspect that the Italians will once again play this style in the World Cup, but if they play it the way Inter played today, it will be a lot more palatable than 2006. I will still always prefer the open, attacking style to the defensive "bunker and counter" mentality.

Utter dominance. People just don't respect the Italian style of soccer. When they have another great WC people will still say they are "lucky".

It's not luck. It's a great counter attacking style that wins against the best.

A weakened Italian team only got beat in EURO 08 by Spain because of PK's.

[Betterread]

Never said Milito's first goal was a counter, and I agree that Milito worked his butt off to get around his marker to receive the return pass from Sneijder for the goal. I said that after Milito's first goal, Inter was content to drop the vast majority of their team into their back third of the field and play the rest of the game content with either a 1-0 finish or maybe pick up another goal on a counter.

If my so-called stereotype of Inter's style after the first goal was scored was unimaginative, then maybe it's because bunkering down into a catenacchio after one goal is unimaginative. After Milito scored, I counted 6 men on Inter's back line for the rest of the first half, with three others sitting 10 yards in front of them. Second half it was more 4 in front, 5 in back, but still for the most part hanging very close to the top of their own penalty area, with the exception of corners.

I follow Italian league play and Inter plays 5 men back pretty regularly (cambiasso joins the back four). Not 6 or 9 or whatever your fluctuating claim is. They play that way because they have to: other than Sneijner, their midfield is unathletic and not technically gifted, but they do play a good tactical style of football (ie team oriented). And as for your claim that Inter's style of play will be emulated by Italy: FYI there are no Italians in the Inter midfield or defense. Actually of the back 5, 2 are argentines and 2 are brazilians with one romanian. And the coach is Portugese. Italy wishes it could defend this well. And for that matter, the US national team doesn't even know what to do to defend that well, much less execute it.
I have to admit that they are the class of Italy and Europe for 2010 (leaving Barca out - does anyone think there was any way they would play for the Champs league in the Bernabeu? )and this will enable them to spend even more money to improve their midfield but I hate Inter so I will no longer continue to praise them.

[Yachtzee]

1. Inter Milan has been playing the catenaccio or some revised form of it, with various revisions to account for changes in offensive tactics over the years, off and on since the 1960s. It's probably to the point where this style of play is institutionalized at Inter, so Mourinho has hardly brought in an innovative style of play. I feel I was giving a fair assessment of the game in that I said Inter played a rather tactically clean version of it. Notice I have intentionally avoided using the name that a lot of soccer commentators have used for it, antifutbol, as I feel that that style implies a great deal of thuggery and dirty tactics that I didn't see. Maybe some would feel Chivu and Pandev were playing dirty, but I didn't see anything that necessarily crossed line from a standard tough challenge to thuggery.

2. Just because Inter has a Portuguese coach and a bunch of foreign players on their team doesn't mean Italy isn't going to use the same tactics at the World Cup. Italy probably will use the same tactics at the World Cup because it's the style Lippi has favored in the past. The Italian National Team has used this style under previous coaches as well going back for decades, and I would hazard a guess that the reason Italy uses this style of play is because it is preferred by the powers that be when they make their coaching decisions.

3. Betterread, your point about Inter having a foreign coach and foreign players just proves the point I've tried to make in threads about the previous World Cup and the Confederations Cup. You keep trying to make it sound like I have some kind of beef against Italians in general because I don't like the style of soccer played by their national team and a number of teams in Serie A. It's nothing of the sort. I don't think the Italian public as a whole really favors one style over another. They just want the teams they follow to win. I'm sure if Inter and the Italian National Team went with a more balanced, flowing attack, soccer fans in Italy would be all for it as long as it wins games. The problem is that strongly defense oriented play, which can often devolve into negative play, is the style preferred by the powers that be for the Italian Federation and many of the teams in Serie A. They choose coaches and players that fit that model.

4. Inter spends a ton of money on players. They could have easily built a more athletic and technically gifted midfield in order to have a more balanced style of play. So did the make-up of the team choose the style or did the preferred style choose the team?

5. Inter played a great game, but they also had a good deal of luck involved. Had Maicon been called for the handball, Bayern gets a PK and a great chance at getting the first goal. Had Bayern gotten the first goal, it could have been a vastly different game, with Inter forced to push their guys up to try for the equalizer and exposing their weaknesses. Now they still could have won, because Bayern still would have that soft center in the defense that Milito, Sneijder and Eto'o could exploit, but it might have been a 3-2 game going either way than the 2-0 result we saw.

[NJReds]

I would say what impressed me about Inter was that, other than Maicon's blatant handball and Pandev either flopping or fouling his way up and down the field, Inter played a rather clean game. Not saying that Inter is normally a dirty team, but often that style of play leads to a lot more diving and fouling as it is a part of the gamesmanship associated with that style developed in the Italian and Argentinian leagues. I suspect that the Italians will once again play this style in the World Cup, but if they play it the way Inter played today, it will be a lot more palatable than 2006. I will still always prefer the open, attacking style to the defensive "bunker and counter" mentality.

Bayern got a taste of their own medicine for how they knocked Fiorentina out of the Champions League. They can flop and foul, too.

Inter has players on the backline that support the attack. Maicon is more forward than defender.

[reds1869]

Ah, an old classic seems relevant here.

YouTube - Italia Trener (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccDyp2aRRCg)

[Betterread]

1. Inter Milan has been playing the catenaccio or some revised form of it, with various revisions to account for changes in offensive tactics over the years, off and on since the 1960s. It's probably to the point where this style of play is institutionalized at Inter, so Mourinho has hardly brought in an innovative style of play. I feel I was giving a fair assessment of the game in that I said Inter played a rather tactically clean version of it. Notice I have intentionally avoided using the name that a lot of soccer commentators have used for it, antifutbol, as I feel that that style implies a great deal of thuggery and dirty tactics that I didn't see. Maybe some would feel Chivu and Pandev were playing dirty, but I didn't see anything that necessarily crossed line from a standard tough challenge to thuggery.

2. Just because Inter has a Portuguese coach and a bunch of foreign players on their team doesn't mean Italy isn't going to use the same tactics at the World Cup. Italy probably will use the same tactics at the World Cup because it's the style Lippi has favored in the past. The Italian National Team has used this style under previous coaches as well going back for decades, and I would hazard a guess that the reason Italy uses this style of play is because it is preferred by the powers that be when they make their coaching decisions.

3. Betterread, your point about Inter having a foreign coach and foreign players just proves the point I've tried to make in threads about the previous World Cup and the Confederations Cup. You keep trying to make it sound like I have some kind of beef against Italians in general because I don't like the style of soccer played by their national team and a number of teams in Serie A. It's nothing of the sort. I don't think the Italian public as a whole really favors one style over another. They just want the teams they follow to win. I'm sure if Inter and the Italian National Team went with a more balanced, flowing attack, soccer fans in Italy would be all for it as long as it wins games. The problem is that strongly defense oriented play, which can often devolve into negative play, is the style preferred by the powers that be for the Italian Federation and many of the teams in Serie A. They choose coaches and players that fit that model.

4. Inter spends a ton of money on players. They could have easily built a more athletic and technically gifted midfield in order to have a more balanced style of play. So did the make-up of the team choose the style or did the preferred style choose the team?

5. Inter played a great game, but they also had a good deal of luck involved. Had Maicon been called for the handball, Bayern gets a PK and a great chance at getting the first goal. Had Bayern gotten the first goal, it could have been a vastly different game, with Inter forced to push their guys up to try for the equalizer and exposing their weaknesses. Now they still could have won, because Bayern still would have that soft center in the defense that Milito, Sneijder and Eto'o could exploit, but it might have been a 3-2 game going either way than the 2-0 result we saw.

I guess I watch too much Italian football to denigrate the catenaccio/sit back and look for counter attack type of football. My favorite team is Roma. For years previous to Ranieri's arrival they played a beautiful flowing passing game with one touches and overlaps all over. But they always finished 2nd. They never really threatend Inter or Juve for the scudetto. This year they played the catenaccion style: always 10 yards from defense back line to midfield line/one forward style and they were really successful. If not for Inter's quality they would have had the title. Look at AC Milan this year - they play more open football - they had a down year because their defense was left open too often.
This style of play works. I now critique the various versions that different teams use. Look at how Man U won the Champs league - they closed the gaps and played differently from their usual open style. When they went back to their typical style of play this year - they gave up too many goals and they were eliminated.
Everyone likes pretty football regardless of who wins. Unless it is their team playing. Then you want the positive result. It doesn't matter how pretty it looks. Demanding that teams play a certain way is how Arsene Wenger acts. He's a great coach and technical teacher, but as a person he's an arrogant twat who insists on a certain asthetic style even if his team can't consistently provide it.
Oh and the defensive style will be utilized heavily in the WC, have no illusions about that. Too much is at stake to risk leaving holes in your defense.