cosmicway

Balotelli was great guns in Ukraine the year before. I saw a little of AC Milan this season and they were a sad spectacle to watch. But maybe the team does n't do justice to the player.

Do you know in the old days we used to have Rachel Welch season ticket holder ? Eva is the new generation.

There is an ethnic division in Ukraine, like in Jugoslavia and maybe more bitter. Crimeans are Russians really. It was only in 1954 that Krustchev named it as Ukrainian territory (like Tito he did n't care about such things - all the Soviet territories belonged to him). Making a revolution over a commerce deal with the EU sounds crazy to me. What their now exiled president was doing some years ago, spraying acid over his opponent's face is also crazy. I don't sympathize at all with either of the two Ukrainian sides.

First Irihman: Did you go to the doctor? Second Irishman: Yes. First Irishman: And what did he say? Second Irishman: "30 pounds please" First Irishman: No you silly ... I mean what did you have? Second Irishman: 20 pounds. First Irishman: Boy, you are stupid, I mean what was your problem? Second Irishman: Err, I was short of 10 pounds.

Now that I remember I was Chelsea before that, because there was the final against Spurs in 1967 and I recall being sad because we lost 2-1. However 1969-70 was the first year we had tv. The two clashes between Chelsea and Leeds were among the first matches broadcasted in Greece, through network Eurovision and made great impression. But the first ever was for the intercontinental cup, AC Milan v Estudiantes of Argentina in October 1969. Back in 1966 the world cup final England v. Germany was broadcasted from video the next day - I 'm told.

That's a very interesting topic. I support technology - it will make things 80% fair from what is now 50-50. The video cameras can be used to assist the referee and it is a question of establishing a hierarchy in the decision making process that does not interrupt the flow of the game. That is n't so difficult as it sounds. First if the play has stopped then the question of flow does n't exist. A throw-in given to the wrong team can be corrected, a goal kick that should have been a corner kick can be corrected and so on. If the ball is played then it is a question of speed. If the video ref decides in time then he overrides the referee in the pitch. If he works out it was a penalty 20 minutes later then of course it's dead and gone. There are cases where nothing can be done. If a player has been flagged off side and he was n't off side, then it's over. Some diabolical things happen now, causing mistrust and sometimes violence. An extreme case was last year's cup final of Greece, Olympiakos Piraeus v. Asteras of Tripoli. See the video below. What happens here is the defender wearing the no 2 uses his elbow to stop the ball that was going in. That penalty was not given, but a corner was given instead ! Well, hundreds of incidents like that happen but the crazy thing is this: The referee and fourth referee have conference for two minutes. During this time tv shows two replays, speaker and guest speakers talk to each other "John that's a penalty ain't it", "yeah, Jim clear case of handballing" and then the two refs decide it was not ! A small national scandal errupts as a result ! There is an explanation as latter analysis showed. The referee's view was obstructed by players. The fourth referee's view was also obstructed by the post (defender's arm was hidden by the post where the fourth referee stood). Both have no right to consult the tv, even if they wanted to. So that was it !But it proves 100% my point. The introduction of video refereeing is a must.

Sh*t happens. Looked into my account now and instead of 32 euros I found 12. Instead of selecting "Panathinaikos-away-win-10 euros at 3.20" I selected "goals under 3.5-price 1.20" ! Can't be the bookie's fault - it was my fault.

City had an attacking crescento early in the second half that paid off. The 1-1 was a Seaman's dance though, then a Nasri goal out of the anthology of football. Imho City is past it now.

Panathinaikos was 10.0 before the match. I saw a little and they looked dangerous but I did n't dare make the move. After the 0-1 it remained a decent 3.00 so I cashed in. It's the so called "eternal derby" and you can't dismiss any of the two teams so easily. I believe live betting is better. If you know football some things are obvious. Chelsea v. Liverpool - backed Chelsea when it was 0-1. Chelsea v. Southampton - backed after the 1-1 - a virtual certainty. Luck is always a factor of course. Here is an example of bad luck: Southampton v. Arsenal. Backed Arsenal after they equalised 1-1. Bookie accepts bet seconds before Arsenal scores a second. Then Southampton equalises with a 100 yard pass on target (same goal as when they scored at the Bridge against us !). Then a sending off and Arsenal reduced to 10 men ! You should know the teams though. I bet the other day Auxerre to beat bottom of the table Bastia. It was Bastia v Auxerre but the stadium was empy (I don't know - some punishment). But those Auxerre men were useless - grannies - could n't string two passes together. Ended 0-0.

Hi, I 'm a relatively new member. Blues fan from old times. Since the 1970 Chelsea-Leeds cup double cup final in fact. I liked Chelsea because in those days they were playing imaginative football in addition to possessing the traditional British strength and stamina (today also).

Ooops, missed it - maybe the slow loading we had. I make thorough study now and I look forward to opinions.

In their two recent defeats they were terrible (Almeria-Ossasuna). Against Barca also very boring 0-0. They beat AC Milan 1-0 away but Milan are a shadow of a team. I 'm not greatly impressed - ran out of steam maybe.

Mods. start a world cup thread. I think it's very interesting and it's about the right time.

Atletico 2-1 at half time against Real. Real scored first then Atletico scored twice.

There is the following strange pattern: When two teams play against each other twice in a short space of time the winners of the first match are the losers of the second match. Is that true you think or just my memory playing tricks ? This will be the case with City and Sunderland.

siege of tobruk

De Michelis goes scotland yard investigates with the ref

2-1 Nasri

1-1 - goalie was called to the phone

City one up (Borini). It's about 4.50 now the Sunderland win - don't know what it was before the match. Profit!

Chelsea's first European trophy, in Athens, in May 1971. The result was 2-1. This match was a replay, as the two teams drew 1-1 and there were no penalty shootouts. The video of the first match is not in youtube, but we were ahead 1-0 (Osgood) and Zocco equalised in the dying seconds of extra time. There was a guard of evzons to accompany the winners and they had already taken positions when Zocco equalised. The Greek crowd supported Chelsea in both matches. Some say this happened so the English fans support Panathinaikos against Ajax at Wembley but it's not true because Panathinaikos was disliked at the time and the terraces were going to be 100% Madrid on such grounds.

I liked the Spurs in some matches. Then City smashed them 5-0 when they were expected to do well. At Dnipro they were joking and nearly paid the price. Why were those Ukrainians rated so so low ? I think they had a decent team. In the first match we were denied by the referee if I remember correctly.

It's my first time. Used to sub to some Chelsea forums but there was no crowd - one post per year. So I had never had the chance to write about it and I truly believe it's a Guiness. I did n't know some Chelsea fans just don't want to hear the story.

Liverpool 2-0 up - we have company.

Karagounis almost scored the equalizer.