Did Chelsea get robbed of the Champions League final?
By tomysole
@tomysole (457)
United States
6 responses
@squeezeme (135)
• Italy
10 May 09
The refree had a terrible match for sure.
It's not like football fans are always blaming the refree as someone says. It is that such a high level match can't be affected from refree's errors in this way. Maybe Chelsea would have lost anyway, but the point is that the match and the players attitude towards it was too compromised by what happened, and it was clearly impossible that Chelsea, and I dare say the whole match, could express all its potential.
I think is time to make some changes in the rules. A tv refree (as they have in rugby for istance) could avoid many of the most common refree errors and make football a better and fairer sport.
@gunagohan (3414)
• India
10 May 09
tv referee????its all a 90 minutes game...if u wanna use a tv referee then thats all...no use of the 90 minutes...for injuries and fouls they willextend a maximum of 6 minutes (90+6)..
u see there is no pausing in the time of 90 minutes it will roll on...its not like other games (cricket -third umpire, tennis-referral)
@squeezeme (135)
• Italy
10 May 09
If the situation is really critical for the refree, would it be so bad to stop have an objective point of view supported by video proofs? I think that the timing could be stopped in case the refree need the tv proof, so no one would lose precious time.
I have to say that I'm always suprised to see a lot of bitter refusals on this proposal even when something like that is debated at high levels of football management like FIFA. That makes me think that in the end even the refree is a part of the game.
Football is maybe the one and only sport where the refree is an important variable of the match, and maybe it is just meant to be like that.
After all, what would the day-after be like if the refree was perfect?
@Boffle (123)
•
12 May 09
Well, the ref had a really terrible game, and there's no doubt that at least some of those penalty appeals should have been upheld. But I can't help thinking that Chelsea had enough chances themselves to score in open play. If they'd taken just one of their opportunities, the incompetence of the officials would have been irrelevant because they would have been on their way to Rome. Surely the real reason that Drogba was so incensed at the end was because he knew that he had had plenty of chances to put the tie beyond doubt - he missed those chances and so was looking for someone else to blame.
So I do think they were robbed - but I don't think it was deliberate: I don't believe the conspiracy theorists who think that UEFA didn't want two English teams in the final. It's just that the officials were useless and Chelsea missed the chances they had.
@rolento (227)
• Spain
15 May 09
the refferee was very crappy, thats right, but if the chlesea players were so dumb that with 1 player more because the abidal's red card because anelka fell alone and tried to defend the 1-0 so that's what happen, you can go to the trash on the last second. another thing, chelsea made lots of dangerous fouls that the refferee didn't see on the 2matches, oh, and don't forget the penalty to henry, and going to london with 1-0 instead of 0-0 makes a great diference.
@sidharth29 (32)
• India
10 May 09
well it was really unfair for chelsea. i wouldn't rule out a conspiracy to avoid another Manu - Chelsea final. If i was in ballack's position i would have hit the referee. how many wrong decisions can a referee make in a game????? i was really disappointed.
@gunagohan (3414)
• India
10 May 09
pique was unintentionall in his hand ball...it was not his mistake to hand the ball...so this is the only thing ..others are all equally shared..
u cant blame the referee...he is very gentle...rather he made a mistake by sending a barca player out by red card..that was very intentionall..many people wont see that...they will see only this, did u notice how abusive language did drogba use to the referee after the final whistle...
@xingxingsky (176)
• China
12 May 09
Yes, they got robbed. The terrible referee destroyed this high-level match, also destroyed Chelsea. Although I like Bacelona more, I believe Chelsea should win this game. There were at least two or three penalties ignored by the referee. I understand the fury of team player or fans. I hope the similar scene never happens in final match.
@GioBuffon (119)
• Canada
18 May 09
I believe, they've been robbed even though Barcelona deserved the win. They had a lot of possession and a brilliant goal at the end. Chelsea should've had at least one or two penalty shots.