brady
Active Member
yes the treble was a possibility but only if you have the luck as united proved in '99. no one will convince me that they were the best team that year in england, least of all europe. bergkamp's penalty miss, two fluky goals in the champions league final... yes we had our share of luck this year as well but it ran out at the wrong time.
first let's deal with the obvious criticisms and get the arguments out of the way. should wenger have started henry? i think he was right to rest henry as he has played a huge number of games. frankly if we had to choose one of the three competitions to sacrifice, it would be the cup. so henry sitting out this one was not a wrong decision. in any case, the team played well enough (before they scored any way) and just did not take its chances. it was the same last week where we were clearly the better team and created more chances. the argument that henry should have started and get a rest only when we had secured the game is an arrogant view.
did henry come on too late? i thought the team played better before he came on, and that reyes had a bigger impact when he came on. i thought reyes should have started. that we have now lost him for a few games is really unfortunate. he has settled well and is beginning to look really dangerous. aliadiere did not have a good game. not surprising really when he has not featured in recent games.
this was always going to be a close game and it was vital not to concede. in the end, it was kind of a soft goal to give away. scholes, is a master predator (though he is often overlooked as a nasty piece of business with his tackling - see reyes yesterday and last season's FA cup) and should have been tracked in those situations. perhaps it was mental fatigue. apart from that united hardly had a shout and they just sat back.
we lacked our usual patience once we went behind. there were too many hurried passes, too many balls into the same channels (to feet in the middle), and generally a lack of bite in attack because we did not have the width. lauren and clichy (who is I think a better defender than cole but not as adventurous in attack) did not get up often enough because of giggs and ronaldo.
in the end, notwithstanding what i said at the beginning about sacrificing the cup, it was a big game because a win would have given us a tremendous lift for the next 8 days. the chelsea game is beginning to look ominous and we cannot really afford any more injuries. beating chelsea will allow us to put the champions league on the backburner for a while at least, and get back to business in the league. That is still the main priority.
first let's deal with the obvious criticisms and get the arguments out of the way. should wenger have started henry? i think he was right to rest henry as he has played a huge number of games. frankly if we had to choose one of the three competitions to sacrifice, it would be the cup. so henry sitting out this one was not a wrong decision. in any case, the team played well enough (before they scored any way) and just did not take its chances. it was the same last week where we were clearly the better team and created more chances. the argument that henry should have started and get a rest only when we had secured the game is an arrogant view.
did henry come on too late? i thought the team played better before he came on, and that reyes had a bigger impact when he came on. i thought reyes should have started. that we have now lost him for a few games is really unfortunate. he has settled well and is beginning to look really dangerous. aliadiere did not have a good game. not surprising really when he has not featured in recent games.
this was always going to be a close game and it was vital not to concede. in the end, it was kind of a soft goal to give away. scholes, is a master predator (though he is often overlooked as a nasty piece of business with his tackling - see reyes yesterday and last season's FA cup) and should have been tracked in those situations. perhaps it was mental fatigue. apart from that united hardly had a shout and they just sat back.
we lacked our usual patience once we went behind. there were too many hurried passes, too many balls into the same channels (to feet in the middle), and generally a lack of bite in attack because we did not have the width. lauren and clichy (who is I think a better defender than cole but not as adventurous in attack) did not get up often enough because of giggs and ronaldo.
in the end, notwithstanding what i said at the beginning about sacrificing the cup, it was a big game because a win would have given us a tremendous lift for the next 8 days. the chelsea game is beginning to look ominous and we cannot really afford any more injuries. beating chelsea will allow us to put the champions league on the backburner for a while at least, and get back to business in the league. That is still the main priority.
