Liverpool or Chelsea

Gaz · Post by **Gaz** » Tue May 03, 2005 7:42 pm

Just over an hour away from kick off, who do you want to win?

I've gotta go for Chelsea

Georgie_2690 · Post by **Georgie_2690** » Tue May 03, 2005 7:46 pm

I think this is Chelseas year!! Like it is ours

Rach · Post by **Rach** » Tue May 03, 2005 7:47 pm

CHELSEA

Post by **Dazza** » Tue May 03, 2005 8:03 pm

Chelsea Please!

Dont mind Liverpool going through if PSV win, but that aint gonna happen!

Phil · Post by **Phil** » Tue May 03, 2005 8:05 pm

Liverpool.

Jus · Post by **Jus** » Tue May 03, 2005 8:06 pm

Chelsea. They deserve it more after having a much harder path to the final and don't send you to sleep like Liverpool!

lunchbox · Post by **lunchbox** » Tue May 03, 2005 8:12 pm

liverpool please 2-1 penalty to win it so muriniho can cry about cheating
again...again...and again!

Mark18 · Post by **Mark18** » Tue May 03, 2005 8:16 pm

chelsea
mainly cause i think they have the better chance of beatin ac milan if ac do get through , which they should

Diddy Dubz · Post by **Diddy Dubz** » Tue May 03, 2005 8:26 pm

Chelsea all the way.

toby · Post by **toby** » Tue May 03, 2005 8:28 pm

Chelsea, purely because it'll wind up both Manchester United fans AND Arsenal fans...now who wouldn't want that?

Ferguson = 1 Champions League win in 18 seasons
Wenger = 1 Champions League Quarter Final in 8 or 9 seasons

Mourinho = 1 Champions League win in 1 season?

Would be funny as fook!

Also Chelsea are the only team left in who've not won the trophy before and of course Chelsea play in blue!

COME ON YOU BLUES!

(Having said all that if Liverpool win I don't mind either really, in fact as long as Milan don't win the trophy I don't mind!)

Fully · Post by **Fully** » Tue May 03, 2005 9:27 pm

Liverpool....im sorry but dont agree with teams buying trophies. Liverpool have worked their socks off to get this far, and their effort alone should be rewarded with a place in the final.

Yeah ok Chelsea have done well to beat teams like Bayern, but they should and did beat them with the quality they have sustained in the squad.

Compare that to Liverpools squad, and they did well to beat Juve.

Tim · Post by **Tim** » Tue May 03, 2005 9:35 pm

Cheski!!!!

I dont like Liverpool, met 2 may cocky Liverpool supporters, plus i dont like the fact that they score like 11 goals past us in 1 season!

toby · Post by **toby** » Tue May 03, 2005 9:37 pm

Fully wrote:Liverpool....im sorry but dont agree with teams buying trophies.

Sorry I must have missed all the evidence of Chelsea bribing teams and referees.

To say Chelsea "bought" trophies is to only accept half the truth.

Yes they've spent a lot of money but no more than Manchester United have, albeit in a shorter period of time.

They've no more bought trophies than Manchester United have, if it was all down to money then Ranieri would've won more than he did.

If money was everything then why did it take Manchester United 26 years to win the title? They were by far and away the richest team even then.

Real Madrid find it hard to "buy trophies".

I don't think any other manager has achieved as much as Mourinho in as short a space of time, Arsenal were UNBEATEN all last season, Manchester United spent Ã‚Â£20 million plus on a teenager (to go along side Ã‚Â£15million Ruud, Ã‚Â£14million Saha and Ã‚Â£6million Smith) and he came in and didn't just win the title but won it at a canter!

Look at all of Chelsea's players and tell me one who isn't a better player under Mourinho than he was before?

Lampard before Jose = England squad player
After Jose = Possibly the best midfielder in Europe

Joe Cole B.J = waster
Joe Cole A.J = possible answer to England's left wing problem!

Fully · Post by **Fully** » Tue May 03, 2005 9:52 pm

Good points Toby but on contrast think of all the youth players that are good players and will never get a chance cos Chelsea buy players for the sake of it.

e.g Forssell

Also i never said they had "bribed" the refs i meant they have bought the best players in Europe with money neither Man United or Arsenal can compete with. Since when have Man United or Arsenal had over a Billion pounds transfer kitty to spend?

Tim · Post by **Tim** » Tue May 03, 2005 9:57 pm

Man Utd aint that short for cash Fully, if they wanted, im sure they could put a healthy transfer bid in!

Hacaman · Post by **Hacaman** » Tue May 03, 2005 9:58 pm

Fully wrote:Good points Toby but on contrast think of all the youth players that are good players and will never get a chance cos Chelsea buy players for the sake of it.

e.g Forssell

Also i never said they had "bribed" the refs i meant they have bought the best players in Europe with money neither Man United or Arsenal can compete with. Since when have Man United or Arsenal had over a Billion pounds transfer kitty to spend?

Man U spent Ã‚Â£60m in a season a year or two back....Chelsea have spent Ã‚Â£200m in 2 seasons, Arsenal...well Aseanl never spend fook all but will be able to compete a bit more when in their new home

Fully · Post by **Fully** » Tue May 03, 2005 10:08 pm

tim_itfc wrote:Man Utd aint that short for cash Fully, if they wanted, im sure they could put a healthy transfer bid in!

Healthy, but if Chelsea wanted to buy the same player...Man U would lose out because chelsea have the money to put a higher bid in. Therefore it makes the Premiership/Europe unfair.