UEFA Champions League 2021/22 SF - Man City v Real Madrid

BarcaLearning wrote:Why the blue covering the front section seats?

That’s where we put Barca fans!

Unbelievable mentality really. No where near the prime madrid yet the mentality is there , the unreal refuse to die shear will power of a dying man.

Once again true football prevails. All is well in the world.

Fraud hipster. Once again Carlo gets the better of you. You may win some battles but you will ultimately never win the war.

Carlo has had some catastrophic starting lineups and tactics but this game he was king. Guardiola failed with his tactics on the other hand.

Congratulations to Madrid for a well deserved victory. Clutch performance

Let's not forget Madrid had 0 shots on target until the 90th minute

Camivinga looks great already, so Real also has that MF long term replacement already... plss dont get Mbappe plsss... cant stand Real domination if not already gonna happen...

What a game.

Pep really can't do it without Messi!

Why did he take off KDB?

Nishankly wrote:Why did he take off KDB?

He looked super tired. He doesn't have the legs anymore it seems.

The subs were very sensible at the time.

De Bruyne kept giving the ball away and Gundogan brought a lot more control. Grealish could hold on to the ball and win fouls while Fernandinho was trusted to help see the game out.

They had their 2 chances with Grealish to kill the game, but they couldn’t. Rodrigo scored two goals from two shots. Fine margins.

The issue is when you take out De Bruyne you lose your only clutch player. There was zero penetration when he went off the pitch. They couldn’t create anything in ET.

futbol_bill wrote:

BarcaLearning wrote:Why the blue covering the front section seats?

That’s where we put Barca fans!

Casciavit wrote:Where does this semi finals rank in all time ones?

Not number one for sure.

i really wanted villareal to do something so we thrash them in the final...oh well, i guess it's got to be liverpool

The difference is that Madrid missed three easy chances in the first half, and two good ones before City's first.

In a sense, Carlo's grandpa midfield work until it didn't, bit the margins didn't favor Madrid at first (City's goal came in from one of the lesser chances in the game), until it suddenly favored them all at once as City looked like deers in front of a headlight.

Lord Spencer wrote:The difference is that Madrid missed three easy chances in the first half, and two good ones before City's first.

Lmao these will always be ignored to push the narrative that City were extremely unlucky and lost by fluke.

Also please let us not forget the contributions of Yaya Toure. How many CL upsets will it take us to give the respect to African black magic that it deserves.

M99 wrote:

Lord Spencer wrote:The difference is that Madrid missed three easy chances in the first half, and two good ones before City's first.

Lmao these will always be ignored to push the narrative that City were extremely unlucky and lost by fluke.

Exactly. Any report you read about the match will have you think that Madrid was on the ropes, barely threatening, until the 90'th minute, when in fact they have been the better team in the first half (while uncharacteristically sloppy with their chances), and conceded a sublime goal by Mahrez.

It honestly was a more even tie than against PSG or Chelsea. (They really were weakest against PSG, only playing well for 30/180 minutes).

halamadrid2 wrote:Camavinga is soooooooo good. Imagine if it was Pedri doing this at this stage

Is this a trend or something? Swear I've seen this opinion already

Camavinga gets a ton of hype and is rated very highly. Nonsense.

Madrid missed one sitter in the first half (Vini).  That's it.  The other two were by NO MEANS easy chances.  That's a gross mischaracterization.

On balance, we should have scored 1 and City should scored 2-3.  But leaving the game at 1-0 was allowing the opportunity for miracle.

But even if you believe in miracles... getting 2 90+ min goals to then win it in extra time was beyond improbable.

And I want people to understand something very clearly...  we were dominated in both games with Kroos and Modric playing.  They were outmatched.  Only when we shuffled our midfield did we create true chances from play.

M99 wrote:

Lord Spencer wrote:The difference is that Madrid missed three easy chances in the first half, and two good ones before City's first.

Lmao these will always be ignored to push the narrative that City were extremely unlucky and lost by fluke.

How do you concede three goals inside five minutes by "fluke". It was a game between BTS loving, nose ring wearing, gender fluid emo bois versus gun slinging, horse riding, tobacco chewing cowboys. And guess who held their own when it mattered the most.

M99 wrote:

Lord Spencer wrote:The difference is that Madrid missed three easy chances in the first half, and two good ones before City's first.

Lmao these will always be ignored to push the narrative that City were extremely unlucky and lost by fluke.

I mean, Madrid had some chances but they weren't clear-cut ones....and City looked in control.

But then, City is dead mentally. They didnt look threatening in extra time at all. Having that winner mentality can tip you over the edge even if you underperform.

It's ridiculous that madrid do it again in dying minutes, though.

sportsczy wrote:Madrid missed one sitter in the first half (Vini).  That's it.  The other two were by NO MEANS easy chances.  That's a gross mischaracterization.

On balance, we should have scored 1 and City should scored 2-3. But leaving the game a 1-0 was allowing the opportunity for miracle.

But even if you believe in miracles... getting 2 90+ min goals to then win it in extra was beyond improbable.

And I want people to understand something very clearly... we were dominated in both games with Kroos and Modric playing. They were outmatched. Only when we shuffled out midfield did we create true chances from play.

Benzema had a free header at goal in the first half and sliced badly at another Valverde cut-back. Two chances he usually scores. He even missed some good chances when he was offside, so this is one of his poorer matches in recent memory (still a great performance)

The second half had Modric miss-controlling a pass from a great shooting area. That's not counting the times Vini was in a good position to shoot or pass but was let down by poor decision-making.

Your midfield wasn't dominated by City in the first half of this match and only started losing steam in the second half. The difference after the subs is that you converted the chances the team created instead of wasting them. In fact, Madrid had a higher XG than City this game, and didn't lose as much in possession for the majority of the match.

Myesyats wrote:

M99 wrote:

Lord Spencer wrote:The difference is that Madrid missed three easy chances in the first half, and two good ones before City's first.

Lmao these will always be ignored to push the narrative that City were extremely unlucky and lost by fluke.

I mean, Madrid had some chances but they weren't clear-cut ones....and City looked in control.

But then, City is dead mentally. They didnt look threatening in extra time at all. Having that winner mentality can tip you over the edge even if you underperform.

It's ridiculous that madrid do it again in dying minutes, though.

The XG was 2.6 for Madrid against 1.2 for City. Madrid should have scored before City, but didn't look like scoring after City's goal until the end.

The biggest thing being ignored is Madrid should have had a second penalty...Cancelo handled the ball in City's box.

Casemiro should have had yellows, but so should have Zinchenko. Ref was pretty poor throughout the match. Did not have the balls to send of Laporte at the start of the match.