years ago, even as a diehard of manchester united, i had believed that for all the domination in the english league, we were inferior to some of the continental heavyweights. there were the barcelona, borussia dortmund, juventus, monaco, real madrid, benfica, bayer leverkusen, and ac milan.
in recent years, though, ive changed, convinced that man utd have progressed so much that pound-for-pound, technically, and tactically we can go into any match confident. im no longer afraid when we are drawn a top european opposition.
the last humbling moment was probably the 3-0 semi final defeat to ac milan, a footballing lesson by kaka & co. on this night, barcelona made man utd ordinary again.
for me, it's alright to lose to arsenal, chelsea, liverpool or middlesbrough. these are english teams, we play them at least twice a year, we know each other inside out, and blips happen. but in the champions league, at the grandest stage of club football, we expect only the best. teams must be ready to give everything and put on the best show. winners of european ties are acknowledged as superior to losers. that is why it sucks when man utd lose a continental match.
we played like we could in the opening minutes. then eto'o made vidic spin and struck, and on hindsight, you can say it was game over. messi's insulting header simply served to confirm barca's name on the trophy. man utd could not flow, there was no passing, no possession, no confidence from the backline, and the tactics were deficient and senseless. what's unbelievable was that the man utd machine never purred, never recovered, never began any sort of sustained pressure and comeback. we were that bad, or if ur from the other camp, barca were that good.
1. ronaldo
the current world player of the year was too eager to kill off barca singlehandedly, too eager to win the duel with the humble messi. his credit was probably that he was man utd's most dangerous player on the night. whether he once again flopped on the big stage is debatable. he's had a poor season by his standards and we could not have asked for too much this final.
2. rooney
probably the star of this campaign, many had predicted this would be his stage. but he was ordinary throughout. some say it was ferguson's fault, while some say rooney improved this season after switching to the wing. there was talk that it could be a masterstroke to play him on the left wing, first to combine shackle the messi menace with evra, second to destroy the emergency rightback in place of the suspended daniel alves, third to do what he's been doing this season, provide telling crosses and cut in to fire off his trademark curlers. but he failed to provide the spark, largely because ferguson played without a central striker.
3. evra
the classy and skillful wingback was out of sorts. the disappointing show definitely contributed to man utd's defeat. without messi to worry about, he was still a ball of nerves. in attack he still provided some spark, but his usual composed manner complementing his centrehalves was missing. played a part in both conceded goals.
4. vidic-ferdinand
probably the best defensive pairing in the world. the worst time to screw up. vidic was turned inside out by eto'o for the crucial opener, ferdinand was left in no man's land in a lopsided defeat to the 1.69m messi. outside these two key incidents, the usually cool and stylish pair were flustered like headless chickens, regressing more than progressing, unable to pass on an important confidence to the midfield.
5. centre-midfield
what exactly were ferguson's plans? in the middle, strictly speaking there were carrick, anderson, and giggs. the match was lost there. anderson is a talented kid best used against inferior midfields, but he's not one for battles. giggs has vision and oceans of experience to offer, but the barca midfield is too good to play a 35-year-old there. so it was carrick, shouldering the heaviest burden of the night, up against the holy trinity of xavi, iniesta and yaya toure.
6. strikeforce
barca were missing daniel alves, marquez and abidal. a suspect barca rearguard is further weakened. in comes an old sylvinho, a man utd reject pique, and, who the hell is busquets? it was almost handed to man utd on a platter. but ferguson chose to "contain and counter". to 'expose' barca's makeshift defence, he played ronaldo as sole striker, rooney on the wing, and left tevez and berbatov on the bench.
7. xavi-iniesta
to worsen things in the middle of the park, we had to contend with barca's and spain's heartbeat and Euro '08 player of the tournament xavi. beside him, his buddy for many years now, is the underrated genius iniesta, whom rooney labeled "the best player in the world" currently. less than a year ago they teamed up to win spain the euro championship, in recent months they have manoeuvred lampard, ballack, essien, toulalan, juninho and van bommel and left them in their wake. these two are pass masters schooled in an academy loyal to fast, beautiful football, and it is no overstatement to credit barca's style of play to them. it is hard to imagine how two such diminutive players can ooze such endless confidence.
8. 'between the lines'
as mourinho and hiddink know it and proud to repeatedly announce, u stop teams like barca and man utd from playing their game by stifling the space between the lines. those two masters have done it successfully to these two finalists, but on this night, barca came out intending to kill man utd this way. and they did it. if u reduce the field and players into a chessboard, u will see clearly how the barca players were drilled well in training to do that. when vidic or ferdinand turn, messi, henry and eto'o were in their faces. giggs was too slow, and carrick could not pass properly through the iniesta, xavi and yaya toure.
9. messi
this assessment cannot be complete without the no.1 contender for 2009's ballon d'or. true, by his standards he probably didn't have the impact of iniesta or xavi, but he was still such a menace and without his presence the result could very well have been reversed. he moved into the middle to keep vidic and ferdinand edgy, and to free up eto'o and henry. even without marauding from the wing, the red devils still chased his shadow. this is a real superstar. ronaldo, listen up.
if we had won, we would be the first team to defend the champions league. we would be on four european crowns, one shy of liverpool's, especially landmark since we have matched their league titles. we would have capped a season of wins in the community shield, club world cup, league cup, and premiership. yes, for that much gravity, too much complacency existed prior to the final. the Telegraph aptly put it, "Everybody and his dog thought United would win and with ease." man utd fans have traditionally been hyper excited about big matches, and they don't get bigger than this, but the mood was as if if the team plays its football, barca would be no match. how ignorant. therefore, the right hype was weak, and even the players were too relaxed.
it just wasn't good enough.
Friday, May 29, 2009
Friday, May 08, 2009
land of few turns
i was at shokudo yesterday. apparently it's an enormously popular place, judging by e familiar faces i recognised in that short 2 hours.
there were,
supei, year one from wkwsci
si ting, graduating from wkwsci
clement's sis (whom i cant recall her name), graduated from wkwsci
jayne, nyjc's 26th council president
some other 26th councillors
edelina, jieying, from hall 4
cai chenghan, from signal spec course, who was with edelina and jieying
janice and shaun, the new couple from wkwsci
this is a stupid post but ive nothing to do.
there were,
supei, year one from wkwsci
si ting, graduating from wkwsci
clement's sis (whom i cant recall her name), graduated from wkwsci
jayne, nyjc's 26th council president
some other 26th councillors
edelina, jieying, from hall 4
cai chenghan, from signal spec course, who was with edelina and jieying
janice and shaun, the new couple from wkwsci
this is a stupid post but ive nothing to do.
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
23rd wish-list
ok i hope this is not too late. i DO have things i want but i forgot about this. ha. take ur pick.
1. loafers
2. slippers/flipflops
3. scene/emo/indie/retro backpack (eastpak, jansport kind)
4. the iphone
5. ikea 2-metre-tall cd/dvd rack
6. Star Wars Original Trilogy dvd pack
7. wallet
8. cash, always comes in handy.
...
2,184. im trying to think of something not so materialistic, but i cant find anything. oh, superficial me.
1. loafers
2. slippers/flipflops
3. scene/emo/indie/retro backpack (eastpak, jansport kind)
4. the iphone
5. ikea 2-metre-tall cd/dvd rack
6. Star Wars Original Trilogy dvd pack
7. wallet
8. cash, always comes in handy.
...
2,184. im trying to think of something not so materialistic, but i cant find anything. oh, superficial me.
Saturday, May 02, 2009
trying to understand that code of Da Vinci's
ok i know this is abit late. what's worse, for diehards out there, i didnt read THAT book. i watched the movie. haha. so please give me the benefit of the doubt if im lacking in any way. and well anyway Angels & Demons is coming, so this CAN be the right time too yea.
Priory of Sion
this caught me the most. not only is it a riveting idea, it seems solid and convincing enough. a "secret society founded in the Kingdom of Jerusalem in 1099" that has been debunked as untrue, but as propogated in the book/film, "that is what they want you to believe". that it's no more. furthermore, the priory is portrayed in the book/film "as an ancient, powerful organization guarding a historical secret of immense importance" and "a mystery cult seeking to restore the feminist theology necessary for a complete understanding of early Christianity, which was supposedly suppressed by the Roman Catholic Church". apparently, this order had many illustrious members, including Leonardo Da Vinci, Isaac Newton and Victor Hugo. the priory is the protectors of the royal bloodline, the direct descendants of Jesus. feminism is at the crux of this version of Christianity. Jesus is supposedly the original feminist, and the Church has distorted his message, putting in place a patriarchal system.
so, was it Constantine? is the great Christian emperor responsible for manifesting a religion for other agenda.
that it was believed that Jesus was a man. a great, but just mortal man. then, he was given status of divinity, for various reasons, chief of which was to consolidate authority.
Mary Magdalene. prostitute, or Jesus' wife?
a cool exchange from the movie, between Sophie and Leigh.
"Not the son of God?"
"Not even his nephew twice removed."
Leigh Teabing in the book/film blames God and His followers for the majority of the world's ills, past and present. To him, freedom for mankind can come only if everyone stops believing in Him.
"As long as there has been one true God, there has been killing in His name... What if the world finds out that the greatest story ever told is a lie?"
Newton and his apple play a significant role in the book/film as well. we see evidence of how Newton was a heretic in his time and fits in with the Priory through his discovery of gravity and using science and reason to challenge magic.
on this note, the hugely successful but critically dismissed documentary Zeitgeist offers an additional and interesting perspective on all this.
im not propagating anything. i just hope to provide some material i found challenging to me and how so. i hope u can ask urself those questions and give it a thought.
and finally, of course something nice from the movie, since that was what motivated me to write this.
Langdon: "The only thing that matters is what you believe. History shows us Jesus was an extraordinary man. A human inspiration. That's it. That's all the evidence's ever proved. But... when I was a boy, when I was down in that well... I thought I was going to die. ...I prayed. To Jesus, to keep me alive. So I can see my parents again, so I can go to school again, so I can play with my dog. Sometimes I wonder if I wasn't alone down there. Why does it have to be human or divine. Maybe human is divine."
isnt this what religion is about? who cares about how many people believe in it, how factually accurate it is, how thick its holy book is, how to praise and worship. it should be about what's inside us, and the good it brings.
and...
Leigh: "has he been telling you that the Holy Grail is a cup?".
ha! cool.
Priory of Sion
this caught me the most. not only is it a riveting idea, it seems solid and convincing enough. a "secret society founded in the Kingdom of Jerusalem in 1099" that has been debunked as untrue, but as propogated in the book/film, "that is what they want you to believe". that it's no more. furthermore, the priory is portrayed in the book/film "as an ancient, powerful organization guarding a historical secret of immense importance" and "a mystery cult seeking to restore the feminist theology necessary for a complete understanding of early Christianity, which was supposedly suppressed by the Roman Catholic Church". apparently, this order had many illustrious members, including Leonardo Da Vinci, Isaac Newton and Victor Hugo. the priory is the protectors of the royal bloodline, the direct descendants of Jesus. feminism is at the crux of this version of Christianity. Jesus is supposedly the original feminist, and the Church has distorted his message, putting in place a patriarchal system.
so, was it Constantine? is the great Christian emperor responsible for manifesting a religion for other agenda.
that it was believed that Jesus was a man. a great, but just mortal man. then, he was given status of divinity, for various reasons, chief of which was to consolidate authority.
Mary Magdalene. prostitute, or Jesus' wife?
a cool exchange from the movie, between Sophie and Leigh.
"Not the son of God?"
"Not even his nephew twice removed."
Leigh Teabing in the book/film blames God and His followers for the majority of the world's ills, past and present. To him, freedom for mankind can come only if everyone stops believing in Him.
"As long as there has been one true God, there has been killing in His name... What if the world finds out that the greatest story ever told is a lie?"
Newton and his apple play a significant role in the book/film as well. we see evidence of how Newton was a heretic in his time and fits in with the Priory through his discovery of gravity and using science and reason to challenge magic.
on this note, the hugely successful but critically dismissed documentary Zeitgeist offers an additional and interesting perspective on all this.
im not propagating anything. i just hope to provide some material i found challenging to me and how so. i hope u can ask urself those questions and give it a thought.
and finally, of course something nice from the movie, since that was what motivated me to write this.
Langdon: "The only thing that matters is what you believe. History shows us Jesus was an extraordinary man. A human inspiration. That's it. That's all the evidence's ever proved. But... when I was a boy, when I was down in that well... I thought I was going to die. ...I prayed. To Jesus, to keep me alive. So I can see my parents again, so I can go to school again, so I can play with my dog. Sometimes I wonder if I wasn't alone down there. Why does it have to be human or divine. Maybe human is divine."
isnt this what religion is about? who cares about how many people believe in it, how factually accurate it is, how thick its holy book is, how to praise and worship. it should be about what's inside us, and the good it brings.
and...
Leigh: "has he been telling you that the Holy Grail is a cup?".
ha! cool.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)