Some fans went to bed crying bitterly on the night of the Champions League final, others slept disappointed. Sreeram Ramachandran explores the latter
Some fans went to bed crying bitterly on the night of the Champions League final, others slept disappointed. Sreeram Ramachandran explores the latterIT follows basic logic that the Champions League final should usually turn out to be amongst the best games of the season. Everything is in place the best two teams in Europe playing each other, the biggest prize at stake, the atmosphere, the sense of occasion. Why then has it actually produced a great game only once, or at best twice, in this decade? Why have the Champions League finals of late been at best half decent, and at worst, a damp squib?
The Manchester United vs Barcelona encounter at Rome was symptomatic of the malaise affecting most of the finals that have been played out in the last few years. There was a great, even contest, but only till the first goal was scored. After the first 10 minutes, we knew who should win, and before long, we knew who is likely to win, which is never a good sign for the game. Of the two great attacking forces of Europe, only one turned up.
The outcome of any attempt to rank the best Champions League finals of this decade reads like a typical La Liga end-of-season table. There exists a gulf between the top 1 or 2 and the rest of the pack. There is little left to talk about how fantastic life was at Istanbul when Liverpool came back from three goals down to take Milan to the penalties, and outfox the shocked Italian club at gunpoint in 2005. The other classic that comes close to this is Bayer Leverkusen's lung busting but failed attempt to hunt Real Madrid down after Zidane the sorcerer had produced the sort of wizardry that made his 46 million pound price look very measly indeed, to put Madrid 2-1 up in 2002. Beyond that, though, none of the finals have come close to producing the magic combination, that of a twisting, turning, even game, with both teams playing their best football, plenty of chances and goals, with little moments of brilliance, required to create one of the famed Great European Nights.
Some of the blame can be attributed to the pressing need of modern football to play safe. The game's core nature is rapidly evolving into that of a win-all-lose-all beast. The Champions League is the biggest trophy of them all, and modern football is unabashedly hedonistic in its celebration of the winners and punishment of those who lost. Harangued by the constant reminder of the high stakes, it is understandable for teams to look to defend first, and attack later. The biggest evidence of this was when Alex Fergusson, Manager Extraordinaire, the man who has the safety cushion of five major trophies in the last two years, chose to adopt the block-and-hit-on-the-counter strategy by ignoring his regular attacking trident of Ronaldo-Rooney-Berbatov/Tevez, and going for a more defensive minded 4-4-2 formation.
Goals are not the sole barometer of a great game, but they nevertheless provide some hints to its quality. The 2000s have produced nine Champions League finals and only one of these nine have produced more than three goals between both teams put together. The 90s are not necessarily much better off with two such games, a far cry from the 60s where an astonishing seven of the 10 European Championship finals produced four goals or more. United and Chelsea waited for each other to make the first move for over 120 minutes last year before penalties produced the facade of an 'exciting game'. The Liverpool-Milan final in 2007 was a pale shadow of their illustrious predecessor in Istanbul two years back.
Ominusly, two Italian teams, Milan and Juventus made it to the final in 2003, and produced, what else a 0-0 draw.
Curiously enough, the football World Cup finals haven't been spectacular for a while either. You have to go back to 1986, to Maradona's highest peak, when Argentina beat West Germany in a cracking 3-2 encounter filled with the choicest footballing delights. Most other finals between now and then have been 1 or 2 goal encounters. It can, perhaps, be interpreted as an extension of huge-stakes-leading-to-safety-first theory.
The uncontrolled ballooning self-importance of the Champions League, fuelled by relentless media worship of football's holy-grail, has spurned a lesser evil u2014 the one-sided final. The pressure of being on such an elevated platform, being so-close-yet-so-far to such glory has led to several good teams facing a nerve-jam and just not turning up. Manchester United went back into their dugouts and their nervous, gawky twin emerged once
Eto'O got the first goal. The unfancied Monaco choked in the face of also-unfancied Porto in 2006, losing 3-0.
Valencia were relatively new to the glare and attention of the Champions League final and shriveled up as old-hands Real Madrid took them apart in another 3-0 fest in 2000.
However, it is true that definitions of 'disappointing' and 'great' change with such a context. A 2-1 Barcelona vs Arsenal game featuring a Barca comeback would be seen as a fine game under normal circumstances, but add the backdrop of the Champions League final to it and it suddenly falls short of the ideal. 3-2 becomes the benchmark, a fine Fabregas through-ball with a slick Henry finish becomes a necessity as against a Sol Campbell header.
The satisfaction an event provides is inversely related to what we expect from it. The Law of Averages, amongst other laws, suggests that the more you anticipate, build up and look forward to something, the lower the chances of it actually living up to your expectations become. So perhaps, the best way to create a great final is to expect a dreadful one.
Mumbai-based Sreeram Ramachandran writes for and edits the website www.HoldingWilley.com
