IamtheTruth1:


Chelsea kept the same team and even added quad depth more. Arteta couldn’t keep the same team hence why

What do you mean Arsenal couldn't keep the same team? Do you mean between 2009 and 2012, the same team played for Chelsea? Ballack, Shevchenko etc have all gone before Chelsea won it. I hope you remember.

edenex:
see the useless club that araujo allowed to beat barca

fluke win from senseless red card and mumu coaching from xavi
mumu dembele as no be barca you don forget how to score abi. RAT

psg will never win ucl

that Girona coach is far better than xavi.
To beat xavi home and away and to make it to top three in LA Liga is no mean feat.
The earlier Barca part was with xavi,the better for everybody.
Xavi is not a strong coach,can't maintain lead .

geoworldedu:
if the balls are not hitting the crossbars, pls tell me where they will go. They would have come lower for the keeper's hands to touch, isn't it? That's why the keeper could have saved them. But they were too high for the keeper's reach or too far from his reach. If they come closer to his reach, they won't strike the crossbar and he would have caught them. If you don't understand my grammar let me use Mathematics to explain them. A particular football was shot towards the keeper. The keeper stretched to 3.2m but his hand could not touch it. The 3.2m already covered all the surface of the post, but the ball went farther at 3.4m. Instead of saying that PSG nearly scored the ball, I am seeing it from the angle that they nearly had a shot on target because if the ball had come 0.2m closer to the keeper, the keeper could catch it. So next time, tell PSG to be more accurate because nearly cannot kill a bird and nearly that involved woodwork is not almost a goal but almost a 'shot on target' because the keeper could have caught it.

Look at the picture below. Will you tell me that if the ball that hit the crossbar and ricocheted away had come a bit lower, the keeper wouldn't have saved it?

Somebody said that the reason why PSG hit the crossbars all the time is that Dortmund defended so well that there wasn't any available space to play the ball into the net than the crossbar. That's how good Dortmund's defence was over the two legs

It’s the way you’re spewing undiluted trash with so much confidence for me
Does this mean that I’m now teaching you that if a shot is able to hit any part of the crossbar (with exception to the ones pushed/deflected by the goalies), it means it has already gone past the goalkeeper? (meaning that it’s faster than what the goalkeeper could have stopped)
Am I seriously having this conversation with a human?
How on earth did your argument make sense to you baby girl?

Morphinne:

It’s the way you’re spewing undiluted trash with so much confidence for me
Does this mean that I’m now teaching you that if a shot is able to hit any part of the crossbar (with exception to the ones pushed/deflected by the goalies), it means it has already gone past the goalkeeper? (meaning that it’s faster than what the goalkeeper could have stopped)
Am I seriously having this conversation with a human?
How on earth did your argument make sense to you baby girl?

You are talking like an olodo. Any ball that went past a keeper is because the keeper stretched to his limit, but the ball was going away from his reach. So if someone shoots a ball 2m higher than the post, it means that the ball is faster than the keeper? It simply means the ball went far away from where the keeper is. So a ball that touches the bar could have passed the keeper by an inch. If it had come closer a bit to the keeper, he would have caught it. Have you heard what they call a keeper covered the post? Have you also heard about trajectory or projectile? The position the keeper stood, he stretched to the end, but the ball stubbornly passed him because the ball was going out of the goal post, only to hit a bar. If it was a ball that was going to enter inside the post, the keeper would have stopped it and that's what we called shot on target. I wonder why you value a shot off target than shot on target. Nawa o.

spencekat:
Just because say una dey beef them say they don too carry champions League no mean say they no go lift am this time around.

Baba,dem don too carry am..oo.
I no bin even want make dem play final cos dem no dey carry eye see cup for final go leave am.
But Bayern too too dey loose guard dis season including tonight

chriselderson:

You could say that again man. You got pretty good idea about the game. Do your homework well, even luck will chose your side.

There is simply something they are doing better. They had fewer attacks but they are sharper and more compact in defence. They executed their plans better

geoworldedu:
You are talking like an olodo. Any ball that went past a keeper is because the keeper stretched to his limit, but the ball was going away from his reach. So if someone shoots a ball 2m higher than the post, it means that the ball is faster than the keeper? It simply means the ball went far away from where the keeper is. So a ball that touches the bar could have passed the keeper by an inch. If it had come closer a bit to the keeper, he would have caught it. Have you heard what they call a keeper covered the post? Have you also heard about trajectory or projectile? The position the keeper stood, he stretched to the end, but the ball stubbornly passed him because the ball was going out of the goal post, only to hit a bar. If it was a ball that was going to enter inside the post, the keeper would have stopped it and that's what we called shot on target. I wonder why you value a shot off target than shot on target. Nawa o.

I purposely left you to keep ranting silly. Una no go watch match but keep relying on online analysis and full-time scoreline and na una go dey do oversabi pass . When did you start watching football?
Like I said earlier this week, this present Dortmund’s defence is not a sustainable one and that they were being lucky against PSG and their match today against Mainz, a fellow German side team fighting relegation, just proved me right.
Again, just like they did earlier this week in the UCL against PSG, Borussia Dortmund conceeded 3 goals and 2 hit-woodworks (would have been 5-0) thereby raising the tally to 8 hit-woodworks in just 3 matches. Are you okay at all my friend?
I will tag you again when they get beaten blue and black at Wembley
Your football knowledge is amazing.

Morphinne:

I purposely left you to keep ranting silly. Una no go watch match but keep relying on online analysis and full-time scoreline and na una go dey do oversabi pass . When did you start watching football?
Like I said earlier this week, this present Dortmund’s defence is not a sustainable one and that they were being lucky against PSG and their match today against Mainz, a fellow German side team fighting relegation, just proved me right.
Again, just like they did earlier this week in the UCL against PSG, Borussia Dortmund conceeded 3 goals and 2 hit-woodworks (would have been 5-0) thereby raising the tally to 8 hit-woodworks in just 3 matches. Are you okay at all my friend?
I will tag you again when they get beaten blue and black at Wembley
Your football knowledge is amazing.

What is this one saying? Is this PSG's game or did I tell you that Dortmund is invincible? Dortmund will beat PSG anyday anytime home and away and that's all I know. Real Madrid is the master of the game. So I don't expect Dortmund to win them, though I wish they can. So your tagging after losing the final is unnecessary, but you can tag me another time they meet PSG again. PSG go still chop am wotowoto that time, then sef, Mbappe no go dey. Dortmund a champions league winner is not PSG mate in any way. It's Arsenal and PSG that you can mention in the same sentence, not Dortmund

geoworldedu:

What is this one saying? Is this PSG's game or did I tell you that Dortmund is invincible? Dortmund will beat PSG anyday anytime home and away and that's all I know. Real Madrid is the master of the game. So I don't expect Dortmund to win them, though I wish they can. So your tagging after losing the final is unnecessary, but you can tag me another time they meet PSG again. PSG go still chop am wotowoto that time, then sef, Mbappe no go dey. Dortmund a champions league winner is not PSG mate in any way. It's Arsenal and PSG that you can mention in the same sentence, not Dortmund

You are now talking trash my friend and next time, make sure you know the root of an argument before senselessly jumping into it. At least, that’s what wise people do.
Both PSG and Dortmund weren’t my favorites but I made that comment according to what I observed in their home and away games. My observation was that PSG played better that night and that DORTMUND’S TACTIC WAS WACK AND NOT SUSTAINABLE because if it wasn’t a poor tactic, they wouldn’t concede 6 hit-crossbars in just 2 matches against the same team. Those were my exact words.
To buttress the point I made, I gave you what they played again today against Mainz that is a much weaker team in all areas compared to both PSG and Dortmund (trophies and achievements-wise). This team beat them 3 to nil with 2 of their shots hitting the crossbar again. Good team with good defence and tactical defensive play wouldn’t be conceding that much shots (woodwork)
Don’t make me insult you abeg. Next time, stop arguing about topics that are above your mental capacity. Thank you.

Kukutente23:

If PSG had good chances to shoot, won't their shots be on target? The fact that their shots were hitting the goalposts shows they never had good sights on goal but were just trying their luck with speculative shots.
Dortmund did not concede any meaningful chance to PSG until they scored. Go and watch the match again.

I left the two (even more) of you that day because I know it’s highly exhausting to try to convince ignorant people especially when they come in large number.
Now that they have crossed to the final, let’s see if they are going to be lucky this time at Wembley.
Again today, Borussia Dortmund conceded another 2 crossbars and 3 of their opponents’ (Mainz) shots made it to the back of their net. It could have been 5-0
What did I say about their defence on Tuesday? You can’t concede 3 goals and 8 hit-crossbars against 2 teams in just 3 matches and still claim you are tactically defensive. That’s so much an erroneous claim for a team that hardly keeps a clean sheet.
What kind of defense is that?
Be kiaful o my friend abeg make I no enter you this night