Spurs were the better team throughout the game. Willian's free kick was decent but not what you'd claim was unstoppable. I think you're disappointed, as a fan, if that goes in. The penalty was correct and I think playing Son in this position was an error. For some reason, Spurs decided not to mark Hazard in a dangerous area for their 3rd and of course Matic's goal was a screamer. Unlike other games this season at Wembley, Spurs played well and deserved for this match to go into extra time (really hope that annoying bloke doesn't question the notion of "deserved" in football again). This is where Pochettino will earn his stripes as a coach. For some teams this would spur (pun unintended.... but I'll take it) them on to a run of losses snatched from the claws of victory, my team an expert in such. He needs to get them to put this out of their minds and realise it is actually just a one-off game where they outplayed who will likely go on to become 2016/17 premier league champions.
@SteveHyland You're right. I was disappointed that Willian's free kick went in. It was well hit but Loris started to bounce to the other side before it was struck. Not Loris' best day but Toby shouldn't have given it away in the first place - a rare error from him. Regarding the strange decision to play Son as a wing back, some people have said that Davies picked up a knock in the warm up but he was also available on the bench?! Looking at the heat maps, Son wasn't tracking back nearly as much as Trippier was despite 53% of Chelsea's attacks being down that flank. The slide in from Son was poor and unnecessary. Despite there being no contact with Moses it's not surprising that it led to a penalty. Not marking Hazard for Chelsea's (first and only corner) was a third defensive error. So Spurs made three defensive errors and were punished for all three. Add to that a brilliant strike from Matic and 4 goals to Chelsea (at least 2 of which were gifts in a game like this).
@MEHJones Otherwise Spurs were objectively the better team for much of the game: dominated possession (63%), shots (13 vs 8), dribbles (15 vs 5), territory, aerial duels (17 vs 10), and corners (11 to 1). As the Telegraph's Jonathan Liew has pointed out, Eriksen made 48 passes in the final third alone (compared to Chelsea’s front three total of 43 passes during the entire game). It's a shame that Winks and Rose were unavailable for Spurs (who both took part) in the 2-0 win over Chelsea at the Lane in January. Now Spurs have to pick themselves up and beat a dangerous Palace side... I'm expecting a draw :/
@0708915762- Which part can be described as wishful thinking? I haven't heard any non-Chelsea fan claim they were the better team and that their victory didn't owe at least a little bit to Spurs errors.
Tot lost 2-4, Willian score 2 goals, Hazard came on, scored one and gave assist for the winning goal. Eriksen MoM.
Whoscored need to work on their algorithm. Terribly poor.
@boller- Eriksen was the best player on the pitch by at least 1.5 points out of 10 for me (over Willian). I don't subscribe to the idea that the best individual has to come from the winning team. Christian influenced the game from everywhere (look at his heat map, ignore the corners- it is still highly impressive), created 6 chances including that sumptuous pass to Dele, and in general was Spurs' go-to man (as is evident by the amount of the ball he had). His pass completion percentage (considering he was crossing a lot and not playing 1m balls to open payers the whole game) is also very good. Claiming Hazard was even a contender for one shot which shouldn't have even been allowed to happen and the least deserved assist of the season should be below even the most hardcore of Hazard fans imo.
Spurs have won 2, drawn 1 and lost 6 at the 'new' Wembley whereas Chelsea have won 9, drawn 0 and lost 5. Between the 2 teams, the record is Spurs wins 1 and Chelsea wins 2. I think this is a pretty close game, when you factor in form I would make this as close a 50-50 as football could be. It would've been interesting to see how Spurs would've faired in the league without European football commitments. As an Arsenal fan, I'm dreaming of the North London derby so am in the extremely uncomfortable position of wanting Spurs to win. :-o . I think this will go to extra time, and Chelsea will win on penalties but hopefully I'm wrong. 1-1 AET.
Tottenham don't have a great record in semi finals but they have been brilliant in recent weeks. Provided no one gets injured or sent off, Tottenham have what it take to beat Chelsea but it won't be easy. I hope it's a good game and doesn't get nasty. R.I.P. Ugo COYS! Chelsea 2-1 Tottenham
@MEHJones I meant Chelsea 1-2 Tottenham but whatever. Tottenham dominated large spells of the game but gave Chelsea two stupid goals. Mati's goal was an excellent strike.
Chelsea have dropped the gear recently - a couple of bad results - 8 or so matches without clean sheet in a row. I am chelsea fan but I am not confident for this match. 2-1 to Tottenham or 2-2 and we all know if it comes to penalties Spurs are gonna spurs it up.
Spurs win 1-2, Begovic has been poor since replacing injured Courtois and Chelsea are getting complacent. Also, Spurs are motivated and are chasing Chelsea. They're in a hunting mood.
Chelsea to progress straight to the finals.Tottenham doesn't win games easily at neutral grounds,in addition to their lack of experience in winning trophies.
Chelsea 2-0 Tottenham
Spurs were the better team throughout the game. Willian's free kick was decent but not what you'd claim was unstoppable. I think you're disappointed, as a fan, if that goes in. The penalty was correct and I think playing Son in this position was an error. For some reason, Spurs decided not to mark Hazard in a dangerous area for their 3rd and of course Matic's goal was a screamer. Unlike other games this season at Wembley, Spurs played well and deserved for this match to go into extra time (really hope that annoying bloke doesn't question the notion of "deserved" in football again). This is where Pochettino will earn his stripes as a coach. For some teams this would spur (pun unintended.... but I'll take it) them on to a run of losses snatched from the claws of victory, my team an expert in such. He needs to get them to put this out of their minds and realise it is actually just a one-off game where they outplayed who will likely go on to become 2016/17 premier league champions.
@SteveHyland You're right. I was disappointed that Willian's free kick went in. It was well hit but Loris started to bounce to the other side before it was struck. Not Loris' best day but Toby shouldn't have given it away in the first place - a rare error from him. Regarding the strange decision to play Son as a wing back, some people have said that Davies picked up a knock in the warm up but he was also available on the bench?! Looking at the heat maps, Son wasn't tracking back nearly as much as Trippier was despite 53% of Chelsea's attacks being down that flank. The slide in from Son was poor and unnecessary. Despite there being no contact with Moses it's not surprising that it led to a penalty. Not marking Hazard for Chelsea's (first and only corner) was a third defensive error. So Spurs made three defensive errors and were punished for all three. Add to that a brilliant strike from Matic and 4 goals to Chelsea (at least 2 of which were gifts in a game like this).
@MEHJones Otherwise Spurs were objectively the better team for much of the game: dominated possession (63%), shots (13 vs 8), dribbles (15 vs 5), territory, aerial duels (17 vs 10), and corners (11 to 1). As the Telegraph's Jonathan Liew has pointed out, Eriksen made 48 passes in the final third alone (compared to Chelsea’s front three total of 43 passes during the entire game). It's a shame that Winks and Rose were unavailable for Spurs (who both took part) in the 2-0 win over Chelsea at the Lane in January. Now Spurs have to pick themselves up and beat a dangerous Palace side... I'm expecting a draw :/
@SteveHyland Wishful thinking in football doesn't help
@0708915762- Which part can be described as wishful thinking? I haven't heard any non-Chelsea fan claim they were the better team and that their victory didn't owe at least a little bit to Spurs errors.
Tot lost 2-4, Willian score 2 goals, Hazard came on, scored one and gave assist for the winning goal. Eriksen MoM. Whoscored need to work on their algorithm. Terribly poor.
@boller- Eriksen was the best player on the pitch by at least 1.5 points out of 10 for me (over Willian). I don't subscribe to the idea that the best individual has to come from the winning team. Christian influenced the game from everywhere (look at his heat map, ignore the corners- it is still highly impressive), created 6 chances including that sumptuous pass to Dele, and in general was Spurs' go-to man (as is evident by the amount of the ball he had). His pass completion percentage (considering he was crossing a lot and not playing 1m balls to open payers the whole game) is also very good. Claiming Hazard was even a contender for one shot which shouldn't have even been allowed to happen and the least deserved assist of the season should be below even the most hardcore of Hazard fans imo.
Chelsea is in Wembley.
Well that's one of the best assists of the season.
@WestwardKiller Presumably you mean Eriksen's cross to Dele.
The first goal is not Willians, it took a slight deflection off Matic so it's his goal.
chelsea till death
Spurs have won 2, drawn 1 and lost 6 at the 'new' Wembley whereas Chelsea have won 9, drawn 0 and lost 5. Between the 2 teams, the record is Spurs wins 1 and Chelsea wins 2. I think this is a pretty close game, when you factor in form I would make this as close a 50-50 as football could be. It would've been interesting to see how Spurs would've faired in the league without European football commitments. As an Arsenal fan, I'm dreaming of the North London derby so am in the extremely uncomfortable position of wanting Spurs to win. :-o . I think this will go to extra time, and Chelsea will win on penalties but hopefully I'm wrong. 1-1 AET.
Chelsea to win after 2-2 ft
@koziol.mutant Nice just like today's date! Exactly what I was thinking :)
Tottenham don't have a great record in semi finals but they have been brilliant in recent weeks. Provided no one gets injured or sent off, Tottenham have what it take to beat Chelsea but it won't be easy. I hope it's a good game and doesn't get nasty. R.I.P. Ugo COYS! Chelsea 2-1 Tottenham
@MEHJones I meant Chelsea 1-2 Tottenham but whatever. Tottenham dominated large spells of the game but gave Chelsea two stupid goals. Mati's goal was an excellent strike.
Kane, Eriksen and Alli on fire. 1-2 Tottenham or X2
Kane Eriksen Alli on fire. 1-2 Totttenham
I believe referee will decide this game! As a neutral good luck to both teams who have been excellent throughout the season!
Chelsea win 101% @ 2 - 1
Shit!..Another Under 3.5 on the cards here for punters.
Chelsea have dropped the gear recently - a couple of bad results - 8 or so matches without clean sheet in a row. I am chelsea fan but I am not confident for this match. 2-1 to Tottenham or 2-2 and we all know if it comes to penalties Spurs are gonna spurs it up.
chelsea have a good defend and tottenham have a good attackers so match will be about mistakes probably 2-1 chelsea win
@Taryaoui Chelsea no longer have the best defence in the league, last time chelsea had a clean sheet in the league is in january 22th.
Please Chelsea cmon
Spurs win 1-2, Begovic has been poor since replacing injured Courtois and Chelsea are getting complacent. Also, Spurs are motivated and are chasing Chelsea. They're in a hunting mood.
Form would suggest spurs but it's at Wembley so it's anyone's guess 1-0 either way after ET.
Chelsea to progress straight to the finals.Tottenham doesn't win games easily at neutral grounds,in addition to their lack of experience in winning trophies. Chelsea 2-0 Tottenham