My impression of the Milan-Barcellona game is that the Spaniards played as
badly as A.C. Milan did an year ago against Marseilles. Last year, for the
first time ever, a team qualified for the EC1 final by winning all the games.
The awsome record prompted A.C. Milan to believe the final was just another
formality; they played and OM adopted a very defensive tactic: the Frenchmen
won, but the match was not entertaining at all.
Alternatively A.C. Milan were afraid of OM, since they were beaten by them in
controversial circumstances (AC Milan players had walked out of the second leg
2' from the end when they were losing and a power failure obliged the referee
to halt the match).
However, in Athens A.C. Milan went on the ground determined as I have rarely
seen them before. Also Capello designed a perfect game strategy based on
cutting Koeman out of the action and on dominating at midfield. The result was
that A.C. Milan came up with a performance, which was just the opposite of that
of last year. They won, and Barcellona looked like newcomers who had never been
In conclusion, I think that A.C. Milan won because they were incredibly
determined to do so. I made no difference that VAn Basten, BAresi and
Costacurta were put; the substitutes played at the same level as the more
famous absentees. The question, however, remains: is this the true A.C. Milan?
Well, in my view this is the best they can ever play. Unfortunately in any
sport nobody can be at his/her/their peak all the time.
A Sampdoria soccer fan from Downunder