From the owners of the club, to the manager, to a whole host of players past and present and onward to “19″— I’m not a fan.

So, you’d naturally think I’d be supporting Barcelona in Saturday’s Champions League final.

Lefty. Progressive. Unicef.

But I can’t. And it has nothing to do with the Qatar Foundation.

Remember when

After the 5-0 destruction of Real Madrid last November, I, like everyone else who follows the game, thought Barcelona undoubtedly the best team in the world. It was a beautifully masterful display, sublime in its effortlessness.

But then came that series of El Clasicos.

Remember how exciting the anticipation was? Four El Clasicos in little more than two weeks! A league title, a cup championship, passage to the Champions League final—all were at stake.

“Thank the gods, I’m alive to see this”

And what did you see?

A Barcelona whose play was based on the disgustingly cynical conceit of entitled greatness and lots of fouls.

He fell over. So did he. Then the whole team swarmed the ref.

If Barcelona were a single player, right now the club would be Cristiano Ronaldo—gifted like no one else of his generation (save one guy!), regularly producing astonishing, head shaking displays of skill, and all of that overshadowed by a propensity for petulance, whining, and diving.

Beautiful. Great.

Ugly. Embarrassing.

For myself…

I get behind players and teams who make do with much less—less skill, less reputation, less indulgence from officials—not to mention the relentless churnings of a media machine that extends from player’s agents, to clubs, to advertisers and football confederations and everything else that weighs on who to believe in.

I support players and teams that manage to achieve with dignity and grit.

You know, like the Union.

So, on Saturday, I won’t be behind Barcelona. l be rooting for soccer.

I’ll be rooting for Messi, and for Park, for Puyol and Vidic, for Valdes and van der Sar. I’ll be rooting for tough but clean play, and I’ll be rooting for beauty.

I’ll be rooting for that transcendental moment when time slows down, when an entire lifetime of playing and watching the game connects with events occurring thousands of miles away.

Making the move, defending the move, trying the shot, trying to make the save, warming up, watching from the stands.

Your breath stops, and you are there.

The bigger picture

I’ll be rooting for the ever renewed—and ever expanding—love for the world’s game in Philadelphia and beyond.

I’ll be rooting for soccer in America.

The final will be broadcast on Fox. True, it hasn’t been accompanied with the usual curious mixture of “the time is now” versus “it will never be” coverage that is the World Cup in this country. Still, access to the Champions League final will be available to American viewers running the wide spectrum of soccer interestedness at a level that otherwise only reliably occurs when it’s the World Cup final.

In that regard, the last World Cup final was a missed opportunity.

The Dutch, inventors of total football. Spain, featuring so many Barcelona players—the final should have been magnificent. Instead, my abiding memory of it is one of ugliness and frustrating boredom.

Missed calls. Diving. Unaccountable writhing—who could blame the unconvinced American viewer for getting the spectacle but not getting the game.

Hopefully, this Champions League final will be different.

One team will win.

I only hope the game wins, too.

If you want to learn about the history check out this site dedicated to the rivalry.

The ego? Just look at the spending. While it’s easy to point the finger at Madrid as the big ticket buyers, this is a Barcelona team that – with the World Player of the Year on their books – paid 60 million pounds (plus Samuel Eto’o) for Zlatan Ibrahimovic then loaned him out and dropped a cool 44 million pounds on David Villa. And 36 million on Dani Alves. And 25 million on Javier Mascherano.

But you know all this.

Test runs are over

Now that we are two matches into this unprecedented run of four meetings in under three weeks, the big test has arrived: 180 minutes to determine who goes to the Champions League final. Leave the history aside. At this point, the matches are a tactician’s dream. How often do you get two chances to test out your tactics against an opponent? To try something and see how well it works?

The best manager in the world has taken his Madrid team from 5-0 losers to 1-0 Cup winners in two games. Should Barcelona be worried?

Oh yes. They should.

Blaugreatness

Ever since Barcelona anointed themselves Best Team in the World, they have played one style of soccer: A tika-takka possession system taught at every level of their prosperous academy. But Barcelona is not hiding the ball. Maxwell Kuhl recently described it as a case of “possession game permanently leaning forward.” And when they lose it, Barca doesn’t let you possess: Their defense is leaning forward too.

So confident are the Blaugrana in their style of play that Xavi Hernandez recently said, “Inter won the Champions League but no one talks about them.”

Of course, Xavi left out one important bit of information. Nobody talks about Inter, but everybody talks about Mourinho.

Special one (Why not? Very nice)

It is the rare manager who has the ability to make overpaid, pampered players understand the gestalt of the game. A team united is greater than the sum of its parts. Over the two legs against Barca in 2010, Inter Milan was a better team. In the first match they counterattacked with purpose and precision, never pushing unless they spied a weakness.

The second leg is remembered for Inter’s incredible “ninety of nothing.” The Italian champions never even tried to leave their half of the field. But a close watching of the match reveals something more important: Inter rarely even left their own eighteen yard box. Barcelona has, at any one time, about six players who can nail a free kick from 35 yards and in. What Mourinho showed that night was that they wouldn’t do it in open play.

The plan is the plan! There is no other plan

Barca has no Plan B. They won’t speed up or change the point of their attack. It is what it is. Lucky for Barca, it’s damn hard to stop. No amount of tactical preparation can stop Barcelona without an exceedingly high quality of player on the pitch. Mourinho has those players at Real Madrid, and for the past two games he has dared Barcelona to step outside of their comfort zone. They have refused.

There will be minor changes for both teams going into the first leg of their Champions League match. Carvalho is unavailable for Madrid. Puyol should be back for Barca.

Unless the Catalan team can learn to adjust on the fly (put in the occasional cross, perhaps?), the result will be similar to the past two. Between the November blowout and the April 16th tie, Real Madrid found an identity as a team that has so much offensive talent it can win while rarely leaving its defensive shape.

It’s a trick Inter learned last year. Will Barcelona learn a new trick? Or will they once again entrust the European Championship to the tika-takka gods?

Eli and I will have a full analysis and player ratings after the first leg of this fantastic soccer event. Tell us what you think about Madrid and Barcelona. Is it over-hyped? Did the first two matchups get your adrenaline pumping or do you wish they’d just start playing other teams already?

Questions for Real Madrid fans

1. Really? You’re not bothered by the whole fascism thing? I mean, it’s cool. Just making sure.
2. First leg at home. A lot of teams like it the other way around. Can you build a lead in the first leg? That would require playing a full 90 like the first 45 of the Copa del Rey.
3. How will you cope without Carvalho? He was pretty bad in the 5-0 loss. He was pretty great in the last two matches.
4. Has Mourinho solved Barca? Or have we just seen a pair of fantastic defensive efforts?
5. Higuain was great against Valencia. Should he start?

Questions for Barcelona fans

1. Do you change anything in your approach? Barca is supremely confident in their system, but they haven’t scored in open play against Madrid in 210 minutes.
2. Should Barca sit back and wait for the second leg to attack? Cruyff will cringe if they do.
3. Will the Blaugrana ever cross the ball? Maybe just once? See what it feels like?
4. Who should play left back? Adriano was beaten on the winning header in the Copa del Rey. Should Maxwell get on the pitch?
5. Should Mascherano step in for Busquets? Sergio is a great player but he has been less than effective in the past two games against Madrid.

Looking back, I have to place the blame not at the feet of the juvenile siblings but rather the solemnity of the service. Years later, while working on a service project in the Bahamas, I had the chance to attend mass at a Baptist church. I was shocked when I witnessed singing, dancing, and clapping. The energy and enthusiasm were palpable. I was captivated. The atmosphere was electric.

Fast-forward to 2008 and the Theater of Dreams, Old Trafford, home of Manchester United. My first experience with live English football just so happened to be the Northwest derby and one of the most heated rivalries in world football, Manchester United  versus Liverpool. I was blown away: by the size of the stadium, the green of the grass, the massive dimensions of the pitch, and just how frigging cold it is in England in March.

But most of all, I was blown away by the atmosphere. I sat in the “Clock End,” opposite the famed Stretford End (and preferred second half target of the Red Devils). It would have been an unremarkable area if not for it being adjacent to the traveling Liverpool supporters. For no less than two hours, the away fans sang their hearts out, from the iconic “You’ll Never Walk Alone” to the simplistic “Ja-vi-er Ma-sche-ra-no! Ja-vi-er Ma-sche-ra-no!”

Despite being trounced 3-nil—and the aforementioned Señor Mascherano getting an early shower—the Scousers never stopped singing. As a result, several MUFC fans in my section never stopped hurling abuse. Either way, it was an incredible atmosphere, the greatest source of live entertainment to which I’d ever been exposed.

The next year, as a birthday present, my mother purchased me a ticket to a European Champions League game: Bayern Munich versus Barcelona. I didn’t realize just how amazing this gift was until I stepped off the train and saw the glowing orb that is the Allianz. From the outside, the arena in Munich is an architectural marvel. On the inside it is a boiling cauldron of chanting, singing, and flag waving.

From high atop the second tier, I was ensconced in a sea of colored flags and banners. The synchronicity of the booming chants proved a cacophonous weapon for the home fans against mighty Barca, already with a three goal-aggregate lead. It may have also been the impetus for the game’s opener, a stunning strike from Franck Ribery. What you can’t hear on television is that every time Ribery finds the net, the stadium finds the song, “Le Champs Elysees” by Joe Dassin, a homage to the winger’s French heritage. Despite Seydou Keita equalizing and putting the tie out of reach, you get the sense that, if nothing else, everyone left the stadium thoroughly entertained.

After all, football is about entertainment. Isn’t it?

Why then do I feel like I’m back kneeling at the pew, scolded for my sacrilege? So-called purists of the game will complain about modern footballers: the neon-colored shoes, the tribal tattoos, the look-at-me haircuts, and the ultimate desecration of their holy ground: goal celebrations. The ranting and raving of the purists would have you believe they want to return to the days when footballers wore button-down shirts, black work boots and feebly tried to move 20-lb. sewn balls. And sometimes it feels like FIFA, and several football associations around the world, feel the same.

Last week, Neymar, the impossibly gifted Brazilian international and (for the time being) Santos forward, was sent off after being booked for wearing a mask emblazoned with his own likeness. Neymar, after carving up the Colo Colo defense on his way to the third goal in the Copa Libertadores contest, took the mask from a fan and duly obliged him by sticking it on, albeit upside-down. The referee, none too pleased, brandished a yellow card to young Neymar, his second of the evening, sealing his exit.

The previous weekend, AC Milan forward Antonio Cassano, far and away the most skilled Italian playing the game today, was booked for removing his shirt after scoring an incredibly important penalty against city rival, Internazionale. A benign gesture at the time, it later proved fatal when he inexplicably pulled down a rushing Inter player to receive his second yellow and marching orders.

Who me? What about the guy with no pants?

Which brings us to our beloved domestic competition, Major League Soccer. Eric Hassli, French forward for expansion franchise Vancouver Whitecaps, was sent off last week for celebrating a goal against New England for removing his shirt. The referee was unimpressed and, even though Hassli was wearing another Whitecaps top underneath, presented him with his second yellow card of the match.

Now, while I can’t condone Roma’s Mirko Vucinic’s de-pantsing trick from last year’s Euro qualifiers, I can empathize with the above predicaments. Why do we demonize celebration? Why do we adopt a puritanical approach to the most hedonistic of sports? Scoring a goal is one of life’s greatest pleasures. Some have gone so far as to rank its resulting euphoria above the pleasure of sex (I might need to quote Lori Petty in Pointbreak here though and say maybe you’re not doing it right, then).

Nevertheless, scoring a goal is an amazing feeling. Whether it’s in a five-a-side pickup game, a high school championship or in front of 80,000 at the San Siro, it is a wonderful thing. Goals, like those who score them, come in all different forms—delicate chips, blasted volleys, nutmegs, backheels, and headers. Goals are great to watch. But every so often, the goal is surpassed by the goal celebration.

I’ve been watching televised soccer for almost 20 years and in that time I’ve seen choreographed dance routines, corner flag boxing bouts, backflips, and fake boat rides. I’ve watched Romario rock his air baby, Cantona look disgusted with the mortals around him and Fabio Grosso look to be on the verge of tears. I’ve seen Totti suck his thumb and Tevez suck his binky. I’ve seen undershirts with messages written on them, from “Free Palestine” to “Feliz Cumpleanos.” Just this past weekend, Argentinian side Velez Sarsfield celebrated a goal and a “cumpleanos” simultaneously when Santiago Silva ran to the touchline to retrieve a lit candle in honor of a teammate’s birthday.

Sure, sometimes these elaborate gestures don’t go off quite as planned. Two weeks ago we all saw Jermain Defoe’s “100” message written on a shirt underneath his jersey, despite the fact that he failed to score his century goal. Then there are the neo-Nazi salutes, the throat slashes, and a whole host of abusive gestures such as the middle finger and the Barry Ferguson “V”.

But, even the most misguided celebrations are often entertaining. And isn’t that what football is all about? It’s the reason we pay way too much for “authentic” replica kits, the reason we save for travel and ticket costs, the reason we plunk down hard-earned dough week in and week out—so we can share in the pleasure, share in the spectacle, be a part of the drama.

I know, I know—a match-winner removing his top can incite fan violence. Has that ever really happened though?  And if so, doesn’t it say more about the person reacting violently to someone removing his shirt than the bare-chested player himself?

Maybe it’s our puritanical roots. Maybe it’s our jealousy. Whatever the reason, it’s ridiculous to think we should expect our heroes to shuffle back to the midway line silently, like nuns in the cloister, heads bowed in reverence for their savior, Sepp Blatter. And maybe that’s exactly what the so-called “purists” want too.

But not me. I’ll be standing, I’ll be cheering, I’ll be chanting. And when Nani follows up a left-footed strike with a perfect 10 backflip, I’ll be applauding both. Because it’s fun. Because it’s entertainment. Because it’s football, bloody hell.

It ain’t church.

Spain – AKA: La Furia Roja

Much concern mounted weeks leading to the World Cup with several key players injured for Spain. After their demolition of Poland 6-0 and convincing performances by newly recovered El Nino Ferando Torres and Francesc “Cesc” Fabregas one week before World Cup, the 2008 Euro Champions are is expected to open in great form.

Coach: Vicente del Bosque — Former Real Madrid coach (1999-2003). Took reigns of the Spanish team immediately after their Euro 2008 win.

Players to watch:

Fernando Torres – Striker – Liverpool star, fresh off the injury list.
David Villa – Striker – New Barcelona purchase.  One of Spain’s most deadly strikers
Xavi Hernandez – Center Mid – Barcelona midfielder, considered by many, Messi’s secret weapon.
Cesc Fabregas – Center Mid – Arsenal midfielder, looking to make the move to Barca this Summer.
… rest of the team

Strengths:
Tough defense, masters of the midfield, and world-caliber strikers. Well rounded.

Weaknesses:
… I’ll get back to you on this.

Switzerland – AKA: Schweizer Nati

With their young side taking the U-17 World Cup, Switzerland has begun boasts a fleet of maturing players with lineage. With qualification coming easy for the Schweizer Nati, many expect to see them advance from the group stage.

Coach: Ottmar Hitzfeld — Almost 30 years of coaching history. Took over the Swiss National team in 2008.

Players to watch:

Alexander Frei – Striker – Swiss footballer with FC Basel

Strengths:
Organized midfield

Weaknesses:
Lacking in an organized attack.

Prediction:

Let’s reference the historical data, Spain has always played well in group stages. While I’d like to say they should demolish the Swiss, we’ve only seen convincing wins thus far from Germany and South Korea. I’ll give them the win, but it won’t come easy against a team that performed well to qualify.

Match result – Spain 2 – Switzerland 0

Robert Green can't remember if he left the oven on.

Since FIFA went to the current knockout stage qualification system in 1998, 59% of teams that tie their first round game have made it to the knockout stage. Paraguay and Sweden have done it twice. The Swedes tied Trinidad and Tobago in 2006 0-0 and tied England 1-1 in 2002. Paraguay tied South Africa 2-2 in 2002 and Bulgaria 0-0 in 1998.

The 2010 World Cup has already seen more first game ties than ’98, ’02, or ’06 and two groups have yet to play

Leaving Germany’s dominance aside, the obvious question to ask is why teams in the 2010 World Cup cannot hold a lead. Only South Korea and the Dutch have put in the crucial second goal that good teams usually grab, a goal that has been referred to as a dagger so many times that it should be represented on Gamecasts with tiny sword clipart. South Africa, England, Paraguay and Slovakia have all been found lacking when asked to finish off a game. And, curiously, only Slovakia has looked as though they were pushing for a second goal (and only in spurts). The rest seemed content to sit back and defend.

"Does this outfit make me look fantastic? The question is rhetorical."

This mentality has been a long time coming and, incredibly, the story behind it begins and ends with Jose Mourinho.

The Special One won the 2004 Champions League final with Porto by playing a 4-4-2 built to counterattack. Deploying what amounted to four central midfielders behind a sitting striker and Carlos Alberto, Mourinho deigned to let Monaco attack. The theory can be summed up in basketball terms by the cliche, “There are good shots and bad shots.” In soccer there are spots on the field that players like to go, and there are types of crosses and types of passes that teams like to play. If you can force a team – even a very good team – into unfamiliar positions, you have the advantage. It is up to your defenders to win the less-than-ideal crosses and the obtusely angled through-balls that come in.

Porto played the system perfectly, as evidenced from Monaco’s seven first half offsides. While the French side held 54% of possession, they managed only a single shot. And in the 39th minute, Porto counterattacked through an outside back, Paulo Ferreira, whose cross found Carlos Alberto after bouncing around the box.

All well and good, but counterattacking football has been around since… well, since attacking football. So what’s the big deal?

The big deal is the second half. Monaco had 58% of possession, 5 offsides, no shots on goal, and Porto committed 8 fouls but received only a single yellow card. Mourinho’s theory was that he could allow Monaco to possess the ball, provided that they remained in unfamiliar positions. It’s a very basic footy idea, but you have to truly understand the other side’s strategy to make it work.

Porto made the holding midfielder distribute and forced Monaco’s wide strikers to collect the ball in advanced positions where they didn’t have room to run at defenders. Two things made this system work: 1) Porto never stopped counterattacking, and 2) Mourinho is a fantastic coach, and his players often know the other team’s system better than the other team.

"Good one, Didier. Now let's go. I don't think you practiced diving over here yet."

Mourinho added a new wrinkle when he moved to Chelsea. With Didier Drogba, he had a striker who gave his offense two dimensions. While Chelsea could still counterattack with the best, Drogba’s ability to hold the ball alone meant that the Blues could develop a possession offense around the big Ivorian through the wing play of Arjen Robben. Chelsea lost one game in Mourinho’s first year and tied 1-1 only twice. When Chelsea got a lead, they did their best to finish the game off.

With Mourinho’s success, the system he built filtered down through the footy world. The one-striker system gained prominence in the EPL and many teams took other cues from Porto’s Champions League win. Noting the high foul total in the match, managers have realized that if you foul early and often, you get more leeway before the cards start a-comin’. This type of rough play only works if it starts from the opening whistle, but it can completely stifle a strong passing attack (lookin’ at you, Wenger).

Barcelona was the first to develop a gameplan to combat The Mourinho. They started by purchasing Giuly, the player who gave Porto the most trouble in the final. Then they brought in Deco, the playmaker at the heart of Porto’s counterattacks. By pairing Deco with Xavi Hernandez, Barcelona planned to move the ball quickly and efficiently, while stretching the length of their passes. They devised a system in which off-the-ball movement took extreme precedent over dribbling until deep in the final third of the field, an ironic choice considering two of the three best dribblers of the 2000s have worn the blue and red jersey. But Barcelona needed to speed up the game in order to get key men like Ronaldinho and Eto’o into their most dangerous positions. Once those guys were in good positions, they could dribble all they wanted.

Thus Barcelona ruled Spain while Mourinho ruled England, then Italy. And, wearily, we arrive at our climax: The 2009-10 Champions League meeting between Mourinho’s Inter Milan and Barcelona. Mourinho finally had the players to run his system, bringing in playmaker Wesley Sneijder to feed strikers Diego Milito and Samuel Eto’o. Although Inter fell behind Sneijder pulled them level 11 minutes later off a Milito pass, and then it was Milito’s ability to hold the ball that allowed Maicon the time to get forward and finish the go-ahead goal. Milito would top off his brilliant display with a headed goal off a counterattack.

Sneijder brings to life his metaphorical embrace of the playmaker role in Mourinho's system

But the first leg of the semifinal isn’t our focus. We began by discussing how to hold a lead, and to this topic we must return. Inter needed to hold a lead against the most talented offensive team in the world, and to spice things up, they went down to ten men after 27 minutes. So a man down against the defending Champions League winners, Mourinho’s Inter went into a shell. They stuck at least nine and often ten men behind the ball and forced Barcelona into (say it with me) unfamiliar positions. Barca doesn’t like to take the ball into the corner and cross it, they want to cut inside and shoot.** And they don’t want Keita taking their shots, they want Messi and Pedro shooting, or at the very least Ibrahimovic. It was a stunning sight to see Barcelona languidly moving the ball in a semicircle around the 18-yard box, uncertain of how to attack. And this memory seems to be etched into the mind of so many World Cup managers. Establish a lead, then sit back and absorb the attack. But this theory has oh so many problems.

First of all, Inter is a team of great players who spend most of the year together. International teams, particularly at the beginning of tournaments, lack the cohesion necessary to pull off 60 minutes of pure defense. All it takes is one mistake, aka Robert Green,*** to lose your advantage.

Additionally, it takes a great coach to make a team truly understand how the other side will attack. Not just what they like to do, but why they do it and when. In the 2010 Champions League final, Inter snuffed out Arjen Robben because they knew when to send a second defender and how to cover that double-team. Why wasn’t any other team in the tournament able to figure that out? Coaching.

And last, this superdefense technique is counterintuitive. You don’t start a game with eleven defenders on the pitch, and it’s madness to pretend otherwise once you score. There may not be many American football fans reading this, but if you do watch soccer’s lesser cousin you know how frustrating it can be to watch your team go into the prevent defense. It rarely lives up to its name.

As of this writing, 10 of the 13 2010 World Cup matches have been ties or 1-0 wins. Playing for a 1-0 win is like playing for a tie. You give up control of your own destiny and you offer the other team a chance to pull a rabbit out of their hat. You know how to keep the rabbit in the hat?

Stab it with a dagger.****

*Written before Brazil-North Korea.

**Or send in a surprising early cross, everybody who watched the 2009 Champions League final is thinking.

***Yeah, I mean AKA, not e.g. It’s a joke, like his nickname is One Mistake. One Mistake Green, get it? Suck it, language buffs.

****I am the proud owner of two awesome rabbits, and if I actually catch any of you stabbing a bunny I will hire John Harkes to follow you around and commentate on your life while Alexei Lalas chimes in on the hour.

(thumbnail image source: Zonal Marking)

Straight Outta Craven

The Champions League is a big deal. And with such a hyperbolic name, it better be. But the Champions League is also one of the biggest culprits behind financial mess engulfing the footy world these days. A place is the Champions League is worth so much money that clubs deficit-spend like crazy in order to give themselves a chance to secure a spot in Europe’s biggest money pit. In 2005, it was estimated that winning Champions League brought Liverpool an extra $47 million in revenue over the next year.

But for all its big names, the Champions League can be a bit boring. There’s a reason why the All-Star game is only played once a year. Since 1990, when the formation of the English Premier League announced soccer’s intent to become bigger than big business, only four clubs not considered global powerhouses have won Europe’s biggest prize. And let us not forget the 2008 final between Manchester United and Chelsea – easily one of the most boring games of soccer you will ever see. Ever. It’s more boring than this article, so don’t go look it up, just keep reading.

Fulham manager Roy Hodgson, aka Neo

And if you thought the Europa League was the Champions League’s baby brother, you’re only partially right. The winner of tonight’s Europa League final between Fulham and Atletico Madrid will take home close to $8 million in UEFA bonuses. That, coupled with increased revenue from sponsorships and consumer sales, is an almost unfathomable financial boost for a club like Fulham. However, it is a gift and a curse. If you invest that money in your squad but don’t make in to Europe next year, you’re in a huge hole and you have to start selling. A European championship can change the dreams of a club like Fulham from “stay in the top flight” to “make Champions League”. How high should a small club aim?

The most notable thing about Fulham’s run to the Europa League final is how often they’ve been the better team. While neither Atletico or Fulham lost a home game, Atletico tied all but one while Fulham reeled off victories over Shahktar Donetsk, Wolfsburg, and Juventus. The Juve game was the best match of the entire tournament, as Craven Cottage was treated to an epic comeback after a 1-3 defeat at Turin. Atletico’s biggest win was actually a loss. An extra time goal by Diego Forlan gave them an away goals victory over Liverpool and put them into the final.

Forlan and Kun Aguero will lead a strong Atletico attack into Hamburg, the site of this year’s final. Brede Hangeland will be tasked with stopping Forlan’s powerful left foot for Fulham while they’ll rely on Bobby Zamora and American Clint Dempsey for offense. Zamora has been fantastic in the tournament but he is coming off an injury that could see him less than one hundred percent.

What makes this a great final is how well the two teams embody their home country’s styles of play. Fulham will battle in the midfield and try to slow down the swift Atletico counterattack with crunching tackles and a strong aerial presence. Fulham’s midfield revolves around Danny Murphy, who has to have a great match for the Cottagers to win. Atletico’s defense is shaky at best, so they look to get the ball forward as fast as possible. When Jose Antonio Reyes and Simao are on their games, Atletico can move the ball upfield on the wings with the best. When those players are low in confidence, the red and whites crumble like… well, like Reyes himself whenever he gets close to the box.

Here’s how each team got to the final:

Group Stage

*Athletico Madrid only entered the Europa Cup in the knockout stage. Third place finishers in Champions League move to Europa knockout phase. I know, it’s stupid.

CSKA Sofia 1-1 Fulham

Fulham 1-0 Basel

Fulham 1-1 Roma

Roma 2-1 Fulham

Fulham 1-0 CSKA Sofia

Basel 2-3 Fulham

Round of 32

Fulham 2-1 Shakhtar Donetsk

Shakhtar Donetsk 1-1 Fulham

Athletico Madrid 1-1 Galatasaray

Galatasaray 1-2 Athletico Madrid

Round of 16

Atletico 0-0 Sporting Lisbon

Sporting Lisbon 2-2 Athletico Madrid (2-2 on aggregate, Athletico on away goals)

Juventus 3-1 Fulham

Fulham 4-1 Juventus

Quarterfinals

Valencia 2-2 Athletico Madrid

Athletico Madrid 0-0 Valencia (2-2 aggregate, Athletico on away goals)

Fulham 2-1 Wolfsburg

Wolfsburg 0-1 Fulham

Semifinals

Athletico 1-0 Liverpool

Liverpool 2-1 Athletico (2-2 aggregate, Athletico on away goals)

Hamburg 0-0 Fulham

Fulham 2-1 Hamburg

March 31, 2010
Arsenal v Barcelona
Inter Milan v CSKA Moscow

Champions League Quarter-finals, Second Leg
April 6, 2010
Barcelona v Arsenal
CSKA Moscow v Inter Milan

April 7, 2010
Bordeaux v Lyon
Manchester United v Bayern Munich

Champions League Semi-finals
First Leg April 20 & 21; Second Leg April 27 & 28 
Bayern Munich/Manchester United v Lyon/Bordeaux
Inter Milan/CSKA Moscow v Arsenal/Barcelona

 Europa League Quarter-finals, First Leg
April 1, 2010
Hamburg v Standard Liege
Valencia v Atletico Madrid
Fulham v Wolfsburg
Benfica v Liverpool

Europa League Quarter-finals, First Leg
April 8, 2010
Wolfsburg v Fulham
Standard Liege v Hamburg
Atletico Madrid v Valencia
Liverpool v Benfica

Europa League Semi-finals
First Leg April 22; Second Leg April 29
Valencia/Atlético Madrid v Benfica/Liverpool
Hamburg/Standard Liège v Fulham/VfL Wolfsburg

Liverpool’s Europa League campaign begins today against Unirea Urziceni. The surprise champions of the Romanian league made a good showing in the Champions League group stage, finishing in third place and only one point behind Stuttgart.

Urziceni is located in southeast Romania. It takes almost half the town to fill up the 7,000 seat stadium where Unirea Urziceni plays their home games. Thus, the team has been using Steaua Buchuresti’s massive facility 15 miles away for Champions league fixtures. This agreement is one of many between Urziceni owner Dumitru Bucsaru and Bucuresti’s Gigi Becali. The two oligarchs are close business associates and they have grown closer as Unirea has rocketed up the Romanian league ladder. This has led to speculation that Becali is considering a takeover of Urziceni. Both businessmen made their money through dubious land deals with the government (or in Becali’s case, the army) so their interests are intertwined on many levels.

In December, Unirea manager Dan Petrescu left the club to join recently demoted Russian side Kuban Krasnodar. Petrescu’s departure has only fueled rumors that big changes are in store for Unirea. New coach Ronny Levy was recently fired from Maccabi Petach Tikva, but he previously led Israeli powerhouse Maccabi Haifa to three championships. His arrival could coincide with the signing of more foreign talent in the summer, with Unirea groomed as an able competitor for Bucuresti. This would alleviate the pressure on Romanian football to introduce more competition to the league. It would also allow owner Bucsaru to clear out some of the players who are intensely loyal to Petrescu, the only top division manager the team has ever had.

Currently, Unirea sit in a three-way tie for first place in the Romanian league with surprisingly resilient Cluj and Bucuresti. But they should take heart: When they play at Anfield today it will be one of the few times all season their opponent will have more front office issues than they do.

It's what all of the cool babies will be wearing this spring.

Barcelona fans had much to celebrate the first week of May in 2009. First, on May 2nd, they kicked the bejesus out of Real Madrid 6-2, effectively ending any questions as to who would be La Liga champs. Then, on May 6th, Andres Iniesta scored a screamer of a goal in the last seconds of stoppage time against Chelsea, thus advancing to the Champions League final where they then thoroughly dismantled Manchester United.

Celebrations for many no doubt went on long into the night. For most, the after effect was probably no more than a hoarse throat and lingering hangover. For some, it seems, the celebration of these momentous events will be more lasting.

According to the results of a survey by Barcelona radio station ComRadio of local hospitals and clinics, requests for beds at maternity hospitals have gone through the roof. Births this week, and those expected for next week, are 45% above average.

The El Mundo newspaper quoted Mercedes Rodriguez of the city’s Quiron Clinic as saying, “When we notice some sort of surge we look for the reason and it’s evident that the cause of the increase this week is the euphoria of Barca fans thanks to the huge win (against Real) and Iniesta’s goal.”

According to the paper, in Barcelona the baby boom is popularly referred as “the Iniesta generation.”

No word yet on whether there has been a spike in naming babies “Andres” or “Andrea.”

The Glazers new unorthodox tactical system for Manchester United

Last Monday the Glazer family, owners of the club and proud Americans, announced a plan to float a bond for £500m to address the club’s rising level of debt, although financial experts in London warned that the Glazers’ plan could be “hampered by a glut of similar high-yield bond offerings.”

Along with that announcement came a lot of very distressing details.

First came the news that without the sale of Cristiano Ronaldo the club would have been in the red. Thanks to that record breaking deal of £81m, the club was able to report a pre-tax profit of £48.2m (£26m after tax) instead of a loss of £31.8m.

Then came the news that the six members of the Glazer family who sit on the club’s board have loaned themselves £10m, this in addition to paying themselves a further £10m in “management and administration fees.”

The numbness is in the details

Things went from bad to worse last Tuesday when reports emerged that the Glazers were considering transferring ownership of United’s training complex to a holding company they control and then leasing it back to the club.

Today it was reported that the Glazers could take £127m out of the club next year alone if enough investors sign up for the bond issue. The £127m figure includes £70m from the club’s cash reserves (which includes money received from the sale of players), £25m as a dividend to themselves from the club’s cash profits, £6m for “administration and management services,” and £3m “‘in respect of services provided by directors, officers or employees’ of companies the Glazers use to hold their shares in United.”

These payments, combined with the estimated £45m that will be paid out as interest on the £500m bond issue, mean that, next year alone, some £172m will be taken out of the club to service money the Glazers borrowed to buy the club in 2005. Since then the club has paid out £124m in interest payments on the Glazers debt.

At a meeting over the weekend of the Manchester United Supporter’s Trust, which had opposed the Glazers’ takeover of the club in 2005, founding member Johnny Flacks proposed that a letter should be written to Sir Alex Ferguson asking him to resign in protest of the Glazers’ handling of the club. Said Flacks, Ferguson “claims to be a socialist, a former shop steward and a man of the people, so he must be horrified by what is going on,” though he acknowledged that asking Ferguson to resign “would work only if thousands of people sent a copy of this letter to Ferguson letting him know that our fear, if the Glazers stay in control, is that his legacy is going to be destroyed.”

On Monday, the Supporters Trust distanced themselves from Flacks’ idea: “We believe Johnny Flacks and indeed every Manchester United supporter is absolutely entitled to express their views but it is important to distinguish individual views from those of organizations or those present at a meeting.”

A protest march is nevertheless still scheduled for before Manchester United’s Champions League match against AC Milan in February. The idea of the march is that ticket holders will arrive to the match ten minutes into the first half. It is hoped that a great expanse of empty seats will be on view for the television cameras before the kickoff.

Ferguson has said that he does not have”any concerns about the financial situation.” Said Ferguson shortly after the announcement of the bond issue, “I have absolutely no issue at all with the club’s finances and I am really confident about that.” He has said that the club’s debt level had no effect on his refusal to enter the transfer market during the January transfer window, adding “I have all the money I need; the money is available. If I wanted to buy someone, I could get the money.” Ferguson has thus far been silent on the current concerns of the Supporter’s Trust.

He has made his views known about FC United of Manchester, the protest club formed by Manchester United supporters who were disgusted with the Glazers’ takeover of the most successful club in the short history of the Premiership. Ferguson, in the words of the Guardian, “dismissed” the club, nicknamed the “The Red Rebels” and currently playing in the Northern Premier League Premier Division, the seventh tier of the football pyramid in England, as “self-publicists.” Such a view begs this question: are Flacks and his supporters self-deluded in thinking Ferguson will support their cause?

Manchester United captain Gary Neville has made it clear that he wants nothing to do with the planned protest. “”We’re always very well protected and we never get involved in the financial side of things . . . As players we never get involved in those things; our job is purely on the pitch and we allow people who are paid to do jobs in other areas of the club to do their job. It’s nothing to do with us at all.”

Nick Towle represents the interests of those that all of this has everything to do with as chair of the Manchester United Supporters’ Trust. Towle said that, instead of “United’s success and profits” being used to keep ticket prices down and investment in the team up, “immense amounts of money [are] being leaked out of United to pay banks, lawyers, the Glazers themselves and interest, to pay for a takeover none of the supporters, or the United board itself, wanted.” Unless one of his members is a philanthropic gazillionaire, there seems to be little the Supporter’s Trust can do to actually affect any real change in the troubles with United.

For particulars on the details of the £500m bond offering and further alarming insight into Manchester United’s financial health, see this analysis by Neil Hume of the Financial Times.