Champions League Final

Richard Williams (Guardian, 22 May) is wrong as usual. He dismissed last night's Champions League Final as a typical Premiership match, all rush and bustle, but no finesse. Where, or where, he asks were the skills of the great European teams -- Read Madrid in the 1960s or Ajax in the 1970s?

Last night's final only lacked one thing: goals. There were two reasons for that: bad luck and superb defending. And this brings us to the flaw in Williams' argument. The speed of the passing was at times awesome. The interplay between Rooney, Ronaldo and Tevez, or between the Chelsea midfield during their great surge in the second half, was full of skill, played at tremendous speed. The move which started with Rooney parallel with his own penalty area, finding Ronaldo, running at full speed, with a 70-yard pass, who then crossed for Tevez, nearly produced one of the all-time great European goals. The skill which led Drogba and Lampard to hit the woodwork was exceptional. What more could Williams want?

One answer is goals. When we think of the great European or FA Cup finals we think of goals. How many times have Real Madrid's 7-3 defeat of Eintracht Frankfurt or Man United's 4-1 defeat of Benfica been shown? But would Real Madrid have put seven past Ferdinand and Vidic? Would the '68 United team really have scored four times against Terry, Carvalho and Cech? What has changed in the modern game is not the level of skill but the speed in midfield and the quality of defending. United and Chelsea not only had the two best defences in the Premiership, they had the two best defences in Europe. Until Lampard's scrappy goal, United had conceded one goal in six games since the qualifying rounds (where they conceded four goals in six games).

Both defences were great, but they were also helped by superb defensive midfield players. Makalele has been a star for Cheslea and was superb against Gerrard, reducing his contribution. Joe Cole was underrated by nearly all the journalists in today's papers. They all missed the fact that no Chelsea player covered as much ground before he went off and he tackled back through the second half. The reason Ronaldo was less effective in the second half was because Cole and Ballack were frequently set on him, to control his marauding runs which had destroyed Essien in the first half. Cole was superb. Carrick and Scholes were also unsung heroes, making the most number of accurate passes in the game (Carrick 60, Scholes 53).

Much of this isn't pretty and some of it isn't even visible, but it is crucial. Without the running and tackling of Joe Cole and the neat passing of Makalele, United would have continued to control midfield in the second half. Without Carrick and Scholes, United would never have bossed the first forty minutes. It's not Best and Cruyff, but it was great football and made possible the fireworks produced by Ronaldo, Rooney and Tevez at one end and Lampard and Drogba at the other.

There were three turning-points in the match. Two which everyone saw and one which no one has commented on. The first, was Ferguson's decision to play Ronaldo, Tevez and Rooney from the start (note that only one started against Cheslea at Stamford Bridge in the league -- Ferguson wanted to rest Tevez and Ronaldo, along with Evra and Scholes, before the crucial Barcelona match). That and the decision to play Hargreaves, Carrick and Scholes in the middle, was adventurous and led to some exhilarating attacking football in the first forty minutes, cancelled out by Lampard's goal. The second was Grant's ability to reshape his team in the second half, setting Joe Cole and Ballack on Ronaldo, moving the luckless Essien forward. They were all over United and should have scored. The third moment turned the tide for United. Earlier Makalele had hit Tevez with his arm, unnoticed by the referee or his assistants. In the 72nd minute, Tevez got his own back. All eyes were on a United attack and without any officials noticing, Tevez clattered into Makalele and struck him with his arm. Makalele was laid out briefly and was never the same force. The tireless Tevez, United's man of the match despite two missed goals, raised United's morale and United came back stronger in the last 15 minutes and with Giggs replacing the tiring Scholes, held their own in Extra Time, despite Lampard's shot against the bar.

Had Lampard's shot, or Drogba's gone in, or Giggs' shot not been saved by Terry or had it not been for those two excellent saves by Cech in the first half, the match could easily have been 3-3. Then it would be remembered as a classic, one of the all-time great Finals. The fact that it was just 1-1 and decided only be penalties, and that some fo the best football was by defenders and midfielders practising the dark arts of their craft, doe snot mean that it was Premiership bustle. This was great football played by two great sides with hardly an inch between them. Everyone feared a repeat of last year's dull Cup Final, a fitting legacy to '1-0 Mourinho'. It wasn't. It was a match of great athleticism, tremendous tackling and some moments of sublime skill. The sad thing is not that Terry missed a penalty, but that this may be the last glimpse we will have of the team that Ranieri and Mourinho built with their owner's millions and that Grant has managed with great acumen and dignity. The future does not belong to Terry, Drogba or Makalele. Nor, of course, to Neville, Giggs or Scholes. Only time will tell whether it will belong to Ronaldo, Tevez, Rooney, Nani and Anderson. Among other things, this match was the end of an era.