F365 Features

Fleet Street's review of events at the Bridge is as uninspired as the game itself. There's a general consensus that ManYoo were unlucky but an unmemorable game has been matched by unmemorable reviews...

But at least there's a decent summary provided by John Cross for The Daily Mirror to set our paper review on its way:

'Carlo Ancelotti wore the look of a manager destined to win the Premier League after Chelsea struck a major blow in the battle for the title.

'It was a look of relief after his team dug in and ground out yet another victory at Stamford Bridge when they barely deserved it. Chelsea boss Ancelotti will know that his team were lucky as Manchester United certainly did not deserve to lose after a gritty, niggly battle of wills at Stamford Bridge.'

And the party line in The Times is also that Chelsea were undeserved victors.

'It was a masterpiece of preparation by Sir Alex Ferguson and an excellent performance by his team - and still it didn't add up to enough,' writes Patrrick Barclay. 'The better side lost; it happens. But the worry for Ferguson now is that those five points, should they still separate the teams at the end of the year, may prove a lot harder to claw back now that Chelsea have been allowed to spend Roman Abramovich's money in the January window, just in time to plug any gaps left by the departure of Drogba, Michael Essien, Salomon Kalou and John Obi Mikel for the African Cup of Nations.'

In his match report for the paper, a concurring Oliver Kay adds: 'United's players knew that this was a significant setback, not to mention a painful one. When Sir Alex Ferguson claimed that his team had "dominated the game", it was a mild exaggeration, but it was by no means the stuff of fantasy. They had been the more assertive team throughout, defending diligently and attacking with purpose when the opportunity arose, and would surely have claimed something from the game, quite possibly a victory, had not the two big refereeing decisions gone in Chelsea's favour.'

The Guardian's Richard Williams makes an unmemorable point:

'Winning ugly, they call it. And that was certainly ugly. Roman Abramovich's hopes that Carlo Ancelotti would bring a new age of artistry and enlightenment to Stamford Bridge were put on hold for 90 minutes as Chelsea and Manchester United fought out a bitter contest for supremacy at the top of the Premier League, with no concession to beauty or entertainment.

'This, too, is football, thank goodness. The game cannot survive on an unrelieved diet of dainty stepovers, geometrical build-ups and goals of the month flying in from improbable angles. It needs its edge, its bared teeth, its tribal memory of muddy marshes and bloody scars. Just not too often, please.'

A piece of zero illumination is provided by Martin Samuel for The Daily Mail in which he focuses solely on the virtues of the player who we thought scored the winning goal but actually probably didn't.

'Every fibre in Terry's body must have ached for the revenge of a winning goal against Manchester United, particularly this day, when he would have known the ground was alive with mockery and whispers, yet he let the moment pass.

'This is captaincy of the highest order, Terry putting his mind on the line, as much as his body. He sacrifices, the way Tony Adams once did for Arsenal and Roy Keane for Manchester.

'The Italian talks up the influence of Didier Drogba - although he was quiet by his standards yesterday - but Terry is his leader, as he has been for every Chelsea and England manager since 2006.

'That time span does not appear long, but in those three years a total of seven managers, whose honours include a World Cup, five European Cups, two Copa Americas and close to two dozen domestic titles, have all made him their captain.

'They do so because they see beyond the headlines, beyond the scandals and celebrity soap operas, beyond the sensation and the sneers. They do so because, when all that baggage is removed, what remains, quite simply, is one hell of a footballer.'

Over at The Daily Telegraph, Kevin Garside saw some signs of progress from United:

'The headline statistics of three defeats and a five-point deficit to the leaders with Arsenal cutting loose, ought to be tempered by the underlying progress Ferguson's team are making. There is more to be teased once Ferguson trains the sights of Anderson and Valencia on goal.

'Fletcher is arguably easing Paul Scholes into retirement. Ferguson's increasing reliance on the minimalist Scot is justified. The Fletcher-Carrick-Anderson triangle was of the Bermuda variety, making the ball disappear mysteriously from Chelsea's view.'

But at least Sam Wallace of The Independent has made an effort to add some sort of illumination to the dull affair seen at the Bridge:

'This was not one of those epochal Chelsea-United games when you feel one team has either been plunged into trouble or rescued themselves from decline with an improbable victory - as United did almost exactly four years ago with Darren Fletcher's goal at Old Trafford. Yet it was United's third defeat of the season and there is cause for concern about a team who keep losing their way and a manager who keeps moaning about referees.

'Even with Rooney, United looked flat in attack. It is not often they miss Dimitar Berbatov but they did yesterday. With Ryan Giggs isolated on the left and Antonio Valencia equally out of touch on the other flank, they just did not have the menace of last season. Cristiano Ronaldo never had his best games against Chelsea - Moscow aside, he never scored against them - but they do really miss him in the big games.

'This has been the marquee fixture of English football over the last five years and nothing yesterday made you think that these two will not be in contention come May. But for all the glum faces in red shirts and the celebrations on the opposing side no-one was claiming that this was definitive. Neither are indomitable, both are capable of losing games.'