맨체스터 유나이티드가 19일 뉴웸블리구장에서 첼시와 맞붙은 잉글랜드축구협회(FA)컵 결승전서 연장전에 나온 첼시 디디에 드록바의 결승골로 0-1로 지면서 더블(리그·FA컵 우승) 달성에 실패했다.

잉글랜드 프리미어리그 최고의 두팀이 새 경기장에서 맞붙는다는 점에서 팬들의 기대는 컸다. 빅4의 맞대결은 호쾌하고 강렬한 플레이가 나오는 등 특별하다.

하지만 FA컵 결승전은 솔직히 좀 맥빠진 경기였다. 이에 대해 새 경기장의 시설, 즉 잔디의 길이가 좀 길었다던가, 심판 판정에 문제가 있었다는 등의 불평은 있다.

내 생각은 무기력했던 결승전은 이런 제반여건보다 선수들의 피로도와 전술적인 부분에서 기인했다고 본다.

출전선수 대부분은 시즌 마지막 경기까지 치르느라 피곤한 기색이 역력했다. 이날 경기는 맨유의 올시즌 60번째 경기였고, 첼시는 63번째 경기였다. 올시즌 최고 스타들이 모였지만 시즌 중 부상으로 양팀 선수 모두 힘들어 해 최고의 경기력을 보여주기에는 부족함이 있었다.

특히 '올해의 선수'상 수상자 맨유 크리스티안 호날두는 첼시 수비수 숀 라이트-필립스와 파울로 페레이라의 협력수비에 번번이 막히며 강력한 모습을 보여주지 못했다. 마치 지난해 2006 독일월드컵 4강전에서와 같이 무기력한 모습이었다. 그에게는 휴식이 필요하다.

첼시에서는 프랭크 램퍼드가 그러했다. 올시즌 거의 전경기를 소화한 그는 이날 경기서 다른 선수들에 비해 적은 운동량을 선보였다.

하지만 그는 드록바의 결승골에 기여하며 존재감을 드러냈다. 체력적인 부담이 있었지만 효과적인 움직임으로 다른 선수들에 없는 영향력을 선보인 것이다.

양팀 감독 모두 똑같은 포메이션으로 나왔다는 점에서 전술적으로도 팬들에게는 재미가 덜했다. 첼시 무리뉴 감독은 2시즌 연속 첼시를 챔피언에 올렸던 4-3-3 전술을 들고 나왔다. 사실 무리뉴 감독은 맨유 알렉스 퍼거슨 감독보다 더욱 승리를 바랬다.

무리뉴 감독은 자신의 스타일로 팀을 조율했고, 경기에서 이겼다. 반면 퍼거슨 감독은 시즌 내내 다양한 전술로 상대팀을 상대했지만 이날 경기의 4-3-3 포메이션은 좀 어색했다.

퍼거슨 감독이 대런 플레처를 선택하고 앨런 스미스를 뺀 것은 긍정적인 부분이었다. 첼시에 이기기 위해서는 미드필드 싸움에서 이겨야 하는 데 스미스는 너무 전방에서 움직이는 경향이 있다.

첼시 존 테리와 마이클 에시앙을 바쁘게 해 육체적으로 압박을 해야 하지만 스미스는 그러한 점이 부족하다. 또 웨인 루니와 라이언 긱스에게 많은 공간을 내주는 역할도 조금 부족하다.

맨유 루니는 후반들어 공격에 활기를 띄었지만 첼시 존 테리와 마이클 에시앙은 협력수비로 잘 막아냈다. 호날두와 긱스는 루니를 돕지 못했다.

호날두는 자주 윙으로 움직였고, 긱스도 움직임이 별로였다. 폴 스콜스, 마이클 캐릭, 대런 플래처 역시 첼시 수비수이 반칙에 연결을 원할히 하지 못하며 그라운드에 쓰러지기 일쑤였다. 맨유는 유럽축구연맹(UEFA) 챔피언스리그에서 AS로마를 7-1로 이기던 강력한 공격력을 보여주지 못했다.

맨유 네만야 비디치는 가브리엘 에인세, 에브라 등과 협력해 고급 수비로 첼시 드록바를 훌륭하게 막아냈다. 결과적으로 골을 주기는 했지만 마지막 몇분 동안 캐릭과 존 오셔의 움직임에 문제가 있었기 때문에 벌어진 일이었다. 결승골은 캐릭이 드록바가 페널티박스 안으로 파고드는 것을 막아서야 하는 입장이었음에도 놓쳤기 때문에 벌어졌다.

드록바가 공을 잡을 당시 캐릭은 자리를 지키고 막아서야 했다. 캐릭이 램파드와의 원투패스에 신경쓴 나머지 리오 퍼디낸드와 사이 공간을 내주고 말았다. 어째든 첼시는 이겼고, 올시즌 2개의 트로피를 들었다.

Skysports 부편집장

[마크 칼럼 원문]

Manchester United failed to make it a Double as Didier Drogba?s goal in extra-time gave Chelsea a 1-0 win in the first FA Cup final back at Wembley.

In such a superb new stadium, it would have been fitting if the match had lived up to expectations of a huge battle between the top two teams in country.

But, as is so often the case, it was quite a major let-down and it was a disappointing way for the English domestic season to finish.

In some ways, how the game played out should not have been a surprise as it is rare that meetings between the leading four clubs in England are exciting spectacles.

There were also complaints about the pitch and the fact that the grass was too long for the teams to play attractive football. I think there were two main reasons why the match did not live up to the hype, and these were tiredness and tactics.

Starting with the tiredness factor and it was the final game in a long season for both clubs - United were playing their 60th match of the campaign and Chelsea their 63rd.

With injuries having affected both squads at various stages of the season, there was a lack of freshness about the players on show at Wembley, particularly the big stars.

Player of the Year, Cristiano Ronaldo, has been a shadow of his usual self in recent games and he was unable to make an impact.

In part this was due to the way he was dealt with by Chelsea, particularly in the first half when Shaun Wright-Phillips came back to help Paulo Ferreira.

But it was clear that Ronaldo did not have the same zip that was in his performances for most of the season and, bearing in mind he also reached the World Cup semi-finals with Portugal last summer, he is
ready for a rest.

For Chelsea, Frank Lampard has played in almost every game and he was another player who looked short on energy.

I would, however, suggest that it was yet another example of Lampard not being good enough to stamp his authority on a big occasion.

Yes, he provided the pass for Drogba to score the winning goal, and had a couple of first-half shots, but if you examine his displays against the top teams, and those of lesser ability, there is usually quite a difference in how effective he is.

Turning the focus on to tactics and the big problem here was that both managers decided to send out their teams in the same formation.

In a way, Chelsea cannot be faulted for their approach as Jose Mourinho went back to the 4-3-3 formation which had won the title in the previous two seasons.

Also, for Mourinho, the game was much more important than for Sir Alex Ferguson as it was one he just could not afford to lose.

Therefore, he had to pick a system and style that served his interests - winning the game. As the result shows, it worked to perfection.

Ferguson, on the other hand, was far too cautious, particularly when you consider how well United have played at times this season.

Again, tiredness perhaps prevented the team from playing in their usual manner, but the selection of Darren Fletcher rather than Alan Smith was not a positive one.

Knowing the pressure Chelsea were under to win, and it is easy to say this in hindsight, United would have done better with a more positive approach, with Smith playing up front.

Smith?s physical presence would have kept both John Terry and Michael Essien busy, and allowed the likes of Wayne Rooney and Ryan Giggs to find more space and link up better.

Instead, while Rooney did well on his own up front and ensured Essien had an uncomfortable afternoon, there was simply not enough support and so Terry was always free to help Essien out and leave Rooney frustrated.

Ronaldo was stuck to the wing too often, and Giggs never really got close enough to help Rooney out. With Paul Scholes sitting deeper than usual, and with Michael Carrick and Fletcher also quite deep, it left Rooney far too isolated.

It also meant United did not play to their main strength - going forward - and you only have to look back at the 7-1 win over Roma to see how good a role Smith played in unsettling the opposition.

Where Ferguson did brilliantly was in defence as Drogba was shut out for 116 minutes before his match-winning contribution. Nemanja Vidic was excellent in marking Drogba and the selection of Gabriel Heinze, rather than Patrice Evra, gave United extra height in defence to cope with the Chelsea striker.

One other thing which may have had an effect on the result was the decision to substitute Carrick and bring on John O?Shea in the final few minutes. I say this because, for the winning goal, I just wonder whether Carrick may have been in a position to stop Drogba running into the box if he had been on the field.

If you look where Drogba originally picked up the ball, it was in a position where Carrick usually sits. He then played a one-two with Lampard and was into the box before Rio Ferdinand was able to react and turn round quickly enough.

Had Carrick still been on the pitch, I think he may have followed Drogba?s run and got in a tackle - O?Shea had only just come in and was not up to the pace of the game. However, while Chelsea won on the day, and finished the season with two trophies, I still think United will be the happier of the two clubs.

The target at the start of the season was to win the Premier League title and Ferguson was determined to make that happen. He achieved that, and he deserves great credit, too, for it is arguably the best of his nine successes - winning the FA Cup would have been a bonus.

Chelsea, though, must be a little disappointed as, if they had been asked which two trophies they would like to win this season, it would not have been the Carling Cup or the FA Cup.

The Champions League was the big priority, followed by the Premier League, then the FA Cup, then the Carling Cup. Once again, Chelsea lost in the semi-finals of the Champions League >and drew too many games in the league.

And let?s not forget that United did play better football than Chelsea throughout the season. Unfortunately, the FA Cup final proved to be just one game too many for both clubs to put on a show to mark such a historic occasion.