“Come on Roma, you can do it.” Corriere dello Sport’s front-page headline somehow came across as more desperate than optimistic. Thirty-four years the Giallorossi had waited to play in another European Cup semi-final, only to be ripped apart by a player they had sold to Liverpool 10 months earlier.
Two late goals at Anfield restored the faintest of hopes but did Italians really believe this Roma team could repeat the Champions League second-leg comeback they achieved against Barcelona?
“When you finish up beneath a train, and you come out of it with just a few broken bones, you almost feel lucky,” wrote Luigi Garlando in Gazzetta dello Sport. “That 5-2 final scoreline almost looked beautiful, after risking an historic rout. Now Roma can repeat, like a mantra: ‘Three goals at the Olimpico and we’re through.’ In reality this task is much more complicated. Because between a good start [Kolarov hitting the bar] and a proud finish, came the heart of this match, during which Roma were demolished.”
Defeat hurt more for the fact it was orchestrated by the former Roma player Mohamed Salah. “Those hands placed together asking for forgiveness will not make the goals any less bitter,” observed Matteo Pinci in La Repubblica of the player’s refusal to celebrate. That newspaper, along with several others, called the Egyptian worthy of a Ballon d’Or.
“The past is a beast,” wrote Pinci’s colleague Maurizio Crosetti. “The past is cruel, with long nails. Roma found it suddenly on top of her, flesh torn by ‘Mo Sala’, as they call him here. He is the worst nightmare they feared, and which arrived punctual as anything. It was like being caught in a story written by Stephen King, who had been sleeping badly due to indigestion, and who got up to start writing instead.”
Even the statistics seemed to taunt Roma. “Salah was sold for €42m before bonuses,” noted Davide Stoppini in Gazzetta. “The same player went past the 42-goal mark against Roma: almost as if to demonstrate that he is worth more, much more, too much more.”
Elsewhere in the pink paper, Fabio Licari called for readers to look beyond bland facts and figures, adding: “The numbers cannot tell the full story. [Salah] looked like Messi set to double speed.”
There was praise, too, for other Liverpool players, and in particular Roberto Firmino. Yet one article on the website of Il Messaggero raged against Roma’s failure to plan better for the man they should have known best. “Liverpool are not ‘only’ Salah, how many times have we heard that said? Many, too many times. By everyone, from [the Roma manager Eusebio] Di Francesco down. Now he is almost there, enjoying the final in Kiev. Even if we still have the game at the Olimpico first. Maybe this time, after Anfield, we will hear someone say: ‘We need to stop Salah.’”
Corriere dello Sport’s editor, Alessandro Vocalelli, however, seemed the least willing to give up the ghost. “If it is true that this result was a heavy one, Roma showed once again that they are alive, that they have the character of their manager, that they can punish the English players’ moment of relaxation and a defence – that of the Reds – which is anything but invulnerable,” he insisted in his front-page editorial.
His newspaper also pointed a finger of blame at the officials, labelling the referee, Felix Brych, “a disaster”. “A clear foul on Strootman on the goal that opened up the game,” wrote Vocalelli. “An offside on Liverpool’s third goal‚ two grave errors in a match that at that point still wasn’t yet decided.”
Other newspapers also picked up on the offside, though most relegated it to a footnote. “This Roma team was too broken to be true,” reflected Gianni Mura in La Repubblica before acknowledging they had at least shown character at the end. Still, he pondered: “How many times do miracles repeat themselves?”
Comments (…)
Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion