UCL talking points: Are PSG favorites? Arsenal right to be aggrieved?

Well, well, well: the first legs of the UEFA Champions League semifinals are in the books, and we have a lot to discuss.

We had Paris Saint-Germain and Bayern Munich put on a clinic of end-to-end action in a 5-4 game on Tuesday, while Wednesday saw Atlético Madrid and Arsenal battle to a gritty 1-1 draw that leaves things hanging in the balance heading to the Emirates next week.

So, what to make of it all? ESPN FC writers Gab Marcotti, Mark Ogden, Julien Laurens and Sam Tighe are here to break down the action as it happened and look ahead to the second legs.

- Marcotti: Don't nitpick, just marvel at PSG vs. Bayern
- VAR Review: Were Bayern wronged by penalty call?
- Atlético, Arsenal still have all to play for in Champions League

Q1. So PSG and Bayern put on a nine-goal thriller, but was it a good game/instant classic, or a chaotic mess?

Tighe: It was the best game of football I've seen since at least the 2022 FIFA World Cup final ... but honestly, it might simply end up going down as the best I've ever seen.

However, mine is not a universally held view. Former players turned pundits Wayne Rooney and Clarence Seedorf were somewhat scathing of the defending on show; the former called it "immature," while the latter was so concerned it prompted him to suggest Arsenal are the favorites to win the Champions League.

OK, fine, it was no rearguard masterclass. There were some two-on-two breaks that exposed wide-open defensive schemes, but the main reason we saw nine goals is because the quality of the attackers was simply too damn high to deal with.

play

Moreno credits Bayern for keeping PSG tie alive in Paris

Ale Moreno was impressed to see Bayern Munich keep the tie against PSG alive after falling 5-2 down in Paris.

When have you ever seen Nuno Mendes -- possibly the best left back -- torn to shreds like that? Michael Olise gave him the runaround. Meanwhile, the less said about Josip Stanisic's efforts to stop Khvicha Kvaratskhelia, the better.

Much of this was simply elite attackers winning their one-on-one battles so convincingly, it made great defenders look shabby. I'm not one to turn my nose up at that sort of thing!

Ogden: I love watching a team execute a well-drilled defensive plan, which is weird considering that I grew up idolizing strikers, but I'm never going to throw a bucket of cold water over a game as enthralling as PSG vs. Bayern by pointing to the defensive shortcomings of both sides. It was an amazing game made better by the fact that risk and adventure were rewarded in the shape of goals and plenty of near misses.

I understand why Rooney and Seedorf focused on the negatives -- there's also a great clip making the rounds of former Republic of Ireland defender Kenny Cunningham suggesting that AC Milan's 0-0 draw with Juventus in the 2003 Champions League final was a better game -- but we all really want to see goals and excitement.

Tuesday's game had everyone talking about football and goals rather than overthinking about team selection, tactical mistakes or xG: just the simple joy and thrill of a great game of top-quality football.

Laurens: I'll admit, I really don't understand this debate. It was both magical and chaotic, and we are allowed to like both. It is a bit like the old Lionel Messi vs. Cristiano Ronaldo debate. You don't have to choose one or the other -- they are both GOATs and you are allowed to like them both.

Football is played all around the world with different tactics, identities and philosophies. If you love attacking football to the extreme, with fluidity within the system, then you would have been in heaven watching PSG vs. Bayern. If you are more of a defensive purist who prefers more rigid structures, then you would not have enjoyed the Parc des Princes goalfest, and that is fine. A 5-4 scoreline with a combined xG of 5 is not for everyone; neither is a 0-0 with a combined xG of 0.8! That's why we love football right? Because of its differences.

Take Vitinha. In possession on Tuesday, he was once again incredible and is arguably one of the best players in the world in his position. Without the ball, however, he was not good enough because he doesn't have the power, strength or a defensive mindset. Some managers, like PSG boss Luis Enrique, love him and what he offers; other more defensive-minded coaches would not.

Marcotti: The old cliché is that the perfect, mistake-free game ends 0-0 and sure, you can go back, review the tape, second-guess and point out errors on many of the goals.

Why does Jamal Musiala let João Neves run across him? Why are there four guys around Olise and he still scores? There were many other examples, but I think it needs to be seen within the context of the game. Most matches are like that, with goals scored because somebody makes a mistake -- or a decision they quickly come to regret -- and often because somebody very talented forces them into a mistake.

The intensity and athleticism on display Tuesday night was outrageous. And the precision of the movements, and the individual technique of the players: Are you kidding me? I might add -- and maybe it should be food for thought -- that both teams had plenty of rest and plenty of time to work on stuff without domestic pressure. It's amazing what great managers can achieve with great teams when given the tools to do so, rather than forcing them into the usual congested fixture lists.

Q2. If PSG and Bayern did this in leg one, what can we expect from leg two? Both Vincent Kompany and Luis Enrique pledged postgame that they would stick to their approaches next week; can the return fixture live up to the hype or will nerves set in? And who goes through: Bayern Munich or PSG?

Ogden: I don't think we can realistically expect a different game, simply because both teams are so accustomed to winning and dominating that neither are likely to shut up shop if they go ahead on the night.

PSG won't go to Munich to defend their one-goal lead. They will try to score again and kill the tie off, but Bayern need to score, so their approach from minute one will be based on attack.

In terms of nerves, I don't see either side being derailed by that. Bayern are at home and will be backed by a passionate crowd, but PSG have fond memories of the Allianz Arena having won the Champions League there last season, so in many ways, they will feel as at home as Bayern.

Who's going to win? I'm backing PSG. I would always back them to score when they need to.

Laurens: Kompany was asked this same question about next week. Does he want the same from his team? He answered: "more." They will go again in Munich on Wednesday and will go harder, stronger and faster even than in Paris because this time, a place in the final is on the line.

These two coaches and two teams don't change their style of play. It doesn't matter if they are at home or away, whether it's the Champions League semifinals or the DFB-Pokal. They attack, attack again and never stop attacking from the first minute to the 90th, and next week will be no different.

Achraf Hakimi's absence will be a big blow for PSG and without him, it won't be the same. Warren Zaïre-Emery will start at right back, and he offers different qualities than Hakimi: expect less attacking output on that flank, but more stability. PSG have a slight lead, but the fact that the game is in Munich erases that slender advantage, which will feel like a one-goal head start for Bayern.

So who will qualify? We are in for another treat and another unforgettable night, even more this time. As much as I would love my beloved PSG to reach another final, I think the home advantage for the Bavarians will be too much and they will make it to Budapest.

play

Leboeuf: Even the best defenders in the world end up in trouble

Frank Leboeuf says the defensive side of the game was "forgotten" in Paris Saint-Germain and Bayern Munich's UCL semifinal.

Marcotti: You can't realistically expect them to come back and play like this again in eight days' time, but I do think it stung Luis Enrique a little bit that his team gave up two goals in the space of three minutes with half an hour left, turning a 5-2 advantage into a slender 5-4 lead.

I'd assume sending on Fabián Ruiz was maybe a way to manage the game a little bit, put on some fresh legs and add a wise, ball-playing head to PSG's midfield, but it wasn't enough. I'm not suggesting they should have gone full-on catenaccio and gone to play on the counter, but this PSG side are very flexible. They can play possession, and their transition game is exceptional.

I think we're likely to see a slightly more measured approach from PSG in the return leg because, unlike Bayern, they know how to do that, and they have the players to do that. With Hakimi missing the return leg, you could look at moving Zaïre-Emery to right back for example, putting Ruiz in the middle of the park, maybe have Désiré Doué start from a deeper position and make Bayern chase you more for the ball, rather than going north-south at every opportunity.

Ultimately, Luis Enrique knows what he's doing, and I think he might spring a surprise or two.

Tighe: I agree with Gab that of the two teams, PSG is the one capable of trying to slow the game down and control proceedings. Zaïre-Emery replacing Hakimi at right back would lend itself to the team being more cautious too and quite frankly, I consider this essential to winning the tie.

Bayern's inability -- or unwillingness -- to play anything other than electric attacking football at 100 mph has been a treat to watch, but it has left them vulnerable against Real Madrid and now PSG. It threatened to derail them at the Bernabéu and it put them 5-2 behind at one stage at the Parc des Princes.

Now that's not to sniff at what they do well, because clearly they're able to hang four or five goals on Europe's top teams. But PSG are the only opponent who can return that favor, and if they do find themselves in a spot where they need to take the tempo out of the game in order to win, I back them to do it.

Q3. Atlético Madrid vs. Arsenal ended, perhaps, as we expected, with a cagey and aggressive 1-1 draw, with both goals coming from the penalty spot. Forget about comparing it to Bayern and PSG: was it as bad, ugly and/or unwatchable as we feared?

Laurens: If you feared that Atlético vs. Arsenal would be unwatchable, bad or ugly, you know nothing about football.

This was not a bad game. It was a tactical affair as we expected. It was intense as we expected, too, but in a different way than Tuesday night. It was structured, it was disciplined, and it showcased different philosophies to Kompany and Luis Enrique.

There is also no need to compare with what we saw on Tuesday. It doesn't mean Atlético or Arsenal are two bad teams or inferior to PSG and Bayern. It might not be your cup of tea, but it still was a high-level game. They just have different qualities and different types of players. But over one game, especially a Champions League final, anything will be possible, even if most of the bets will be on Paris or Munich. So I am really looking forward to the second leg next week at the Emirates for another tense, fascinating encounter.

Ogden: It wasn't bad, it was just ... different. Like watching a film at the cinema and then re-watching it on a small TV the next night. It was what we expected it to be, in the sense of it being two teams who would rather play the percentages and grind out a 1-0 win than be more expansive and risk-taking.

It wasn't boring, but it was a grind compared to PSG vs. Bayern. The passes didn't flow quite so quickly, none of the players showed anything like the flair and speed of thought and movement that we saw in Paris, but it's probably unrealistic and unfair to have expected that.

Diego Simeone works within Atlético Madrid's limitations and always builds sides capable of irritating Real Madrid and Barcelona, so he and his team regularly punch above their weight. But Arsenal are a wealthier, more powerful club and they should be better than they are under Mikel Arteta. He has the players to play a less rigid game, but nonetheless retains the stiff structure that makes Arsenal so hard to watch at times.

This game was always going to turn out as it did, and the second leg will be the same.

Tighe: It was just such a contrast to Tuesday. We can respect different approaches and styles, Juls, but ultimately football fans experienced the high of their lives watching PSG and Bayern go at each other in relentless attack mode. Nothing was ever going to compare.

What we got from Arsenal and Atléti was appropriately cagey. Two teams whose strengths do not lend to relentless attacking; two teams who feel varying degrees of unsure of themselves right now.

Arsenal attempted a classic European away performance -- slow-paced, cagey, nick a goal and let's see -- and largely pulled it off. Atléti turned it on for ... 25 minutes (at most?) before settling back down and seemingly accepting a draw. It's just a world away from what the other semifinal provided.

Marcotti: It wasn't a bad game, and I kind of think the cliché-merchants who wheeled out the old stereotypes about Cholismo (Simeone's style of play) and the Atléti that reached the Champions League final, as if Diego Godín, Raul García and Diego Costa were still around need to watch them a little more.

It was cagey because it was a semifinal and a far more tactical game (in the pejorative sense) than the other one. But that makes sense: these teams have different identities and in Arsenal's case, lest we forget they're amid a title race, which takes a ton out of you.

And, by the way, for the numbers folk: PSG-Bayern had 4.96 xG, this game had 3.72: we're not that far off. I don't know if it was part of Simeone's game plan to take the sting out of the match in the first half and kick it up a notch after the break, but the figures are pretty striking. Arsenal won the first half, 1.23 to 0.21 (and 6-5 on shots), while Atleti had the second: 2.00 to 0.27 (13 to 5). On the evidence of the chances created, I thought Atleti probably deserved more.

Q4. Atlético and Arsenal ended 1-1, with both sides scoring a penalty and then Arsenal being denied a second spot-kick late in the second half. Were they the right decisions?

Ogden: It was a bad night for the officials, especially referee Danny Makkelie, but in many ways they are a victim of the rules governing penalties. Three penalties were given, one was rescinded and I think the only one that was correctly called in the end was the Atleti spot-kick following a Ben White handball.

The other two were really soft. Arsenal's penalty, awarded when Dávid Hancko collided with Viktor Gyökeres, was harsh because it was more of a coming together than a foul. Gyökeres made the most of it and tumbled to the ground, but it was a fortunate decision for Arsenal.

Hancko was involved in the third incident too, when he was judged to have fouled Eberechi Eze. Replays showed that he didn't foul the Arsenal player -- Eze anticipated contact and fell to the ground. It wasn't a dive, but wasn't a penalty either and, after a lengthy review, Makkelie overturned it.

But with virtually every instance of contact in games now leading to free kicks or penalties, referees now have very little room for manoeuvre so too many soft penalties are awarded.

Laurens: I don't know if the referee had a tough night like Oggy says. The foul on Gyökeres is definitely a penalty. There is no doubt. The Arsenal striker is ahead of the defender who barged into him without any contact on the ball. The handball should never be given (like on Alphonso Davies' one on Tuesday) but it is the letter of the law and in the Champions League they follow the rules. Finally, there was no contact between Hanko and Eze, it was never a penalty and was correctly overturned once VAR intervened to save Makkelie.

play

ESPN FC crew back VAR call to overturn Arsenal's penalty

Stewart Robson, Frank Leboeuf and Craig Burley agree with the VAR intervention that prevented a second Arsenal penalty against Atletico Madrid.

Tighe: Three penalty decisions, and in the end, all three officiated correctly in my view.

I don't think Gyökeres had to be particularly clever to win the first one -- Hancko ended up barging through the back of him just as he was considering a shot from close range.

I despise the fact that the White handball is a penalty, but in Europe, and in lockstep with the Davies call the night before, it's a penalty.

And I've been shouting this from the rooftops for years: Just because contact is made in the box doesn't mean it's a penalty. It's a contact sport. There's barely any contact in that Eze challenge from Hancko. I was admittedly surprised to see it overturned, but ultimately pleased: I do not like seeing those given.

Marcotti: All three calls were correct, but all three are also examples bad defending. White should not be turning his head away, especially as it's obvious where Marcos Llorente's shot was heading (way out of play). In so doing, his arm comes up. At this level, you expect more awareness.

A big strong boy like Gyökeres goes down way too easily, but equally you can't just run into the back of somebody. To make a basketball analogy, Gyökeres got there first and established position and if Hancko doesn't run into him, he probably gets a shot off. Pretty cut-and-dried that one.

Eze goes down and acts as if he's hurt on the one that was overturned. That's what players do these days. The contact was minimal and it's a contact sport, so I have no problem with VAR's intervention. That said, I have a lot of problems with Hancko's defending. There is no reason to stretch out your leg like that, you are putting yourself at risk (and, really, you should know that Eze is coming). Even if Hancko had gotten there first, the best he could hope for was knocking the ball away in an area where Arsenal would have recovered it straight away. Better to track the run and defend Eze, maybe driving away from goal.

With all that said, I think some folks -- particularly in England -- think the penalty should have stood because of the "clear and obvious" threshold for VAR intervention. And since the Hancko/Eze incident was given as a penalty, it should stand. I get that argument. But what they forget is that Makkelie is communicating with the VAR. And if he doesn't think his view was clear enough or wants to have another look, it makes sense to let him have one.

Q5. You've made your picks to advance from Bayern and PSG. Who advances here, and do either of them have a chance against whichever team emerges from the Allianz Arena next week?

Ogden: I expect Arsenal to go through next week. Atleti haven't been great recently, they were average on Wednesday, and Julián Álvarez looks to be injured, so I don't see how they can win at the Emirates.

But no matter which side reaches the final, they will obviously have a chance to win the game. Over 90 minutes, anything can happen at this level, although Arsenal will pose more threat to PSG or Bayern than Atlético.

You don't get many upsets in Champions League finals, but the gap between the finalists in Budapest, whoever they are, will be much smaller than it was in 2005 when Liverpool beat AC Milan in Istanbul, so don't expect a one-horse race.

Arsenal have already beaten Bayern this season and they ran PSG close in the semifinals a year ago, so if they make it to the final, they will have more than a puncher's chance of winning.

Laurens: I also expect Arsenal to qualify at home next week. Atlético's record on the road this season in any competition (bar the first leg quarterfinal against Barcelona) is not great. They lost 4-0 at the Emirates in the league phase for example. The only thing that makes me think that Atleti still have a chance is that they will be fresher physically on Tuesday because they will play their B team in LaLiga, where they have nothing to play for at Valencia on Saturday, like they have done for the last five weeks.

Meanwhile, Arsenal will have to play their strongest XI against Fulham on Saturday evening to keep pace with Manchester City in the Premier League title race. Nevertheless, I still think the Gunners will edge it in London. It won't be an emphatic win, but they will have just a little too much for Atlético.

play

Burley: Atletico-Arsenal like a 'Europa League semifinal' compared to PSG-Bayern

Craig Burley can't imagine either Atletico Madrid or Arsenal stopping PSG or Bayern from winning the Champions League.

Marcotti: It's super close and since everybody is picking Arsenal, I'll go Atleti. I thought they had the better chances (just) in this game and there are two big factors that they can lean into. One is that, unlike Arsenal, who have a huge game against Fulham and have to deal with the stress of a domestic title race, they can just be laser-focused on this game.

The other is Jan Oblak. Maybe I'm being romantic (and, yes, David Raya is exceptional too) but I feel the gods of football owe the Atleti custodian one. And we know he can be a shutdown keeper. The wildcard, for Arsenal is, again, Jurriën Timber and if he's going to be back and contributing (probably not, but who knows?). And Bukayo Saka. He came off the bench on Wednesday, and I'd assume he'll be ready to start next week.

As for the final ... really? Of course whoever advances has a chance. That's why we play the games. PSG and Bayern are both better, substantially better, right now. But I'm not sure either matches up that well against a full-strength Arsenal or Atlético Madrid. PSG or Bayern will be favorites, but we'll still get a contest. Certainly more than last year.

Tighe: I expect Arsenal to get the job done at home next week. That will be one nervy stadium, and there's still scope for it to go wrong, but my faith in Atleti away from home is distinctly lacking.

They'd then go into the final as heavy, heavy underdogs no matter who emerges from that other tie. I'd love to sit here and make a compelling case for a stout defensive unit proving the key to victory in a final settling -- but I probably tried that last season, only to watch Internazionale get taken apart 5-0 by ... PSG! Luis Enrique's side are the ones I'm tipping to reach the showpiece event.