Following the Champions’ league exits of England’s top two sides, it seems that it is now universally accepted that going for victory in all competitions is foolish, it being ‘impossible to win on all fronts’. In fact, the very use of this terminology – usually found in descriptions of failed German attempts to conquer Europe – suggests that attempting to win the Champions’ League alongside other domestic competitions is as difficult as taking an army through Russia in wintertime. As many a General has found to his cost, this is indeed very difficult and by extension, United and Chelsea are excused for their poor showing in last week’s semi-finals. Just like the armies of Napoleon and Hitler, they had become battle-weary, whereas Liverpool – who according to Mourinho have been focussing solely on Europe since January – and Milan were not better, just fresher.

Now, to anyone who actually watched both matches, this view may seem a little hard to swallow. And anyone who witnessed Chelsea lump countless diagonal balls to Drogba or Manchester United obstinately refuse to mark the brilliant Kaka may wish to suggest that the root cause of the defeats imposed upon United and Chelsea was not fatigue, but tactical naivety. Going for victory on so many ‘fronts’ is undoubtedly a tall order, but both teams played into the hands of their adversary. Traps were laid and the Premiership’s top two sides gamely fell prey to their opponent’s devices.

One doesn’t imagine that the DVD of Liverpool’s epic victory over Milan two years ago is among Sir Alex Ferguson’s personal collection, but had he thrown even a cursory glance at that game, he couldn’t have helped but notice how Kaka took Liverpool to the proverbial cleaners before the tough tackling German, Didi Hamann, was brought on to nullify the Brazilian’s wizardry. With his influence diminished, Liverpool were able to get a foothold in the game and went on to stage one of the greatest comebacks of all time.

On Wednesday night, Sir Alex Fergusson’s United refused to pay any special attention to the dynamic Brazilian. Pre-game, when asked directly how he planned to deal with Kaka, Fergusson claimed with dismissive authority that he would be dealt with by the nearest man. This was not a bluff and was quite extraordinary considering how the balletic playmaker had twice dismantled the United defence just a week previously. Ferguson’s carefree attitude was bordering on arrogance and he was suitably punished when Kaka ghosted unmarked into the United box to slot home Milan’s crucial opening goal.

The Rossoneri were certainly not going to leave Ronaldo and Rooney unattended in a similar fashion. The Portuguese was constantly tracked and hounded by two men, whilst Rooney was left isolated up front. Despite an array of attacking talent at their disposal, United failed to provide any support for England's most potent striker. As Sven found out against Portugal, Rooney is not suited to playing up front on his own: he becomes frustrated, the responsibility becomes burdensome. He is at his best when another forward is able to occupy defenders, leaving him the space to operate in front of them. The combative Smith should have started against Milan, if only to bring Rooney into the game.

Whereas United were largely undone by their failure to deal with an outstanding individual, Chelsea were bereft of ideas from start to finish in their clash with Liverpool. Due to the regularity of the meetings between these two clubs, a synthetic rivalry has developed, which provokes as much volume and fervour inside Anfield as when more traditional foes are in town. Fans have claimed that the noise during Liverpool’s semi-final victory two years ago was like nothing experienced at Anfield before. On Tuesday night, it was possibly louder. And just like two years ago, Mourinho’s men were unable to silence the Liverpool faithful.

Like United, Chelsea left the focal point of their attack isolated up front and persisted in lumping aimless diagonal balls forward from Ashley Cole who seems to have lost all of the marauding instincts that characterised his game at Arsenal. In the vain hope that Didier Drogba could reproduce some of the magic that has enabled Chelsea to emerge unscathed from many a tight squeeze this season, they persevered with this tactic throughout the match. It was only the late introduction of Wright-Phillips and Robben that enabled Mourinho’s side to pose any attacking threat at all. However, by this stage, the tie had degenerated into an exhausted slugfest, with both sides hoping for a mistake rather than actively trying to create an opening.

For all Mourinho’s sound and fury before the game, his team exited with a whimper. They came to Anfield intent on preventing Liverpool scoring, but when the goal came, there was no plan B for them to fall back on.

So, simple as it is true, fatigue was not to blame for the Champion’s league demise of United and Chelsea. They just got it tactically wrong on the night.

The Champions League returned last night with a game that almost began in tragedy but ended in pure farce. A largely uninspiring encounter on the pitch between French club Lille and Manchester United was marked by two rather dramatic incidents. Both will require careful attention from UEFA and could result in the French club being expelled from the competition. And such a result would be far from an overreaction given the events that transpired. The first incident saw police - unaware that a potentially fatal crush was developing - fire tear gas into the end where the United supporters had been herded. The second involved Lille players staging a walk off protest after Ryan Giggs scored the only goal of the match (I could add 'in somewhat controversial circumstances' but as quickly taken freekicks are not prohibited by the rules of the game, I shan't!).

The events surrounding the beginning of the tie provided an ugly reminder of the terrible proceedings at Hillsborough 18 years ago. Whilst United fans were pushed against the high perimeter fences, riot police fired tear gas and swung truncheons at those who, in desperation, tried to climb to safety. The French police, not known for their softly-softly approach, swung their batons with such fervour it was as if they were repelling revolutionary hordes intent on seizing power, not desperate fans trying to escape a potential crush. In scenes reminiscent of the early 1980s, it seemed as though the police had travelled to the game in a time machine, hell-bent on crushing a hooligan element that hasn't been witnessed in English football stadiums for almost 20 years. To say that the policing of the situation was merely a little heavy handed would be a complete misrepresentation of what happened. It would not be out of place to suggest that they totally misread events due to an ill-informed and out-dated collective assumption that crowd trouble and pitch invasions were to be expected when the English came to town.

Of course, serious questions need to be asked as to how so many United fans ended up in one particular end of the ground. The French authorities claim the cause was a number of away fans gaining entry to the stadium with forged tickets. Countering this, United supporters are adamant that the root cause was a security blunder that saw many of them who'd bought tickets to sit with the home fans being rounded up and squeezed into one end of the ground. Neither explanation reflects well on the French club's ability to stage a top-level football match, though the latter would suggest a total failure on their part to implement basic safety measures.

Blame for the incident, however, does not sit squarely at the feet of the French club. UEFA, will no doubt, come down hard on Lille, but they themselves must share responsibility for what happened. United claim they had expressed concerns about the basic facilities at the ground long in advance of the match, but the governing body took no action. Although it would seem ludicrous to allow Lille off scot-free, there is an element of injustice in punishing the club after UEFA themselves were made aware of specific safety issues, yet did nothing. Perhaps now they will move to prevent games being played at stadiums that do not come up to their own safety standards. This, however, is unlikely. Given new UEFA president Michel Platini's desire to see more and more smaller teams involved in the competition, they will probably continue turning a blind eye to obvious safety issues, and merely punish clubs retrospectively when incidents occur.

If, somehow, Lille do escape sanction over stadium safety, they must be punished for the ridiculous and childish reaction of their players following Ryan Giggs’ opening goal. Although only short lived, their unprecedented protest demonstrated a total lack of respect for the sport and the spirit of competition. Whilst, as Alex Ferguson was quick to point out, their actions had the unsavoury effect of whipping up the crowd into something of a frenzy. Ferguson, quite correctly, described it as an obvious attempt to intimidate the referee.

In a rather bizarre effort to defend his team’s behaviour, the Lille president has suggested that it was never anyone's intention to walk away from the match, but what we witnessed was actually an example of how the game is played in France. Apparently, when French teams disagree strongly with a decision they stage a protest at the first available stoppage. Now, it is obviously part of French culture to protest at any given opportunity, but to suggest that disrespectful protests of this nature are an integral part of the game in France is an outright lie. And, in any case, this rather flimsy moral relativism provides scant defence of his team's actions. If accused of stealing, a thief will gain little advantage in court by pleading that he comes from a community of thieves!

UEFA are not known for the fair and even distribution of their punishments and disciplinary decisions are often motivated by the political and financial implications of taking action. However, should they fail to administer an appropriate punishment against Lille, then a rather dangerous precedent will have been established. What a ridiculous situation we would have if teams believed that when in disagreement with the referee, they could escape sanction if they left the pitch in protest. Refereeing mistakes are commonplace in football (not that the referee was mistaken on this occasion), but no match would ever be completed if every error by one of the officials were followed by a silly walk-off.

Platini’s campaign to be elected president of UEFA focused almost entirely on how the big European clubs needed to have their power and influence curtailed. In an ironic twist of fate, his first major act as president will be to deal with a small provincial club from his own country who have brought shame on Europe’s premier sporting competition. Will he be brave enough to throw the book at Lille? Failure to do so could well have drastic consequences for the future of European football.