Chelsea in, Manchester United out, Martin annoyed. Natch.

So some of the ties in what is now called the 'Super 16' round of the Champions League were decided tonight, and they saw Chelsea stay in and Manchester United go out.

I can't help but get aggravated by the exaggerated hype that accompanies such an occasion. On Radio Five Live Jonathan Pearce said to Gavin Peacock that the Chelsea match "would have made a great final", and the ITV television commentary team claimed of the same game that "There couldn't have been a more fitting final for the competition".

Well, I guess that may be the case if you think a fitting final for the Champions League would be a match between a team from Spain and a team who haven't won the English league for fifty years. Or indeed if you think that whoever ends up in the Istanbul Final this year will be less fitting than a match between a team who won their Champions League group stage and a team who finished second in their opening group.

Still, I can just about buy into a competition that contrives to keep the richest clubs in Europe in it for as many fixtures as possible, unless someone rubs my face in it. Which ITV did tonight by pointing out that although the group stage is "enthralling" [sic - their claim, not mine], the knock-out stage of the competition is when "the pulse starts racing" and "the nerves get shredded".

So why can't we just have that from the start?

(and, honestly, none of my unhappiness is due to the fact that I missed nearly all the goals in the Chelsea - Barcelona match because I was watching the 8pm BBC One junction after EastEnders to see the first TV showing of one of the teaser trails for Doctor Who)