How Chelsea rated I How Liverpool rated I Chelsea give Anfield the Blues I Liverpool on the ropes after Ivanovic one-two I Hiddink shows the way to beat Liverpool I Cascarino: Chelsea's ambition surprised everyone I Mourinho's pupils produce something extra special I Ivanovic: an unlikely hero emerges from the shadows I Graphic: how Essien kept Gerrard quiet I Graphic: how Chelsea exposed Liverpool's zonal marking

Even Jorge Valdano would have enjoyed this one. Who didn’t — Kopites aside — as Liverpool raced into an early lead and Chelsea retaliated in quite breathtaking, and, let’s be honest, unexpected fashion to underline football’s never-ending capacity to surprise?

Perhaps the football did not match Barcelona’s exhibition at the Nou Camp for grace and beauty but 31 shots, the majority from Chelsea, amounted to crazy abandon for these two clubs.

All in all, it was a vast improvement on many of the duels, including the “s*** hanging from a stick” semi-final contest in 2007, as Valdano, a World Cup winner with Argentina in 1986, described it. This was one to hang in a gallery. We could call it A Study In Boldness given how Chelsea were rewarded for their willingness to attack one of Europe’s form teams in their own formidable castle.

Valdano had not entirely meant to be rude. He also talked about Anfield being “unbeatable” as a passionate, crazy stadium. Nothing changes there. Old Trafford the previous night had an air of smug complacency at kick-off. Anfield teemed with the usual fervour, at least until Chelsea’s third goal flew past José Manuel Reina, which was pretty admirable considering that this was the 23rd time these teams had met in the past five seasons.

But Valdano had been full of scorn, saying: “Chelsea and Liverpool are the clearest, most exaggerated example of the way football is going: very intense, very collective, very tactical, very physical, and very direct.

“A short pass? Noooo. A feint? Noooo. A change of pace? Noooo. A one-two? A nutmeg? A back-heel? Don’t be ridiculous. None of that. If Didier Drogba was the best player it was purely because he was the one who ran the fastest, jumped highest and crashed into people the hardest.”

Had much changed? Well, it was pretty hard to conclude otherwise on a night when Chelsea might easily have scored six against the side who, at kick-off, could reasonably be described as one of the most feared on the Continent.

We can look at a number of reasons for that but if we had to alight on one, it is that José Mourinho is no longer here to cast his Armani-clad shadow.

He was not here to stifle Chelsea’s attacking instincts or to turn the pre-match build-up with Rafael Benítez into a ludicrous psychological war — a tactic that invariably led to a tactical stalemate: all talk and precious little action.

“They have two things in common: a previously denied, hitherto unsatisfied hunger for glory, and a desire to have everything under control,” Valdano said of the two coaches. “Both of those things stem from one key factor: neither Mourinho nor Benítez made it as a player. That has made them channel all their vanity into coaching.” A shrewd guy, that Argentinian.

From Chelsea’s point of view, the change last night was joyous. Guus Hiddink managed to take largely the same players that Mourinho used to deploy, and even his old 4-3-3 formation, yet turned roundheads into bold cavaliers.