Dominator

The papers are pretty positive this morning, headlines, which all concentrate on missed opportunity, aside. Then again, given our utter domination, they don't really have much choice do they.
This, from Kevin McCarra in The Guardian is pretty typical, although it does express the truth of the situation pretty clearly:

Manchester United overwhelmed ­Arsenal, yet neglected to leave the full evidence in the result. That could be termed ­carelessness, but it is the habit of this side, with its emphasis on control, to show circumspection. In consequence the visitors will have left Old Trafford in good heart, but that is simply because they avoided devastation in the first leg

"Emphasis on control" - we had total attacking domination without ever risking a goal (Bendtner's header aside) at the other end, and Arsenal being happy at avoiding devastation, the fact that we outplayed them with such seeming ease must be on their minds for the next game (and the approaching Premiership game), as well as ours, we must know we're better and must be confident of showing it again at The Emirates.
Daniel Taylor on The Guardian Blog describes our performance as, "an epic, lyrical performance", before going on to look at the negative, but at least he recognises it:

A negative tone, perhaps. But 1-0 felt like a meagre reward when you totted up all those scoring chances inside the Arsenal penalty area. In fact, 2-0 would have still seemed rather miserly given the near-unremitting nature of this onslaught. Ferguson's men were so superior, so utterly rampant at times, it is not an easy thing to criticise them but you would have to think this was a missed opportunity.

Yes, a missed opportunity, but the important words are "so superior".
Matt Dickinson in The Times continues this theme, but looking from an Arsenal perspective:

Arsenal looked so callow, so raw, at times so bewildered in the first half of this semi-final, first leg that, with his neatly brushed hair and his sober suit, Arsène Wenger might have been their headmaster rather than their manager.

As Wenger gets older, his team seem to get younger: and they have never looked so youthful as last night.

Of course the age of Kieran Gibbs, the 19-year-old who was being asked to shackle Cristiano Ronaldo in only his second European start, did not mean that he could not make several telling interventions — any more than the relative experience of Emmanuel Adebayor did not protect him from repeatedly giving the ball away.

And it is worth asking of a player such as Alexandre Song whether it is a question of age or simply not being good enough. Either way, there were spells last night when it really did feel as though Manchester United should pick on someone their own size. This was a tie that would not have required a second leg had United converted even half their chances.

He then goes on to offer the usual "Arsenal - team for the future" argument, but even here there is a rare moment of press self-awareness:

He must have looked at players such as Gibbs, Song, 21, Abou Diaby, 22, Theo Walcott, 20, and even Cesc Fàbregas, the wily old captain at 22, and wondered if this was going to be part of the learning process rather than, truly, “their moment”, as he had publicly stated pre-match.

And then he could have consoled himself that he is building a team for the future — isn’t he always — and he is certainly not under pressure to win the Champions League in the way that managers of Liverpool or Manchester United are, not least because Arsenal have never won it.

It must have been some performance by us to bring this (admittedly tiny) kind of criticism of Arsenal. He finishes well, "you were left to conclude that it would be a miracle if this Arsenal team were being saluted a month from now as champions of Europe."
In the same paper Oliver Kay returns to the usual Arsenal version:

In one sense, it did not look a fair fight. These things are not easy to say with regard to a club who do not disclose their transfer fees, but Arsenal’s entire starting line-up cannot have cost Wenger much more than the £30.75 million that Ferguson spent on Dimitar Berbatov, who was left out of the United team.

Whatever.

Jim White in The Telegraph continues the theme:

It was all about experience against innocence, achievement against potential, serial trophy accumulators against a work in progress. They had a point. After all, of the total of 13 major medals won by members of this Arsenal starting 11, eight had been earned by Mikael Silvestre. And he had won them all in his time at United.

We get the message, honestly. We play a young team in a semi-final and get slaughtered for it, Arsenal base their entire transfer policy on it and get nothing but praise for consistently failing to win anything...

Even the generally reliable Henry Winter falls into it:

Arsenal remain a work in progress, a potential work of sublime art but needing more time.

(I apologise if this is concentrating on Arsenal rather than praise for us, but when every sentence of praise for us ends in "but", it isn't easy to avoid getting involved in the bit that follows the praise...) And his reading of the second half seems a trifle optimistic:

If Arsene Wenger’s players perform with the character they showed in the second half, however, battling to turn the tide, seeking to impose their celebrated passing game, then they have a chance. It all comes down to firepower and fire in the belly.

Because to me, no matter how Arsenal played second half, we still controlled it, still had, Bendtner's aside, all the chances. They may have seeked "to impose their passing game", but they failed to in any meaningful way.

Martin Samuel in The Mail avoids all that type of thing and writes a decent article on Berbatov and Tevez:

It is a fee that would appear to be too rich, even for a club of United's wealth, meaning Tevez is for sale. Certainly last night, he played like a man open to offers.

Sir Alex Ferguson does not do sentiment, so one can safely presume that he did not give Tevez his first Champions League start of this year to placate him over a lack of first-team opportunities in the biggest games.

Tevez was scowling when he was substituted after 67 minutes but in the time remaining his replacement Dimitar Berbatov demonstrated why Ferguson has a decision to make.

As wholehearted and tenacious as Tevez is, so Berbatov is all subtle efficiency. It is easy to see why the work ethic of one appeals and the demeanour of the other does not, but Ferguson must consider more than appearances.

Tevez plays hard, but Berbatov is more effective. The fee that United will not pay for Tevez is roughly what Ferguson pulled up for Berbatov without a second thought. That is not to say Tevez failed to impress when at last given the opportunity to lead the line, more that he failed to capitalise on the moment.

And he gives an eloquent and fair assesment of the state of the tie, and looks at a problem with Tevez into the bargain:

United did not put Arsenal to the sword, so much as take them to it, show it to them, then shy away from using it. Ferguson said he would be happy with a 1-0 victory before the game, but he was probably revising that opinion with hindsight.

Arsenal are still in with a shout and, after a performance as disappointing as this, should not be.

Manchester United's absence of a cutting edge last night reflected the issue with Tevez. His work rate is exceptional, yet his great strength is his build-up play.

I like this, on Arsenal's defending, in The Sun:

The whole night was summed up by the most bizarre moment of all played out a quarter of an hour from the end right under the Stretford End.
Ryan Giggs, on as a substitute, crossed from the left, Manuel Almunia flapped at it and missed whereupon the ball struck the unsuspecting Mikael Silvestre on the side of the head before rebounding over the bar for a corner.

David Pleat praises Rooney in his Guardian Blog piece:

This was a big test for Theo Walcott ... but another Englishman stationed on the wing last night, Wayne Rooney, helped to nullify his threat. Arsenal would have been hoping to counter-attack against United using Walcott's pace from wide but a combination of their slow passing – when possession was gained – and the efforts of the workaholic Rooney ensured he was unable to make an impression. ... The indefatigable Rooney was putting in a shift and a half on the left touchline, threatening every pass that may have come Walcott's way but also being a constant danger with the ball when United broke.

Onto the quotes and Sir Alex sounded pretty happy and confident after the game:

"The most positive aspect is that before the game we spoke about trying to win without losing a goal and we've done that," he said. "The performance was very good and we've given ourselves a really good chance. The tie is obviously not over but we have players who can score a goal at their place and we have shown that we definitely carry a goal threat. We know we can go there and score and that's the problem for Arsenal."
When Ferguson was informed that Wenger had struck an equally optimistic chord. "He has to," the United manager responded. "He'll be thinking it's a good day for him because he could have been out of the tie and he's not. We tend to do things the hard way at our club and once again it's a night when our supporters have been frustrated because we could have been in the final. We had enough chances to score four but their goalkeeper [Manuel Almunia] was really fantastic."

John O'Shea:
“The goal was a little early birthday present for me,” O’Shea said. “Their keeper made some great saves. We could have scored more but we are capable of scoring at the Emirates. Arsenal are a good team and they kept the ball well but overall we have to be happy.”
Sir Alex on Ferdinand and a fairly humorous look at our's and Arsenal's weekend fixtures:

“He’s gone for an X-ray and it doesn’t look too good at the moment,” the United manager said. “He’s got a crack on the ribs and we hope nothing is broken.”

“We have to play a team to win at Middlesbrough in the lunchtime kick-off, which I don’t think is right, while it doesn’t really matter who Arsène plays against Portsmouth,” he said. “They can play Pat Rice at right back and Arsène at centre forward. It doesn’t matter and that’s to Arsenal’s advantage.”