Sam
member
Reged: 12/07/2006
Posts: 1063
Loc: North Somerset (returning to M...
|
|
Quote:
Suggestion of a Champions League alike for the East European nations are noble enough but I doubt whether this is going to solve the problem fully. How many of the people would actually watch teams from Albania,Georgia or Malta play even if the competition be termed as the East European Champions League? I doubt whether everyone here or anywhere outside the regions know who are the reigning champions of these nations or who leads the tables there at the moment!
But the point of this competition being set up isn't to make money or to broadcast to an international audience. Come on, they know they're not going to do THAT! It's to give the local fans an extra competition to watch, with a bigger prize at stake, and, most crucially, to improve the standard of football over time in the competing leagues. Personally, I hope it'll work (and think it could well do).
Sam
--------------------
More fútbol argentino than you can shake a mullet at - Hasta El Gol Siempre
|
druryfire
member
Reged: 20/03/2007
Posts: 351
|
|
Your spot on there SAM,
thats what i'm trying to get across, its not about us the Westerner's who watch competitive footy every week,
its about Eastern Europeans, cos thats who i assume are the ones who want more places in CL need, competitive football on a rgular basis against other nations on a par with themselves.
Theres no point having more teams in CL if there just going to get thumped, get some money and dominate there own domestic league, which unfortuanelty happens in most top 5 eagues now
|
Rogorn
member
Reged: 24/03/2007
Posts: 314
|
|
(Hi there, nice to join, first post, etc)
First of all, thanks to WS for the magazine, the forums and the opportunity to have our say.
The European club competitions have been having the same problem as the Olympic Games: who to allow in to compete. This comes from having two different aims, one to find the best, and another to have representation from everywhere. Usually both can be combined, but sometimes there are clashes.
If competition is for the best, then why should weaker teams compete instead of others just because they come from a region without stronger representatives? In this view, it would the 5th or 6th Spanish, English and Italian clubs the ones who should feel aggrieved that they are not allowed to play in the CL whereas teams they could surely beat are in just because there have to be geographical quotas. Sevilla this season are a good example. Barring teams in this manner would be akin to putting a limit to the number of clubs from a given city (London in the Premiership, for example) that can play in the top division of a country.
I understand why this was done, though. It was not about barring teams, it was about choosing the best from each country, so that everyone could feel involved. First it was only the national champions, and then more teams from the stronger countries were allowed. It's an evolving format, and each new change seems to be pushing the competition forward, even when some of them (like the second 6-match league round that was introduced), were later scrapped.
What I would propose would be going the full way towards a dual National-European calendar, where everyone who wants (and has minimum financial and stadium guarantees) is allowed to play European football. If the dates are booked already for the European matches, why are only a few clubs involved while the rest have got nothing to do? While Chelsea are playing Barcelona, and Tottenhan playing Bayer Leverkusen, why can't be Everton be playing Fiorentina, or Wigan be playing Getafe? And I mean a proper league, with teams involved in it until March at least, to then solve the matter through quickly-played QFs, SFs and a big final. I understand that elimination ties produce excitement all year round, but the price of that is that half of the entrants are out after round one, another quarter after round two, etc. The World Cup understood this quite quickly and introduced groups very early on in its history. Now the CL has followed suit. Now, why can't a proper league be introduced in which EVERYONE is involved most of the season? A league is always the fairest way of deciding a champion, or at least sorting the best from the not so good. But to retain the glamour and history of knockout football, the business end of the season would still be decided through elimination among the best 8 of the year. This is how it's done in American club sport, for example, and it works.
So, taking another step forward, let's make the Champions League the First Division of Europe and the UEFA Cup the Second Division. The best 24 or 32 would play at the top and the UEFA Cup would have a meaningful role to play, giving promotion to the best. If you're Atlético de Madrid, AZ Alkmaar, Reading, Catania, Wolfsburg, Toulouse, whoever, and have a brilliant team that year, go on, live the dream, beat the best in the second flight of the continent and reach the Champions League. It would make for big success stories like the ones national leagues produce.
It works at national level, why shouldn't it at continental level?
|
subhankar_mondal
member
Reged: 29/08/2006
Posts: 2003
|
|
Of course,originally when the European Cup was set up,the founding fathers had virtually no concrete idea that it was going to be so huge 50 or so years fast forward.Now with the advent of broadcasting ease,the Champions League reaches out to large scale and worldwide audience and albeit the teams in the UCL are Europeans,the players are from all over the world and so are the fans or the viewers
--------------------
Subhankar Mondal is a football writer for www.goal.com.
|
subhankar_mondal
member
Reged: 29/08/2006
Posts: 2003
|
|
Quote:
Sub,
What would your solution be?
Personally, i can't see any change, no fans want to see a change to the quality of the comp, so why should UEFA try to change the comp.
They simply just need to bring in something for the minor nations, but if the minor nations want something they should help themselves and try to bring something to the table and just let UEFA say its 'good to go' as and when they have a format for themselves.
They can still particpate in the Champions League but have something else for them when they fail and cannot access the UEFA Cup
I suggest that the champions of the lesser domestic teams are inducted directly into the third round of the qualifers,obviously according to the their standards(I mean champion clubs whose domestic league is beleagured and thirdor fourth rate need to play earlier) and then are pitted against the third,fourth or even the secondplaced teams of the bigger leagues. I guess I have said this already but nevertheless,Ifind no harm in repeating really.....
--------------------
Subhankar Mondal is a football writer for www.goal.com.
|
big_gaz
member
Reged: 25/03/2007
Posts: 29
|
|
Hi folks, just signed up to add few comments to this interesting thread.
Firstly, I think Platini the politician is speaking here - I don't believe he's really prepared to take on the big leagues, but it's won him a few votes to suggest that he might.
Secondly - an obvious point but one which I haven't seen anyone make - the battle for fourth adds some spice to the end of the season and allows a couple more teams to dream of a CL place. If the CL is reserved for the top 3, or just the Champions, it becomes an even more exclusive club for the rich. The 4th place CL spot enhances the competitiveness of the most popular domestic leagues.
Thirdly, some posters have referred to meaningless CL group games. In my view there are very few of these - even if neither side can improve their position in the group there is usually enough pride, money or a UEFA place at stake to make the game interesting. I think there are proportionately far more tedious domestic league games than CL group games.
Finally, the UEFA Cup is an unfairly neglected competition, in my opinion. Platini could achieve a lot more for european football by restoring a little prestige to the UEFA Cup rather than pretending he's reforming the CL. The latter stages of the UC are generally exciting and unpredictable. I watched the 2nd half of Espanyol v Haifa in a bar in Barcelona the other week, with de la Pena in full flow, and it was superb. Yet on my TV I have to make do with some scruffy live coverage of the English clubs' progress through the interminable group stages and then nothing until the final. If the UC was given a more dynamic format and more prize money, TV would show more interest and the clubs in the countries whose support Platini is courting will get more coverage and more money. Seems like a much quicker win to me.
|
Sam
member
Reged: 12/07/2006
Posts: 1063
Loc: North Somerset (returning to M...
|
|
Quote:
I suggest that the champions of the lesser domestic teams are inducted directly into the third round of the qualifers,obviously according to the their standards(I mean champion clubs whose domestic league is beleagured and thirdor fourth rate need to play earlier) and then are pitted against the third,fourth or even the secondplaced teams of the bigger leagues.
So what you're saying is, no change at all from the current system then (apart from maybe making the 2nd placed teams from 'big' leagues qualify as well)?
Sam
--------------------
More fútbol argentino than you can shake a mullet at - Hasta El Gol Siempre
|
subhankar_mondal
member
Reged: 29/08/2006
Posts: 2003
|
|
Quote:
Secondly - an obvious point but one which I haven't seen anyone make - the battle for fourth adds some spice to the end of the season and allows a couple more teams to dream of a CL place. If the CL is reserved for the top 3, or just the Champions, it becomes an even more exclusive club for the rich. The 4th place CL spot enhances the competitiveness of the most popular domestic leagues.
Welcome to the forum.
You mean to say that the fight for thr fourth place in the top leagues at the end of the season lightens up the whole atmosphere? Well,should only a maximum of 3 teams qualify from the Big Three,then the battle for the third place would be enhanced and that would add more spice. I don't want any changes but cannot agree on your point. You look now at the EPL table and you can well insinuate who are going to finishn third and fourth,but should only 3 teams be made to play in the UCL,then Liverpool and Arsenal would be fighting tooth and nail now. I seem to contradict myself here perhaps but still,felt your point wasn't valid enough.
On other issues,we two are at one. Yes,the UEFA Cup has be smeared with more prestige and honour as well as quality and the UCL should remain untouched.
--------------------
Subhankar Mondal is a football writer for www.goal.com.
|
subhankar_mondal
member
Reged: 29/08/2006
Posts: 2003
|
|
That's right. That's what I have been shouting all the time. Let the current format remain as it is and if you want to invite more teams from Eastern Europe into the Champions League proper,then let them first prove themselves in teh qualifying rounds,though if these games be made slightly easier for these teams and a bit tougher for teh teams from England,Spainand Italy,then I am not going to be the one who would complain.
--------------------
Subhankar Mondal is a football writer for www.goal.com.
|
badgerboy
member
Reged: 26/03/2007
Posts: 727
Loc: Bucks, England
|
|
Well I joined this forum to start a topic about the proposed European competition format changes only to find it's already the "big issue" of the week/month - excellent!
I was actually hoping that there might be some folks with some more concrete information about what the actual changes might be - but from the posts so far (interesting as many of them are) that doesn't seem to be the case.
Since this thread started there seem to have been a few alterations (all rumoured rather than confirmed) to the changes to the CL that UEFA are likely to come up with.
We started with the simple "election pledge" to take out the 4th clubs from the top three countries. Frankly, I thought this was a terrible idea. Why? Well possibly as an Englishman I was biased - alarmed more it has to be said by the thought that the already slim chances for a club outside the top four to reach the "promised land" was being snatched away than any sympathy with the one of the top four that might miss out every other year. But also appalled because I could see only negatives & not positives for the competition as a whole. Take out three top clubs with potential to reach the latter stages of the competition - so diminish the quality. Fine, at least to a degree, if doing so was a compromise to ensure a greater diversity (i.e more Champions) in the competition. But to my mind - taking out one team from England, Spain & Italy is more likely to make it easier for a third team from France or Portugal or a second club from Ukraine or Turkey etc. to qualify every year. To put numbers to this. Whereas now the minimum number of countries guaranteed to be represented at the Group Stage is 12 - removing the three 4th placed clubs would only increase this by one - to 13.
But things are getting better. First it's suggested that - rather than eliminating the 4th team from the top three countries all together the lowest ranked teams from the top six should have to play off against each other instead. Now I hear on another forum that Kicker magazine is reporting that it's not the top six countries but the top nine or eleven.
Now information is still sketchy. I assume that "play-off" simply refers to the teams in CLQR3 being split into groups (similar to the UEFA Cup regional groups) rather than being subject to one big draw. And, unless the number of clubs per country is going to change then the numbers in Kicker don't make sense - if it's going to include the runners-up from the top nine or eleven countries it surely has to include all the runners-up (down to country 15) that currently enter the competition.
But if this idea does come to fruition I'm much happier. Essentially, you make the "non-Champions" who have to play qualifying rounds play each other - 18 clubs if you include the 3rds from the top three countries. And the remaining seven matches will be between Champions. Some people might frown at the idea that this guarantees a lot of non-Champions progress to the Group Stage at the expense of Champions but I'd be willing to bet that a guaranteed 17 Champion clubs is more than there's been for a while.
The devil is still in the detail of the changes but it's looking a lot better to me now than the vague election pledge we had in the first place.
|
worldsoccer
member
Reged: 08/06/2006
Posts: 241
|
|
Thanks for your comments so far folks. A very stimulating read. I've forwarded all the posts from this thread to World Soccer editor Gavin Hamilton for his perusal.
|
subhankar_mondal
member
Reged: 29/08/2006
Posts: 2003
|
|
Quote:
Thanks for your comments so far folks. A very stimulating read. I've forwarded all the posts from this thread to World Soccer editor Gavin Hamilton for his perusal.
So does this imply that the discussion on this particular topic will now cease?
--------------------
Subhankar Mondal is a football writer for www.goal.com.
|
RichieC
member
Reged: 17/07/2006
Posts: 534
|
|
Don't think so...they did say 'so far' so i'm assuming we can still comment...
|
worldsoccer
member
Reged: 08/06/2006
Posts: 241
|
|
Quote:
So does this imply that the discussion on this particular topic will now cease?
Not at all. The thread is still open.
|
subhankar_mondal
member
Reged: 29/08/2006
Posts: 2003
|
|
Just check out this piece guys.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/europe/6507131.stm
--------------------
Subhankar Mondal is a football writer for www.goal.com.
|
RichieC
member
Reged: 17/07/2006
Posts: 534
|
|
"Uefa spokesman William Gaillard said: "We want to revitalise the cup competitions in each country which have suffered in recent years."
Would they be the years since the Cup Winners' Cup was scrapped?
|
badgerboy
member
Reged: 26/03/2007
Posts: 727
Loc: Bucks, England
|
|
Quote:
Would they be the years since the Cup Winners' Cup was scrapped?
I think the chicken definitely came before the egg in this instance. The Cup Winners Cup was scrapped because - even before 1999 - it had become largely the "Cup Losers Cup". With three or four teams from the top countries now in the CL it would probably have to be renamed the "Cup For Teams That Aren't Even Cup Finalists Cup".
I'm sure some people would argue "well if you kept the CL just for Champions this problem wouldn't occur" which is a fair enough argument if you don't expect things to evolve & develop over time. I can just imagine the looks on the faces of Mourinho or Ferguson if told: "Only one CL spot for you to fight over next year guys - but don't panic we're bringing back the Cup Winners Cup..."
|
RichieC
member
Reged: 17/07/2006
Posts: 534
|
|
LOL!!!!!
Oh can we??? That would be excellent! Then they could use it in a credit card advert...
...the looks on the faces of Mourinho or Ferguson if told: "Only one CL spot for you to fight over next year guys - but don't panic we're bringing back the Cup Winners Cup..."
Priceless...
|
Sam
member
Reged: 12/07/2006
Posts: 1063
Loc: North Somerset (returning to M...
|
|
Quote:
I can just imagine the looks on the faces of Mourinho or Ferguson if told: "Only one CL spot for you to fight over next year guys - but don't panic we're bringing back the Cup Winners Cup..."
Even as a fan of a team managed by one of those two, I would pay good money to see that happen...
Sam
--------------------
More fútbol argentino than you can shake a mullet at - Hasta El Gol Siempre
|
druryfire
member
Reged: 20/03/2007
Posts: 351
|
|
Hey Guys,
So we have discussed on what we think should happen to the European Cup format - from keeping it as it is to creating a new tournement for Eastern Europeans and stregthening the UEFA Cup and now talk from UEFA on Cup Winners Cup.
Seems to me UEFA no they can't change CL, so add another cup - one they once got rid of.
But what i really want to know, away from this subject a little is, what do you guys really follow - do you just like CL with Real Madrid, Man U, Barca etc every year or do you follow something else, something you don't see on TV but follow with an interest?
We all want CL to be competitive, but its always the same teams every year with about one or two surprises maybe every season (qualifying for group stage, but then cannot compete on the field?). I'd prefer another tournement that is conpetivtive - forget about watching on tv, can always find something on the web to follow it - but it creates something unique, more fasinating.
Maybe its just me, but seriously i do get bored with CL with the same teams all the time, and need something i don't no about to get me realy going.
i mean i always know who will win out of Real Madrid and Steaua Bucharest, but Steaua Bucharest against Red Star Belgrade seems more interesting and not too sure who will come out on top - a bit of genuis or good solid defending.
Whats your guys take on what you like to see in footy, atractive football, or tactical football?
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
[Re: 
Edit
Reply
Quote
