Glasgow Rangers into group stage of Chp Lge.

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊



Simster

"the man's an arse"
Jul 7, 2003
54,983
Surrey
That's not true though is it?

The 2nd round teams are pretty much the same every year.

The group stages are almost meaningless.
While it does seem feel that, it's not actually true. For example, only this season, a quarter final was played out between two French teams. How many times has that happened?
 




Mr Blobby

New member
Jul 14, 2003
2,632
In a cave
Rangers would had to pre-qualify if the team that wins the Champions League did not qualify automatically from there own league (ie like the year Liverpool won it and then finished 5th, but as holders allowed to enter).

Lyon are only 5th in France so unlikely to get into next years Champions League. It is expect that Bayern Munich, Inter or Barceloan will all qualify so its now assumed that the Scottish Champions enter at the group stages not the pre-qualifying.

Next season will be more interesting in Scotland as they have lost the 2nd Champions League spot so only the Champions will qualify next seasons Champions League. Will make the Celtic/Rangers race a little more interesting as 2nd spot will be a disasterous place to finish!

I hate this new format, how can they call it the Champions League when teams finishing 4th in domestic leagues take part. Get back to one competition for just the Champions of each league!!! In years gone by I always used to watch the European games, now I dont bother, but then again I am in a minority as refuse to subscribe to Sky TV as they just make the big clubs richer and only want certain clubs on TV.
 


Wozza

Custom title
NSC Patron
Jul 6, 2003
24,392
Minteh Wonderland
While it does seem feel that, it's not actually true. For example, only this season, a quarter final was played out between two French teams. How many times has that happened?

Well, admitedly, not as many times at Liverpool v Chelsea. Zzzzzz

Some facts for you:

In the past five years, six clubs have made the knockout stage EVERY season: Arsenal, Barcelona, Chelsea, Inter, Lyon and Real Madrid.

And a further five teams have made it four out of five seasons: Liverpool, Man United, Milan, Porto and Bayern Munich.

So that's 11 of the 16 slots pretty much taken each season...
 


Simster

"the man's an arse"
Jul 7, 2003
54,983
Surrey
Well, admitedly, not as many times at Liverpool v Chelsea. Zzzzzz

Some facts for you:

In the past five years, six clubs have made the knockout stage EVERY season: Arsenal, Barcelona, Chelsea, Inter, Lyon and Real Madrid.

And a further five teams have made it four out of five seasons: Liverpool, Man United, Milan, Porto and Bayern Munich.

So that's 11 of the 16 slots pretty much taken each season...
Actually it's 10 out of 16 really, but I take your point. I didn't realise it was quite that much of a closed shop, although you could argue that we shouldn't expect much deviation in just five years in any league in any sport.

I suspect you get a very different picture if you widen the scope to the last ten years.
 






The Large One

Who's Next?
Jul 7, 2003
52,343
97.2FM
The point is, as an expanded example of the Premiership, these clubs who make the last 16 vastly increase their chances of doing so the following season because of the huge amounts of money received.

If it was just one team from each country, plus the previous season's winners (like it was before) you would have a smaller competition, but vastly widened range of last 16 qualifiers, with a greater chance of an upset to take that side further.
 


Hatterlovesbrighton

something clever
Jul 28, 2003
4,543
Not Luton! Thank God
I think the current format works well. It produces great matches and virtually eradicated the possibility of some European Superleague being formed, which would have happened had the old format been kept on.
 






Simster

"the man's an arse"
Jul 7, 2003
54,983
Surrey
Can you recall any great group matches, though?
Liverpool v Olympiakos in the year the bin dippers won it?

I think that was a group game.

I do agree with you though. I don't tune into the Champs League until after Christmas.
 


The Large One

Who's Next?
Jul 7, 2003
52,343
97.2FM
Can you recall any great group matches, though?

There have been some great group matches - but that's not the issue.

It's three points, and a long, tedious, predictable drawn-out exercise in fleecing the public, taking six matches for the usual suspects to inevitably get to the next round instead of the should-be required two.

Oh, and the concept of seeding can f*** off too.
 


Hannibal smith

New member
Jul 7, 2003
2,216
Kenilworth
The champions league isn't perfect by any means but I can't believe that people really think the champions of Luxembourg or Latvia have more right to be in the comp than say Arsenal. Alright, Arsenal aren't champions but then Debrecini of Hungary are and their record this year was P6, L6, F5, A19. The group stages are dull enough as it is without introducing more whipping boys.

And if anyone has forgotten. The old European cup was shithouse. If we were to re-introduce it, it would be a long drawn out process to get the champions of England, Spain, Germany and Italy in the last 4 with plenty of 6-0 drubbings along the way when a load of part timers from Lichestein get wollaped.
 




Simster

"the man's an arse"
Jul 7, 2003
54,983
Surrey
And if anyone has forgotten. The old European cup was shithouse. If we were to re-introduce it, it would be a long drawn out process to get the champions of England, Spain, Germany and Italy in the last 4 with plenty of 6-0 drubbings along the way when a load of part timers from Lichestein get wollaped.
This is actually very true.

Personally, I have far more of an issue with the Europa league letting in Champions League losers. What the f*** is that all about? If you want better team in the Europa, then surely the answer is to slim down the Champs League and bulk up Europa with bigger names *from the start*, not let in the losers FFS.
 


Hatterlovesbrighton

something clever
Jul 28, 2003
4,543
Not Luton! Thank God
This is actually very true.

Personally, I have far more of an issue with the Europa league letting in Champions League losers. What the f*** is that all about? If you want better team in the Europa, then surely the answer is to slim down the Champs League and bulk up Europa with bigger names *from the start*, not let in the losers FFS.

Or just say bye-bye to the losers from the champions leage. Half of them probably wouldn't want to win it anyway.

As for good group games I seem to remember Arsenal winning some good ones away from home in the last few years.
 


The Large One

Who's Next?
Jul 7, 2003
52,343
97.2FM
The champions league isn't perfect by any means but I can't believe that people really think the champions of Luxembourg or Latvia have more right to be in the comp than say Arsenal. Alright, Arsenal aren't champions but then Debrecini of Hungary are and their record this year was P6, L6, F5, A19. The group stages are dull enough as it is without introducing more whipping boys.

And if anyone has forgotten. The old European cup was shithouse. If we were to re-introduce it, it would be a long drawn out process to get the champions of England, Spain, Germany and Italy in the last 4 with plenty of 6-0 drubbings along the way when a load of part timers from Lichestein get wollaped.

Was it bollocks.

This competition is little more than a Gravy Train for the biggest clubs in Europe, at the expense of the smallest.

So what if the champions of Latvia get a pasting from Inter? At least they'd have earned the right to get that pasting. Besides, the small club winners from the 'lesser' countries did occasionally get to the final...

Celtic 1967 and 1970
Feyenoord 1970
Panathanaikos 1971
Bruges 1978
Malmo 1979

Semi-finalists have included
Hibernian
Dundee United
Gothenburg
Dukla Prague
 




Spun Cuppa

Thanks Greens :(
With Falmer on the way, I can visualise some great European nights under the lights. Wouldn't of dreamt it a few years ago, but now think anything is possible. Look at what Fulham are doing on less capacity than Falmer will be :thumbsup:
 




Wozza

Custom title
NSC Patron
Jul 6, 2003
24,392
Minteh Wonderland
Was it bollocks.

This competition is little more than a Gravy Train for the biggest clubs in Europe, at the expense of the smallest.

So what if the champions of Latvia get a pasting from Inter? At least they'd have earned the right to get that pasting. Besides, the small club winners from the 'lesser' countries did occasionally get to the final...

Celtic 1967 and 1970
Feyenoord 1970
Panathanaikos 1971
Bruges 1978
Malmo 1979

Semi-finalists have included
Hibernian
Dundee United
Gothenburg
Dukla Prague

Sadly, the rich leagues have got even richer, so the chances of a Dutch, Scottish or Czech side getting into a semi-final are slim.

And these days one of only two sides (three, at most) are likely to win each league.

So I don't think a return to the old format is necessarily the answer.
 


The Large One

Who's Next?
Jul 7, 2003
52,343
97.2FM
Sadly, the rich leagues have got even richer, so the chances of a Dutch, Scottish or Czech side getting into a semi-final are slim.

And these days one of only two sides (three, at most) are likely to win each league.

So I don't think a return to the old format is necessarily the answer.

Granted, it would take a while (say, five years) for balance to be restored, but it would even out much more eventually.

After the teams from France, England, Spain, Italy, Portugal and Germany, have taken their obligatory place in the quarter-final, there would be at least one 'minnow', probably more.
 




Hannibal smith

New member
Jul 7, 2003
2,216
Kenilworth
? At least they'd have earned the right to get that pasting. Besides, the small club winners from the 'lesser' countries did occasionally get to the final...

See this is the bit i don't get. Say Skonto Riga win the league and finish ahead FK spartaks collection of part time footballers and part time post men, shelf fitters and bin men. Why do they have more right to play than Arsenal who have consistently proved they are one of the top 8 sides in European football?

If there is one thing we are agreed on it is that we would like to see different teams and more competition. That will only happen with an American football style European wide wage cap. Seeing as FIFA and UEFA couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery, that is never going to happen and we will have to put up with the same teams in the last 16 year on year. Dundee Utd aren't ever going to play in the Champions league let alone get to the Semi final in this day and age
 
Last edited:


The Large One

Who's Next?
Jul 7, 2003
52,343
97.2FM
See this is the bit i don't get. Say Skonto Riga win the league and finish ahead FK spartaks collection of part time footballers and part time post men, shelf fitters and bin men. Why do they have more right to play than Arsenal who have consistently proved they are one of the top 8 sides in European football?

You're putting the cart before the horse.

Arsenal proved themselves one of the top sides in Europe because of this ridiculous format which gives equal reward for a team which wins its league and a team which finishes fourth. Therefore, it was always going to be (and so has proved) a closed shop when it comes to success. UEFA throw money at clubs who are already the richest around.

Why? Because they know of the marketing power of targetting armchair fans. Spread the money around too thinly, and you get... loyal supporters not buying into one centrally-controlled product but several individual products which they cannot control.

Before this format started, for the size of club that they were, Arsenal were European failures - a UEFA Cup win in 1970, and that was it. Why? Because they didn't win their national league. They were not champions, yet now they're treated like they are.

Just as an aside, if this format were around in the 1970s, Ipswich Town would now be one of the biggest clubs in Europe. And if it were around in the late 1980s, and English teams were allowed into Europe, who would have been in the Champions League? Crystal Palace.

Your FIRST qualification for being in the Champions League ought to be that you are Champions. And if Arsenal are not, they don't qualify. Simples.


If there is one thing we are agreed on it is that we would like to see different teams and more competition. That will only happen with an American football style European wide wage cap. Seeing as FIFA and UEFA couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery, that is never going to happen and we will have to put up with the same teams in the last 16 year on year. Dundee Utd aren't ever going to play in the Champions league let alone get to the Semi final in this day and age

One way to reverse the money flowing into so few clubs' hands is to re-introduce the competition as was, and spread the money around the various country's national champions, rather than a few automatic qualifiers from a select few countries.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top