Platini : If I Were UEFA President... (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Ahmed
- Start date
The CL has gotten fat and dumb ... with the quality dropping off so much that it's made a bigger joke of the UEFA Cup. (Even the teams playing in the UEFA Cup these days seem to treat it lower than the Coppa Italia.)
But UEFA will never turn away money, no matter what Platini says. That means:
a) They won't be playing Haifa over Liverpool
b) They won't do the right thing, which is roll back the number of teams allowed in it
So as fans we just have to bend over and take it.
But UEFA will never turn away money, no matter what Platini says. That means:
a) They won't be playing Haifa over Liverpool
b) They won't do the right thing, which is roll back the number of teams allowed in it
So as fans we just have to bend over and take it.
this system could help the smaller teams and would bring some interest back to those counteries.However in most times they would just get Slaugthered in their games against the big teams.
Just look at Leviski Sofia, they made it and they r champions(i think).And they r just getting kicked down in every game.
Anyway,it would be less appealling to most people if this system was to be implemented but at least there could be some new teams that "could" make things interesting.Although i dont think that would have and the richer will get richer cause they will have an easier path.
Also i see one of two things happening if Platini heads the Uefa:
1-Platini backing on his word, and he just makes some minor changes.
2-G14 intervene and break away from the champions league and creating their own super competition.
Just look at Leviski Sofia, they made it and they r champions(i think).And they r just getting kicked down in every game.
Anyway,it would be less appealling to most people if this system was to be implemented but at least there could be some new teams that "could" make things interesting.Although i dont think that would have and the richer will get richer cause they will have an easier path.
Also i see one of two things happening if Platini heads the Uefa:
1-Platini backing on his word, and he just makes some minor changes.
2-G14 intervene and break away from the champions league and creating their own super competition.
the small teams dont make it through the first rounds and have to sell their best players to biggers teams to avoif financial problems. if they had a chance to play with the big boys they might actually just start to think of keeping their stars and in 10 years skonto riga may do a pretty good job in the tournament.
fuck uefa, fuck g14.
fuck uefa, fuck g14.
Don't think so. After all Di Stefano did play for Real Madrid. And don't tell me it's coincidental Boniperti went to Juve and George Best played for Manchester United. Big players will always want big teams. Even without financial problems it would have been impossible for Dynamo Kiev to keep Shevchenko.
Back then you hardly had globalization in the world of football. Let's face it, Juventus will now get the best players in Italy and will attract numerous stars from all over the globe. Why? Because they're Juventus. I see the point you're trying to make, but you're forgetting that there's a huge gap between teams such as Juventus and Sofia. If you want Sofia to be competitive you'll have to use that knockout system for 20 years straight and no customer is going to wait that long to see some exciting football.
Indeed, less teams is where we should go. Nevertheless the champion of Israel should NOT be qualified automatically for the CL and the 2nd best team in Italy should. Why? Well, because it's pretty damn clear Milan would blow away all competition in Israel, but are having a tough time with Juventus and Inter. It's by no means any fairer that Hapoel Haifa would get a spot, but Milan wouldn't.
Fliakis,
Wasnt Hungry one of the best country at the time?
.
Anyway, I generally agree majority of the sentiment here.
IMO, UEFA is in dire need of some reform if it is to preserve its excellence that it maintained in recent years. And as Seven correctly mentions it, I think the competition is being ruined by the commercial success it has endowed itself by the initially successful management.
Personally, I think too many teams are given the "right" to competete for the title "Champions of Europe" despite not deserving of such title shown by the performances at the domestic league. I believe this is a joint product of decision to expand team and run a traditional knock-out competition in a fashion similar to the old European Cup. The result is a combination of bad-aspects of two-group stage and old European system. The matter of fact is that it is there are more permeatations in relation to 2 leg straight knockout system because one bad game could potentially ruin the whole torunament. Vice verse for a team that does well. Which means that teams like Liverpool, Porto, Monaco have far better chances of proceding through the latter stages than the previous 2 group format whereby I am pretty sure they all would have found hard to qualify initially. As Flakis convieniently did some research for us (I am more than willing to free-ride ), Old European Cup also shared similar bizarre cases as does the current system - This is natural fact derived from simple calculation of probability.
The difference is that at least the old system gave right to compete to the teams that were "champions of each respective nations". The modern version replaces those teams with the ones who are better but probably undeserving of the title endowed by the competition because they are clearly inferior to the better ones in their domestic competition. Beside as a by-product of plethora of big matches these days, I think the notion of big-match lost is lusture that these brought before the expansion. As often with celebrities, over exposure might be detrimental over the long run despite short-term gains.
Also, there should be limitations as to the number of foreigners being played out by each teams. I certainly don't want to discriminate non European nations - since I am Japanese myself - but were I English I would personally find it hard to support a that doesnt even pretend to care about English players. Its all right for teams like Arsenal to act in their interest and buy best players available but there is also a no small matter of international football invovled and this is essentially a public good that cannot be considered on the basis of individual interests alone. It is always nice if your opposition emphasizes the notion of home-grown and fields inferior players and you benefit it both on the pitch and at the national stage, but then where would there be an incentive to every field a "home-grown" talent then if every team acts on the same line of reasoning? Teams like Arsenal and Inter should be ashamed of "representing" their respective countries. Fielding a team of 11 foreigners was an act of disgrace by Inter. That is taking an interpreatation of the law to the extreme literal sense.
Based on a similar line of thought, teams should be expected to obey similar line of regulation in their each respective country, as to prevent unfair advantages that their country legislation provides them over others. Arsenal and Man U should not have the right to just barge in take any talent that they find interesting because teams in Spain and Italia are forbidden to offer professional contract 18 whilst their country allow them to do so at 16. Teams like Barca and Parma spends millions each year inthe hopes of finding one Fabregas, Guiseppe Rossi et al, and in doing so they are willing to take in hundreds of youngsters that will probably never set foot a field in Nou Camp for Emillio Tardini. Its not matter of ethics invovled here. Unless one respect the simple notion of private property then there won't be any incentive to develop these properties. For every more pound Fabregas makes, he is potentially destroying the chances of better player coming through the ranks in the future.
Lastly, I would like to see the competition expanded to provide a more general format on which WORLD competiton can by played out. As far as I am concerned the large proportion of money are provided by those who does not even have the right to participate in the competition - whilst the Europeans share the benefit of such money not only through attracting better South Americans to compete in CL but also via domestic league, which would not have been possible to finance had the Asian money from CL dried up. More importantly, because of such phenomena, the money which could be helped to enhance to domestic leagues of Asia are being gobbled up by the European leagues. J-League is ok in this respect because teams in general have been run very well (the exception of Kashima Reysol but they are owned by the billionaire anyway), but I sense the situation is probably not the same in other Asian nations. Hearing from my Korean friend, some teams in Korea churn up only couple of thousand spectators in a stadium, because built for a WC purpose, can hosts mid tens of thousands. He tell me that most people would rather stay up and watch Man U on tele then see the match alive in 30C scorching, humid sun - who can blame then I do the same despite the fact that my home is accessible to 4 teams (Verdy, FC Tokyo, Urawa and Omiya). I feel we Asians have the "right" to see our teams participating in the European competition - and in the long run even the Europeans will benefit as we in turn stimulate our own domestic league and become a producer of products rather than being a consumer of it.
Anyway I will cut it here. I needed a practice for the analytical stuff so I will shamelessly do it here. 45mins gone I better be off.
Wasnt Hungry one of the best country at the time?
.Anyway, I generally agree majority of the sentiment here.
IMO, UEFA is in dire need of some reform if it is to preserve its excellence that it maintained in recent years. And as Seven correctly mentions it, I think the competition is being ruined by the commercial success it has endowed itself by the initially successful management.
Personally, I think too many teams are given the "right" to competete for the title "Champions of Europe" despite not deserving of such title shown by the performances at the domestic league. I believe this is a joint product of decision to expand team and run a traditional knock-out competition in a fashion similar to the old European Cup. The result is a combination of bad-aspects of two-group stage and old European system. The matter of fact is that it is there are more permeatations in relation to 2 leg straight knockout system because one bad game could potentially ruin the whole torunament. Vice verse for a team that does well. Which means that teams like Liverpool, Porto, Monaco have far better chances of proceding through the latter stages than the previous 2 group format whereby I am pretty sure they all would have found hard to qualify initially. As Flakis convieniently did some research for us (I am more than willing to free-ride
), Old European Cup also shared similar bizarre cases as does the current system - This is natural fact derived from simple calculation of probability.The difference is that at least the old system gave right to compete to the teams that were "champions of each respective nations". The modern version replaces those teams with the ones who are better but probably undeserving of the title endowed by the competition because they are clearly inferior to the better ones in their domestic competition. Beside as a by-product of plethora of big matches these days, I think the notion of big-match lost is lusture that these brought before the expansion. As often with celebrities, over exposure might be detrimental over the long run despite short-term gains.
Also, there should be limitations as to the number of foreigners being played out by each teams. I certainly don't want to discriminate non European nations - since I am Japanese myself - but were I English I would personally find it hard to support a that doesnt even pretend to care about English players. Its all right for teams like Arsenal to act in their interest and buy best players available but there is also a no small matter of international football invovled and this is essentially a public good that cannot be considered on the basis of individual interests alone. It is always nice if your opposition emphasizes the notion of home-grown and fields inferior players and you benefit it both on the pitch and at the national stage, but then where would there be an incentive to every field a "home-grown" talent then if every team acts on the same line of reasoning? Teams like Arsenal and Inter should be ashamed of "representing" their respective countries. Fielding a team of 11 foreigners was an act of disgrace by Inter. That is taking an interpreatation of the law to the extreme literal sense.
Based on a similar line of thought, teams should be expected to obey similar line of regulation in their each respective country, as to prevent unfair advantages that their country legislation provides them over others. Arsenal and Man U should not have the right to just barge in take any talent that they find interesting because teams in Spain and Italia are forbidden to offer professional contract 18 whilst their country allow them to do so at 16. Teams like Barca and Parma spends millions each year inthe hopes of finding one Fabregas, Guiseppe Rossi et al, and in doing so they are willing to take in hundreds of youngsters that will probably never set foot a field in Nou Camp for Emillio Tardini. Its not matter of ethics invovled here. Unless one respect the simple notion of private property then there won't be any incentive to develop these properties. For every more pound Fabregas makes, he is potentially destroying the chances of better player coming through the ranks in the future.
Lastly, I would like to see the competition expanded to provide a more general format on which WORLD competiton can by played out. As far as I am concerned the large proportion of money are provided by those who does not even have the right to participate in the competition - whilst the Europeans share the benefit of such money not only through attracting better South Americans to compete in CL but also via domestic league, which would not have been possible to finance had the Asian money from CL dried up. More importantly, because of such phenomena, the money which could be helped to enhance to domestic leagues of Asia are being gobbled up by the European leagues. J-League is ok in this respect because teams in general have been run very well (the exception of Kashima Reysol but they are owned by the billionaire anyway), but I sense the situation is probably not the same in other Asian nations. Hearing from my Korean friend, some teams in Korea churn up only couple of thousand spectators in a stadium, because built for a WC purpose, can hosts mid tens of thousands
. He tell me that most people would rather stay up and watch Man U on tele then see the match alive in 30C scorching, humid sun - who can blame then I do the same despite the fact that my home is accessible to 4 teams (Verdy, FC Tokyo, Urawa and Omiya). I feel we Asians have the "right" to see our teams participating in the European competition - and in the long run even the Europeans will benefit as we in turn stimulate our own domestic league and become a producer of products rather than being a consumer of it.Anyway I will cut it here. I needed a practice for the analytical stuff so I will shamelessly do it here. 45mins gone I better be off.
I don't think CL needs to change it's format, except the name maybe? the "champions" thing? who gives a damn about the name anyway?
Leave it like this, the old format wasn't as exciting as it is now, and specially the ones where there were only knock outs. thou I would be more satisfied if they add the second group phase too, the more matches the better..
Leave it like this, the old format wasn't as exciting as it is now, and specially the ones where there were only knock outs. thou I would be more satisfied if they add the second group phase too, the more matches the better..
um.. di stefano came from argentina so he's irrelevent in this discussion. boniperti and best are youth team products of their teams. i know im just picking on thenames you mentioned but still..
and again, shevchenko isnt the best example. he is one of the better players in europe. these always go where the money are. but when lithuanian champions sell their best players to second rate russian/scandinavian teams something surely isnt right. and that something can easily be solved if they get more money from uefa. because now its only the rich who get the money and the smaller ones get fucked over.
ill get back to this, got to go now.
and again, shevchenko isnt the best example. he is one of the better players in europe. these always go where the money are. but when lithuanian champions sell their best players to second rate russian/scandinavian teams something surely isnt right. and that something can easily be solved if they get more money from uefa. because now its only the rich who get the money and the smaller ones get fucked over.
ill get back to this, got to go now.