The Premiership vrs Europe & UEFA

gosplan

So another 3 English semi-finalists in the Champions League and already the English media have started their 'put that in your pipe and smoke it Platini' nonsense.

Does anyone else see this as a serious problem?

Europe has been dominated by various nations before but I don't think it was ever like this.

England dominated the old European cup winning 5 in a row in the late 70's/early 80's but that was on the back of a great Liverpool team and the management ability of Brian Clough - not the same as now IMO.

AFAIK this is the third year in a row of 3 of the last 4 being from England. English teams are using the massive money in the premiership to dominate Europe. Conversely, the top 4 English teams are using the massive money available in the latter stages of Europe to dominate the premiership. Both competitions basically become a battle of the big four.

Lesser teams in the premiership don't really give a stuff about the UEFA cup anymore because the premiership is far more lucrative but they've no real hope of reaching the champions league so they'll never actually compete in it.

UEFA are making plenty of noise but if anything they've left it far too late to react. They stood aside as the three big leagues gained financial sway over leagues that produce real quality footballers such as the Dutch, French and German leagues. They should have looked at what happened to the competitiveness of the south American leagues and saw it starting all over again.

I'm not sure how it will go, I feel that in the end the champions league will lose it's competitiveness and become something like the World Club Cup, where the European winners simply need to show up and play fairly well.

All this said, there is the 'so what' argument. We live in a united Europe so what difference does it make if an excellent footballer from the arse end of Portugal plays his football for Manchester rather than Benfica or Porto? Plus the champions league is about entertainment - who gives a crap where the franchises are based as long as the games are of an excellent standard? If so, why not just create the European super league? Any argument for that?

That_Guy

Kind of getting sick of the same teams in there every year. Villa would have been a fresh air if they managed to qualify for it next year. Pity.

United really don't deserve to be there after their poor group stage performances. I still think Barca will win the competition though.

prendy

That_Guy wrote: »

Kind of getting sick of the same teams in there every year. Villa would have been a fresh air if they managed to qualify for it next year. Pity.

United really don't deserve to be there after their poor group stage performances. I still think Barca will win the competition though.

In a competition named the Champions league in my opinion they are the only English team who deserve to be there.

redout

I dont mind at all. During the ninties early 2000's I was sick to death of watching Juve and Real Madrid dominating the latter stages. What goes around comes around and at the moment its making the competition a lot more interesting for Premiership fans and I doubt UEFA actually mind because the English broadcasters supply the most money to the competition in the first place. Its Englands turn at the top and tough crap if a snooty little Frenchmen and a Grumpy old Swissman cant stand it.

prendy

redout wrote: »

I dont mind at all. During the ninties early 2000's I was sick to death of watching Juve and Real Madrid dominating the latter stages. What goes around comes around and at the moment its making the competition a lot more interesting for Premiership fans and I doubt UEFA actually mind because the English broadcasters supply the most money to the competition in the first place. Its Englands turn at the top and tough crap if a snooty little Frenchmen and a Grumpy old Swissman cant stand it.

well said, Who's to say that in another 10 years we are looking at 3 German teams in the last 4 for the 3rd year in a row. I for one love the fact that the English league is dominating the CL. Long may it continue as for me it makes the competition more interesting. My club are no longer there but my mates clubs are so there's plenty of interest.

redout

prendy wrote: »

In a competition named the Champions league in my opinion they are the only English team who deserve to be there.

Also emphasis on the fact Barcelona arent even domestic champions of Spain so should they really be there ?

prendy

redout wrote: »

Also emphasis on the fact Barcelona arent even domestic champions of Spain so should they really be there ?

I was only refering to the earlier quote about Man Utd's position in the comp. But the same could be said of the other 2 semi finalists.

Highsider

As a Liverpool fan i've heard other fans say Platini has it in for English football but TBH he has'nt. The money in the game brought in by Sky has ruined the European game. It's far to easy for the big four to constantly make it to the semi finals year after year now (okay okay so Liverpool did'nt make it this year) without breaking sweat. It's sad to see the likes of European giants like Munich,Inter,Ajax,Porto reduced to cannon fodder for the big four year after year. I mean in all honesty only Barca and Milan seem to be able to compete now in terms of on field play and even at that Milan did'nt make it to the Champions league this season.

There is no doubt in my mind in the long term something needs to be done to even the playing field so some excitement can be brought back into the European game. The question is what?

Headshot

not the English teams fault if some teams like Real Madrid are badly run

gosplan

redout wrote: »

During the ninties early 2000's I was sick to death of watching Juve and Real Madrid dominating the latter stages. What goes around comes around.

...
...
Its Englands turn at the top

With all respect, I don't think this is the same at all.

For a few years now the big teams haven't really been challenged at all in the group stages. It's becoming the case where English teams aren't really challenged until they meet other English teams.

Barca might change that this year but IMO, it's because they have the best player in the world. If Messi were to get injured, I'd give them little chance of progressing.

The financial background to the big four means they have effectively ruined any proper competition in the premiership. Now they're doing it to the Champions League. They only way I can see out of it is for other Man City/Chelsea type clubs to come along, but that doesn't help the other European leagues.

Xavi6

The whole thing is a farce anyway due to its name. False advertising of the highest order.

That_Guy

prendy wrote: »

In a competition named the Champions league in my opinion they are the only English team who deserve to be there.

My bad I meant to say that they don't really deserve to be this far in the competition. Their group stages were lucky for them.

Highsider

Headshot wrote: »

not the English teams fault if some teams like Real Madrid are badly run

What are you talking about. What is the combined debt of Liverpool,Chelsea,Utd and Arsenal combined. I'm of the opinion that only Arsenal are well run out of the three clubs. German football is prob the best run league in Europe TBH.

Headshot

Highsider wrote: »

What are you talking about. What is the combined debt of Liverpool,Chelsea,Utd and Arsenal combined. I'm of the opinion that only Arsenal are well run out of the three clubs. German football is prob the best run league in Europe TBH.

not talking about that side of the game

im talking about how madrid sack managers like theres no tomorrow

gosplan

Headshot wrote: »

not the English teams fault if some teams like Real Madrid are badly run

Erm, they won the last two La Liga's and are still pushing Barca for this one.

So do you really mean, it's not the English teams fault the current champions of Spain can't compete with them?

_blank_

That_Guy wrote: »

My bad I meant to say that they don't really deserve to be this far in the competition. Their group stages were lucky for them.

What are you talking about?

The teams that are in the semi finals are there on merit.

It is bitterness of the highest order to suggest otherwise.

Some people :rolleyes:

Chardee MacDennis

gosplan wrote: »

English teams are using the massive money in the premiership to dominate Europe. Conversely, the top 4 English teams are using the massive money available in the latter stages of Europe to dominate the premiership. Both competitions basically become a battle of the big four.

hang on a sec sunderland and a few more teams spent more than arsenal and liverpool this summer afaik (anyone have the numbers i cant fine em)

redout

gosplan wrote: »

Erm, they won the last two La Liga's and are still pushing Barca for this one.

So do you really mean, it's not the English teams fault the current champions of Spain can't compete with them?

Look, in Spain Real Madrid have a good side but in Europe they cant compete. No quarter final since 2003 ! Now compare that with Barca.

x in the city

gosplan wrote: »

So another 3 English semi-finalists in the Champions League and already the English media have started their 'put that in your pipe and smoke it Platini' nonsense.

Does anyone else see this as a serious problem?

Europe has been dominated by various nations before but I don't think it was ever like this.

England dominated the old European cup winning 5 in a row in the late 70's/early 80's but that was on the back of a great Liverpool team and the management ability of Brian Clough - not the same as now IMO.

AFAIK this is the third year in a row of 3 of the last 4 being from England. English teams are using the massive money in the premiership to dominate Europe. Conversely, the top 4 English teams are using the massive money available in the latter stages of Europe to dominate the premiership. Both competitions basically become a battle of the big four.

Lesser teams in the premiership don't really give a stuff about the UEFA cup anymore because the premiership is far more lucrative but they've no real hope of reaching the champions league so they'll never actually compete in it.

UEFA are making plenty of noise but if anything they've left it far too late to react. They stood aside as the three big leagues gained financial sway over leagues that produce real quality footballers such as the Dutch, French and German leagues. They should have looked at what happened to the competitiveness of the south American leagues and saw it starting all over again.

I'm not sure how it will go, I feel that in the end the champions league will lose it's competitiveness and become something like the World Club Cup, where the European winners simply need to show up and play fairly well.

All this said, there is the 'so what' argument. We live in a united Europe so what difference does it make if an excellent footballer from the arse end of Portugal plays his football for Manchester rather than Benfica or Porto? Plus the champions league is about entertainment - who gives a crap where the franchises are based as long as the games are of an excellent standard? If so, why not just create the European super league? Any argument for that?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

well its pretty much boils down to an elite group.

the sky 4, its a cycle whereby they are pretty much guaranteed access to the cl each season and all the money that entails, plus they have funds available to sign players for pretty much whatever fee they see fit.

German clubs are not in a position to challenge this, there is a thread about German football here also, they have no monopoly and a totally different and more normal wage structure, Michael Ballack is earning millions more than he ever earned before for instance.

Spain is probably the only country with a elite monolopy with Barca and Real. But Reals shambolic management means they are never likely to win a CL until they get their act together and stop harping on about Rolando.

Italy too has much less of a monolopy
clubs like inter, juve, ac, fiorentina etc all would have pretty much equal chance of a title. apart from the two milans wages in Italy are a fraction of what is paid to the top 4 in England

so it all boils down to money, and its pretty much impossible to break into.

don't call me a bitter blue either, try telling any other club that they would like some piece of cl cake. Everton were knocked out by villereal ages ago, everyone said who they hell are these minnows, well they have since played in almost every cl competition, more funds available to pay wages for their star names.

If Villareal did not qualify for the cl [each season]they would struggle and could not sustain wages they have at the moment, although right from the outset they have no hope of actually winning it.

If Liverpool were not in the CL, they would be just like Everton, they depend on the monies they get from continued participation in the CL to attract star players and pay their wages as well as foreign investors.

Liverpool have won it once since the Sky 4 eara, but its the continued participation that they need, whether they win it or not.

for the rest of the teams in the top flight they basically have no chance of breaking that group unless Arsenal, Pool, Chelski or Man U spontaneously combust and go into liquidation.


its a viscius cycle, and its due to that nice Robert Murdoch chap.

jesus_thats_gre

Whatever about Platini but the argument about money that is used so much is somewhat misleading:

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/34/soccer-values-09_Soccer-Team-Valuations_Revenue.html

Compare AC Milan to Liverpool. Their revenues etc are virtually identical.

Compare Inter Milan to Man United. United's revenues are nearly double that of Inter's yet Inter's wage bill is double that of United's.


I genuinely believe it is as much a cyclic thing. It is obviously a very complicated argument and needs careful consideration to indentify what is really responsible but the power has regularly rotated around the major leagues every few years for as long as I can remember.

I would also put it down to the quality of managers and players that the PL have picked up. I don't attribute their existance in England down to money either. I genuinely believe that the English clubs are managed better above the football levels of the club.

Then there is the pace, intensity and fitness of the English teams. Continental teams weren't equipped to cope with this in the same way that English clubs couldn't compete at a technical level 15 years ago. Barca under Pep have learned from English clubs in that they now play as a single unit and everyone works for the better of the team. Soon the other great continental clubs will catch up with the English clubs and something else in Italy, Spain or Germany will leave the Enlgish clubs playing catch up.

I think AC Milan are nearly a perfect example of what is wrong with Italian football. They still think that they play the best football in the world and think that they are the best league in the world. Instead of building for the future with the best young talent in the world like they used to, they seem to have settled on signing ex world players of the year who are effectively hasbeens and keeping players that have served them well 10 years previously. This has led to stupidly high wage bills and a rediculously high average age of the first team. Over simplified and not much thought put into it but it doesn't make sense.

So to summise, I think it is a combination of mis-management at the upper levels of clubs in terms of financing, football appointments, lack of a long term strategy and refusing to adapt to the changing face of football at pitch level.

Badabing

Platini tried to change the Champions League and has to a certain extent from next season, but neither him or anyone in Uefa has the balls or the clout to take on the top teams in Europe. Top four leagues in Europe pay the most money to Uefa so they will always have 3/4 teams in Group stages of Champions League.

gosplan

BastardPrince wrote: »

hang on a sec sunderland and a few more teams spent more than arsenal and liverpool this summer afaik (anyone have the numbers i cant fine em)

Can't really judge it by one seasons spending. Look at spend over a few years and more importantly, wage structure.

Do you think Sunderland, with all their cash, could ever be in the hunt for Benzema, Nasri, Berbatov, Tevez, Torres etc?

gosplan

jesus_thats_gre wrote: »

the power has regularly rotated around the major leagues every few years for as long as I can remember.

Yeah. I guess the one difference that's really notable is that in the old European cup there was only one team from each country. Doesn't really make a huge difference though, AFAIK getting to the final is financially pretty much the same as just getting to the CL in the first place.


Interesting bit on the finances here

This report is 4 years old but with the new TV money this year the premiership must now be the richest league by far. I'm of the opinion that the impact of that has only just begun to be felt.

Highsider

x in the city wrote: »

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

well its pretty much boils down to an elite group.

the sky 4, its a cycle whereby they are pretty much guaranteed access to the cl each season and all the money that entails, plus they have funds available to sign players for pretty much whatever fee they see fit.

German clubs are not in a position to challenge this, there is a thread about German football here also, they have no monopoly and a totally different and more normal wage structure, Michael Ballack is earning millions more than he ever earned before for instance.

Spain is probably the only country with a elite monolopy with Barca and Real. But Reals shambolic management means they are never likely to win a CL until they get their act together and stop harping on about Rolando.

Italy too has much less of a monolopy
clubs like inter, juve, ac, fiorentina etc all would have pretty much equal chance of a title. apart from the two milans wages in Italy are a fraction of what is paid to the top 4 in England

so it all boils down to money, and its pretty much impossible to break into.

don't call me a bitter blue either, try telling any other club that they would like some piece of cl cake. Everton were knocked out by villereal ages ago, everyone said who they hell are these minnows, well they have since played in almost every cl competition, more funds available to pay wages for their star names.

If Villareal did not qualify for the cl [each season]they would struggle and could not sustain wages they have at the moment, although right from the outset they have no hope of actually winning it.

If Liverpool were not in the CL, they would be just like Everton, they depend on the monies they get from continued participation in the CL to attract star players and pay their wages as well as foreign investors.

Liverpool have won it once since the Sky 4 eara, but its the continued participation that they need, whether they win it or not.

for the rest of the teams in the top flight they basically have no chance of breaking that group unless Arsenal, Pool, Chelski or Man U spontaneously combust and go into liquidation.


its a viscius cycle, and its due to that nice Robert Murdoch chap.

Nail head.

LuckyLloyd

jesus_thats_gre wrote: »

Then there is the pace, intensity and fitness of the English teams. Continental teams weren't equipped to cope with this in the same way that English clubs couldn't compete at a technical level 15 years ago. Barca under Pep have learned from English clubs in that they now play as a single unit and everyone works for the better of the team. Soon the other great continental clubs will catch up with the English clubs and something else in Italy, Spain or Germany will leave the Enlgish clubs playing catch up.

Yup. And what will happen in the next three seasons is AC, Inter, Real or Munich will get drawn against one of the four English sides and play like their lives depended on it out of pent up desire and frustration - scrapping all over the park for 180 mins. And once they see that it has worked, they'll bring it every year thereafter. And the English dominance will be broken.

I always laugh at this whinging after the fact. You look at Liverpool's European winning runs in 2001 and 2005 and you realize that these are still cup competitions where inferior squads can triumph IF they want it enough. You have got to earn it imo, and over two games gaps in squad talent can be closed by bravery, determination and effort. If these teams are soft, then **** them.

Mitch Connor

All this hating on Sky....but doesn't every premiership side get the same amount from Sky, so how is it Skys fault that there is a top four monopoly.

everdead.ie

Mitch Connor wrote: »

All this hating on Sky....but doesn't every premiership side get the same amount from Sky, so how is it Skys fault that there is a top four monopoly.

I think everyone gets a set lump sum
then you get paid for every match shown on tv your involved in
then you get paid money for your league position which comes from the sky money.

LuckyLloyd

Mitch Connor wrote: »

All this hating on Sky....but doesn't every premiership side get the same amount from Sky, so how is it Skys fault that there is a top four monopoly.

It isn't entirely down to Sky, but they are as convenient and simple a fall guy as any.

jank

plus they have funds available to sign players for pretty much whatever fee they see fit

In fairness I dont think you can say that about Arsenal. They are just well run and Wenger is a god at running a CL team year in year out on a shoe string. I dont think the other 3 teams especially chelsea could do that. Personally I think Chelsea next year are in danger off losing out as there is a big clear out rumoured.

Mitch Connor

everdead.ie wrote: »

I think everyone gets a set lump sum
then you get paid for every match shown on tv your involved in
then you get paid money for your league position which comes from the sky money.

Not sure about the extra cash per game shown - though I do know every side is shown a minimum number of times.

As for the positional money - so what, teams should get a 'prize' depending where they finish - happens in all sports really. Also, the difference between positions is 500k per position, so i don't think that is a reasonable justification for the hating on Sky.

monkey9

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

It isn't entirely down to Sky, but they are as convenient and simple a fall guy as any.

I concur with this. Liverpool were dominating English and European football well before Sky came along. They built up a history, they're a great club who a lot of players would want to play for.
Man Utd are the same! I know they only won the league once Sky took over, but that's just coincidence as it's down to Ferguson rather than Sky.
Arsenal have been a force since Wenger took over, but you can hardly put that down to money alone. He's bought players on the cheap who nobody heard of and they turned into superstars.
Chelsea, well that is about the money in fairness. But they did qualify for Champions league before Abramovich took over so they were always hovering near the top the way Leeds, Newcastle etc were.
It all comes round full circle. You think of the money that Barca and especially Real Madrid have and they struggle at times in the Champions League. Sometimes it just comes down to the battle on the pitch. You can have great great players at the likes of Inter, AC, Madrid, Barca etc but there's a certain passion from British crowds that you just don't get with continental clubs at times.
As i say, it will all change around again. Say for example, the likes of Villa, Everton and their ilk manage to qualify for the group stages at the expense of an Arsenal or Liverpool, (as in 2005 in Everton's case), they may not qualify from the group because of the inexperience and that's when teams from other leagues can capitalise.
Every country has their period of power eventually!

x in the city

Mitch Connor wrote: »

All this hating on Sky....but doesn't every premiership side get the same amount from Sky, so how is it Skys fault that there is a top four monopoly.

The top 4 get way more funds, the higher the season finish the more cash you get.

more cash to fun their CL exploits, its a bit like leeches really.

Why is there a SKY 4? well they are on sky all the time, duh..!

everdead.ie

Personnally I can't see Chelsea being able to continue making loss's of 40m a year abromovich has taken a serious hit in this recession he can't afford to keep soaking up these loans if he withdraws support and they fall a little behind I can see villa or spurs capitalising everton are a good team with a great manager but they haven't got the financial backing to be able to sustain a challenge

Mitch Connor

x in the city wrote: »

The top 4 get way more funds, the higher the season finish the more cash you get.

more cash to fun their CL exploits, its a bit like leeches really.

Why is there a SKY 4? well they are on sky all the time, duh..!

Come on now, the team finishing in 4th get about 500k (from what i remember from a while back) more than the team finishing in 5th, so money from the league is not the reason the teams in the CL have so much more cash. the CL is the reason.

As for there being a Sky 4.... United are on Setanta more than they are on Sky from what i can see.

ShooterSF

The best thing that could happen would be to unseed the qualifiers and let any big club meet each other there. It would also improve the Prem as teams would fight to win rather than to make top 4.

Mossy Monk

x in the city wrote: »

Why is there a SKY 4? well they are on sky all the time, duh..!

How many Arsenal Premier League games have been shown live on Sky Sports this season and compare that with let's say Everton

Iang87

Mossy Monk wrote: »

How many Arsenal Premier League games have been shown live on Sky Sports this season and compare that with let's say Everton

i actually think everton were on more. arsenal, liverpool and united are always on setanta

Iang87

one thing i've noticed througout this thread is some people saying that englands top 4 have the money to spend on whoever they wanted.

As a matter of interest i wonder what brought maradona, ronaldo, rivaldo, van basten, cruyff, gullit, all these massive names in football history, to the italian and spanish leagues back when they made the moves. now the english sides are the attraction and just like the english did in the late 90's and early 2000's its up to the rest of europes elite clubs to find a way to beat them. No bitching no whining just find a solution be it a new football mentality, new players it doesn't matter they've to find a way. it took ferguson i dunno nearly 20 years to find a way to the top in football management but he did now its up to them to do the same.

As for the english media attitude of put that in your pipe, thats a much easier question to answer. The majority of older school football fans not necessarily liverpool fans feel that what should have been more glory years for their clubs think they were stolen by the Heysel ban. Up until the ban English sides had won 7 of the previous 9 european cups and now these same journalists who may have reported on a lot of these glory nights in english football are finally happy to report on the english rising back to the top of club football after nearly 20 years trying to get back to this dominant level

kinaldo

It's late and I haven't read through this entire thread, but I keep on seeing people refer to Real Madrid's bad management for not competing in Europe.

Maybe so, but people should remember that they won 3 Champions Leagues in 5 seasons [that's the same as Manchester's, Arsenal's, and Chelsea's combined history, 3 of the 4 clubs supposed to be dominating], the first under the presidency of Lorenzo Sanz, who had his son in the team (honsetly, can anybody remember his first name?), then another 2 with Perez, who was obssessed with Galacticos and sacked Del Bosque, one of the most successful managers in their history.

Really little has changed at Madrid, but thankfully that muppet Calderon is gone. They were in serious debt under Lorenzo Sanz, they recovered to become the richest club in the world, and remain so there or thereabouts today.

The reasons that Real haven't competed in the last few years are no different to the rest; that Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea all have FANTASTIC managers, the BEST, and with the exception of Chelsea, more than 5 years stability. The manager is most important. Mourinho proved this with Porto, Benitez with Valencia. Chelsea forced their way in through astronomical spending but Mourinho was the key for them. I'm almost more interested in the afformentioned managers battling it out with one another than the teams themselves. Chelsea, Mourinho's players, have rallied without him, but Barca will brush them aside. Of that I have no doubt, and I wouldn't like to try and predict Chelsea's long term future.

There's no reason at the moment why Real and Barca shouldn't always be in the mix. Just because Real have a terrible record in the past 5 years shouldn't fool people. They are very powerful and will be back.

I would worry about the other big guns of European football right now, but post Wenger/Ferguson, there will be a vacuum of power and who knows what will happen then... things will get very interesting for sure. Money won't always win.

In the meantime, fans of the big 4 should just enjoy it while it lasts.

Pepe LeFrits

Boo, the big bad premiership is ruining everything! Let's go back to the good old days when nobody ever dominated anything. Who gives a toss what the CL is called. I know I'd rather watch a quarter final like the one we just had between the 2nd and 3rd placed English teams than watch Man United hammer the champions of Cyprus.

Funny to see people slagging off the PL for its lack of competition at the top - just the 'Big Four' - and praising the likes of Serie A with its many teams who can it. I can't be arsed searching for it myself but I've a vague idea of the numbers - anyone else want to check how many titles Juventus have? Milan? Inter? And how many do the rest have? How many times have Roma, Lazio, Fiorentina and the other teams that are apparently in with a chance won it?

Have a look at the numbers for Spain while you're at it, because they don't offer much support either. Valencia managed the feat of being a club other than Real Madrid or Barcelona to win the title this century, and now look at the state of them.

There's no problem whatsoever in giving Platini grief because some of his ideas and comments deserve to be given grief. Buying into his guff is a bigger problem.

jem

I remember when Liverpool couldn't keep souness or Rush due to the money in Italy,Liniker went to spain Hughes went to spain also even steve archibold ended up in spain. Luter blisset was signed for big money to italy.
Platini went to Juve from france, at the time all the big money was in italy and the best players played there.
before that spain has all the money players maradonna etc.
It goes in cycles.

jesus_thats_gre

kinaldo wrote: »

It's late and I haven't read through this entire thread, but I keep on seeing people refer to Real Madrid's bad management for not competing in Europe.
.

I actually rate your post hightly and am not posting to argue with any of it but the sacking or undermining of successful managers is completely retarded. I personally consider that to be extremely poor management of the club.

Third_Echelon

jem wrote: »

I remember when Liverpool couldn't keep souness or Rush due to the money in Italy,Liniker went to spain Hughes went to spain also even steve archibold ended up in spain. Luter blisset was signed for big money to italy.
Platini went to Juve from france, at the time all the big money was in italy and the best players played there.
before that spain has all the money players maradonna etc.
It goes in cycles.

That was more to do with the ban on English clubs in Europe I think... plus Lineker had a great World Cup in Mexico. True Italy was were the cash was, but it wasn't the only factor..

redout

Scudamore defends PL dominance
CEO disappointed not to have all-English semi-finals
By Rob Carragher Last updated: 17th April 2009


Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore has defended the dominance of English clubs in the UEFA Champions League.

The Premier League has come under criticism in recent years for allowing a 'Big Four' to emerge in England that have gone on to rule European competition.

At least one English side has made the final of the competition for the past four years, producing two winners in Liverpool and most recently Manchester United, who overcame Chelsea in last year's showpiece.

And with the competition now on course for another all-English final, Scudamore has reiterated that the clubs are there rightly because they are the strongest in Europe.

"The whole point of a competition is the best come out on top and that is what is happening," he told The Sun.

"It's a pity we couldn't have had all four of our clubs in the semi-finals.

"There are no easy games in the Premier League and that prepares clubs well for Europe. What matters is that the best teams play the best football, entertain the fans and win matches.

"I understand the arguments against English domination but I don't accept them."

Format change
While Scudamore is happy to see the Premier League outfits regularly making the latter stages of the Champions League, he feels that if Uefa wish to rein in the English clubs then they should first look at altering their own system before pointing the finger at England's top flight.

The current European campaign has seen Chelsea knock fellow English side Liverpool out of the competition, and Scudamore expects that a simple change to the format could lead to Premier League clubs having to overcome each other earlier on.

"At the moment clubs from the same country cannot be drawn against each other until the quarter-finals," he added.

"They could make it an open draw from the last 16."

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11661_5198967,00.html

kinaldo

jesus_thats_gre wrote: »

I actually rate your post hightly and am not posting to argue with any of it but the sacking or undermining of successful managers is completely retarded. I personally consider that to be extremely poor management of the club.

I forgot to mention that Jupp Heynckes who won them their first CL in 1998 under Lorenzo Sanz was also sacked following that success, but yet they still went on to win 2 more in the following 4 seasons. Perhaps sometimes there's method to their madness...
I really believe that had they not sacked Del Bosque then they would have almost certainly won the CL again, with all their Galacticos. Probably their first season without him, 03/04, under Carlos Quierez when they threw it away against Monaco and Porto went on to win it.

jesus_thats_gre

kinaldo wrote: »

I forgot to mention that Jupp Heynckes who won them their first CL in 1998 under Lorenzo Sanz was also sacked following that success, but yet they still went on to win 2 more in the following 4 seasons. Perhaps sometimes there's method to their madness...
I really believe that had they not sacked Del Bosque then they would have almost certainly won the CL again, with all their Galacticos. Probably their first season without him, 03/04, under Carlos Quierez when they threw it away against Monaco and Porto went on to win it.

You can get away with it for so long as the existing talent generally remains when managers are coming and going. Eventually however, it will catch up on you if you continue to do it over an extended period as there is no long term vision in terms of what happens on the pitch and what players are signed.

If anything, you being a supporter of Newcastle, I thought you would be in an ideal position to see the consequences of constantly dicking around with your managers.

Chelsea could have been another example in my opinion, but they seemed to nip it in the bud before the rot really set in.

PHB

Maybe if they had collective league rights so that the league could grow properly together instead of just giving the money for the big clubs their leagues wouldn't be so piss poor.

kinaldo

jesus_thats_gre wrote: »

You can get away with it for so long as the existing talent generally remains when managers are coming and going. Eventually however, it will catch up on you if you continue to do it over an extended period as there is no long term vision in terms of what happens on the pitch and what players are signed.

If anything, you being a supporter of Newcastle, I thought you would be in an ideal position to see the consequences of constantly dicking around with your managers.

Chelsea could have been another example in my opinion, but they seemed to nip it in the bud before the rot really set in.

I totally agree that it's bad management, but I'm just pointing out that this hasn't stopped them from being successful in the past. Even after they got rid of Capello they still went on to retain the league under Schuster.

patmac

It's not just the big four, the CL last 16 is almost becoming predictable with the same teams qualifying year in year out with the odd exception when a club fixes matches etc, Next years last 16 will almost certainly include nearly all these teams: Man Utd, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal,Lyon, Porto, Milan, Inter, Juve, Barca, Real, Sevilla, Bayern, So thats 13 places leaving room for just 3 of 4 others to scrape through to be knocked out in the last 16.

English clubs attitude towards the UEFA Cup is more laughable, the Sky hype about getting to Europe in order to make dull meaningless end of season games more interesting and recently Spurs being lauded for going from relegation to being on the brink of Europe, yet when they get there they field weakened teams I pitied the 300 Villa fans that travelled to Moscow to see their reserves get thumped and what good did it do them as they haven't won a game since.

citytillidie

ShooterSF wrote: »

The best thing that could happen would be to unseed the qualifiers and let any big club meet each other there. It would also improve the Prem as teams would fight to win rather than to make top 4.

If you look thats sort of whats happening next season.

There is two different set of quailfy runs one for teams who are champions of leagues lower down on UEFA co effiencts and another path for teams who are not Champions like the team who finishs 4th in England could play the team who finishs 4th in Spain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Champions_League_2009-10

Mossy Monk

Iang87 wrote: »

i actually think everton were on more.

That was my point. It is not always the top 4 on Sky Sports where Arsenal are concerned.