Platini opens his mouth... AGAIN!

The Guardian

The Guardian wrote:

The Uefa president, Michel Platini, has revived the prospect of FA Cup winners qualifying for the Champions League. Platini launched a proposal for domestic cup winners to take a qualifying slot two years ago but was forced to withdraw it after opposition from the European leagues.

The Uefa president has now returned to the issue but admits its implementation would be "complicated". "It's difficult to change the tournament because it's a great success," Platini told Fox Sports.

"The access list is something we can think about for the future, and I am always feeling and thinking that the winners of the cup perhaps have to participate in this competition. They are champions as they have won a trophy and this is the Champions League. But it's complicated and very difficult."

Platini's original proposal would see the domestic cup winners take the lowest qualifying spot from a league, in England's case the place in the final qualifying round that goes to the fourth-placed side in the Premier League. He dropped the proposal, however, in return for changes to the competition which allowed more places in the group stage for national league champions from smaller nations.

Platini has welcomed the International FA Board's decision to grant a further two years for experiments to take place using his idea of an extra two assistant referees behind each goalline.

He added: "The eyes of one referee can never cover all the field of the game. In American Football you have five or six referees, in tennis you have 12 and the court is small. Let's play with human people and cover all the parts of the field and I will show you that's better for the referee and you don't need technology."

LINK

Whatever about the fa cup spot (I personally agree, they are champions and it could bring a little more respectability to the cup - I'm an Arsenal fan btw) How can he say,

Platini wrote:

"The eyes of one referee can never cover all the field of the game. In American Football you have five or six referees, in tennis you have 12 and the court is small. Let's play with human people and cover all the parts of the field and I will show you that's better for the referee and you don't need technology."

They use technology in both sports he mentions. Teams in AF and players in tennis are allowed challenge refereeing decisions. Why can't he see it's time to introduce technology? It does my head in to be honest. Too many games are won/lost on a referee that misses something. Does anyone know where the refs association stand on the introduction of new technology?

missingtime

Papa Smut wrote: »

LINK

Whatever about the fa cup spot (I personally agree, they are champions and it could bring a little more respectability to the cup - I'm an Arsenal fan btw) How can he say,
They use technology in both sports he mentions. Teams in AF and players in tennis are allowed challenge refereeing decisions. Why can't he see it's time to introduce technology? It does my head in to be honest. Too many games are won/lost on a referee that misses something. Does anyone know where the refs association stand on the introduction of new technology?

They wont bring in technology because it would stop the attention and controversy that is brought to the sport.

Marty McFly

missingtime wrote: »

They wont bring in technology because it would stop the attention and controversy that is brought to the sport.

While i agree with what you say. What does it mean for football if there relying on controversy to keep the game in the spotlight. They should be trying to make the game as fair and as entertainig as it can be.

Lukker-

I'll cry if he gets re-elected. All we need is one free-thinker....

astrofool

luvbulmers01 wrote: »

While i agree with what you say. What does it mean for football if there relying on controversy to keep the game in the spotlight. They should be trying to make the game as fair and as entertainig as it can be.

Unfortunately Henry's handball brings more attention and money to the sport, than Ireland qualifying.

I'd like to see them go down the route of a couple more refs, and a video ref as in cricket/rugby for the controvertial incidents, and for offside.

Am I correct in saying that his problem with CL and top level football getting video refs is that it means Sunday leaguers wouldn't have it? He likes his level playing field across all levels, I believe.

That to me is utter tosh. It doesn't seem to affect school rugby at all or low level tennis.
I would like to see a limit on how many challenges you could have. Say 2 per half per team would be plenty and could be used tactically as well.

Lukker-

Papa Smut wrote: »

Am I correct in saying that his problem with CL and top level football getting video refs is that it means Sunday leaguers wouldn't have it? He likes his level playing field across all levels, I believe.

That to me is utter tosh. It doesn't seem to affect school rugby at all or low level tennis.
I would like to see a limit on how many challenges you could have. Say 2 per half per team would be plenty and could be used tactically as well.

Hahahaha, you think the Sunday leaguers are gonna employ two more "Goal-line officials" when they can barely get a single ref the majority of the time. The guy is utterly clueless.

jesus_thats_gre

Feck domestic cups. It would make sense if the winner (or the last 2 or 3 teams) of the Europa Cup qualified though.

Lukker-

Lukker- wrote: »

Hahahaha, you think the Sunday leaguers are gonna employ two more "Goal-line officials" when they can barely get a single ref the majority of the time. The guy is utterly clueless.

The situation is beyond ridiculous

_blank_

jesus_thats_gre wrote: »

Feck domestic cups. It would sense if that winner or last 2 or 3 teams of the Europe Cup qualified though.

What? That is not an English sentence

jesus_thats_gre

Des wrote: »

What? That is not an English sentence

Haha, that was shambolic on my behalf! Slightly distracted

_blank_

jesus_thats_gre wrote: »

Haha, that was shambolic on my behalf! Slightly distracted

It still "makes" no sense

jesus_thats_gre

rofl

greendom

Not sure the thread title is warranted tbh. I know he winds people up at times, but his dislike of technology on the football field is well known and whether the 4th placed team in the league or cup winner qualifies is no big deal either is it ?

ShooterSF

I'd love to see the cup given the last CL spot. Would revive some of the magic I feel its lost in recent years.

Degag

Think it's a great idea. Would make the cup as important as it once was again.

Boskowski

It's a crap idea. It just brings more second string teams from the money leagues into it while actual league champions still have to struggle through several qualification rounds.
If the English FA has a problem with fading significance of their cup competition then that's their own problem. Let's not use that to water down the champions league (even more).
I mean what with the other countries, they all have cups? So are we effectively giving everyone another CL spot while the small leagues are screwed even moreso?

Degag

Boskowski wrote: »

It's a crap idea. It just brings more second string teams from the money leagues into it while actual league champions still have to struggle through several qualification rounds.
If the English FA has a problem with fading significance of their cup competition then that's their own problem. Let's not use that to water down the champions league (even more).
I mean what with the other countries, they all have cups? So are we effectively giving everyone another CL spot while the small leagues are screwed even moreso?

Lets face it, the Champions League became "watered down" the second it allowed more than one team from a country enter. It's a bit fcuked up when finishing fourth in a league is a much bigger deal than winning a cup.

Hank Scorpio

isnt the winner of the cup more than likely be in the top 3 or 4 anyway? in england at least

noodler

I think FA cup winners going in is an excellent idea.

The competition would be much better.

Boskowski

I don't.

I tell you what I find an excellent idea. Scrap the stupid cup competitions altogether. They serve no real purpose these days. People (and clubs) don't care about them. They're just a nuisance to the already packed league schedule. The big teams treat them as some sort of semi-competitive thing for their reserve teams and thats as much as they expect to get out of it.

If one wants more teams in the CL let the small-domestic-league champions play in the group stages.

noodler

Boskowski wrote: »

I don't.

I tell you what I find an excellent idea. Scrap the stupid cup competitions altogether. They serve no real purpose these days. People (and clubs) don't care about them. They're just a nuisance to the already packed league schedule. The big teams treat them as some sort of semi-competitive thing for their reserve teams and thats as much as they expect to get out of it.

If one wants more teams in the CL let the small-domestic-league champions play in the group stages.

I think removing the cup competitions is very narrow-minded personally.

Removing the cup runs of Villa, Pompey and Fulham from this season really takes something away from the whole thing.

Boskowski

noodler wrote: »

I think removing the cup competitions is very narrow-minded personally.

Removing the cup runs of Villa, Pompey and Fulham from this season really takes something away from the whole thing.

Guess that one comes down to personal preference / opinion. Every time I see 'cup-gameday' on the tv-schedule I go 'no proper soccer this weekend, meh'. Couldn't be arsed watching cup games. Not even the final would interest me.

Edit:
See years ago, when it wasn't all about money the cup was different. The cup had prestige. Prestige & honor were things to play for - not some relic from the past.
The small teams were hoping to get their 'dream draw', get the big (pay)day out and topple the big team. For the big teams the cup was prestigious enough itself.
Now the big teams use it as a practice area for their under 17s which takes away from the cup for the small teams obviously. Also takes away for the spectators. Who wants to see Obertan & Gibson play Millwall? I don't.
Why are they doing it? Because they have too many matches/competitions already.
Now they want even more games in Europe (money). IMHO the domestic cups are dead.

noodler

Boskowski wrote: »

Guess that one comes down to personal preference / opinion. Every time I see 'cup-gameday' on the tv-schedule I go 'no proper soccer this weekend, meh'. Couldn't be arsed watching cup games. Not even the final would interest me.

Honest to god then, that is your own problem.
It really says more about your attention span then the quality or excitement of the football, surely?

wobblyknees

noodler wrote: »

I think removing the cup competitions is very narrow-minded personally.

Removing the cup runs of Villa, Pompey and Fulham from this season really takes something away from the whole thing.

And this is the whole point of different tiered cup competitions. It gives everyone something to play for in their domestic season as opposed to the league.

I personally think allowing cup winners in is a bad idea. The european cup, once upon a time, was a competition for the best league winning teams in europe. Teams who had proven themselves over a season to be the best and therefore earning the right to compete against one another for the biggest prize. They should be trying to get back to that situation rather than further away from it by allowing teams in who will basically become whipping boys.

On the other hand, maybe he is right and if they do end up letting FA Cup winners into a slightly expanded cl. Still allowing the top 4 in obviously. They should then also let league cup winners in. This would then mean that the europa could maybe include the fair play winners, the FA and league cup runners up and say positions 6/7 to 12 in the league. It would mean nearly everyone gets a crack in Europe!

noodler

wobblyknees wrote: »

And this is the whole point of different tiered cup competitions. It gives everyone something to play for in their domestic season as opposed to the league.

I personally think allowing cup winners in is a bad idea. The european cup, once upon a time, was a competition for the best league winning teams in europe. Teams who had proven themselves over a season to be the best and therefore earning the right to compete against one another for the biggest prize. They should be trying to get back to that situation rather than further away from it by allowing teams in who will basically become whipping boys.

On the other hand, maybe he is right and if they do end up letting FA Cup winners into a slightly expanded cl. Still allowing the top 4 in obviously. They should then also let league cup winners in. This would then mean that the europa could maybe include the fair play winners, the FA and league cup runners up and say positions 6/7 to 12 in the league. It would mean nearly everyone gets a crack in Europe!

I am almost certain that the idea of letting the FA cup winners in is on the understanding that the fourth placed team would no longer qualify.

wobblyknees wrote: »

They should be trying to get back to that situation rather than further away from it by allowing teams in who will basically become whipping boys.

Only once in the last 20 years has the cup been one by a team outside of the traditional top 4. If this happens again, under these proposals for example, then perhaps they could give the place to the fourth place team in that situation.

I am not sure you could really say any team in the top 8 of the PL would be a whipping boy in the CL anyway.

wobblyknees

noodler wrote: »

I am almost certain that the idea of letting the FA cup winners in is on the understanding that the fourth placed team would no longer qualify.

I agree. My point is allowing cup winners in could potentially dilute the competition even more.

Only once in the last 20 years has the cup been one by a team outside of the traditional top 4. If this happens again, under these proposals for example, then perhaps they could give the place to the fourth place team in that situation.

If that's the case, what's the point? Anyway, I think if you are talking about the epl, you have to also consider potential double winners, which happens a bit in England, and other countries when considering making these kinds of changes where you could have more variety with winners of national cup competitions.

I am not sure you could really say any team in the top 8 of the PL would be a whipping boy in the CL anyway.

I didn't say that, I meant a potential one off cup winner could become whipping boys. And if not the winners, in the case of double winners, does the runner up get the spot?

noodler

Well, it is clear, given the that the winner has only once in 20 years (Pompey) not been Utd, Liverpool, Arsenalo or Chelsea that these teams have squads that are big enough or good enough to win the competition regardless of league/european concerns.

If the rest of the PL had a real cherry, cherry in a financial sense, to take the competitions more seriously then it might make the competition as a whole more attractive to the viewer.

Even in the most optimistic scenario, it is difficult to see anyone outside the top 10 winning it IMO.

Boskowski

noodler wrote: »

Honest to god then, that is your own problem.
It really says more about your attention span then the quality or excitement of the football, surely?

Why would you say that? What in my posts did suggest to you that my attention span (or lack of) is my problem?

I think I gave reasons why I can't take the cup seriously anymore. It's because nobody else does including the participants.

abouttobebanned

The days of the 3 cups - uefa, cup winners cup and European cup, was a perfect example of if it's not broke, don't fix it.

The FA Cup lost all relevance when the cup winners cup was scrapped and IMO the champions league was devalued when you had 3rd and 4th place teams in it.

Platini and blatter are ruining the game.

Oh and while I'm at it -

The play off system is a joke. The third place team should play the third from bottom team of the league above it. And having a trophy and being promoted, potentially, for finishing 6th is a joke.

And one more...away goals...scrap it alltogether...if not, at least scrap it from extra time...just doesn't make any sense.

Boskowski

abouttobebanned wrote: »

The days of the 3 cups - uefa, cup winners cup and European cup, was a perfect example of if it's not broke, don't fix it.

The FA Cup lost all relevance when the cup winners cup was scrapped and IMO the champions league was devalued when you had 3rd and 4th place teams in it.

Platini and blatter are ruining the game.

Oh and while I'm at it -

The play off system is a joke. The third place team should play the third from bottom team of the league above it. And having a trophy and being promoted, potentially, for finishing 6th is a joke.

And one more...away goals...scrap it alltogether...if not, at least scrap it from extra time...just doesn't make any sense.

But for the away goals I agree with everything you said.
Without the away goals rule away teams more or less just parked the bus - all the time. I understand that's why the away goal rule was brought in.

wobblyknees

noodler wrote: »

Well, it is clear, given the that the winner has only once in 20 years (Pompey) not been Utd, Liverpool, Arsenalo or Chelsea that these teams have squads that are big enough or good enough to win the competition regardless of league/european concerns.

If the rest of the PL had a real cherry, cherry in a financial sense, to take the competitions more seriously then it might make the competition as a whole more attractive to the viewer.

Even in the most optimistic scenario, it is difficult to see anyone outside the top 10 winning it IMO.

Well, we'll have to disagree on a couple of things because as I said, I agree on your point of who has won the FA cup, but in the context of having a prestigious european competition, I think it makes more sense ensuring that only the best teams, proven over a season in the league, get to play in the top tier european competition.

Also, I think the cherry for teams at the minute to win the fa cup is that it's kind of the only realistic avenue to try and win silverware as the big teams are more focused on the top four. This is why someone like portsmouth make it to the final imo.

Spiritoftheseventies

Had high hopes for Platini. He was a great footballer. But Fa Cup idea is pure madness.

Guy:Incognito

abouttobebanned wrote: »

IMO the champions league was devalued when you had 3rd and 4th place teams in it.
.

But not the 2nd place teams

I dont see how it's been devalued at all. Theres more of the top teams in Europe in it now.

There were some crap teams getting to finals years ago.

.

abouttobebanned

I don't like having 2nd place finishers in there but for economic reasons if they had to be in I'd make them qualify first.

And this whole thing about qualifying for the Europa cup via the champions league...that's the most idiotic thing I've ever seen.

Boskowski

Stekelly wrote: »

There were some crap teams getting to finals years ago..

Sure if they were crap teams those top teams you're on about would have taken care of them eventually wouldn't they?

Spiritoftheseventies

abouttobebanned wrote: »

I don't like having 2nd place finishers in there but for economic reasons if they had to be in I'd make them qualify first.

And this whole thing about qualifying for the Europa cup via the champions league...that's the most idiotic thing I've ever seen.

Agree with you on that. If you go out in the Champions league that should be it.

Guy:Incognito

Boskowski wrote: »

Sure if they were crap teams those top teams you're on about would have taken care of them eventually wouldn't they?

Nope, it was an open draw like the FA cup, so all the top teams could potentially draw each other.


Im in favour of open draws tbh, but I'm also in favour of more good teams in the CL.

FatherTed

astrofool wrote: »

Unfortunately Henry's handball brings more attention and money to the sport, than Ireland qualifying.

I'd like to see them go down the route of a couple more refs, and a video ref as in cricket/rugby for the controvertial incidents, and for offside.

100% Correct.

Now I'd bet you One Meeeeeeeellion Dollars that if two minutes later, Robbie Keane did the exact same thing at the other end and Richard Dunne bundled the ball into the net giving us the win on goal difference, there would be all sorts of enquiries, referees banned, replayed matches, talk of injustice from Platini and Blatter. I'm sure they'd be calling for goal line technology/video refs then.

As for the CL, I've been saying that for years. Why should 4th place, think about it, fourth f'ing place get into the CL? Winners of the FA Cup should get in. Should the winners do a double like Chelsea this year then the runners up should get the FA Cup spot. So this year the representives from England would have been Man Utd(Prem Champions), Liverpool(Prem Runners up), Chelsea(Prem 3rd place) and Everton(FA Cup runners up). This year would be a bit strange because of the Portsmouth situation.

Spiritoftheseventies

Again there is no way FA cup winners should be allowed into it. The fourth spot was introduced to allow the bigger teams who were missing out under the old format to be included.
Depending on the draw you get, you could go could go straight to the final and win it. Finishing fourth in the premier division is done over thirty eight games.
Personally I would have three teams from the Premiership to qualify

citytillidie

Cup winners going into the Champion League no way, it almost as bad as the play off idea

The FA devalued their own Cup by making Man Utd (the holders) play in the 1st World Club Championship in Brazil in 2000 and not defend the FA Cup, hoping it would get England the World Cup in 2006

astrofool

The cup winners should get a place in the World cup group stages (which would be increased to 64 to allow for 4 years of cup winners from the top 8 leagues).

Some players might have to play against themselves, but I think it would make a great spectacle.

It would also let us settle questions like Messi vs Messi, and give the likes of Giggs a chance to play in a World Cup.

Hell, they should let the American clubs join it and call it the World Series, Becks wouldn't retire till his feet fall off.

ShooterSF

Boskowski wrote: »

Guess that one comes down to personal preference / opinion. Every time I see 'cup-gameday' on the tv-schedule I go 'no proper soccer this weekend, meh'. Couldn't be arsed watching cup games. Not even the final would interest me.

Edit:
See years ago, when it wasn't all about money the cup was different. The cup had prestige. Prestige & honor were things to play for - not some relic from the past.
The small teams were hoping to get their 'dream draw', get the big (pay)day out and topple the big team. For the big teams the cup was prestigious enough itself.
Now the big teams use it as a practice area for their under 17s which takes away from the cup for the small teams obviously. Also takes away for the spectators. Who wants to see Obertan & Gibson play Millwall? I don't.
Why are they doing it? Because they have too many matches/competitions already.
Now they want even more games in Europe (money). IMHO the domestic cups are dead.

But take one of the CL spots off the league and give it to the FA cup winner and you may reverse the whole downfall. Now you have United Chelsea Arsenal Liverpool Spurs City and maybe more competing for 3 CL spots in the league or they could take the cup serious and play a stronger team (giving Milwall their big day too) and maybe get in that way.

Mr. Presentable

Maybe if the cup winner took the place of a 4th place league side..........

I think Platini has has some good ideas, I believe he believes in what he is doing, whether the majority do or not.