Atletico Madrid vs Real Madrid - Champions League Final 2014 *Mod Warning Post #856

Soups123

thelad95 wrote: »

You realise it's called injury time. The referee doesn't have to make up for throw-ins/freekicks etc.

Is it not called stoppage time?

Call it what you want it also covers time wasting from throw ins, free kicks, goal kicks etc. etc.

Soups123

Seaneh wrote: »

First half stoppage time is always small, and made up for in the second half stoppages. That's why you'll often see 5 minutes at the end but only 1-2 minutes at the end of the first half.

No time is carried from the first half into the second half, if needed it has to be covered in first half stoppage time

Moneymaker

Well, 6 of us were watching on Saturday and we were all surprised at the amount of injury time.

Can't say Real aren't worthy winners though. Ramos and Di Maria were great. Marcelo made a big impact too.

I won't even bother commenting on the Ronaldo celebration as some of the posts i've read are just pathetic. They'd be nowhere without him, think he's entitled to celebrate.

Seaneh

Nuri Sahin wrote: »

There's no defending Simeone's actions, though it's hardly surprising if you knew anything about the man before he took over at Atleti, especially as a player. Great player, very passionate, but he's always been on the tipping point. The two additional goals in extra time were just kicking a man when he was down. Not absolving him of blame at all, but again, it was hardly surprising he snapped, at least it wasn't for me anyway.

I agree with this totally, he's a nutter, I'd say he has a serious collection of red's and yellows from his time at Lazio and Inter alone (when I'd have seen him regularly).

He was a good player and he's clearly a good coach, but he's also a psycho.

Nuri Sahin

Seaneh wrote: »

Maybe If Raul Garcia hadn't taken more time to stroll off the field than all 3 of Real's subs combined, it wouldn't have ben quite so long?
Maybe If Gabbi hadn't rolled around on the ground for no reason in the 80th minute and the Atelti players hadn't started pushing and shoving and cause the game to be stopped for the guts of 2 minutes, it wouldn't have been as long.

But 5 minutes was a fair assessment of time added, even if we only take the second half into account.

It comes down to consistency. Saturday's game for one ref is 5 minutes of stoppage time. For many more refs it's 3 minutes. The ref may indeed got it right last Saturday, but is this going to be a template for referees in future games? Hell no

Moneymaker

Most surprising of all is Ramos didn't drop the trophy during the parade. :pac:

Seaneh

Moneymaker wrote: »

Most surprising of all is Ramos didn't drop the trophy during the parade. :pac:

I'm surprised he stayed on the pitch, he started like a nutjob, but kept the head in the second half.

SlickRic

the antics with Gabi and Felipe Luis was 2 minutes on its own.

regardless, Real scored in the 3rd minute of injury time. it didn't make a jot of difference so Simeone hasn't a leg to stand on here.

they were at it at the Nou Camp too last week. it was 3 minutes injury time, and after 90 seconds of it the Atleti bench was going absolutely ballistic asking for the full time whistle to go. some of them were almost on the pitch.

Blatter

To be perfectly honest, I expected 4 or 5 mins stoppage time. There was one occasion near the end of the game where Felipe Luis (I think) went down 'injured' before he was subbed and wasted at least 90 seconds.

kfallon

SlickRic wrote: »

they were at it at the Nou Camp too last week. it was 3 minutes injury time, and after 90 seconds of it the Atleti bench was going absolutely ballistic asking for the full time whistle to go. some of them were almost on the pitch.

Yip and no team in the history of the game has done that before......EVER!!! All staff and fans of teams don't open their mouths til the allotted stoppage time has passed...... :rolleyes:

SlickRic

kfallon wrote: »

Yip and no team in the history of the game has done that before......EVER!!! All staff and fans of teams don't open their mouths til the allotted stoppage time has passed...... :rolleyes:

and i've already said that I know that's the case.

but they don't get brought up on their gamesmanship often at all because they're "underdogs" or they're "passionate". that's the point.

thelad95

Despite his antics at the end, I still feel a massive respect for Diego Simeone. What he has achieved this year is absolutely incredible given the resources he has and who he has faced.

His antics could be justified at the end to a certain extent. If the ref had given three minutes, I don't think anyone on here would be protesting that it should have been five. I just think what he did shows his raw passion as a coach. Had his actions been motivated solely by sour grapes ala Mourinho, then I would have lost a lot of respect for him.

kfallon

SlickRic wrote: »

and i've already said that I know that's the case.

but they don't get brought up on their gamesmanship often at all because they're "underdogs" or they're "passionate". that's the point.

What's with all the rolleyes?

If you know it's the case that a lot of other teams do it then why are you using it as a stick to beat Atletí with? Will you be going thru each match thread on here from this day on letting us all know what 'gamesmanship' is being used by each team?

And if everyone is doing it (you say you know it's the case) then why should we bring it up for Atletico only? El Clasico games are much worse offenders for this kind of carry on from both teams!

SlickRic

thelad95 wrote: »

Despite his antics at the end, I still feel a massive respect for Diego Simeone. What he has achieved this year is absolutely incredible given the resources he has and who he has faced.

His antics could be justified at the end to a certain extent. If the ref had given three minutes, I don't think anyone on here would be protesting that it should have been five. I just think what he did shows his raw passion as a coach. Had his actions been motivated solely by sour grapes ala Mourinho, then I would have lost a lot of respect for him.

i have respect for what they've done, of course.

but it's not all black & white.

read this.

Jelle1880

SlickRic wrote: »

i have respect for what they've done, of course.

but it's not all black & white.

read this.

Who ever called Atletico 'the team of the people' ?

For many they are simply the team that disrupted the dominance of Barcelona and Real (who aren't exactly squeaky clean when it comes to taking on debt etc.).

Pro. F

SlickRic wrote: »

the only things likeable about Atletico Madrid are their fans, and the fact they've been underdogs.

the team, and the coach, in reality, are as thoroughly dislikeable as they come.

Nah, they are exciting to watch imo and for every cynical foul you'll see, you'll also see a heroic header, tackle, lung bursting run or tidy bit of technique. So overall I think there's plenty to like about them and they're quite entertaining at times.

With regards to the time wasting and play acting, yes they do it, but compared to the horrible norm in Spanish football I don't find them quite as bad.

The one thing that would really put me off them is that I don't for a moment believe that they could do all that running, all season and with such a shallow squad, without help from a magic bottle.

Smithwicks Man

Stoppage time remains one of the most inconsistent elements of the game. If there is 30 seconds to be added for each substitution then surely every game would have a minimum of 4/5 minutes stoppage time but it's not the case. It's at the discretion of the referee but it varies far too much from game to game.

Stoppage time at the end of the game is not there to account for all stoppages either as the ball is usually only in play for around two thirds of the 90 minutes on average.

I was very surprised to see 5 minutes added on tbh (and I wanted Madrid to equalize). I thought 3 minutes would've been fair and 4 minutes would have been generous.

I was even more surprised that that useless c*** Bjorn Kuipers was in charge to begin with.

greendom

It does seem a little strange that first half added on time is rarely more than 2 minutes, most commonly 1 and for 2nd half added on time seems to average at about 3 minutes. I suppose this is down to substitutions most of which are in the 2nd half. It does seem to be a very vague science though. Would it be better to have an independent time keeper, with a clock on display stopped whenever a stoppage was deemed to have occured ? Rather than relying on a ref who has plenty of other things to be worrying about?

eagle eye

SlickRic wrote: »

and i've already said that I know that's the case.

but they don't get brought up on their gamesmanship often at all because they're "underdogs" or they're "passionate". that's the point.

The reason they don't get brought up on it is because they are not a team full of the world's best players assembled regardless of the transfer fees or wages.

Simeone got a pass because we all know he is a football genius and like the majority of them he has a flaw in his personality.

Take Zidane's headbutt which wasn't a big deal for most people because he was a football genius. We don't hear about Ferguson's hairdryer treatment as something awful because he was a football genius. Cantona stamped on a lot of players but it was just looked at as a flaw in the character of a genius. There are lots of people who get away with it.

Ronaldo is a genius but he has been seen diving and crying and people don't like those character flaws. They dislike him for that even though its been a long time since he played in the EPL and he hasn't been at those things as much since he joined Real. Everything he does is under a microscope because of his past actions.

Shanotheslayer

Atletico seem to be the new Dortmund. Everybody will love them for a year as they're "Underdogs" then they'll go back to being brutal and no body will mention them again.

Nuri Sahin

Yeah, Dortmund are brutal. Truly brutal.

The pearls of wisdom of the SF.

Skylinehead

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

Atletico seem to be the new Dortmund. Everybody will love them for a year as they're "Underdogs" then they'll go back to being brutal and no body will mention them again.

Are you seriously describing Dortmund as "brutal"?

Moneymaker

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

Atletico seem to be the new Dortmund. Everybody will love them for a year as they're "Underdogs" then they'll go back to being brutal and no body will mention them again.

Yes a team missing 10+ first teamers all year is brutal.

But despite that they NARROWLY lost to the eventual winners.

Brutal...fcking hell. :rolleyes:

Shanotheslayer

Moneymaker wrote: »

Yes a team missing 10+ first teamers all year is brutal.

But despite that they NARROWLY lost to the eventual winners.

Brutal...fcking hell. :rolleyes:

1) That Narrow lose is ridiculous. It was narrow because Bayern dropped a tonne of points AFTER the league was won. 2) Nobody spoke of Dortmund before 2-3 years ago. Since they were under dogs and won the league. Bit like Atletico now. 3) Apologies, brutal was more aimed at Atletico, who were brutal 2-3 years narrowly escaping relegation. My point is more Atletico are the new flavor of the year. It'll be somebody else next season I imagine. Edit: There also wasn't half as much chat of Dortmund this year compared to last year or so. It was Atletico this year.

Moneymaker

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

1) That Narrow lose is ridiculous. It was narrow because Bayern dropped a tonne of points AFTER the league was won. 2) Nobody spoke of Dortmund before 2-3 years ago. Since they were under dogs and won the league. Bit like Atletico now. 3) Apologies, brutal was more aimed at Atletico, who were brutal 2-3 years narrowly escaping relegation. My point is more Atletico are the new flavor of the year. It'll be somebody else next season I imagine. Edit: There also wasn't have as much chat of Dortmund this year compared to last year or so. It was Atletico this year.

I was talking about the Champions league against Real.

No-one spoke of Dortmund? That's 1997 Champions League winners and one of the top clubs in Germany.

keane2097

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

1) That Narrow lose is ridiculous. It was narrow because Bayern dropped a tonne of points AFTER the league was won. 2) Nobody spoke of Dortmund before 2-3 years ago. Since they were under dogs and won the league. Bit like Atletico now. 3) Apologies, brutal was more aimed at Atletico, who were brutal 2-3 years narrowly escaping relegation. My point is more Atletico are the new flavor of the year. It'll be somebody else next season I imagine. Edit: There also wasn't have as much chat of Dortmund this year compared to last year or so. It was Atletico this year.

Christ almighty.

Fescue

eagle eye wrote: »

The reason they don't get brought up on it is because they are not a team full of the world's best players assembled regardless of the transfer fees or wages.

Simeone got a pass because we all know he is a football genius and like the majority of them he has a flaw in his personality.

Take Zidane's headbutt which wasn't a big deal for most people because he was a football genius. We don't hear about Ferguson's hairdryer treatment as something awful because he was a football genius. Cantona stamped on a lot of players but it was just looked at as a flaw in the character of a genius. There are lots of people who get away with it.

Ronaldo is a genius but he has been seen diving and crying and people don't like those character flaws. They dislike him for that even though its been a long time since he played in the EPL and he hasn't been at those things as much since he joined Real. Everything he does is under a microscope because of his past actions.

Interesting you refer to Simeone as a football genius. What struck me watching the way Atletico play is that they are somewhat old fashioned in their tactics. Two banks of four with two up front. Sitting deep and counter attacking at pace. I know I will get ridiculed but its essentially the tactics that Roy Hodgson has been practicing for the last 30 years.

The difference obviously is the way Simeone has motivated the Atletico squad into such a high intensity machine. Which is where his genius lays but tactically its nothing new.

Shanotheslayer

Moneymaker wrote: »

I was talking about the Champions league against Real.

No-one spoke of Dortmund? That's 1997 Champions League winners and one of the top clubs in Germany.

Apologies thought you were referring to the league. That's a long time ago mate, Over 15 years is. No league wins between 03-11. But didn't mean to derail thread. So no more posting of Dortmund from me.

Morzadec

Is it not obvious why people got behind Atleti or Dortmund last year?

Atleti winning would have been a triumph for hard work, team spirit, a collective spirit and never doubting what you can achieve. It would have been inspirational (as would Dortmund winning last year).

Madrid winning just doesn't have that narrative. They won because they repeatedly spent huge sums of money on the best talent available. It was always going to come off eventually. Not much narrative in that one, and not particularly inspiring or admirable. They should be winning it far often than they do to be perfectly honest.

Anyone who has a streak of romanticism, who wants to believe that there may be more to football than just money, that the game isn't going down a one way street of predictability, is going to get behind these teams.

It is not the team we're getting behind, it's the ideal

Dolph Starbeam

Morzadec wrote: »

Is it not obvious why people got behind Atleti or Dortmund last year?

Atleti winning would have been a triumph for hard work, team spirit, a collective spirit and never doubting what you can achieve. It would have been inspirational (as would Dortmund winning last year).

Madrid winning just doesn't have that narrative. They won because they repeatedly spent huge sums of money on the best talent available. It was always going to come off eventually. Not much narrative in that one, and not particularly inspiring or admirable. They should be winning it far often than they do to be perfectly honest.

Anyone who has a streak of romanticism, who wants to believe that there may be more to football than just money, that the game isn't going down a one way street of predictability, is going to get behind these teams.

It is not the team we're getting behind, it's the ideal

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Agueroooo

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

Atletico seem to be the new Dortmund. Everybody will love them for a year as they're "Underdogs" then they'll go back to being brutal and no body will mention them again.

I bet you liked listing to The Thrills.

don't ask me why - just a hunch

Pro. F

Fescue wrote: »

Interesting you refer to Simeone as a football genius. What struck me watching the way Atletico play is that they are somewhat old fashioned in their tactics. Two banks of four with two up front. Sitting deep and counter attacking at pace. I know I will get ridiculed but its essentially the tactics that Roy Hodgson has been practicing for the last 30 years.

The difference obviously is the way Simeone has motivated the Atletico squad into such a high intensity machine. Which is where his genius lays but tactically its nothing new.

There's nothing old fashioned about Atletico's tactics or formation. There isn't even any tactics or formations that you will see used these days that could sensibly be called old fashioned. Just fashions of what fans and journalists decide is modern while completely ignoring how long those tactics and formations have been around. And conversely, there are no managers who have done anything particularly new either.

There's nothing old fashioned about the way Hodgeson sets his teams up, nor Simeone. Although they are very different. Once a style has success, and journalists and fans figure out what it is and can see it being used in more than one good team, it suddenly gets called modern. But it almost never is.

The reason some people might call Simeone a genius is because he has just won la liga and a heap of cups with Atletico and also gotten to the CL final. Hodgeson on the other hand, has never done anything so impressive.

Also, calling Atletico a team that sit deep and counter is a very poor description.

Shanotheslayer

Agueroooo wrote: »

I bet you liked listing to The Thrills.

don't ask me why - just a hunch

No mate.

Optimalprimerib

The reason athletico and simione are not hated is because they are not well known yet. They are new to most football fans at this level of the game. Put simione in charge of a premier league outfit, then peoples opinions would change.

Of course some spectacle-with-clear-lens-wearers will poke their heads over their imacs to say they watched all of athletico games this season, but I am talking about the majority here.

Fescue

Pro. F wrote: »

There's nothing old fashioned about Atletico's tactics or formation. There isn't even any tactics or formations that you will see used these days that could sensibly be called old fashioned. Just fashions of what fans and journalists decide is modern while completely ignoring how long those tactics and formations have been around. And conversely, there are no managers who have done anything particularly new either.

There's nothing old fashioned about the way Hodgeson sets his teams up, nor Simeone. Although they are very different. Once a style has success, and journalists and fans figure out what it is and can see it being used in more than one good team, it suddenly gets called modern. But it almost never is.

The reason some people might call Simeone a genius is because he has just won la liga and a heap of cups with Atletico and also gotten to the CL final. Hodgeson on the other hand, has never done anything so impressive.

Also, calling Atletico a team that sit deep and counter is a very poor description.

Well that's just nitpicking isn't it.

Smithwicks Man

Optimalprimerib wrote: »

The reason athletico and simione are not hated is because they are not well known yet. They are new to most football fans at this level of the game. Put simione in charge of a premier league outfit, then peoples opinions would change.

Of course some spectacle-with-clear-lens-wearers will poke their heads over their imacs to say they watched all of athletico games this season, but I am talking about the majority here.

Hang on a second now. We're not talking about Juve Stabia or Herta Berlin II.

They're after winning La Liga and getting to the CL final, the way some people are going on here you'd swear they were semi-professional :eek:

Pro. F

Fescue wrote: »

Well that's just nitpicking isn't it.

No.

Fescue

Pro. F wrote: »

No.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Pro. F

Fescue wrote: »

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Or you could bother your arse to engage in the discussion rather than moaning about nitpicking when somebody goes to the trouble to reply to one of your posts.

jmayo

Morzadec wrote: »

Is it not obvious why people got behind Atleti or Dortmund last year?

Atleti winning would have been a triumph for hard work, team spirit, a collective spirit and never doubting what you can achieve. It would have been inspirational (as would Dortmund winning last year).

Madrid winning just doesn't have that narrative. They won because they repeatedly spent huge sums of money on the best talent available. It was always going to come off eventually. Not much narrative in that one, and not particularly inspiring or admirable. They should be winning it far often than they do to be perfectly honest.

Anyone who has a streak of romanticism, who wants to believe that there may be more to football than just money, that the game isn't going down a one way street of predictability, is going to get behind these teams.

It is not the team we're getting behind, it's the ideal

Excellent post.

I love how some posters turn round and say they were glad that Real Madrid won because they have the best players and they played the best football.
Well why the fook wouldn't they have the best players and by extension play better more attacking football what with the huge amount more money they spend on transfers and wages.

It is like saying you expect a Ferrari to be a better roadholder than a fecking Kia.

And as for some shyte about how Simeone and Athletico parked the bus and tried to stop Real playing.
FFS did they expect them to try and outshoot the likes of Ronaldo, Bale, Benzenma et al, one of the world's best and most exciting attacking forces ?

You play to your strengths and if you lack in one area you try and make up for it.

And if that was all Athletico were good for, then how come they managed to win all the games up to the final and a La Liga title.

What Athletico achieved this year to me is a damming indictment of PSG, City, Monaco, etc.
What with all the hundreds of millions spent by these guys over the last few years they should be odds on to be in the CL semis, and with the amount spent by Real they shouldn't be bloody scraping a draw in the 93th minute, but should be dominating the damm thing.

More power to Athletico. They showed that it isn't all about who has the backer with the biggest wallet.
Sadly the days when the likes of them makes finals is probably drawing to an end and they might be the last of the "little" guys to reach it for a while.

Fescue

Pro. F wrote: »

Or you could bother your arse to engage in the discussion rather than moaning about nitpicking when somebody goes to the trouble to reply to one of your posts.

Apologies, I was at work, don't have the time for in depth tactical discussions so my responses were just light hearted. I actually agree with a lot of what you said in so far as tactics aren't old fashioned.

I was just making the point that there are similarities between the way Hodgson sets out his teams and the way Atletico Madrid play, certainly the way they played in the final. Sitting deep and looking to counter. Two banks of four.

That said I know Atletico have the ability to press higher up when required.

Moneymaker

Basically the main conclusion from this thread is Morzadec should post more.

Ulysses Gaze

Smithwicks Man wrote: »

Hang on a second now. We're not talking about Juve Stabia or Herta Berlin II.

They're after winning La Liga and getting to the CL final, the way some people are going on here you'd swear they were semi-professional :eek:

Yep. They've won a similar number of trophies domestically as Arsenal and have won more than Arsenal in Europe in terms of trophies. Also played in more CL finals than Arsenal.

Where people are getting the idea that they aren't big club...

Morzadec

Moneymaker wrote: »

Basically the main conclusion from this thread is Morzadec should post more.

Thank you good sir.

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Yep. They've won a similar number of trophies domestically as Arsenal and have won more than Arsenal in Europe in terms of trophies. Also played in more CL finals than Arsenal.

Where people are getting the idea that they aren't big club...

Their wage budget is less than half of Arsenal's. Arsenal have had, for the last ten or fifteen years, a host of international stars with high reputations in the game. Atleti's players (for the most part) are only now finally getting moved into that bracket in most people's minds.

A team like Arsenal or Liverpool winning the CL is an impressive feat but is no miracle.

These players 3 years ago were a mix of journeymen, rejects from the Real Madrid academy not deemed good enough for the top level, scrawny 18 year olds looking for experience, even a couple of players that weren't at Atleti -loaned out to smaller La Liga teams with doubts that they would ever make it at their struggling parent club.

Very few of these players could have ever hoped to play in a World Cup for example, many would have doubted they would ever play in the Champions League. They were a team languishing in 10th place when Simeone took over, and they have converted themselves into a team capable of going toe to toe with anyone in Europe.

Not comparable in any way to compare this Atleti team and the journey they've been on, who still have a lower wage budget than QPR and Fulham, with a team that is pretty much a heavyweight like Arsenal.

Pro. F

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Yep. They've won a similar number of trophies domestically as Arsenal and have won more than Arsenal in Europe in terms of trophies. Also played in more CL finals than Arsenal.

Where people are getting the idea that they aren't big club...

Arsenal are 128 years old, Atleti are 111 years old. Comparing the number of trophies they have won over their history is not a way of gauging how well Atleti have done this year.

Pro. F

Fescue wrote: »

Apologies, I was at work, don't have the time for in depth tactical discussions so my responses were just light hearted. I actually agree with a lot of what you said in so far as tactics aren't old fashioned.

Fair enough.

Fescue wrote: »

I was just making the point that there are similarities between the way Hodgson sets out his teams and the way Atletico Madrid play, certainly the way they played in the final. Sitting deep and looking to counter. Two banks of four.

That said I know Atletico have the ability to press higher up when required.

Even in the final they still did a lot of high pressing. In games other than the final, where they haven't been so badly affected by injury, they did more again. I don't see the similarities to Hodgeson other than formation and having a defensive approach.

NIMAN

Interesting that Atleti had the better all season over Barca, not losing to them at all.

Yet against Real their record got worse, conceding 9 goals iirc in their last 3 meetings in the Cup and CL against them.

I think this proved they were better set up to defend against the tika-tika style than Real's faster counter-attacking football.

Turtwig

I wouldn't read too much into it.

Barca should have beaten them in the Champions League First Leg. In the second leg, Barca had no Pique, or Valdes. so Atleti could press high with ease.

In contrast, Real beat Atleti in a mid game Copa Del Rey game when Atleti were clearly going through a lull in form. Real were awfully lucky to win the Champions League. Atleti were lacking Turan and Costa. They were also depleted from their game against Barca and the long season with little rotations. Yet but for 2 minutes they would have been champions. The scoreline didn't reflect the match and it's certainly not grounds to say Real performed better than Barca against because in reality I believe the league reflects the standings of the teams in Spain. Barca performed better against Atleti than Real did. Real just happened to win two games. If you go by 90 minutes just one game. In sport, that happens.

I don't think we can conclude anything about Atleti being set up better against tiki taka or not.

jmayo

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Yep. They've won a similar number of trophies domestically as Arsenal and have won more than Arsenal in Europe in terms of trophies. Also played in more CL finals than Arsenal.

Where people are getting the idea that they aren't big club...

I would say Arsenal have a poor enough record in Europe.
Yeah they have made the CL for 16 years, but only got to one final and a semi.
That is not great return when you consider how good some of the early teams were.

Athletico does not have the financial stability of Arsenal and neither do they have the players if you look at the salaries and transfer fees paid.
That is why I would consider them a poor club.

And if you use that yardstick it makes Arsenal and most of the PL look like overpaid wasters.

Look at how much the likes of Spurs have spent and then see how they have faired in Europe where Benfica tore them apart.

The PL is awash with money with some very overpaid over hyped footballers.

I would even like to see a comparison of the spending of the relegated clubs to the likes of Athletico.

Ulysses Gaze

Morzadec wrote: »

Thank you good sir.



Their wage budget is less than half of Arsenal's. Arsenal have had, for the last ten or fifteen years, a host of international stars with high reputations in the game. Atleti's players (for the most part) are only now finally getting moved into that bracket in most people's minds.

A team like Arsenal or Liverpool winning the CL is an impressive feat but is no miracle.

These players 3 years ago were a mix of journeymen, rejects from the Real Madrid academy not deemed good enough for the top level, scrawny 18 year olds looking for experience, even a couple of players that weren't at Atleti -loaned out to smaller La Liga teams with doubts that they would ever make it at their struggling parent club.

Very few of these players could have ever hoped to play in a World Cup for example, many would have doubted they would ever play in the Champions League. They were a team languishing in 10th place when Simeone took over, and they have converted themselves into a team capable of going toe to toe with anyone in Europe.

Not comparable in any way to compare this Atleti team and the journey they've been on, who still have a lower wage budget than QPR and Fulham, with a team that is pretty much a heavyweight like Arsenal.

I am not comparing this teams journey, merely stating that they are, and have been, a big club that has had success before this season.