Malmo v Celtic TV3 19:45

Dirty Dingus McGee

CSF wrote: »

You can always get better players with more money if you spend it right. I wouldn't be too quick to slaughter the standard of league. Allsvenskan is no better a standard. On 2 different nights Celtic go through and Malmo don't. Celtic don't have the players anymore to be expecting to go through to the Champions League easily.

But the margins are fine, a 95th minute goal in the first leg has arguably decided the whole thing.

It may not be but it is at least competitive which means Malmo have to fight to win every week and are therefore properly prepared for playing tough games which Celtic aren't at the moment

LuckyLloyd

Celtic are very poor, they have no complaints after tonight. Well beaten.

martingriff

Dennis Reynolds wrote: »

In fairness the club is run on a shoe string. Ultimately a Late goal in celtic Park and an awful refereeing decision in the first half has contributed to being knocked out. Terrible defending from set pieces also, but nothing pathetic about it.

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA the ref lost if for Celtic it was the GOD AWFUL performance of there players

CSF

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

It may not be but it is at least competitive which means Malmo have to fight to win every week and are therefore properly prepared for playing tough games which Celtic aren't at the moment

Not sure I completely buy that. I get the competitive thing but I'm not sure Malmo gain anything more beneficial for going into Champions League football playing Goteborg than Celtic do playing Hearts or Aberdeen. Obviously Malmo playing a summer league has been a help but I wouldn't buy that Celtic being a really strong team in a weak league has hindered them anymore than Malmo being a fairly strong team in a weak league.

You prepare yourself better for European competition by playing that standard of team on a weekly basis but neither team are doing that.

CSF

martingriff wrote: »

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA the ref lost if for Celtic it was the GOD AWFUL performance of there players

I'd argue both teams suffered and benefitted equally from poor refereeing decisions. Had Griffiths been sent off you'd have been hard pushed to see Celtic coming back from there. Had Celtic seen their goal included I think they would have gone through.

Soups123

martingriff wrote: »

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA the ref lost if for Celtic it was the GOD AWFUL performance of there players

Read his post again

Dirty Dingus McGee

CSF wrote: »

Not sure I completely buy that. I get the competitive thing but I'm not sure Malmo gain anything more beneficial for going into Champions League football playing Goteborg than Celtic do playing Hearts or Aberdeen. Obviously Malmo playing a summer league has been a help but I wouldn't buy that Celtic being a really strong team in a weak league has hindered them anymore than Malmo being a fairly strong team in a weak league.

You prepare yourself better for European competition by playing that standard of team on a weekly basis but neither team are doing that.

It more of an attitude thing is it not.

Malmo know every week they have to be tuned in to win and so are tuned in every week.

Celtic know that in their domestic league they can stroll through it and therefore have to switch themselves on again as soon as the play in Europe.

Winning the Bundesliga early seems to have negatively impacted Bayern Munich in the champions league for the last couple of seasons and Bayern probably wold have been better off in Europe if they had won the league so early.

mikeym

Celtic were poor tonight.

Although the disallowed goal was ridiculous.

CSF

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

It more of an attitude thing is it not.

Malmo know every week they have to be tuned in to win and so are tuned in every week.

Celtic know that in their domestic league they can stroll through it and therefore have to switch themselves on again as soon as the play in Europe.

Winning the Bundesliga early seems to have negatively impacted Bayern Munich in the champions league for the last couple of seasons and Bayern probably wold have been better off in Europe if they had won the league so early.

Wouldn't see it that way myself. Bayern's Champions League winning team had a more comfortable title margin than the 2 titles that followed.

If I'm looking at the Celtic league situation and seeing how that affects them in Europe, I'd think it's more down to Celtic not having to sign better players to compete. Players like Boyata, Griffiths, Forrest aren't the standard of players to be competing in Europe, nor would they be the standard of player to win the league if it became as competitive as it was in previous years.

MarkSRFC21

Just for the record, cork city bet Malmö in 2004. Rovers also bet them in a friendly in 2011. Because of the result tonight, Celtic will now enter the CL in the same round as the LOI champions. So in uefas eyes at least, Celtic are the same standard as Dundalk. Just thought I'd let you all know:rolleyes:

Vision of Disorder

MarkSRFC21 wrote: »

Just for the record, cork city bet Malmö in 2004. Rovers also bet them in a friendly in 2011. Because of the result tonight, Celtic will now enter the CL in the same round as the LOI champions. So in uefas eyes at least, Celtic are the same standard as Dundalk. Just thought I'd let you all know:rolleyes:

I bet Dundalk are mortified by that.

dundalkfc10

MarkSRFC21 wrote: »

Just for the record, cork city bet Malmö in 2004. Rovers also bet them in a friendly in 2011. Because of the result tonight, Celtic will now enter the CL in the same round as the LOI champions. So in uefas eyes at least, Celtic are the same standard as Dundalk. Just thought I'd let you all know:rolleyes:

Celtic entered the same round as Dundalk this year, so you obvs are just trolling.

As a regular in Oriel and away games and someone who goes to 10-15 Celtic games a season, If Celtic played Dundalk 10 times, Celtic would win at least 9 of them!

Richie Towell never made it at Celtic or Hibs, and yet since he arrived in Dundalk has been the best player in Ireland by a mile.
Every Celtic player that played tonight would be the best player in any LOI side and that's a fact

MarkSRFC21

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

Celtic entered the same round as Dundalk this year, so you obvs are just trolling.

As a regular in Oriel and away games and someone who goes to 10-15 Celtic games a season, If Celtic played Dundalk 10 times, Celtic would win at least 9 of them!

Richie Towell never made it at Celtic or Hibs, and yet since he arrived in Dundalk has been the best player in Ireland by a mile.
Every Celtic player that played tonight would be the best player in any LOI side and that's a fact

If they had of won tonight, their coefficient would have been boosted and they wouldn't be entered in the same round next year:rolleyes:

Dempsey

MarkSRFC21 wrote: »

Just for the record, cork city bet Malmö in 2004. Rovers also bet them in a friendly in 2011. Because of the result tonight, Celtic will now enter the CL in the same round as the LOI champions. So in uefas eyes at least, Celtic are the same standard as Dundalk. Just thought I'd let you all know:rolleyes:

Is that the LOI's greatest achievement?

A Dub in Glasgo

MarkSRFC21 wrote: »

If they had of won tonight, their coefficient would have been boosted and they wouldn't be entered in the same round next year:rolleyes:

You are not making sense

dundalkfc10

monkey9 wrote: »

Celtic have never been the same since they lost Rangers. That should be sorted next season so at least there's that.

If you knew anything about Scottish football (which you obvs don't) Aberdeen and Hearts are in a much stronger position (on and off the field) to challenge Celtic over the next few years than The Rangers

TheBuilder

MarkSRFC21 wrote: »

If they had of won tonight, their coefficient would have been boosted and they wouldn't be entered in the same round next year:rolleyes:

Co efficient doesn't work that way, its based on 5 years so they'll still enter at the same stage next year.

Nice try though and lets be honest, Celtic would comfortably beat any league of Ireland side so lets not try draw comparisons with the two.

MarkSRFC21

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

You are not making sense

This year, both teams were entered in the second round. If Celtic won tonight, their co efficient would have gone up and Celtic would have been entered in the third round next year

MarkSRFC21

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

You are not making sense

This year, both teams were entered in the second round. If Celtic won tonight, their co efficient would have gone up and Celtic would have been entered in the third round next year

dundalkfc10

MarkSRFC21 wrote: »

This year, both teams were entered in the second round. If Celtic won tonight, their co efficient would have gone up and Celtic would have been entered in the third round next year

No they wouldn't! They are in Round 2 next year unless they win the EL now and would have been unless they won the CL

MarkSRFC21

TheBuilder wrote: »

Co efficient doesn't work that way, its based on 5 years so they'll still enter at the same stage next year.

Nice try though and lets be honest, Celtic would comfortably beat any league of Ireland side so lets not try draw comparisons with the two.

It's based on the last five years, so yes it would have an effect. And I don't think they would win that comfortably

Oat23

TheBuilder wrote: »

Co efficient doesn't work that way, its based on 5 years so they'll still enter at the same stage next year.

Nice try though and lets be honest, Celtic would comfortably beat any league of Ireland side so lets not try draw comparisons with the two.

Ability is not everything and a side like Dundalk going up against Celtic in July would be a lot closer than some think if you ask me. The Celtic lads didn't look like they gave a sh*t out there tonight.

Celtic would win the majority of times but I don't think you can say they would comfortably beat them in a one off game or over two legs with such surety.

TheBuilder

MarkSRFC21 wrote: »

It's based on the last five years, so yes it would have an effect. And I don't think they would win that comfortably

It has no effect in the following season, it will only have effect the season after.

CSF

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

If you knew anything about Scottish football (which you obvs don't) Aberdeen and Hearts are in a much stronger position (on and off the field) to challenge Celtic over the next few years than The Rangers

Hardly relevant given he was talking about the past rather than what they are now. Hearts and Aberdeen are not what the Old Firm was before it all went t*ts up?

Did having a legitimate title contender force Celtic to better themselves? Of course. Sure that's what sent Rangers down the tubes really (among other things) Stretching themselves too far to better themselves. Were there no Celtic to challenge them they probably wouldn't have spent so much.

dundalkfc10

MarkSRFC21 wrote: »

It's based on the last five years, so yes it would have an effect. And I don't think they would win that comfortably

Your wrong Jesus just give it up.

Tell you one thing, Pat Fenlon and his hoofball wouldn't beat them anyway

MarkSRFC21

TheBuilder wrote: »

It has no effect in the following season, it will only have effect the season after.

No it won't. This years results will affect next years rankings

dundalkfc10

CSF wrote: »

Hardly relevant given he was talking about the past rather than what they are now. Hearts and Aberdeen are not what the Old Firm was before it all went t*ts up?

Did having a legitimate title contender force Celtic to better themselves? Of course. Sure that's what sent Rangers down the tubes really (among other things) Stretching themselves too far to better themselves. Were there no Celtic to challenge them they probably wouldn't have spent so much.

How's it not relevant when the last line he wrote was. Least that should be sorted next year anyway (I.e New Rangers will be about)

MarkSRFC21

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

Your wrong Jesus just give it up.

Tell you one thing, Pat Fenlon and his hoofball wouldn't beat them anyway

I completely agree regarding rovers but I think your lot would give them a decent game

Oat23

MarkSRFC21 wrote: »

No it won't. This years results will affect next years rankings

I've played enough football manager in my day to know you're wrong on this. Sorry.

dundalkfc10

Oat23 wrote: »

I've played enough football manager in my day to know you're wrong on this. Sorry.

He is wrong and a simple Google search would tell him that

RoryMac

CSF wrote: »

Hardly relevant given he was talking about the past rather than what they are now. Hearts and Aberdeen are not what the Old Firm was before it all went t*ts up?

Did having a legitimate title contender force Celtic to better themselves? Of course. Sure that's what sent Rangers down the tubes really (among other things) Stretching themselves too far to better themselves. Were there no Celtic to challenge them they probably wouldn't have spent so much.

True but both Celtic & Rangers cut back on their spending a good few years before Rangers ran into trouble, the last time Celtic spent decent money was the early 2000's under MON. Since then spending was reined in and budgets cut.

It has far more to do with the growth of money in the English game than the lack of an Old Firm.

Celtics spending has been pretty much the same since Strachan took over

dundalkfc10

MarkSRFC21 wrote: »

I completely agree regarding rovers but I think your lot would give them a decent game

I disagree, Celtic are a good level ahead of us, prob similar to BATE who showed their quality in Oriel by totally outplaying us really when u look back on it

MarkSRFC21

The club coefficient rankings are based on the results of clubs competing in the five previous seasons of the UEFA Champions League and UEFA Europa League. The rankings determine the seeding of each club in all UEFA competition draws.

From the UEFA website

Francie Barrett

MarkSRFC21 wrote: »

Just for the record, cork city bet Malmö in 2004. Rovers also bet them in a friendly in 2011. Because of the result tonight, Celtic will now enter the CL in the same round as the LOI champions. So in uefas eyes at least, Celtic are the same standard as Dundalk. Just thought I'd let you all know:rolleyes:

Don't know why anyone is bothering to reply to this :pac:

MarkSRFC21

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

I disagree, Celtic are a good level ahead of us, prob similar to BATE who showed their quality in Oriel by totally outplaying us really when u look back on it

But you weren't beaten comfortably

MarkSRFC21

Francie Barrett wrote: »

Don't know why anyone is bothering to reply to this :pac:

I honestly didn't want an argument when I posted it. I just wanted to make a point

Oat23

RoryMac wrote: »

True but both Celtic & Rangers cut back on their spending a good few years before Rangers ran into trouble, the last time Celtic spent decent money was the early 2000's under MON. Since then spending was reined in and budgets cut.

Where is the money going now? Shareholders?

Celtic are a big enough club that they could be fan owned. Shame that the decision makers are f*cking them over and pocketing profits if that is the case.

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

I disagree, Celtic are a good level ahead of us, prob similar to BATE who showed their quality in Oriel by totally outplaying us really when u look back on it

What game were you watching? Another night and Dundalk would have went through. McMillan missed a glorious 1 v 1.

dundalkfc10

MarkSRFC21 wrote: »

But you weren't beaten comfortably

In the 2nd leg, we had 1 chance all game and to be honest if there was another 30 mins that night we still wouldn't have had another chance.
BATE were better in every position (bar Stevie o Donnell)

MarkSRFC21

Oat23 wrote: »

Where is the money going now? Shareholders?

Celtic are a big enough club that they could be fan owned. Shame that the decision makers are f*cking them over and pocketing profits if that is the case.



What game were you watching? Another night and Dundalk would have went through. McMillan missed a glorious 1 v 1.

Tbf that was their only shot of the game and BATE had a lot of chances

MarkSRFC21

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

In the 2nd leg, we had 1 chance all game and to be honest if there was another 30 mins that night we still wouldn't have had another chance.
BATE were better in every position (bar Stevie o Donnell)

Yes but I certainly wouldn't say you were beaten comfortably

Oat23

MarkSRFC21 wrote: »

Tbf that was their only shot of the game and BATE had a lot of chances

Yet they scraped through by a goal which is why I said 'on another night' they could have went through. If McMillan had scored that 1 v 1 Dundalk would have won.

Anyways..they didn't and they went out. Back on topic.

dundalkfc10

Oat23 wrote: »

Where is the money going now? Shareholders?

Celtic are a big enough club that they could be fan owned. Shame that the decision makers are f*cking them over and pocketing profits if that is the case.



What game were you watching? Another night and Dundalk would have went through. McMillan missed a glorious 1 v 1.

If BATE took their chances, it could have been 2/3-0 oonnight before McMillans chance

MarkSRFC21

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

If BATE took their chances, it could have been 2/3-0 oonnight before McMillans chance

And if Dundalk took theirs they could they could have gone through

citytillidie

MarkSRFC21 wrote: »

The club coefficient rankings are based on the results of clubs competing in the five previous seasons of the UEFA Champions League and UEFA Europa League. The rankings determine the seeding of each club in all UEFA competition draws.

From the UEFA website

And you do know that a countries ranking is depended on all teams playing in Europe, Celtic could go on and get a good run in the Europa League but because they are the only Scottish team then Scotland's league rankings will not be as good as another country beside it if 2 teams from there make a good run in the Europa League.

Scotland is currently ranked 23rd it needs to be in the top 15 for the winners to start in the next round and there is no way Celtic are going to claw those places on their own.

They need more teams to make the group stages and then also they better the results of teams from Belarus, Poland, Croatia, Denmark, Cyprus, Israel and Romania.

So in answer to your question no if Celtic had of won last night it still would not have mattered the Scottish champions will still start in the 2nd round next season it will just matter if they are seeded or unseeded.

citytillidie

As it stands right now

# country 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 ranking teams
14 Czech Republic 3.500 5.250 8.500 8.000 3.875 29.125 4
15 Romania 3.166 4.333 6.800 6.875 5.125 26.299 4
16 Austria 4.375 7.125 2.250 7.800 4.125 25.675 4
17 Croatia 4.125 3.750 4.375 4.375 6.875 23.500 4
18 Cyprus 3.125 9.125 4.000 2.750 3.300 22.300 5
19 Poland 4.500 6.625 2.500 3.125 4.750 21.500 4
20 Israel 4.625 6.000 3.250 5.750 1.375 21.000 4
21 Belarus 5.875 3.125 4.500 1.750 5.500 20.750 4
22 Denmark 6.700 3.100 3.300 3.800 2.900 19.800 5
23 Scotland 3.600 2.750 4.300 3.250 4.000 17.900 4
24 Sweden 2.600 2.900 5.125 3.200 3.900 17.725 5

How it is looking for next season

# country 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16 ranking teams
13 Czech Republic 5.250 8.500 8.000 3.875 1.700 27.325 4/ 5
14 Greece 7.600 4.400 6.100 6.200 2.200 26.500 5/ 5
15 Romania 4.333 6.800 6.875 5.125 2.000 25.133 2/ 4
16 Croatia 3.750 4.375 4.375 6.875 4.000 23.375 2/ 4
17 Austria 7.125 2.250 7.800 4.125 1.500 22.800 3/ 5
18 Cyprus 9.125 4.000 2.750 3.300 2.375 21.550 1/ 4
19 Poland 6.625 2.500 3.125 4.750 3.250 20.250 2/ 4
20 Sweden 2.900 5.125 3.200 3.900 4.250 19.375 1/ 4
21 Israel 6.000 3.250 5.750 1.375 2.250 18.625 1/ 4
22 Belarus 3.125 4.500 1.750 5.500 2.625 17.500 2/ 4
23 Scotland 2.750 4.300 3.250 4.000 2.250 16.550 1/ 4
24 Denmark 3.100 3.300 3.800 2.900 3.375 16.475 2/ 4
25 Norway 2.300 4.900 2.600 2.200 4.250 16.250 3/ 4

As you can see Sweden has gone above Scotland and Denmark have fallen down