IF Liverpool win the Champions League (part 23)...

therecklessone

And UEFA allow them to compete in next year's CL as defending champions, how do they fit in to the draw?

I mean, there are only X number of teams can compete in the 3 qualifying stages and the following group stage. X+1 doesn't work surely? So do UEFA take a CL place away from another nation to accomodate them?

Make sense? Try this on for size:

Imagine Brazil fail to qualify for WC 2006, but FIFA decide that as champions, they have a right to defend the trophy (prompted by commercial concerns as Brazil are a huge draw ) and decide to allow them to compete anyway. They are left with a choice of 33 teams to compete (which doesn't equal 8x4 tidy groups), or replacing one qualifying team with non-qualifying Brazil. Neither works, yes?

What think ye?

PHB

CL has a lot more options, and the WC just wouldn't do it. p.s. it'll never happen in the WC Theres countless qualifiying rounds at the start, Man Utd for example will play in the last round of the qualifiers, while there will be like 4 before that.
They simply eliminate one of the final qualifiers by having another round before the the qualifiers

Dont be at yourself

They give Liverpool's UEFA Cup spot to some minnows team and let Liverpool take their CL spot.

MrJoeSoap

Or...

therecklessone

PHB wrote:

CL has a lot more options, and the WC just wouldn't do it. p.s. it'll never happen in the WC Theres countless qualifiying rounds at the start, Man Utd for example will play in the last round of the qualifiers, while there will be like 4 before that.
They simply eliminate one of the final qualifiers by having another round before the the qualifiers

There's only 3 qualifying rounds.

So the maths is:

1st qualifying round (Q1) - 32 teams, 16 progress
2nd qualifying round (Q2) - 32 teams (16 winners from Q1 + 16 higher teams), 16 winners
3rd qualifying round (Q3) - 32 teams (16 winners from Q2 + 16 higher teams), 16 winners

Group stage - 32 teams (16 winners from Q3 + 16 higher teams), arranged in 8 groups of 4 with 16 to progress to knockout stages.

Whatever way you look at it, introduce 1 more team and it makes it difficult. How do you resolve it? Have a pre-qualifying round, where the worst team to qualify for the CL qualifiers has to play against Liverpool, then the winners advance to the 1st qualifying round proper?

Allow Liverpool to join at Q2 or Q3, and make two lesser teams fight it out pre-qualifying?

Add 15 more teams and have a 4th qualifying round???

Whatever way you look at it, for 32 teams to progress to the group stage someone somewhere needs to play an extra match, simply to accomodate the Premier League (who won't nominate Liverpool instead of Everton), UEFA (who are considering this), and Liverpool (though I don't actually blame them!)

therecklessone

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

They give Liverpool's UEFA Cup spot to some minnows team and let Liverpool take their CL spot.

Not on.Those "minnows" deserve to be there more than 2nd, 3rd, and even 4th place teams in the glamour leagues.

JoeSoap's link for the TNS offer is interesting, but would Liverpool be prepared to slog it out through 4 qualifying rounds to make the group stages? Probably the fairest (i.e. not forced on the "minnow" but done at their own request, and with the relevant compensation)

Hydromonkey

The table on UEFAs website
http://www.uefa.com/competitions/UCL/news/Kind=1/newsId=268457.html
seems to have a place for the title holders.

Apparently, last year, only 15 teams qualified automatically because Porto qualified as title holder and as domestic champions.

So, they promoted Fenerbahce from the qualifying rounds to make up the numbers as the 16th automatic qualifier and modified the qualifying system at the expense of Irtysh Pavlodar (Kazakhstan Champion's).

shelsfan

I feared that might happen where Liverpool team would replace a small team because that would make it harder for Shels to do well if the standard is brought up in the qualifying rounds.

MrJoeSoap

Only really if we were drawn against Liverpool. Would be very unfair on the team that were drawn against Liverpool in the 1st Qual Round alright, but could be seen as a money-maker on the other hand. Do Shels have to do all three Qualifying rounds again even despite last year?

_blank_

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Do Shels have to do all three Qualifying rounds again even despite last year?

Yes, the only difference is that we are seeded for the first qualifying round.

Of the 32 teams in it, we are in the Top 16 of them, so will be drawn against one of the lower 16 teams, for example TNS.

I don't like that TNS thing up there on little bit.

uberwolf

If liverpool won they would be seeded - i.e qualify as one the top 16 teams, so it would be the 16th place team who would be relegated to qualifying rounds and not liverpool

MrJoeSoap

So many 'ifs'. The whole situation is starting to annoy me.

Liverpool should accept that they have missed out on the CL and take their UEFA place gratefully.

mike65

MrJoeSoap wrote:

So many 'ifs'. The whole situation is starting to annoy me.

Liverpool should accept that they have missed out on the CL and take their UEFA place gratefully.

Ha! If there is provison then Liverpool have every right, and indeed would be expected to take it.

Mike.

eirebhoy

Hydromonkey wrote:

The table on UEFAs website
http://www.uefa.com/competitions/UCL/news/Kind=1/newsId=268457.html
seems to have a place for the title holders.

Thats strange alright. The winner of the Turkish league qualify automatically this year. Unless UEFA have got it horribly wrong though it looks from that table that they had planned to give the title holders a bye into the group stages iin place of the Turkish champions.

PHB

Still think it'd be better if Liverpool lost the CL final, got stuck in the UEFA, and decided to pull out.
I honastly belive they could challenge next year without a European Compo

ianomccabe

If we win in Istanbul i can honestly say i couldnt give two fooks if we get in next season.

I think like u say the year without champions league would be a blessing in disguise

Slash/ED

If Spain didn't get an extra space why should this be any different?

The WC winners have to qualify for the next competition, the EC winners the same. Next years CL qualification started this season, Liverpool failed. The End. It could happen Brazil.

The Rooster

Slash/ED wrote:

If Spain didn't get an extra space why should this be any different?

If Real Madrid qualified for the CL by winning the previous year CL and coming 5th in the league, why should this be any different?
If the FA allow the UEFA Cup champions (if English) to defend their trophy if they dont otherwise qualify for the UEFA Cup, why should this be any different?
If my auntie had balls....

Champions should be allowed defend. Comparing to the World Cup is disingeniuos because its a completley different system - they have qualifiers which are purely to decide who makes the final stages so Brazil do have the opportuntity to play in these as champions (obviously completely different to the CL system where qualification is mostly based on performances in separate standalone competitions in the previous campaign).

Big Nelly

Want to put another Liverpool thread about this up?

In my opinion they shouldnt be allowed back in, as mentioned before in the 100 thread they where told at the start of the season to get into the CL then they needed to get into the top 4 teams....they didnt so story over!

Anyway they wont win and there will prob still be a thread......What if Liverpoll had won the Champions League?

Lex Luthor

therecklessone wrote:

Imagine Brazil fail to qualify for WC 2006, but FIFA decide that as champions, they have a right to defend the trophy (prompted by commercial concerns as Brazil are a huge draw ) and decide to allow them to compete anyway. They are left with a choice of 33 teams to compete (which doesn't equal 8x4 tidy groups), or replacing one qualifying team with non-qualifying Brazil. Neither works, yes?

What think ye?

I thought Brazil didn't have to qualify anyway for 2006 as Champions.

~Rebel~

People keep bringing up this world cup/ eurpoean championships thing.
*1st - The competitions are every 4 years so there could be no comparison between 1 team and the one competeing 4 years later, eg, greece could be abysmal 3years from now
*2nd - It was the holders who pushed for it to be changed as it gave them an automatic disadvantage to not have to qualify as they dont get the competitive games they need.
*3rd - To get into the champions league you have to finish in top4 in england. The equivilent of this to get into world cup is simply being a nation. Thats it. Once you're a country, you're in the world cup. You then go through the qualifying rounds to reach the finals exactly as happens in the champs league for the smaller teams, only difference is all the teams have to go through the pre qualifying rounds in the world cup while in the CL, the big teams get to skip a few rounds. So Everyone is already in the world cup, they just made it that the holders have to go through a few extra rounds. They're 2 different systems from the very beginning so stop comparing them!

Now will people stop bringing this up?! Please?!

Big Nelly

~Rebel~ wrote:

greece could be abysmal 3years from now

Greece are abysmal and so are Liverpool, as mentioned they finished 5th, shouldnt be allowed near the CL next season!! ask Dunphy and he will tell you ! lol

eirebhoy

~Rebel~ wrote:

*2nd - It was the holders who pushed for it to be changed as it gave them an automatic disadvantage to not have to qualify as they dont get the competitive games they need.

There is absolutely no way that is true.

Qualifying rounds for international tournaments last a year (in Europe anyway) and I don't think any country would hand back an automatic place in a WC or EC.

France had an abysmal time in Japan so FIFA decided to change the system.

So many countries have proved that not having to qualify for an international tournament doesn't give you too much of a disadvantage. Look at the hosts of the most recent tournaments.
Portugal got to the final.
South Korea got to the semi's I think.
Holland won their 3 group matches against (eventual winners) France, Czech Republic and Denmark. They eventually got knocked out by Italy in the semi's on penos.
France won World cup 98.
England got to the semi's of Euro 96 and were knocked out on peno's.

*3rd - To get into the champions league you have to finish in top4 in england. The equivilent of this to get into world cup is simply being a nation. Thats it. Once you're a country, you're in the world cup.

Well I don't see it that way at all. Ask someone from the Faroes or San Marino have they ever qualified for the world cup and they'll tell you no.

You then go through the qualifying rounds to reach the finals exactly as happens in the champs league for the smaller teams, only difference is all the teams have to go through the pre qualifying rounds in the world cup while in the CL, the big teams get to skip a few rounds. So Everyone is already in the world cup, they just made it that the holders have to go through a few extra rounds. They're 2 different systems from the very beginning so stop comparing them!

The actual qualifying for the Champions League is the domestic league's. The 3 rounds of CL qualifiers is all down to country seedings.

What Liverpool fans are arguing is that they should have a right to defend their title. If thats the case Greece should have a right to defend theirs. There is no difference and it is the bias that makes the fans think there is. No doubt if I was a Liverpool fan I'd be also saying they have a right to defend their title but I'm not and have no bias at all in this case.

Gileadi

what they could do is like what happens in the all ireland for teams like new york and london,

they have to play a round 0 qualifier before they can even get to the 1st one

eg make liverpool do all the qualifiing rounds and pick one of the present teams to play against them,the winner would go into the qualifing rounds and this wouldnt disrupt the numbers

only downside is the teams that have to do that amount of qualifying are gonna get trounched by a CL winning team

Slash/ED

eirebhoy wrote:

What Liverpool fans are arguing is that they should have a right to defend their title. If thats the case Greece should have a right to defend theirs. There is no difference and it is the bias that makes the fans think there is. No doubt if I was a Liverpool fan I'd be also saying they have a right to defend their title but I'm not and have no bias at all in this case.

Exactly

And about the Spain thing, UEFA gave them four spots and they distrubted it the way they wanted to (Suprise suprise in Reals favour), the same thing will happen in England, they wont give them five spots when Spain got four, it would be stupid, unfair and the Spanish FA would doubtless go ballastic over it.

And I think the FA got it right giving it to the teams who finish in the top four and the Spanish FA got it wrong letting Real in.

~Rebel~

Slash/ED wrote:

Exactly
it would be stupid, unfair and the Spanish FA would doubtless go ballastic over it.

And I think the FA got it right giving it to the teams who finish in the top four and the Spanish FA got it wrong letting Real in.

Spanish cant complain cause they made the decision themselves, whereas england have said **** liverpool (rightly i believe as they put their people forward from the league) and are risking that UEFA might let them in as holders. Its up to UEFA as its nothing to do with england really anymore as its not their route of qualification.

Slash/ED

No it's the same situation, of course the Spanish FA wanted the full five spots so they could let fourth and the winners in but they weren't given them and they made a choice. The English FA want five spots and will only get four and so have made a choice too, in their case the correct one. If UEFA now turn around and give five spaces to England it is unfair after not doing the same for Spain and they will not be hapt about it.

Every year the English FA 'nominate' four teams that are entered into the champions league, not UEFA. Technically they could have nominated West Brom this year, it's their decision to put Liverpool in next year or not, not UEFAs, winners or not winners. The only way so for Liverpool to get in next year is for the FA to back out of their decision to let the top four go through or UEFA to give them five places in the CL, neither is likely nor fair.

~Rebel~

eirebhoy wrote:

There is absolutely no way that is true.

Brazil did complain that being that automatic qualification would hamper their chances of winning it next time (much as it may have france)

eirebhoy wrote:

So many countries have proved that not having to qualify for an international tournament doesn't give you too much of a disadvantage. Look at the hosts of the most recent tournaments.
Portugal got to the final.
South Korea got to the semi's I think.
Holland won their 3 group matches against (eventual winners) France, Czech Republic and Denmark. They eventually got knocked out by Italy in the semi's on penos.
France won World cup 98.
England got to the semi's of Euro 96 and were knocked out on peno's.

you cant compare automatic qualification as holders with hosts cause as hosts you have a massive massive advantage! theres a reason away goals count for more in champs league.

eirebhoy wrote:

Well I don't see it that way at all. Ask someone from the Faroes or San Marino have they ever qualified for the world cup and they'll tell you no.

Im saying that just by being a country they have guaranteed themselves a chance just by getting through their group, not the massive ordeal of a domestic league season.

eirebhoy wrote:

The actual qualifying for the Champions League is the domestic league's. The 3 rounds of CL qualifiers is all down to country seedings.

Thats exactly what i said, (read my original post again) that in the champions league the teams have to go through huge amounts of work just to even reach the early qualifying rounds whereas in the world cup all teams start at the same level, just 1 group away from the finals. THE WHOLE POINT I WAS MAKING IS THAT THEY ARE DIFFERENT ENTRANCE SYSTEMS AND SHOULDN'T BE COMPARED.

Also the first point i made was glossed over, even though its a very major one, that a team can be completely different in 4 years, eg greece in 4 years.
Someone cleverly informed us that greece are crap now, as are liverpool, but this actually serves my argument. Greece played with spirit determination and teamwork and so deserved to be in the final and to win, much as liverpool(nobody could realistically say they're crap based on CL campaign which is the only route they have for qualification so how poor they were in league is moot) deserve this CL final. In 4 years that teamwork could be gone, but more then likely the following year it wouldn't. Obviously why change their plans if its working.

p.s. that first message about comparisons about the world cup and CL wasn't me being a liverpool fan trying to reason us being let it, it was simply saying the champions league system cant be compared with the world cup, they're just too different so its pointless people saying liverpool shouldn't be in it next year due to what happens in the world cup

~Rebel~

Meant its nothing to do with england now in that england have allocated their 4 teams so its totally up to uefa to let them in. I dont know if its right or wrong, i personally think its kinda pointless having a Champions League without the champions (i mean it is the name after all..) but sure whatever they decide someones gonan complain over something..they always do..

Slash/ED

~Rebel~ wrote:

Meant its nothing to do with england now in that england have allocated their 4 teams so its totally up to uefa to let them in. I dont know if its right or wrong, i personally think its kinda pointless having a Champions League without the champions (i mean it is the name after all..) but sure whatever they decide someones gonan complain over something..they always do..

the only way UEFA can let them in is by giving a 5th spot to England and then the English FA nominating them. They can't put them in themselves unless they have a spot aside for champions which they obviously don't or this wouldn't be an issue, it's entirely up to the FA who gets in and unless they're given a 5th spot, which would mean UEFA completley rearranging the entire set up of the competition, Liverpool will not make the champions league bar the FA changing their mind.

THE WHOLE POINT I WAS MAKING IS THAT THEY ARE DIFFERENT ENTRANCE SYSTEMS AND SHOULDN'T BE COMPARED.

The system isn't the issue the fact is that being holders doesn't qualify you for the WC so why should it for the champions league? The qualification system is not relevant.

Pigman II

It'd be a quite simple reshuffle Therecklessone.

What you're trying to do is put 65 into 64 and finding that it just isn't working out!

Under the regular system there is 64 qualifer teams (32 first round entrants, 16 second round entrants and 16 third round entrants).

In this hypothetical Liverpool system you would have 65 teams. They could be arranged as follows.....

have 34 first round entrants
have 15 second round entrants
have 16 third round entrants.

and it would work as follows ...

round 1 : 34 teams play 17 ties -> 17 progress to round 2

round 2 : 17 winners from round 1 + 15 second round entrants = 32 teams. These play 16 ties -> 16 progress to round 3

round 3: 16 winners from round 2 + 16 third rounds entrants = 32 teams -> 16 progress to group stage.

(Might miff the 2nd round team that is pushed back into round 1 , but TS! )

~Rebel~

I dont know how it would be done, but the UEFA president basically said to the FA to "make a little noise and Liverpool will get in" Also said hes definately in favour of the holders defending. What was someone saying about fenerbache being entered automatically because porto were entered as holders and porto champions (showed it on a table with porto top seed as holders instead of as portugese entrants..)

The system isn't the issue the fact is that being holders doesn't qualify you for the WC so why should it for the champions league? The qualification system is not relevant.

I also gave several reasons why holders entry cant be compared with each other as are just too different. Re; The one about one being a competition every 4 years, the other yearly. The point i made about the entrance systems being totally different was just emphesising that they are totally different competitions and shouldn't be used to compare the situation.

Slash/ED

~Rebel~ wrote:

I dont know how it would be done, but the UEFA president basically said to the FA to "make a little noise and Liverpool will get in" Also said hes definately in favour of the holders defending. What was someone saying about fenerbache being entered automatically because porto were entered as holders and porto champions (showed it on a table with porto top seed as holders instead of as portugese entrants..)

If there was a space for holders that'd be fine but if that was the case do you not think this would have been mentioned and this wouldn't be an issue at all? And why if there was one did Spain have to give up a place in the CL the year Real won it and finished 5th?

EDIT what you've said there is that Porto had a higher seed than the Portugese champions? That is to be expected and is nothing to do with the Liverpool situation unless I've missed your point. Man U probably have a higher seed than Arsenal for example. If everton won the league they would still be the lowest seed English team.

~Rebel~

Im only saying what i know, and that was that the UEFA pres was very in favour of pool getting in. Dont know how he planned on doing it or if its going to effect spain, just that he said it and that there was a good chance of a 5th english team.

The portugal thing was unrelated just that it seemed by that table shown by someone that porto were entered as Title Holders this year instead of as portogeese champions (which they also were).
Was meant as a question actually kinda but forgot "?"

TheMonster

I reckon whoever Real Madrid replaced as Spains 4th team would be suing UEFA for loss of money if UEFA allow England have 5 teams under the exact same rules as Spain weren't allowed enter 4 teams.

Bottom line is under current UEFA rules there is no fair way to allow the winners in if they haven't qualified without changing the rules.

Slash/ED

~Rebel~ wrote:

Im only saying what i know, and that was that the UEFA pres was very in favour of pool getting in. Dont know how he planned on doing it or if its going to effect spain, just that he said it and that there was a good chance of a 5th english team.

The portugal thing was unrelated just that it seemed by that table shown by someone that porto were entered as Title Holders this year instead of as portogeese champions (which they also were).
Was meant as a question actually kinda but forgot "?"

He probably would be in favour if the champions getting in, sadly that's the FAs decision and not his.

I'm not sure you can read anything into the Porto thing.

I reckon whoever Real Madrid replaced as Spains 4th team would be suing UEFA for loss of money if UEFA allow England have 5 teams under the exact same rules as Spain weren't allowed enter 4 teams.

Exactly.

~Rebel~

Either way im sure people are going to be pissed and there will be reprecussions. Just hope to God they sort this out for next season leaving a provision that the champions can get in from next year on, avoiding the speculation and nonsense. To be honest cant believe they didn't sort it out after the Madrid/Zaragoza thing.

eirebhoy

~Rebel~ wrote:

Brazil did complain that being that automatic qualification would hamper their chances of winning it next time (much as it may have france)

Actually, we're both wrong. FIFA announced on 1st December 2001 that the WC winners would have to qualify. Brazil won the '94 WC and didn't have to qualify for the '98 one. They still made it to the final so I doubt it was them that complaint, if anyone.

I also gave several reasons why holders entry cant be compared with each other as are just too different. Re; The one about one being a competition every 4 years, the other yearly. The point i made about the entrance systems being totally different was just emphesising that they are totally different competitions and shouldn't be used to compare the situation.

Liverpool fans are arguing that they should be given the right to defend their title if they win it. In that case Greece should have a right to defend yours. You're talking about international tournaments having different systems. I don't know what that has to do with it but its an example of bias f**king your head up.