Champs League Final: Liverpool v. AC Milan

[rexallllsc]

Looks like it's on tomorrow (WED) at 2:45 EST / 11:45 PST. Does that mean the came kicks off at 9:45 pm in Istanbul?

[SackAttack]

I think the more likely answer is 'tape delay.'

[Mr. Wednesday]

Looks like it's on tomorrow (WED) at 2:45 EST / 11:45 PST. Does that mean the came kicks off at 9:45 pm in Istanbul?I believe so.

[cartman]

Looks like it's on tomorrow (WED) at 2:45 EST / 11:45 PST. Does that mean the came kicks off at 9:45 pm in Istanbul?

Yep, since Istanbul is 3 to 4 hours ahead of most of Western Europe, notably Italy and the UK.

[Crapshoot]

Which is why I'm leaving work tomorrow for a "dentist's appointment.."

[MIJB#19]

The game will be at 8:45 pm here in the Netherlands. The time difference with Istanbul is 2 hours, so the kickoff time there should be 10:45 pm (unless they don't use daylight savings time in Turkey, in which case it should be 9:45 local).

[CraigSca]

Unfortunately, I don't think Liverpool has a chance :(

[Sharpieman]

Unfortunately, I don't think Liverpool has a chance :(
Thats not unfortunate.

[Tara]

The final start in Italy at 8.40 pm. This means that on us est cost should be 2.40 pm...

As Italian I don't care about soocer, I don't like it, despite the fact that here in Italy most of people consider it as the most important thing to think about.
Anyway I really hope Milan is going to loose. That's the team of Berlusconi...He is already enough lucky to exploit his Prime minister position to make money for himself, leading this country to ruin that I don't want him to have this satisfaction too.

[ice4277]

I think the score will be 1-0 but I'm not sure who will win.

[moriarty]

Which is why I'm leaving work tomorrow for a "dentist's appointment.."

Funny, I have a dentist appt as well at the same time. :D

I'm pulling hard for 'pool, but sadly this game has all the makings of a 0-0 penalty kick shootout. I'm keeping my fingers crossed though. If Liverpool can somehow get an early goal ....

[B & B]

Funny, I have a dentist appt as well at the same time. :D

I'm pulling hard for 'pool, but sadly this game has all the makings of a 0-0 penalty kick shootout. I'm keeping my fingers crossed though. If Liverpool can somehow score a goal ....


Fixed.

0-0 sounds right

[Crapshoot]

Unfortunately, I don't think Liverpool has a chance :(

Like they didnt have a chance against Juventus or Chelsea ? :D

Here's hoping the miracles continue.

[Critch]

A miracle would be three goals, it's got borefest written all over it. (Hopefully I'm tempting fate there.)

Liverpool can win, they'll need luck like they got against Juventus and Chelsea, but AC Milan are far from unbeatable. I'll be hoping they lose, Greece in the European Championships and Liverpool winning this would convince enough managers that boring defensive soccer is the way to make an under-talented team compete at the top level and spawn a lot of copycats.

[Desnudo]

Since every pundit is predicting a tight, goalless affair, I predict the final score to be 3-2.

[terpkristin]

Um, what a sucky start for 'Pool.

/tk

[flere-imsaho]

I recommend this site for updates if you don't have access to TV/radio/Internet stream: http://football.guardian.co.uk/news/matchreport/0,9752,1492011,00.html

[Koryo]

Liverpool looks completely out of their league.

[flere-imsaho]

Milan 3 - 0 Liverpool at halftime.

Does not look good for Liverpool, especially as Italian teams aren't known for giving up leads.

[andy m]

Does not look good for Liverpool, especially as Italian teams aren't known for giving up leads.

i guess when the 'coalition' vs Iraq war started you also posted "Iraq looks a little over-matched here, the coalition forces aren't known for giving up territory".

this game has been so embarrassing and one sided. its like a premiership team against the conference. except a conference team would have a bit of passion about them.

and what is with starting harry kewell? that guys is a joke.

[FrogMan]

I recommend this site for updates if you don't have access to TV/radio/Internet stream: http://football.guardian.co.uk/news/matchreport/0,9752,1492011,00.html
thanks for the link.

and ouch, I thought that going down 0-1 after 50 seconds only happened in FM... God I hate when that happens...

FM

[terpkristin]

OK, who spiked Liverpool's Gatorade?
Or, did Pool just play a team of look-alikes in the first half?

This is a wholly different team, one that's actually PLAYING. 3-2 Milan...

/tk

[Ryan S]

interesting developments....

[terpkristin]

THIS IS CRAZY.

3-3 on a follow-up off a PK.

Holy moly.

/tk

[FrogMan]

wow... I hit refresh on that guardian page and, well wow...

FM

[Ryan S]

I think it was a debatable penalty, so I am glad that Gattuso was not sent off.

[Flasch186]

very cool

[3ric]

I actually flipped over to a different channel when Pool were down by three. I'm so happy I switched back seven minutes into the second half.

[terpkristin]

ET here we come.

Man. What a game. That's all I can say.

/tk

[andy m]

haha! did the teams swap shirts at half time? nice to be proven wrong anyway. wow.

[ice4277]

What an incredible final. Should be a very interesting extra time.

[moriarty]

This is amazing (well for Liverpool fans anyways). I'm just not sure they have enough left in the tank. C'mon boys!!!

[cartman]

I forget, does CL use the Golden Goal rule, or will they play the full 30 minutes?

[CraigSca]

Wow - the writer on that site dropped 2 pounds on Liverpool to win at halftime. 188 to 1 odds! not bad!

[CraigSca]

dola - according to the site, they play the full 30 minutes followed by penalties.

[moriarty]

2 15 minute halves followed by penalties.

[3ric]

Hope they make it to penalties, half the squad seems to be cramping...

[terpkristin]

Wow, here we go.
PK's for FA and CL. Gotta love it.

/tk

[cartman]

Penalties!!!

[moriarty]

Unfortunately, Liverpool as a team is awful at penalty kicks. After Cisse ... it probably goes to Gerrard, then Alonso (both who have missed penalty kicks in the last couple of attempts).

[fantastic flying froggies]

thanks for the tip guys, I passed on the game thinking it would be boring, but now I've just turned the TV on to watch the PKs...

[3ric]

Don't forget Milan's advantage in having Dida in goal.

[terpkristin]

Milan misses first PK.

[3ric]

Ooh! A miss! Hamann...

[terpkristin]

Liverpool gets first one in.

AC Milan 0 - Liverpool 1

/tk

[SirFozzie]

www . whatthefuck . com...

(no, not linking it, just my reaction to see this thread, I clicked it off (PBP at work) at 3-0 and came back to see how bad the rout ended, to see this. Made me flashback to the old Denis Leary comedy routine.)

[terpkristin]

Dudek saves #2.
Milan 0 for 2

/tk

[fantastic flying froggies]

looking good for 'pool!

[terpkristin]

Liverpool sets it, Milan 0 - Liverpool 2

/tk

[terpkristin]

Milan gets one in.

Riise next for Liverpool.

/tk

[terpkristin]

Save by Dida.

Milan 1 - Liverpool 2

/tk

[fantastic flying froggies]

5

(answer to stkelly's post 2 post downs... :rolleyes: )

[terpkristin]

Kaka scores.
Deduk has been coming off the line it seems before the ball has been kicked.

/tk

[robbgmaier]

If the refs don't have the balls to order a rekick on milan's second attempt, and if they are too lazy to spot the ball themselves, rather than let dudec run out there with it, then they just need to give up

[terpkristin]

Smice scores.

Milan 2 - Liverpool 3

/tk

[terpkristin]

they take 5, stkelly

/tk

[terpkristin]

Dudek saves it again.

LIVERPOOL WINS 3-2 on PK's (6-5)

/tk

[stkelly52]

how many shots do they take?

[terpkristin]

Ok, now that my play-by-play is done, I must say that Dudek looked like he was coming off his line quite a few times. Oh well, the refs didn't call it...

/tk

[moriarty]

Unbelievable!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

[fantastic flying froggies]

What an amazing result! I am glad Liverpool wins it, against all odds...

[Celeval]

Way to go Pool. Listened to this on British radio over the net, hell of a match. Deserved of a CL Final.

[flere-imsaho]

Wow. Comeback of the century. :eek:

[terpkristin]

Yeah, I was rooting for Liverpool, but I must say, Dudek definitely looked to jump off the line too early on at least 3 of those 4 kicks (meaning they should have been re-done). I suppose that since the refs didn't call it, it didn't appear that way to them, but ESPN2's camera angle made it definitely look that way. Anybody else see it?

/tk

[rexallllsc]

HOLY.CRAP.

Amazing comeback.

[3ric]

UNBELIEVABLE! I'm so happy!

[NevStar]

Wow. What a comeback. Good for them.

[ice4277]

That has to be one of the top comebacks in the history of sport. Congrats to Liverpool.

[Huckleberry]

Doesn't top Manchester City being down 3-0 and one man at halftime against Tottenham last year then coming back for the 4-3 win in regulation in the FA Cup.

:D

[AlexB]

Just wow - what a game of football! This is the type of thing that makes football the greatest game on earth - sorry guys!

[Crapshoot]

WOWWW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

What a game ! What a goddamn Game!
Jezry Dudek! Wow!

[scooter]

Yeah, I was rooting for Liverpool, but I must say, Dudek definitely looked to jump off the line too early on at least 3 of those 4 kicks (meaning they should have been re-done). I suppose that since the refs didn't call it, it didn't appear that way to them, but ESPN2's camera angle made it definitely look that way. Anybody else see it?

He was definitely leaving early. The replays prove it. But like most things in sports, unless they call it, it's legal. Sheva has to feel terrible after Dudek's double save in extra time and then missing the last penalty. Fantastic comeback for Liverpool!

[Huckleberry]

Just wow - what a game of football! This is the type of thing that makes football the greatest game on earth - sorry guys!
Soccer's a great game and all, but you do realize that nearly every sport has great comebacks, right?

[DeToxRox]

I watched this game, and I guess I just don't have the passion for it but I found it really boring. I dunno. I watched an indoor soccer playoff game, now that was interesting. :)

[AlexB]

Soccer's a great game and all, but you do realize that nearly every sport has great comebacks, right?

I do, but in my opinion the passion, simplicity, energy and constant ebb and flow of football and football supporters does set it apart from everything else. There will be Liverpool fans going crazy and Milan fans in disbelief everywhere in the world, from internet messageboards about an NFL text sim to villages in the sub-continent - no other sport in the world has an effect like this...

I would also qualify by saying that I may be overreacting slightly beacuse I have just watched Liverpool/Milan as opposed to the Bills/Oilers game for example ;)

But I still believe my claim stands up.

[Marc Vaughan]

Loved that match - nothing like an underdog coming back to win in plucky style ... regardless of the sport (but even better when its an English soccer team .. would have been perfect if it'd been Brighton ;) ).

[Marc Vaughan]

Doesn't top Manchester City being down 3-0 and one man at halftime against Tottenham last year then coming back for the 4-3 win in regulation in the FA Cup.

:D
You're forgetting to mention that Joey Barton actually managed to get himself sent off during the half-time break .... by arguing with the ref on the way off the pitch ....

(my wife LOVED that game when it was over, at half-time she was decidely unhappy ... despite my reassurances that all would be well, hey I'm an eternal optimist and it sometimes pays off ;) )

[stkelly52]

I do, but in my opinion the passion, simplicity, energy and constant ebb and flow of football and football supporters does set it apart from everything else. There will be Liverpool fans going crazy and Milan fans in disbelief everywhere in the world, from internet messageboards about an NFL text sim to villages in the sub-continent - no other sport in the world has an effect like this...



And this is different from Boston's ALCS last season? It is all the same. A great comeback is always exciting to watch no mater the sport.

[AlexB]

And this is different from Boston's ALCS last season? It is all the same. A great comeback is always exciting to watch no mater the sport.

Not wanting to totally change the direction of the thread, I agree with you: of course the level of the emotion is exactly the same for fans of whichever sport is involved, but Boston's ALCS (what does that stand for btw? I know it was their first title since Babe Ruth but can't get the acronym) will not have caused emotion in as many people as Liverpool's win tonight, as is generally the case with football vs. any other sport.

That is the only evidence I can present to back up my comment: everything else is subjective - if this is insufficient I will leave it alone :)

And don;t get me wrong, I follow the NFL as closely as football, and how the Dolphins do means almost exactly the same to me as how Leicester City do (which means I've had a really shitty sports year :D )

[SirFozzie]

By the way.. for those of you who missed it..

*Unfortunately, the first reairing is, say.. now.*

Missed Liverpool's thrilling Champions League comeback? You can catch a re-airing Wednesday night at 7 ET on ESPN2 or catch the Instant Classic Thursday at 10 ET on ESPN Classic.

[condors]

I was actually surprised that ESPN sorta showed highlights of the game (pretty crappy job though) but at least it was a little exposure.

[Desnudo]

By the way.. for those of you who missed it..

*Unfortunately, the first reairing is, say.. now.*

Missed Liverpool's thrilling Champions League comeback? You can catch a re-airing Wednesday night at 7 ET on ESPN2 or catch the Instant Classic Thursday at 10 ET on ESPN Classic.

Thanks for the info. I went out when it was 2-0 Milan. Sounds like I missed a heck of a game.

[Sharpieman]

****. I'd rather not see them win it, but in the end it really doesn't concern me.

[ISiddiqui]

Not wanting to totally change the direction of the thread, I agree with you: of course the level of the emotion is exactly the same for fans of whichever sport is involved, but Boston's ALCS (what does that stand for btw? I know it was their first title since Babe Ruth but can't get the acronym) will not have caused emotion in as many people as Liverpool's win tonight, as is generally the case with football vs. any other sport.
I'm a soccer fan, but this is 100% wrong! The Red Sox's victory in the American League Championship Series over the Yanks had just as much and probably more emotion than Liverpool's win tonight. In fact, I'd definetly wager on 'more'.

[kingfc22]

Great game, just wish my Tivo didn't cut off ET and the penalties. Heck of a turn around for Liverpool.

[Galaxy]

So,
Will Liverpool be able to defend the title next year?

As for Liverpool and the Red Sox, both are emotional turnarounds. It's hard to us to fairly judge these two sports, as soccer is life in Europe, and baseball isn't even on the rader over their. Here, soccer is a second-tier sport when Baseball is a primetime game.

[Desnudo]

I don't see why the achievements have to be ranked. They're both great in their own right, and special to their fans.

Great game. I agree with TK that Dudek definitely came well off his line on several of the kicks. On the first save he made, it was really obvious, as it was on one of the made ones. Suprising that the ref didn't make the call.

[larrymcg421]

I don't see why the achievements have to be ranked. They're both great in their own right, and special to their fans.

Great game. I agree with TK that Dudek definitely came well off his line on several of the kicks. On the first save he made, it was really obvious, as it was on one of the made ones. Suprising that the ref didn't make the call.
Was the other team working the ref on it? If they didn't catch it either and try to point it out to the ref then it's their own fault.

[Desnudo]

Was the other team working the ref on it? If they didn't catch it either and try to point it out to the ref then it's their own fault.

No, it's the refs fault for not calling it. He was so far off, it wasn't even a close call.

[fantastic flying froggies]

...Dudek definitely looked to jump off the line too early on at least 3 of those 4 kicks (meaning they should have been re-done). I suppose that since the refs didn't call it, it didn't appear that way to them,...
He did jump early, but it is rarely called by the refs nowadays.

FWIW, and on a similar level, at least 2 of the kicks (one Milan, one 'Pool) were also illegal with a pause in the run to the ball. But the refs rarely call that either...

[MIJB#19]

I was playingvolley all night.
When we went into a break, we saw Milan go from 1-0 to 3-0.
When we returned, I was like: "Huh, isn't this game over yet? what's the score, 5-0?"
I got back: "It's 3-3 and the first over time is almost over."
I watched in shock and started rooting for penalty kicks. Being in a bar were everybody is for Liverpool (only because 'we' hate AC Milan for beating PSV in the semis) it was a happy environment. Until I had to mention that Liverpool can't defend their title and their archrivals Everton got their CL ticket for 2005/2006.

[Mac Howard]

If UEFA don't find a way to let Liverpool into next season's CL then they're tacitly accepting that winning the CL is less of an achievement than 4th place in the Premiership. Can't see them doing that :rolleyes:

[Butter]

Does UEFA let 5 English teams in though.... at maybe the expense of a UEFA Cup spot? That'll be interesting. I can't see who they would bump to let Liverpool back in.

[daedalus]

If UEFA don't find a way to let Liverpool into next season's CL then they're tacitly accepting that winning the CL is less of an achievement than 4th place in the Premiership. Can't see them doing that :rolleyes:Or that entry to the CL is earned.

[moriarty]

Or that entry to the CL is earned.

Yeah, it's a tough argument (and being a Liverpool fan one that I would like to see them side with the champion).

My guess is that the CL will push it back to the FA to decide to drop Everton. I don't think the FA will make that decision, so the CL will come under increasing pressure to allow them in. And the CL knows that it's to their benefit to have a big team with a big following in the CL next year from a $$ standpoint.

In the end, I suspect that the CL will allow Liverpool will make a financial contribution to one of the fringe teams (one of the teams in the qualifier rounds) to compensate them for taking their place. That way face is sort of saved all around, and they change the rule next year to formally allow the defender to attempt to repeat.

On a side note ... still can't get over the fact that Liverpool came back and won that game. Especially when you look at some of the folks who made key contributions to that game. Sure Gerrard was a given, but Dieter Hamann coming in at half time who was rumored to be out at the end of the year (after the team picked up Alonso), Vladmir Smicer (who's had very little playing time over the past two years) scoring and taking a great penalty, and Dudek ending up the hero of the night after it is widely assumed he is on his way out for one too many spectacular blunders.

One thing I'm curious about is who was going to take the 5th penalty for Liverpool? Gerrard, Alonso, Garcia???

[flere-imsaho]

1. Doesn't Liverpool get an automatic entry into next year's CL on account of winning it this year?

2. Didn't UEFA change the rules a few years ago that allowed the GK to move on the line (though not off of it) before the PK?

[moriarty]

1. Doesn't Liverpool get an automatic entry into next year's CL on account of winning it this year?

No.

[Celeval]

Yeah, it's a tough argument (and being a Liverpool fan one that I would like to see them side with the champion).

My guess is that the CL will push it back to the FA to decide to drop Everton. I don't think the FA will make that decision, so the CL will come under increasing pressure to allow them in.
That has precedent a few years ago when Real Madrid won and didn't qualify - UEFA didn't let them in, and the Spanish FA bumped Real Zaragoza to give Real Madrid the last qualifying slot.

[KevinNU7]

Maybe the can take FC Porto's spot :) Please :)

[scooter]

There is an interesting little story over at Soccernet:

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/headlinenews?id=334349&cc=5901

I think this could be a win-win situation for everyone involved. It's just up to UEFA to agree to it. Some pretty good thinking too on the part of the TNS owner.

[MIJB#19]

The solution mentioned at Soccernet, wouldn't work. If the FA writes Liverpool in, Liverpool would get the #1 seed in the qualification (as defending champions), while Everton would be stuck at the qualifications stages and with a much lower seeding number. If Liverpool enters, a couple of clubs from other countries move down in the seeding procedure and have to play in an earlier qualification stage. Or at least that's what happened in the past with defending CL champs that ended up in a qualification rounds spot.

Edit: I mean to say there, Liverpool is either #1 seeds or not in the competion at all, making them get through the qualification stages as Wales' representative would be really odd. Maybe they should have gotten the spot of Liechtenstein, that country always forfeits their Champions' League ticket because they have no league and only a cup competition.

[scooter]

The solution mentioned at Soccernet, wouldn't work. If the FA writes Liverpool in, Liverpool would get the #1 seed in the qualification (as defending champions), while Everton would be stuck at the qualifications stages and with a much lower seeding number. If Liverpool enters, a couple of clubs from other countries move down in the seeding procedure and have to play in an earlier qualification stage. Or at least that's what happened in the past with defending CL champs that ended up in a qualification rounds spot.

That's not the way I read it. I read it as TNS and Liverpool would play in Wales (nice chunk of change for a high-profile team). Liverpool would most likely win that match and take TNS's qualification spot in the Champions League - Everton would be unaffected. Now it would mean that Liverpool would have to go through the qualification rounds, but they would be in the tournament without affecting any of the other English teams that also qualified. TNS would end up with a nice pile of gate receipts in exchange for their spot in the Champions League.

[Critch]

Glasgow Rangers fans are starting a petition to have Scotland give up their 2nd Champions League spot to allow Liverpool to enter. By complete coincidence the 2nd Scottish Champions League spot is held by Glasgow Celtic :)

[MIJB#19]

That's not the way I read it. I read it as TNS and Liverpool would play in Wales (nice chunk of change for a high-profile team). Liverpool would most likely win that match and take TNS's qualification spot in the Champions League - Everton would be unaffected. Now it would mean that Liverpool would have to go through the qualification rounds, but they would be in the tournament without affecting any of the other English teams that also qualified. TNS would end up with a nice pile of gate receipts in exchange for their spot in the Champions League.That's what I understood as well, I tried to explain that Liverpool is entitled to get the #1 seed or nothing at all. The Wales' representative will have to survive 3 rounds of qualifying knock-out rounds, which they wouldn't have survived anyway (realistically). They take profit out of it mostly since they never get the opportunity to play a high profile team like Liverpool in a competitive match anyway.

[scooter]

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't think that Liverpool deserves a #1 seed. I think they should get TNS's seeding and go through those 3 rounds of qualifications. It is the "Champions" league. Liverpool did not qualify. They don't deserve to be a top seed. They must prove they belong there.

As far as it being a win for everyone: TNS wins because, like you say, they would never have played a team of Liverpool's calibre before being knocked out of the competition. Chelsea, Arsenal, ManU and Everton are unaffected. And UEFA get another top tier team in their competition. To me that's a winning situation all around.

[Desnudo]

Yeah, it's a tough argument (and being a Liverpool fan one that I would like to see them side with the champion).

My guess is that the CL will push it back to the FA to decide to drop Everton. I don't think the FA will make that decision, so the CL will come under increasing pressure to allow them in. And the CL knows that it's to their benefit to have a big team with a big following in the CL next year from a $$ standpoint.


The FA already made the decision a few weeks ago that the 4th place team would go to the CL, regardless of who won the CL final.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't think that Liverpool deserves a #1 seed. I think they should get TNS's seeding and go through those 3 rounds of qualifications. It is the "Champions" league. Liverpool did not qualify. They don't deserve to be a top seed. They must prove they belong there.

As far as it being a win for everyone: TNS wins because, like you say, they would never have played a team of Liverpool's calibre before being knocked out of the competition. Chelsea, Arsenal, ManU and Everton are unaffected. And UEFA get another top tier team in their competition. To me that's a winning situation all around.

There is no good solution that won't hurt at least one team. I'm sure what will happen in the end is that the last team by ranking will be pushed out to make way. There is an automatic spot in group play for the CL winner, so that part of it will have to be sorted out. Liverpool don't automatically qualify, but do have a spot reserved in group play. Arsenal in the qualifiers?

I disagree with the TNS argument. They've earned the right according to UEFA rules. Don't agree to invite them in the first place if you don't want teams of their calibre in the tournament.

[Koryo]

The FA already made the decision a few weeks ago that the 4th place team would go to the CL, regardless of who won the CL final.



Actually they ruled that they would prefer that the teams who are in the Champion's league qualify that way. But they were unspecific that they would require it. Hence the debate.

[KevinNU7]

Ok, I don't know enough about the CL to answer this question by myself. I'm going to need to make some assumptions

Assuming that in a normal season the CL Champ becomes the #1 seed as long as the qualify for the CL next season, this means if Pool had finished 4th in the EPL they would have instantly become the #1 team from group play and skipped qualifiy. Again this is an assumption, I do not know if it is true.

Assuming that is true would it be all that hard to just add Pool into the groups stage and then froce an additional qualifier between all the qualifier teams? Think of it like the NCAA basketball tourny. They added a autobid so they created a 64/65 play in game. Can't you jsut take the two lowest seeded qualifier teams and have them play a play in game to make the qualifier.

This does a few things. If gives Pool isn't #1 seed that it would get in normal circumstances. It does not restrict any teams except the bottom two. The bottom two teams were both probably going to lose their first qualifier game, now one of them is guaranteed to play atleast 2 games

[Desnudo]

Everton are definitely in the CL as the 4th place finisher. Perhaps you're confusing quotes from the English FA, who decides the matter, versus UEFA?

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/headlinenews?id=332607&cc=5901

FA verdict brings relief for Everton


Everton have welcomed the confirmation by the Football Association that the top four teams in the Premiership will enter the Champions League next season.

Rafa Benitez: Euro blow. (TonyMarshall/Empics)

With Liverpool unlikely to earn qualification via the league, there had been suggestions that one of England's four places should go to the Anfield side if they were to beat AC Milan in Istanbul later this month.


But that possibility has been ruled out by the FA, although they say they will lobby UEFA for a fifth place on Liverpool's behalf.

The news was greeted with cautious relief by Everton - who are currently in fourth place, three points ahead of their city rivals with two games to play.

Everton chief executive Keith Wyness said: 'Whilst we welcome the announcement from the FA regarding clarification on the fourth place qualification issue, we are still operating in a hypothetical situation with regards to Everton's position.'

UEFA leave the allocation of each country's Champions League places in the hands of national associations.

And there had been some hope for Liverpool, who are three points behind Everton with two games to play, in the example set in 2000 by the Spanish FA who selected fifth-placed Real Madrid over fourth-placed Real Zaragoza after the former won the Champions League.

However, with the Premier League likely to have resisted any attempt to remove the reward from the team finishing fourth, the board of six chairmen decided to leave Liverpool's fate in UEFA's hands.

The board is made up of Dave Richards (Premier League), David Dein (Arsenal vice-chairman), Rupert Lowe (Southampton), Phil Gartside (Bolton), David Sheepshanks (Ipswich) and Peter Heard (Colchester).

The decision was endorsed by UEFA's director of communication, William Gaillard.

He told the Press Association: 'That is fine. This is the rule although the FA could have asked for an exception and replaced the fourth-placed team with the eventual winners of the Champions League if Liverpool win it.

'They have chosen not to. However, the Premiership is not over and there are still three games for Everton and two for Liverpool so we could have a nice race.'

Liverpool do have small cause for hope with the FA intending to try to persuade UEFA to award fifth place to English football, although the competition's rules stipulate a maximum of four entrants from each country.

UEFA president Lennart Johansson has made it clear the association's executive committee do have the power to make and enforce changes.

However, they will not take any action until after the final itself and should Liverpool win that, a decision would be made at the next executive committee meeting on June 17.

The Anfield side will have an ally in Everton, with Wyness adding: 'Despite what is a most intense local rivalry, we do believe that if Liverpool were to win this year's tournament they should be invited to return as holders.'

[moriarty]

Everton are definitely in the CL as the 4th place finisher. Perhaps you're confusing quotes from the English FA, who decides the matter, versus UEFA?
'

Your assuming the FA doesn't change their mind. Just because they came out with a statement (made when they probably didn't think Liverpool would win it anyways) doesn't mean they wont' change their mind especially when there is pressure and $$ involved.

Having said that, I don't think the FA will give in on this one. I think Liverpool will be the 5th team in and take some other teams' spot who are willing to give it up for $$ or a match.

[ISiddiqui]

Frankly I think Liverpool will have to sit out. UEFA will not give England a 5th spot. Other FA's would cry bloody murder! Especially the Spanish league, which had to make a hard choice a few years back. They'll argue that Englad is taking advantage of the sitution to get 5 teams in the CL, so they'll get more money, when the cap is 4 teams per FA.

I don't think the FA bends on having Everton in as 4th. They can't at this point in time without looking bad.

I don't think UEFA bends either (or allows the Welsh club to so give up their spot... you could end up seeing a rash of that sort of behavior if allowed). So Liverpool is on the outside looking in. Its like American sports, where winning the championship one year doesn't guarentee you a playoff spot the next.

[moriarty]

Frankly I think Liverpool will have to sit out. UEFA will not give England a 5th spot. Other FA's would cry bloody murder! Especially the Spanish league, which had to make a hard choice a few years back. They'll argue that Englad is taking advantage of the sitution to get 5 teams in the CL, so they'll get more money, when the cap is 4 teams per FA..

Well Liverpool is basically a pseudo-Spanish team at this point (alonso, garcia, pelligrino, josemi, morientes, nunez, benitez, etc...), :D but I could see where other leagues might complain. And you're right about the Spanish league having to compromise earlier.


I don't think UEFA bends either (or allows the Welsh club to so give up their spot... you could end up seeing a rash of that sort of behavior if allowed). So Liverpool is on the outside looking in.

Well I hardly think a rash of these type of things is going to start to occur. It's a special situation where the champion doesn't qualify that has occurred rarely (once that I can think of), and the odds are certainly against it. I think there's enough goodwill here, and it's rare enough, that the other leagues might be willing to allow it especially if it becomes a future rule (as the other big leagues have a chance of it benefitting them). While not league organizers, several foreign teams including AC Milan's coach have already supported Liverpool being in the CL next year. And again, I think UEFA recognizes there's enough potential money involved that they'll come to some agreement.

[ISiddiqui]

Well I hardly think a rash of these type of things is going to start to occur.
Why not? I mean if the Wales champ realizes it can get more money from a home and home with Liverpool than by going into the qualifying round and UEFA allows it, I'm sure other smaller country champs will see if they can go around a similar loophole.

UEFA has said that they may change the rule when the contract comes up, but I don't think they do anything this time around. Too many pitfals, too many people will get angry. They made the Spaniards choose, why not leave it up to the English FA?

[moriarty]

Why not? I mean if the Wales champ realizes it can get more money from a home and home with Liverpool than by going into the qualifying round and UEFA allows it, I'm sure other smaller country champs will see if they can go around a similar loophole.

UEFA has said that they may change the rule when the contract comes up, but I don't think they do anything this time around. Too many pitfals, too many people will get angry. They made the Spaniards choose, why not leave it up to the English FA?

I meant that it's not like a lot of Euro CL winners won't qualify in their own leagues. As long as UEFA allows the Welsh deal (or something similar) under the strict guidelines that they'll only allow if for a Champion to defend ... it won't happen very often.

[AlexB]

I'm a soccer fan, but this is 100% wrong! The Red Sox's victory in the American League Championship Series over the Yanks had just as much and probably more emotion than Liverpool's win tonight. In fact, I'd definetly wager on 'more'.

We're arguing different points here, to a Boston fan I'm sure you're right, the win after such a long periold would have at least as much emotion as for Liverpool fans last night.

But this isn't what I was trying to say, and I'm not feeling much love (or interest really ;) ) so let's carry on with the thread...

I think Liverpool deserve to be in the CL next season, but am not sure if they will be - UEFA seem to have dug their heels in. The TNS offer could signal the death of the competition: it's could be the beginning of trying to selling your position to the highest bidder

[ISiddiqui]

I meant that it's not like a lot of Euro CL winners won't qualify in their own leagues. As long as UEFA allows the Welsh deal (or something similar) under the strict guidelines that they'll only allow if for a Champion to defend ... it won't happen very often.
But then it'd come under attack as preferential treatment for English FA, gifting them a 5th spot, when Spain had to choose, etc.

[rexallllsc]

Why not? I mean if the Wales champ realizes it can get more money from a home and home with Liverpool than by going into the qualifying round and UEFA allows it, I'm sure other smaller country champs will see if they can go around a similar loophole.

UEFA has said that they may change the rule when the contract comes up, but I don't think they do anything this time around. Too many pitfals, too many people will get angry. They made the Spaniards choose, why not leave it up to the English FA?

I agree. You'd see every team trying this, and every little team giving up their spot.

[moriarty]

But then it'd come under attack as preferential treatment for English FA, gifting them a 5th spot, when Spain had to choose, etc.

If they allowed this they would have to change the rule to allow any future defending champ the same option (should they not qualify). Spain or any other leauge would have the same opportunity going forward.

Yes, Spain missed out last time (if this rule went into effect) and they'd probably understandably be pissed, but rule changes are made all the time, and you can't retroactively go back and change the teams that would have been impacted in previous years. You could argue the Spanish FA let UEFA off the hook last time ... they might have taken a hard line and forced UEFA's hand just the same as the English FA is threatening to do.

[ice4277]

I think Everton deserves their place for finishing 4th but I think its also necessary for Liverpool to be allowed back into the tournament. If it doesn't happen, oh well, but, look at the two teams. One of them won the world's foremost club competition, the other finished in 4th place with a negative goal differential. Find a way to get them both in.

[KevinNU7]

I agree. You'd see every team trying this, and every little team giving up their spot.
It's like you purposely don't read posts so you can have your point. This condition would only exist when the CL Champs does not qualify. This would be one tema and would only happen once in a great while.

I guess the bigger concern would be selecting the team that is willing to risk their qualfier spot for a play in game. My guess is that in an open format you would have a few teams taht would want to do it, and that might be a hard choice to make.

Personally I think Pool should be out, if you won the SUper Bowl you shouldn't be give an auotmatic entry into the playoffs next season.

[moriarty]

I think Everton deserves their place for finishing 4th but I think its also necessary for Liverpool to be allowed back into the tournament. If it doesn't happen, oh well, but, look at the two teams. One of them won the world's foremost club competition, the other finished in 4th place with a negative goal differential. Find a way to get them both in.

I say screw Everton ... but then I might be a tad biased. :p

Here's some quotes on the AP wires which suggests there might be a glimmer of hope for UEFA blinking -

"However, UEFA president Lennart Johansson said earlier this month that Liverpool could get a wild-card berth if it won the Champions League. UEFA's executive committee meets on June 17-18 in Manchester, England, to discuss the matter.

"The door is always open," Johansson said. "We are there to serve football and not just dictate. It is for the executive committee to decide, and anything can be granted if they decide to go to the member associations and ask for a change in the regulations."

Johansson said it would be "unfair" to exclude Everton.

"For sporting reasons and for the wider interests of European football, Liverpool should get a special exemption," FA executive director David Davies said. "We know there is a body of support on UEFA's executive committee for our view."

[AlexB]

If there's no other way to do it, then I would put Liverpool in at the expense of Everton - Liverpool as champs have to be in the competition one way or the other.

If a team wins the FA Cup, and finishes below 7th place, they get into the UEFA cup and the team that finshes 7th is just unlucky - that's the way it's always been done and even applies to the FA Cup losing finalists if the winners have qualified for the CL (which is how Millwall were in the UEFA Cup this year even as a Championship side)

The Liverpool/Everton situation is in effect no different: there's four CM places available, Liverpool have won a trophy and therefore IMHO Everton have to take their lumps and drop into the UEFA. They would have every right to be upset but them's the breaks.

I wonder what the sponsors of the CL think about the previous winners maybe not being in the tournament at all?

[Desnudo]

It's like you purposely don't read posts so you can have your point. This condition would only exist when the CL Champs does not qualify. This would be one tema and would only happen once in a great while.

I guess the bigger concern would be selecting the team that is willing to risk their qualfier spot for a play in game. My guess is that in an open format you would have a few teams taht would want to do it, and that might be a hard choice to make.

Personally I think Pool should be out, if you won the SUper Bowl you shouldn't be give an auotmatic entry into the playoffs next season.

The problem is that it's already happened twice within the past ten years. Maybe that doesn't indicate the probability of it happening in the future, but they need a permanent solution put in place.

The one that makes the most sense is to automatically qualify the winner of the CL and make accomodations if they don't qualify through league play.

[Katon]

If a team wins the FA Cup, and finishes below 7th place, they get into the UEFA cup and the team that finshes 7th is just unlucky - that's the way it's always been done and even applies to the FA Cup losing finalists if the winners have qualified for the CL (which is how Millwall were in the UEFA Cup this year even as a Championship side)


On the other hand, if the World Cup or European Championship winners botch their qualifying groups then they're toast. They don't get to defend their trophy.

[Galaxy]

I never understood the "seeding" of these leagues? I though it was base on the qualification material, and where those teams are put into play throughout the competition.

Personally, I think Everton should get the slot. The competition is base on the best teams of the last season in Europe. The argument here, is who is the better team? Liverpool won the tourney as the best team in Champions League, and Everton won the right as the best team in the Premiership to gain that fourth spot.

[moriarty]

On the other hand, if the World Cup or European Championship winners botch their qualifying groups then they're toast. They don't get to defend their trophy.

However the host nation of the World Cup automatically gets in ... so it's not like there some stringent 'must qualify' rules here either.

[Celeval]

The one that makes the most sense is to automatically qualify the winner of the CL and make accomodations if they don't qualify through league play.
Which will be great fun when a single-qualification league side wins the CL. ;)

[moriarty]

Personally, I think Everton should get the slot. The competition is base on the best teams of the last season in Europe. The argument here, is who is the better team? Liverpool won the tourney as the best team in Champions League, and Everton won the right as the best team in the Premiership to gain that fourth spot.

Just playing devil's advocate here, but you could agrue that Liverpool recognized as early as mid-season that they weren't going to win the Premier League with Chelsea and Arsenal running away from them, so they dropped focus on the league to concentrate on and field their best teams in the CL (and as a result fell out of 4th spot in the Premier League).

Now as UEFA running the CL, and as the sponsors paying, you really want to reward this type of behavior not punish it. Because that will ensure that teams are fielding their best teams in the CL and not perhaps sacrificing the competition just so they can finish 4th in their home league.

[Galaxy]

Just playing devil's advocate here, but you could agrue that Liverpool recognized as early as mid-season that they weren't going to win the Premier League with Chelsea and Arsenal running away from them, so they dropped focus on the league to concentrate on and field their best teams in the CL (and as a result fell out of 4th spot in the Premier League).

Now as UEFA running the CL, and as the sponsors paying, you really want to reward this type of behavior not punish it. Because that will ensure that teams are fielding their best teams in the CL and not perhaps sacrificing the competition just so they can finish 4th in their home league.


Good points. Everton worked hard and play the guts out to overachieve and meet the qualification.

Personally, why not just let these cross-city rivals battle it out for the final spot, in a one game or two leg series.

[ISiddiqui]

I wonder how many people here would want to guarantee a playoff spot for the Super Bowl winner or World Series Champion the next year... no matter what position they are in? ;)

Liverpool didn't finish in the top 4, they shouldn't be allowed to go, no matter if they won the CL.

[ISiddiqui]

Here's some quotes on the AP wires which suggests there might be a glimmer of hope for UEFA blinking -

"However, UEFA president Lennart Johansson said earlier this month that Liverpool could get a wild-card berth if it won the Champions League. UEFA's executive committee meets on June 17-18 in Manchester, England, to discuss the matter.

"The door is always open," Johansson said. "We are there to serve football and not just dictate. It is for the executive committee to decide, and anything can be granted if they decide to go to the member associations and ask for a change in the regulations."

Johansson said it would be "unfair" to exclude Everton.

"For sporting reasons and for the wider interests of European football, Liverpool should get a special exemption," FA executive director David Davies said. "We know there is a body of support on UEFA's executive committee for our view."
That was a month ago. This past week, UEFA said no way. Even if Johansson may want it (and it may have just been PR), the rest of the executive committee seems to be putting their foot down.

[Galaxy]

I wonder how many people here would want to guarantee a playoff spot for the Super Bowl winner or World Series Champion the next year... no matter what position they are in? ;)

Liverpool didn't finish in the top 4, they shouldn't be allowed to go, no matter if they won the CL.


But comparing the way European soccer works to our sports system is comparing apples to oranges. Here, we have a single entity league in which the top teams from the same league advance pass the regular season. The CL is a makeup of the top teams of multiple leagues. You could argue that if the Red Sox couldn't win the division, why should they be in the post-season?

[ISiddiqui]

But comparing the way European soccer works to our sports system is comparing apples to oranges. Here, we have a single entity league in which the top teams from the same league advance pass the regular season. The CL is a makeup of the top teams of multiple leagues. You could argue that if the Red Sox couldn't win the division, why should they be in the post-season?
It may indeed be comparing different structures, but the underlying question is the same. Why should a team that won the championship get an automatic bye for the playoffs next year if they don't qualify under the rules to get there the next year?

The Red Sox analogy doesn't work because they qualified under the wild card system, which, let's face it, is what teams 2-4 in the big leagues get in under (they aren't Champions).

The point is that in order to defend your title, you have to qualify for the playoffs. You don't get a free ride in just because you won the tourney.

[Celeval]

It may indeed be comparing different structures, but the underlying question is the same. Why should a team that won the championship get an automatic bye for the playoffs next year if they don't qualify under the rules to get there the next year?
The far better analogy is probably: Should UNC get an automatic bid into the NCAA Men's Basketball tournament next season?

[AlexB]

It may indeed be comparing different structures, but the underlying question is the same. Why should a team that won the championship get an automatic bye for the playoffs next year if they don't qualify under the rules to get there the next year?

The Red Sox analogy doesn't work because they qualified under the wild card system, which, let's face it, is what teams 2-4 in the big leagues get in under (they aren't Champions).

The point is that in order to defend your title, you have to qualify for the playoffs. You don't get a free ride in just because you won the tourney.

Your question is a good one, and there's merits to both arguments - but there is a significant difference between the qualification methoids for these tournaments and US play-offs.

All teams qualify for these tournaments based on their previous year's performance, so winning the cup is not a free ride: they earned their spot by winning it the previous year. In US sports play-offs qualification is based on that same season's performance so the comparison is not valid.

In Europe it's always been the way that the defending champions gain entry to the following tournament. While the World Cup winners and European Championship winners do not now gain automatic entry, 2006 will be the first WC where this is the case, and 2004 was the first EC - France qualified so there wasn't a debate.

And I don't believe that the WC/EC and CL/UEFA cups are directly comparable, as latter are annual and the formal every four years - a lot will change in four years while the change will be much less in a 12 month period.

[Ryan S]

If Liverpool wanted to play in the European Cup (I refuse to call it the Champions League), they should have tried harder to finish in the top four. Taking a spot away from Everton now would be extremely unfair.

If Liverpool get in, somebody else has to miss out.

[AlexB]

If Liverpool wanted to play in the European Cup (I refuse to call it the Champions League), they should have tried harder to finish in the top four. Taking a spot away from Everton now would be extremely unfair.

If Liverpool get in, somebody else has to miss out.

And surely that somebody should be a team that has won bugger all this season, as opposed to one who have won the biggest European club competition.

Look at Forest (spit!), they won the EC two years running, but would not have been in the tournament the 2nd year if they had not won it the first...

The winners have historically defended the trophy and they should this time as well: end of story. If they can do it without anybody else missing out, all well and good, if they can't it's tough shit on whoever misses out, and if a team hasn't won anything they have very little reason to complain about not being in the tournament IMO.

[Mac Howard]

It shouldn't be too difficult to come up with a solution - a temporary change such as the TNS suggestion for next season and changes in legislation so that the CL winner automatically goes through as number one seed in future with adjustments to the qualifying stages.

But then this is UEFA :rolleyes:

[MIJB#19]

The real problem is the UEFA fucking up. They give England 4 spots, but also tell them there are 5 teams who are qualified to take the 4 spots and say: Do as you please, but it's your problem now. Even knowing the UEFA Champions' League will lose some tradition if the defending champs are denied to defend their title. Let the Engilsh FA play it hard, write-in Everton and make the UEFA come upo with a solution.

Less than ten years ago this wasn't even an issue, cup holders would always qualify, no matter their league classification. This only stopped when the UEFA realized it would mean at some point a league could get 5 representatives (hence the Spain example and this years problem) and that looked over the top, so they set a 4-team limit per football association.

[Galaxy]

It may indeed be comparing different structures, but the underlying question is the same. Why should a team that won the championship get an automatic bye for the playoffs next year if they don't qualify under the rules to get there the next year?

The Red Sox analogy doesn't work because they qualified under the wild card system, which, let's face it, is what teams 2-4 in the big leagues get in under (they aren't Champions).

The point is that in order to defend your title, you have to qualify for the playoffs. You don't get a free ride in just because you won the tourney.

But Liverpool did "qualify" for the CL by winning the title. It's just that five teams qualified from the same league, yet you only have four spots to give.

[McSweeny]

Look at Forest (spit!),

no spitting at Forest! Go back to Derby, you sheepshagger! :D

[ISiddiqui]

But Liverpool did "qualify" for the CL by winning the title. It's just that five teams qualified from the same league, yet you only have four spots to give. No, they didn't. UEFA has said five teams will NOT qualify for the CL. If you qualify, you get to go. If you don't go, you didn't qualify. You get 4 teams and the English FA has decided Everton will get in instead of Liverpool.

All teams qualify for these tournaments based on their previous year's performance, so winning the cup is not a free ride: they earned their spot by winning it the previous year. In US sports play-offs qualification is based on that same season's performance so the comparison is not valid. I fail to see why it is such a large distinction. In both types of sports teams qualify for the playoffs due to league position. Whether it was last year or this year, it is irrelevent.

Look at the old World Cup system. The previous champion used to get in, even though the playoff qualification was based on that World Cup. FIFA realized that rule was wrong and you should qualify for the World Cup based on qualification rather than previous victory. However, they kept the home team rule for local interest sake (economic rather than sport justification).

surely that somebody should be a team that has won bugger all this season They won their league, which in a "Champion's League" should be a key point for admittance.

[Galaxy]

[QUOTE=ISiddiqui]No, they didn't. UEFA has said five teams will NOT qualify for the CL. If you qualify, you get to go. If you don't go, you didn't qualify. You get 4 teams and the English FA has decided Everton will get in instead of Liverpool.

QUOTE]


I said that five teams "qualified" for UEFA Champions League, meaning that they met the requirements. But UEFA will only allow four to get in, unless something is worked out.

[ISiddiqui]

Meeting the "so called" requirements means jack if you don't get to go.

Obviously winning the CL is NOT a requirement to coming back next year, since it seems Liverpool will be left out.

[AlexB]

no spitting at Forest! Go back to Derby, you sheepshagger! :D

How. Dare. You. :mad:

There is nothing worse that you can call a Leicester fan & I demand an apology ;)

[AlexB]

I fail to see why it is such a large distinction. In both types of sports teams qualify for the playoffs due to league position. Whether it was last year or this year, it is irrelevent.

Look at the old World Cup system. The previous champion used to get in, even though the playoff qualification was based on that World Cup. FIFA realized that rule was wrong and you should qualify for the World Cup based on qualification rather than previous victory. However, they kept the home team rule for local interest sake (economic rather than sport justification).



I'm sorry buddy, you talk a lot of sense at times on this board from what I've seen, but on this topic you've been screwed up all along.

NFL (as this is the only US sport I have any degree of knowledge on) - 2006 playoffs are governed by the 2006 league positions: therefore the 2005 Superbowl winners will be able to defend their trophy by qualifying through the 2006 regular season - an entire new qualification process between winning the Superbowl and the new playoffs

IN the WC, now the previous winners do not automatically qualify, they do get the chance to qualify in the 2004/5 qualifying stages.


The UEFA rules state that if the CL winners finish outside the defined league positions, the nations FA can put forward this team instead of the lower placed team, which is in this case Everton. 5 years ago Real Madrid were in the same situation and Real ZAragoza were unlucky, finishing 4th and not being put forward by the Spanish FA - maybe the fault is the English FA's rather than UEFA's but the solution is simple and there has been a precedent set.


They won their league, which in a "Champion's League" should be a key point for admittance.

Who did? Everton, for example, have won nothing - they finished 30 something points behind the league champions and did nothing in the cups. Normally they'd qualify, this year it should be tough titties to Everton.

Liverpool are the UEFA Champions (as winners of the CL - that is UEFA's flagship club tournament) and will be representing UEFA in the World Club Championship - can you seriously tell me that a club who will be put forward for a tournament by UEFA not be given the chance to defend their title?

If you can, it is obviously a difference in philosophy between the two sides of the pond and we're not going to get any understanding.

[MIJB#19]

Meeting the "so called" requirements means jack if you don't get to go.

Obviously winning the CL is NOT a requirement to coming back next year, since it seems Liverpool will be left out.Sigh...

Winning the CL is a way to qualify, but like I posted above, the UEFA screwed up by giving England 4 tickets and 5 teams to choose from. Same situation with Spain a couple of years ago. But the main problem is one that you can't compare with in the US sports playoffs scenario.

The main reason for this being screwed is that the CL qualification tickets are set at the start of the season, so Everton and Liverpool knew from the start that 4th place would qualify to the CL under normal circumstances, as would be winning the CL (in Liverpool's case). Only after both were out of contention for 3rd place, the English FA decided to let everybody know that the 4th placed team would get the 4th ticket and the defending CL champion would settle with nothing.

It's almost like having the NFL season going on and in week 16 of the regular season tell a 7-8 division leader they have to give up their playoffs ticket to a 9-6 team in 4th place in another division. But even this is apples and oranges.

[MIJB#19]

Look at the old World Cup system. The previous champion used to get in, even though the playoff qualification was based on that World Cup. FIFA realized that rule was wrong and you should qualify for the World Cup based on qualification rather than previous victory. However, they kept the home team rule for local interest sake (economic rather than sport justification).uh, no.

They abandoned the auto qualify rule to get another ticket to the world cup for Asia since WC2002 had two host countries and Asia otherwise would have had only two qualified ticket. There was some pressure from the Asian continent and FIFA gave in. For 2006, they simply decided to stick with it.

[Katon]

uh, no.

They abandoned the auto qualify rule to get another ticket to the world cup for Asia since WC2002 had two host countries and Asia otherwise would have had only two qualified ticket. There was some pressure from the Asian continent and FIFA gave in. For 2006, they simply decided to stick with it.

True. The World Cup isn't really a very good example. The European Championship, on the other hand, has asked its holders to qualify I think since the tournament started and certainly for the last three tournaments.

In any case, it's important to differentiate between what was clearly stated in the rules at the beginning of the season, which shouldn't be changed after the fact, and what wasn't formally stated anywhere.

What is formally stated in the competition's rules is that no more than four teams can qualify from any given country and if there are five teams eligible then it's down to the FA in question to pick who gets the fourth slot. Those were the rules at the start of the season, they were the rules all the way through the competition, and it would be unfair to change them now. There's no guidance whatsoever, though, as to which team the FA should pick.

Personally I think the FA should give the spot to Everton. Liverpool weakened their team for the Premiership in order to focus on the CL; that's obviously a perfectly valid thing to do, and I doubt their supporters would want them to have done anything differently, but if you have a disappointing season in the Premiership then you have to deal with the consequences of having a disappointing season.

[moriarty]

If you can, it is obviously a difference in philosophy between the two sides of the pond and we're not going to get any understanding.

I don't think it's a difference based on sides of the pond, because coming from the otherside of the pond I understand your points completely. :)

I can appreciate both sides of the agrument in letting the winner compete, and sticking to the rules (although I still maintain the qualifying 'rules' are pretty loose - as they let Spain modify them). But I still think in the end it's going to come down to $$, especially sponsor money - so I think Liverpool will get in. Any sposnor who saw the size of the Liverpool crowd in Instanbul (and many of their CL road games for that matter) will be pushing to get them in next years tourney.

[Celeval]

Winning the CL is a way to qualify, but like I posted above, the UEFA screwed up by giving England 4 tickets and 5 teams to choose from. Same situation with Spain a couple of years ago. But the main problem is one that you can't compare with in the US sports playoffs scenario.
But isn't the UEFA just giving England the 4 tickets, and saying "choose however you like"? I mean, if England decided to send Crystal Palace instead of Everton or Liverpool, is that against the UEFA regulations; or does the UEFA qual rules simply go to how many slots each country gets, and what they do with them (league winners, cup winners, etc) is up to them?

[MIJB#19]

But isn't the UEFA just giving England the 4 tickets, and saying "choose however you like"? I mean, if England decided to send Crystal Palace instead of Everton or Liverpool, is that against the UEFA regulations; or does the UEFA qual rules simply go to how many slots each country gets, and what they do with them (league winners, cup winners, etc) is up to them?The UEFA will not allow any other team in than those that met qualification standards. There is a wild card for the defending champs, but only if they did not qualify through the league and if it won't add up to 5 tickets for one FA. If the English FA would write in, say, Fulham, Manchester City and Crystal Palace together with champs Chelsea, the UEFA would simply exclude them from the draw and England would get through the competition with less representation.

Some FA's even forfait some of their tickets because they have no teams who would meet the qualification standards. Liechtenstein and San Marino are good examples as they have no league structure and thus can only write-in cup winners or second their cup tournament winners.

The Dutch FA has asked about this a couple of times because they have had plans to add playoffs at the season end for the European tickets. For the 2005/2006 season it will be tried out again as there's been some of these experiment in the early 1990's before, but back then without approval of the UEFA.

[Galaxy]

Sigh...

Winning the CL is a way to qualify, but like I posted above, the UEFA screwed up by giving England 4 tickets and 5 teams to choose from. Same situation with Spain a couple of years ago. But the main problem is one that you can't compare with in the US sports playoffs scenario.

The main reason for this being screwed is that the CL qualification tickets are set at the start of the season, so Everton and Liverpool knew from the start that 4th place would qualify to the CL under normal circumstances, as would be winning the CL (in Liverpool's case). Only after both were out of contention for 3rd place, the English FA decided to let everybody know that the 4th placed team would get the 4th ticket and the defending CL champion would settle with nothing.

It's almost like having the NFL season going on and in week 16 of the regular season tell a 7-8 division leader they have to give up their playoffs ticket to a 9-6 team in 4th place in another division. But even this is apples and oranges.


I do think UEFA will step up and refix the rules starting with the 2006-2007 CL. As for UEFA, how is the money "earned" and paid out to the teams? Does UEFA get all the TV $, then that is the prize money, and the home teams get to keep the ticket revenue, on top of the prize money?


I though the World Club championship was cancelled? How is that tournmanet set up?

[ISiddiqui]

NFL (as this is the only US sport I have any degree of knowledge on) - 2006 playoffs are governed by the 2006 league positions: therefore the 2005 Superbowl winners will be able to defend their trophy by qualifying through the 2006 regular season - an entire new qualification process between winning the Superbowl and the new playoffs

IN the WC, now the previous winners do not automatically qualify, they do get the chance to qualify in the 2004/5 qualifying stages.
And in the NFL, the previous winners get a chance to qualify for the playoffs through next year's regular season. In the WC, previous winners get a chance to qualify through the qualifying stages. In UEFA, the previous winners get a chance to qualify through that year's league position (if their FA says only Top 4)

The UEFA rules state that if the CL winners finish outside the defined league positions, the nations FA can put forward this team instead of the lower placed team, which is in this case Everton. 5 years ago Real Madrid were in the same situation and Real ZAragoza were unlucky, finishing 4th and not being put forward by the Spanish FA - maybe the fault is the English FA's rather than UEFA's but the solution is simple and there has been a precedent set.
What precedent? Because Spain PICKED Real Madrid, which has always been a team favored by the government since Franco's era, to go to the CL instead of Real Zaragosa, there is a precedent that the CL winner should go in place of the 4th place team? NO! That isn't a precedent. Now if there were 10 times this happened and the same thing occured, then maybe you'd have a point.

Who did?
The team that would be forced out if England got 5 spots.

Liverpool are the UEFA Champions (as winners of the CL - that is UEFA's flagship club tournament) and will be representing UEFA in the World Club Championship - can you seriously tell me that a club who will be put forward for a tournament by UEFA not be given the chance to defend their title?
They had a chance. It was to finish 4th in their league standings. Simply because it was the same time period as when they won their CL is irrelevent. FA said Top 4 will go, so Liverpool loses. They aren't top 4. Their chance to 'defend' their title was in the league positions that year, even though it was before they won the title. Them's the rules and I see nothing wrong with them.

Frankly, I wish Spain had told Madrid to take a hike a few years back, but that'd never happen to Madrid.

[Galaxy]

Always been curious, what is the seeding in the tournament? How is the seeding done and what is the purpose?

[AlexB]

Real Madrid won the CL and finished 5th - the Spanish FA picked RM (5th place in the Primera League) over RZ (4th) to defend the trophy in 2000/1- therefore this is a precedent - an action taken in a given situation that has occurred before. This is what the FA should do this time with Liverpool/Everton - exact same thing. I redirect you to this point made earlier which you appear to have missed/misunderstood.

Plus as I've said in my other posts I'm suggesting Everton miss out, still leaving England with 4 spots not five. Hence the situation decribed above.

Them's the breaks: historically this is what's always happened (I'l repeat the facts as you again appear to have missed/misunderstood them - over decades of European football teams finishing in the bottom Euro qualifying slot have always missed out if the 'wrong' team wins the FA Cup or League Cup), and we're back to a precedent. A further precedent: the European champions have never before not been allowed to defend their crown.

The point you make about not finishing in the top 4 - if Liverpool had lost the final, they would have deserved to be in the UEFA cup, but they won and therefore deserve to be in the CL. It might not be how it works in the US, but it is how it has always worked in European club competition (not just in football, but rugby, golf (actually golf is worldwide on this basis - exemptions from majors, etc), snooker, etc.

I seriously think that it must just be the American way of doing things vs. the European way of doing things: given the historical precedents for European competition in general, if I were a Liverpool fan I would be absolutely incensed at missing out if that proves to be the case.

You might disagree with the principle, that is your choice and nobody can tell you otherwise, but your argument is wrong if you are basing your stance on historical precedent.

[MIJB#19]

Always been curious, what is the seeding in the tournament? How is the seeding done and what is the purpose?
The seeding is a weird system.
First you have to understand the way they rank the associations (countries) based on results in te last five seasons in the European club competitions.

Second, teams are seeded and placed based on their league rankings. So te top two teams in the top leagues go into the draw of 32 for group play, but the #3 and #4 in the league will have to play in the last qualification round. The weaker teams (countries) will have to survive 3 rounds of qualifications to get into the the league ellement of the Champions' League.

Third, for seeding per round, the team rankings in the European club competitions over the last five years are used. But then there's still a flaw as teams get a bonus of half their association's points. Here, the defending champs are always 1st seeds.

I've probably missed a detail or two here, but that's the risk I'm willing to take to go from the top of my head.

I do think UEFA will step up and refix the rules starting with the 2006-2007 CL. As for UEFA, how is the money "earned" and paid out to the teams? Does UEFA get all the TV $, then that is the prize money, and the home teams get to keep the ticket revenue, on top of the prize money?


I though the World Club championship was cancelled? How is that tournmanet set up?The money earned is fucked up as well. The teams get a starting fee based on the population of their country (sort of to compensate for the # of tv viewers they bring in) and then earn more money based on results, with big boni for reaching next stages. So, in the end, the teams from the top leagues always get the most, even if teams from the smaller countries like Portugal, the Netherlands or Greece get deep into the tournament, the Spanish, Italian, German, French and Enlgish teams still get the most money.

And the World Club Championship? Is that thing still alive? :D
(I think every continental association is allowed to sent one representative, as well as 1 hosting nation's club and an 8th team, which by memory I don't know how they are invited.)

[ISiddiqui]

Real Madrid won the CL and finished 5th - the Spanish FA picked RM (5th place in the Primera League) over RZ (4th) to defend the trophy in 2000/1- therefore this is a precedent - an action taken in a given situation that has occurred before. This is what the FA should do this time with Liverpool/Everton - exact same thing. I redirect you to this point made earlier which you appear to have missed/misunderstood.
That isn't a precedent. That's a one time affair done by the Spanish FA, which has no binding authority on the English FA. There is no reason for the English FA to follow it.

I'l repeat the facts as you again appear to have missed/misunderstood them - over decades of European football teams finishing in the bottom Euro qualifying slot have always missed out if the 'wrong' team wins the FA Cup or League Cup)
The UEFA Cup is entirely different. Especially since the FA Cup or League Cup winner aren't 'defending their title' when they go into the UEFA Cup. They are competing for an entirely different one.

A further precedent: the European champions have never before not been allowed to defend their crown.
Because they've always finished in the top positions of their league, or the Spanish picked them over the 4th position.

To use a North American example, it'd be like saying the Stanley Cup winner has never not qualified for the playoffs the next year, so when the Devils finished outside of the Top 8 in the East in 1995, they should have taken the 8th spot because of the winning last year.

Sorry, this situation has occured only TWICE. Spain decided to go one way. English is not bound and should not be bound by their decision.

Furthermore, as stated the European Championship (you know, between countries) has always had the holders have to qualify for the next tourney. France was champion in Euro 2000, but still had to go through a qualification group in Euro 2004.

So I don't see any precedent at all. Just that CL winners all qualified for next year's competition through league play, except one time, where the Spanish allowed them to go through regardless.

It also seems UEFA doesn't seem to buy a precedent here either.

[Celeval]

It also seems UEFA doesn't seem to buy a precedent here either.
Actually, I think the UEFA is right on the precedent - it's not their problem, it's the country's. That's what they did for Spain, that's what they're doing for England. Not their call to make.

England does not have a precedent set, Spain does, the UEFA does.

[ISiddiqui]

Actually, I think the UEFA is right on the precedent - it's not their problem, it's the country's. That's what they did for Spain, that's what they're doing for England. Not their call to make.

England does not have a precedent set, Spain does, the UEFA does.
True. I never thought of it in that way. I don't remember UEFA back when Real Madrid won the CL and finished 5th making any noises about allowing both Madrid and Zaragosa in. I believe Spain waited to make their decision known as well.

Then again, it's only happened once, so perhaps not enough for a precedent to establish. Though if UEFA changes the rules for England, there will be a howl from Spain, I'm sure.

[AlexB]

The previous winners have not always qualified, going back over the years when there was only one or two qualifiers for the Champions League/European Cup, it regualrly happened (Forest & Villa spring immediately to mind - this is the 50th European Cup you realise?: the Champions League is just it's current format),
the analogy of the Stanley Cup playoffs is IMO totally irrelevant (I've already discussed why)
I began to doubt myself so looked up the definition of precedent to confirm, I've pasted a definition below:

'an example that is used to justify similar occurrences at a later time'

I am not saying the Spanish situation is a legal precedent, but it is a precedent nonetheless.

The EC has historically not allowed winners to automatically qualify - different tournament, different rules. Occurs every four years as opposed to annually, so a national team's make up will be very different from tournament to tournament - different situaiton altogether.

Tbh I'm bored - you believe Liverpool shoudn't be in the CL next, I believe they should.
I'm trying to explain why I believe this using relevant comparisons and similar or same situations that have occurred in the past in the same tournament, your examples are situations that are not related from different tournaments.

Those point where you do relate to the same tournament, you ignore where I'm coming from: at no point have I said that I think England should get 5 places at the expense of another country (although it would be nice for English football, I don;t think this is right - edit: since reading another article on the situation I'm coming round to the idea that there should be a place available for Liverpool without affecting anybody else - see below)

The only tournament that is linked is the UEFA Cup, as the qualification procedures are linked - there has always been a bump down the list if other teams win cup tournaments but don't finish high enough in the league to qualify this way.

Your point is arguable on one black and white fact: they didn;t finish in the top 4. However the rest of your evidence does not take into account extenuating circumstances of European club football or historically similar or same situations.

This is why I keep rising to the bait and responding: not to your point itself, but your arguments in defense of the point

[Katon]

But the thing is, a precedent is only useful if it's the same body acting in both cases. Why is the English FA obliged to follow the Spanish FA's precedent?

As to which competition is the best comparison, the UEFA Cup and previous years' versions of the CL aren't actually comparable. The thing is, if someone won the old European Cup who hadn't qualified for the next season's competition via the league then UEFA just let them in. Someone would be bumped back a qualifying round and everything would be fine. If that meant England having more countries than would otherwise be possible, then so be it. This is what we probably ought to be doing now - just reword the relevant rule to say no more than four teams can quailify via the league from any given country - but it isn't, and so for this season we're stuck with the current rule.

The point is, neither the UEFA Cup nor the CL/European Cup (under previous rules) have ever had a hard-and-fast limit on the number of teams like the one that's causing the current difficulty. The only competitions which have ever had to deal with a problem like this are the European Championships and the World Cup; they are therefore the only competitions to which a real comparison can be made.

[AlexB]

Katon, not sure I agree with you on the first point they're not obliged to follow the Spanish FAs precedent: I was just pointing out that sombody had been the exact same situation and they took the course of action of putting in Madrid ahead of Zaragoza - therefore the FA IMO should look to what another organisaiton did in the same circumstance, if UEFA stick with their current position.

Something else I just found that tbh I was unaware of, from Teamtalk (which I know is not always the most reliable source):

'Meanwhile, the FA's chairman Geoff Thompson, who is also a Uefa vice-president, has continued lobbying for there to be five English clubs in the Champions League so Liverpool can defend their crown.

His main argument is that nearly all the 52 Uefa member countries would be given an extra place in the Champions League in similar circumstances - apart from England, Spain and Italy because they are already allowed four teams in the competition.

The FA believe that is an inconsistency in the regulations and that even if Uefa are not convinced on this occasion they should change the rules for the future.

Thompson said: "We are working extremely hard to try to secure the extra place for Liverpool.

"Our basic concern is to ensure that all 52 countries have the same opportunity. There is an additional place guaranteed should the champions come from 49 countries in Europe but not for the other three - England, Italy and Spain.

"We are saying that there should be a level playing field and that every country should have the same opportunity."


If this is true it would be unfair for Everton to miss out and do indeed support Liverpool getting an 'extra' spot. But whatever the situation, Liverpool have to be in the CL next season.

[Marc Vaughan]

Katon, not sure I agree with you on the first point they're not obliged to follow the Spanish FAs precedent: I was just pointing out that sombody had been the exact same situation and they took the course of action of putting in Madrid ahead of Zaragoza - therefore the FA IMO should look to what another organisaiton did in the same circumstance, if UEFA stick with their current position.

The spanish situation was very different though in that Madrid are a huge club with great political (both in football and external to it) clout and Zaragoza simply weren't.

In England it was a very touchy situation with Liverpool and Everton being rival clubs from the same city and both having illustrious histories and large supporter bases.

The FA imho chose to back Everton for two reasons, (1) they thought Liverpool wouldn't win it so it wouldn't matter in the long run and the decision would have set a 'precedent' for future occurances, (2) it promotes the league (and hence the FA) over the Champions League so they're protecting their own interests.

That being said I'm hoping they sneak Liverpool into the comp somehow.

[AlexB]

The FA imho chose to back Everton for two reasons, (1) they thought Liverpool wouldn't win it so it wouldn't matter in the long run and the decision would have set a 'precedent' for future occurances, (2) it promotes the league (and hence the FA) over the Champions League so they're protecting their own interests.

That being said I'm hoping they sneak Liverpool into the comp somehow.

Totally right: I think when all these 'what will happen if Liverpool win and finih 5th' questions were being asked, it was seen as the most pointless conversation ever. Now its landed right back on them...

[Galaxy]

Everton really is hitting the transfer market though. Seems like they are zeroing on three players already to bring in.

[AlexB]

I like the players they're linked with so far - Simon Davies is a very good player, Scott Parker is solid: players who should definitely improve the squad but won't bring the prima donna attitude, as Everton is a team heavily dependent on teamwork and effort this is as important to them as ability.

[ISiddiqui]

Isiddiqui - I've just gone to your profile and seen you're a law student - therefore I can only assume that your obvious knowledge of American law is not allowing you to understand that things work differently in Europe.
I understand perfectly how things work in Europe. However, you are offering justifications that do not conform to it.

There are so many holes in your argument: the previous winners have not always qualified, going back over the years when there was only one or two qualifiers for the Champions League/European Cup, it regualrly happened (Forest & Villa spring immediately to mind - this is the 50th European Cup you realise?: the Champions League is just it's current format)
It is disingenous to refer to the Champions League and European Cup as the same thing since there were massive changes made to the structure of the competition from a playoff of champions to a league of the top teams in the leagues of Europe. It's like saying the Fairs Cup and UEFA Cup are the same exact things.

your worrying lack of the knowlede of the definition of precedent - for your reference and to help your study, I've pasted a definition below:

an example that is used to justify similar occurrences at a later time
That is NOT what you are arguing. If you were simply using it as a prior example to explain this occurance, you wouldn't be this adamant.

You are arguing on behalf of the definition of precedent that says:

Convention or custom arising from long practice

The FA imho chose to back Everton for two reasons, (1) they thought Liverpool wouldn't win it so it wouldn't matter in the long run and the decision would have set a 'precedent' for future occurances, (2) it promotes the league (and hence the FA) over the Champions League so they're protecting their own interests.
May I add a third, more practical reason. It was a 'make-up' for Everton missing out on the CL in the late 80s due to Heysel, where Everton won the Premier League twice. Liverpool won it twice, but since their fans were responsible, no real guilt there. Arsenal won it once as well, but they had great success in the late 90s. Everton haven't really been close to that good since the late 80s.

[AlexB]

That is NOT what you are arguing. If you were simply using it as a prior example to explain this occurance, you wouldn't be this adamant.

You are arguing on behalf of the definition of precedent that says:

Convention or custom arising from long practice



How arrogant are you to tell me what I am and am not arguing? And once again you are wrong - I am arguing the former. The reason I was so adamant is because you told me that this was not a precedent: it is a precedent byut not a legal one - maybe semantics but true.

However I am not going to go on because unfortunately you repied to my pre-edited version which was a little too thoughtlessly worded.

Your point about Everton following Heysel is an interesting one, probably not entered anybody's mindset or decision making, but it would kind of even it out I guess.

[Galaxy]

I like the players they're linked with so far - Simon Davies is a very good player, Scott Parker is solid: players who should definitely improve the squad but won't bring the prima donna attitude, as Everton is a team heavily dependent on teamwork and effort this is as important to them as ability.

And the other player they are "looking hard" at is Chelsea keeper Carlo Cudicini.

[AlexB]

good keeper: depends how much he wants 1st team football as to whether he leaves Chelsea or not. Hadn;t heard this rumour, but also would be a good signing.

[Galaxy]

good keeper: depends how much he wants 1st team football as to whether he leaves Chelsea or not. Hadn;t heard this rumour, but also would be a good signing.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/e/everton/4590397.stm

[AlexB]

Sounds like they're trying to buy Chelsea's reserve side - although from the quality of some of them there are worse policies!

[Marc Vaughan]

Sounds like they're trying to buy Chelsea's reserve side - although from the quality of some of them there are worse policies!
I rate Moyes as a manager pretty highly and think he's going about strengthening the team intelligently, he's after quality players who are still 'hungry' to prove themselves, 'chelsea reserves' will be desperate to get one over on their previous team and very motivated to succeed ... not to mention that Parker is imho an amazing talent and could form a crucial link in the midfield for an Everton team still missing Gravesen ...

[Marc Vaughan]

PS> As far as keepers go - I'm surprised they haven't been linked with Caroll(sp?) now he's been released by Man Utd .. he's a pretty solid keeper, bar a few gaffes this season (which imho wasn't helped by the pressure which Ferguson puts his keepers under, one of Man Utd's weaknesses in recent years has been the turnover and lack of faith put in keepers subsequent to Schmeichal(sp?).

[AlexB]

I rate Moyes as a manager pretty highly and think he's going about strengthening the team intelligently, he's after quality players who are still 'hungry' to prove themselves, 'chelsea reserves' will be desperate to get one over on their previous team and very motivated to succeed ... not to mention that Parker is imho an amazing talent and could form a crucial link in the midfield for an Everton team still missing Gravesen ...

What's interesting about Moyes and Everton is he's had two very good years and one poor one: I like the fact he's not getting carried away with last season's position, and looking to improve the squad not necesarily slowly but surely, but not trying to buy in world superstars at exorbitant prices: I think these deals would represent excellent value for money.

The counter argument is that Everton massively overachieved last year and can three or four very good players raise what is on paper a fairly ordinary squad and enable them to challenge at a similar level next season, given their drop in form two years ago.

It will be very interesting to see how they do: I hope he does well as he comes across as a decent bloke with his head well and truly screwed on.

[Galaxy]

I love the European soccer and "free agency" and team building. It's amazing to get wrapped up in FM 2005, and teams can get a windfall of money from being successful/overachieving (Liverpool) and turn it around.

What is Liverpool's plan of action now? Are they in debt? Will this win allow them to get back into the financial ballpark of the "Big 3", and return to that level year in and year out? They are planning a new stadium as well, correct? I'm sure that will really give them a revenue stream.

[Desnudo]

What's interesting about Moyes and Everton is he's had two very good years and one poor one: I like the fact he's not getting carried away with last season's position, and looking to improve the squad not necesarily slowly but surely, but not trying to buy in world superstars at exorbitant prices: I think these deals would represent excellent value for money.

The counter argument is that Everton massively overachieved last year and can three or four very good players raise what is on paper a fairly ordinary squad and enable them to challenge at a similar level next season, given their drop in form two years ago.

It will be very interesting to see how they do: I hope he does well as he comes across as a decent bloke with his head well and truly screwed on.

Or like Bill Parcell's once said, "you are what your record says you are." I don't buy the overachievement argument about Everton (not saying you're making it). 38 games is more than enough time to shake out the fakers. What they proved is that hard work and dedication to the team concept can beat superior talent that is less disciplined or less organized.

My main concern if I were an Everton fan would be that they build the team with solid team players that won't disrupt the chemistry that was so vital to their success. Talent is definitely important, but Everton won't be competing solely on that basis for some time to come.

[ISiddiqui]

How arrogant are you to tell me what I am and am not arguing?
You need to be told. You are backtracking so fast, I'm afraid, your ass will be quite sore when you fall upon it. :p

You even said it again a few posts above:

"historically this is what's always happened"

And once again you are wrong - I am arguing the former. The reason I was so adamant is because you told me that this was not a precedent: it is a precedent byut not a legal one - maybe semantics but true.
If you are using that definition of precedent, then your argument has got nothing behind it at all. All that definition means is a similar situation happened before, but has no standing behind it. You said there has been a precedent, like we are required to follow it. That definition doesn't make that assumption at all.

[Marc Vaughan]

Or like Bill Parcell's once said, "you are what your record says you are." I don't buy the overachievement argument about Everton (not saying you're making it). 38 games is more than enough time to shake out the fakers. What they proved is that hard work and dedication to the team concept can beat superior talent that is less disciplined or less organized.

My main concern if I were an Everton fan would be that they build the team with solid team players that won't disrupt the chemistry that was so vital to their success. Talent is definitely important, but Everton won't be competing solely on that basis for some time to come.

While I agree with that to a large extent - the biggest thing Moyes has to look out for imho is players getting 'cocky' ... the reason they did so well this season as much as anything is the 'underdog factor', they started the season as favourites to go down and the players drew a lot of determination and bloody mindedness from that which kept their work-rate and motivaton high.

Having had a season in the sun (so to speak) he'll have to ensure that they don't allow this work-rate to drop, most likely by playing on the fact that people think its a 'fluke' and they 'over-achieved' and asking the players to prove it otherwise.

Bringing in failed players from big clubs is sensible also in two ways imho, (1) They're hungry and will keep the everton players hungry, (2) most of them came from 'everton-type' clubs moved to bigger clubs and failed to make an impact ... having them around reminds Everton players that going to a big club isn't always to their good.

[bhlloy]

I'm with the camp that says Everton should be in, I think it would be an absolute disaster for the Premiership if they got screwed.

2 main reasons:

1) The rules for qualification are clearly set out at the start of the season. Get in the top four, and qualify for Champions League. Given the huge financial implications for Everton if they don't get in, and the smaller but still significant financial implications for whoever missed out on the UEFA to let Everton in that competition I could see a very messy and protracted legal battle over this one. I cannot believe Zaragoza just laid down and let Madrid in over them, but we all know the godlike status Real have in Spain so who knows what was going on there.

2) The English Premiership is run by the English FA, and when it comes to choosing the English FA representatives in the CL, they should go on the placing in their league. Liverpool won a competition run by UEFA, so if they get any perks in the competition next year it should be provided and administered by UEFA. By passing the buck back to the English FA, UEFA is just dodging the bullet and screwing one of it's members over. Either let the champs defend the title, or require them to qualify period.

I strongly feel that Liverpool should be in the tournament, but not at the expense of Everton (or whoever is the fourth placed team) Not in a million years. I don't like this new trend of tournament winners not getting an automatic place in the tournament. How hard would it be really to add a play-in game to the qualifying round or something?

Incidentally, did anyone see the Welsh champs TNS wanted to play Liverpool for a place in the qualifying rounds? The reasoning behind that being that they would get a bigger crowd for Liverpool than some random team from Georgia that they were going to lose to anyway, and it would be an extra good British team in the tournament. The Welsh FA shot it down and probably quite rightly so, but still a nice thought...

[Marc Vaughan]

Incidentally, did anyone see the Welsh champs TNS wanted to play Liverpool for a place in the qualifying rounds? The reasoning behind that being that they would get a bigger crowd for Liverpool than some random team from Georgia that they were going to lose to anyway, and it would be an extra good British team in the tournament. The Welsh FA shot it down and probably quite rightly so, but still a nice thought...

I like that idea personally - although its got to be something thats sanctioned and a 'one-off' otherwise most small qualifying clubs would simply auction their qualifying round places to big clubs who had a poor season ..

[AlexB]

You need to be told. You are backtracking so fast, I'm afraid, your ass will be quite sore when you fall upon it. :p

You even said it again a few posts above:

"historically this is what's always happened"


If you are using that definition of precedent, then your argument has got nothing behind it at all. All that definition means is a similar situation happened before, but has no standing behind it. You said there has been a precedent, like we are required to follow it. That definition doesn't make that assumption at all.

How am I backtracking? Liverpool should be in the CL - until I read the article I pasted above I was under the impression from UEFA's statements that they could not create a space in the tournament for the winners, now it seems it's purely because they don;t want more than 4 teams from one country in.

If they stick to this 'no more than 4' then Everton should miss out: however 'in light of new evidence' (i.e. the article from Teamtalk) I think there should easily be a way in which Liverpool can be included without cost to anyone.

At no point have I said that the FA should be legally bound by what the Spanish FA's actions - I have used this an example of the only time in the current European Cup structure where the situation occurred, and the fact that this matched the philosophy behind qualification to the tournament in the past.

Therefore the precedent (not legal precedent, just precedent) is that that the CL winners get in: whether the FA decide to follow this is their choice but I believe that they should. At no point have I used the term 'legal precedent' other than in explaining the difference between a legal precedent and the use of the single word 'precedent' in everyday English.

As I have said, you have one point on which you can argue your case from (if indeed you do have an argument, as now you've reverted to just abusing me) - this does not mean I agree with your case, it's just that I can see that somebody might have a point of view based on one fact, and it's not completely ridiculous.

Acknowledgement that an argument is not ridiculous is not backtracking! :rolleyes: You, my friend, are a fuckwit, and I am not going to dignify your garbage posts with any more responses

[Edit: and this is not because you don't agree with me (you are perfectly entitled to your opinion) but the nature of your posts and arguments]

[ISiddiqui]

How am I backtracking?
Very simply because you were using the definition of precedent that "Convention of custom arising from long practice". Then, when we hammered you, you changed it to say, you were using the defintion that said "An act or instance that may be used as an example in dealing with subsequent similar instances."

You changed from saying this is how it has always been (implying that is basically what is required because of history) into saying you were just using it as an example of how to deal with this situation.

(Notice I didn't mention 'legal precedent' once).

That is backtracking.

[MIJB#19]

I heard nobody about the essensce on how the tickets are divided.

The 4th place has turned into a CL ticket because English clubs earned a lot of points from 1999/2000 through 2003/2004. Guess what teams contributed the most to that? Manchester United, Arsenal and Liverpool. Liverpool brought in a lot of points with their UEFA Cup title in 2000/2001, reaching the elite eight in the CL in 2001/2002, and the elite eight of the UEFA Cup in 2002/2003, making the 10th most succesful club of Europe in the period that determines which league positions will result in European football.

And what did Everton do to make the 4th place even worth a CL ticket? Absolutely nothing, they didn't even qualify for the European cups to make that 4th place worth anything.

Having done the math research, it shows that Liverpool's success eventually wasn't even necessery to make England move into the 4-CL tickets countries group for 2005/2006. Liverpool accounted for over 10 of 62 points, but even with 52 points the 4th placed team in England would still go into the CL draw in stead of the UEFA Cup draw.


Given all that, it's a freaky thought that a team can waste their own CL victory prestige as being worth a CL ticket by having had too much success in the previous five seasons, while a team that didn't contribute to the country's success can steal their ticket.

I've also doing the research on Real Madrid's influence on their own luck of being too good to make their CL victory worth a CL ticket. Real Madrid earned almost 11 points in 1996-2001, Real Zaragoza less than a quarter of a point. Again, the points total of Real Madrid wasn't necessery to make the 4th place in the league be worth a CL ticket.

[bhlloy]

[QUOTE=MIJB#19]

Given all that, it's a freaky thought that a team can waste their own CL victory prestige as being worth a CL ticket by having had too much success in the previous five seasons, while a team that didn't contribute to the country's success can steal their ticket.
QUOTE]

There is no fricking stealing... the English FA says that the 4th placed team in the league gets in and Everton were the fourth placed team! Liverpool should be in the tournament but they got in by winning a UEFA sanctioned tournament and their place should be provided by UEFA. Everton outperformed Liverpool in the English league this year and deserve to get the English ticket... geez

Or should we just let the teams that "earned" the tickets play in the tournament every year? Screw the domestic leagues and earning a place in the tournament, screw the excitement of the race for European places, let's just have the same qualifiers every year :rolleyes:

[Galaxy]

Just curious,
What is happening with Inter after the problem in the Milan-Inter series. Do they "Qualify" for the CL? If so, what happens with that ticket?

[MIJB#19]

Given all that, it's a freaky thought that a team can waste their own CL victory prestige as being worth a CL ticket by having had too much success in the previous five seasons, while a team that didn't contribute to the country's success can steal their ticket.

There is no fricking stealing... the English FA says that the 4th placed team in the league gets in and Everton were the fourth placed team! Liverpool should be in the tournament but they got in by winning a UEFA sanctioned tournament and their place should be provided by UEFA. Everton outperformed Liverpool in the English league this year and deserve to get the English ticket... geez

Or should we just let the teams that "earned" the tickets play in the tournament every year? Screw the domestic leagues and earning a place in the tournament, screw the excitement of the race for European places, let's just have the same qualifiers every year :rolleyes:Everton as much earned that fourth ticket as Liverpool did, both met UEFA qualification demands. The UEFA gives England 4 tickets and will only allow Chelsea, Arsenal, Manchester United and either Liverpool or Everton. The whole discussion that's going on is whether L. or E. should get the ticket. The FA decided to give it to Everton, but their timing was bad and both the UEFA and FA should learn from this situation.

Again, I'm agreeing that the UEFA fucked up and shouldn't make this the FA's problem. I figured it was worth figuring out whether there was any irony in the whole situation with Liverpool's own success costing them a ticket. FWIW, if the same thing happens next season, Liverpool's success in Europe will have cost them their own CL ticket.

[Galaxy]

Didn't UEFA just annouce that they think Liverpool should be allowed to defend the title?

[AlexB]

Didn't UEFA just annouce that they think Liverpool should be allowed to defend the title?

The UEFA president Lennart Johannsson (spelling?) supports this, as do the major European teams, as do many high standing UEFA personnel such as Franz Beckenbauer.

THe UEFA spokesman William Gaillert (spelling?) is the main 'no' man, but he does appear to have a thing against English teams: he basically called Chelsea and Jose Mourinho liars over the Barca episode, and I don;t recall him making an apology over that...

hxxp://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/4590899.stm

[MIJB#19]

But Chelsea and Mourinho are liars, tough to argue about that. ;)

[Mr. Wednesday]

If the refs don't have the balls to order a rekick on milan's second attempt, and if they are too lazy to spot the ball themselves, rather than let dudec run out there with it, then they just need to give upAt risk of repeating something that someone else has posted in the six or seven pages I haven't read yet...

I have it on good authority from the referee forum at BigSoccer that international-level referees are expected to give the keeper one to two meters of leeway, which means that there was still one (I think) kick that should have been retaken.

[Mr. Wednesday]

On the other hand, if the World Cup or European Championship winners botch their qualifying groups then they're toast. They don't get to defend their trophy.Which is a new development as of the 2006 World Cup -- in previous tournaments the defending champion had automatically received a spot in the finals.

[AlexB]

But Chelsea and Mourinho are liars, tough to argue about that. ;)

You're right, it is generally very tough to argue about that, but this was the one occasion where they were actually telling the truth in that Rikjaard did go through the first door to the refs room, (but not the second). Anders Frisk (eventually) backed them up...

[moriarty]

Haven't seen this posted yet, but Liverpool are in the Champions League (along with Everton and the others). They're going to have to start at the bottom though going through full qualifying (6games) prior to the group stage.

As predicted, the 'future' rules have been modified such that if it happens again, the 4th place team (or 3rd etc. if you only get 3 teams in) would automatically be dropped.

No doubt it came down to $$ in the end.

[MIJB#19]

I have a feeling the big clubs have pressured the UEFA to either let Liverpool enter or they would all stay away. The G14 (the 14 biggest clubs and some financial over the top former top clubs) had a meeting on Thursday, coincidentally a day before the final decission was made.

[moriarty]

Slightly off topic -

Being a Liverpool fan, I was caught up in the excitement of their Champions League victory and I thought ... man, I've got to get a 'Liverpool champions of Europe T-shirt'. You would think I could just order from one of a hundred of sites online ... but to my suprise I couldn't find an 'offical' winners t-shirt anywhere (although they did have 'finalist' ones). Well after looking around, I read where someone said they wont' be available until June 15th or something. I was really suprised by this ... and seems like UEFA or someone is missing out on a big marekting opportunity.

If the Spurs win the NBA title this year, fans around the world will be able to buy champions t-shirts/hats/etc... the day after the final game (if not sooner). Seems weird that UEFA/Reebok or whomever controls this would miss out on the Euporia by not having a gadzillion shirts ready to go. Maybe they're all over Europe ... just not online yet?

[FrogMan]

being a Pats fan and with the last 4 years having been very good to us :) I can tell you that they usually don't have a gadzillions shirts ready. Only enough for the players and people around the team, but you usually can order them right after the game, or even pre-order before the game is even played, with your order automatically getting cancelled if your team doesn't win. And when you order/preorder, they tell you when the shirts are supposed to ship. Kinda weird that you can't even order a shirt with a future delivery date...

FM

[Critch]

Well after looking around, I read where someone said they wont' be available until June 15th or something. I was really suprised by this ... and seems like UEFA or someone is missing out on a big marekting opportunity.

Maybe they had them all ready to go, but chucked the lot in the trash at half time? Back to square one.

[FrogMan]

Maybe they had them all ready to go, but chucked the lot in the trash at half time? Back to square one.
just like the NFL chucked the whole lot of "ST LOUIS RAMS, NFL CHAMPIONS, BACK-TO-BACK" shirts in the trash when Vinatieri kicked it through the uprights with time running out :D

FM