• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Broadcasting
UEFA Europa League
<<
<
64 of 120
>>
>
Turnbull2000
08-03-2013
As a Newcastle fan, I'm more disgusted that Chelsea are simply in the competition. It's absolute lunacy from UEFA.
Judio
08-03-2013
I agree as stated earlier in the thread

if you lose in Europe then you should be OUT !!!!
Steveaustin316
08-03-2013
Originally Posted by Li4m:
“Football kicking-off at 6pm on a weekday is bad enough. There's no need to start it an hour earlier.”

They could schedule the games being played in eastern and central Europe for the earlier kickoffs which would suit their timezone better and the games held in western Europe could be played in the later kickoff slot.
stevvy1986
08-03-2013
Originally Posted by Turnbull2000:
“As a Newcastle fan, I'm more disgusted that Chelsea are simply in the competition. It's absolute lunacy from UEFA.”

I agree. If you lose in the CL qualifiers, you're out. If you come 3rd in the CL group stage, you're out. Basically if you fail, that's it. I see no reason for teams to be rewarded for failure.
pakokelso93
08-03-2013
Champions league qualifiers should gain Europa league place, If you are defeated in the UCL qualifers, in theory it shows you aren't good enough for the UCL season ahead but could be for the UEL (2nd tier). Some decent teams get knocked out in later Champions League qualifier rounds that add to the quality of the UEL.

The third place UCL thing in the group stages does need looked at.
Ambassador
08-03-2013
Decision was fairly obvious.

Fair chance of Newcastle sticking out a weakened side again, the first leg was terrible to watch for a neutral (was looking forward to seeing Willian but he went off injured)

And Chelsea are a locked on media circus this season so it gives a focus for the match.

Only reasons I can think to stick Newcastle on would be the unpredictability of the second leg
Judio
08-03-2013
Originally Posted by pakokelso93:
“Champions league qualifiers should gain Europa league place, If you are defeated in the UCL qualifers, in theory it shows you aren't good enough for the UCL season ahead but could be for the UEL (2nd tier). Some decent teams get knocked out in later Champions League qualifier rounds that add to the quality of the UEL.

The third place UCL thing in the group stages does need looked at.”

But in the Past it was

1st placeEuropean Cup
2nd place UEFA Cup

If you lost in the first round of the European Cup then tough

So what if the second place stays in Europe longer
stevvy1986
08-03-2013
Originally Posted by pakokelso93:
“Champions league qualifiers should gain Europa league place, If you are defeated in the UCL qualifers, in theory it shows you aren't good enough for the UCL season ahead but could be for the UEL (2nd tier). Some decent teams get knocked out in later Champions League qualifier rounds that add to the quality of the UEL.

The third place UCL thing in the group stages does need looked at.”

Sorry but I disagree. If you lose/fail to come in the top 2 of the UCL group stages, you've failed. You're then being rewarded for failing. Why should anyone be rewarded for failing? There's absolutely no reason for it. If you lose, that's it, you're out, goodbye, see you next season if you're lucky enough to qualify.
jlp95bwfc
08-03-2013
I have to agree. It seems unfair that Man Utd, Celtic and (probably) Arsenal are out of Europe, but Chelsea remain despite failing to get out of the CL group stage. Although you could argue that it increases the quality of the Europa League knockout stages.
Sirius
08-03-2013
Originally Posted by jlp95bwfc:
“I have to agree. It seems unfair that Man Utd, Celtic and (probably) Arsenal are out of Europe, but Chelsea remain despite failing to get out of the CL group stage. Although you could argue that it increases the quality of the Europa League knockout stages.”

Of course it's unfair but it's the money from major countries the game chases. The Champions League was better when it was just Champions, and that allowed both the UEFA Cup and Cup Winners Cup to be strong.

The inevitability now is just one big Champions League in the long run.
jlp95bwfc
08-03-2013
Originally Posted by Sirius:
“Of course it's unfair but it's the money from major countries the game chases. The Champions League was better when it was just Champions, and that allowed both the UEFA Cup and Cup Winners Cup to be strong.

The inevitability now is just one big Champions League in the long run.”

Which will of course dilute the quality of a great tournament, in a similar way to how the European Championships will be diluted when it is expanded to 24 teams. It seems like UEFA want to have their cake and eat it, but I can't help but feel like it will ultimately backfire.
wolvesdavid
09-03-2013
Originally Posted by Judio:
“And that is how as a fan I want the choices to be made

It isnt a gripe against ITV or ESPN it is just that sometimes the choices are not made fairly.

It is the Same with Sky”

I don't think the choices have been unfair. If anything I think Newcastle shouldn't have been on ITV4 in the last 16 first leg.

Steaua București who lets not forget are former European Cup champions would be more well known and therefore a more attractive tie with them playing Chelsea, rather than some other billionairres team playing Newcastle.

This applies to both legs of the tie. The away leg for Newcastle didn't even take place at the clubs own home ground, but in a neutral venue over 1,000 miles away.
Ambassador
09-03-2013
Originally Posted by wolvesdavid:
“
Steaua București who lets not forget are former European Cup champions would be more well known and therefore a more attractive tie with them playing Chelsea, rather than some other billionairres team playing Newcastle.

This applies to both legs of the tie. The away leg for Newcastle didn't even take place at the clubs own home ground, but in a neutral venue over 1,000 miles away.”

I doubt Steau are more well known in modern football

Anzhi are coached by Hiddink with Roberto Carlos, and have the likes of Eto'o, Traore, Tardelli,Diarra etc and the star of Europe this season for many in Willian

Liverpool played them in Moscow too, its hardly an uknown thing.

I agree with ITV's reasoning but to suggest one of the favourites for the competition and a modern upcoming force like Anzhi who will probably be in the CL next season are a smaller draw than Steaua Bucharest is just wrong
wolvesdavid
09-03-2013
I reckon Steau are more well known. History counts for a lot.
KarlHyde
10-03-2013
ESPN have opted for Zenit v Basel at 5pm as their early game.
Phoenix04
12-03-2013
I presume ESPN went for Zenit to avoid a 6pm kickoff going up against Inter-Spurs on ITV4
Judio
12-03-2013
There were two 5 pm kick offs

They went for the side that was 2-0 down rather than 0-0

Or did they pick Zenit as they have a better recent history than Rubin ???
Phoenix04
12-03-2013
Didn't realise there were two 5pm kick offs on Thursday, seems odd not to go for the more balanced tie in that case. Or maybe they're after more than a football story considering Zenits fans have a bit of a reputation
Judio
12-03-2013
If you think about it a nil nil first leg would mean potentially a low scoring game

Zenit have to get three and are at home
whedon247
12-03-2013
i understand it makes no sense but i like that CL 3rd placed teams go into europa, it spices up the competion and excitement levels imo
The Wanderer
12-03-2013
Zenit are slightly better known with a few biggish name players (Hulk, Witsel etc)
Steveaustin316
12-03-2013
It wouldn't be that difficult to change the Europa League format to remove the need for the 8 3rd placed teams to enter at the knockout stage.

At present, there are 48 teams in the group stage. If they increased that to 64 teams (16 groups of 4) and adjust the qualifying rounds to accommodate the change, then the top 2 from each group (32 teams) would advance to the knockout stage which would remain in it's current format.

I don't have a problem with the teams who fail to make the group stage of the Champions League entering the Europa League as it avoids the scenario of a team finishing 4th and getting a tricky draw, then being eliminated from Europe before the end of August after just 2 games.
Judio
13-03-2013
But the problem with the Last 32 is you have to play 4 Thursdays in 5 weeks

That is why English clubs have turned up their noses at this event when it gets To February

If it went back to a Last 16 it would be more appealing
jazzydrury3
13-03-2013
Originally Posted by Judio:
“But the problem with the Last 32 is you have to play 4 Thursdays in 5 weeks

That is why English clubs have turned up their noses at this event when it gets To February

If it went back to a Last 16 it would be more appealing”

I think its the other way around, If clubs scramble through the groups, then they focus on the Europa League more.

Alan Pardew, was said to have wanted to win last weekend like he did, so he could put out a better team for the 2nd leg.

AVB has always seemed to put a strong side out.
stevvy1986
13-03-2013
Originally Posted by Steveaustin316:
“It wouldn't be that difficult to change the Europa League format to remove the need for the 8 3rd placed teams to enter at the knockout stage.

At present, there are 48 teams in the group stage. If they increased that to 64 teams (16 groups of 4) and adjust the qualifying rounds to accommodate the change, then the top 2 from each group (32 teams) would advance to the knockout stage which would remain in it's current format.

I don't have a problem with the teams who fail to make the group stage of the Champions League entering the Europa League as it avoids the scenario of a team finishing 4th and getting a tricky draw, then being eliminated from Europe before the end of August after just 2 games.”


But then if you get a tricky draw, that's something you'll just have to deal with, as as with any draw, you don't know who you'll get. Plus, what may look easy/hard on paper may turn out differently.

For me, if your European season ends after 2 games in July/August, well tough, better luck next time. If you lose in a qualifying/playoff round over 2 legs, you should be out of Europe completely. Same goes for if you fail to come in the top 2 of a CL group, you should be out of Europe completely.

Why reward failure? That's all that happens if a CL team finishes 3rd and drops into the EL or if you lose in a CL qualifier and drop into the EL. It's basically saying "hey, you failed, but no worries, you can play in a different competition instead as a reward for failing".
<<
<
64 of 120
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map