VillaChris Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 Are we missing something, it's not like Spurs had a free pass into the group stages, they would've had a qualifier. As far as I'm concerned they fluked it two years ago when they got that young boys pub team or whoever they were. Let's see how you'd do against a proper team like an Udinese who Arsenal struggled to see off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeilS Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 I still think it's basically wrong that there isn't a place in the CL set aside for the winner without denying clubs who have qualified for it the 'right' way. Yes I know Spurs only came 4th, but it's supposed to be the top 4 so they can legitimately feel hard done by. No European trophy ever did it that way and the EL doesn't do it now either. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't Spurs finishing 4th mean they have qualified to play a qualification round to get into the Champions League? Which if true means they technically haven't qualified for the Champions League at all? I know that 4th used to mean that as Everton crashed out that way, it may well have changed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 Yes 4th spot gets you a shot at qualification. Next season however, all 4 English teams go directly into the group stage. Spare a thought for Anderlecht who were the team to make way, giving up their full spot to Chelsea and taking the Spurs qualifier instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeilS Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 I thought as much. It is unfortunate for Spurs, but you have to draw the line somewhere. England have four teams in the Champions League already, the team that won the cup have the right to defend it, and it would be unfair on other nations if we took up all of the spaces available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted May 22, 2012 Moderator Share Posted May 22, 2012 I thought as much. It is unfortunate for Spurs, but you have to draw the line somewhere. England have four teams in the Champions League already, the team that won the cup have the right to defend it, and it would be unfair on other nations if we took up all of the spaces available. But that's my point. The winner should be a separate spot, independent of nationality. So every country gets it's allocation AND there's the winner. You draw the line, but you draw it just beyond the point where the winner gets to retain the trophy without making a balls of 2 other teams who have qualified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrDuck Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 It's pretty unfortunate for Spurs, and to be honest I think it's a little unjust - see BOF's point above. If it was us in their position I would feel suitably pissed off. But... you know... it's Spurs... and I just can't seem to feel that sorry for them :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 Roflcopter To think that a few months back Spurs were being linked with players such as Eden Hazard I wonder if he will want to play in the Europa next season Should have gone for the England job as soon as it was available Arry I think Modric should rub further salt into the wounds handing in a transfer request to go to Chelsea because he wants champions league football!!! Hahahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted May 22, 2012 Moderator Share Posted May 22, 2012 But that's my point. The winner should be a separate spot, independent of nationality. So every country gets it's allocation AND there's the winner. You draw the line, but you draw it just beyond the point where the winner gets to retain the trophy without making a balls of 2 other teams who have qualified. In a perfect world that would be great but its unworkable. If ever country has their allocation regardless and then a team go and win the trophy who fail to qualify you end up with one too many teams in the competition. I think everyone thinks its harsh on Spurs but they knew the rules at the start of the season. They knew then or should have known then that this situation could occur, they certainly knew it was a possibility in the last few weeks of the season. They blew their chance, they are responsible for their own downfall they had 3rd place in the bag and blew it. If the rules had been changed on them the way they were so nearly changed on Everton when Liverpool won it I'd be up in arms on their behalf but they weren't. The rules are clear, they were clear back in August and they are the way they are for a logical reason. There is much to deride UEFA for but personally I don't think this should be added to the list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeilS Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 I thought as much. It is unfortunate for Spurs, but you have to draw the line somewhere. England have four teams in the Champions League already, the team that won the cup have the right to defend it, and it would be unfair on other nations if we took up all of the spaces available. But that's my point. The winner should be a separate spot, independent of nationality. So every country gets it's allocation AND there's the winner. You draw the line, but you draw it just beyond the point where the winner gets to retain the trophy without making a balls of 2 other teams who have qualified. I guess it depends on your viewpoint. I don't think having a quarter of the Premier League in the Champions League would be fair on the other nations. Having 5 PL teams would inevitably mean someone else misses out elsewhere. The rules were set after the Everton/Liverpool argument, so they have to abide with them whether they like it or not. They hadn't actually qualified for a CL place, just gave themselves a chance to qualify for it via a two legged knock out round. Spurs had the chance to qualify automatically in the top 3 and blew it. As Martin Samuels painfully put it last night on tv, Spurs have only themselves to blame for not getting a win against us at Villa Park. They would have had it in there own hands in the final game if they would have won against us at VP, like the rest of the top three did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted May 22, 2012 Moderator Share Posted May 22, 2012 If ever country has their allocation regardless and then a team go and win the trophy who fail to qualify you end up with one too many teams in the competition. You divide the places so that the winner is always separate i.e. if the winner of the competition ALSO qualifies through the league then their spot drops down one. That way it becomes completely immaterial where the CL winner came in their league and no-one ever loses out. Sure, the way it is currently done is messed up (or unworkable) if the winner finishes outside their CL spots, but that's precisely my point. It would require a small change to the way one spot is allocated, but once it was done, it would never ever **** anyone over again. At the moment, they've taken an extremely exclusive competition and actually unnecessarily made it even more exclusive albeit by one spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 If ever country has their allocation regardless and then a team go and win the trophy who fail to qualify you end up with one too many teams in the competition. You divide the places so that the winner is always separate i.e. if the winner of the competition ALSO qualifies through the league then their spot drops down one. That way it becomes completely immaterial where the CL winner came in their league and no-one ever loses out. Sure, the way it is currently done is messed up (or unworkable) if the winner finishes outside their CL spots, but that's precisely my point. It would require a small change to the way one spot is allocated, but once it was done, it would never ever **** anyone over again. At the moment, they've taken an extremely exclusive competition and actually unnecessarily made it even more exclusive albeit by one spot. You still only have the same number of places. A lower ranked league (presumably the Belgium one?) will have to lose a place every season to make way for the newly created winners spot. That seems less fair on the Belgians just so one of England, Spain or Italy (the winners almost always come from one of these leagues) can have 5 spots each season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted May 22, 2012 Moderator Share Posted May 22, 2012 You still only have the same number of places. A lower ranked league (presumably the Belgium one?) will have to lose a place every season to make way for the newly crated winners spot. That seems less fair on the Belgians just so one of England, Spain or Italy (the winners almost always come from one of these leagues) can have 5 spots each season. I give up. Your first sentence is incorrect. The changes would mean that there isn't the same number of places available. I don't know whether people are trying not to understand or whether I got you all on a bad day Let's move back on topic to Spurs, the Europa League side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted May 22, 2012 Moderator Share Posted May 22, 2012 If ever country has their allocation regardless and then a team go and win the trophy who fail to qualify you end up with one too many teams in the competition. You divide the places so that the winner is always separate i.e. if the winner of the competition ALSO qualifies through the league then their spot drops down one. That way it becomes completely immaterial where the CL winner came in their league and no-one ever loses out. Sure, the way it is currently done is messed up (or unworkable) if the winner finishes outside their CL spots, but that's precisely my point. It would require a small change to the way one spot is allocated, but once it was done, it would never ever **** anyone over again. At the moment, they've taken an extremely exclusive competition and actually unnecessarily made it even more exclusive albeit by one spot. And how exactly would that additional team in the competition be accommodated? Neither situation is perfect as I illustrated in my last post but everyone knew the rules back in August. It's akin to missing out in the Championship Playoffs then grumbling about the playoffs. As I said its hard luck on Spurs but that's life, I still think its the simplest way to do it. Something UEFA must agree with having tried it the other way when it happened with Everton and Liverpool. The only thing that I wonder is would they do it this way if it wasn't in England where this was most likely to occur? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 You still only have the same number of places. A lower ranked league (presumably the Belgium one?) will have to lose a place every season to make way for the newly crated winners spot. That seems less fair on the Belgians just so one of England, Spain or Italy (the winners almost always come from one of these leagues) can have 5 spots each season. I give up. Your first sentence is incorrect. The changes would mean that there isn't the same number of places available. I don't know whether people are trying not to understand or whether I got you all on a bad day Let's move back on topic to Spurs, the Europa League side. Yeah sorry, I don't get it. You have 20 places. Some of those places are half spots (like spurs had) and some are full spots. If you guarantee a seperate full place to the winners but keep the league places the same as they are now then you have to take away a spot from somewhere else, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted May 22, 2012 Moderator Share Posted May 22, 2012 Sorry BOF it doesn't make sense, you are still either adding an additional team to the competition or you are taking a place from a league in order to give it automatically to each years winners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRS-T Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 If Inter Milan had won the Champions League, then Italy would get 4 Champions League places next year (even though they are only entitled to 3.) So if Chelsea win the Champions League, England should get 5 Champions League places - Italy gets an increase from 3 to 4 places, so we should get an increase from 4 to 5 places. Either no leagues get an increase, or every league gets an increase. Equality for all leagues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 Equality for all leagues. You mean, each league getting the same number of places? Like perhaps, just one place reserved for each league's champions? I think you will find a lot of support in this very thread for "equality for all leagues". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeilS Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 Sorry BOF it doesn't make sense, you are still either adding an additional team to the competition or you are taking a place from a league in order to give it automatically to each years winners. I'm glad I'm not the only one who doesn't fully understand BOF's idea. I had put it down to the heat affecting my brain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voinjama Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 Usually I agree with BOF, but not this time. One quarter of the premiership in the champions league would devalue it even more. UEFA have done the right thing, and it is not often I think that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiganvillain Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Why are we even arguing Spurs got kicked in the nuts, Glaston has commited Sepukku The world is in it's rightful place Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts