The 2018/19 RAWK nuggets thread - 29 years and counting

Originally Posted by Brucie

£#%&!ing Spurs are in a CL final...

Ugh...

The format of the champions league this past 15 years has made it a mockery. I don’t see it anywhere near as prestigious as it used to be.

Liverpool have been in 4 finals under this format. They wouldn’t have got close to 1 final under the 99 format, and that’s assuming they’d finish top 2 in England to qualify in the first place.

Originally Posted by Jammy Dodger

Tottenham will absolutely shit the bed. 3-0 down inside half an hour.

Liverpool think they belong. Spurs are spurs.

Yep

Spurs...

£#%&!ing Spurs.

Originally Posted by Jammy Dodger

The format of the champions league this past 15 years has made it a mockery. I don’t see it anywhere near as prestigious as it used to be.

Liverpool have been in 4 finals under this format. They wouldn’t have got close to 1 final under the 99 format, and that’s assuming they’d finish top 2 in England to qualify in the first place.

Isn't the format the same but with one extra round now?

Or do you mean the criteria to qualify?

Originally Posted by Jammy Dodger

The format of the champions league this past 15 years has made it a mockery. I don’t see it anywhere near as prestigious as it used to be.

Liverpool have been in 4 finals under this format. They wouldn’t have got close to 1 final under the 99 format, and that’s assuming they’d finish top 2 in England to qualify in the first place.

Liverpool won it four times in a format that allowed byes

Originally Posted by Buck

Liverpool won it four times in a format that allowed byes

When they won it in 1978 they played 7 games and lost 2 of those.

Can we have a champions league final build up thread? Its got serious potential for flights being cancelled, tickets being robbed, crying scousers, spanish plod waving batons

Originally Posted by waynes ear's

Can we have a champions league final build up thread? Its got serious potential for flights being cancelled, tickets being robbed, crying scousers, spanish plod waving batons

Yes. Just press the new thread button

Wonder if earsy did.......

Originally Posted by Clownbones

Isn't the format the same but with one extra round now?

Or do you mean the criteria to qualify?

The criteria to qualify is one. But it’s also the group stage.

In 99 there were 6 groups with only the group winners and 2 best runners up qualifying for the next round. This meant every game had tension and attacking football was encouraged. You couldn’t afford a bad result. Now, you can lose 3 group games and still qualify. Think Liverpool lost their first 3 group games in 2007 before then reaching the final. They’d have been dead and buried under the 99 format. Inconsistent teams had no chance.

And not to mention the groups are more diluted now compared to then. United in a group with Barca and Bayern Munich, and only group winners guaranteed to qualify. Miles better than the format today. If they must have more than 24 teams in it, then it should be, say, 12 groups of 4 with group winners and 4 best runners up going though. But the biggest clubs just want a procession with minimised risk.

Originally Posted by Jammy Dodger

The criteria to qualify is one. But it’s also the group stage.

In 99 there were 6 groups with only the group winners and 2 best runners up qualifying for the next round. This meant every game had tension and attacking football was encouraged. You couldn’t afford a bad result. Now, you can lose 3 group games and still qualify. Think Liverpool lost their first 3 group games in 2007 before then reaching the final. They’d have been dead and buried under the 99 format. Inconsistent teams had no chance.

And not to mention the groups are more diluted now compared to then. United in a group with Barca and Bayern Munich, and only group winners guaranteed to qualify. Miles better than the format today. If they must have more than 24 teams in it, then it should be, say, 12 groups of 4 with group winners and 4 best runners up going though. But the biggest clubs just want a procession with minimised risk.

That group stage format you’re harking back to only happened for 2 years

Before that, the top 2 from the group progressed. And after those 2 years, the top 2 from the group progressed again.

So are you saying those 2 years were the only prestigious years in the history of the CL??

Originally Posted by Buck

Liverpool won it four times in a format that allowed byes

I’ve spoken to plenty of scousers who spout on about how it was a real tournament back then because “only champions” were in it. Nothing about the fact that half those “champions” came from places like £#%&!ing Malta. There were probably three or four proper contenders in the whole competition. They may as well have started the thing in the semis.

It’s no shock every other set of supporters hates them.

1977
1st Round - Crusaders 2-0, 5-0 (7-0)
2nd Round - Tabzonspor 0-1, 3-0 (3-1)
Quarter-Final - St Etienne 0-1, 3-1 (3-2)
Semi-Final - FC Zurich 3-1, 3-0 (6-1)
Final - Borussia Moenchengladbach 3-1
WINNERS

Originally Posted by Jammy Dodger

The criteria to qualify is one. But it’s also the group stage.

In 99 there were 6 groups with only the group winners and 2 best runners up qualifying for the next round. This meant every game had tension and attacking football was encouraged. You couldn’t afford a bad result. Now, you can lose 3 group games and still qualify. Think Liverpool lost their first 3 group games in 2007 before then reaching the final. They’d have been dead and buried under the 99 format. Inconsistent teams had no chance.

And not to mention the groups are more diluted now compared to then. United in a group with Barca and Bayern Munich, and only group winners guaranteed to qualify. Miles better than the format today. If they must have more than 24 teams in it, then it should be, say, 12 groups of 4 with group winners and 4 best runners up going though. But the biggest clubs just want a procession with minimised risk.

I’m all for minimising the scousers’ achievements but this year’s Champions League has been the most exciting and dramatic tournament in recent memory. Some of the games have been ludicrous. Don’t see the point in us being salty about it because we’re shit.

Originally Posted by Knockers

I’m all for minimising the scousers’ achievements but this year’s Champions League has been the most exciting and dramatic tournament in recent memory. Some of the games have been ludicrous. Don’t see the point in us being salty about it because we’re shit.

Only in the KO rounds really

jammy’s Point is fair I think. The competition group stage is set up to allow the big clubs the safety net to £#%&! up and still go through. Not sure what the alternative is though. It is after all meant to be a league and not a KO cup competition.

Remember one year (92?) when teams did the ko rounds first and then it was just two groups and top team from each one went into the final. Was mental. Rangers fans still say they got to the semis because they finished second in their group

Originally Posted by Switching Off

Yes. Just press the new thread button

Originally Posted by Ethers

So are you saying those 2 years were the only prestigious years in the history of the CL??

No. I’m saying it became easier under the current format, compared to all formats prior. Whether it be qualification criteria to get in the competition or groups with diluted quality and two qualifying from them.

I found it more prestigious prior to the change to the current system, as it felt like the winners had earned the title of best team in Europe, whereas now it feels more like winning a European wide FA cup.

Originally Posted by Knockers

I’m all for minimising the scousers’ achievements but this year’s Champions League has been the most exciting and dramatic tournament in recent memory.

You mean there’s been 3 or 4 exciting games in the knockouts. Big whoop. The fact it stands out says enough. But a few exciting games in the knockout stages is irrelevant to the point I made.

Originally Posted by Buck

Liverpool won it four times in a format that allowed byes

It was hard for an individual club to win back then because it was difficult to qualify. Liverpool wouldn’t have played in it for the past 29 years, never mind reaching finals or winning it.

Originally Posted by Jammy Dodger

No. I’m saying it became easier under the current format, compared to all formats prior. Whether it be qualification criteria to get in the competition or groups with diluted quality and two qualifying from them.

I found it more prestigious prior to the change to the current system, as it felt like the winners had earned the title of best team in Europe, whereas now it feels more like winning a European wide FA cup.



You mean there’s been 3 or 4 exciting games in the knockouts. Big whoop. The fact it stands out says enough. But a few exciting games in the knockout stages is irrelevant to the point I made.



It was hard for an individual club to win back then because it was difficult to qualify. Liverpool wouldn’t have played in it for the past 29 years, never mind reaching finals or winning it.

So in the past it was harder to qualify, but much easier to win once you qualified. And now it’s the opposite. Can agree with that.

I disagree that it was more prestigious though. Certainly more enigmatic because we weren’t bombarded with 200+ matches each season.

Regardless of format though, winner is still officially the best team in Europe

Topic: The Brick Wall of Perfection

https://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum...topic=342946.0

MADRID CRIME WARNING (pick-pockets)

https://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum...topic=342951.0

both posted without a hint of irony

£#%&!ing @#%&!s

Originally Posted by waynes ear's

Topic: The Brick Wall of Perfection

https://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum...topic=342946.0

MADRID CRIME WARNING (pick-pockets)

https://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum...topic=342951.0

both posted without a hint of irony

£#%&!ing @#%&!s

Never been targeted by pickpockets. Makes me wonder if I look like a tramp.

Originally Posted by shenwen

So in the past it was harder to qualify, but much easier to win once you qualified. And now it’s the opposite. Can agree with that.

It may be harder to win now when qualified, than it was back n the 70s/80s, but it’s still easier than all previous formats of the champions league. It’s not only even easier to qualify for the competition compared to 20 years ago, but it’s also easier to get through to the knockout stages. This format of the past 15 years or so allows weaker or more inconsistent teams to get lucky. That was highly unlikely to happen under previous formats of the champions league, so the winners had a more genuine claim to being the best team in Europe, and it felt like it.

Regardless of format though, winner is still officially the best team in Europe

How can teams who’ve not won their domestic title for 29 and 40+ years be officially the best team in Europe? That’s why it’s lost prestige. It’s like saying Wigan were the best team in England when they won the fa cup.

The current format is to to weaken the competitiveness of domestic leagues, weaken the prestige of the domestic cups, and be a stepping stone to a European league.