Is there a question to be asked about the honesty of the CL?

orourkeda

Drumpot wrote: »

Any player that approaches the ref to dispute a free should be carded unless its the captain.

Any player who shows an imaginary yellow, gets a yellow (and offending player should get off his yellow unless its a red).

Any player in a high profile match who is subsequently proven to cheat in anyway, gets an automatic 1 game ban. 2 if they have been found guilty of this act in the past.

As for the ref being bought by Barca, dont make me laugh. Thats just downright ridiculous. Refs have good and bad games. Sometimes they favour the home teams , sometimes the away ones. Managers try to influence the kind of decisions they will give by giving them warnings in pre match interviews, but its up to the refs to keep themselves impartial.

I dont think either team came out with any credit after the game. Messis genius goals did not absolve his team of awful cheating antics. Uefa have to start attacking the cheating culture that seems to be on a differant level in Spanish football if yesterdays game is anything to go by.

I know people who scouted for a premier league club for a while and the young players on their books were encouraged to cheat (dive, feign injury). It's now a part of professional football. Doesn;t mean we have to like it but it is endemic.

orourkeda

NekkidBibleMan wrote: »

There's a magic bullet to solve all of this, of course: video technology. Would Busquets, Alves and Pedro roll around the pitch for 90 minutes if the ref could view each foul? Would Marcelo and Arbeloa sneakily stamp on other players? Would the entire Barca team surround the ref to intimidate him, if he could view an incident from multiple angles in super slow motion?

Won't happen, though. FIFA and UEFA will trundle on, ignoring what has fast become the norm in virtually every other major sport in the world, and losing fans because of it.

Video technology is a no brainer really. It's now a must. However, Sepp Blatters response to it around the time of the last world cup when he said that controversial decisions give fans talking points, reminds me of a guinness ad a while back where the barman throws the TV into a dump and says to his customers "now we have something to talk about"

Gerty

The Refs favoring Barca is a load of ****e. I've no doubt that Jose is gearing up his players before each match to be as aggressive as possible. To be in their faces. And there is a certain amount of frustration as well on RM's players part, such as the ramos sending off in the 5-0.

You could see Jose's smug smile in the 1-1 after Albiol was sent off for dragging down Villa i think it was in the box. Albiol had got himself is a crap position, misjudged the ball and had his arms around Villa's neck. Sure Villa probably moved into him then and went down easy but still a blatant penalty. Jose had been banging about his penalty conspiracy and now he was proved right. In my opinion, he's doing all this for an excuse when he loses, and in the hope that while his players are tackling so aggressively that one referee will be too afraid to take out that red card.

Like Drumpot said "Any player that approaches the ref to dispute a free should be carded unless its the captain". Barca surround the referee like a pack of dogs at every chance in particular. Yellow card should be mandatory. Every league where possible should have a review panel for simulation(I know it has happened on rare occasions). The champions league should be the pilot programme for where it is done consistently next season. They certainly have the resources. Couple it with severe public punishments.

At the end of the day, blaming referees is a cop out. They only have their natural eye to see it once. And on occasions like last night, they'll have 60,000 fans screaming at them to make a decision, and 60,000 again if they're not happy with it. It's already a tough enough job without players trying to cheat them every few minutes of the game. The referee would get an awful lot more decisions correct if the players weren't throwing themselves to the ground. If it was played fair, the outcome would often be a lot more fairer. I know its naive to hope to achieve that, but by f**king them over with punishments when you can, it will do a lot to reduce it.

P.s, one thing that does piss me off though is the suspension system, if you get one yellow in the 1st knockout match and the second semi final you miss the final, load of balls.

OhNoYouDidn't

Neil3030 wrote: »

And restrict access to European Football/funds to a handful of clubs? What kind of absurd plutocratic idea is that?

But one of those clubs would have to be Irish every year....

kippy

Neil3030 wrote: »

And restrict access to European Football/funds to a handful of clubs? What kind of absurd plutocratic idea is that?

Handful of clubs?
It's restricted to a handful of clubs as it is.

gosplan

Gerty wrote: »

The Refs favoring Barca is a load of ****e. I've no doubt that Jose is gearing up his players before each match to be as aggressive as possible.

That applies to last night and the sending off for Inter last year

Arsenal played in a perfect spirit against Barcelona and still had Van Persie sent off. Chelsea forced them to concede 4 stonewall penalties (iirc) and were given none of them.

Gerty wrote: »

At the end of the day, blaming referees is a cop out.

Nope. Every match I watch now, I see an offside quickly followed by a pass played or a shot taken and I'm waiting for a yellow card which never comes.

The ref in that instance chose to change the application of the rules ... with 30 minutes to go ... in a Champions league knock out match ... with a player already on a yellow. You play the game one way for years and suddenly it's different because you're away to Barca.

Henning Ovrebo had one of the worst reffing matches ever in the Chelsea Barca match.

Blaming them is not a cop out.

pickarooney

I think the half-measure approach to a European league has run its course. By weighing the dice what we currently have is a de facto play off between the big European teams with the odd smaller team crashing the party. The latter is more of an annoyance than a pleasant surprise to the average fan.

They should just cut the bull**** and make a European super league with no promotion or relegation and all money split evenly between the 14 or so teams involved. This should result in a top-class competition where year on year each side has a genuine chance of success and the league format should dispense with the perennial whining that goes on about teams losing out on one bad decision.

The remainder of Europe's teams would then in turn be free to compete in their domestic leagues with something resembling a competitive competition playing out, again with a more even split of TV cash between the teams.

OhNoYouDidn't

pickarooney wrote: »

I think the half-measure approach to a European league has run its course. By weighing the dice what we currently have is a de facto play off between the big European teams with the odd smaller team crashing the party. The latter is more of an annoyance than a pleasant surprise to the average fan.

They should just cut the bull**** and make a European super league with no promotion or relegation and all money split evenly between the 14 or so teams involved. This should result in a top-class competition where year on year each side has a genuine chance of success and the league format should dispense with the perennial whining that goes on about teams losing out on one bad decision.

The remainder of Europe's teams would then in turn be free to compete in their domestic leagues with something resembling a competitive competition playing out, again with a more even split of TV cash between the teams.

Sounds horrific. No thanks.

What 14 do you pick? The current 14 would not be the same 14 of 5, 10, 20 years ago. Will it be the same 14 in 5, 10, 20 years? Would the fans of the clubs involved want it? Losing local derbies for trips across Europe instead to play the same teams every year.

rebel girl 15

Drumpot wrote: »

Any player that approaches the ref to dispute a free should be carded unless its the captain.

Any player who shows an imaginary yellow, gets a yellow (and offending player should get off his yellow unless its a red).

Any player in a high profile match who is subsequently proven to cheat in anyway, gets an automatic 1 game ban. 2 if they have been found guilty of this act in the past.
.

I'd agree with all of it, except the part in bold - if a player does something to deserve a yellow by the letter of the law, then they still have to be punished. It was also mentioned that the refs should be miked so that everyone can hear, I'd agree with this too.

Bodhisopha

I have my doubts about the honesty of the CL draws in the latter stages. A certain English club always seem to land on the easier side of the draw.

IRISHSPORTSGUY

I'm sick of the crap about Chelsea in the CL semi two years ago. If the ref was so biased, why the hell did he (wrongly) send Abidal off? A fact often glossed over by the conspiracy theorists. :rolleyes: Incompetant yes, corrupt no.

OhNoYouDidn't

IRISHSPORTSGUY wrote: »

I'm sick of the crap about Chelsea in the CL semi two years ago. If the ref was so biased, why the hell did he (wrongly) send Abidal off? A fact often glossed over by the conspiracy theorists. :rolleyes: Incompetant yes, corrupt no.

And its never been explained WHY UEFA would bother picking on Chelsea.

MUSEIST

IRISHSPORTSGUY wrote: »

I'm sick of the crap about Chelsea in the CL semi two years ago. If the ref was so biased, why the hell did he (wrongly) send Abidal off? A fact often glossed over by the conspiracy theorists. :rolleyes: Incompetant yes, corrupt no.

Intersting why abidal felt the need to admit afterwards that he did thug on anelkas shirt, hmmmm.

http://www.tribalfootball.com/articles/abidal-admits-bringing-anelka-down-cl-semi-final-243176

MUSEIST

Bodhisopha wrote: »

I have my doubts about the honesty of the CL draws in the latter stages. A certain English club always seem to land on the easier side of the draw.

Who are you talking about, for clarity

Its not arsenal, its not chelsea (they always get the side that goes onto win it) ??????

IRISHSPORTSGUY

MUSEIST wrote: »

Intersting why abidal felt the need to admit afterwards that he did thug on anelkas shirt, hmmmm.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX4S0CyRRpI

See 6:27. Well it looks like Anelka clearly fell over himself to me!

But if he did get a deft yet significant touch, fair enough. The main sentiment still stands though - if the ref was so biased why didn't he turn a blind eye? There was also a debatable hand ball by Ballack from Messi. And Henry had a stonewaller denied at the Nou Camp. If the UEFA officials were so pro-Barca, they did a bloody good job at hiding it.

It was Sky Sports and the British media that were (naturally) biased, not UEFA.

MUSEIST

IRISHSPORTSGUY wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX4S0CyRRpI

See 6:27. Well it looks like Anelka clearly fell over himself to me!

But if he did get a deft yet significant touch, fair enough. The main sentiment still stands though - if the ref was so biased why didn't he turn a blind eye? There was also a debatable hand ball by Ballack from Messi. And Henry had a stonewaller denied at the Nou Camp. If the officials and UEFA were so pro-Barca, they did a bloody good job at hiding it.

It was Sky Sports and the British media that were (naturally) biased, not UEFA.

I don't think the officials are pro barca, on that night they were just pure incompetent on a epic level tbh.
Not corupt, just useless

pickarooney

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Sounds horrific. No thanks.

What 14 do you pick? The current 14 would not be the same 14 of 5, 10, 20 years ago. Will it be the same 14 in 5, 10, 20 years? Would the fans of the clubs involved want it? Losing local derbies for trips across Europe instead to play the same teams every year.

Whichever clubs bid highest for the places. It wouldn't necessarily have to be 14 or even current clubs. Franchises could be sold to the larger urban areas, for example.

OhNoYouDidn't

pickarooney wrote: »

Whichever clubs bid highest for the places. It wouldn't necessarily have to be 14 or even current clubs. Franchises could be sold to the larger urban areas, for example.

No

No

No

Horrific idea.

Einhard

pickarooney wrote: »

Whichever clubs bid highest for the places. It wouldn't necessarily have to be 14 or even current clubs. Franchises could be sold to the larger urban areas, for example.

That's a horrible idea. Basically what you're proposing is that we create a "super league" where the only criteria is the wealth of the owners? So QPR could potentially get in ahead of Man Utd and Bayern?

pickarooney

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

No

No

No

Horrific idea.

Sure, there'll be objections at the start, but so was there with squad numbers, names on shirts, foreign players, three points for a win, stadiums named after companies, non-champions in the Champions League... people get used to all this stuff quickly and forget about tradition when the benefits of more glamorous games are laid out for them.

rebel girl 15

Einhard wrote: »

That's a horrible idea. Basically what you're proposing is that we create a "super league" where the only criteria is the wealth of the owners? So QPR could potentially get in ahead of Man Utd and Bayern?

I agree that its a horrible idea - something that I don't think could happen, not the way that UEFA and FIFA are looking at owners coming into clubs and the new regulations as regards debt. I could see clubs going into financial ruin if there was a bidding system - ticket prices going sky high for fans and even worse attendances. A lot of extra cost would be associated with travel etc.

pickarooney wrote: »

Sure, there'll be objections at the start, but so was there with squad numbers, names on shirts, foreign players, three points for a win, stadiums named after companies, non-champions in the Champions League... people get used to all this stuff quickly and forget about tradition when the benefits of more glamorous games are laid out for them.

A lot of those had benefits imo, I can't see any benefit for clubs in bidding for the places - the actual best football teams might not be in it. Changing the system wouldn't allow the likes of Tottenham in like this season - causing a few upsets along the way. Yeah, they got beaten, but I think it was fantastic for their fans to get the chance to see their team in Europe. Maybe I'm being too sentimental with it - but bidding is the wrong way to go about it imo - maybe relegate it to the top two teams in each league rather than four or something like that

KrazeeEyezKilla

Neil3030 wrote: »

This argument was quite beautifully blown out of the water by Rafa Hoenigstein on Football Weekly in November, when Partizan played Shakhtar in the group stages.

"I'm sure the purists who only want champions in the Champions' League were glued to this one"

Neil3030 wrote: »

Guys, if they only let champions into the tournament, it would be shit!

This year, for example, you wouldn't have had Man Utd, Arsenal, Real Madrid, Spurs, Roma, Milan, Lyon or Schalke.

The only reason so many of the champions are sh!t is because of the CL. They'd be a lot stronger if there was a fairer system. Look at the great teams Ajax produced which wouldn't happen today. People seem to judge teams by their name leading to them viewing the likes of St Etienne or Red Star as crap as if this years Man Utd are really that much better.

OhNoYouDidn't

pickarooney wrote: »

Sure, there'll be objections at the start, but so was there with squad numbers, names on shirts, foreign players, three points for a win, stadiums named after companies, non-champions in the Champions League... people get used to all this stuff quickly and forget about tradition when the benefits of more glamorous games are laid out for them.

If you are going to seriously suggest that a breakaway franchise league would start the same level of debate as squad numbers, you are as daft as the idea.

Why on earth would UEFA allow this franchise league happen? What possible benefit is there to them and the sport in general?

How would the London Queens versus the West Spanish Bulls be more 'glamourous' than Arsenal v Barca?

parker kent

pickarooney wrote: »

I think the half-measure approach to a European league has run its course. By weighing the dice what we currently have is a de facto play off between the big European teams with the odd smaller team crashing the party. The latter is more of an annoyance than a pleasant surprise to the average fan.

They should just cut the bull**** and make a European super league with no promotion or relegation and all money split evenly between the 14 or so teams involved. This should result in a top-class competition where year on year each side has a genuine chance of success and the league format should dispense with the perennial whining that goes on about teams losing out on one bad decision.

The remainder of Europe's teams would then in turn be free to compete in their domestic leagues with something resembling a competitive competition playing out, again with a more even split of TV cash between the teams.

That would be a complete and utter disaster.

flahavaj

parker kent wrote: »

That would be a complete and utter disaster.

+1. I think I'd stop watching altogether, or at least my interest would be sorely diminished.

pickarooney

Einhard wrote: »

That's a horrible idea. Basically what you're proposing is that we create a "super league" where the only criteria is the wealth of the owners? So QPR could potentially get in ahead of Man Utd and Bayern?

It's just a more honest version of what we have now, which is essentially the same thing - a self-propogating system whereby the richest clubs qualify year after year, win the money, buy the players, qualify again ad nauseam.

rebel girl 15 wrote: »

I agree that its a horrible idea - something that I don't think could happen, not the way that UEFA and FIFA are looking at owners coming into clubs and the new regulations as regards debt. I could see clubs going into financial ruin if there was a bidding system - ticket prices going sky high for fans and even worse attendances. A lot of extra cost would be associated with travel etc.

UEFA could set the rules for bids, e.g. no tendering at over x% of the club's value. Clubs are constantly overstretching themselves as it is trying to qualify for the CL and failing. Under this system once you're in the league you're guaranteed a steady income.

A lot of those had benefits imo, I can't see any benefit for clubs in bidding for the places - the actual best football teams might not be in it. Changing the system wouldn't allow the likes of Tottenham in like this season - causing a few upsets along the way. Yeah, they got beaten, but I think it was fantastic for their fans to get the chance to see their team in Europe. Maybe I'm being too sentimental with it - but bidding is the wrong way to go about it imo - maybe relegate it to the top two teams in each league rather than four or something like that

Personally I can't see any benefit to the game whatsoever in having silly numbers, names all over the show, The Emirates stadium... fair enough on actual rules of the game which improved it, but the rest are 100% about money, let's not pretend otherwise.

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

If you are going to seriously suggest that a breakaway franchise league would start the same level of debate as squad numbers, you are as daft as the idea.

I would imagine, hope even that there would be a much more vociferous objection, but when all is said and done the old guard of fans are becoming less relevant and the new generation of low attention-spanners need shinier things to look at than, with respect, Stoke and Blackburn.

Why on earth would UEFA allow this franchise league happen? What possible benefit is there to them and the sport in general?

Money.

How would the London Queens versus the West Spanish Bulls be more 'glamourous' than Arsenal v Barca?

The precedent is there in American sports with franchises moving to suit the market. You'll find a lot of people daydream about combined Manchester sides or London all-star selections. It's just an idea though - The Man United and Real Madrid brands are strong enough that they would not need this kind of thing.

parker kent wrote: »

That would be a complete and utter disaster.

Well, there's no way of knowing until someone gives it a go. Don't forget, the up-side for traditional fans is a more competitive domestic league and UEFA cup.

flahavaj wrote: »

+1. I think I'd stop watching altogether, or at least my interest would be sorely diminished.

I've all but stopped watching as it is. European football is moribund in its current state.

dfx-

Is there this sort of reaction after every team wins ugly?

strawberryb0y

dfx- wrote: »

Is there this sort of reaction after every team wins ugly?

And it's not as if they were the ugliest team on the pitch.
The biggest disgrace last night were Mourinho's post match comments. A long touchline ban is in order.

OhNoYouDidn't

pickarooney wrote: »

It's just a more honest version of what we have now, which is essentially the same thing - a self-propogating system whereby the richest clubs qualify year after year, win the money, buy the players, qualify again ad nauseam.

No it isn't. Its a terrible idea. Clubs rise and fall all the time. Look at Juve. Look at Chelsea. One of the worlds biggest sides who fell very far and are in the process of rebuilding. A mid sized London club who are now a force. Its not in any way static.

pickarooney wrote: »

UEFA could set the rules for bids, e.g. no tendering at over x% of the club's value. Clubs are constantly overstretching themselves as it is trying to qualify for the CL and failing. Under this system once you're in the league you're guaranteed a steady income.

Terrible idea. The new rules coming in will deal with all that by the by.

pickarooney wrote: »

Personally I can't see any benefit to the game whatsoever in having silly numbers, names all over the show, The Emirates stadium... fair enough on actual rules of the game which improved it, but the rest are 100% about money, let's not pretend otherwise.

That will have to be translated, doesn't make sense.

pickarooney wrote: »

I would imagine, hope even that there would be a much more vociferous objection, but when all is said and done the old guard of fans are becoming less relevant and the new generation of low attention-spanners need shinier things to look at than, with respect, Stoke and Blackburn.

Fcuk them. In the advent of the tv age, there is always 'shiney' football on the box.

pickarooney wrote: »

Money.

They have the money trapped now. A breakaway league will threaten that.

pickarooney wrote: »

The precedent is there in American sports with franchises moving to suit the market. You'll find a lot of people daydream about combined Manchester sides or London all-star selections. It's just an idea though - The Man United and Real Madrid brands are strong enough that they would not need this kind of thing.

Who daydreams about this? Do you think Arsenal, Spurs, Chelsea, West Ham, Fulham, QPR, Millwall, Palace, Charlton, Brentford, Orient, Daggers etc fans will jack it in and follow the London Beefeaters? Will they fcuk. Celtic and Rangers following the Glasgow Haggis's? Milan and Inter the Milan Mafia?

There is a reason no franchises have happened in football. Look at Dublin City and Fingal. Fans don't attach to new entities like that. Forget about Irish bandwagon jumpers, they aren't reflective. To make this work people would have to abandon their current sides and start following these franchises and it won't happen.

pickarooney wrote: »

Well, there's no way of knowing until someone gives it a go. Don't forget, the up-side for traditional fans is a more competitive domestic league and UEFA cup.

But thats quite a shít deal. Lose the best players and CL footie for that? No thanks.

pickarooney wrote: »

I've all but stopped watching as it is. European football is moribund in its current state.

Well the billion odd people who tuned in last night would beg to differ.

chelseavera

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

And its never been explained WHY UEFA would bother picking on Chelsea.

We were the enemies of football who dared to tell the world about the halftime rendevouz between messers Frisk and Riikjard (sp?). Upstarts - go away ..... (Platini loves us really!!)