Laurel and Hardy . “It died of a Tuesday!”

100% agree, I don't mind England having an extra allocation as we have a stronger league. Same with many other. But how on earth, whilst we are fighting for equality and a just system, do many countries in Europe not even get an automatic spot for their champions. That for me is disgusting. How will these countries ever progress or improve themselves. It needs to be fair, The champions league should include every champion from every league, then they can make provisions for certain other leagues to have a few more spots as is done now..

Eh. Conversely I'd argue that allowing one team from every league then creates the feedback loop that leaves leagues in the state of the Bundesliga, Scottish Premier, France. Even worse probably. One team dominating everyone else with 0 chance of them catching up. 

Although I guess we like there being an illusion of someone else being able to take the place

Edited April 21, 20215 yr by Stim

Just now, Stim said:

Eh. Conversely I'd argue that allowing one team from every league then creates the feedback loop that leaves leagues in the state of the Bundesliga, Scottish Premier, France. One team dominating everyone else with 0 chance of them catching up. 

Although I guess we like there be an illusion of someone else being able to take the place

I meant one team minimum. Then certain leagues based on their rating get extra spots. It protects the smaller countries out there who have champions that sometimes have to play 2 qualifiers just to get in. That in my opinion is ridiculous and uefa chasing the money

19 minutes ago, Oli said:

The champions league should include every champion from every league,

I disagree...I can barley walk up a set of stairs without a mid flight break and I guarantee I could walk into any Maltese team 🤣

 

40 minutes ago, Malta Blue said:

I disagree...I can barley walk up a set of stairs without a mid flight break and I guarantee I could walk into any Maltese team 🤣

That is a good point and shows there is a little more to this selection than just being a country. T

They must have some football history and likley their facilities will need to be improved.

 

Apparently from the protests yesterday,

3 hours ago, Spurs in peace said:

Will probably be my only post.

You guys did football proud last night. 
As a Tottenham supporter it takes a lot to say this, but I unconditionally applaud you.

But Enough of this sentimentality,  we have our own battle now in trying to hound our owners out over their part in this. 

But well done guys,  new found respect

I would of given you a love heart icon thing but I have recently found out after I got a bit trigger happy last night that there is a limited supply and I dont want to waste one on a spud....no offence so you get a whole reply instead.

I dont think they are limited

33 minutes ago, Zeta said:

Apparently from the protests yesterday,

I would love it for that to be true.

 

1 hour ago, Argo said:

 

How far does this go though? For example imagine an example where Manchester United are relegated but were also one of the 2 clubs with the highest coefficient that failed to qualify. That would mean they got in the Champions League despite being relegated from their domestic league. In other words if a team knows they have a high club coefficient, and is having an indifferent league season, they can probably risk sliding in the league (prioritizing cup/europe for example) rather than worry about the chase for top 4, knowing that they still get a free entry. Hopefully an entry via this spot will at least require that these teams participate in the earliest stages of qualification. It would be ridiculous if a team qualifying this way gets fast tracked ahead of a champion from a country with a lower league coefficient.

I'm still pretty upset that Chelsea even agreed to join this farce. I know CST is calling for action to be taken against members of the board and I think that they are correct in that request/demand.

The whole point of the Champions League is to reward those teams who finished the top of their leagues, and to reward clubs based on coefficient when they haven't earned the right to compete is asinine, but not surprising. Let's not forget the corruption at UEFA and FIFA prior to this and they are just as guilty and shameful as the whole ESL.

I didn't really think that Chelsea would do something that would make me this upset at them, but they have done it. The lack of an apology to all supporters has not escaped me and it is pretty ridiculous that they couldn't do that; the bare minimum. I want to continue to show support for the the first team, the manager, the academy, and the women's team but at the same time I'm at that point where I want the board to know how disgusted I am with their actions the last few days. 

7 minutes ago, forbzy said:

How far does this go though? For example imagine an example where Manchester United are relegated but were also one of the 2 clubs with the highest coefficient that failed to qualify. That would mean they got in the Champions League despite being relegated from their domestic league. In other words if a team knows they have a high club coefficient, and is having an indifferent league season, they can probably risk sliding in the league (prioritizing cup/europe for example) rather than worry about the chase for top 4, knowing that they still get a free entry. Hopefully an entry via this spot will at least require that these teams participate in the earliest stages of qualification. It would be ridiculous if a team qualifying this way gets fast tracked ahead of a champion from a country with a lower league coefficient.

Yup. Honestly at that point I would rather we opt out of playing in any of their competitions as that is bang unfair as well.

Now Joel Goazer has apologised to Uniteds fans. 

Just leave Spurs, City and Ourselves who have not.

2 hours ago, Malta Blue said:

I disagree...I can barley walk up a set of stairs without a mid flight break and I guarantee I could walk into any Maltese team 🤣

Ye listen i agree, maybe certain countries who have teams with a quality so bad, shouldnt, but a lot of other countries should. This is no different from the super league saying they dont want to watch Burnley vs Man Utd, they want Real Madrid vs Man Utd. Basically Uefa need to sort it out, because as it is they were pandering to the rich and elite a little too much with this new format, ESL just took it to the extremes. 

So what will be the punishment? Point deduction, relegation, European ban?

11 minutes ago, dansubrosa said:

So what will be the punishment? Point deduction, relegation, European ban?

PL group are said to want to punish the boards not the fans or players.

Sounds like executives from all 6 clubs, including our own Bruce Buck, have been asked to step down from their duties.

4 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

PL group are said to want to punish the boards not the fans or players.

Sounds like executives from all 6 clubs, including our own Bruce Buck, have been asked to step down from their duties.

Yeah it sounds like the supporters trust want Buck and Lawrence to resign.

11 hours ago, coco said:

@Vanitas @Stretford Ender

I doubt it. Woodward is hated. He's already trying to rehabilitate hos reputation. Jamie Jackson (who else) has already started the process in today's Guardian. Whilst I have no doubt that the Glazers were the prime movers, Woodward was hip-deep in it and had the ESL been successful, he would have been at the front of the queue for a pat on the head. He's a snake all right. Now we're hoping the Glazers decide to sell but knowing them, they will be re-thinking the ESL plan and will come back. Remember the 'Big Picture' proposal from a few months ago? They backed off that only to return with ESL. These people want franchise football and so, I suspect, do other owners. I had to laugh at Burnley's smackdown of the ESL plans. Their CEO was installed at Turf Moore after a leveraged buyout that put another solvent club deep in the red.

We don't know who pushed for this I'm guessing there were a number of executives that voted on this. Buck might have voted against it yet lost out in the vote.

We just don't know. 

Just now, Stretford Ender said:

I doubt it. Woodward is hated. He's already trying to rehabilitate hos reputation. Jamie Jackson (who else) has already started the process in today's Guardian. Whilst I have no doubt that the Glazers were the prime movers, Woodward was hip-deep in it and had the ESL been successful, he would have been at the front of the queue for a pat on the head. He's a snake all right. Now we're hoping the Glazers decide to sell but knowing them, they will be re-thinking the ESL plan and will come back. Remember the 'Big Picture' proposal from a few months ago? They backed off that only to return with ESL. These people want franchise football and so, I suspect, do other owners. I had to laugh at Burnley's smackdown of the ESL plans. Their CEO was installed at Turf Moore after a leveraged buyout that put another solvent club deep in the red.

I really hope you guys push Glaziers out of the club. Just like I hope the rest of big 6 do, especially American owners, they need to f*ck off.

Just now, Strider6003 said:

We don't know who pushed for this I'm guessing there were a number of executives that voted on this. Buck might have voted against it yet lost out in the vote.

We just don't know. 

I doubt it, he defended the club’s decision to join ESL at a fan forum.

I was thinking about some of the places we are forced to play-in, recall that final in Baku, Azerbaijan. That is right on the Caspian Sea and a former Soviet Republic with large oil deposits.

So I think there is political influence and I suspect some of the funds we think go to the fat cats are going to build stadiums in places like Baku for geopolitical reasons, not saying there are not FIFA or UEFA execs lining their pockets yet take into account likley political projects.