It?s good enough of a system to decide who spends an entire season in the league above, so why not for a place in the champions league? The logistics would need to be ironed out, but surely a system where the top 2 (Man U, Chelsea) automatically qualify for the ECL and the teams in league places 3-6 play off for the last 2 champions league spots, and the 2 (normally) UEFA Cup spots? Sure, a team from 6th place MAY qualify for the ECL ? but a team in 6th in the championships MAY win promotion to the premier league. What?s the difference? If anything, my proposed system is less ?risky? because the team who wins the ECL spot from 6th will only have a handful of games (6 group games at most) in which to embarrass themselves, but a team who wins promotion from the 6th has 38 possibly painful games to endure the following season in the premier league.
I live in Australia so my exposure to Football discourse is limited, but surely this has been discussed before? Apologies if I?m revisiting an old (and dead?) issue but I can?t see why this idea doesn?t have merit.
For those who oppose it (probably fans of the Sky 4) may say that it will let ?lesser? teams enter the ECL, but that argument can flow through to the playoff system that we use for our other leagues so I don?t see it as a valid rebuttal.
Only 8 times in 128 (32 * 4) games were the Sky 4 defeated by one of the other 16 teams in the league (6%) ? surely that makes for as KK says, a boring league and the FA has the responsibility to make it fairer. Wouldn?t this system achieve that, or at least give the other 16 teams something more realistic to aim for? Of course, and probably, the 3rd and 4th teams would probably beat the 5th and 6th teams (as they should) but at least it gives the 5th and 6th teams a chance? and surely every so often there will be an upset and Everton, or Villa or Tottenham will win the ECL playoff and (assuming they negotiate the ECL qualifier) will be endowed with the 30mil that the Sky 4 take for granted.
This can only strengthen the competition in the long-run. Am I getting carried away by my own idea, or does anyone else think this idea has merit.
(Again, sorry if I?m rehashing a long dead issue that has already been discussed at length in England).
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
1 Posted 12/05/2008 at 16:21:57
So as a footballl fan it gets my vote but as an Evertonian I think I’ll decline.
2 Posted 12/05/2008 at 16:44:07
3 Posted 12/05/2008 at 17:08:54
I suspect the powers that be are happy to protect the closed shop money tree so it’ll never happen.
4 Posted 12/05/2008 at 17:12:24
Imagine the excitement of those play-off games as well as the increased excitement towards the end of the league season.
Surely the only objectors to such a system (which they have in Holland) would be the club that nearly always finishes fourth. I wonder who that could be.
5 Posted 12/05/2008 at 17:30:06
’Surely the only objectors to such a system (which they have in Holland) would be the club that nearly always finishes fourth. I wonder who that could be.’
Hopefully it will be us in the near future!!
6 Posted 12/05/2008 at 17:19:29
Part of the problem is that they let in too many teams. If only the champions qualified the teams that now comprise the Sky 4 would have to be much more careful with their big spending. With only one team guaranteed CL money, the next season’s revenue stream would be much more volatile. The league would then be much more fluid at the top.
Of course, this is all a pipe dream.
The old European Cup was fought over by the champion elite of each nation. And now we have the so-called Champion’s League. George Orwell would be impressed.
As for the playoff idea. I kind of like it. It would actually give the chance of diluting some of that CL money to the chasing teams. Don’t know what you would do if, say, a losing playoff team went on to win that year’s CL.
7 Posted 12/05/2008 at 17:50:48
I have searched everywhere and nowhere is there an apostrophe in Champions League.
Is there an expert in philology who might be able to explain this?
8 Posted 12/05/2008 at 17:57:05
They cannot, surely, be implying that every team in the competition is a champion? There is all manner of riff raff allowed entry...Liverpool has not won the league in almost 20 years.
9 Posted 12/05/2008 at 18:09:39
10 Posted 12/05/2008 at 18:35:12
Amontillados 5, brain cells -42,000.
11 Posted 12/05/2008 at 19:02:47
I think that this is probably pie in the sky, but we live in hope...
12 Posted 12/05/2008 at 20:16:20
13 Posted 12/05/2008 at 19:52:43
Eric Arthur Blair provided six rules for writers. You have contravened two.
* Never use a long word where a short one will do.
*Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
Perhaps you are trying to be particularly clever and referring to his service for the Republican side in the Spanish Civil War. If this be the case, I would argue that this particular aperitif is peculiar to southern Spain, and may not have been widely available in Catalonia, especially during war.
So, surely "sherry" should suffice.
14 Posted 14/05/2008 at 06:47:55
This from a Man who allowed, for filthy lucre, his name and face to adorn a Higsons beer mat.
I bet Gwladys Street still stays true to Higsons.
15 Posted 14/05/2008 at 15:32:14
Good idea and one I’ve never heard mention of before.
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment to Column articles, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and MailBag submissions across the site.