The mancityfans.net football forum

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/arsenal/11151877/Arsenal-hit-with-Champions-League-blow-as-only-Premier-League-winners-will-be-guaranteed-top-seed-status.html

How is this kind of thing possible?

I thought the whole coefficient system was a stich up to ensure the big clubs got guaranteed easy fixtures through to the knock out stages and UEFA needed their permission to make any changes.

Apparently this was all agreed in May but I can't work out how it would be allowed.

What is missing?

Makes it a lot simpler doesn't it! Teams finishing 1st, second and third go into the Pot 1, 2 and 3, the rest qualify and fight it out to get into Pot 4.
not sure if the top 7 leagues all have top 3 qualifying?

I agree, something's missing.
This is all too logical, fair and transparent for Platini and his mates.
Maybe there's some rule been put in place that makes it illegal/impossible for City to win the league.

It was also reported on BBC Manchester this morning that yhey are considering adding debt reduction as a criteria under FFP. Only considering, mind.....

Hutch's Shoulder wrote:It was also reported on BBC Manchester this morning that yhey are considering adding debt reduction as a criteria under FFP. Only considering, mind.....

David Gill will put a stop to that stupid idea

Scatman wrote:

Hutch's Shoulder wrote:It was also reported on BBC Manchester this morning that yhey are considering adding debt reduction as a criteria under FFP. Only considering, mind.....

David Gill will put a stop to that stupid idea

Spot on.

Why is this happening now? Well I think the whole of football is groaning at the repetitive nature of the draw. Mustn't kill the goose that lays the golden egg, so even they have to react eventually.

There will be an 'Arsenal/Barca/Real' clause that ensures they always get in pot 1 no matter what.

If the Rags get back to top 4 they'll be added to the clause too.

Probably replacing the team who finish 1st in the prem (us) ;-)

Twobob wrote:There will be an 'Arsenal/Barca/Real' clause that ensures they always get in pot 1 no matter what.

If the Rags get back to top 4 they'll be added to the clause too.

Probably replacing the team who finish 1st in the prem (us) ;-)

Finalists of the last ten years will be covered, that gets the Scousers in too. At this rate, we'll have to play a qualifier after winning the league.

Maybe Uefa know that City are here to stay and are already starting to cosy up to them. City will be one of the main driving forces of this change definitely.

What good news.

We will.probably never win the league again.
City. Super city. In pot 4.

Cheers

Wonderwall wrote:Makes it a lot simpler doesn't it! Teams finishing 1st, second and third go into the Pot 1, 2 and 3, the rest qualify and fight it out to get into Pot 4.
not sure if the top 7 leagues all have top 3 qualifying?

I'd like to read more about this. Can you/anyone provide a link to where you found that? The link in the OP just says who goes into Pot 1.

PSG have bent his ear !

It does signal that there is some element of concern from the media/sponsors, as most of the rules around the composition of the groups and the fixture schedule of each group were designed by the media/sponsors to allow them to not have two 'mega games' clash on the same night to maximise their advertising exposure.

Without seeding, you could very easily end up with a group of Bayern, City, PSG, Real Madrid if the leagues finish as they stand today - now for me as a fan, that excites me as it means the group will be really competetive and stop the utter shite we see in the group stages now, although there will probably be an equal number of shit groups.

When you think about it logically, the fans of each of those clubs is still going to watch just as many hours of advertising (of course the football is irrelevant) regardless what group they are in. But equally, people are more likely to tune in to watch additional coverage of big ties the shite that's often served up these days, and by default they will stay tuned to watch the rest of the program and thus be sold to for another hour.

If the manipulation of the draw to avoid clubs from the same country was binned, that could make for some really tasty groups, and I reckon I could finally be tempted to watch the champions league group stages on TV, which I currently refuse to do

Im_Spartacus wrote:It does signal that there is some element of concern from the media/sponsors, as most of the rules around the composition of the groups and the fixture schedule of each group were designed by the media/sponsors to allow them to not have two 'mega games' clash on the same night to maximise their advertising exposure.

Without seeding, you could very easily end up with a group of Bayern, City, PSG, Real Madrid if the leagues finish as they stand today - now for me as a fan, that excites me as it means the group will be really competetive and stop the utter shite we see in the group stages now, although there will probably be an equal number of shit groups.

When you think about it logically, the fans of each of those clubs is still going to watch just as many hours of advertising (of course the football is irrelevant) regardless what group they are in. But equally, people are more likely to tune in to watch additional coverage of big ties the shite that's often served up these days, and by default they will stay tuned to watch the rest of the program and thus be sold to for another hour.

If the manipulation of the draw to avoid clubs from the same country was binned, that could make for some really tasty groups, and I reckon I could finally be tempted to watch the champions league group stages on TV, which I currently refuse to do

Good points, but I really despair that we have to think so much about this commercial crap when watching football!

Hutch's Shoulder wrote:

Im_Spartacus wrote:It does signal that there is some element of concern from the media/sponsors, as most of the rules around the composition of the groups and the fixture schedule of each group were designed by the media/sponsors to allow them to not have two 'mega games' clash on the same night to maximise their advertising exposure.

Without seeding, you could very easily end up with a group of Bayern, City, PSG, Real Madrid if the leagues finish as they stand today - now for me as a fan, that excites me as it means the group will be really competetive and stop the utter shite we see in the group stages now, although there will probably be an equal number of shit groups.

When you think about it logically, the fans of each of those clubs is still going to watch just as many hours of advertising (of course the football is irrelevant) regardless what group they are in. But equally, people are more likely to tune in to watch additional coverage of big ties the shite that's often served up these days, and by default they will stay tuned to watch the rest of the program and thus be sold to for another hour.

If the manipulation of the draw to avoid clubs from the same country was binned, that could make for some really tasty groups, and I reckon I could finally be tempted to watch the champions league group stages on TV, which I currently refuse to do

Good points, but I really despair that we have to think so much about this commercial crap when watching football!

Agreed, an excellent post that makes lots of sense.

Scatman wrote:

Hutch's Shoulder wrote:It was also reported on BBC Manchester this morning that yhey are considering adding debt reduction as a criteria under FFP. Only considering, mind.....

David Gill will put a stop to that stupid idea

On the other hand, EUFA might consider bringing in new regulations which make it obligatory for Clubs to massively increase ticket prices, in order to reduce debt levels.

So, more importantly, who is this Gianni Infantino. I'd never heard of him before today, and he seems to be looking at things without the usual agenda. Has democracy broken out in waffaland, and more importantly, has M. Platini been guillotined.

patrickblue wrote:So, more importantly, who is this Gianni Infantino. I'd never heard of him before today, and he seems to be looking at things without the usual agenda. Has democracy broken out in waffaland, and more importantly, has M. Platini been guillotined.

Infantino is the UeFA General Secretary. The bald guy who was prominent in the CL draw.

Not sure about any of this as it goes against the grain of recent UeFA stuff, especially when we consider there are noises to count debt towards the FFPRs. Both of these moves would severely damage the elite clubs who have controlled UeFA increasingly since the 1990s.

I have separated this post as it is mainly considered specuation which I though might be useful to chick into the mix.

The common perception seems to be that UeFa have always been the bad boys acting on behalf of the old G14. This is not necessarily always the case. There have been a number of battles between the G14 and Uefa, many of which UeFA have lost due to court rulings and/or coercion from the G14. Sometimes UeFA have managed to dilute the more hard line demands of the G!4 (now ECA).

We know that the the current powerful clubs have been discussing a new breakaway league, probably set for 2018 when the current "Memorandum of Understanding finishes and it is highly likely that UeFA are now moving to stop it, We know that the G14 ideally want 20 clubs to set this up and there are 11 clubs definitely in favour of a Euro super league and we know their reasons. Those reasons don't necessarily hold up for other clubs and without other clubs' support, a super league would fail before it began

Attacking debt and equalising the coefficients would benefit all but the most greedy and powerful and may be enough to stop othe club's support for a breakaway.

Any breakaway would need a serious TV deal to sustain it, so ultimately Sky and/or BT would decide if it's feasible or not. Chelsea's last home CL game on Sky (in competition with us on ITV) apparently drew an audience of around 500k - not promising.

We drew some criticism for having a low crowd for our game against Roma. It was still one of the biggest attendances in Europe that night. Is it that audiences for football are reaching saturation point? Are fans fed up of the same teams playing each other with a lack of variety? If so funding a breakaway would be risky.

In Europe at least, I don't see many "new" fans emerging. You have your club, you might take an interest in other clubs, but, you certainly aren't going to pay through the nose for the "privilege". So, that leaves Asia and the USA. Just a thought, should any breakaway be dependent on US and Asian viewers stumping up to watch them, how long would it be before one of the franchises re-located?