We're In Pot 2!!!

[southern softy]

UEFA regulations:
http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Dow ... WNLOAD.pdf

9.04 For the purpose of the draw, the 32 clubs involved in the group stage are
seeded into four groups of eight, in accordance with the club coefficient
ranking established at the beginning of the season (see 9.02). The titleholder
is always the top seed.

[southern softy]

I notice that Bert also has the baseline team coeffs for 2013 already set up.
http://kassiesa.home.xs4all.nl/bert/uef ... k2013.html

We are 21st, with points for the 12-13 season to be added.

[johnny crossan]

UEFA regulations:
http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Dow ... WNLOAD.pdf

9.04 For the purpose of the draw, the 32 clubs involved in the group stage are
seeded into four groups of eight, in accordance with the club coefficient
ranking established at the beginning of the season (see 9.02). The titleholder
is always the top seed.

indisputable proof thank you, apologies to all for my persistent error.

[southern softy]

btw for all those (like me) who thought that our Europa League involvement this season was a waste of time, those
points that we gained from the 3 wins against Porto and Sporting have got us into Pot 2.

[john68]

I notice that Bert also has the baseline team coeffs for 2013 already set up.
http://kassiesa.home.xs4all.nl/bert/uef ... k2013.html

We are 21st, with points for the 12-13 season to be added.

That ranking table is not accurate enough for our needs. The figures are correct, but some are missing. The rankings are calculated over 5 years, that listing only contains 4 years and the coefficient totals are therefore lower and misleading. It is a projection, waiting for the next set of figures to be added. It does show that when next season's calculations are made, we start from a much healthier position, because some clubs will lose a good year's figures from 5 years ago. It is also worth noting that as far as I understand it; quite a number of clubs directly above us have failed to qualify for any European competition next season and some (like Spurs) are only in the Europa league. As long as we have a decent run, we could/should jump up into the top 20.

Politically important for City is that last night's game means we will overtake Spurs in that list and should qualify for ORDINARY MEMBERSHIP of the ECA instead of being an Associated Member, thus increasing our political clout in the decision making.


1 BARCELONA.............157.837...CL
2 THE RAGS................141.857...CL
3 CHELSEA.................134.857...CL
4 BAYERN MUNICH.........132.003...CL
5 REAL MADRID............121.837...CL
6 ARSENAL.................113.857...CL
7 INTERNAZIONALE.......104.996...EURO
8 ATLETICO MADRID......100.837...EURO
9 PORTO....................98.069...CL
10 LYON .....................94.935...EURO
11 LIVERPOOL...............90.857...EURO
12 AC MILAN................89.996...CL
13 VALENCIA................89.837...CL
14 BENFICA..................87.069...CL
15 MARSEILLES.............85.835...EURO
16 SHAKHTAR..............84.026...CL
17 SPORTING LISBON......82.069...EURO
18 CSKA MOSCOW.........80.556...EURO
19 VILLARREAL.............79.837...NONE
20 ZENIT....................79.066...CL
21 SCHALKE................78.003...CL
22 PSV......................76.103...EURO
23 WERDER BREMEN......73.003...NONE
24 HAMBURG..............71.003...NONE
25 SEVILLE.................70.337...NONE
26 ROMA...................69.496...NONE
27 SPURS...................66.857...EURO
28 MAN CITY...............63.857...CL
29 BRAGA..................63.069...CL
30 FIORENTINA............62.996...NONE

That is the list used for the CL seeding and the CL draw. The Chelsea and Bayern totals have to be adjusted after last night's result.

[BlueinBosnia]

It is also worth noting that as far as I understand it; quite a number of clubs directly above us have failed to qualify for any European competition next season and some (like Spurs) are only in the Europa league. As long as we have a decent run, we could/should jump up into the top 20.

Politically important for City is that last night's game means we will overtake Spurs in that list and should qualify for ORDINARY MEMBERSHIP of the ECA instead of being an Associated Member, thus increasing our political clout in the decision making.

I'm pretty sure there's no weighting difference between CL and Europa with regard to accumulating coefficient points. Therefore, with a good run and the two extra games they would play as a result, Spurs could, theoretically at least, pull even further ahead of us. Also interesting to note is that Liverpool could potentially play six fixtures more if they go all the way to the final in comparison to a CL team achieving the same feat, which would do wonders for maintaining their coefficient...

[southern softy]

It is also worth noting that as far as I understand it; quite a number of clubs directly above us have failed to qualify for any European competition next season and some (like Spurs) are only in the Europa league. As long as we have a decent run, we could/should jump up into the top 20.

Politically important for City is that last night's game means we will overtake Spurs in that list and should qualify for ORDINARY MEMBERSHIP of the ECA instead of being an Associated Member, thus increasing our political clout in the decision making.

I'm pretty sure there's no weighting difference between CL and Europa with regard to accumulating coefficient points. Therefore, with a good run and the two extra games they would play as a result, Spurs could, theoretically at least, pull even further ahead of us. Also interesting to note is that Liverpool could potentially play six fixtures more if they go all the way to the final in comparison to a CL team achieving the same feat, which would do wonders for maintaining their coefficient...

CL is a big advantage.

CL group stage gets 4 points. CL last 16 gets 4 points.
You don't get that for EL.
And Spurs are not ahead of us for 2013 coeffs, they are behind us by 10 points.
And for Liverpool, the qualification rounds don't count for coeffs. It only starts at the group stage.

And...I think I'm becoming as sad as Bert on this bollocks. I need to get out more.

[john68]

Sorry SS but I think you misunderstand Pal.
The current list containing 5 years, is the one that will beused for this years seedings/pots etc when the next draw is made. The list showing us 10pts ahead of Spurs needs to have the coming competitions included and will be used for the following season.

It does show that we will have a much improved base for that season.

[BlueinBosnia]

It is also worth noting that as far as I understand it; quite a number of clubs directly above us have failed to qualify for any European competition next season and some (like Spurs) are only in the Europa league. As long as we have a decent run, we could/should jump up into the top 20.

Politically important for City is that last night's game means we will overtake Spurs in that list and should qualify for ORDINARY MEMBERSHIP of the ECA instead of being an Associated Member, thus increasing our political clout in the decision making.

I'm pretty sure there's no weighting difference between CL and Europa with regard to accumulating coefficient points. Therefore, with a good run and the two extra games they would play as a result, Spurs could, theoretically at least, pull even further ahead of us. Also interesting to note is that Liverpool could potentially play six fixtures more if they go all the way to the final in comparison to a CL team achieving the same feat, which would do wonders for maintaining their coefficient...

CL is a big advantage.

CL group stage gets 4 points. CL last 16 gets 4 points.
You don't get that for EL.
And Spurs are not ahead of us for 2013 coeffs, they are behind us by 10 points.
And for Liverpool, the qualification rounds don't count for coeffs. It only starts at the group stage.

And...I think I'm becoming as sad as Bert on this bollocks. I need to get out more.

I'm 99.99% sure that isn't true, hence the reason Welsh, Bosnian clubs, etc. have more coefficient points than their base 'National' score, despite having never qualified for the group stages.

[Swales4ever]

Politically important for City is that last night's game means we will overtake Spurs in that list and should qualify for ORDINARY MEMBERSHIP of the ECA instead of being an Associated Member, thus increasing our political clout in the decision making.

Sir John, I'd love if You expanded Your tought on the matter of Chelsea winning the Chumps being a plus for increasing City's political clout. I was tempted to foreseen a scenario of City taking Chelsea place among ECA establishment, so that, apperentely, it's no good for me, unless we don't expect Abramovich to retire upon fulfillment...
But I learnt to expect a proper understanding from Your wise self. so please kindly expand.

[john68]

Mancio,

At the time when Chelsea came on the scene, I think there was some discomfort within the elite and they did remain isolated. They were never invited to join the G14, which, at one point, led to the anomoly of having the 4th richest (Chelsea) outside whilst the 11th richest (Liverpool) were on the inside. Chelsea were invited to join but refused the invitation, just before the G14 was broken up and the ECA founded. Changes to the structure of the CL (4 English places) allowed Chelsea to be accommodated. I think the length of time they have been around and the comparable ease that allowed them to be accommodated, meant they were less of a threat and they have largely become accepted, though possibly still to some extent disliked in the corridors of power. They have been ORDINARY MEMBERS of the ECA since its foundation.

With City, I think it is a completely different scenario. Firstly, I think that the European powers are run by "Old men from the west" and I don't think they feel comfortable having Arabs arrive on the scene. Not obvious racism but certainly a culture shock. An attitude of: "It's ok doing business with them" but "Would you invite them round your house?" Different cultures, different attitudes that allows business but not friendship. (That should open a debate!!!)

It is all about money. They have created the channels of income and don't want to share it....with anyone (not just us). We are the most imminent threat but there are others following (Malaga, PSG and a host of Russian clubs). They MUST shut the door to safeguard their position. UeFA when alligned to the ECA is a powerful group and it has the political muscle of the European Commision backing them.

We can consider that we are politically friendless. Domestically, the Rags, Arsenal, Liverpool, Everton and Spurs have all made comments about us and our money so we know where we stand with them. KHR, Hoeness and Bayern as well as Napoli all criticised us and we have been attacked and criticised within UeFA and the European Commision.

As someone mentioned; the Rags, Arsenal, Chelsea, Spurs, Liverpool and City don't fit into 4 CL qualifying places and if they could bar us, they would be happy. Chelsea's win was important for us, as it puts us ahead of Spurs and should change our status within the ECA from ASSOCIATED MEMBER to ORDINARY MEMBER. At least we get a voice now.

Forget acceptance, that will never happen ("in my lifetime"). We can however get ourselves into a position where they have to deal with us. By becoming successful on the pitch at the highest level and having such financial muscle, they won't be able to ignore us. Our opponents are pragmatic businessmen, if they can't destroy us but can benefit financially/politically from us, they will deal with us.

[Swales4ever]

Thanks Sir John.
I am well convinced of every points You summoned in the first 4 sentences. I've been saying pretty almost the same for the last 2 years (including the uPC reference to "non wasp" amongst personae gratae).
But I still fail to get how the Chealsea acheivement of CL would help our case.
I mean:
1) You cannot seriously think at Spuds as a steady threat either for the establishment and/or for the City quest for re-establishing the establishment
2) Someone could argue that acheiving the ultimate prize/toy might get Zar Roman bored and willing to shift to another tool, but fact is that if they have lost, next season CFC would ahve been a team of overaged former glories outside the money machine.
At that stage there would have been just 2 options: either to allow them to splash a very serious amount of money despite having them a worser projection of sustainability than City or to shut the door behind them.
Would then have been easier or tougher for MCFC to be co-opted?

I have no doubts that City, in 2 years time shall reach a point when ECA won't have any choice bar ratify the inevitable.

p.s. the "wasp" reference is intended as humorous, I am aware that italian and Spanish are not ... :-D

[john68]

Though at first sight, the ECA appears to be all encompassing, there are three levels. Ordinary Membership, Associated Membership and No Fucling Membership.
Each country is allotted a quota of members for each level, dependent on the coefficients of their country. The clubs in each level depend on the individual club's coefficient. England have 5 Ordinary members' places...the rags, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool and Spurs. and 5 Associated Members' places...City, Villa, Fulham, Newcastle and Everton. It now looks certain that with Chelsea's result pushing Spurs into the Euro League, City will overtake them and move into England's 5th place...thus qualifying us for ordinary membership.

Though I am not wholly certain of the benefits, it does mean we will get a better voice within that organisation and a chance to be represented on committees within that organisation. City will undoubtedly be in a better position to influence decisions.

[john68]

The Wasp issue is one I have long considered Mate. Not just WASP, as both UeFA and the ECA are Europewide bodies. Even as City supporting cab driver who meets many diffrent fans from many different places, I have been confronted (affronted) by the definition of City's owners as "the fucking Arabs" or comments as "City are owned by fuckin Pakis". We would be very naive to think that in many less enlightened countries that attitudes would be any better, even at the highest level.

It may not be as obvious as the street level racism we encounter but I think it exists and does define certain attitudes towards us.

[Swales4ever]

Though at first sight, the ECA appears to be all encompassing, there are three levels. Ordinary Membership, Associated Membership and No Fucling Membership.
Each country is allotted a quota of members for each level, dependent on the coefficients of their country. The clubs in each level depend on the individual club's coefficient. England have 5 Ordinary members' places...the rags, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool and Spurs. and 5 Associated Members' places...City, Villa, Fulham, Newcastle and Everton. It now looks certain that with Chelsea's result pushing Spurs into the Euro League, City will overtake them and move into England's 5th place...thus qualifying us for ordinary membership.

Though I am not wholly certain of the benefits, it does mean we will get a better voice within that organisation and a chance to be represented on committees within that organisation. City will undoubtedly be in a better position to influence decisions.

I agree. But I miss to get where the Chealsea win of the Chumps benefit City quest to became Ordinary member. If I'm not mistaken they are establised on two years revision basis according to UEFA rankings (Country to determinate whose entitled to 5 OMs and Clubs to the select the best ranked in any Country). Next season City would have been ahead Spuds anyway.

[john68]

You may well be right mate but if Spurs had qualified for the CL and had a far better run than us, they could possibly have stayed ahead of us. not doing so, makes it much less likely.

[Swales4ever]

You may well be right mate but if Spurs had qualified for the CL and had a far better run than us, they could possibly have stayed ahead of us. not doing so, makes it much less likely.

You know, My Lord, I only care to sense myself in full understanding of Your wise Word.

[southern softy]

Sorry SS but I think you misunderstand Pal.
The current list containing 5 years, is the one that will beused for this years seedings/pots etc when the next draw is made. The list showing us 10pts ahead of Spurs needs to have the coming competitions included and will be used for the following season.

It does show that we will have a much improved base for that season.

I agree. No misunderstanding at all. Maybe my post wasn't clear.
I was trying to emphasise what a great position we are in to move up the rankings next year.
I think 15th is easily achievable and maybe we can do even better.

[southern softy]

It is also worth noting that as far as I understand it; quite a number of clubs directly above us have failed to qualify for any European competition next season and some (like Spurs) are only in the Europa league. As long as we have a decent run, we could/should jump up into the top 20.

Politically important for City is that last night's game means we will overtake Spurs in that list and should qualify for ORDINARY MEMBERSHIP of the ECA instead of being an Associated Member, thus increasing our political clout in the decision making.

I'm pretty sure there's no weighting difference between CL and Europa with regard to accumulating coefficient points. Therefore, with a good run and the two extra games they would play as a result, Spurs could, theoretically at least, pull even further ahead of us. Also interesting to note is that Liverpool could potentially play six fixtures more if they go all the way to the final in comparison to a CL team achieving the same feat, which would do wonders for maintaining their coefficient...

CL is a big advantage.

CL group stage gets 4 points. CL last 16 gets 4 points.
You don't get that for EL.
And Spurs are not ahead of us for 2013 coeffs, they are behind us by 10 points.
And for Liverpool, the qualification rounds don't count for coeffs. It only starts at the group stage.

And...I think I'm becoming as sad as Bert on this bollocks. I need to get out more.

I'm 99.99% sure that isn't true, hence the reason Welsh, Bosnian clubs, etc. have more coefficient points than their base 'National' score, despite having never qualified for the group stages.

Yes BB, you're right, teams eliminated in the qualifying rounds get something (max 1 point). But teams who make it through to the group stage get nothing for the qualifying rounds.

[john68]

SS,
Just been updating the latest listings. Chelsea, Bayern have had their totals increases as have all English and German clubs whose national coefficients have been increased (by 0,025). The figures are so small, that no positional changes have been made. Just a heads up that it has been updated and our other figures now slightly (but not much) out of date.

Difficult to assess where we may end up in the list, but there are obvious losers even at this stage, Teams who have big points to lose when 07/08 are removed and are not in the CL next season, some not even qualifying for either competition.

City only lose 3,575, before next season's points are added.
Spurs lose 16.585 and are only in the EL. Roma (19.05), Seville (18,775), Hamburg (18.7), Bremen (15.7), are not in any comp.
Most of the others immediately above could expect to replace what they lose, except for Villarreal (15,775) no comp.

The rags (2nd place) could take a big hit if they fail to have a decent run next season. They lose 32.575pts, so could fall a few places.