Let the RUMBLE begins
Let the RUMBLE begins
I love this final.laliga best vs epl best, lol
there is no second chance in this final,u cant line up ten men defence and hoping u could make it up in your home incase the ugly style fails.
Rome is no man's land,the only language we understand is attack and attack,i hope the epl best will be able to fight like a man,i dont think they can afford to defend this time arround having seen what happened to their brother.7 star barca will make history this season.
I will like to thank Krayola, lailai and all the under dog Barca fans for contributing on this thread, and most especially to Honerico who created the thread.
The subjective debate was if Barca can Prevent Another All-English Final? Then a change in the debate came through, sauron and co speculating on how EPL is the strongest league in Europe and all of those analysis constructed with jaw breaking grammar.
I think this thread should be deleted right after work is finished come May 26.
Chelsea threa: its better you call for switche's ban right away. There will be alot of spamming, NL will be short in GGB space. Cristalz,Mukina do something.
cheale na mumu team wey just dey play rugby type of football to win but this time around is a different ball game which would have the best and good team winning,barcelona would not only beat them at stamford bridge but would disgrace them in front of there home fans,champions leauge cup is meant for only the champions like BARCELONA ok,, UP BARCA!!!!!!!!!BARCA 4LIFE!!!!!!!!
That would mean German league/clubs is not dominant and not the best.
Ok if bayern beats Sporting 12-1 in Champions league and Braga beats Leverkusen 12-1 in UEFA cup which league is the best.
Is it impossible for EPL clubs to dominate both competition? Spain did, Italy did, and German clubs did.
This argument was in another context. When some people were reffering to Arsenals popularity as a basis to declare them a bigger clubs Winning trophies is what matters in football and since Arsenal doesnt win trophies but claim to play beautiful passing football.
The only advantage chelsea had in the encounter is that they are very powerfull physically using ugly football, which makes it difficult for most decent attack to penetrate without been roughly muscled off the ball. ala Rugby/ witchcraft soccer
chelsea dont play they just win (says xavi) and not a few sport analysts share this opinion- the blues are good at winning games, but they dont make good viewing,the Blues have been able to record some impressive results so far but they do not play play in the same crowd pleasing way as the Blaugrana side do,chelsea employ an effective style of playing but not at all attractive,Nou camp did not change tactics just to ensure that they neutralise the non- pleasing playing stamford bridge side.
CHELSEA IS A DISGRACE TO ENGLISH FOOTBALL (play anywhere belle face pull and drag football)AND IF THEY TRY TO ATTACK AT STAMFORD BRIDGE THEY WILL BE DESTROYED And if they also try to commit 12 players in their Box 18 they wont be so lucky that time because the goals will go in then!!
TRUE CHAMPIONS PLAY TO WIN ------MUMU CHELSEA PLAYS NOT TO LOSE!! It is a two leged affair------BARCELONA IS CLEARLY A BETTER TEAM THAN CHELSEA AND THEY WILL BEAT CHELSEA RIGHT THERE AT STAMFORD BRIDGE
You know my problem with you? You're not consisitent with
your positions and principles. You bring up theories to suit
your current arguments.
On more than one occasion, you have made this statement.
I cant believe this same person is bringing up the UEFA Cup analysis.
Can you imagine a scenerio where the German teams are dominating
the UCL and the English teams are doing well in the UEFA cup?
Would you have brought this UEFA cup theory?
THEIR HEAD TO HEAD FROM BEGINING OF RIVALRY
TEAM P W D L GF GA GD Pts
BARCELONA 8 3 2 3 15 14 +1 11
CHELSEAFC 8 3 2 3 14 15 -1 11
The only advantage chelsea has in this encounter is that they are very powerfull physically, which makes it difficult for most decent attack to penetrate without beiong roughly muscled off the ball, but a player like messi sure knows how to handle such a defence, but then if the defence concentrates too much on messi, HENRY , ETo and anyother player may just do the magic, I WILL GIVE TODAYS ENCOUNTER TO BARCELONA!!
chelsea dont play they just win (says xavi) and not a few sport analysts share this opinion- the blues are good at winning games, but they dont make good viewing,the Blues have been able to record some impressive results so far but they do not play play in the same crowd pleasing way as the Blaugrana side do,chelsea employ an effective style of playing but not at all attractive,Nou camp will not be changing tactics just to ensure that they neutralise the non- pleasing playing stamford bridge side. I Give this encounter to BARCELONA
Even as a hardcore MAN UTD fan i admit that la liga is better than the premiership, apart from the big four all other teams sit back and defend. At least in Spain all 20 teams play attractive football. If you put the bottom 10 premiership teams and the bottom 10 la liga teams in a league of their own the premiership teams have no chance in hell
Oh yes, villareal, our beautiful football can't go unrewarded the season. Tomorrow marks the beginning of the end to a celebrated of season. Barcelona deserves the ucl trophy, la liga trophy and copa del la rey's trophy. I hope other teams learn to play at least 30% of beautiful football just like Barca and arsenal.
Oh yes, villareal, our beautiful football can't go rewarded the season. Tomorrow marks the beginning of the end to a celebrated of season. Barcelona deserves the ucl trophy, la liga trophy and copa del la rey's trophy. I hope other teams learn to play at least 30% of beautiful football just like Barca and arsenal.
2008- Zenit (Did not drop out of CL)
2007 Sevilla ((Did not drop out of CL)
2006- Sevilla (Did not drop out of CL)
2005 - CSKA (I am not sure)
2004 - Valencia (Did not drop out of CL)
Everyone knows Villa threw the game is a very watery excuse. Why dont you think Hamburg fielded a weakened squad.
Villa threw the game to do what?
The facts do not support anything you are saying. First of all the Top 4 have been represented 8 times (6 years, but in 2 years there were 2 teams from the top 4) in the last decade. Only in 2001 did Liverpool win the cup. I find it hard to swallow that the trend would just change just because they have not been in the last few years. Also, the season Sevilla won the UEFA cup was their 1st season in the top 4, they were a mid table team previously and have just recently started making lots of noise. The season before they made it to the UEFA cup they were 10th in La Liga. They went on to win back to back UEFA cups.
1997-98-Arsenal knocked out in 1st qualifying round, Liverpool knocked out in 2nd round .
1999- Liverpool knocked out in 3rd round
2000- Arsenal runners up
2001-Liverpool win UEFA cup.
2002-2003- Chelsea knocked out in first round, Liverpool knocked out in quarter finals.
2003-2004- Liverpool knocked out in 3rd round
2nd i find your argument that EPL teams have no interest in winning the UEFA cup kinda absurd. The whole point of professional football is to compete. Fans support teams because they want to see them compete. Why do thousands of EPL fans travel to see their teams play away UEFA cup fixtures. Just to watch them "throw" games? I'm sorry but I don't buy that. What changed in 2001 that caused Liverpool to win it? There is no unique view of anything in the EPL, sports is about competition, thats why it matters, teams go out and fight for honours. Every competition, even friendlies is about teams going for the win, if it was anything but, none of us would be here debating so passionately about it.
Now I agree that under certain conditions teams have to prioritize, for example when Arsenal, during Mourinho's reign saw that the title was out of reach, the settled for 4th place and focused all their resources (started resting players like Henry for EPL games) on reaching the CL finals, but that is just a response to a reality, and not because they considered the EPL title, or 2nd place less important than the CL.
To be honest the arguments in defense of the EPL get weirder by the hour.
very interesting points being put thru by everyone
the issue is also a contentious one for uefa which is why they use a ranking method for each country based on both the laeagues with ucl having a higher coefficient than uefa cup and of course the wins,draws all have their points
the fact is that in based on the last five years, Spain has the highest rating followed by England Italy France then Germany
sauron u re pretty bright but that does not mean u dont respect contrary views
though the format of the ucl has changed from the old league, winners of the ucl,european c are still referred to as Champions of Europe
Your team is counted as having won the european championships 3 teams 1967,1999 and 2008
the thread has deviated from the object for which it was set up
To know the best teams you have to set up parameters and assign weights to each
finances, successes in leagues, europe, etc,
UEFA Club Competitions
Associations' Coefficient Ranking
Bottom. +/- 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 Total
ESP = 15.500 14.312 12.437 15.642 19.000 76.891
ENG +1 10.666 11.250 15.571 14.428 16.625 68.540
ITA -1 15.928 8.875 14.000 15.357 11.928 66.088
FRA = 7.916 13.500 11.428 10.812 10.000 53.656
GER = 9.142 4.714 10.571 10.437 9.500 44.364
Lack of contextual analysis is evident here. Everyone knows Villa virtually 'threw' the UEFA game to try to get into the CL spots.
The reason why there is an overarching emphasis on the UCL is the near absolute focus of English teams on the UCL, often to the detriment of the UEFA Cup even while they are still participants. Other clubs in other leagues do not have such a focus and therefore would calmly accept to play in the UEFA Cup if they can't make the CL, whereas in England, it's nearly UCL or nothing. Again, this is another unique view point of EPL teams.
Looking back on the UEFA Cup winners, how many of them are 'non top 4' in their respective leagues? If you are getting sides outside the 'top 4' region of their leagues winning the cup while their equivalents in England are not winning, then you might have an argument. But generally what you tend to have is UCL drop outs (essentially the top 4 members from other leagues) winning the UEFA cup.
In essence, my argument is, if any of the EPL top 4 dropped out of the CL at the relevant stage and got into the UEFA cup, you would have more winners.
Spain did in 2006(Barcelona and Sevilla), Germany did in 1997(Dortmund and Schalke) and Italy did for most of the 1990's
A champion deserves the highest point and those that make an effort too e.g Reaching the finals, reaching the knockout stages They all deserve points and in regressing order
Correction I meant knock out stages.
Then use 12 teams it still does not change the result.
Reminder all these were to favour EPL team
TKB cant come up with anything sensible, You stand a better chance of getting water from a rock.
If the EPL is the best they should be dominating both CL and UEFA cup like
Spain did in 2006(Barcelona and Sevilla), Germany did in 1997(Dortmund and Schalke) and Italy did for most of the 1990's
TKB can you say something intelligent for once? You are going down the road of Switch47, Toba and Folahann
For the reasons I have outlined, it's virtually impossible to say what is the best league. What I know for certain is that all the talk that the EPL is the best on the basis of UCL performances by the same top 4 is ridiculous.
The UCL is one competition ,why stop there? What about the international tournaments, why wasn't the Final of the Euro '08 dominated by EPL players? Why wasn't the World Cup in '06 dominated by EPL players? Why isn't the EUFA Cup dominated by the EPL? Surely, the EPL should be able to replicate the performance in the UCL in another European competition.
does not even know Bundesliga don't have 20 teams and he is calculating the remaining 14??
Dayokanu, u should be ashamed of yourself.
Not only have u shown sheer stupidity with your theory. The calculation is flawed cos the remainder should be 12 and not 14.
This is the most moronic statement ever.
Bremen, Leverkusen made which quarter finals??
Champions League or UEFA?? Who compares UCL to UEFA cup??
Only a complete will compare Bundesliga, Serie A or La Liga to the EPL.
Akinalabi and co,
Lets do a little bit of statistics
I would only consider the last 6 seasons from 2004 till date (This is to deliberately favour the EPL) since this was their time of dominance. Years like 2001, 2002 where Bundesliga sides won and played finals were deliberately exluded.
This is only for UCL performance not UEFA cup where the EPL is obviously weak.
Any CL winner in the last 6 season gets 90%.
Any team who plays the CL finals get 80%.
Any team who plays the knockout stages 70%
Any team who played group stages gets 50%
and teams that dont make it into Europe(CL) at all get 10%
In a class of 20, (EPL)
Man Utd 90%
The rest 16 make 10%.
Bundesliga Bayern, Bremen, Sttutgart, Leverkusen and Schalke made quarter finals 70% =350
Hamburg made group stage 50%
The remaining 14 ten percent = 140
I am sure conspiracy theorist would claim 4play is Dayokanu?
Thats why I have always said it that 4play is the most intelligent EPL follower on NL.
If the EPL is without doubt the best league, it should be able to replicate UCL performances in the UEFA cup, no be so?
My point is that no matter how you look at it, the top 4's performance doesn't tell us much if it's the same top 4 season after season and if the top 4's gulf with the rest of the league is quite large.
Bingo!! Thats is exactly what the EPL is. Marketing genius and a very successful venture. They bring in poo loads of money because they sell themselves well globally as a League, while in the other leagues the teams pretty much have to do their own marketing because their Leagues don't have a clue, which is why only the big teams get global exposure. Any tom manliness and fatai knows Portsmouth, but some people have never heard of say, Mallorca, or Siena. The EPL is the biggest most followed League in the world , the smaller EPL teams bring in more money because they have a bigger audience, and the League makes sure all the money goes around to all the teams so that they can grow. It is the best league without a question in terms of financial/marketing success but not in pure footballing terms.
The Bundesliga also does an excellent job selling itself as a League.
Take for example a comparison of wealth between a given set of people. In one case a group of 99 paupers(each with a net worth of 0) and Bill Gates(net worth $50bn). In another, a group of 100 people(each with a net worth of $100m).
The overall wealth of the first group($50bn) is higher than the overall wealth of the 2nd($10bn). Does that mean the 1st group is better off than the 2nd?
In the EPL, the top 4's permanence and chasm from the rest distorts the picture of the real worth of the EPL. In that sense, trying to assess the strength of the Scottish league by measuring the performance of Celtic/Rangers alone in the UCL will not really tell you much about the Scottish league any more than measuring Bill Gate's wealth will tell you much in my example.
4play nice to hear ur tots
but ill say ure not correct on this
ok, let me ask you one question
as for you, which of the leagues will you say is the best as today? u can use any parameter to arrive at ur conclusions
UTD is the current UCL champion, and also the current world champions
Zenith is the current uefa cup holder and also the current super cup holder
in the uefa cup finals last season, we had Rangers (british), a german club, a russian and i think an italian/spanish club (not sure)
in the UCL, we had 3 english clubs and a spanish ( no Italian and no German)
i can safely conclude judging from last seasons performance alone that the epl is the best!
if ur arguements is to measure how the remaining 16 clubs perform in europe as against the best 4 in the epl, then we cant really measure hw good a league is. UEFA has helped by designing a competition where all clubs in a league will aspire to play by either coming tops or being amongst the top 4/3 as the case may be.
so if the bundesligas/la liga/ seria a's best are not good enough to match the best from the epl, then tell another credible way of measuring how good a league is.
The best of serie A couldnt play the best of epl
the best of bundesliga isnt even in the semis
the best of la liga is against 3 clubs from the epl and i wonder how this is hard to figure
this has been happening for about 4-5 seasons now and you guys think its not enuff to adjudge the epl to be the best
so which is the best league?
That may be so - but would you ever evaluate the Scottish League sans Celtic/Rangers? Would the league hold any significant attraction or value without those teams?
You could possibly relate the same theory to Spain - in the old days it was Deportivo, Real and Barca who held the dominance. Even today, Real and Barca are still a class apart. I don't think there is much value in removing the so called 'outliers' from the league. Exceptional performance from a few members and the unique power distribution of the premiership are the unique qualities of the league, while the more 'distributed' power/ability in other leagues may be their own unique quality.
U must be smoking cheap Bolivian weed.
I'd eat maself if Man Utd, Chelsea or Arsenal ever play in the UEFA cup in the next 10 years.
EPL teams don't pride themselves playing in inferior European competitions unlike the rest of Europe.
EPL top 4 becoming outliers like Porto/Celtic is also a dud theory because the EPL's top 4 seems to crawl into the European semis every season.
Playing in the elite competition in Europe is a standard achievement for the EPL teams(Owners don't wanna know how it's done---it must be done).
While teams like AC Milan, Juventus, Bayern Munich and the other "has beens" can sacrifice their place in the league to concentrate in UCL, Premiership teams will never do it. The financial motivation in the EPL is twice as much of what u can sniff in Europe.
West Brom(relegation bound) will make more money than the eventual winner of the Champions League this season.
How do you actually measure the comparative strengths of 20 clubs leagues?
The problem with measuring the EPL's strength by virtue of the performance of their representatives in the UCL is that, unlike many other leagues, the EPL puts out virtually the same 4 teams every season. In effect, all we are measuring is the strength of the EPL's ''permanent'' top 4 against the ''relative'' top 3 the Bundesliga puts out.
In reality, it doesn't tell us enough of the comparative aggregate strengths of the 2 leagues, i.e; is the average EPL side better than the average Bundesliga side?
In addition, the points gap between the top 4 sides in England, the so called mini-league, and the rest of the league is larger than the points gap between the Bundesliga's top 3 or 4 and the rest of the league. In effect, rather than the EPL's top 4 becoming a reflection of the strength of the overall league, they become outliers - like Celtic/Rangers(Scotland) and Porto/S.Lisbon(Portugal) - that have little correlation with the rest of the league.
For the above reasons, the UEFA Cup becomes relevant because it enables us to assess comparative strengths sans outliers.
I'm sure Dayo himself knows his theory is flawed.
If we had 4 German teams doing what the English teams are
doing in the UCL, he wont dare mention the UEFA cup.
The Dangote, Adenuga theory is flawed.
Super rich people like Dangote are less than 0.1% of Naija's population
We have 4 super strong English teams. That is almost 25% of the
entire premiership. If we have 35 million Nigerians (25%) that are
super rich like Dangote, then we can celebrate.
Your analysis is flawed dayo.
The cream of the crop rises to the top inevitably. It may not be an equitable or continuous distribution of ability/talent/money in the premiership, but when you look at the sum total, it is still the best.
Germany is more equitably distributed, hence the 'competitive' nature of the league with different clubs able to rise into the to echelon. But in sum total, what you have is less overall value compared to the premier league.
An example will suffice
12 people in two classes
The first 4 have $200,000 each, and then the next 8 have $50,000 each. Total comes to $1.2m
The first 4 have $100,000 each, and the next 8 have $80,000 each. Total comes to $1.04m
While class 2 has a more even distribution or a higher mean, the sum total of class 1 is higher, and the 'top third' of Class 1 is eminently above that of Class 2.
This is the basic difference between the premiership and say the Bundesliga.