Match Day Thread 2016/17 Premier League, Cups & Euro Watch

Not really. Its a select few of the best teams. Its like saying the European super cup or that world club cup (winners from the big tournies) should be highly regarded. Its not because it doesnt have the worlds best teams in it.

Likewise neither does the confederations cup

 

So the teams in it are not the current champions of their Federations?

 

Are New Zealand better than France, Cameroon better than Brazil.... Also Russia have won bugger all

 

So are the teams that are in the world club cup but i would never argue the champions of asia, south america etc are stronger than the top 6 european clubs

If realistically only 3 top class teams are in the confederations cup (even chile are debateable) then no i dont see it as the pinnacle

 

Russia are the hosts so are invited to take part.
Are New Zealand in the same federation as France, are Cameroon in the same federation as Brazil?
I think you will find the teams who beat Brazil and France to their particular federation championship are taking part.

 

So do you think the world club cup should be a major trophy and rank higher than the chanpions league?

 

You seem to be missing the point, these tournaments are for teams who have proved to be the best in their areas, not like the Champions League where 2 or 3 also ran's get invited.

The old Cup Winners Cup was good for me, it was for teams who had done what the title suggested and gave them a chance to play competitive football against top teams from other country's.

 

But are they better... no is the answer. So the best teams are not all there like they will be at the WC.
Not all Federations are equal, the Fifa rankings will show you that.

I'd also argue that Portugal are by far not the best team in Europe, they had the good fortune to win the Euro's, So did Greece and they were never the best team in Europe. The best team does not always win.

Your logic is that of if team A beats team B, and then team C beat team A. Therefore team C must be better than team B. Its flawed logic.

 

Likewise thats the same for the world club cup. They are for teams who were the best on their continent. However there is a reason they are not as prestigious and thats because the highest ranked teams (or close to that) do not participate in them.

Just as the community shield is for the 2 winners of our most lauded trophies in the uk, the fact that the winners and from your previous comment at the international level these should be our 2 best teams in the country. However we know thats not true and its just a mickey mouse trophy and is used as a glorified friendly

 

No, but only because it is representative and not as prestigious in monetary terms.
If it was given the same coverage as the CL and teams had a reason to take it seriously then it could well rank higher since the teams taking part were already winners/champions and would be playing to prove who was best.
As it is people treat it as a friendly and I cant see that changing any time soon.

 

Pretty sure the world club cup has coverage on sky.

It doesnt have the glamour because it doesnt have the worlds best players or acknowledged worlds best teams.

It is why winning the asia cup is not as famous as winning the european cup. Its also why winning the scottish premier league doesnt compare to winning the english premier league

 

So the World champions or European champions are never really the best teams because they only beat the teams they played but not the others who were knocked out.
All I am saying is that the Confed Cup is between the best teams from each federation, are Brazil better than Cameroon, possibly. Are they the best in their own federation, it seems not because they didn't win it.
Cup competitions are not like the league, you can only beat the teams you are drawn against and all they teams in the Confed have done that to win their area titles.
France and Brazil didn't.

 

Can honestly say I have never noticed the hourly adverts for a month before

Winning the Asia Cup will become more popular as time goes by, the European Cup has had a good head start on it so will take some time to catch up.

I work with quite a few African lads and believe me, they take ACON a lot more seriously than the World cup or European championship.

We are in Europe and like to think our competitions are the best and most important, it's not the case for others and things will change over time.

 

Surprised with the african lads taking afcon more seriously than world cup. However them being more interested in that isnt a surprise. Presumably they support an african national team so of course they would be more interested in that. Just like supporters of mk dons will watch and enjoy league 1 more than the pl.

Theres a reason why more people that arent in europe watch the world cup and european championships over the afcon and its because it has the best players and therefore the best quality.

As for asia cup, i doubt it will be bigger if all the big players play in europe. The dynamics will change if they start moving over there though.

 

Close to your heart (team) Oscar?

 

Hes a good player (always thought he was overrated) but hes clearly not one of the best players in the world or even in the pl. He basically was a backup this season before he moved to china and was a squad player in our atrocious team last year.

Also that is 1 player. To be fair there are a few more, witsel, hulk, texeira but none are close to being the best players in the world

 

True, but they are a lot better than the Americans started with (and are still getting), washed up players who go as a circus act.
The Chinese are attracting younger players who still have a lot to give and will raise the profile of the game much quicker and better.

 

No thats not what I said, my point was its not as black and white. Just because someone wins a cup competition doesn't necessarily mean they are the best in said competition, often yes, always no.

But that doesn't mean they are amongst the best in the World. Its pretty clear that the Asian, Gold Cup, Oceanic and to some extent Acofn, lack the same strength in competition as the Copa America and Euro's.

Your original argument was that the Confed should be view on a par (or above) the WC as it consists of the supposed best teams in each region, and therefore the world. Well how can that be when only 3 teams competing are in the world top 10 (Brazil are no1 btw) and yet its likely all top10 (plus many others) teams will be at the WC next year.

NZ are currently ranked 95 btw, thats lower than Scotland, Cyprus, St Kitts and Nevis, Swaziland, Libya, Faroe Island (who aren't even a country)..

But hey I'm sold on your logic, Celtic must be better than Barcelona or ManU as they won their league and the other two didn't.

 

Yeah, teams like New Zealand, Australia and Mexico are far better opposition than Brazil, Spain, Argentina.

You'll be saying the the world club thing that no one pays attention to Is better than CL next because has winners of each continents cup.

its a warm up for WC to show the country can run a competiton more than anything else.

 

Leagues are totally different than cup competitions, but I think you probably know that.
Do you think the World Cup or European Championship is better or benefits from having teams like Honduras, Uganda or Guinea in it?
Lets just take the top 64 Fifa ranked teams and cut out the bull ****. It would make the competition a lot quicker and only have the (perceived) best in the world in it.
Honduras 69 rank
Uganda 71 rank
Guinea 72 rank
Would all miss out, close but no banana