I am currently consulting with Islamic clerics/scholars to see what sharia says I can do to you if it does ...
Love a bit of manager bantz, moureen one of the best at it tbf. When asked if he was glad about fans being back....
In his defence, he shouldn't have been sent off. It was a joke decision. However, I am annoyed at the way we've totally mismanaged him this season. I don't know if the death of his mother is still affecting him (he's lost both parents at only 19 years old), which is why he wants to go back to France on loan (to be closer to family), but when I look at how poorly Rob Holding has been for us, yet starts every week, and Mustafi, who doesn't even want to be at the club, starts in the Europa, I don't see how he couldn't have got more minutes for the first team. Unless he's in a really bad place mentally. In any case, Arteta's man-management was something that he was praised for in the first 6 months, now it's his biggest downfall.
I was wonder why this was in Rival Watch, but he's a Chelsea fan. They applauded the players taking the knee, by the way. I'm sure he was furious. Wouldn't have happened in his day.
Just seen Mourinho claim that teams who finish third in the Champions League group-stages shouldn't be allowed to enter the Europa League. As much as I dislike the bloke, I agree with him 100% on this. If you have your chance of qualifying for the knockout stages of the CL, but fail to do so, the 3rd-placed team's 'punishment' shouldn't be getting a second bite of the cherry to win a European competition. Why are they being rewarded for failure? I had this same issue when Atletico Madrid won the competition in 2018.
The whole thing has the stench of the G14 all over it, as it comes across as a move to have their members who risked not qualifying from the CL knockout stages - Marseille, Lyon, Porto, PSV all springing to mind - topping up their bank balance regardless Given this has been in place since the 1999-2000 season, and came hot on the heels of second-placed teams also getting a spot in the CL, there's a point where it can't be a coincidence
I don't get why people have an issue with this. It's quite common on cup competitions for there to be different ways of qualifying to be in any given round. For example in the FA cup you get into the third round by either winning in the second round or by being in the PL or the Championship. The CL is the top competition in Europe and the Europa is contested by clubs who couldn't qualify for the CL. So it is perfectly sensible for those who didn't quite qualify to be given a second chance in a competition they would have already been in if they were even worse.
I've already explained why there is an issue with it. And it seems like your manager agrees. They had their chance to qualify. They didn't do it. What purpose, apart from financial reasons and maybe having a few top sides drop into it, does it serve? It's not in the spirit of fairness of competition. Other teams had to work to qualify for the Europa, but failing to qualify from the CL group rounds means you're eligible? I know Europa isn't as big as the Champions League, however, it is still an important European competition that provides a great reward should you win it. This isn't a recent belief I've held, I've always believed this.
The reason is long known. The failures don't make money from the demotion (although one may win it) . What they do keep is their ability to maintain their ranking pts total, which affects which CL pot they will be on for the group stage draw. If the UEFA darlings start slipping down the rankings like this, then they face the prospect of the spiralling vicious circle once they reach CL pot 3. Which is why the likes of Spurs and the Goons must make hay in the EL, even if the final is not reached and won (maintain a high ranking score for when you do return to the CL) .
I don't object to your opinion, but the claim that it's unfair or rewarding failure doesn't stand up. All teams in the CL have already out qualified those in the EL. I don't see any harm in their being a consolation prize for coming third in a group. Indeed it gives more integrity to that competion by making matches less likely to be dead rubbers. And it is an elegant solution to the problem of needing 32 teams in the EL knockout stages. Having four more groups would be an alternative but not a better one in my opinion and putting the best 8 third places in the EL through is definitely unfair.
I'm sorry, but this isn't correct. If you do not qualify for a competition, you shouldn't get another shot in another competition that other teams have had to work for on merit to get involved in. There does not need to be a 'consolation prize' unless, as has been rightly stated above, it's to preserve the status and UEFA coefficients of said clubs by keeping their European hopes alive. And although I understand why it's structured this way, I don't believe it's the right thing to do. Four more groups wouldn't be an ideal solution, but it's fairer than the current process. I also don't believe there needs to be 32 teams in the EL knockout stages, but that's a conversation for another time and I'm sure it's another belief you will vehemently try to argue against.
The CL does not have 32. It has a harsh group stage qualification process though for certain teams. No objective reason why the EL cannot do the same.
'Pool fans definitely helped get the penalty decision overturned. The ref had extra pressure when looking at the monitor and that could easily influence him.
There has to be 16 or 32 I think. A lot of CL qualifying round losers end up in the Europa League too. Is that also out of order?
'Out of order' isn't the phrase I'd use, but principally, I don't agree with it. Admittedly, I feel slightly less strongly about it because it's much earlier on in the process, but it still doesn't mean it's right.
