Just reading about Liverpools five European cup wins ? While i accept that you can only win the competion as it is set out , how can they possibly claim that the old European cup was comparable with the champions league as it is now . A typical example was their 1978 victory . They had a bye in the first round and played a total of 7 matches [ losing two ] to win it , beating the mighty FC Brugge in the final . Stadiums , even for the final were sometimes only half full , one match i noticed at Anfield had 21,000 !!!!! . A final they played in Paris [ capacity 72000 ] attendance 48,000 !!!! No disrespect to Forest or Villa , but could you imagine either of those clubs winning it now ! Forest actually beating MALMO in the final , Malmo ?????? How can yo win a competion , losing two out of the seven matches you play !!! and claim that it is the equal of todays champs league ?
To hell with the comparisons pal. There's 5 of our european cups in the trophy room... thats all that matters. Would of been more if we weren't banned for years during our dominant period.
and had we not had a certain tragedy in 1958 we would likely of won a couple prior to 1968. least thats the opinion of european football at the time. Ifs and buts. You have 5 we have 3 but regardless of that its now harder to win. Doesnt make yours any less of an achievement though. Far from.
And whose fault is that? If it wasn't for the ban Man Utd could be on more European trophies by now as the English game wouldn't have missed out on years of European football and wouldn't have to have spent years re-strengthening after the ban was lifted.
Of Course i know the reason , just wanted to hear you accepting responsibility for it ! rather than using it for an excuse for not winning more . At least no one died for our three , apart from the victims of munich of course , a tragedy that your fans have sung about for years !!!
I wouldn't dismiss the 5 European cups that Liverpool have but the old competition is not comparable to the Champions league. Because the structure is so different the winner of the European Cup nowadays has to come past all the best clubs in Europe. For example this year to win the Cup Barca had to beat Real and United, who in turn had to beat Chelsea. After Barca not many people would argue that those 3 clubs are the next best. Barca have won the Champions league 3 times in 6 years, this is a far greater and far more difficult feat to achieve than Liverpool's victories in the 70's and 80's.
This is getting tedious now. If competitions were SO much easier before 1993 why didn't United come close to winning something, what with it being so easy...
Got to be in it to win it. Why havent liverpool won many more since? I mean you have been in it plenty of times. Again, its only liverpool fans who disagree.
Well because of the competitions structure United were never in it. But also United were not a top team either. The debate is whether the old European cups were equivalent to the champions league. As a Liverpool fan I'm sure you will say they are, but in reality most would argue the Champions league is far more difficult to win than the old European Cup. Up to 4 teams from the strongest leagues enter the competition and weaker league champions have to pre qualify. Some people have said United had an easy run to the final, but who did they meet there? Barca! In the old cup you could have an 'easy' run to final and then meet Malmo!
Because we fell apart after Dalglish left, competitions didn't immediately become harder. Although United fans would like to think otherwise to make themselves feel like they've achieved more.
Back in the old format teams used to win the European Cup and then retain it, Real Madrid won it 5 times in a row! Now though clubs never manage to retain their title because it is so difficult.
