When it was 2 legged knockout all the way could could also lose half of your games - you could lose all your away games, but as long as you won the home games by more you were fine. And of course the old style European Cup only had five knockout rounds, compared to four in the CL, so the first round in the EC was equivalent to the group stage in the CL. So rather than play six games against some of the best teams from Spain, Italy, Germany and England, you'd get an easy walkover against the champions of Malta, Northern Ireland or Wales. And how was the fact it was only the champions in the competition possibly make it harder? Barca were not the champions of Spain in 2008, are you seriously trying to claim that the 2008/09 competition would have been harder without them in it?!? In fact, there have been many seasons (including 1999, 2000 and 2007) when neither of the CL finalists were the champions of their domestic league. Sorry mate, but your argument makes absolutely no sense.
I think some actual news,not Giggs love life is needed for discusion, I hope someone actually dips(no pun) into the market soon!
1 word - Barcelona. If it wasn't for those ridiculously talent bastards we'd probably be on 5 European Cups (4 Champions Leagues) by now.
Will they remember Liverpool though? Who they didn't play in the final because they were too useless to even qualify...?
surely the difficulty in winning the competition (proper) isn't the only factor to consider when comparing the diffculty of winning the European Cup back in the day you had to win your domestic league to be in it, how many Champions League winners were their countries domestic champions the year before? I know Liverpool weren't champions in 2004 so there is no need for the silly remarks regarding that. I'm just sayng that if only the champions went through the compeition would be just as hard as you have to consider the difficulty of qualifying for it in the first place
Liverpool never met a European powerhouse? Try Bayern Munich in the 1981 European Cup semi final. How about Real Madrid in the 1981 European Cup final. Are these not European powerhouses
Jese the European cup, whatever format, is and always has been difficult to win, formats have changed but so has football it is a very different game as each decade passes, non the less the competition doesn't change it still has it's prestige, the winner is crowned champions of Europe. You have won 5 times, United 3 times - and that is fakt andthat will not change till obviously one of us wins it again.
That doesn't necessarily make it more difficult. After all, Nottingham Forest only won the old 1st division once in 1978, but that was enough for them to win back to back European Cups in 1979 and 1980. Likewise Villa only one one title in 1981, but then won the European Cup the next season. And United have been champions of England 12 times over the past 19 years, so I don't think we'd have found it any more difficult to qualify. If anything, only playing nine, or even seven, European games in a season would have made it easier for us to dominate the PL than in the current format where we have to play 13. Particularly given the obvious dead rubbers you get against tiny clubs in the first and second rounds.
Also, who did we encounter en route to the 2005 final? In the group stage we face Monacod, Deportivo & Olympiakos Then the knockout stages - Bayer Leverkusen, Juventus, Chelsea, before the epic battle with AC Incidentally, a lot of people have been dissing Malmo on this thread, but even back then in 1979, they still had to dispose of Monaco & Dynamo Kiev on their way to the final - so they weren't THAT bad
Did you notice the 'very rarely'? Compare them with Brugge and Monchengladbach and they are nothing special are they?
To the Utd fans who question the strength of cups in the past compared to now. Get some perspective and realise that to be the champions of Europe in ANY year makes you if not the very best side, certainly one of the top few in the whole continent, there will always be dodgy results, bad luck and even outright cheating and bribery, but in the (not so) old days, you still had to win your league and face other champions, so Mönchengladbach were the best Germany had to offer, Brugge beat Panathinaikos, Athletico Madrid and Juve to get to their final and similar can be said for just about every finalist that has graced the European cup. It may be harder to win now, it may not, it's just as impossible question as Pele v Maradonna, Schmeichel v Zoff or even Owens v Bolt, the point is both your clubs have won the trophy at least as many times as the rest of Englands clubs put together and with Villa and Forest and the fact that Leeds were blatantly robbed of a win (what a shame ) and you notice that the English league is the strongest and most successful in Europe, try enjoying that fact and the fact that you've both won so many (unlike the city of London) and stop acting like 5 year olds arguing about whose dad is hardest
