So in a nutshell you're saying we should ditch the knockout stages of the Champions League and the World Cup? And that's precisely what a competition does - decides who deserves to win it.
What goes on in your tiny mind? You're suggesting that a game of football has never been swayed by a referee or a bit of luck? Don't be so dense all of the time, it gets boring. The knockout games of football offer a different competition to league play. It's who dares wins, usually. But you can't say that a side is instantly better than another because they won over a game or two. Chelsea 1-1 Barcelona in 2009 is the perfect example.
How is it? What's the aim of football again, and in this particular case what's the aim over 2 legs in the Champions League? And what exactly is 'luck' in football? And I'm being deadly serious - using your argument what's the point of knockout football? We might as well not bother if it's not to decide who is the best team on the day across a series of days.Lets just see who has the prettiest names on the teamsheet and then declare them the winner.
Knockout football is bloody entertaining and a different type of game to normal League football. it requires different skills and tactics to win. But you're not serious if you honestly think that a referee has never swayed a game of football? Say you didn't get the winner when we played a month ago and we'd got a point because Gray was fouled 5 yards outside of the box and it was still given as a penalty. Would that have been fair? Chelsea had 3/4 stone wall penalties turned down. Ovrebo had an awful game and Barcelona went and scored with their only shot on target of the game.
That is generally the case, but you're barking mad if you think it's always the case. In fact, you're as thick as **** if you do. I'd much rather take a League of 38 games to decide who is the best team but you're welcome to your ignorance.
Why would I follow Rugby, let alone Rugby League? I don't particularly know much about League (it's only played in Yorkshire is about the extent of my knowledge) but even Rugby Union is ****. Finish a league season top of the league then have a play off? Bollocks to that. The Football League Play Offs are a bag of ****e an all. 1st, 2nd and 3rd should be promoted.
I disagree, there's nothing more exciting than a seasons worth of work coming down to one game at the end. If you lose to a team that finished below you in the league then tough ****, its what makes it exciting.
It perfectly fair. I'd like to see it brought in to the Premier League, those that finish top of the league are automatically in the Champions League then those that finish 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th have a pay-off for a second spot. At least then we'd stop this ludicrous system where finishing 4th is celebrated.
there were only 3 games that month....... I have an idea, lets extend the month. can only vote on whats played
A lot in here seem under the impression only big clubs will win because it's a popular vote. I'm just pointing out that's not the case.
They'll win the public vote. Which means either the panel will go along with it (ie. it influences the decision) or they ignore it (in which case why bother with it? It's not like they make money on people's votes).
My impression is the public vote will only matter if it's close and the panel is unsure. Each club's captain also gets a vote. By allowing people to "have their say" it makes them more engaged.
