PL Opposition Tidbits
- Thread starter Frogfish
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
City and Arsenal between them will get enough points for that 5th place. It's the best two countries so even if Spain is one for sure who else could get the second? France? Germany? Italy? They don't really have enough good teams to do that. How many years is this calculated over? Unlikely anyone but Spain has enough history too ... if that comes into it.
It's a one-season gig, based on the average performance of all teams in all UEFA comps, and England is currently in 6th - top two only get the places. Doesn't help that Brighton have been shit too.
https://www.uefa.com/nationalassociations/uefarankings/country/seasons/#/yr/2024
Resets each season?
Yep. The UEFA document on qualification places links directly to the page I linked.
"Slots three and four: These places will go to the associations with the best collective performance by their clubs in the previous season (i.e. the association club coefficient of the previous season, which is based on the total number of club coefficient points obtained by each club from an association divided by the number of participating clubs from that association). Those two associations will each earn one automatic place in the league phase ('European Performance Spot') for the club ranked next-best in their domestic league behind those clubs that have already qualified directly for the league phase."
Thanks for the link - but we all know that that table is nothing like what it will look like by the time the CL, EL and Conference (?) are finished (because the co-ed is based on all but far more weight given to the CL). It's likely Spain will run away with it (4 teams all topping their CL groups and others in the EL and Conference likely to do well) and we'll probably finish 2nd (there'll be lots of points with these teams going on to the later stages : City & Arse in the CL. Us, West Ham and maybe Newcastle in the EL and Villa have as good a chance as any in the Conference) ... though Italy are indeed a danger.
Just looking at where they are getting their points :
Turkey are leading but that will drop off quickly (no depth, no outstanding teams that can win anything)
Germany (as usual reliant on Bayern, weaker this year but then they have Kane, and Dortmund, who are far from sure to even qualify from their group) have teams that will drop out of both the CL and EL after the group stage.
Italy may be the dark horse with Inter, Lazio, AC and Napoli all likely to progress (but none of them likely to win it or probably not even make the semis) and Atalanta and Roma will progress in the EL.
France - no chance, as none of their teams will go far and none are capable of winning anything.
It helps it greatly, I believe.
This has to be the funniest video I've seen in ages
Not a great deal for the 5th CL spot, although it could sway the balance. However, we will be at least 5th on the 10-year coefficient (we're 8th this year) which means we'd get a bigger media share if we qualify for the CL next year. Doesn't make any difference this year as we're the top-ranked side in Europa already.
We move up in the 10 year as we didn't qualify 10 years ago so a lot of the teams above us lose points from 10 years ago and we don't, plus we get points this year whereas Chelsea and Juventus, both above us, aren't even in Europe. Even as things stand today, we are up to 5th, and further progress in the Europa will only improve that (although it's unlikely we'll move up
to 4th, just strengthen our position in 5th)..
As far as I'm concerned, Rashford sending off was very similar Jones on Bissouma. I would have gone with a yellow.
Both were trying to step over the ball and protect it, but ended up stepping on a players leg.
Both got a very harsh red card.
United fans were saying Jones deserved his red, so they should have no complaints about Rashford getting a red either.
Thanks for this - "Double Penetration" was funny but not as good as him losing his voice at the end
That was exactly my take too.
I think the Rashford thing warranted a card. If the ref had of seen it he would have given it as a yellow, but VAR has to intervene. Since VAR can only give(or rescind) goals or red cards then it was always going to be red, which was very harsh.
The two handballs were both very debatable. Having not been given on field I fail to see how either were clear errors of judgement. More that the VAR guys can watch it 50 times from 10 different angles and freeze frame.
Love the end result of the game but it was an absolute clusterfuck from the decision point of view
The ref in the Spurs game gave Jones a yellow. Which I thought was correct. VAR intervened and asked him to upgrade it to a red. If Rashford had been given a yellow, I think VAR would have similarly intervend.
The two hand balls were harsh, but with Maguire's handball, I can see why it was given, as he had his hand out trying to grab the player's shirt, and in doing so, it looked like he made a movement towards the ball. I have a lot less sympathy for that one, as it was pure desperation for Maguire trying to grab an opposition play in the box.
United's penalty was a scandal though. It felt like VAR just wanted to give the poor sods something. Not only did Maguire head it onto the player's arm, whose back was turned to the ball (Barkley vs us at the weekend was the same; in fact, Barkley had his arm up and was further away, whereas the Copenhagen player had his arm down and was very close to Maguire). Not only that, but Maguire actually headed the ball onto his own hand first, before it rolled off his fingertips and struck the arm of the Copenhagen defender! Absolutely scandalous decision, in my opinion.
United fans can cry me a river.
The red card shouldn't have meant they lost anyway. 2-0 up! We were 1-0 down to Newcastle, 10 men, and came back and won.
The problem with the red cards to both Jones and Rashford is that in real time they dont look like a red card offence. But when you slow it down and look at the still then it looks much much worse. It takes out the footballing side of the challenge. The ref should look at the situation in real time again as well imho.
Both were a yellow card, but the Rashford one will probably have a higher chance of being a red in Europe given that its so high up on the ankle and endangers the opponent. He's unlucky but its reckless.
Both were a yellow card, but the Rashford one will probably have a higher chance of being a red in Europe given that its so high up on the ankle and endangers the opponent. He's unlucky but its reckless.
It was as much as a red as Jones imo.
Nah… Jones at least touched the ball.
Then by your logic Endos was also a red..
I’d say the difference was Endo stomped on a foot, whereas Rashford was a little higher up on the shin and there was a clearer movement away from the ball.
All fine lines and decisions could have gone either way.
More importantly though - Rashford deserved red for the fact he plays for Man Utd.
So, what do we think about this one then? I'd be furious if that was given against us but part of me thinks Gabriel is making a meal of it as well.
Probably should have been disallowed though. Two hands in the back is a free kick everywhere on the pitch.
They still have this matey lingo that is coming across very unprofessional.
Probably should have been disallowed though. Two hands in the back is a free kick everywhere on the pitch.
They still have this matey lingo that is coming across very unprofessional.
I expect it from fans (including too many on here) but not from officials - that utter, utter garbage about "not enough for a foul". A push in the back is a foul, discussion over. Of course it should have been disallowed.
The issue is although you can clearly see 2 hands on the back of the defender, it's hard to tell if Gabriel's fall is from a result of a push which is quite a ludicrous thing to say so I can only imagine how ludicrous it is to read, but the fact of the matter is you can have 2 hands on a player and not have judged to be fouling them (by pushing, dragging, pulling etc) so ultimately this is a subjective decision which comes down to the force of the contact as there is no tool that can calculate the force behind the contact.
No doubt it passes the eye test of being a foul but that also doesn't always mean there is 1.
For me a bigger shout for a blatant push in the back where a goal should've been disallowed and wasn't was Isak's 2nd goal at West Ham 1:58 in the clip below.
Sorry but the second you typed that impossibly confused bit in bold, it should have been clear to you that you're trying to defend the indefensible. I can't think of a single circumstance in which an outfield player could or would have his hands on an opposition player without at the very least obstructing him. And no, it absolutely does not come down to the force of the contact - there is sod all about that anywhere in the rules.
Happens all the time on corners/indirect free kicks in the box when players are looking to get away from their markers or vice versa, there's one in the clip I posted where Isak is clearly seen pushing Aguerd in stopping his attempt at heading the ball away. This to me is a clear push as you can see his arms being deliberately extended into his back and stops him dead in his track.
& sorry but the force of a contact is key, it decides almost everything, "how much contact can be seen"....refs/VAR will always review this whether deciding to award a pen or not, whether it's a red or yellow and it's the same here.
Similar threads
-
- Locked
