Boo hoo, we got beat - Man Utd try to bend the Champions League rules to suit the big boys

Oh no! Whatever next?

rules are there to be bent

Is it too late to stomach the old idea that now must sound so quaint, of the Champion club from each European country actually playing on level-ish terms, seeding notwithstanding ? Or at least the pre-2000 two-club-maximum system ?

Real Madrid - 4th
Manchester United - 3rd
Juventus - 3rd
Inter - 4th
Liverpool - 4th

Who the hell do those bastards think they are to deserve special treatment and seeding in perpetuity ?

Surely the Romanian, Swedish or Serbian champions - all recent former European Cup/UEFA Cup winning countries - have got a right to be seeded higher than those heartless cunts ?

And I'm nearly there with him. This is an utterly ridiculous and contemptible attitude on display from David Gill that goes against the very concept of sportsmanship and fairness. And I speak as someone who was very disappointed to see Utd and Arsenal AND Real exit 'early' as I still enjoy the prospect of the big clubs and best clubs (on paper at least, not as proven, as such) meeting in the later stages. I would be utterly thrilled if Lyon or PSV won the Champions League by playing genuinely exciting, dynamic football and getting the results however (of course I will settle for Chelsea or Liverpool doing this too).

it's funny that in all the years of wanting Utd to play Milan when they finally did it wasn't really the most thrilling affair. Lyon v Werder Bremen otoh must've been really great fun to watch...

also, had Chelsea met Barcelona or Real met Juve in the final would it really have been as exhilirating to watch? who knows...but i suspect they would both have been much cagier...as long as the big clubs clash at SOME point in tournaments i am happy

(I'm such a girl about this, aren't I?)

Real's inability to win trophies more often is a great example of how throwing money on the best players doesn't automatically equal greatness and honours. Real are still exciting to watch tho a lot of the time...oh well.

I feel like being a girl
Being a girl
And my life never tasted sweeter

(xpost with Steve)

My problem is when the competition is clogged with a mini-tournament of the richest clubs fromthe richest west European clubs countries. I have met several people from places like Poland, Belgium and Hungary f/ex who love to talk about Chelsea and can't understand whay anyone would be interested in their top teams any longer. It's amazing how so many English people will bemoan how young kids in Swindon or Oxford don't get behind their team any more because they watch so much Man U or Chelsea, and then bleat about how the Champions League doesn't need the non-Big Five countries.

However, I wonder if Gill really means it. With yesterday's announcement that profits have halved, and with Glazer still stalking the club, he might just be looking to show the City that he has a plan to make things better.

I'm happy with that as long as it's not a Real team.

How it works is that the four Italian, Spanish or Italian clubs will all be automatically placed as high seeds regardless of their own European pedigree, as country co-efficient counts more than club co-effiecient. Hence even if my beloved Spurs get to the UEFA cup, let alone some jammy Cup Final loser like Millwall or Southampton, we'll be in the bizarre position of being seeded higher than, say, Dynamo Kiev or Basle.

besides, its not a random draw after the group stage - first place teams get to play second place teams - united finished second and got milan instead of werder bremen - we have no-one but ourselves to blame.

Italian and Spanish football is much better than English football and that is the reason why they keep doing better. Blaiming it on seeding is a bit lame I think.

Sven, you obviously havent watched Milan in the CL the last three years.

Unless they are bringing the game into disrepute or buying their overrated Argentinians for millions of pounds over their actual value, of course.

they were fantastic against Deportivo in that first leg last year and then just absoulutely awful in the second leg - maybe you could explain that as i found it utterly mystifying. the year before they got to the final following a tense affair with Inter which probably featured some great football at times only for some reason i kept nodding off so can't really remember. seriously tho, i know they have been one of the most consistently great sides in the last 15 years.

Italian and Spanish football is much better than English football and that is the reason why they keep doing better.

actually English clubs have fared very well against Italian clubs in the last five or six years - it's probably quite even in terms of victories and defeats. and Chelsea proved their worth against Barcelona the other week.

Nowhere does Darren says this. He's pointing out the highest placed nations in the UEFA coefficients table (INCLUDING England) get the seeded places, irrespective of any particular club's past Euro performances.

if anything it's just the predictability of there being three Italian clubs left that bugs me. when it's not Italian clubs it's Spanish clubs, other nations never have that many left at this stage. it's not a criticism of them really, just the rather routine nature of the tournament over the years.

which i thought may be insinuating that there's something about the tournament itself that facilitated spanish and italian clubs doing particularly better than others.

but how though? the game surely is still the same! unless you mean the two-legged nature of the matches suit them better..

(Ooops, who's that under the table? Why, it's Manchester United!)

different style of play throughout much of Europe supposedly thwarts 'English' style, or so general pundit consensus has it - tho with the number of foreign coaches and players in the Premiership now this should not be as much of a problem as before. Italy and Spain have the biggest, richest leagues after England so that they would dominate makes sense in that respect.

the English teams are just better at winning at finals that they only need to be there once to be once winners.

startling about the only one English club in a Champions League final ever thing. Utd redefined the concept of 'charmed life' en route to the 99 trophy but they matched that luck with skill - i think they may have been the last club to win the trophy without losing a single match on the way but i could be wrong there (and the two group phase thing came in after that making it more difficult to do this). anyway, just what is the reason why the Englich clubs can't cut it? excuses range from 'too many games' to 'no Midwinter break' to 'different style of play' to 'arrogance + complacency'.

"He (Arsene Wenger) feels the cause of the disappointment is English football's inflated perception of itself. "I don't know where this English superiority complex comes from," said Wenger. "Bayern Munich has won the European Cup four times and Arsenal zero."

The English winning teams had a heavy preponderence of Scots, such as Ken McNaught and Des Bremner.

UEFA in "sensible response" shock.