What has happened to the English teams in the CL?

Yet Stoke are through, a team that lost 5-0 to Bolton. And that takes some doing.

 

that was a nasty kick in the pants. i kept telling myself there is no way fulham will throw it away, but lo and behold, they found a way. black 2 weeks for the epl, worst for many a year i think, 4 teams in cl, 4 teams in el, 2 elimiated from cl, 3 elimiated from el, not good at all. still a very real chance (till tomorrows draw perhaps) of being in both finals this year, and ending with a respectable coefficient for the season.

 

on stoke: their home form could take them to the quarters and beyond. wouldnt like to see them in the final though, they are no where near as good as fulham were under hodgeson and probably not even on middlesboro 06s level, where they got a nasty shock in the final.

 

stokes home form is generally highly impressive, they often give the utds, chelsea and arsenals a black eye, they would be far from hopeless against any of the sides youv mentioned, and i would bet on them to ko lazio, besiktas, potentially shalke. also, they got the fa cup final last season, so not totally bereft of ko form.

 

All this European season confirmed is that we are still watching assocciation football, a game in which a lot of surprises are possible and a game in which money does not neccessarily buy you succes day in - day out.

If this happens next year too you could make an argument that the rest of Europe is catching up, or that the English league is falling. As is now it probably is just an odd year out.

 

Slow down. Lets at least wait until the draw comes out on Friday before handicapping teams' chances of reaching the quarters. Stoke might not have to play any of those clubs before the quarters (in fact, they cannot be drawn against an English team in the next round).

 

im not tipping htem to win, it, but to the quarters, and a scalp on route, maybe. anyway, its not worth talking about, their football is often shit (occasionaly they can put on a good show), and if they get anyway, it will mostly be based on the average height of the players rather than any real talent (again though, etherington a few years ago, really fun to watch)

 

Lol its my real surname actually.

Oh and before I forget while we're discussing made up usernames my username on Fifa 12 for X Box is ChEdCa for anybody who wants to add me.

The Barca dilemma is concerning especially the blind eye people show towards their business practices which should be condemned.

But the Champions League still has a special allure to it and the ratings prove that. There's something about playing a foreign club with a lot of money at stake on a weekday night that attracts club supporters worldwide. There's really nothing else like in the international sports index.

 

Thought it was a 'champions league' thread?
The goalposts are getting moved now by the "valencia fan" . Now its become just a general trolling thread which is common in this forum .Amusing!


There are 5 English teams left (2 in the CL , 3 in the Europa)
There are 5 Spanish teams left (2 in the CL , 3 in the Europa)
There are 5 Italian teams left (3 in the CL , 2 in the Europa)

The other leagues have less teams..
Yet the Focus of the attacks is on the English teams. Seems like the performance level is the same as the other leagues ,even in a down year.
Nobody can claim that another league has done better as far as I can see. Apparently having the exact same composition of qualifiers as Spain and Italy = "not doing well".
The joker who started this thread hasnt got anything left to say .

 

England started with more teams than anyone else.

Besides, as the richest league, England is expected to do better than the rest.

It's a very poor - dare I say humiliating? - European campaign for England.

Not that I see it marking a trend. The EPL simply is a top-heavy league with very rich clubs.

One swallow doesn't make a summer.

 

I am not trying to say English teams are bad or this league is better or any of that bullshit. But by simply saying each league has 5 teams left in European competition doesn't mean their performances thus far have been equal.

Clearly, to have 3 teams in the CL and 2 in the EL is better than having 2 in the CL and 3 in the EL. This is not the "EXACT" same composition, as you claimed, but is the same only in the numbers of competitors left. In addition, both Spain (Atletico, Valencia) and Italy (Udinese, Lazio) have teams of lesser caliber in the EL while England has two of its dominant teams, ManCity and ManU, in the EL. That is considered somewhat of a feat for those Spanish and Italian teams while a failure for 2 of the 3 English teams.

So, I think this statement "Nobody can claim that another league has done better as far as I can see" is inaccurate. I wouldn't say EPL teams are "not doing well" but I would say they have not performed "as well as" their Spanish and Italian counterparts thus far.

 

I do.

In past years, many English dismissed the group-stages as a mere formality. A waste of time.

Considering the EPL's wealth, taking advancement for granted is a reasonable enough expectation.

It's like Brazil exiting the WC in the quarter-finals. Horrible result in Brazilian eyes, whereas for say England it's considered a decent enough result.

Different benchmarks apply. And if England's two dominant teams cannot navigate the CL group-stage successfully, that of course is a very sorry performance. Compounded by similar failure in the EL.

It's bad. But hey, England is by far the richest league and will comfortably remain topdog in the UEFA coefficients. I don't see a trend.

 

When considering only EPL, La Liga and Serie A, I thought each league entered 4 teams in the CL and 3 in the EL. What do you mean they started with more teams than anyone else?

Oh, yes, if you consider outside, tangible factors such as wealth and co-efficients than this hasn't been a great campaign thus far for the EPL. But, I was merely looking at it only from the perspective sinner78 was saying in his post.

 

Nobody from England said it was a good season. Is that concept too complex for the people around here?
The statements are just getting repeated now. Its like the first page is being repeated by the same posters who just see and read whatever the hell they like .

None of the other leagues have done shit either. Including the "impoverished" spanish league teams who are so much poorer than England ,if various trolls are to be believed . Not to mention those well known paupers Bayern Munich ,Milan ,Inter Milan..
all teams who never spend big .

Yeah ,we had 1 more team than the other leagues and now we have the same number!!!! well fck me!!! what a comedown .
Shame our contingent was saddled by lower ranked teams who got in on technicalities like relegated Birmingham ,fair play award winners Fulham ,etc

 

Only Man City spend freely .The other teams are saddled with some bad debts acquired from foreign owners. But man city had no CL experience and just missed out on going through . Just keep repeating it as long as you like though..
I doubt you are the type of person who ever listens to anything thats said anyway.

 

Your reply (at least to my post) is off. You said EPL has the "same exact composition" as the other leagues when, in fact, this is not true in comparison to Italy. And, when considering the caliber of the teams in the EL from La Liga, Serie A and EPL it is also not equal. As I said, EPL thus far, have not done as well as La Liga and Serie A. Forget what the first post said or didn't say (I didn't read it and frankly don't care). Do you disagree with what I am saying?

 

Udinese were in the CL but got knocked out by Arsenal in the prelim round.
So its now deemed they are of "lower calibre" .
They are 2nd in the Serie A table right now and are perennial Euro campaigners
But yeah they are some lowly scrub team . Thanks for that info.

Then you have decided that Man City are "dominant" . This was their first ever CL entry!! They have had a good start in the league but have no experience at top level at all . They outclassed Villarreal ,who have far more Euro experience . Then you have Chelsea and Valencia who are similarly ranked in their leagues as maybe being 3rd or 4th best teams . Chelsea came out on top in that battle easily .

English and Spanish clubs played each other 4 times in the CL this year. Prem winning 3 out of 4 games. being denied a 100% record by an 87th minute penalty award for Valencia... In their groups the English clubs were superior points and results wise ,the spaniards went out. But apparently they have "done better" . errrr ok then ,son .

Im not pretending this has been a great year..
none of the other leagues have done been that much better . This is getting really pedantic now and boring..
Im sure retards will be posting in this thread until it hits the max post limit..
#yawn

 

Your idea of what teams are "caliber" is very suspect to say the least. Just because man city had one good domestic season doesnt rank them above Chelsea and Arsenal in calibre . This was the first time they ever entered the CL .

You call Udinese a lower calibre team when they done well in Italy for a good few seasons . They obviously dont even watch the league you claim to support..

well I have got to take off home now..
Im sure other people will be willing to beat their head against a brick wall talking to the clowns in here..

 

I tend to agree. And to add to that, the only reason that the number of teams in Europe is 5 a-piece is because of the mickey-mouse rule where if you get eliminated from the CL group-stage you enter the EL mid-way through that tournament.

Sorry, but finishing 3rd in the CL group-stage is considered a fail and needs to be presented as such. So in terms of success rate to advance in the 2 competitions, we have England at 3-for-8 (CL: 2/4; EL: 1/4) compared to Italy at 5/8 (3/4 in CL and 2/4 in EL).

I'd say 5/8 is better than 3/8.

 

Shouldn't that also mean that Udinese don't count in the Europa? As they failed to qualify for the CL. So Italy would be 1/3 in EL.....just saying.

 

Yea, and I will say it again that Udinese are of lower (not low) caliber, certainly lower than the likes of Manchester United! They finished in 4th place last year and are currently tied for first. That makes them top caliber? *scratches head* Perennial Euro campaigners? They didn't make the EL, let alone the CL, the two seasons prior to last year. 2004-05 they made the CL for their first time in team history. In the past decade, they miss out on the EL/UC as much as they make it.

And, you say Spain hasn't done better and you bring up something about an 87th penalty or whatever. These are all what ifs and hypotehticals. The fact of the matter is both leagues have two in the CL, but three in the EL. But, for one of the EPL teams (ManU), it was considered an embarrassment for them to be out of the CL. For Valencia and Atletico I wouldn't say so. That makes a difference.

You know damn well ManCity are of a different caliber than Udinese. Cmon now. And, again, if you look to the last several years, they've made the CL sparingly, and often miss out on European competition all together. Either way, you're just focusing on ManCity. But, coining them as "dominant" does come down to opinion. So, even if you take them out of the question, one of the EPL's most dominant teams, now and historically - Manchester United - are out of the CL and in the EL. That is a failure for them and for England. But, for Udinese to be knocked out of the CL and then qualify for the knockout round of the EL is a feat for them.

Also, I notice you did not continue that "exact same composition" argument. Boy, was that a loser on it's face. Glad you stopped that one.