FIFA Club World Cup: Japan 2016 [R]

Subscribing.


Santos of Mexico announced they were acquiring Ventura Alvarado and Oswaldo Martinez, as well as sending Marchesin to America which likely means the end of Munoz. Wonder if the premature announcement will effect the intensity with which these players play.

 

Marchesin gonna play for America in december? in japan?

 

Mamelodi Sundowns have a cool name and badge. And Brazil kits, I always like a Brazil kit.

 

Don't think so. Unless the rules have changed, no one from the winter transfer period is eligible to play in the CWC. Monterrey and Boca jrs ran into this problem if I remember correctly.

 

I was rooting for the Red Diamonds since they had a better regular season, but as we've learned in all sports with playoffs, the playoffs are what determines the better team. So congrats to Kashima, they won when it counts. Too bad the GS Warriors couldn't.

Los Del Sur ‏@LDSoficial 7h7 hours ago
Atención Colombia! Todos listos para la multitudinaria despedida del Campeón de América rumbo a Japón por las calles de Medellín y Bogotá?

América Monumental ‏@AmeMonumental 11h11 hours ago
Se confirmó lo que te adelantamos hace una semana: @rubenssambueza no irá ni a la banca mañana. Ya piensa en Japón.

Priorities

 

... on the day. Or rather, over two days.
We gone over this before and you're often in the very minority.
Red Diamonds had the better team from March-November which is the fairer way to decide a league title.
But as in the Western Hemishphere where we know playoffs rake in the cash and are deemed by many fans to be "exciting", the J.League uses a ridiculous short-window playoff system in November to decide who wins the league which started in March.
So whereas the Urawa were the better team for nine months, Kashima had the better team for two days. And since two days determines who wins a league that started in March ( ) I, too, congratulate the Antlers for a great two day run.

Question:
If "the playoffs are what determines the better team" why don't the major European leagues employ a playoff format, especially the Premier League which loves to boast about its income? Surely, a playoff format would bring in even more €y€ba££$, no?

 

Not a minority opinion at all, it's objective fact that it all comes down to the playoffs, and that they determine the best. You can't judge a team by regular season in playoff leagues. Would Urawa have won more regular season games if there were no playoffs? Not necessarily. Change the rules, you change the results.

So if you say Urawa, or the GS Warriors etc., were better during the reg season, it doesn't mean much, just means they get a higher seed. But if a team was better in the playoffs, that means everything, that's the main determinant.

And yes, I remember that WR thread from a few years ago where some posters just couldn't understand. Sad for them, but others here in The Beautiful Game forum did get it, they were smarter.

I congratulate the Antlers for being the best Japanese team this year, the only counterargument to that would be the JL team that went deepest in the AFC CL. Calling a playoff system unfair is silly, these are grown men who agreed to this system, no one was conned into it.

This isn't a comparison of playoff-system leagues vs round-robin-only leagues. No one is saying NCAA hoops has a better system to determine the best than the PL. Both determine the best for their respective fields because both fields were told what the rules are to claim the title.

Whether it's single-elimination, round robin, jumping thru hoops, winning more electoral votes, grabbing a belt on top of the ladder, etc., as long as the competitors know the format, it is fair.

Idk if a playoff format would bring in more money for Euro leagues, I'm glad they haven't switched to it because the complaining by purists would be insane. But if by some horrible reason they did, then the champion is still the best even if it's a 1-game Final played in MSG using footsal rules with timeouts, cheerleaders and the Pepsi Pride Crew shooting shirts at people throughout the game.

The only counterargument to Euro league champions is if another team from that league went farther in the CL.

 

AtNa also will have their playoff opponent waiting while they try to become World Champs, they're in the semis of their domestic title hunt.

If America reaches the bronze medal game, I hope they don't play the bench in anticipation of the MX Final. 4 days are ample time to rest up for it.

 

That neglects to say that Real Madrid must win hosting Borussia Dortmund to win their group. I think Real Madrid would be disappointed to finish behind Borussia Dortmund, who is only sixth in the Bundesliga. The fact that clubs from the same country can't meet in the Round of 16 means Real Madrid can finish second without risking having to face Barcelona or Atletico Madrid, both of whom won their groups. If Real Madrid finishes second, their possible Round of 16 opponents are Paris-Saint Germain, Arsenal, Benfica, Napoli, Besiktas, Monaco, Leicester City, and Juventus. That includes multiple clubs from groups whose winner has not been determined yet.

http://us.soccerway.com/national/new-zealand/premiership/20162017/regular-season/r34954/ has Auckland in third:

Eastern Suburbs: 16 points from 7 games
Waitakere United: 13 points from 8 games, +1
Auckland City: 13 points from 7 games, +8

I don't know what the tiebreaker is, and I'm not guaranteeing that Soccerway is using the correct tiebreaker. Even if Auckland City is behind Waitakere United on the tiebreaker, Auckland City is second in points per game.

 

yeah, its the first time that i can recall. usually the mexican team either doesn't even make the liguilla or is eliminated quickly. club america are also undefeated under lavolpe so far.


i only wish concacaf wasn't drawn in the same bracket as eufa so frequently. i'd be much more intrigued to see the concacaf winner possibly face the liberrtadores winner, especially since the top mexican teams weren't allowed to participate in the CL most of the time.

 

Christ....

 

So you don't believe a bad call by the referee could influence the outcome of a playoff final?
Or a key player missing a playoff game due to injury or suspension?

It is for me. A round robin format is easily the fairer way to decide a league champion.
Cup tournaments satisfy those who enjoy the live-or-die format of playoff-type knockout competitions. More exciting, so they say. But in every instance the domestic round-robin champion is awarded higher prestige than the domestic knockout tournament cup winner.
I don't believe Leicester City's league campaign last season wouldn't have garnered as much notoriety had the league been decided via a playoff format and they ended up winning it. A round robin format requires months of consistency. A playoff format only requires days, or weeks at best.

 

Its no use. ICF thinks the best teams always win the biggest competitions** and the people (who are the vast majority) who disagree with that view are all idiots.

** That includes the CWC meaning if Atletico Nacional beat Real Madrid they are actually better than Real Madrid!

 

Sure, it happens often, but it's still no excuse for the losing team. Good thing these pathetic excuses are never accepted by the public. The few times that players blame their loss on the ref, they are rightfully criticized for doing so.

It happens to everyone. Not a valid excuse. Even on this board, when losses were blamed on injuries, the excuse maker is shut up by other posters.

Both ways are fair. How can you say it's unfair for athletes to accept a playoff format? Did the league commissioner put guns to the players' heads until they accepted the terms?

It's not because of the format, it's because of the trophy.

Leicester's title wasn't notorious, it was celebrated worldwide.

It depends on the playoff format as to how much consistency is needed. But if you can get in with a losing record, you can't hold it against the team for coasting in there. Low seeds win often.

Round-robins are pleasing to purists, KOs are pleasing to the rest. Both are equally enjoyable for me, and both can decide the best if the trophy to be won is created for the purpose of deciding the best.

 

Only a minority disagree, otherwise the World Cup and CL wouldn't be popular, and you wouldn't have announcers saying EVERY YEAR that those tourneys crown the best in the world or Europe.

If AtNa pull it off, then yes, they are better, they earned the bragging rights. Why would you want to discredit them? This is the Super Bowl of club football. For all the marbles. It isn't a friendly or league fixture. The purpose of this tourney is to see who is the best among the 6 continental champs.

The only champ I'd discredit would be the host since they don't really belong there. Even then, if they won it all and anyone discredited them, it would be pitiful sour grapes.

 

@It's called FOOTBALL
I agree with just about all of your points.
But this does not equate to "knockout tournaments are always won by the best team", which is where we'll have to agree to disagree. The thread has gone off-topic long enough.