Why do I feel so much anger in your posts. You're the one who comes off as a fanboy when you reply with this. England hasn't prevailed at the club level for 10 years and at the national level for 60 years gomd
I'm not seeing any anger in his posts, more a piss take of those posters on here whose objectivity is "a little lacking" when it comes to Italian teams.
I think it's fair to say people are biased towards the leagues they support and it's being magnified in this thread like with Lorne for the Prem or Italy Azzurri fan tho I haven't seen him in a while and thank god cuz he was annoying as fcuk for the serie a
Watch this, ready? Liverpool were unlucky in the final with Salah out after 20 min on top of Mane hitting the post late when at 2-1. Liverpool were excellent in the starting 20 minutes. That game was settled by very fine margins. Am I a Liverpool fan boy now? In the CL, luck plays a massive massive role. Watch, the team with quality that also is healthy and the luckiest will win the CL this year.
Literally the opinion was, hey luck plays a huge role in the CL. We just saw two groups settled on goals for and aggregate where teams literally tied on points and split on head to head. Bias would be OMG only X teams from Y league get unlucky every year. No one is saying that.
Since the UEFA coefficient incorporates 5 years worth of results for 6-7 teams per league, luck shouldn't really come into play for this discussion. Yet its brought up continuously.
Teams play roughly 38 league matches in one year. That is more than most will play over 5 years in Europe combined (if not 10 years). I'm all for expanding these short tournaments in large part to minimize the role of luck. Soccer itself given the scoring system is prone to huge influences that don't involve skill. A bounce here or there can have dramatic effects even more so in such a short tournament like the CL. A great book on this is The Numbers Game. Again, the point isn't that skill doesn't play a role. It certainly does, but we are prone to undervalue the massive role randomness plays in determining results.
Again, its 5 years worth of results for 6-7 teams per league. That's about 60 matches per year, or 300 matches over the 5 years without even counting the qualifying matches played in August. Luck plays no part in the overall coefficient ranking of the top 5 leagues.
For 7 teams, they will play 1,330 league matches over 5 years. The larger the sample size (league format) the more randomness is minimized relative to a small sample size (short tournament format). Is luck the only determining factor? No because skill plays a big role obviously. Does randomness/luck influence outcomes? Yes. Both those statements can be true. The book that I link to along with many other studies provide evidence of this. It's a great read.
Why do you insist on comparing the # of matches with how many league matches are played over the same time span? Just because you find a bigger number to throw out there, doesn't mean 300 matches is inconsequential. The only question that matters is, does luck play a notable role when each entity involved plays 300 matches? Or would you say that luck more or less evens out after 300 football matches?
You really think taking a teams results from 3years ago to 5 years ago is worth basing how the team currently performs? Liverpool was knocked out of the Champions League at home in the group stage by Basel 4 years ago and Man United was sent to the Europa League in a group with PSV, Wolfsburg and Cska Moscow. Please don't embarrass yourself with the luck plays no part in the overall coefficient. Every year there is at least 2 shitty groups where 2-3 teams who are probably among the worst 10 of the 32 who qualify for the tournament through to the knockout stage while 2 teams among the best 15 or best 10 even are eliminated.
Because it's important bud, Luck unfortunately plays a bigger role when the amount of games played is smaller. Such as a 6 game group stage where luck again unfortunately ruins the competition for some teams. Such as Atletico Madrid last season, as a team they're stronger than Roma and they're probably level with Chelsea yet they were dumped out in the group stage with only 1 loss. (Yes I know they tied 4 games but they were the better team in 3 of those draws)
And 300 matches, played out over 10 competitions and 35 group stages + KOs is not much to go by? Just clarifying....
Over 300 games luck evens out, but not nearly to the degree that it does over 1,330 matches. I rightfully brought up the latter figure because it shows that as a percentage of total matches played, European fixtures are a small percentage of the matches a team will play. Take the CL where half the teams will play no more than 6 matches (16% of all their matches). Even players themselves often cited how randomness/luck plays a much bigger role in short competitions relative to a league format. Especially in a tournament were the sequence of lucky breaks plays a bigger role than in a series of one-off league fixtures. In a tournament, the matches before condition the next matches much more than a league format which is more similar to a series of coin flips. Reading that book and seeing how they break down the role of randomness changed my perception of the game. Soccer isn't like basketball for example. The limited frequency of scoring means that goals are magnified in importance where a larger percentage of them we think are a product of non-skill based events.
Not over half of those were played out 3+ years ago. You're right in the fact that the more games evens the luck out, but season by season INDIVIDUALLY not as a collective group spanning over the previous 5 seasons, luck unfortunately does play a bigger role than what people assume. That's all that I'm trying to say, not that it is a make or break with teams going in or out, just that it CAN and DOES play a role in the competition
If that's true, the moderators haven't detected it for over half a year. The old username was red carded. I'm a Manchester United fan, and I want England to be the best in the country coefficients, but I like the posts by Serie A fans in this topic better than LorneMarvello. My favorite Serie A club is Genoa, and they haven't been in a UEFA competition recently. I'm happy that Genoa's Krzysztof Piatek leads Serie A in goals. He played in Poland last season, and if you were choosing a newcomer to lead Serie A in goals you would choose Ronaldo.
Thanks for the rep, but I do have to say that "England hasn't prevailed at the club level for 10 years" isn't true because Chelsea won in 2011-2012. Spain is trying for their sixth consecutive CL, which would tie England's record from 1976-1977 through 1981-1982. In 5 of the first 7 Finals, the losing club scored at least 2 goals. In the 56 Finals since then, the only losing club to score at least 2 goals was when AC Milan blew the 2004-2005 and lost penalty kicks after a 3-3 draw with Liverpool.
The Mighty Nations League Finals. Nations League Finals > World Cup am I right? Maybe you guys can win something