What has happened to the English teams in the CL?

And we'd still get no credit, as they'd have started rolling out the "only four good teams", "no English players", "foreign coaches, foreign owners", "TV Money", "billionaire investment". All of which I've frequently pointed out as hypocritical, as Serie A and La Liga were spending extravagantly and bringing in foreign players, while seeing a concentration of elite clubs dominating, long before we did.

Europe will never give English football any credit. Even when we truly did dominate the game, with Liverpool, Nottingham Forest and Aston Villa winning the European Cup year after year, we were accused of not having any skill and just being fast, strong brutes.

This thread is a tribute to the fact that fans of certain leagues can't wait for English teams to struggle.

What happened to the English clubs in the CL this season? Well one underestimated it's group draw and went out, one narrowly got eliminated from the group of death, another came within a whisker of reversing a first leg 4-0 scoreline against AC Milan, while the fourth went all the way, defeating teams from Germany, Spain and Italy in the process.

 

That's why I laughed when Chelsea won. To stick 2 fingers up at the "EPL in decline" bandwagon. The fact it was a mid range Chelsea team being crowned the best team in Europe made it even funnier. Shoved it up Platini too. Although yes Chelsea have spent a great deal in the past.

And on top of that it was the greatest premier league season of all time with an incredible end. Not bad for a league "In decline"

I think some people in Europe would rather just watch Barcelona all day than the Champions League. We might as well just hand them the trophies each season rather than play the game. After all whoever looks best deserves to win right?

 

It's rare the team that does well in international cups and in its own league, at the same time.

Almost always, one comes at the expense of the other; unless it's a Scotland-style league, where the other teams are so far behind, no amount of tiredness makes them equal.

 

Weren't the last 4 CL winners also winners of their own league?

 

Yes, and that's remarkable, but the norm is that there's a drop in league performance when you have to play the extra continentcal cup games. Even Manchester United and Inter dropped points (otherwise they wouldn't have) for the season while they had to play the extra Champs League games.

In the case of Chelsea, the managerial issues with Villas-Boas compounded the problem. I don't think anyone seriously thinks they're the team #6 in England right now, playing as they did versus Barcelona and Bayern.

 

Tottenham were a much better team with a stronger squad for most of the season if you watched them play, they even played better football than Arsenal at times, and maybe the best in the League for some periods.

Newcastle also beat Chelsea 2-0 at Stamford Bridge recently.

So Chelsea are at least the 5th best team, tied close to Newcastle.
Arsenal and Tottenham are better. Although when Van Persie goes Arsenal could slip.

 

So you're ignoring all the former players and pundits saying the same thing?

The premier league has never been closer in its history, and ended like it did on the final day.

Are Gary Neville, Graeme Souness, Jamie Redknapp and Stan Collymoore etc TV Fan boys? Even they said it was the best ever season.

You call an English team winning the European Cup "Poor in Europe"

When did a German team other than Bayern win a European trophy since 1997?

 

Was it the best season? Not sure. It was as dramatic an end as I’ve experienced, but is that moment colouring our perception of the entire campaign?

Also, excitement doesn't always equal quality. I think we all recognise that the top English clubs are not at their best. However, I would say those teams are in "transition" rather than "decline". Also, the standard of technique and strategy of promoted teams is improving. Critics long cast aside the strength of the "big 4" as indicative of the EPL quality when it suited them. Now they're using it as the measuring stick.

EPL midfields not great? Sure. I’m not sure to what extent that can be a blanket reason their European performances. I’m also not sure to what extent that can be aimed at EPL sides any more than the state of Europe in general. Despite the strength of Barca and Real Madrid, this isn’t a vintage period for the game overall.

A transitional Chelsea did okay against most teams, then scrapped their way past probably two of the best three teams in the tournament. The fact that this Bayern side is rated so highly, simply illustrates my previous point.

The bigger question is how far are the EPL teams to reaching their previous stature? Or if there are teams available to replace those that can’t? City are a ready-made replacement who could probably contend next season. Chelsea are a few big signings and the right coach away. There’s enough fuel in the tank for the older players to provide squad depth. United require a little more experience for their younger players and either a couple of strong signings and/or for certain players to fulfill their potential.

Arsenal, Spurs and Liverpool are the biggest question marks and depending on various decisions can either become very significant outfits or become entrenched in mediocrity.

 

Good post

I will speculate that City won't do much in europe with Mancini in charge of them, however.

 

This has been the most exciting and competative season I have ever seen with some fantastic football and so many teams who can beat each other.

Tottenham, Man City are the strongest they have ever been in the Premiership.
Newcastle are the strongest they have been since 2002.

Chelsea beat the top 4 many times and won 2 major trophies.

Arsenal had blips but were still strong and Van Persie had an amazing season.

Liverpool beat Chelsea, Arsenal and Newcastle

Man Utd still managed to nearly win the league.

 

That's more true of Spurs who may be at their optimum level right now and sustaining even that is dependent on them keeping hold of their talent.

Arsenal's biggest barrier to success is Wenger's increasingly stubborn obsession with identifying and bringing through youth prospects. He's handicapped by financial constraints compared to the very top tier of world clubs. However, he has greater spending power than he's tended to utilise in recent seasons.

Liverpool have the greatest chance if they get their act together. Say what you will about Man Utd's OOT support, but Liverpool certainly rival it domestically. Their global support is also not to be sniffed at. They have huge potential for increasing revenue. That they haven't already is a damning indictment on the running of the club over the last twenty years.

 

Do you think the pundits are going to be paid more for saying it's the best season so far?
They already have contracts. Take off the Tin Foil hat.

Nobody tells Souness what to say that's for sure and he tells it like it is. So does Gary Neville.
The ex pro's are experienced independently minded professionals who have seen and been involved with past seasons.

 

So you're telling me Man City, Newcastle and Spurs are not good sides?
Chelsea, the European Champions, are not a good side? LOL bitter much?

Arsenal beat Ac Milan at home without breaking sweat. But sure Arsenal are not good are they?
They beat Dortmund at home and nearly won away.

Show me another league with "poor teams" where the team that finished 6th can win the Champions League.

Dortmund? Valencia? Shalke? Malaga? Stuttgart? Lazio? Inter? Give me a break

 

What does OOT mean?

 

"Out of Town" or more specifically "Not Local".

 

I'm sorry, did I speak ill of a German team? Did I say Bayern didn't have a good midfield? Or that EPL teams did?

I think it's been well established that European football in general is at it's worst in a while. The AC Milan and Juventus teams that have contested Serie A this season are not vintage. Man City, while looking good at times, still almost lost out to a poorly regarded Man Utd in the EPL.

La Liga actually gave a good account of themselves in Europe, save for Real Madrid and Barcelona's disappointing CL semis, yet the league was still characterised by a gargantuan gulf between the top two and everybody else.

Outside Bayern Munich, German and French teams continue to struggle to make an impact in Europe.

I'll go back to my orginal point: this thread was born out of United's elimination from a relatively weak group, Citeh not getting out of the group of death and some poor 2nd round, 1st leg results for English teams.

Furthermore, this was stoked by Serie A fans looking at a the Milan/Arsenal 4-0 and the Napoli/Chelsea 3-1 and declaring fresh dominance over the EPL. In hindsight, Milan lost any credit garnered from that result by almost blowing it in the return leg, while Chelsea of course, went all the way.

That was far too small a sample size to damn any league going forward.

 

chealsea was lucky. they got dominated in both games against barca and if barca chealsea played 10 games barca 9 chealsea 1 same thing in the final as well bayern dominated from minute 1 to minute 120 and game finnished in tie. chealsea won on penalties. and if bayern played chelsea 10 games bayern 9 chealsea 1. reason chealsea came to final was mazzari being stupid, barca and bayern bad luck. you were not better in 4 out of 5 games 1 against napoli 2 against barca and final you were outplayed and goot some fluke goals.

 

Just because you're lucky, it doesn't make your opponent "unlucky".

Barca and Bayern wasted chances. Missed penalties in fact. Chelsea took theirs. Chelsea were lucky that their opponents didn't finish effectively. However, all this complete guff about the scores being "unjust" are ridiculous. Barca and Bayern blew it. They weren't unlucky.

And after an entire season of haters declaring that English football is on it's way out, Chelsea and United appear to be making some solid signings. Meanwhile, City are already loaded with quality (as much as it loathes me to admit) so I think these declarations are very premature.