Saprissa held on in La Chorrera and got an insurance goal from - who else? - Johan Venegas to advance to the CL semifinals, and in so doing become the first Central American side to reach the Champions League. 2020 CCL Qualifiers 1. Cruz Azul [MEX3] 2. Club América [MEX1] 3. Club León [MEX4] 4. Portmore United (JAM) [CFU1] 5. Tigres UANL [MEX2] 6. Atlanta United [USA1, USA3 or USA4] 7. LAFC [USA1 or USA2] 8. L'Impact de Montréal [CAN1] 9. New York City FC [USA1, USA2 or USA3] 10. Deportivo Saprissa [CRC3]
The commentators can always be wrong, but this doesn't make any sense to me. Like, I get the reasoning - Waterhouse and San Carlos are treated as having "won" their match via penalties. But if there's a penalty shootout in a tie where the teams exchanged, say, 2-1 results, and the team that loses the second leg wins the shootout, then by Concacaf logic, they'd be on 6 points after 2 matches with a win and a loss that is paired with a penalty shootout win.
Okay correction. New York City FC would be playing playoffs in New York City if they played at Citi Field. They would not be playing in New York City if games got moved to Red Bull Arena or Connecticut. In addition, it's possible that they could sell more playoff tickets than the capacity of Red Bull Arena. Let's compare the Quarterfinal losers if the club with fewer points is eliminated in every Quarterfinal: Independiente: 4 points, -1, 5 goals scored, 6 goals allowed (done) Comunicaciones: 4 points, -1, 2 goals scored, 3 goals allowed (hosts Olimpia) San Carlos: 4 points, -1 or -2, 0 goals scored (or 1 if they get 1 for winning PKs), 2 goals allowed (hosts Alianza) Waterhouse: 4 points, -1 or -2, 2 goals scored (or 3 if they get 1 for winning PKs), 4 goals allowed (at Motagua) Independiente qualifies if at least two of the other three lose. If Waterhouse loses, they need Comunicaciones and San Carlos to lose enough tomorrow to win the tiebreaker. If Waterhouse loses 3-0, they don't have much hope. If winning PKs does not give a goal scored, Comunicaciones qualifies with a loss as long as San Carlos and Waterhouse lose by at least as much. Since clubs normally do better at home, I would think a majority of PKs come from each club winning at home as opposed to each club winning away or two draws. Looking at the 2019-2020 UEFA Champions League and Europa League Qualifying Rounds, my hypothesis was wrong, 4 PKs came from two draws, 3 PKs came from each club winning at home, and none came from each club winning away. I only looked at PKs, not aggregates decided by away goals.
Normally I would be in agreement...but how would they make this up? 1. I highly doubt they're nerds poring over each line of the regulations, like...um, **shies away from mirror** 2. Normal football logic dictates that 2 draws and a loss = 2 points. That is, I don't think the Yahoo! Sports guys (don't know who the main commentator was - Tony Meola was the color analyst) would state that San Carlos and Waterhouse are on 4 points unless Concacaf put that in the game notes for them. Agreed - this is non-sensical. I've been bugging them on Twitter about this to no avail, so it looks like (once again), we'll have to wait for the situation to actually arise before they explain it. And if anything, I disagree with the extra points being given even in this instance, as IMO it encourages teams to be risk-averse - if sneaking through on penalties is going to be treated the same as actually winning the second leg.
You're right about all of this. Though, American commentators are always horrible about getting competition information correct, especially when it's in any way complicated, so I'm always skeptical when they advance qualification scenarios that don't make sense. It's pretty explicit in their regulations (which still have Track Changes enabled, because Concacaf can't do anything right), under Section II(G)(1)(b)(i): "Matches won by penalty kicks, will be considered as a victory, and winning club will be awarded +3 points." I'm very curious as to when that was added, since it's still marked up. Also curious if that means that the team losing the penalty shootout is viewed as having earned a draw or a loss. https://res.cloudinary.com/concacaf...s/2019_Concacaf_League_Regulations-_ENG_1.pdf So, bad grammar, and the faulty logic I laid out before: if a team loses the second leg, but the match goes to penalties and that team wins the shootout, they're considered to have won the match, at least according to these ham-fisted rules. Concacaf needs to hire some law students (not even lawyers, this is literal amateur shit) to review their regulations. I drafted better regulations than this during law school.
Damn, I didn't even think about that. It's insignificant insofar as it affects seeding for future tournaments. Either Concacaf goes with the "can't have a winner without a loser" logic (in that case, Herediano - CRC1 this year - finished their campaign with only 1 point rather than 2 ); or they go by the strict letter of the regulations, in which there's nothing dictating 0 points for the penalty shootout loser. If the latter, then it's even more reason to park the bus in the second leg...although teams are unlikely to immediately care about their country's future seeding.
Don't know which one of you fixed the Wiki page, but thanks Motagua settled for a 0-0 draw with Waterhouse to make the CL semifinals and the CCL; the fact that both Waterhouse and CAI bowed out with fewer than 6 points means that Motagua's archrivals Olimpia are guaranteed Champions League participation as well. However, the "PK wins count for 3 pts" quirk means that the Jamaicans still have a shot at the CCL, so long as at least one home team loses tonight. 2020 CCL Qualifiers 1. Cruz Azul [MEX3] 2. Club América [MEX1] 3. Club León [MEX4] 4. Portmore United (JAM) [CFU1] 5. Tigres UANL [MEX2] 6. Atlanta United [USA1, USA3 or USA4] 7. LAFC [USA1 or USA2] 8. L'Impact de Montréal [CAN1] 9. New York City FC [USA1, USA2 or USA3] 10. Deportivo Saprissa [CRC3] 11. Motagua [HON1] 12. Olimpia [HON2]
Well...credit where it's due, Concacaf caught me out this time 🐘¡@AlianzaFC_sv se clasifica a la Liga de Campeones Concacaf Scotiabank! Los Albos confirman su puesto en la élite de nuestra región. ¡Nos vemos en 2020! #SCCL2020 pic.twitter.com/2QR2oRoteF— Concacaf Champions Cup (@TheChampions) October 3, 2019 Btw, as you can tell below, dropping the top seeds in Central America down into the Concacaf League will wreak havoc on their CCL coefficients. See: SLV1, PAN1, and potentially CRC1 this evening missing out on the 4 points just for showing up in CCL. So unless a Central American country lucks out with its top seeds regularly qualifying for CCL and making strong runs there, Pot 1 for the CCL draw will remain North American for the foreseeable future. 2020 CCL Qualifiers 1. Cruz Azul [MEX3] 2. Club América [MEX1] 3. Club León [MEX4] 4. Portmore United (JAM) [CFU1] 5. Tigres UANL [MEX2] 6. Atlanta United [USA1, USA3 or USA4] 7. LAFC [USA1 or USA2] 8. L'Impact de Montréal [CAN1] 9. New York City FC [USA1, USA2 or USA3] 10. Deportivo Saprissa [CRC3] 11. Motagua [HON1] 12. Olimpia [HON2] 13. Alianza [SLV3]
Watching the 2nd half of San Carlos/Alianza, I just realized that if this stays 0-0, Waterhouse would top San Carlos to reach the CCL on goals scored.
San Carlos won the return leg 1-0, not enough to advance to the semifinals (or win 2-0, lose on penalties and cause regulatory havoc with how many points each side would get ), but enough to send them through to the CCL...at CA Independiente's expense. Now it's down to Waterhouse and Comunicaciones; the latter just need to avoid defeat for the minimum goal of CCL advancement. 2020 CCL Qualifiers 1. Cruz Azul [MEX3] 2. Club América [MEX1] 3. Club León [MEX4] 4. Portmore United (JAM) [CFU1] 5. Tigres UANL [MEX2] 6. Atlanta United [USA1, USA3 or USA4] 7. LAFC [USA1 or USA2] 8. L'Impact de Montréal [CAN1] 9. New York City FC [USA1, USA2 or USA3] 10. Deportivo Saprissa [CRC3] 11. Motagua [HON1] 12. Olimpia [HON2] 13. Alianza [SLV3] 14. AD San Carlos [CRC1]
Comunicaciones held Olimpia 0-0, earning the point needed to overtake Waterhouse on GD for the last CL ticket to the big stage. 2020 CCL Qualifiers 1. Cruz Azul [MEX3] 2. Club América [MEX1] 3. Club León [MEX4] 4. Portmore United (JAM) [CFU1] 5. Tigres UANL [MEX2] 6. Atlanta United [USA1, USA3 or USA4] 7. LAFC [USA1 or USA2] 8. L'Impact de Montréal [CAN1] 9. New York City FC [USA1, USA2 or USA3] 10. Deportivo Saprissa [CRC3] 11. Motagua [HON1] 12. Olimpia [HON2] 13. Alianza [SLV3] 14. AD San Carlos [CRC1] 15. Comunicaciones [GUA3]
Makes sense, logically. Dear Concacaf: This would be a lot easier if you just had a rules expert to whom clubs, NTs, media and fans could reach out for these kinds of questions. You know, someone based in Miami, who already knows your regulations like the back of his hand, and speaks the main languages of the region... **slyly leaves a CV on the table**
Oh man...oh, oh man... @EvanJ @ArsenalMetro @newtex @maizenblue07 Y'all gonna want to sit down and take a swig of something, because what I'm about to share is mind-numbingly stupid. So, with respect to the "PK wins count for 3 pts" rule, I've been openly wondering two things: 1. How does it apply to a series when the second leg does not end in a draw? Does a team get 3 points for winning the shootout even if it loses the game? 2. The rules clearly state that the PK winner gets 3 points...but does the PK loser get 0? Independent of what happened during the 90 minutes? ...well, here you go (see 0:59): As Comunicaciones' coach explained, if they had won 2-0 and lost the penalty shootout, they would have ended up with nothing. No CL semifinals and no CCL qualification, b/c they would've received 0 points for winning a game 2-0 **bangs head against wall** So with reaching the CCL being their first goal, Comuncaciones were better off settling for 0-0 or 1-0 than actually trying to win the series. That is a disaster in game design, and Concacaf needs to get rid of this nonsense as soon as possible (so help me if this makes it into the CCL regulations ).
I'm at a wedding in Connecticut all weekend, so I'm ready for this. Go on. Pure, undistilled Concacaf. Drink that shit in.
I don't know if people remember, but when I do prediction contests for aggregates, I ask for the second leg predictions after regulation. I don't want to deal with if 1-1 or 2-1 was a better prediction if it was 1-1 after regulation and 2-1 after extra time or PKs. In terms of a "swig," I don't drink alcohol.
Worth noting here that based on how the MLS regular season ended, if LAFC, NYCFC or Atlanta win MLS Cup, the hand-me-down berth goes to Seattle.
If you believe the MLS prediction odds at 538, then Seattle has an 87% chance of qualifying for the CCL as either champion or via the hand me down spot.
...then again, 538 gave us a double-93% chance of Pres. Hillary Clinton congratulating the USMNT on qualifying for Russia 2018
It's not like CONCACAF hasn't done this kind of thing before, like in 1994 Caribbean Cup qualification where a golden goal OT goal counted for 2 in the standings, resulting in the farcical situation where Grenada was trying to score either a goal or an own goal as either would send them through to the next round. As the Grenadian manager said:
If I'm not mistaken, that one was on the CFU - who have a long track record of ridiculous rules and rulings.
🔜🔜🔜RT if you're ready for the next round! // @Audi #MLSCupPlayoffs pic.twitter.com/gZ8sZVhvdn— Major League Soccer (@MLS) October 22, 2019 If the home teams prevail in all of the latter three games, Seattle will be CCL-bound by Thursday.
As I was saying... Back at it! 💚🙌 @SoundersFC is the last team qualified to #SCCL2020 See you next year! #SoundersMatchday pic.twitter.com/1FqOoXKPzA— Concacaf Champions Cup (@TheChampions) October 25, 2019 So our guest list for the next Champions League is complete: 2020 CCL Qualifiers 1. Cruz Azul [MEX3] 2. Club América [MEX1] 3. Club León [MEX4] 4. Portmore United (JAM) [CFU1] 5. Tigres UANL [MEX2] 6. Atlanta United [USA1, USA3 or USA4] 7. LAFC [USA1 or USA2] 8. L'Impact de Montréal [CAN1] 9. New York City FC [USA2 or USA3] 10. Deportivo Saprissa [CRC3] 11. Motagua [HON1] 12. Olimpia [HON2] 13. Alianza [SLV3] 14. AD San Carlos [CRC1] 15. Comunicaciones [GUA3] 16. Seattle Sounders [USA1 or USA4]
In addition, as we discussed on the CCL thread: Unless Concacaf decides to change up the coefficients, we already know the pots for the Dec. 3 draw: Pot 1 Club América (MEX) Tigres UANL (MEX) Cruz Azul (MEX) LAFC (USA) New York City FC (USA) Atlanta United (USA) Seattle Sounders (USA) L'Impact de Montréal (CAN) Pot 2 Club León (MEX) Motagua (HON) Olimpia (HON) Deportivo Saprissa (CRC) San Carlos (CRC) Alianza (SLV) Comunicaciones (GUA) Portmore United (JAM)