First of all let me lay this straight at the door of Rangers fans and their cohorts in the media.
There has been a myth perpetrated which seems to have gained credence over the last few seasons, that Scottish teams if they make the CL group stages are there just to make up the numbers. They will have little chance of qualifying from the group, and are there really for the cash and to do their level best to avoid being the big gun's whipping boys.
Why this regurgitated myth about all our CL participants has gained traction after the last two seasons watching Rangers Wattenaccio style is beyond me, I have to confess.
But lets us cast our collective minds back to our last team to qualify from the group stages. Twice WGS' Celtic team qualified into the last 16 of the CL tournament. Twice! If we were to believe the current orthodoxy one would inevitably come to the conclusion that, that particular team must be better than the current Celtic and Rangers squad. Let us consider that;
Was the team which had mainstays like Lee Naylor, Gary Cladwell, Stephen McManus, Barry Robson, Paul Hartley, JVOH or Scott McDonald so significantly better than the current Old Firm teams, that we are by comparison so impoverished that we must write off our CL chances before they even start?
If the answer is 'No' our teams at this moment are just as good if not better than that particular Celtic side, then how has this doctrine of 'just be glad to be in it' managed to take such a foothold in the minds of the scribes and essayists, who devote all their working hours to analysing the minutia of our national sport? How can they have got it so wrong and given us such a defeatist mentality? It will probably forever remain a mystery for most, but not for me.
The Myth Of Champions League Football
posted on 28/7/11
DSOI-
I think the word to best describe the reporting of the Glasgow clubs' exploits in ECL is apathetic,to say the least.
With regards to team comparisms you appear to omit O'Neil from the equation.he is a master team builder.His team had balance,competence in ALL positions,belief in what Martin told them and an untiring unity in the cause.
Strachan should have set about building a new team,making his own mark if you like.Celtic didn't back him further.
It is easier to hide in Lennon's team.He will instill most of O'Neils ethics if he is not already on his way to doing so.
Good article imo.
posted on 28/7/11
just checked back. lost all away games in the CL that year. drew with aalborg and man u at CP beat villareal = 5points. Wasn't 5 points a big improvement for you last season?
posted on 28/7/11
thanks Mordor
posted on 28/7/11
Why do Celtic fans seem to forget we got to the last 16 of the CL as well? They act like they did it first or something?
posted on 28/7/11
no one is forgetting anything mate. promise!
posted on 28/7/11
Until this current Celtic team win the league THEN go onto qualify for CL group stages then quite simply they will be inferiour to WGS teams. MONs Celtic were a tad unlucky not to qualify as in some cases not even 9 points qualifies you to knockout stages.
In regards to Scottish clubs' bragging rights in CL then Celtic surely have the best record, yes? Over and above that in their respective campaigns in CL they beat the Man Us Milans Portos Juventus Ajax Benficas Lyons to name but a few. Hail Hail
posted on 28/7/11
Nautius - then by your reckoning the WGS team was better than the ONeil team because it achieved more?
posted on 28/7/11
Normally thats how I would gauge a teams status, by what they achieve.I think that there was very little between them tbh. Would probably say MONs team just edged it. I did say they were unlucky not to qualify and also WGS teams didnt have the Suttons n Larssons etc which made his achievments all the more comendable. Yes, towards the end of his time the team were down but it has to be remebered the board instructed him yes we will back you but the emphasis was to be quantity, with the hope of unearthing another Henrik or Lubo etc and not quality, which MON had the luxury of.
posted on 29/7/11
I disagree with your post - I don't think either team has a chance anymore of qualifying unless we luck in along the way. As was pointed out earlier the coefficients have meant we are seeded lower than in the mid 2000s when Rangers were the first Scottish team to qualify for the latter stages, and Celtic impressively followed up by doing it twice.
Secondly, I feel both managers (McLeish and Strachan) were miles better than their current day equivalents.
Thirdly, if you honestly believe either team now could be said to be better than back then, you have to be deluded! As you so often point out, Rangers lack real quality with the exception of a strong spine. Celtic again have a few decent players and a large amount of unknown foreign duffers.
The Rangers team of 05/06 had the quality of Ferguson, Ricksen, Lovenkrands, Buffell, Prso. All who would walk into the current team.
The Celtic team of 06/07 had Boruc, Thomson, JVOH, Miller, Nakamura, Zurawski who again would walk into your team. Your central defenders were Scotlands first choice at the time, and both are now worth far more than either of us could manage to afford now.
Finally, as was pointed out below, there are no 'easy teams' anymore. The eastern teams are bankrolled by Billionaires, the rest are catching up.
The sad fact is, both teams will continue to struggle to even qualify for the Champions League, and when we do the chances of finishing in the top two are slimmer still!
posted on 29/7/11
Secondly, I feel both managers (McLeish and Strachan) were miles better than their current day equivalents
================
Ecosse....are you talking about Walter or Ally here?