comment by The Devil's Advocate's Advocate - I Represent Him (U6522)
posted 2 minutes ago
It’s really not subjective. The FA, the organising body, categorises it as a competitive fixture. Whether it is important is another debate. I don’t know how people can even argue against this.
--------------------------------------------------------------
How many in game rules of the FA's rely on the subjective opinions of the referee? By having a retrospective appeal policy all their own rules are subject to debate by a few people in a boardroom.

The Charity Shield's capacity as an official game is only as strong as them deciding one day it's not deemed important enough to stage anymore, which (if that happened) would be based on widespread subjective opinion that it's not a competitive fixture.

It's a subjective argument because in this case the source has no credibility.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is desperate.

There is no subjectivity. It’s about categorisation, and it’s recognised as a competitive fixture by all governing bodies.

You literally cannot argue with this. It’s a black and white issue.

That is desperate.

There is no subjectivity. It’s about categorisation, and it’s recognised as a competitive fixture by all governing bodies.

You literally cannot argue with this. It’s a black and white issue.
----------------------------------------------------------
Take the 2006 Italian scandal. The FIGC declared Inter the 05/06 Serie A champions despite finishing 2nd in the league table. That's the official position of the governing body in that example, is that open to subjectivity, yes it is. Furthest thing from a black and white issue.

The Charity Shield's relevance is the same. The only thing about it that makes it an official game on the calendar is the FA's word that it is. There's no prize money and no consequences to the result, so they in effect treat it like a friendly. That's the subjectivity.

You literally cannot argue with this. It’s a black and white issue.

-------------------------

In a world where there are three outcomes; win, lose or draw, we have a situation where the score 2-2 can be deemed anything. Other than a draw of course.

There is no black and white.

The only thing about it that makes it an official game on the calendar is the FA's word that it is.
———
Yep and FIFA. They are the bodies that categorise these things and why it is official. That is black and white. No ifs and buts. I can’t believe I’m even having this conversation, especially with an intelligent poster such as yourself.

The only argument around the charity shield has been whether or not it is important not whether or not it is an official match or honour, because it is.

comment by Manfrombelmonty (U1705)
posted 12 minutes ago
You literally cannot argue with this. It’s a black and white issue.

-------------------------

In a world where there are three outcomes; win, lose or draw, we have a situation where the score 2-2 can be deemed anything. Other than a draw of course.

There is no black and white.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

You lost in the competitive community shield. Just accept it

I can’t believe I’m even having this conversation, especially with an intelligent poster such as yourself.
-------------------------------------------------------
I'm half playing devil's advocate if it makes you feel better. Defending the statement that we're unbeaten in all competitions this season

Doesn't seem to be an issue then. OP didn't state only team 'officially unbeaten' so there's no issues with the semantics

comment by The Devil's Advocate's Advocate - I Represent Him (U6522)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
It's not subjectiveThe charity shield is literally an official game. It is.
----------------------------------------------------------
If a tree falls in the woods and no-one's around, does it make a sound?

If the Charity Shield is a competitive game, but nobody treats it like one unless to suit an agenda, is it really competitive?

It's incredibly subjective
----------------------------------------------------------------------
IT'S NOT SUBJECTIVE. IT'S AN OFFICIAL GAME.

If you don't care about it, that's fine, that's your business, but it's an official game.

OP didn't state only team 'officially unbeaten' so there's no issues with the semantics

----------------------------

Salzburg are still unbeaten

It's not semantics, the guy is just wrong.

Devil’s Wumvocate

No it just said all competitions, which is still wrong.

This charity shield thing is hilarious!!!. Pundits on all known tv stations, reporters/journalists of all the top newspapers report that we are unbeaten. It's just the desperate jealous fans of other clubs that disagree. Hilarious HaHaHa. We are unbeaten. Get a grip HaHa

I support Chelsea and we are not unbeaten.

Salzburg are still unbeaten
-------------------------------------------------------
Based off the comments the Salzburg thing sounds even more interesting than the Charity Shield thing. Drew the match but lost the tie? What glorious semantic possibilities, reminds me of the question was Mourinho really unbeaten at home for so long considering he lost on pens to Charlton in 2004

Okey dokey. Statement should read 'only unbeaten team (but not officially) in Europe to avoid elimination from competition'.... rolls right off the tongue doesn't it?

This charity shield thing is hilarious!!!. Pundits on all known tv stations, reporters/journalists of all the top newspapers report that we are unbeaten.
———
Agreed, it’s hilarious all these people are wrong.

Genclerbirligi in the Turkish 2nd division haven't been beaten in a competitive game this season. So now we have 2 teams unbeaten. neither of which are Chelsea

Genclerbirligi in the Turkish 2nd division haven't been beaten in a competitive game this season. So now we have 2 teams unbeaten. neither of which are Chelsea
--------------------------------------------------------------
Only unbeaten team (but not officially) in Europe to avoid tournament elimination and are able to pronounce the clubs name properly, this season.

Next argument?

FC Daugava of the latvian second division may have only played 2 matches this seaon.

4-0 and 5-1 so I think thats two draws isn't it?

Undefeated all the same.

Mourinho is unbeaten this season since all the games he lost don’t matter in my opinion so they’re not official games.

FC Daugava of the latvian second division may have only played 2 matches this seaon.

4-0 and 5-1 so I think thats two draws isn't it?

Undefeated all the same.
----------------------------------------------------------
Only unbeaten team (but not officially) in Europe to play five games or more whilst avoiding tournament elimination and are able to pronounce the clubs name properly, this season.

We're still the best.

Next

Anyone been following the Slovakian Division C Bratislavan League?

man! What a story. Slovan Bratislava B are the only team in Europe to have not yet been beaten!

OK how about this? Clearly Slovan Bratislava B are the best team in Europe, I mean there's just no question about it, but plucky Chelsea are right behind him having been unbeaten, etc..... (can't even be bothered to copy/paste it).

How are you finding all these clubs btw? Serious question