comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 3 minutes ago
On point 1, if every game is a big game; then there are no big games. The reason people look forward to those fixtures is that they are prestigious and infrequent. If you make every game like that then they lose their effect and there no higher level to get excited about.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Man United vs Real Madrid will be a big game even if it’s the 76th time they have met that season - there is always a narrative with these games.
comment by #LiquidGenius (U20571)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Sut mine klunker - Admin 5 (U1250)
comment by #LiquidGenius (U20571)
comment by Sut mine klunker - Admin 5 (U1250)
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
On point one, you look forward to playing them because there are always narratives past the one layer of “to qualify for the next round”. They are rivals and depending on the season u can be even on points or one side better than the other.
I for one, have been begging to get Real Madrid and was bored of constantly getting Barca, or Liverpool in the 00s.
Add the fact that there is no competition in this thing and no repercussions such as a knock out two legged tie. Then yes it will get boring. So it is not nonsense at all and people are allowed that opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The super league still would end with 2 leg QFs & SFs tbf, with a one off Final.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But for what purpose? A final in a closed shop. Next year we go again, same teams. Its an American concept that has no place in football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well 25% of the teams could be turned over. So not fully closed shop.
Most competitions have the same usual suspects trying to win it each year anyway.
But the closed shop element of it is partly why it’s more viable commercially.
I know a lot of people may not realise this but the UCL has been a commercial failure. Most games don’t attract much attention at all. Apart from serious football fans, no one cares about the UCL. That’s one thing Perez was right about in his statement, 16-24 yr olds aren’t watching UCL games.
The NBA with its ‘closed shop’ is miles bigger than the UCL despite basketball not being anywhere near as big a sport as soccer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
...hold on. Got any stats to back that up? Lol
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 16 minutes ago
The league format is better than the CL, all the top teams playing week in week out would be much more entertaining. The vast majority of the CL is mismatches and pointless games. The problem is no relegation and the founding clubs creating a monopoly. You could have multiple leagues with promotion/relegation so it isn't a closed shop. Even UEFA's reformed CL has places for the top teams who fail to qualify through league positionThese clubs already have all the advantages over all the other clubs anyway and still want guaranteed entry. The owners just want to protect their investment if they do a sh!t job running the club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree with this. Elite European competition should have best teams playing against each other regularly.
Teams from Russia, turkey Scotland etc adds nothing to the CL. Better to cull them and make it league of best teams. If it is merit based entry, most stakeholders won’t have a problem with it
comment by The Mur Man (U22601)
posted 30 seconds ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 2 minutes ago
On point one, you look forward to playing them because there are always narratives past the one layer of “to qualify for the next round”. They are rivals and depending on the season u can be even on points or one side better than the other.
I for one, have been begging to get Real Madrid and was bored of constantly getting Barca, or Liverpool in the 00s.
Add the fact that there is no competition in this thing and no repercussions such as a knock out two legged tie. Then yes it will get boring. So it is not nonsense at all and people are allowed that opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are repercussions. If you fail to win you don't make it to the next round, which is a knockout competition.
Would you care to tell the players in the 6 nations that their tournament has no competition in it because it is a closed shop, and they can just try again next year?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Great post 👏👏👏
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jesus Christ
comment by The Luke Show (U8522)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 16 minutes ago
The league format is better than the CL, all the top teams playing week in week out would be much more entertaining. The vast majority of the CL is mismatches and pointless games. The problem is no relegation and the founding clubs creating a monopoly. You could have multiple leagues with promotion/relegation so it isn't a closed shop. Even UEFA's reformed CL has places for the top teams who fail to qualify through league positionThese clubs already have all the advantages over all the other clubs anyway and still want guaranteed entry. The owners just want to protect their investment if they do a sh!t job running the club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree with this. Elite European competition should have best teams playing against each other regularly.
Teams from Russia, turkey Scotland etc adds nothing to the CL. Better to cull them and make it league of best teams. If it is merit based entry, most stakeholders won’t have a problem with it
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s an oxymoron. You just said cull teams from turkey, Scotland just because of where they’re from. Then said it should be based on merit lol
Why are spurs and arsenal in if it’s based on merit?
The Six Nations is such a meaningless analogy.
It emerged as a tournament at a time when the competing nations were the only ones in their region that played rugby seriously. It didn't serve to undercut an existing competition. It's not like home nations were in a league with a dozen other countries and the most powerful ones decided to go it alone. It can't be that much bigger because the international rugby calendar doesn't have that much space. It doesn't compete with the World Cup, which serves as the sport's benchmark international competition. And of course the formation of the Six Nations doesn't break an existing sporting pyramid.
An appropriate analogy would be if a few rugby clubs decided to break away from their domestic and European competitions and form their own league.
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 29 minutes ago
Don’t really have an issue with the super league as a concept. The main problems people have with it are none on the OP though. It’s the criteria for entry and the allocation of funding, both of which pose a huge risk to the integrity of domestic leagues and also go against some of the key principles of the existing structure of competition in football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A huge risk to domestic.leagues how?
You telling me Ligue 1, Eredivisie, Serie A won't be stronger / more competitive thanks to the windfall spent within those leagues?
comment by The Luke Show (U8522)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 16 minutes ago
The league format is better than the CL, all the top teams playing week in week out would be much more entertaining. The vast majority of the CL is mismatches and pointless games. The problem is no relegation and the founding clubs creating a monopoly. You could have multiple leagues with promotion/relegation so it isn't a closed shop. Even UEFA's reformed CL has places for the top teams who fail to qualify through league positionThese clubs already have all the advantages over all the other clubs anyway and still want guaranteed entry. The owners just want to protect their investment if they do a sh!t job running the club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree with this. Elite European competition should have best teams playing against each other regularly.
Teams from Russia, turkey Scotland etc adds nothing to the CL. Better to cull them and make it league of best teams. If it is merit based entry, most stakeholders won’t have a problem with it
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Genuinely thought the last paragraph was Barry
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 minutes ago
On point 1, if every game is a big game; then there are no big games. The reason people look forward to those fixtures is that they are prestigious and infrequent. If you make every game like that then they lose their effect and there no higher level to get excited about.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Domestic fixtures are still big games even though we play every year, don't see how it would be any different. At the moment the top teams don't play each other that often, definitely would be better to see more fixtures between them and the best players competing against each other.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 14 seconds ago
The Six Nations is such a meaningless analogy.
It emerged as a tournament at a time when the competing nations were the only ones in their region that played rugby seriously. It didn't serve to undercut an existing competition. It's not like home nations were in a league with a dozen other countries and the most powerful ones decided to go it alone. It can't be that much bigger because the international rugby calendar doesn't have that much space. It doesn't compete with the World Cup, which serves as the sport's benchmark international competition. And of course the formation of the Six Nations doesn't break an existing sporting pyramid.
An appropriate analogy would be if a few rugby clubs decided to break away from their domestic and European competitions and form their own league.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you. It was a ridiculous analogy.
comment by The Mur Man (U22601)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 29 minutes ago
Don’t really have an issue with the super league as a concept. The main problems people have with it are none on the OP though. It’s the criteria for entry and the allocation of funding, both of which pose a huge risk to the integrity of domestic leagues and also go against some of the key principles of the existing structure of competition in football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A huge risk to domestic.leagues how?
You telling me Ligue 1, Eredivisie, Serie A won't be stronger / more competitive thanks to the windfall spent within those leagues?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Will lose revenue, sponsorship money, tv deals. Will be an absolute sh!tstorm.
But many of these clubs aren’t elite teams.
In the last decade Spurs, Man United, Milan, Inter, Arsenal, Chelsea and City have either not been qualifying, or failing to really make a mark on the competition when they have. Liverpool have had plenty of seasons of not even qualifying.
Being a big club shouldn’t give you a divine right to play in the top European competitions.
comment by Clockwork Red (U4892)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 2 minutes ago
On point one, you look forward to playing them because there are always narratives past the one layer of “to qualify for the next round”. They are rivals and depending on the season u can be even on points or one side better than the other.
I for one, have been begging to get Real Madrid and was bored of constantly getting Barca, or Liverpool in the 00s.
Add the fact that there is no competition in this thing and no repercussions such as a knock out two legged tie. Then yes it will get boring. So it is not nonsense at all and people are allowed that opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are repercussions. If you fail to win you don't make it to the next round, which is a knockout competition.
Would you care to tell the players in the 6 nations that their tournament has no competition in it because it is a closed shop, and they can just try again next year?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The 6 nations is not a closed shop is it lol it’s recently
Become that and I’m sure if another international team wants to join locally then they will be allowed too. What a poor exampleyou do know it was the 5 nations till recently?
Also there’s no repercussions at all. It’s a league where there’s no losers or winners
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorrect. The 6 nations is a closed shop. The only teams that can compete are the 6 nations currently involved, unless those nations explicitly vote to allow someone else in.
Tell me how you think this differs from the proposed Super League?
Also what do you mean no winners and losers? In both the 6 nations and the proposed Super league there is going to be a clear winner, and therefore all the other teams that lost.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hard to compare this with rugby, though there are similarities with the Six Nations. I don't follow rugby so don't want to risk saying things that aren't true, but apparenty the Six Nations has been around, in some form, since 1883: it's something that has never gone away, a bit like the Ashes in cricket, a relic or even an anachronism, rather than something that has been thrust upon the modern game at the obvious expense of others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
True. Although that then means essentially means that the value if something comes from simply when it was set up.
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 2 minutes ago
League format is definitely no better IMO. Would you have a league format for the World Cup by chance?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
we already have group stages for the CL and world cup, but especially for the CL 9 times out of 10 the top teams make it through easily and most of the games aren't competitive. You could still have play offs after you've finished the league season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is just not true though is if. Ajax Utd didn’t get through the group this year. And this is one they’re in the tournament. Arsenal and spurs weren’t even in it. So not even 3 of the 6 this season got pass the group stages.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ajax lost out to Atlanta who are a good team. there's always exceptions but usually the teams who you expect to will qualify and do so comfortably. For me at least the group stages of the CL and especially Europa are not interesting at all, the competition only gets decent once you get to the QF's or even semis sometimes with the Europa.
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by Clockwork Red (U4892)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 2 minutes ago
On point one, you look forward to playing them because there are always narratives past the one layer of “to qualify for the next round”. They are rivals and depending on the season u can be even on points or one side better than the other.
I for one, have been begging to get Real Madrid and was bored of constantly getting Barca, or Liverpool in the 00s.
Add the fact that there is no competition in this thing and no repercussions such as a knock out two legged tie. Then yes it will get boring. So it is not nonsense at all and people are allowed that opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are repercussions. If you fail to win you don't make it to the next round, which is a knockout competition.
Would you care to tell the players in the 6 nations that their tournament has no competition in it because it is a closed shop, and they can just try again next year?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The 6 nations is not a closed shop is it lol it’s recently
Become that and I’m sure if another international team wants to join locally then they will be allowed too. What a poor exampleyou do know it was the 5 nations till recently?
Also there’s no repercussions at all. It’s a league where there’s no losers or winners
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorrect. The 6 nations is a closed shop. The only teams that can compete are the 6 nations currently involved, unless those nations explicitly vote to allow someone else in.
Tell me how you think this differs from the proposed Super League?
Also what do you mean no winners and losers? In both the 6 nations and the proposed Super league there is going to be a clear winner, and therefore all the other teams that lost.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hard to compare this with rugby, though there are similarities with the Six Nations. I don't follow rugby so don't want to risk saying things that aren't true, but apparenty the Six Nations has been around, in some form, since 1883: it's something that has never gone away, a bit like the Ashes in cricket, a relic or even an anachronism, rather than something that has been thrust upon the modern game at the obvious expense of others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
True. Although that then means essentially means that the value if something comes from simply when it was set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not really. The Six Nations has grown with rugby, and vice versa; it hasn't sprung up as a mutant offshoot of an already well-established sport. See also Red Russian's point above about how it doesn't compete with the Rugby World Cup.
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by The Luke Show (U8522)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 16 minutes ago
The league format is better than the CL, all the top teams playing week in week out would be much more entertaining. The vast majority of the CL is mismatches and pointless games. The problem is no relegation and the founding clubs creating a monopoly. You could have multiple leagues with promotion/relegation so it isn't a closed shop. Even UEFA's reformed CL has places for the top teams who fail to qualify through league positionThese clubs already have all the advantages over all the other clubs anyway and still want guaranteed entry. The owners just want to protect their investment if they do a sh!t job running the club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree with this. Elite European competition should have best teams playing against each other regularly.
Teams from Russia, turkey Scotland etc adds nothing to the CL. Better to cull them and make it league of best teams. If it is merit based entry, most stakeholders won’t have a problem with it
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s an oxymoron. You just said cull teams from turkey, Scotland just because of where they’re from. Then said it should be based on merit lol
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe winner of the CL should get an entry.
Teams from Russia turkeys etc hasn’t done anything significant in CL. They are in to just make up numbers. there shouldn’t be a guaranteed spot for them in an elite competition.
comment by Clockwork Red (U4892)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by Clockwork Red (U4892)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 2 minutes ago
On point one, you look forward to playing them because there are always narratives past the one layer of “to qualify for the next round”. They are rivals and depending on the season u can be even on points or one side better than the other.
I for one, have been begging to get Real Madrid and was bored of constantly getting Barca, or Liverpool in the 00s.
Add the fact that there is no competition in this thing and no repercussions such as a knock out two legged tie. Then yes it will get boring. So it is not nonsense at all and people are allowed that opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are repercussions. If you fail to win you don't make it to the next round, which is a knockout competition.
Would you care to tell the players in the 6 nations that their tournament has no competition in it because it is a closed shop, and they can just try again next year?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The 6 nations is not a closed shop is it lol it’s recently
Become that and I’m sure if another international team wants to join locally then they will be allowed too. What a poor exampleyou do know it was the 5 nations till recently?
Also there’s no repercussions at all. It’s a league where there’s no losers or winners
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorrect. The 6 nations is a closed shop. The only teams that can compete are the 6 nations currently involved, unless those nations explicitly vote to allow someone else in.
Tell me how you think this differs from the proposed Super League?
Also what do you mean no winners and losers? In both the 6 nations and the proposed Super league there is going to be a clear winner, and therefore all the other teams that lost.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hard to compare this with rugby, though there are similarities with the Six Nations. I don't follow rugby so don't want to risk saying things that aren't true, but apparenty the Six Nations has been around, in some form, since 1883: it's something that has never gone away, a bit like the Ashes in cricket, a relic or even an anachronism, rather than something that has been thrust upon the modern game at the obvious expense of others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
True. Although that then means essentially means that the value if something comes from simply when it was set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not really. The Six Nations has grown with rugby, and vice versa; it hasn't sprung up as a mutant offshoot of an already well-established sport. See also Red Russian's point above about how it doesn't compete with the Rugby World Cup.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure I understand. Why doesn't it compete with the World Cup?
comment by Rachel The Queen Riley (U10026)
posted 2 minutes ago
But many of these clubs aren’t elite teams.
In the last decade Spurs, Man United, Milan, Inter, Arsenal, Chelsea and City have either not been qualifying, or failing to really make a mark on the competition when they have. Liverpool have had plenty of seasons of not even qualifying.
Being a big club shouldn’t give you a divine right to play in the top European competitions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not the point I'm making anyway. I'm against the closed shop aspect of it, but the current format of the CL is pretty crap and uninteresting until the latter stages.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 7 minutes ago
Why are spurs and arsenal in if it’s based on merit?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenal won’t qualify, Spurs has a chance if six teams from PL gets picked
comment by The Luke Show (U8522)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 16 minutes ago
The league format is better than the CL, all the top teams playing week in week out would be much more entertaining. The vast majority of the CL is mismatches and pointless games. The problem is no relegation and the founding clubs creating a monopoly. You could have multiple leagues with promotion/relegation so it isn't a closed shop. Even UEFA's reformed CL has places for the top teams who fail to qualify through league positionThese clubs already have all the advantages over all the other clubs anyway and still want guaranteed entry. The owners just want to protect their investment if they do a sh!t job running the club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree with this. Elite European competition should have best teams playing against each other regularly.
Teams from Russia, turkey Scotland etc adds nothing to the CL. Better to cull them and make it league of best teams. If it is merit based entry, most stakeholders won’t have a problem with it
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There's a circular logic to this. You select the elite teams for the league and thanks to members of the league they financially outstrip non-members and therefore remain better than the others. This happens to an extent already with the CL money cementing domestic dominance, and with the TV money in the PL and the biggest domestic leagues cementing the dominance of a few familiar faces in the CL. But we do still have the chance for teams with brilliant sporting strategies and business models to disrupt that elite. Dortmund have got close. Porto have done it. Leicester and Atalanta are well run clubs that have managed to disrupt the hierarchy in their domestic leagues without overwhelming financial advantage. Meanwhile Arsenal (for example) have experienced 15+ years of sporting mediocrity but are to be deemed a Big Club thanks to their regular 4th place PL + CL record. Manchester United have been terribly run and impotent on a sporting level since 2013 but we're part of the elite because of our apparently unrivalled number of global followers.
The arrogance to suggest that we deserve a permanent place at the top table while unfashionable teams / countries should be culled just bewilders me. I guess some people really just want entertainment. Football as pro-wrestling, not as sport.
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 2 minutes ago
League format is definitely no better IMO. Would you have a league format for the World Cup by chance?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
we already have group stages for the CL and world cup, but especially for the CL 9 times out of 10 the top teams make it through easily and most of the games aren't competitive. You could still have play offs after you've finished the league season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is just not true though is if. Ajax Utd didn’t get through the group this year. And this is one they’re in the tournament. Arsenal and spurs weren’t even in it. So not even 3 of the 6 this season got pass the group stages.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ajax lost out to Atlanta who are a good team. there's always exceptions but usually the teams who you expect to will qualify and do so comfortably. For me at least the group stages of the CL and especially Europa are not interesting at all, the competition only gets decent once you get to the QF's or even semis sometimes with the Europa.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well it will get even worse once this league comes along. Cl and Europa will only get weaker. Good luck with watching the one or two decent games a week
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Clockwork Red (U4892)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by Clockwork Red (U4892)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 2 minutes ago
On point one, you look forward to playing them because there are always narratives past the one layer of “to qualify for the next round”. They are rivals and depending on the season u can be even on points or one side better than the other.
I for one, have been begging to get Real Madrid and was bored of constantly getting Barca, or Liverpool in the 00s.
Add the fact that there is no competition in this thing and no repercussions such as a knock out two legged tie. Then yes it will get boring. So it is not nonsense at all and people are allowed that opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are repercussions. If you fail to win you don't make it to the next round, which is a knockout competition.
Would you care to tell the players in the 6 nations that their tournament has no competition in it because it is a closed shop, and they can just try again next year?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The 6 nations is not a closed shop is it lol it’s recently
Become that and I’m sure if another international team wants to join locally then they will be allowed too. What a poor exampleyou do know it was the 5 nations till recently?
Also there’s no repercussions at all. It’s a league where there’s no losers or winners
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorrect. The 6 nations is a closed shop. The only teams that can compete are the 6 nations currently involved, unless those nations explicitly vote to allow someone else in.
Tell me how you think this differs from the proposed Super League?
Also what do you mean no winners and losers? In both the 6 nations and the proposed Super league there is going to be a clear winner, and therefore all the other teams that lost.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hard to compare this with rugby, though there are similarities with the Six Nations. I don't follow rugby so don't want to risk saying things that aren't true, but apparenty the Six Nations has been around, in some form, since 1883: it's something that has never gone away, a bit like the Ashes in cricket, a relic or even an anachronism, rather than something that has been thrust upon the modern game at the obvious expense of others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
True. Although that then means essentially means that the value if something comes from simply when it was set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not really. The Six Nations has grown with rugby, and vice versa; it hasn't sprung up as a mutant offshoot of an already well-established sport. See also Red Russian's point above about how it doesn't compete with the Rugby World Cup.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure I understand. Why doesn't it compete with the World Cup?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because all six of the Six Nation teams play in the World Cup and the two competitions are not running at the same time?
comment by The Luke Show (U8522)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 7 minutes ago
Why are spurs and arsenal in if it’s based on merit?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenal won’t qualify, Spurs has a chance if six teams from PL gets picked
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you talking about?
Sign in if you want to comment
Uninformed opinions
Page 3 of 5
posted on 20/4/21
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 3 minutes ago
On point 1, if every game is a big game; then there are no big games. The reason people look forward to those fixtures is that they are prestigious and infrequent. If you make every game like that then they lose their effect and there no higher level to get excited about.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Man United vs Real Madrid will be a big game even if it’s the 76th time they have met that season - there is always a narrative with these games.
posted on 20/4/21
comment by #LiquidGenius (U20571)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Sut mine klunker - Admin 5 (U1250)
comment by #LiquidGenius (U20571)
comment by Sut mine klunker - Admin 5 (U1250)
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
On point one, you look forward to playing them because there are always narratives past the one layer of “to qualify for the next round”. They are rivals and depending on the season u can be even on points or one side better than the other.
I for one, have been begging to get Real Madrid and was bored of constantly getting Barca, or Liverpool in the 00s.
Add the fact that there is no competition in this thing and no repercussions such as a knock out two legged tie. Then yes it will get boring. So it is not nonsense at all and people are allowed that opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The super league still would end with 2 leg QFs & SFs tbf, with a one off Final.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But for what purpose? A final in a closed shop. Next year we go again, same teams. Its an American concept that has no place in football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well 25% of the teams could be turned over. So not fully closed shop.
Most competitions have the same usual suspects trying to win it each year anyway.
But the closed shop element of it is partly why it’s more viable commercially.
I know a lot of people may not realise this but the UCL has been a commercial failure. Most games don’t attract much attention at all. Apart from serious football fans, no one cares about the UCL. That’s one thing Perez was right about in his statement, 16-24 yr olds aren’t watching UCL games.
The NBA with its ‘closed shop’ is miles bigger than the UCL despite basketball not being anywhere near as big a sport as soccer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
...hold on. Got any stats to back that up? Lol
posted on 20/4/21
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 16 minutes ago
The league format is better than the CL, all the top teams playing week in week out would be much more entertaining. The vast majority of the CL is mismatches and pointless games. The problem is no relegation and the founding clubs creating a monopoly. You could have multiple leagues with promotion/relegation so it isn't a closed shop. Even UEFA's reformed CL has places for the top teams who fail to qualify through league positionThese clubs already have all the advantages over all the other clubs anyway and still want guaranteed entry. The owners just want to protect their investment if they do a sh!t job running the club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree with this. Elite European competition should have best teams playing against each other regularly.
Teams from Russia, turkey Scotland etc adds nothing to the CL. Better to cull them and make it league of best teams. If it is merit based entry, most stakeholders won’t have a problem with it
posted on 20/4/21
comment by The Mur Man (U22601)
posted 30 seconds ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 2 minutes ago
On point one, you look forward to playing them because there are always narratives past the one layer of “to qualify for the next round”. They are rivals and depending on the season u can be even on points or one side better than the other.
I for one, have been begging to get Real Madrid and was bored of constantly getting Barca, or Liverpool in the 00s.
Add the fact that there is no competition in this thing and no repercussions such as a knock out two legged tie. Then yes it will get boring. So it is not nonsense at all and people are allowed that opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are repercussions. If you fail to win you don't make it to the next round, which is a knockout competition.
Would you care to tell the players in the 6 nations that their tournament has no competition in it because it is a closed shop, and they can just try again next year?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Great post 👏👏👏
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jesus Christ
posted on 20/4/21
comment by The Luke Show (U8522)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 16 minutes ago
The league format is better than the CL, all the top teams playing week in week out would be much more entertaining. The vast majority of the CL is mismatches and pointless games. The problem is no relegation and the founding clubs creating a monopoly. You could have multiple leagues with promotion/relegation so it isn't a closed shop. Even UEFA's reformed CL has places for the top teams who fail to qualify through league positionThese clubs already have all the advantages over all the other clubs anyway and still want guaranteed entry. The owners just want to protect their investment if they do a sh!t job running the club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree with this. Elite European competition should have best teams playing against each other regularly.
Teams from Russia, turkey Scotland etc adds nothing to the CL. Better to cull them and make it league of best teams. If it is merit based entry, most stakeholders won’t have a problem with it
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s an oxymoron. You just said cull teams from turkey, Scotland just because of where they’re from. Then said it should be based on merit lol
posted on 20/4/21
Why are spurs and arsenal in if it’s based on merit?
posted on 20/4/21
The Six Nations is such a meaningless analogy.
It emerged as a tournament at a time when the competing nations were the only ones in their region that played rugby seriously. It didn't serve to undercut an existing competition. It's not like home nations were in a league with a dozen other countries and the most powerful ones decided to go it alone. It can't be that much bigger because the international rugby calendar doesn't have that much space. It doesn't compete with the World Cup, which serves as the sport's benchmark international competition. And of course the formation of the Six Nations doesn't break an existing sporting pyramid.
An appropriate analogy would be if a few rugby clubs decided to break away from their domestic and European competitions and form their own league.
posted on 20/4/21
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 29 minutes ago
Don’t really have an issue with the super league as a concept. The main problems people have with it are none on the OP though. It’s the criteria for entry and the allocation of funding, both of which pose a huge risk to the integrity of domestic leagues and also go against some of the key principles of the existing structure of competition in football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A huge risk to domestic.leagues how?
You telling me Ligue 1, Eredivisie, Serie A won't be stronger / more competitive thanks to the windfall spent within those leagues?
posted on 20/4/21
comment by The Luke Show (U8522)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 16 minutes ago
The league format is better than the CL, all the top teams playing week in week out would be much more entertaining. The vast majority of the CL is mismatches and pointless games. The problem is no relegation and the founding clubs creating a monopoly. You could have multiple leagues with promotion/relegation so it isn't a closed shop. Even UEFA's reformed CL has places for the top teams who fail to qualify through league positionThese clubs already have all the advantages over all the other clubs anyway and still want guaranteed entry. The owners just want to protect their investment if they do a sh!t job running the club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree with this. Elite European competition should have best teams playing against each other regularly.
Teams from Russia, turkey Scotland etc adds nothing to the CL. Better to cull them and make it league of best teams. If it is merit based entry, most stakeholders won’t have a problem with it
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Genuinely thought the last paragraph was Barry
posted on 20/4/21
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 minutes ago
On point 1, if every game is a big game; then there are no big games. The reason people look forward to those fixtures is that they are prestigious and infrequent. If you make every game like that then they lose their effect and there no higher level to get excited about.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Domestic fixtures are still big games even though we play every year, don't see how it would be any different. At the moment the top teams don't play each other that often, definitely would be better to see more fixtures between them and the best players competing against each other.
posted on 20/4/21
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 14 seconds ago
The Six Nations is such a meaningless analogy.
It emerged as a tournament at a time when the competing nations were the only ones in their region that played rugby seriously. It didn't serve to undercut an existing competition. It's not like home nations were in a league with a dozen other countries and the most powerful ones decided to go it alone. It can't be that much bigger because the international rugby calendar doesn't have that much space. It doesn't compete with the World Cup, which serves as the sport's benchmark international competition. And of course the formation of the Six Nations doesn't break an existing sporting pyramid.
An appropriate analogy would be if a few rugby clubs decided to break away from their domestic and European competitions and form their own league.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you. It was a ridiculous analogy.
posted on 20/4/21
comment by The Mur Man (U22601)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 29 minutes ago
Don’t really have an issue with the super league as a concept. The main problems people have with it are none on the OP though. It’s the criteria for entry and the allocation of funding, both of which pose a huge risk to the integrity of domestic leagues and also go against some of the key principles of the existing structure of competition in football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A huge risk to domestic.leagues how?
You telling me Ligue 1, Eredivisie, Serie A won't be stronger / more competitive thanks to the windfall spent within those leagues?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Will lose revenue, sponsorship money, tv deals. Will be an absolute sh!tstorm.
posted on 20/4/21
But many of these clubs aren’t elite teams.
In the last decade Spurs, Man United, Milan, Inter, Arsenal, Chelsea and City have either not been qualifying, or failing to really make a mark on the competition when they have. Liverpool have had plenty of seasons of not even qualifying.
Being a big club shouldn’t give you a divine right to play in the top European competitions.
posted on 20/4/21
comment by Clockwork Red (U4892)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 2 minutes ago
On point one, you look forward to playing them because there are always narratives past the one layer of “to qualify for the next round”. They are rivals and depending on the season u can be even on points or one side better than the other.
I for one, have been begging to get Real Madrid and was bored of constantly getting Barca, or Liverpool in the 00s.
Add the fact that there is no competition in this thing and no repercussions such as a knock out two legged tie. Then yes it will get boring. So it is not nonsense at all and people are allowed that opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are repercussions. If you fail to win you don't make it to the next round, which is a knockout competition.
Would you care to tell the players in the 6 nations that their tournament has no competition in it because it is a closed shop, and they can just try again next year?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The 6 nations is not a closed shop is it lol it’s recently
Become that and I’m sure if another international team wants to join locally then they will be allowed too. What a poor exampleyou do know it was the 5 nations till recently?
Also there’s no repercussions at all. It’s a league where there’s no losers or winners
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorrect. The 6 nations is a closed shop. The only teams that can compete are the 6 nations currently involved, unless those nations explicitly vote to allow someone else in.
Tell me how you think this differs from the proposed Super League?
Also what do you mean no winners and losers? In both the 6 nations and the proposed Super league there is going to be a clear winner, and therefore all the other teams that lost.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hard to compare this with rugby, though there are similarities with the Six Nations. I don't follow rugby so don't want to risk saying things that aren't true, but apparenty the Six Nations has been around, in some form, since 1883: it's something that has never gone away, a bit like the Ashes in cricket, a relic or even an anachronism, rather than something that has been thrust upon the modern game at the obvious expense of others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
True. Although that then means essentially means that the value if something comes from simply when it was set up.
posted on 20/4/21
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 2 minutes ago
League format is definitely no better IMO. Would you have a league format for the World Cup by chance?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
we already have group stages for the CL and world cup, but especially for the CL 9 times out of 10 the top teams make it through easily and most of the games aren't competitive. You could still have play offs after you've finished the league season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is just not true though is if. Ajax Utd didn’t get through the group this year. And this is one they’re in the tournament. Arsenal and spurs weren’t even in it. So not even 3 of the 6 this season got pass the group stages.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ajax lost out to Atlanta who are a good team. there's always exceptions but usually the teams who you expect to will qualify and do so comfortably. For me at least the group stages of the CL and especially Europa are not interesting at all, the competition only gets decent once you get to the QF's or even semis sometimes with the Europa.
posted on 20/4/21
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by Clockwork Red (U4892)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 2 minutes ago
On point one, you look forward to playing them because there are always narratives past the one layer of “to qualify for the next round”. They are rivals and depending on the season u can be even on points or one side better than the other.
I for one, have been begging to get Real Madrid and was bored of constantly getting Barca, or Liverpool in the 00s.
Add the fact that there is no competition in this thing and no repercussions such as a knock out two legged tie. Then yes it will get boring. So it is not nonsense at all and people are allowed that opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are repercussions. If you fail to win you don't make it to the next round, which is a knockout competition.
Would you care to tell the players in the 6 nations that their tournament has no competition in it because it is a closed shop, and they can just try again next year?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The 6 nations is not a closed shop is it lol it’s recently
Become that and I’m sure if another international team wants to join locally then they will be allowed too. What a poor exampleyou do know it was the 5 nations till recently?
Also there’s no repercussions at all. It’s a league where there’s no losers or winners
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorrect. The 6 nations is a closed shop. The only teams that can compete are the 6 nations currently involved, unless those nations explicitly vote to allow someone else in.
Tell me how you think this differs from the proposed Super League?
Also what do you mean no winners and losers? In both the 6 nations and the proposed Super league there is going to be a clear winner, and therefore all the other teams that lost.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hard to compare this with rugby, though there are similarities with the Six Nations. I don't follow rugby so don't want to risk saying things that aren't true, but apparenty the Six Nations has been around, in some form, since 1883: it's something that has never gone away, a bit like the Ashes in cricket, a relic or even an anachronism, rather than something that has been thrust upon the modern game at the obvious expense of others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
True. Although that then means essentially means that the value if something comes from simply when it was set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not really. The Six Nations has grown with rugby, and vice versa; it hasn't sprung up as a mutant offshoot of an already well-established sport. See also Red Russian's point above about how it doesn't compete with the Rugby World Cup.
posted on 20/4/21
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by The Luke Show (U8522)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 16 minutes ago
The league format is better than the CL, all the top teams playing week in week out would be much more entertaining. The vast majority of the CL is mismatches and pointless games. The problem is no relegation and the founding clubs creating a monopoly. You could have multiple leagues with promotion/relegation so it isn't a closed shop. Even UEFA's reformed CL has places for the top teams who fail to qualify through league positionThese clubs already have all the advantages over all the other clubs anyway and still want guaranteed entry. The owners just want to protect their investment if they do a sh!t job running the club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree with this. Elite European competition should have best teams playing against each other regularly.
Teams from Russia, turkey Scotland etc adds nothing to the CL. Better to cull them and make it league of best teams. If it is merit based entry, most stakeholders won’t have a problem with it
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s an oxymoron. You just said cull teams from turkey, Scotland just because of where they’re from. Then said it should be based on merit lol
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe winner of the CL should get an entry.
Teams from Russia turkeys etc hasn’t done anything significant in CL. They are in to just make up numbers. there shouldn’t be a guaranteed spot for them in an elite competition.
posted on 20/4/21
comment by Clockwork Red (U4892)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by Clockwork Red (U4892)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 2 minutes ago
On point one, you look forward to playing them because there are always narratives past the one layer of “to qualify for the next round”. They are rivals and depending on the season u can be even on points or one side better than the other.
I for one, have been begging to get Real Madrid and was bored of constantly getting Barca, or Liverpool in the 00s.
Add the fact that there is no competition in this thing and no repercussions such as a knock out two legged tie. Then yes it will get boring. So it is not nonsense at all and people are allowed that opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are repercussions. If you fail to win you don't make it to the next round, which is a knockout competition.
Would you care to tell the players in the 6 nations that their tournament has no competition in it because it is a closed shop, and they can just try again next year?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The 6 nations is not a closed shop is it lol it’s recently
Become that and I’m sure if another international team wants to join locally then they will be allowed too. What a poor exampleyou do know it was the 5 nations till recently?
Also there’s no repercussions at all. It’s a league where there’s no losers or winners
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorrect. The 6 nations is a closed shop. The only teams that can compete are the 6 nations currently involved, unless those nations explicitly vote to allow someone else in.
Tell me how you think this differs from the proposed Super League?
Also what do you mean no winners and losers? In both the 6 nations and the proposed Super league there is going to be a clear winner, and therefore all the other teams that lost.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hard to compare this with rugby, though there are similarities with the Six Nations. I don't follow rugby so don't want to risk saying things that aren't true, but apparenty the Six Nations has been around, in some form, since 1883: it's something that has never gone away, a bit like the Ashes in cricket, a relic or even an anachronism, rather than something that has been thrust upon the modern game at the obvious expense of others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
True. Although that then means essentially means that the value if something comes from simply when it was set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not really. The Six Nations has grown with rugby, and vice versa; it hasn't sprung up as a mutant offshoot of an already well-established sport. See also Red Russian's point above about how it doesn't compete with the Rugby World Cup.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure I understand. Why doesn't it compete with the World Cup?
posted on 20/4/21
comment by Rachel The Queen Riley (U10026)
posted 2 minutes ago
But many of these clubs aren’t elite teams.
In the last decade Spurs, Man United, Milan, Inter, Arsenal, Chelsea and City have either not been qualifying, or failing to really make a mark on the competition when they have. Liverpool have had plenty of seasons of not even qualifying.
Being a big club shouldn’t give you a divine right to play in the top European competitions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not the point I'm making anyway. I'm against the closed shop aspect of it, but the current format of the CL is pretty crap and uninteresting until the latter stages.
posted on 20/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 20/4/21
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 7 minutes ago
Why are spurs and arsenal in if it’s based on merit?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenal won’t qualify, Spurs has a chance if six teams from PL gets picked
posted on 20/4/21
comment by The Luke Show (U8522)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 16 minutes ago
The league format is better than the CL, all the top teams playing week in week out would be much more entertaining. The vast majority of the CL is mismatches and pointless games. The problem is no relegation and the founding clubs creating a monopoly. You could have multiple leagues with promotion/relegation so it isn't a closed shop. Even UEFA's reformed CL has places for the top teams who fail to qualify through league positionThese clubs already have all the advantages over all the other clubs anyway and still want guaranteed entry. The owners just want to protect their investment if they do a sh!t job running the club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree with this. Elite European competition should have best teams playing against each other regularly.
Teams from Russia, turkey Scotland etc adds nothing to the CL. Better to cull them and make it league of best teams. If it is merit based entry, most stakeholders won’t have a problem with it
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There's a circular logic to this. You select the elite teams for the league and thanks to members of the league they financially outstrip non-members and therefore remain better than the others. This happens to an extent already with the CL money cementing domestic dominance, and with the TV money in the PL and the biggest domestic leagues cementing the dominance of a few familiar faces in the CL. But we do still have the chance for teams with brilliant sporting strategies and business models to disrupt that elite. Dortmund have got close. Porto have done it. Leicester and Atalanta are well run clubs that have managed to disrupt the hierarchy in their domestic leagues without overwhelming financial advantage. Meanwhile Arsenal (for example) have experienced 15+ years of sporting mediocrity but are to be deemed a Big Club thanks to their regular 4th place PL + CL record. Manchester United have been terribly run and impotent on a sporting level since 2013 but we're part of the elite because of our apparently unrivalled number of global followers.
The arrogance to suggest that we deserve a permanent place at the top table while unfashionable teams / countries should be culled just bewilders me. I guess some people really just want entertainment. Football as pro-wrestling, not as sport.
posted on 20/4/21
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 2 minutes ago
League format is definitely no better IMO. Would you have a league format for the World Cup by chance?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
we already have group stages for the CL and world cup, but especially for the CL 9 times out of 10 the top teams make it through easily and most of the games aren't competitive. You could still have play offs after you've finished the league season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is just not true though is if. Ajax Utd didn’t get through the group this year. And this is one they’re in the tournament. Arsenal and spurs weren’t even in it. So not even 3 of the 6 this season got pass the group stages.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ajax lost out to Atlanta who are a good team. there's always exceptions but usually the teams who you expect to will qualify and do so comfortably. For me at least the group stages of the CL and especially Europa are not interesting at all, the competition only gets decent once you get to the QF's or even semis sometimes with the Europa.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well it will get even worse once this league comes along. Cl and Europa will only get weaker. Good luck with watching the one or two decent games a week
posted on 20/4/21
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Clockwork Red (U4892)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by Clockwork Red (U4892)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 2 minutes ago
On point one, you look forward to playing them because there are always narratives past the one layer of “to qualify for the next round”. They are rivals and depending on the season u can be even on points or one side better than the other.
I for one, have been begging to get Real Madrid and was bored of constantly getting Barca, or Liverpool in the 00s.
Add the fact that there is no competition in this thing and no repercussions such as a knock out two legged tie. Then yes it will get boring. So it is not nonsense at all and people are allowed that opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are repercussions. If you fail to win you don't make it to the next round, which is a knockout competition.
Would you care to tell the players in the 6 nations that their tournament has no competition in it because it is a closed shop, and they can just try again next year?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The 6 nations is not a closed shop is it lol it’s recently
Become that and I’m sure if another international team wants to join locally then they will be allowed too. What a poor exampleyou do know it was the 5 nations till recently?
Also there’s no repercussions at all. It’s a league where there’s no losers or winners
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorrect. The 6 nations is a closed shop. The only teams that can compete are the 6 nations currently involved, unless those nations explicitly vote to allow someone else in.
Tell me how you think this differs from the proposed Super League?
Also what do you mean no winners and losers? In both the 6 nations and the proposed Super league there is going to be a clear winner, and therefore all the other teams that lost.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hard to compare this with rugby, though there are similarities with the Six Nations. I don't follow rugby so don't want to risk saying things that aren't true, but apparenty the Six Nations has been around, in some form, since 1883: it's something that has never gone away, a bit like the Ashes in cricket, a relic or even an anachronism, rather than something that has been thrust upon the modern game at the obvious expense of others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
True. Although that then means essentially means that the value if something comes from simply when it was set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not really. The Six Nations has grown with rugby, and vice versa; it hasn't sprung up as a mutant offshoot of an already well-established sport. See also Red Russian's point above about how it doesn't compete with the Rugby World Cup.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure I understand. Why doesn't it compete with the World Cup?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because all six of the Six Nation teams play in the World Cup and the two competitions are not running at the same time?
posted on 20/4/21
comment by The Luke Show (U8522)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 7 minutes ago
Why are spurs and arsenal in if it’s based on merit?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenal won’t qualify, Spurs has a chance if six teams from PL gets picked
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you talking about?
Page 3 of 5