comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 19 hours, 22 minutes ago
Two of the five seasons they won the league the proceeding year of entry into the cup. They finished second or third the other three years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wrong
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is it? Three times out of five?
Was working on a laptop yesterday with only one screen. Difficult work comparing two sets of data with one screen.
As per UEFA itself, the governing body took full responsibility for the tournament's organisation in 1955. This was all following prior authorisation from FIFA.
The initial 16-team format was indeed proposed by L'Equipe, but ultimately approved, with amendments, by UEFA. The governing body also wrote to all its member federations inviting them all to enter the champions of their respective leagues.
The original organising committee, which comprised the clubs that had been invited by L'Equipe, met for the last time on 3 November 1955.
This same committee wrote that the Union of European Football Associations had assumed responsibility for the the functions for which the Committee was elected."
All of the information above is drawn from UEFA's own 60th Anniversary publication. The same one that states that the first round of the first edition was the only time in the competition's history that the ties were selected rather than drawn from lots:
https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/EuroExperience/uefaorg/General/02/22/46/45/2224645_DOWNLOAD.pdf
Yes, TOOR. I imagine it might have been that you matched the champions for each year sid by side, rather than looking at the league champions for the previous season, which would have been the one that qualified them for the competition.
Neither here nor there, as Madrid would have qualified anyway as holders, which was how it worked every year until the expanded CL format.
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 52 seconds ago
Yes, TOOR. I imagine it might have been that you matched the champions for each year sid by side, rather than looking at the league champions for the previous season, which would have been the one that qualified them for the competition.
Neither here nor there, as Madrid would have qualified anyway as holders, which was how it worked every year until the expanded CL format.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Possibly although I did plan to account for that. I may have mixed it up when changing windows between the two tables.
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 15 minutes ago
As per UEFA itself, the governing body took full responsibility for the tournament's organisation in 1955. This was all following prior authorisation from FIFA.
The initial 16-team format was indeed proposed by L'Equipe, but ultimately approved, with amendments, by UEFA. The governing body also wrote to all its member federations inviting them all to enter the champions of their respective leagues.
The original organising committee, which comprised the clubs that had been invited by L'Equipe, met for the last time on 3 November 1955.
This same committee wrote that the Union of European Football Associations had assumed responsibility for the the functions for which the Committee was elected."
All of the information above is drawn from UEFA's own 60th Anniversary publication. The same one that states that the first round of the first edition was the only time in the competition's history that the ties were selected rather than drawn from lots:
https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/EuroExperience/uefaorg/General/02/22/46/45/2224645_DOWNLOAD.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes - however it wasn't until the sixth year when UEFA took over the draws that entry rules were introduced and all leagues had their proper representative. For example Hibs were Scotland's entry in the first invitational event and they only finished fifth.
They were able to do what some others weren't as they had a floodlight system for night games. Others couldn't enter as they did not.
My opinion is that it was an invitational tournament and not a real European Cup until the sixth year when it became a full blown European Cup with entry rules and the best teams from each European country in the proceeding year were entered.
That's not to say that Madrid wouldn't have won the first five anyhow, they may have but I don't think they should be included as part of the European Cup/CL totals but on their own as another major European trophy.
Not that it will change as there was already a petition in Spain, which gathered tens of thousands of votes about it and nothing came from it.
As for the byes you mentioned, the increased number of entrants for the second edition meant that a preliminary round was organised in order to whittle it down to the 16 teams which would allow a traditional knockout bracket.
The notion of "preliminary round" basically implies that it is a stage prior to the start of the tournament proper. The holders would not need to go through a preliminary phase to qualify, because the actual fact of wining the prior edition qualifies them automatically.
The luck of the draw awarded byes to another 9 teams, with the remaining 12 teams playing off for the remaining 6 berths.
The exact same system, with the number of byes varying as necessary to establish a first round proper of 16 teams, remained in place until the 1963-4 edition, when AC Milan, as reigning champions, were the only team to receive a bye.
It wasn't until the 1966-7 edition that the number of entrants allowed for a round of 32 to be added.
Interestingly, there's been a neat kind of parallel since the current format was brought in. Today, there are preliminary rounds every year to whittle down the appropriate number of entrants for the group stage. Qualification from the GS creates a bracket of 16 teams.
Under this current format, that's been in place now for about a quarter of a century, only one club has managed to qualify for the final bracket every single season. Want to have a guess at who it might be?
Yes - however it wasn't until the sixth year when UEFA took over the draws that entry rules were introduced and all leagues had their proper representative. For example Hibs were Scotland's entry in the first invitational event and they only finished fifth.
-------
You've mentioned that several times now, but you keep on making the same leap between the first edition and the sixth.
For the first edition, L'Equipe sent out invitations to both the English and Scottish champions. They withdrew/declined due to pressure from their FAs, despite UEFA asking all its member FAs to enter their champions. I've no idea how it got down to Hibs, but I do know Aberdeen were invited.
As of 1956-7, the number of entries meant that a preliminary round was necessary, as explained above. As far as I know, as of the second edition the competition began to expand and the entrants were the champions for each country, unless there was some specific reason for having an exception here or there.
I am not sure what you mean when you say UEFA "took over the draws" in 1961, because UEFA's own documentation states that they took over responsibility for the organisation right from the start. It isn't immediately apparent from looking at the draws that there was any great difference in the procedure established for 1960-1.
I'd need to go back and find the exact reference, but last night I read that from the very first edition they even took responsibility for designating the refs.
As an aside to all this, I still haven't gotten around your statement about Madrid being knocked out in 60-61 due to the increased competition.
They were, in fact, knocked out by Barça in the first round due to what is suspected to have been a massive fix in which the English refs -Arhtur Ellis and Reg Leafe- designated for each of the legs played a massive part.
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 1 hour, 29 minutes ago
Yes - however it wasn't until the sixth year when UEFA took over the draws that entry rules were introduced and all leagues had their proper representative. For example Hibs were Scotland's entry in the first invitational event and they only finished fifth.
-------
You've mentioned that several times now, but you keep on making the same leap between the first edition and the sixth.
For the first edition, L'Equipe sent out invitations to both the English and Scottish champions. They withdrew/declined due to pressure from their FAs, despite UEFA asking all its member FAs to enter their champions. I've no idea how it got down to Hibs, but I do know Aberdeen were invited.
As of 1956-7, the number of entries meant that a preliminary round was necessary, as explained above. As far as I know, as of the second edition the competition began to expand and the entrants were the champions for each country, unless there was some specific reason for having an exception here or there.
I am not sure what you mean when you say UEFA "took over the draws" in 1961, because UEFA's own documentation states that they took over responsibility for the organisation right from the start. It isn't immediately apparent from looking at the draws that there was any great difference in the procedure established for 1960-1.
I'd need to go back and find the exact reference, but last night I read that from the very first edition they even took responsibility for designating the refs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You keep explaining the draws to me which I haven't disputed. I understand who was invited and who didn't enter and various reasons why they didn't/couldn't. I'm saying this along with a magazine inviting the members rather than UEFA is why I believe it wasn't a proper European Cup.
When I say UEFA took over the draws, ie from the sixth season onwards, the French magazine no longer sent out invites to teams with reputation but UEFA controlled a draw, based on the entry requirements they set which were based on league position. This happened from the sixth year, which is when Madrid were first knocked out.
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 1 hour, 31 minutes ago
As an aside to all this, I still haven't gotten around your statement about Madrid being knocked out in 60-61 due to the increased competition.
They were, in fact, knocked out by Barça in the first round due to what is suspected to have been a massive fix in which the English refs -Arhtur Ellis and Reg Leafe- designated for each of the legs played a massive part.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh? Do you have any info on that? Interesting!
When I say UEFA took over the draws, ie from the sixth season onwards, the French magazine no longer sent out invites to teams with reputation but UEFA controlled a draw, based on the entry requirements they set which were based on league position. This happened from the sixth year, which is when Madrid were first knocked out.
------
What you're saying is that up until 60-61, the entrants weren't league champions?
As far as I am aware, as from the second edition the absolutely overwhelming majority were, and I think that it's pretty well established from the above posts that if the first edition contained a number of teams who weren't, it was because some national FAs blocked them from participating.
Could you tell me, as of the 56-57 edition, which teams were invited based on reputation rather than achievement? I honestly don't know who they are.
About the Barça tie, it's briefly referenced below. I have to go out now, but I you should be able to find stuff on the web if you want to dig deeper:
There are doubts as to whether Leafe was the man for the job. In total he disallowed four Real goals, and the game finished 2–1 to Barcelona. Phil Ball, a football historian, who saw footage of the game, remarked that the protests carried some substance since none of the goals "appear to be illegal in any way".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reg_Leafe
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 21 seconds ago
When I say UEFA took over the draws, ie from the sixth season onwards, the French magazine no longer sent out invites to teams with reputation but UEFA controlled a draw, based on the entry requirements they set which were based on league position. This happened from the sixth year, which is when Madrid were first knocked out.
------
What you're saying is that up until 60-61, the entrants weren't league champions?
As far as I am aware, as from the second edition the absolutely overwhelming majority were, and I think that it's pretty well established from the above posts that if the first edition contained a number of teams who weren't, it was because some national FAs blocked them from participating.
Could you tell me, as of the 56-57 edition, which teams were invited based on reputation rather than achievement? I honestly don't know who they are.
About the Barça tie, it's briefly referenced below. I have to go out now, but I you should be able to find stuff on the web if you want to dig deeper:
There are doubts as to whether Leafe was the man for the job. In total he disallowed four Real goals, and the game finished 2–1 to Barcelona. Phil Ball, a football historian, who saw footage of the game, remarked that the protests carried some substance since none of the goals "appear to be illegal in any way".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reg_Leafe
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, not completely. I'm saying the magazine invited clubs, many league champions, others based on reputation. Many rejected due to several reasons, cost, not having the required lighting system, worried about not getting the go ahead from their FAs etc. As the years went on these doubts were removed.
I read a similar story about Bill Shankly's Liverpool in regards to match fixing. Many believed Liverpool would have been the first British club to win the European Cup but reported that Shankly had told them that before the second leg against Inter, after Liverpool won the reverse 3-1, the referee 'had been got to'. Dodgy decisions followed.
I think it was Inter who are documented as having handed out gold watches.
Neither here nor there, as Madrid would have qualified anyway as holders, which was how it worked every year until the expanded CL format.
=====
I thought the rule allowing holders to enter was introduced in 2006 after Liverpool won it in 2005 but finished outside the top 4 in 2006?
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 10 minutes ago
Neither here nor there, as Madrid would have qualified anyway as holders, which was how it worked every year until the expanded CL format.
=====
I thought the rule allowing holders to enter was introduced in 2006 after Liverpool won it in 2005 but finished outside the top 4 in 2006?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That was a change to the previous rule, that was introduced early on in the CL era (maybe when it was first expanded to 2 teams per country, can’t remember exactly)
And before Liverpool in 05-06, an exception had already been made a few years earlier 99 or 01 iirc) so Madrid could defend their title which they wouldn’t have been able to through their league position.
Prior to that CL interval, champions had always been granted access so they could defend their crown.
Milan I think was another champion who retained the EC without being league champions. Dunno if any of Ajax’s and Bayern’s 1970s titles were ever won in similar circumstances, I’d have to check.
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 58 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 10 minutes ago
Neither here nor there, as Madrid would have qualified anyway as holders, which was how it worked every year until the expanded CL format.
=====
I thought the rule allowing holders to enter was introduced in 2006 after Liverpool won it in 2005 but finished outside the top 4 in 2006?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That was a change to the previous rule, that was introduced early on in the CL era (maybe when it was first expanded to 2 teams per country, can’t remember exactly)
And before Liverpool in 05-06, an exception had already been made a few years earlier 99 or 01 iirc) so Madrid could defend their title which they wouldn’t have been able to through their league position.
Prior to that CL interval, champions had always been granted access so they could defend their crown.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/4613695.stm
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 58 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 10 minutes ago
Neither here nor there, as Madrid would have qualified anyway as holders, which was how it worked every year until the expanded CL format.
=====
I thought the rule allowing holders to enter was introduced in 2006 after Liverpool won it in 2005 but finished outside the top 4 in 2006?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That was a change to the previous rule, that was introduced early on in the CL era (maybe when it was first expanded to 2 teams per country, can’t remember exactly)
And before Liverpool in 05-06, an exception had already been made a few years earlier 99 or 01 iirc) so Madrid could defend their title which they wouldn’t have been able to through their league position.
Prior to that CL interval, champions had always been granted access so they could defend their crown.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/4613695.stm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s consistent with what I said, isn’t it?
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 58 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 10 minutes ago
Neither here nor there, as Madrid would have qualified anyway as holders, which was how it worked every year until the expanded CL format.
=====
I thought the rule allowing holders to enter was introduced in 2006 after Liverpool won it in 2005 but finished outside the top 4 in 2006?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That was a change to the previous rule, that was introduced early on in the CL era (maybe when it was first expanded to 2 teams per country, can’t remember exactly)
And before Liverpool in 05-06, an exception had already been made a few years earlier 99 or 01 iirc) so Madrid could defend their title which they wouldn’t have been able to through their league position.
Prior to that CL interval, champions had always been granted access so they could defend their crown.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/4613695.stm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s consistent with what I said, isn’t it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can't find anything about Milan or City being allowed as holders tbh. You got a link?
Also, holders being allowed to participate was not in the original rules. So Madrid would not have qualified as winners in the invitational years like you claimed.
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 4 hours, 7 minutes ago
I read a similar story about Bill Shankly's Liverpool in regards to match fixing. Many believed Liverpool would have been the first British club to win the European Cup but reported that Shankly had told them that before the second leg against Inter, after Liverpool won the reverse 3-1, the referee 'had been got to'. Dodgy decisions followed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So not content with ‘removing’ some of Madrid’s titles, he’s now trying to ‘add’ one to Liverpool
comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 4 hours, 7 minutes ago
I read a similar story about Bill Shankly's Liverpool in regards to match fixing. Many believed Liverpool would have been the first British club to win the European Cup but reported that Shankly had told them that before the second leg against Inter, after Liverpool won the reverse 3-1, the referee 'had been got to'. Dodgy decisions followed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So not content with ‘removing’ some of Madrid’s titles, he’s now trying to ‘add’ one to Liverpool
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can't find anything about Milan or City being allowed as holders tbh. You got a link?
———————
City??? You mean Forest I suppose.
I’m out and about on my phone and stealing minutes off the lady as she wandrrs in and out of shops.
Milan is easy to check, you only need to check who won Serie A the same year they won the first of their back-to-back titles under Sacchi, in 88 or 89, whenever it was.
Forest I’m almost completely sure of.
Checked and confirmed:
Milan won the EC in 89/90, for which they qualified by virtue of being the EC title holders, since the 88/89 Serie A title was won by Inter. Compare the links below:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Italian_football_champions
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_Cup_and_UEFA_Champions_League_finals
Check the above EC/CL list against the link below, and you’ll see Forest won it in 78/79 and 79/80, but it was Liverpool who’d won the First Division title in 78/79. Forest were able to take part by virtue of being the European Cup holders.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_football_champions
Liverpool as far as I can see didn’t retain the title at a time when they weren’t league champions, but there were indeed seasons where they took part because they were the EC holders, even though they weren’t domestic champions. One such case was 78/79, when they were knocked out in the first round by Forest, who, as you’ll have worked out by now, had qualified as English league champions.
Continue looking through the seasons and you’ll find a shedload of similar cases. Having reached this point, and given that I’ve been able to back myself up on the other statements I’ve made, I trust you’ll take my word for it.
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 11 hours, 43 minutes ago
Can't find anything about Milan or City being allowed as holders tbh. You got a link?
———————
City??? You mean Forest I suppose.
I’m out and about on my phone and stealing minutes off the lady as she wandrrs in and out of shops.
Milan is easy to check, you only need to check who won Serie A the same year they won the first of their back-to-back titles under Sacchi, in 88 or 89, whenever it was.
Forest I’m almost completely sure of.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Was hard to find without having the dates.
Still, holders being allowed to participate was not in the rules. So Madrid would not have qualified as winners in the invitational years like you claimed.
Sign in if you want to comment
14
Page 4 of 5
posted on 6/5/22
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 19 hours, 22 minutes ago
Two of the five seasons they won the league the proceeding year of entry into the cup. They finished second or third the other three years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wrong
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is it? Three times out of five?
Was working on a laptop yesterday with only one screen. Difficult work comparing two sets of data with one screen.
posted on 6/5/22
As per UEFA itself, the governing body took full responsibility for the tournament's organisation in 1955. This was all following prior authorisation from FIFA.
The initial 16-team format was indeed proposed by L'Equipe, but ultimately approved, with amendments, by UEFA. The governing body also wrote to all its member federations inviting them all to enter the champions of their respective leagues.
The original organising committee, which comprised the clubs that had been invited by L'Equipe, met for the last time on 3 November 1955.
This same committee wrote that the Union of European Football Associations had assumed responsibility for the the functions for which the Committee was elected."
All of the information above is drawn from UEFA's own 60th Anniversary publication. The same one that states that the first round of the first edition was the only time in the competition's history that the ties were selected rather than drawn from lots:
https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/EuroExperience/uefaorg/General/02/22/46/45/2224645_DOWNLOAD.pdf
posted on 6/5/22
Yes, TOOR. I imagine it might have been that you matched the champions for each year sid by side, rather than looking at the league champions for the previous season, which would have been the one that qualified them for the competition.
Neither here nor there, as Madrid would have qualified anyway as holders, which was how it worked every year until the expanded CL format.
posted on 6/5/22
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 52 seconds ago
Yes, TOOR. I imagine it might have been that you matched the champions for each year sid by side, rather than looking at the league champions for the previous season, which would have been the one that qualified them for the competition.
Neither here nor there, as Madrid would have qualified anyway as holders, which was how it worked every year until the expanded CL format.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Possibly although I did plan to account for that. I may have mixed it up when changing windows between the two tables.
posted on 6/5/22
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 15 minutes ago
As per UEFA itself, the governing body took full responsibility for the tournament's organisation in 1955. This was all following prior authorisation from FIFA.
The initial 16-team format was indeed proposed by L'Equipe, but ultimately approved, with amendments, by UEFA. The governing body also wrote to all its member federations inviting them all to enter the champions of their respective leagues.
The original organising committee, which comprised the clubs that had been invited by L'Equipe, met for the last time on 3 November 1955.
This same committee wrote that the Union of European Football Associations had assumed responsibility for the the functions for which the Committee was elected."
All of the information above is drawn from UEFA's own 60th Anniversary publication. The same one that states that the first round of the first edition was the only time in the competition's history that the ties were selected rather than drawn from lots:
https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/EuroExperience/uefaorg/General/02/22/46/45/2224645_DOWNLOAD.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes - however it wasn't until the sixth year when UEFA took over the draws that entry rules were introduced and all leagues had their proper representative. For example Hibs were Scotland's entry in the first invitational event and they only finished fifth.
They were able to do what some others weren't as they had a floodlight system for night games. Others couldn't enter as they did not.
My opinion is that it was an invitational tournament and not a real European Cup until the sixth year when it became a full blown European Cup with entry rules and the best teams from each European country in the proceeding year were entered.
That's not to say that Madrid wouldn't have won the first five anyhow, they may have but I don't think they should be included as part of the European Cup/CL totals but on their own as another major European trophy.
Not that it will change as there was already a petition in Spain, which gathered tens of thousands of votes about it and nothing came from it.
posted on 6/5/22
As for the byes you mentioned, the increased number of entrants for the second edition meant that a preliminary round was organised in order to whittle it down to the 16 teams which would allow a traditional knockout bracket.
The notion of "preliminary round" basically implies that it is a stage prior to the start of the tournament proper. The holders would not need to go through a preliminary phase to qualify, because the actual fact of wining the prior edition qualifies them automatically.
The luck of the draw awarded byes to another 9 teams, with the remaining 12 teams playing off for the remaining 6 berths.
The exact same system, with the number of byes varying as necessary to establish a first round proper of 16 teams, remained in place until the 1963-4 edition, when AC Milan, as reigning champions, were the only team to receive a bye.
It wasn't until the 1966-7 edition that the number of entrants allowed for a round of 32 to be added.
Interestingly, there's been a neat kind of parallel since the current format was brought in. Today, there are preliminary rounds every year to whittle down the appropriate number of entrants for the group stage. Qualification from the GS creates a bracket of 16 teams.
Under this current format, that's been in place now for about a quarter of a century, only one club has managed to qualify for the final bracket every single season. Want to have a guess at who it might be?
posted on 6/5/22
Yes - however it wasn't until the sixth year when UEFA took over the draws that entry rules were introduced and all leagues had their proper representative. For example Hibs were Scotland's entry in the first invitational event and they only finished fifth.
-------
You've mentioned that several times now, but you keep on making the same leap between the first edition and the sixth.
For the first edition, L'Equipe sent out invitations to both the English and Scottish champions. They withdrew/declined due to pressure from their FAs, despite UEFA asking all its member FAs to enter their champions. I've no idea how it got down to Hibs, but I do know Aberdeen were invited.
As of 1956-7, the number of entries meant that a preliminary round was necessary, as explained above. As far as I know, as of the second edition the competition began to expand and the entrants were the champions for each country, unless there was some specific reason for having an exception here or there.
I am not sure what you mean when you say UEFA "took over the draws" in 1961, because UEFA's own documentation states that they took over responsibility for the organisation right from the start. It isn't immediately apparent from looking at the draws that there was any great difference in the procedure established for 1960-1.
I'd need to go back and find the exact reference, but last night I read that from the very first edition they even took responsibility for designating the refs.
posted on 6/5/22
As an aside to all this, I still haven't gotten around your statement about Madrid being knocked out in 60-61 due to the increased competition.
They were, in fact, knocked out by Barça in the first round due to what is suspected to have been a massive fix in which the English refs -Arhtur Ellis and Reg Leafe- designated for each of the legs played a massive part.
posted on 6/5/22
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 1 hour, 29 minutes ago
Yes - however it wasn't until the sixth year when UEFA took over the draws that entry rules were introduced and all leagues had their proper representative. For example Hibs were Scotland's entry in the first invitational event and they only finished fifth.
-------
You've mentioned that several times now, but you keep on making the same leap between the first edition and the sixth.
For the first edition, L'Equipe sent out invitations to both the English and Scottish champions. They withdrew/declined due to pressure from their FAs, despite UEFA asking all its member FAs to enter their champions. I've no idea how it got down to Hibs, but I do know Aberdeen were invited.
As of 1956-7, the number of entries meant that a preliminary round was necessary, as explained above. As far as I know, as of the second edition the competition began to expand and the entrants were the champions for each country, unless there was some specific reason for having an exception here or there.
I am not sure what you mean when you say UEFA "took over the draws" in 1961, because UEFA's own documentation states that they took over responsibility for the organisation right from the start. It isn't immediately apparent from looking at the draws that there was any great difference in the procedure established for 1960-1.
I'd need to go back and find the exact reference, but last night I read that from the very first edition they even took responsibility for designating the refs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You keep explaining the draws to me which I haven't disputed. I understand who was invited and who didn't enter and various reasons why they didn't/couldn't. I'm saying this along with a magazine inviting the members rather than UEFA is why I believe it wasn't a proper European Cup.
When I say UEFA took over the draws, ie from the sixth season onwards, the French magazine no longer sent out invites to teams with reputation but UEFA controlled a draw, based on the entry requirements they set which were based on league position. This happened from the sixth year, which is when Madrid were first knocked out.
posted on 6/5/22
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 1 hour, 31 minutes ago
As an aside to all this, I still haven't gotten around your statement about Madrid being knocked out in 60-61 due to the increased competition.
They were, in fact, knocked out by Barça in the first round due to what is suspected to have been a massive fix in which the English refs -Arhtur Ellis and Reg Leafe- designated for each of the legs played a massive part.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh? Do you have any info on that? Interesting!
posted on 6/5/22
When I say UEFA took over the draws, ie from the sixth season onwards, the French magazine no longer sent out invites to teams with reputation but UEFA controlled a draw, based on the entry requirements they set which were based on league position. This happened from the sixth year, which is when Madrid were first knocked out.
------
What you're saying is that up until 60-61, the entrants weren't league champions?
As far as I am aware, as from the second edition the absolutely overwhelming majority were, and I think that it's pretty well established from the above posts that if the first edition contained a number of teams who weren't, it was because some national FAs blocked them from participating.
Could you tell me, as of the 56-57 edition, which teams were invited based on reputation rather than achievement? I honestly don't know who they are.
About the Barça tie, it's briefly referenced below. I have to go out now, but I you should be able to find stuff on the web if you want to dig deeper:
There are doubts as to whether Leafe was the man for the job. In total he disallowed four Real goals, and the game finished 2–1 to Barcelona. Phil Ball, a football historian, who saw footage of the game, remarked that the protests carried some substance since none of the goals "appear to be illegal in any way".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reg_Leafe
posted on 6/5/22
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 21 seconds ago
When I say UEFA took over the draws, ie from the sixth season onwards, the French magazine no longer sent out invites to teams with reputation but UEFA controlled a draw, based on the entry requirements they set which were based on league position. This happened from the sixth year, which is when Madrid were first knocked out.
------
What you're saying is that up until 60-61, the entrants weren't league champions?
As far as I am aware, as from the second edition the absolutely overwhelming majority were, and I think that it's pretty well established from the above posts that if the first edition contained a number of teams who weren't, it was because some national FAs blocked them from participating.
Could you tell me, as of the 56-57 edition, which teams were invited based on reputation rather than achievement? I honestly don't know who they are.
About the Barça tie, it's briefly referenced below. I have to go out now, but I you should be able to find stuff on the web if you want to dig deeper:
There are doubts as to whether Leafe was the man for the job. In total he disallowed four Real goals, and the game finished 2–1 to Barcelona. Phil Ball, a football historian, who saw footage of the game, remarked that the protests carried some substance since none of the goals "appear to be illegal in any way".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reg_Leafe
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, not completely. I'm saying the magazine invited clubs, many league champions, others based on reputation. Many rejected due to several reasons, cost, not having the required lighting system, worried about not getting the go ahead from their FAs etc. As the years went on these doubts were removed.
posted on 6/5/22
I read a similar story about Bill Shankly's Liverpool in regards to match fixing. Many believed Liverpool would have been the first British club to win the European Cup but reported that Shankly had told them that before the second leg against Inter, after Liverpool won the reverse 3-1, the referee 'had been got to'. Dodgy decisions followed.
posted on 6/5/22
I think it was Inter who are documented as having handed out gold watches.
posted on 6/5/22
Neither here nor there, as Madrid would have qualified anyway as holders, which was how it worked every year until the expanded CL format.
=====
I thought the rule allowing holders to enter was introduced in 2006 after Liverpool won it in 2005 but finished outside the top 4 in 2006?
posted on 6/5/22
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 10 minutes ago
Neither here nor there, as Madrid would have qualified anyway as holders, which was how it worked every year until the expanded CL format.
=====
I thought the rule allowing holders to enter was introduced in 2006 after Liverpool won it in 2005 but finished outside the top 4 in 2006?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That was a change to the previous rule, that was introduced early on in the CL era (maybe when it was first expanded to 2 teams per country, can’t remember exactly)
And before Liverpool in 05-06, an exception had already been made a few years earlier 99 or 01 iirc) so Madrid could defend their title which they wouldn’t have been able to through their league position.
Prior to that CL interval, champions had always been granted access so they could defend their crown.
posted on 6/5/22
Milan I think was another champion who retained the EC without being league champions. Dunno if any of Ajax’s and Bayern’s 1970s titles were ever won in similar circumstances, I’d have to check.
posted on 6/5/22
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 58 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 10 minutes ago
Neither here nor there, as Madrid would have qualified anyway as holders, which was how it worked every year until the expanded CL format.
=====
I thought the rule allowing holders to enter was introduced in 2006 after Liverpool won it in 2005 but finished outside the top 4 in 2006?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That was a change to the previous rule, that was introduced early on in the CL era (maybe when it was first expanded to 2 teams per country, can’t remember exactly)
And before Liverpool in 05-06, an exception had already been made a few years earlier 99 or 01 iirc) so Madrid could defend their title which they wouldn’t have been able to through their league position.
Prior to that CL interval, champions had always been granted access so they could defend their crown.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/4613695.stm
posted on 6/5/22
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 58 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 10 minutes ago
Neither here nor there, as Madrid would have qualified anyway as holders, which was how it worked every year until the expanded CL format.
=====
I thought the rule allowing holders to enter was introduced in 2006 after Liverpool won it in 2005 but finished outside the top 4 in 2006?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That was a change to the previous rule, that was introduced early on in the CL era (maybe when it was first expanded to 2 teams per country, can’t remember exactly)
And before Liverpool in 05-06, an exception had already been made a few years earlier 99 or 01 iirc) so Madrid could defend their title which they wouldn’t have been able to through their league position.
Prior to that CL interval, champions had always been granted access so they could defend their crown.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/4613695.stm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s consistent with what I said, isn’t it?
posted on 6/5/22
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 58 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 10 minutes ago
Neither here nor there, as Madrid would have qualified anyway as holders, which was how it worked every year until the expanded CL format.
=====
I thought the rule allowing holders to enter was introduced in 2006 after Liverpool won it in 2005 but finished outside the top 4 in 2006?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That was a change to the previous rule, that was introduced early on in the CL era (maybe when it was first expanded to 2 teams per country, can’t remember exactly)
And before Liverpool in 05-06, an exception had already been made a few years earlier 99 or 01 iirc) so Madrid could defend their title which they wouldn’t have been able to through their league position.
Prior to that CL interval, champions had always been granted access so they could defend their crown.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/4613695.stm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s consistent with what I said, isn’t it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can't find anything about Milan or City being allowed as holders tbh. You got a link?
Also, holders being allowed to participate was not in the original rules. So Madrid would not have qualified as winners in the invitational years like you claimed.
posted on 6/5/22
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 4 hours, 7 minutes ago
I read a similar story about Bill Shankly's Liverpool in regards to match fixing. Many believed Liverpool would have been the first British club to win the European Cup but reported that Shankly had told them that before the second leg against Inter, after Liverpool won the reverse 3-1, the referee 'had been got to'. Dodgy decisions followed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So not content with ‘removing’ some of Madrid’s titles, he’s now trying to ‘add’ one to Liverpool
posted on 6/5/22
comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 4 hours, 7 minutes ago
I read a similar story about Bill Shankly's Liverpool in regards to match fixing. Many believed Liverpool would have been the first British club to win the European Cup but reported that Shankly had told them that before the second leg against Inter, after Liverpool won the reverse 3-1, the referee 'had been got to'. Dodgy decisions followed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So not content with ‘removing’ some of Madrid’s titles, he’s now trying to ‘add’ one to Liverpool
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 6/5/22
Can't find anything about Milan or City being allowed as holders tbh. You got a link?
———————
City??? You mean Forest I suppose.
I’m out and about on my phone and stealing minutes off the lady as she wandrrs in and out of shops.
Milan is easy to check, you only need to check who won Serie A the same year they won the first of their back-to-back titles under Sacchi, in 88 or 89, whenever it was.
Forest I’m almost completely sure of.
posted on 6/5/22
Checked and confirmed:
Milan won the EC in 89/90, for which they qualified by virtue of being the EC title holders, since the 88/89 Serie A title was won by Inter. Compare the links below:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Italian_football_champions
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_Cup_and_UEFA_Champions_League_finals
Check the above EC/CL list against the link below, and you’ll see Forest won it in 78/79 and 79/80, but it was Liverpool who’d won the First Division title in 78/79. Forest were able to take part by virtue of being the European Cup holders.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_football_champions
Liverpool as far as I can see didn’t retain the title at a time when they weren’t league champions, but there were indeed seasons where they took part because they were the EC holders, even though they weren’t domestic champions. One such case was 78/79, when they were knocked out in the first round by Forest, who, as you’ll have worked out by now, had qualified as English league champions.
Continue looking through the seasons and you’ll find a shedload of similar cases. Having reached this point, and given that I’ve been able to back myself up on the other statements I’ve made, I trust you’ll take my word for it.
posted on 7/5/22
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 11 hours, 43 minutes ago
Can't find anything about Milan or City being allowed as holders tbh. You got a link?
———————
City??? You mean Forest I suppose.
I’m out and about on my phone and stealing minutes off the lady as she wandrrs in and out of shops.
Milan is easy to check, you only need to check who won Serie A the same year they won the first of their back-to-back titles under Sacchi, in 88 or 89, whenever it was.
Forest I’m almost completely sure of.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Was hard to find without having the dates.
Still, holders being allowed to participate was not in the rules. So Madrid would not have qualified as winners in the invitational years like you claimed.
Page 4 of 5