Champions League Winners or 4th spot??

[CJACKO11]

In England at the moment we have 3 English sides currently in the Champions League and all i believe have a shout of winning the trophy. But as we know we could have a situation that if Chelsea or Tottenham win the Champions League but finish out the top 4 then the team that finished 4th will miss out on Champions League football next season.

This has happend once before and not so long ago if we remember. Back in 2005 Liverpool won the Champions League in the thrilling 3-3 comeback win against Carlo Ancelotti's AC Milan. But Liverpool faultered in the Premier League and finished 5th behind rivals Everton. At that time Uefa had no rules about how this situation would be sorted so escaping a backlash from either side Uefa allowed both sides to take part in the Champions League for the 2005/2006 season.

Liverpool were allowed to be drawn striaght into the group stages but Everton had to qualify and unfortunatly lost to Spanish side Villarreal. Because there was 5 English sides in the Champions League Liverpool were a unseeded side and like everyone proberly predicted at the time they were drawn into a group with Chelsea.

To stop this from happening again Uefa bought in a rule saying that if this situation was the happen again then the side that won the Champions League will get the 4th Champions League spot and the side that finished 4th will get demoted to the Europa League.

My question is who deserves to be in the Champions League?? I believe there is an argument for both cases. If you win the Champions League then you deserve to retain your title but finishing 4th over a 38game season surely deserves Champions League football too??

I personly believe if you win the CL then you deserve to reatain it the next season. But what do we all think??

 

[wboyz]

i believe back in 05 Liverpool had to go through all the qualifying rounds, no?

I thnk has to go the league team. Like you said, they've earnt the right over the entire season. Anyone can win a cup competition, which is the joy of it. We all accept that Barca have been the worlds best team over the past 3 seasons, yet in 08 United won, in 09 Barca managed to win with some help from the ref, and last year Inter won it

 

[ajt09]

Champions League winners definately. 4th spot no. But tbh, it just to be the top two teams in each league in Europe. There's two much dross playing to be honest. It's the Champions League-so surely it should just be for the champions of a league, and perhaps the teams that come 2nd?

 

[Tezzz]

Back in 2005 we had to go through every qualifying stage, but we didn't replace any of the top four teams in the premier league. Everton still went into it as we they finished 4th ahead of us.

I believe that there is now a reserved spot for the champions league winners, so the top 4 would still stand as being qualified for champions league football next year.

 

[Chicharito1988]

none, should be like liverpool have 5 teams that is FAIR

 

[Calum]

TEAM who finish 4th should get UCL Place

 

[King Sid]

Champions League winners definately. 4th spot no. But tbh, it just to be the top two teams in each league in Europe. There's two much dross playing to be honest. It's the Champions League-so surely it should just be for the champions of a league, and perhaps the teams that come 2nd?

I agree with this. The winners deserve their right to defend their title and it should be reserved for the top two teams, not the top four.

Some of the teams that play in it are never going to make an impact because of the quality of the league. It should be reserved for Champions and runners-up only leading to a much fairer chance for each country.

 

[RicSLB]

Don´t worry about this, no english side will win Champions League this year XD

 

[Zidave]

Back in 2005 we had to go through every qualifying stage, but we didn't replace any of the top four teams in the premier league. Everton still went into it as we they finished 4th ahead of us.

I believe that there is now a reserved spot for the champions league winners, so the top 4 would still stand as being qualified for champions league football next year.

Yes there is a reserved spot for the winners if they do not qualify thru league position. But this is nowvat the expense of the 4th placed team in England. Therefore the 3rd place team would have to qualify is my understanding

 

[DanWalsallFC]

If it was up to me it would only be the Champions of competitions that would play in it, hence the name CHAMPIONS league. But that's a whole different discussion..

 

[AldoKemp-1]

Personally I think no matter what all allocated positions should stay the same and Champions league winners should always get an automatic place into europe. And if it's a team who finished first in their league the spot should go to the next team down in the league who hasn't qualified. This would save any hassle from any teams. Winners automatically in - and place to the next team in the league if necessary.

 

[paulegend]

what is more of an achievment?? winning the champions league or fnishing 4th in the league?? obvious answer

winning the ampions league shuld always enitle you to defend it.

liverpool had to play ever qualifying round in 06. we started against TNS(welsh) early in July. the players only had about 3-4 weeks off for the summer break. that year we became the only team to ever start at the first qualifying round and get out of the group stage. we also had no country protectin meaning we where able to be drawn against english sides at any time. we effictivly where not an english side that yar.

from now on the champions of Europe will go staright into the champions league group stage. they will be first seeds amongst their own nations teams to qualify for europe. meaning they replace 1st in the league(not 4th in england) IE: if spurs finish 5th and United win the league. Spurs(5th), Man U(1st) and Arsenal (2nd) would qualify for the group stage while City (3rd) would have to qualify. Chelsea (4th) and Liverpool (6th) would qualify for the Europa.


anyone who thinks 4th is more important than winning the champions league is obviuosly a fan of chelsea City or spurs and is worried that their team will suffer because of this rule.

 

[Clince121188]

Champions League winners definately. 4th spot no. But tbh, it just to be the top two teams in each league in Europe. There's two much dross playing to be honest. It's the Champions League-so surely it should just be for the champions of a league, and perhaps the teams that come 2nd?

Not so sure about that tbh, if thats the case then arsenal and tottenham would not have had the chance to affect the champions league in the way they did this year. A.C Milan are leading Serie A this season and Tottenham are 5th in the prem so I believe that this discounts the 2 teams idea alone. Also back in 2004, the champions league final was played out by monaco and porto, two teams that lacked quality in their squads in comparison with many of the teams in the competition. Porto's starting line-up had only Deco and Carvalho who were of any real lasting quality, of course the also had the special one. Monaco had only Evra and Giuly who would go on to greater things and Morientes whos talented was never seen again after that. So teams that don't have many great names can definitely have a profound affect on the competition. I wouldn't change a thing about it.

 

[Puddz]

There was a little idea UEFA/FA came up with to make a playoff from the 4th-7th position in the league to go though to the Champions league, and the other teams go through to the Europa league. There was a huge backlash against it because everyone believed it was harsh for the team that battled to get 4th, might not be in the big competition or that teams wouldn't battle as hard since they could still get 7th and go through. And I think the same could be used in this situation. 4th place should go through, and the Champions League winner shouldn't since they should have to battle their way into it again.

Btw, What if say Chelsea won the Champions league, but during the season they just didn't play great and where relegated. Should they still be allowed in the Champions league even though they are playing in the Championship?

 

[AldoKemp-1]

Btw, What if say Chelsea won the Champions league, but during the season they just didn't play great and where relegated. Should they still be allowed in the Champions league even though they are playing in the Championship?

Yes, The same reason that if a championship or league 1 side won the CC they should be allowed into Europe. League status is irrelevant.

 

[Puddz]

Yes, The same reason that if a championship or league 1 side won the CC they should be allowed into Europe. League status is irrelevant.

If league status is irrelevant, they why aren't teams from the Championship, League 1, and League 2 are able to compete in the champions league/Europa league.

Because we want the best teams to compete in the biggest competitions. And the best teams are the teams that get 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th in our top league.

 

[paulegend]

There was a little idea UEFA/FA came up with to make a playoff from the 4th-7th position in the league to go though to the Champions league, and the other teams go through to the Europa league. There was a huge backlash against it because everyone believed it was harsh for the team that battled to get 4th, might not be in the big competition or that teams wouldn't battle as hard since they could still get 7th and go through. And I think the same could be used in this situation. 4th place should go through, and the Champions League winner shouldn't since they should have to battle their way into it again.

Btw, What if say Chelsea won the Champions league, but during the season they just didn't play great and where relegated. Should they still be allowed in the Champions league even though they are playing in the Championship?

yes because chelsea would have had to beat the best teams in europe to win it.

in the grand scheme of things 4th place means nothing. it is merely our way of deciding who gets the 4th allocation of champions league. there is no rule in UEFA that says that spot must go to the 4th best team. we could just as easily give that spot to the FA cup winners or who ever finished just outside the relegation zone.

i bet not many people on here follow the batle for 4th in italy and spain!!!!! the reson being is 4th means nothing. you get no trophy. Champions league WINNERS however.

as for your example on chelsea........... man united have been resting players in the fa cup and league cup since the early 90's. does that mean that they didnt deserve to win the league as they had the unfair advantage of just playing they reserves in the cups?? thats exactly the same as your chelsea example

 

[AldoKemp-1]

If league status is irrelevant, they why aren't teams from the Championship, League 1, and League 2 are able to compete in the champions league/Europa league.

Because we want the best teams to compete in the biggest competitions. And the best teams are the teams that get 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th in our top league.

But really the only position that matters to clubs most is 1st place. 2nd 3rd and 4th Champions league allocations is just a way of keeping things exciting in the league if one team runs away with it early on. Technically the team that wins the champions league is the best team in Europe. As they beat the best teams from around europe. So in this case League places are irrelevant.

 

[rookiemanager]

I totally agree with cl winners will have to go through qualifiers if they dont get 4th.

 

[paulegend]

I totally agree with cl winners will have to go through qualifiers if they dont get 4th.

they dont. they go into the group.

the team that wins the fa cup should have more right to be in champs league rather than 4th place.

fact is people are worried that their team wont qualify. thats all