Europa League: for or against?

Page 4 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Europa League: for or against?

55% 55% 
[ 46 ]
45% 45% 
[ 38 ]
 
Total Votes : 84

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  hönkki on Fri May 07, 2010 9:56 am

For me the most interesting tournament as a low level player is, when I can watch the top-players and play against someone, who is a little bit better than me, and of course play many games. The current Europa Cup is ok from my point of view, because there are many games and many kind of games (I hope I will participate someday).

BUT IF we really need to have the Champions League and the Europa League, I would develope them in the direction, where teams could have as many as possible exciting games. That means games againts teams of their own level. It is educational in a way to play againts someone very good and lost 0-8, but there need to be more those games, where you have some chances to win.

If FISTF could create a Europa League where are all the champions of the "weak" european countries and not so many from the strong countries, it would be not so bad idea. This is of course just my personal opinion, not the official vote of Finland.

hönkki
Grand Prix Winner
Grand Prix Winner

Posts : 74
Join date : 2010-04-23
Age : 51
Location : Helsinki, Finland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Heinz Eder on Fri May 07, 2010 10:07 am

Piero, I don't know if that is already decided and I don't want to blame other countries, but with your idea these discussions will follow anyway.
Why do England get the same number of starters like Austria for an example? If Stefano really realizes that the most interesting thing will be the key of points. I hope that some more people will be involved in that decision. One more time I want to ask the question, how should a country with 1 starter be able to reach a second place in the Champions League?
I don't know out of which position you are knowing that teams are happy not to play the Champions League, if they can play the Europa League. For me it isn't important to play the Europa League, I want to play with the best teams a 2 day competition.
If you don't use the ranking for something except the seeding, we are going to see that numbers will go down in all events except maybe the Majors (I'm not even sure about that). Please be careful with those changes, and think about the possible consequences, i agree with you that it is a risk to change something, but you can decide about the level of risk, high or low risk, in my opinion you are moving on a very high level at the moment.
Every big change means loosing one season if it doesn't work and I think that the members of FISTF should have a lot of power on the decision about those changes , because you need their support for a successful change. If you decide against teams and players, they won't support your ideas, except of the represented associations in the board of course, but that shouldn't be your goal. The board needs more support.
The whole way of working is strange to me. Nobody saw so far a handbook for the next season, there are no rules for the Europa League, but at the end of october there will be the first edition.
You are talking very fast, if there are 11 teams play it with 11 teams. Of course it is nice to spend some hundred EUR to play an Europa League with 11 teams, I can assure you, if that happens in the first year, the Europa League won't even celebrate a second edition, because teams are not interested any more, because any other Major or GP will be more attractive then.
We are not talking about a national tournament, you have to think for all countries in FISTF, if you can't do that, you should ask them about their feeling.
I don't think it is a good way to try and to say if it doesn't work we cancel it again, especially in such important things. if you are not sure about the success, it is only lost time, and that time could be spent for other things, with a bigger chance of success.

Heinz

pierocapponi wrote:Henize, we have to take risks, is something you do when something new.

In an ideal situation, the Champions would play 32 teams (31 + the winner).

I think the answer to your question is simple:

- If only available in 19, played in 19 Champions League.

- If you write 25 plays in 25.

And the Europe league? For this first year, maybe we are talking about a bet, perhaps risky, but I think important, fundamental even exciting to try.

Will be only 8 teams? played in August. Will be 11? 11.

But if we think the next edition (2011-2012) discover that (as an example, I have assessed the value of each team from each country):

Austria: Wiener Mattesburg and play the Champions and 78 Royal the Europe.

Belgium: Stembert, Hennuyers, JSC Rochefort and the Champions League and Rochefort, Charleroi and Templeux the Europe.

England: Yorkshire Español Premiere League and the Champions League and Kent and White Star the Europe.

France: Issy the Champions League and Elbuef the Europe.

Germany: Sparta the Champions and Dortmund the European.

Greece: Falcons and Roligans the Champions, and Atlas and Olympia the Europe.

Italy: Perugia, Reggio, Pisa and Napoli the Champions League and Milan, Bologna, Urbino and Roma the Europe.

Malta: Hammrun in Champions League and Attard the Europe

Netherlands: Delft the Champions and Rijnmond the Europe.

Scotland: Hot Club in the Champions League and Glasgow the Europe.

Spain: Murcia and Turia in Champions and Tiburones and Madrid the Europe

would have:

so in the Champions League to 20 teams (teams would have to add the Czech Rep, Denmark, Finland, Gibraltar, Monaco, Norway, Switzerland and Wales)

and 19 in Europe.

Utopian? Some might say that this equipment do not travel, not go .. etc etc ... I think that this makes the Champions League is nice and balanced and Europe ... well.

Teams like Milan, Bologna, Sharks, Charleroi, Rochefort, Royal 78 etc. have many opportunities to reach semifinals or even win a European competition.

And smaller teams to play more as a competition of its possibilities.

I hope I explained better.

NATION TEAMS
AUSTRIA 3
BELGIUM 3
CZECH REPUBLIC 1
DANMARK 1
ENGLAND 2
FINLAND 1
FRANCE 1
GERMANY 1
GIBRALTAR 1
GREECE 2
ITALY 4
MALTA 1
MONACO 1
NEDERLAND 1
NORWAY 1
PORTUGAL 2
SCOTLAND 1
SPAIN 2
SWITZERLAND 1
WALES 1
31


Piero

Heinz Eder
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 781
Join date : 2010-04-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Heinz Eder on Fri May 07, 2010 10:16 am

The board seems to have a different view, as far as I can understand they think out of the view of the high level players. Most of them are bored to play games against a "normal" player at a tournament.
The view of Piero on some things is very different, he also doesn't think that you can learn something by loosing 10-0 against a top class player, so he implemented the rule that scores over 5-0 are not existing any more, with that rule he wants to force good players not to score so many goals against the weak players, because it doesn't look fine for sponsors or visitors.
It seems to look much better to have shoot outs after the group stages and nobody knows why.

Heinz

hönkki wrote:For me the most interesting tournament as a low level player is, when I can watch the top-players and play against someone, who is a little bit better than me, and of course play many games. The current Europa Cup is ok from my point of view, because there are many games and many kind of games (I hope I will participate someday).

BUT IF we really need to have the Champions League and the Europa League, I would develope them in the direction, where teams could have as many as possible exciting games. That means games againts teams of their own level. It is educational in a way to play againts someone very good and lost 0-8, but there need to be more those games, where you have some chances to win.

If FISTF could create a Europa League where are all the champions of the "weak" european countries and not so many from the strong countries, it would be not so bad idea. This is of course just my personal opinion, not the official vote of Finland.

Heinz Eder
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 781
Join date : 2010-04-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Heinz Eder on Fri May 07, 2010 10:38 am

Thossa, for you it isn't a problem to travel to Mons, for me it is.
The difference and the risk to travel to Mons is the number of games, driving 2400 km for 4 games in worst case is a heavy decision every season. I'm not scared to play against strong players and loose 6-0, if people would be scared, they wouldn't come to the actual version of the EC. Those teams not coming to the current ECs won't travel to an Europa League too, the reason is very easy (money). If such clubs or their players spend money for a trip they want to play as many games as possible, with 16 teams number of games won't be the same like with 32 teams or 24 teams.
Kostas you can't tell people that you are the only one with good ideas or you are the only one who is right, Sergios opinion represents also a big part of players and clubs, I'm not sure about the situation in my club, if we would be ready to take the risk and book flights without knowing the exact number of teams and in the end maybe play an event with 12 teams from 3 or 4 different countries, isn't really exciting for me too. In the current system 24 teams from 9 or 10 countries are guarenteed.
Don't forget all those aspects, when taking such an important decision. One more thing to Stefano, please cancel the way of thinking that in italy things like that work, you are Sports Director of a World federation now, when I had the job I also didn't do things out of an austrian view.
Instead of making an hour in philosophy what could work and what could not work, it would spend a lot of time to ask all federations about your plans and then change your proposal with the feedback you get, this would be the best way to have success.

Heinz

Thossa wrote:As player on a lower level: If I want to play a team-tournament with strong teams, I just have to travel to Major-Tournaments. No problem. In group stages one top-team is guaranteed.

I played the last EC in Tournai and I must say I enjoyed it, but I don´t need it to play it (the last one before was in Gembloux!). It is just a privilege to take part with a qualified team from my country. That´s all.

In Tournai I enjoyed to play with top teams, with weak teams, a competition different than the other FISTF tournaments. What do we need more?

Heinz Eder
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 781
Join date : 2010-04-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Thossa on Fri May 07, 2010 10:54 am

At least it is still possible to bring in an application to the next congress about this. The power in FISTF still have the associations. A FISTF BoD is only an administrator to do the routine work, but of course, they have to bring in innovations. Nevertheless this innovations needs an approval given by a voting of the associations at FISTF meetings and congress like in the past. I think this is the basic misunderstanding of the provisional BoD. They already fix decisions without backing and upset the community.

If somebody brings in an application to stop the new european team-tournament strategy by the sports department, there has to be a voting for it. Yes or no. If the majority votes for this strategy, it will be fixed. If not, the Sports Director has to accept the rejection.

Same for the plastic goalkeepers. If the majority of the congress refuse the approachment of the new type, that BTW is still invisible, what will the provisional BoD do? Adhere to their decisions? Not really Exclamation
avatar
Thossa
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 627
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 55
Location : Far beyond

View user profile http://www.dstfb.de

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Admin on Fri May 07, 2010 11:02 am

There are many things to say. One thing that bothers me is that many clubs like to go to the EC because they know they will have the chance to play many games. In Tournai, it was great to see teams like Le Raincy, NETFA or TSPA playing to have the best ranking possible. Even the game for the 31st place was interesting for them. On the counterside, some teams like Perugia and Cardiff did not play their last match (one for places 13 & 14, one for places 11 & 12) for several reasons and that is not good for the image of the game. So what will be the garantee for weak teams not to travel to any of the 2 european cups if they don't have more than 5 games (for instance) to play?

I also like in this topic that every opinion is important. I don't always agree with Sergio but on this topic, I totally agree with him and I believe his opinion is important because he's a member of a team that tries every year to play the EC. Because for Bologna it's not easy to qualify, they take things very seriously but people should not forget that Bologna was semi-finalist of the EC in 2008 and 7th in 2009. And both times, they had to struggle to qualify!!! Therefore, it proves once again the level of the italian teams is very good (Napoli was substitue and almost qualified in last minute to play in Tournai!) but what will be the interest to have 4 very good italian teams playing the Europa League let's say against Brussels, Rain, NETFA, Madrid and Le Raincy? Sorry but I don't understand that...
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1330
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 43
Location : Somewhere in Belgium

View user profile http://templeuveunited.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Guest on Fri May 07, 2010 11:06 am

Heinz,

England has two and Austria 3. England is the same as Spain.

The problem is that a climate of confrontation does not help to share ideas.

For me, table football is starting again, in football 70 years passed since the first matches to first World Cup (1930) and to 1970 had not yet mediated. The Champions League has a history of 20 years.

It is important to know where we want to take serious decisions and forcefulness. Tell all where we want to go but not stand to listen to criticism.

There are many people who criticize but then is unable to take responsibility or their own club.

The old board is still discussing the elections are for sale .... waiting for any excuse to criticize.

Not one word of respect. Not after seeing us work in Amsterdam for two days ....

This forum has been opened (by the way, the forum FISTF Coppenolle we had to stick it out for what he has written, has written that it would sell my mother, and only authorize me to denounce it) just to attack any decision of the new board (and not to replace the previous closure).

For this reason I am here to continue to explain. Guess what? I have written 3 forum we have a new style guide. You know how I asked for it? Nobody. You know the problem? most do not even know what a style guide and do not want to know.

95% of the players just want to find a field to play.

For this we need to stop being a sport run by players

Un abrazo.

Piero

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Thossa on Fri May 07, 2010 11:23 am

Piero, you should better stop thinking the former FISTF BoD are bad losers or something like this. If you follow carefuly the discussions, you will find not only critismn but positive suggestions, too... not only from parts of the former BoD to help FISTF keeping on the right track. I fear this is not your opinion, but it is the truth Exclamation

You are now in the same situation the former BoD was: storm-raged.

This is a situation I know since many years as former BoD and all of you in the provisional BoD should better accept this or you should resign right in time.
avatar
Thossa
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 627
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 55
Location : Far beyond

View user profile http://www.dstfb.de

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Heinz Eder on Fri May 07, 2010 11:25 am

Piero,
elections are over, but if people spread wrong information I always will answer. Personally I finished after Frankfurt, but it doesn't mean I'm not interested in the happenings any more.
Especially in sports sector I think it is very important that players are those who take decisions and are responsible for that, there shouldn't be people without any knowledge, who draw their picture of sports department of FISTF. (I'm not speaking about Stefano).
Stefano has a lot of respect from different people of different countries, but by taking decisions in the end it can happen that a few hundreds are against his changes. I only think that a Sprts Director should always try to get as much support as possible.
You will have my respect when I can see results which are positive for FISTF and the sport/game and its members. You have my full respect for it that the game is available in shops in different countries, because it is positive, but it has nothing to do with your job as marketing director of FISTF. I hope we are only talking about respect for work. We don't need to talk about personal respect, because I never showed any disrespect for somebody on a personal level.
Associations are waiting for communication what happened since Frankfurt, people are interested, but they loose their interest, if the board sends out things, which are already decided, or if they have to wait for something promised for months.
If you send out dates for something, the dates have to be respected, instead of letting the associations wait, and even don't give them any information about the reason for delay. If your company makes a deal with somebody and then you don't respect the deal, it isn't good for your image and you will get in troubles and I'm sure you inform your partner about the reasons why your company can't respect the signed deal. Every official communication where the board promise something, has to be seen as a simular deal.

Heinz
pierocapponi wrote:Heinz,

England has two and Austria 3. England is the same as Spain.

The problem is that a climate of confrontation does not help to share ideas.

For me, table football is starting again, in football 70 years passed since the first matches to first World Cup (1930) and to 1970 had not yet mediated. The Champions League has a history of 20 years.

It is important to know where we want to take serious decisions and forcefulness. Tell all where we want to go but not stand to listen to criticism.

There are many people who criticize but then is unable to take responsibility or their own club.

The old board is still discussing the elections are for sale .... waiting for any excuse to criticize.

Not one word of respect. Not after seeing us work in Amsterdam for two days ....

This forum has been opened (by the way, the forum FISTF Coppenolle we had to stick it out for what he has written, has written that it would sell my mother, and only authorize me to denounce it) just to attack any decision of the new board (and not to replace the previous closure).

For this reason I am here to continue to explain. Guess what? I have written 3 forum we have a new style guide. You know how I asked for it? Nobody. You know the problem? most do not even know what a style guide and do not want to know.

95% of the players just want to find a field to play.

For this we need to stop being a sport run by players

Un abrazo.

Piero

Heinz Eder
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 781
Join date : 2010-04-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Guest on Fri May 07, 2010 11:58 am

Heinz,

I totally agree with what you say about our work.

We know perfectly well that we are not doing things perfectly, or worse still, that everything we are doing is not seen.

It is also true that we are concerned about some "sell" what has been done and what is done daily.

We're working on it and I hope to present soon the news.

Would exclude from this discourse to the work of De Francesco. It's just ridiculous to think that a director of sports with its history as a player with his experience in the Italian directors are held accountable to people representing realities of 50 players. is how to appoint a Nobel in economics as the Ministry of Finance and then expect them not to take forward their ideas for opinions against a couple of school teachers.

About my work, I agree with you that Total Soccer has nothing to do with my work in FISTF actually talk about it only if you ask me.

In other post I have asked and the argument just does not go.

I disagree, on the other hand, as regards the decision-making. Removing the sports department, where a table football knowledge is obviously important to any other department FISTF affects only know how to play ..... negative.

Normally the "players" bring your vision to play. They will play with their friends and are neglectful of the rest.

Few will see how things are done. is a normal and natural attitude, but we can not leave it to the players' strategic decisions.

Moreover, in our case the vision is old, conformist and conservative.

A hug.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Heinz Eder on Fri May 07, 2010 12:30 pm

You can only get a line by involving more the members. It is much too long to ask people about your work every 4 years, in worst case 4 years are lost then, do we have that time to take the risk to loose 4 years? The main thing is that you ask after 4 years of work, so things already happened and changed.
Of course Stefano is experienced, but it is a difference to work in a sport national or international. I don't think it is negative, especially in table soccer, if the sports director is active, because he better understands situations.
You know it much better what currently is running well and what needs to be improved, I'm not involved, I only can see that decisions taken in Frankfurt are particullary ignored and that's not ok for me. I think you also should stop telling that the old board is only critizizing, look on the post and you will see many proposals, of course I can understand your view, the board can't realize things proposed by the loosers of the elections, but do you think it is the right way?
Imagine if there could be 2 programs at the congress in Rain, would you prefer it to include members already in the design of your program, or do you prefer it to have a voting and in the end you maybe have to realize a program written by the member associations without including the board?

Laurent mentioned it very often in Frankfurt and you should respect that. FISTF is made of its members, no board should be working against the members of FISTF. The highest priority always have to be the members of FISTF. So far nothing changed what Laurent critizized in Frankfurt, the processes are still the same and as it seems the association have to accept again a program for 4 years, without having influence on it from the scratch. The only change so far is the content of the program. There are 2 possibilities now. The old board worked in a correct way, or the new board didn't change some things as promised!?
Nobody knows facts what is going to happen, the newsletter isn't running well, the update of the homepage isn't running at the moment, the promised forum still isn't available, I asked about it and got an answer, but nobody else knows what's going on. It would be more than normal to inform the associations about the delay the same way, the board informed the associations about the end of the forum, instead of waiting for requests. Even if the board breaks a promise or can't respect deadlines, offensive communication helps more than defensive communication like the board is doing actually. It also isn't positive that the financial director sends out the newsletter now, there is a communication director working in the board!
It is good to know that the board worked for 2 days in Amsterdam, but nobody would know it, if players wouldn't tell it to other players!? I only know it because a player told me that nearly all members of the board were there. Results of the meeting? No official information like meeting minutes or something like that. So please tell me how you want to gain respect for your work, if everything is happening in private and nobody outside the board seems to be allowed to know something.
In the end there is going to come a program in a few months, associations are going to have a few weeks time to give their comments, if the board sees, those who complain are not enough they won't care about it. Again the actual board is doing exactly the same they critizized before Frankfurt.

It shows one more time. before the election is not after the election

Heinz

pierocapponi wrote:Heinz,

I totally agree with what you say about our work.

We know perfectly well that we are not doing things perfectly, or worse still, that everything we are doing is not seen.

It is also true that we are concerned about some "sell" what has been done and what is done daily.

We're working on it and I hope to present soon the news.

Would exclude from this discourse to the work of De Francesco. It's just ridiculous to think that a director of sports with its history as a player with his experience in the Italian directors are held accountable to people representing realities of 50 players. is how to appoint a Nobel in economics as the Ministry of Finance and then expect them not to take forward their ideas for opinions against a couple of school teachers.

About my work, I agree with you that Total Soccer has nothing to do with my work in FISTF actually talk about it only if you ask me.

In other post I have asked and the argument just does not go.

I disagree, on the other hand, as regards the decision-making. Removing the sports department, where a table football knowledge is obviously important to any other department FISTF affects only know how to play ..... negative.

Normally the "players" bring your vision to play. They will play with their friends and are neglectful of the rest.

Few will see how things are done. is a normal and natural attitude, but we can not leave it to the players' strategic decisions.

Moreover, in our case the vision is old, conformist and conservative.

A hug.

Heinz Eder
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 781
Join date : 2010-04-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Guest on Fri May 07, 2010 1:35 pm

I understand your reasoning Heinz,

but in this specific instance, the proposed changes are for the 2011-12 season

The cup is a new bet, will play only teams who can not play the Champions League, obviously a low turnout would be a problem, but again, I believe we should bet on that.

It is clear that we have to organize a good event, in an easy city, playing many games, with a good atmosphere.

Then if Rain wins another board will be free to make changes or steps back they see fit. I do not see the problem.

I'm sorry but is difficult to find interesting proposals in the sea of insults ... and on considerations related to old and conservative position.

I am sure that if tomorrow we offer $ 100 gift to someone we criticize each club as well.

Soon will present many new features, and indeed, as before will see them and understand them criticized ...

See, I have signed an agreement with the Kappa brand to get, for all clubs FISTF, 35% discount on the price of the catalog for professionals (not the price that you find in stores, on the price paid by the store) . this means that a Kappa shirt in the store costs 40 euros paid 13. Vincet comments: "Belgium does not matter why we work with the brand X".

This was the president FISTF. And then wonder why I resigned.

But it's not go into more controversial and keep trying to convey my opinion and my idea, which is not the absolute truth, it is my opinion and my idea.

Piero

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Admin on Fri May 07, 2010 1:41 pm

I said that because Kappa is almost nothing in Belgium. It's not a popular brand so I don't care about such a deal because in Belgium, it will be worthless. Also, the belgian association has a deal with Jako, another brand that is more popular here. That's all.
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1330
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 43
Location : Somewhere in Belgium

View user profile http://templeuveunited.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Guest on Fri May 07, 2010 2:51 pm

I do not want to make a comparison between Kappa and Jako ....

My question is: if you have an agreement in belgium brand Jako interesting, why not you make it extensible to all the clubs?

By the way, you're the one who decides for all Belgian clubs?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Admin on Fri May 07, 2010 3:05 pm

First of all I'm not the one who made the arrangement between Jako and the belgian association.

Secondly it's just between the belgian association and Jako because a guy from the commercial service of Jako is a good friend of one of our members. The belgian national team and several belgian clubs have Jako equipments but the offer is valid for all belgian clubs.
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1330
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 43
Location : Somewhere in Belgium

View user profile http://templeuveunited.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  SergLoureiro on Fri May 07, 2010 4:13 pm

Admin wrote:I also like in this topic that every opinion is important. I don't always agree with Sergio but on this topic, I totally agree with him and I believe his opinion is important because he's a member of a team that tries every year to play the EC. Because for Bologna it's not easy to qualify, they take things very seriously but people should not forget that Bologna was semi-finalist of the EC in 2008 and 7th in 2009. And both times, they had to struggle to qualify!!! Therefore, it proves once again the level of the italian teams is very good (Napoli was substitue and almost qualified in last minute to play in Tournai!) but what will be the interest to have 4 very good italian teams playing the Europa League let's say against Brussels, Rain, NETFA, Madrid and Le Raincy? Sorry but I don't understand that...

That's the point Vincent, and yes, this time we've the same opinion. Very Happy

SergLoureiro
Satellite winner
Satellite winner

Posts : 24
Join date : 2010-05-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Admin on Mon May 10, 2010 10:01 am

There were several discussions this week-end in Stembert when people said it's not normal the Board is changing rules during the season. Int he FISTF Handboo, the rules for this season are as follows:

1. Selection of Teams
a) FISTF World Ranking (at the end of August) will be used to select 8 teams (maximum 2 teams per
nation).
b) In addition to a) each national federation may also nominate 2 teams.
c) Each National Federation may also register one or two substitute teams. If the required number of teams
is not achieved, the first substitutes would have selection priority according to:
1. Team from a nation which have no teams selected in a)
2. Team from a nation which have one team selected in a)
3. Team from a nation which have two teams selected in a)
d) The World Ranking at the end of august is used to determine priority in i, ii & iii if required.
e) Notes
 The holders are automatically qualified.
 If the host nation have no qualifiers according to a), they could nominate three teams
according to b).


Therefore, I think it's totally impossible to change rules for the way to qualify teams for the EC in Mattersburg.

The Europa League is still another story though...
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1330
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 43
Location : Somewhere in Belgium

View user profile http://templeuveunited.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Guest on Mon May 10, 2010 12:00 pm

As Vincent said, the change relates to the 2011-12 season.

The next edition of "Champions" to be played in Mattesburg, are played with the rules of the current Handbook.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Heinz Eder on Mon May 10, 2010 2:45 pm

Hi,
of course this year the new system can't be used, but it is one more reason of confusion, why we need to mix the actual system with the one proposed by Stefano for the future.
We are going to have many teams playing the CL this year, so I think there are going to be troubles for an EL anyway and that won't be positive for the future.

anyway, I don't think it will change the situation or decisions, if we discuss here, maybe there is a need to send something official from more than 1 association, maybe then a "real" discussion can start.

Heinz

Heinz Eder
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 781
Join date : 2010-04-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Guest on Mon May 10, 2010 4:20 pm

We haven't change the rule this year. All the qualifications for the Europa Cup are the same of the last year.

We only create a new cup, Europa league.

I will send to all associations a comunication as soon as possible with all the informations.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Heinz Eder on Mon May 10, 2010 4:41 pm

Stefano, how many teams should play that League?
The old criterias mean that the countries can send more teams.

The numbers are according the ranking of April (i know there are changes possible)

Italy: 4 or 5
Belgium: 4
Austria: 3
Greece: 3
Spain: 3
Wales: 3

All other countries can send 2 teams at least, next year most of those countries maybe can only send 1 starter, then there is 1 team left for the EL. So where should teams come from, except of Italy and Spain. The proposal of an Europa League can only work in combination with your ranking limiting the starters of the countries stricter. If you create the tournament already now in combination with the actual criterias, what should be the result?
If you think that "weaker" teams are going to join the EL instead of the EC it is a big risk. Anyway it is decided now, so let's hope the best.

Heinz

Heinz Eder
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 781
Join date : 2010-04-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Admin on Mon May 10, 2010 4:52 pm

There must still be a candidate to organize the EL...
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1330
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 43
Location : Somewhere in Belgium

View user profile http://templeuveunited.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Thossa on Mon May 10, 2010 4:53 pm

In Circular n.12 (from 2010, March 12th) we can read:

Champions League – Criteria for participation
This amendment will enter into effect as from this season.

Europa League – Criteria for participation
This amendment will enter into effect as from season 2010-2011.


To make it clear Exclamation

@ Heinz
All the new decision are only valid (incl. the new plastic goalkeeper), when they survive the next congress.
avatar
Thossa
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 627
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 55
Location : Far beyond

View user profile http://www.dstfb.de

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Eoin on Mon May 10, 2010 5:45 pm

When is the first Europa League scheduled for, Autumn 2010?
avatar
Eoin
Satellite winner
Satellite winner

Posts : 20
Join date : 2010-05-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Thossa on Mon May 10, 2010 6:52 pm

Yes, October in Belfast, I hope. I love you
avatar
Thossa
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 627
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 55
Location : Far beyond

View user profile http://www.dstfb.de

Back to top Go down

Re: Europa League: for or against?

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 4 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum