The Agenda (Merged)

[hertsblue]

having seen many an article on why young English should not sign for Manchester city as it stunts their development could you please point out a similar worded article concerning one Wilfred zaha?

Don't forget Nick Powell. Or Zinedine Cleverley for that matter.

Januzaj?

Or all the youngsters from earlier in the season who have been dropped now the expensive imports are fit and the 2 left in the squad are both out of contract in the summer.

 

[FanchesterCity]

so like an agenda then?

Of course. But then people say 'agenda' is have different interpretations. I think the common one, is 'an agenda against City'. I don't believe that.
I do believe there's an agenda to sell papers and pander to the masses, and means favouring some clubs more than others.

So which clubs are favoured more than others in your view pray tell.

I believe many of the original G14 clubs exerted considerable influence over UEFA to form the CL. This is very well documented and more or less taken as read now. Most of those clubs still have political influence over UEFA, ranging from 'having the ear' of them, to reminding them of their pulling power for viewing figures and sponsors.
This inevitably influences UEFA, because they seek to maximise revenue and exposure of CL (in particular) and thus affects how UEFA form the competition.
The seeding system deliberately favoured a more 'stable' representation of clubs in the CL, and increased the likelihood of success of those clubs.
UEFA brought in FFP under the auspices of stopping clubs getting into financial difficulty (good), but implemented it in a way that punished clubs that had not put any risk on their finances. Once again, this has the effect of favouring established large clubs with already large revenues, not aspiring ones.

The political influence of many of the G14 simply cannot underestimated. Most of the revenue generated from CL comes from broadcasting rights for the competition. Those broadcasters want to televise the largest most famous clubs, and not the plucky minnows from Greece, or Portugal. This puts considerable power in the hands of those clubs, and they know it. Even since the initial G14, clubs have whispered suggestions of breakaway competitions.

Then, whilst in part 'out of their hands', UEFA does nothing to counter the fact that some countries and teams are at a massive financial advantage over others. Each nation has a different set of circumstances, for instance the PL offer the highest revenues (primarily down to broadcasting rights), but shares those rights in a far more even way than Spain shares it's equivalent. Holland on the other had has no such huge revenues available to its clubs.
We can't blame UEFA for this, but we can say they do nothing to counter it in their regulations. Why? because that system favours a predictable set of CL competitors, which in turns means CL will feature most of the original G14 clubs.

That doesn't mean they deliberate favour Bayern or Real Madrid et al because of who they are, but because of what they are, and what they bring to the CL table. In time, the most favourable clubs can change, and some of the old G14 big boys have fallen a little by the wayside, whilst new ones have emerged. But regardless, UEFA primarily seeks to serve the benefits of the largest clubs and not the smallest.

That's my honest opinion.

I don't believe for one moment UEFA consult Hull City on what's the best format for CL (and yet they're every bit as eligible to be in it), I do believe they'll be talking with Read Madrid, Bayern Munich, United (and City for that matter) on matters. So that means the big boys have a voice and will be heard, and decisions made by UEFA will favour those clubs.

 

[prestonibbo_mcfc]

Any sport that uses a seeding system is biased from the start.

 

[Peter Doherty]

FFS.

Sky Sports News Correspondent "champions Chelsea".

F'OFF!

Nowt wrong with that, Autumn and Winter Champions!

Didn't one of their commentators describe Chelsea as the "champions elect" - last October?

A BBC commentator did tonight on their BBC1 results programme.

 

[FanchesterCity]

Any sport that uses a seeding system is biased from the start.

Indeed.

It would have made more sense if the seeding was based on final league position, at least that way the 'champions' actually got seeded (if seeding had to happen).

The group stages (really designed to make money) have a 'reasonable' effect of filtering out freak results. If you want to find the best team, then a league or group system does a better job than a knockout, but seeding is just intentionally adding a bias to the expected results.

 

[mad4city]

There's nothing wrong with seeding, per se. It's the weighting in favour of clubs who've qualified for five consecutive years - thereby practically ring fencing their participation - that's wrong.
In hindsight, that group we had, where the English, German, Spanish and Dutch champions got lumped in together, may well have done the competition a favour on the long run.

 

[George Hannah]

Lipton slandering us on the Sunday Supplement this morning, everyday stuff really

 

[Centurions]

Lipton slandering us on the Sunday Supplement this morning, everyday stuff really

Anything in particular or just the usual yawn fest?

 

[Bill]

there is a reason these "journalists" are invited on to the show.

 

[Victoria-bahs]

there is a reason these "journalists" are invited on to the show.

would be funny if someone could put their face on a fancy costume of a ****... sat around that table..