Womens Champions League 2024/25

K K

Kinkys Left Foot

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 Sep 2008
Messages
5,035
Location
Audenshaw
Team supported
City
Champions path:

St Polten v ZNK Mura

Benfica v Hammarby

Osijek (69) v Twente (43)

Galatasaray v Slavia Prague

Roma v Servette

Anderlecht v Valerenga

Vorskla Poltava v Celtic

League path:

Sporting CP v Real Madrid

Juventus v Paris Saint-Germain

Paris FC (21) v Manchester City (11)

Fiorentina v Wolfsburg

BK Hacken v Arsenal

This seeding draw is absolutely crap how the fuck can Juventus (9) v PSG (4) be a preliminary round when Vorskla (29) v Celtic (82) or Osijek (69) v Twente (43) can attain the same qualification - its a joke. There is insufficient weighting being given to the strength of the womens' Leagues in the stronger nations.

Not only that - these teams will have their co-efficient enhanced for next year when they qualify for the Group stages while we face the prospect of having to play Real Madrid or Wolfsburg or PSG just to qualify every year. We only lost out to Chelsea on goal difference on the final day yet they get a bye? We've been lucky this year in getting Paris FC, who are no mugs but against whom we should go through over 2 legs. We would likely cricket score the majority of those weaker teams in the "Champions Path". Its not right and needs rectifying.
 
The only sure way of avoiding a tough draw in qualifying - Win your league and you don't have to qualify. It's something we really should've done for this year but blew the end of term exam. Like you say, it's a tie we should win (Chelsea beat them in both legs last year) especially as we get the home leg 2nd.
 
It's funny, in the men's there are always loads moaning about clubs who aren't Champions being included, but then in the women's, where being a Champion gives you an easier draw, we moan about it being unfair.

Bunch of hypocrites (and I'm including myself in that)
 
I certainly did not advocate they shouldn't qualify for this stage, my ire is clearly their UEFA ranking (based on ability to progress in the competition and national ranking) should form the seeding groups for onward qualification for the Group Stage with the top qualified 12 teams drawn against the bottom 12.

Whats the point of giving entry to teams ranked 70 - 100 into the Group Stages - they will get hammered by the top seeds - no doubt the odd double figures score. Who wants to watch uncompetitive football like that where some part time Slovenian side are utterly humiliated by Barca, Lyon or Chelsea? Its nonsense and does the Womens game no good at all, imo.
 
Kinkys Left Foot said:
Champions path:

St Polten v ZNK Mura

Benfica v Hammarby

Osijek (69) v Twente (43)

Galatasaray v Slavia Prague

Roma v Servette

Anderlecht v Valerenga

Vorskla Poltava v Celtic

League path:

Sporting CP v Real Madrid

Juventus v Paris Saint-Germain

Paris FC (21) v Manchester City (11)

Fiorentina v Wolfsburg

BK Hacken v Arsenal

This seeding draw is absolutely crap how the fuck can Juventus (9) v PSG (4) be a preliminary round when Vorskla (29) v Celtic (82) or Osijek (69) v Twente (43) can attain the same qualification - its a joke. There is insufficient weighting being given to the strength of the womens' Leagues in the stronger nations.

Not only that - these teams will have their co-efficient enhanced for next year when they qualify for the Group stages while we face the prospect of having to play Real Madrid or Wolfsburg or PSG just to qualify every year. We only lost out to Chelsea on goal difference on the final day yet they get a bye? We've been lucky this year in getting Paris FC, who are no mugs but against whom we should go through over 2 legs. We would likely cricket score the majority of those weaker teams in the "Champions Path". Its not right and needs rectifying.
Click to expand...
I can see both sides of this with uefa wanting to avoid clubs from the smaller nations being permanently frozen out of European competition. It'll change next season anyway with the introduction of the new single league format. All of the WSL's top three could qualify directly to the league stage.

Meanwhile City and Arsenal will both make it through to this year's group stage. We (Chelsea) played the next CL opponents of City and Arsenal last season. They are decent sides with some good players but neither of them are likely to give the WSL clubs too much trouble.

On the plus side, you'll be glad that some of the 'Champions Path' teams are still fighting on in the group stage when one, or maybe even two, of them wind up in your group. :)
 
acton28.blog said:
FOCs? Sorry, unsure what that is. Just grabbed my £7 standing ticket.
Click to expand...
It's a term of endearment pinned to the lapels of the over-65s. The F is a rather coarse Anglo-Saxon word that has some vulgar attachment to copulation, the O is a reference to the fact that, at present, we still get 'cheap' tickets, and the C is either a nasty unpleasant human being (GNIAFC) or part of a lady's anatomy. It was adopted after MotY(Hahahahahahahahah) Pardew referred to Pellers as a FOC!
 
Dave Ewing's Back 'eader said:
It's a term of endearment pinned to the lapels of the over-65s. The F is a rather coarse Anglo-Saxon word that has some vulgar attachment to copulation, the O is a reference to the fact that, at present, we still get 'cheap' tickets, and the C is either a nasty unpleasant human being (GNIAFC) or part of a lady's anatomy. It was adopted after MotY(Hahahahahahahahah) Pardew referred to Pellers as a FOC!
Click to expand...
Crikey, I always naively thought the C stood for codger!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.