Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

  • Participation within this subforum is only available to members who have had 5+ posts approved elsewhere.

Manchester United

Status
Not open for further replies.
PITA said:
It's really not. We call out dubious pens that we get. Doesn't happen as often as it does for United but it does happen.
Click to expand...
Look im not saying we dont get some favourable decisions but its not every week and what i am saying is that its uproar because its United
 
duncs pigeon said:
Back then you had to be the best side over 42 games to be in European Cup, now you can be the 4th best side after 38 games to get in it. Sometimes there were better and stronger sides in the UEFA Cup. It can be easier to progress in the CL format now, you can lose three group games and still qualify for ko stages.
Click to expand...
Some really good points there. The CL groups are pretty much set-up so the 'better' sides -more often than not - progress to the knock-out stages. It then effectively becomes the old European Cup, which means you could end up winning it by only playing 2 or 3 difficult ties. It's a bit of a paradox really. The old European Cup should have been named 'The European Champions Cup' for the simple fact you had to be champions of your own country to enter it. The Champions League is anything but, & it's galling that the rs finished below us in 2005 & ended up European champions.
 
Blueboy57 said:
Some really good points there. The CL groups are pretty much set-up so the 'better' sides -more often than not - progress to the knock-out stages. It then effectively becomes the old European Cup, which means you could end up winning it by only playing 2 or 3 difficult ties. It's a bit of a paradox really. The old European Cup should have been named 'The European Champions Cup' for the simple fact you had to be champions of your own country to enter it. The Champions League is anything but, & it's galling that the rs finished below us in 2005 & ended up European champions.
Click to expand...
It’s swings and roundabouts. The European Cup only had champions in it so it’s much harder to get in, but once in you maybe only face two or three really top sides, and while the Champions League is much easier to get in, you face at least three top sides (could also be put in a difficult group, there’s always one). Basically, they balance each other out.

Harking back to compare is silly anyway. Look at four of our five opponents in the CWC win: UCD, Inter Bratislava, Fortuna Sittard and Rapid Vienna. Would any of them survive in the championship? I know this example is from the CWC and not the EC where the champions played but the point is the same, it’s swings and roundabouts.
 
Blueboy57 said:
Some really good points there. The CL groups are pretty much set-up so the 'better' sides -more often than not - progress to the knock-out stages. It then effectively becomes the old European Cup, which means you could end up winning it by only playing 2 or 3 difficult ties. It's a bit of a paradox really. The old European Cup should have been named 'The European Champions Cup' for the simple fact you had to be champions of your own country to enter it. The Champions League is anything but, & it's galling that the rs finished below us in 2005 & ended up European champions.
Click to expand...
Cant complain abt rs winning CL, because it was on their league position from 2004. What is galling though, they won it twice with out being champions of the country for 30 years.
 
anxiouswarrior said:
I think one point has to be taken into consideration is that when United got battered by barcelona they were the victim of the five foreigner rule , schemichel , irwin etc could not play so that was a big handicap , not saying we would have won mind , different era is difficult to judge Liverpool had a great team in the late 70s and 80s but the competion was far different compared to today , i think by now we will see if city can finally win it , i think only bayern might stop them
Click to expand...
I think the biggest issue was the European ban as it took a few years for English teams to be competitive in the EC again. When you stop playing against the best, your standards fall, and five years out of Europe set English teams back a lot. As well as not playing against the best, so many top English players left for the continent: Gazza, Waddle, Hoddle, Lineker, Platt, (Des) Walker. English domestic football went backwards.

United losing to Galatasaray and even Gothenburg gave you the runaround, so it wasn’t just Barca that rinsed Pallister, Bruce and co. Didn’t you lose your unbeaten home record to Ferencvaros (sp?). If I remember correctly I think you did. Not even the top sides were beating United in the Champions League. It took a good seven or eight years before English football was able to compete at the top table again, culminating with “And Solskjær has won it”.
 
Last edited:

artetas_biggest_fan said:
It’s swings and roundabouts. The European Cup only had champions in it so it’s much harder to get in, but once in you maybe only face two or three really top sides, and while the Champions League is much easier to get in, you face at least three top sides (could also be put in a difficult group, there’s always one). Basically, they balance each other out.

Harking back to compare is silly anyway. Look at four of our five opponents in the CWC win: UCD, Inter Bratislava, Fortuna Sittard and Rapid Vienna. Would any of them survive in the championship? I know this example is from the CWC and not the EC where the champions played but the point is the same, it’s swings and roundabouts.
Click to expand...
Good shout mate. Was just highlighting the diffence between then and now. Csn remember the rs putting about 15 passed the champions of Luxembourg over two legs, wouldnt happen now. Just my opinion, its easier to win now purely on the basis of how teams qualify.
 
Just remembered another example of how poor the standard of English football was five years after the Euro ban ended. Blackburn Rovers. They got taken to the cleaners by Spartak Moscow home and away and finished bottom of their CL group. Rosenberg and Warsaw also beat them.

I find this period of English football falling behind after a spell without competing against the best as sharing similarities to the Hungary team that took England apart in the 1950s at Wembley. The game had moved on, and English football had to respond, which it has.
 
artetas_biggest_fan said:
I think the biggest issue was the European ban as it took a few years for English teams to be competitive in the EC again. When you stop playing against the best, your standards fall, and five years out of Europe set English teams back a lot. As well as not playing against the best, so many top English players left for the continent: Gazza, Waddle, Hoddle, Lineker, Platt, (Des) Walker. English domestic football went backwards.

United losing to Galatasaray and even Gothenburg gave you the runaround, so it wasn’t just Barca that rinsed Pallister, Bruce and co. Didn’t you lose your unbeaten home record to Ferencvaros (sp?). If I remember correctly I think you did. Not even the top sides were beating United in the Champions League. It took a good seven or eight years before English football was able to compete at the top table again, culminating with “And Solskjær has won it”.
Click to expand...
Imagine if the rs in 1976 got hit with a european ban. That hurt Everton no question, and we never recovered from it. Of course when Colin Harvey came in as manager, he replaced the great players of that 80's side, with players of inferior quality like Nevin McCall Cottee McDonald etc. The first three i named were good players, but they weren't of the same standard as the players they were replacing.

You had an inept boardroom, a slowness to adapt to the way football was changing. All of these things contributed to Evertons demise, as a club that was able to compete at the top table of english football. The european cup final of 1986 was a poor game, with two crap teams in it. Everton would have wiped the floor with that Steaua Bucharest or Barcelona side. But oh well we have to move on i suppose. What's happened has happened.
 
artetas_biggest_fan said:
I think the biggest issue was the European ban as it took a few years for English teams to be competitive in the EC again. When you stop playing against the best, your standards fall, and five years out of Europe set English teams back a lot. As well as not playing against the best, so many top English players left for the continent: Gazza, Waddle, Hoddle, Lineker, Platt, (Des) Walker. English domestic football went backwards.

United losing to Galatasaray and even Gothenburg gave you the runaround, so it wasn’t just Barca that rinsed Pallister, Bruce and co. Didn’t you lose your unbeaten home record to Ferencvaros (sp?). If I remember correctly I think you did. Not even the top sides were beating United in the Champions League. It took a good seven or eight years before English football was able to compete at the top table again, culminating with “And Solskjær has won it”.
Click to expand...
The ban played its part no doubt about that but it took United 6 years to win it after entering after winning the title in 93 , also 2 years previous we won the cup winners cup by beating Barcelona 2-1 in 1991 in Rotterdam , the very next year they won the European Cup so it proved we could compete with the best even then , the foreigner rule had a big impact a couple of years later
 

Good result tonight workmanlike performance the referee was a bit of nutter Bruno nearly messed the penalty up , should be ok now for 2nd leg, Greenwood again very poor though
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top