|
This forum is read-only now. Please use Forum 2 for new posts
xml |
No replies possible in the archive |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 09-05-2006, 12:04
| The old topic was archieved.
Update 9 May
Main changes compared to 2 May:
Djurgården now seeded in CL QR2
Liberec now unseeded in CL QR3
Valencia down to Pot B in CL R1 Lille down to Pot C AEK Athens down to Pot D
Grasshoppers now seeded in Intertoto R2
Palermo now seeded in Intertoto R3 Ried now not seeded
Skonto now seeded in UEFA QR1
Chornomorets now not seeded in UEFA QR2
CSKA Sofia, Tottenham and West Ham now not seeded in UEFA R1
Lazio up to Pot A in UEFA R2 Heerenveen up to Pot C H. Tel-Aviv and Osasuna down to Pot E |
Author: Edgar
Date: 09-05-2006, 13:45
| Thanks! |
Author: Nick
Date: 09-05-2006, 14:30
| Why do you have Dnipro as ukrainian IT participant? |
Author: Ricardo
Date: 09-05-2006, 14:37
| Shaktar Donetsk + Dynamo Kiew: CL Metalurg Z Cupwinner/loser: UC Chernomorets 3rd spot: UC
Dnipro is 4th (same points as Illichevits and Metalist, but Dnipro has the best goaldifference) |
Author: Nick
Date: 09-05-2006, 15:02
| On UEFA.com Dnipro is rated behind both Metalist and Illichevets! |
Author: SHEV
Date: 09-05-2006, 15:42
| Only Dnipro and Chornomorets applied for Intertoto. |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 09-05-2006, 17:37
| @Nick
See my assumptions. I use Goal Difference when a league is still running, and then Dnipro is the best team not on a CL/UEFA-cup place. |
Author: Nick
Date: 09-05-2006, 17:40
| Thanks for the remarks. |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 16-05-2006, 11:24
| Update 16 May
Main changes compared to 9 May:
Liberec now seeded in CL QR3
Celtic down to Pot C in CL R1
Dnipro now unseeded in Intertoto R3
Feyenoord up to Pot A in UEFA R2 Espanyol and Heerenveen down to Pot D |
Author: rod_c
Date: 16-05-2006, 12:11
| Why have Celtic been dropped to pot C?
At the weekend Panathanaikos & Roma missed the CL, so only Sevilla could push us down... but Osasuna only need to equal their result. |
Author: Edgar
Date: 16-05-2006, 12:13
| Forza has Sevilla in 4th place in La Liga because, and I quote:
During the season I sort all leagues tables according to these criteria: 1) points, 2) number of matches, 3) goal difference, 4) goals scored, 5) alphabetic order. |
Author: gabriel1
Date: 16-05-2006, 12:17
| I want to know, if in case in wich rapid bucuresti will win the championship in Romania, they will be seeded in the last round before groupe stage in the CL...
81 Rapid Bucuresti Rom 1.8660 1.7150 1.4300 1.8150 23.5550 30.381 |
Author: Agent327
Date: 16-05-2006, 15:24
| What will be the impact on seeded vs nonseeded in UCR1 with the participation of 11 IT teams? More seeded teams from the big 5 will enter as seeds into UCR1 (if they qualify) This has a direct impact on the ranking. It means they will get further and further away from the rest of Europe. As if their advantage wasn't big enough before
These teams should make it to the UCGS if all seeds went through Villarreal Spa 76,912 Newcastle Eng 75,950 Marseille Fra 48,757 Hertha Ger 46,960 Palermo Ita 36,020 Grasshoppers Swi 23,537
(So 6 teams seeded instead of 3 from recent years ) Which 3 teams are kicked out? Ironically at the moment England will be the most likely victim together with Bulgaria (looking at Forza's site) Just unseeded 41 CSKA Sofia Bul 21,016 U Q1 42 Tottenham Eng 20,950 U 1 43 West Ham Eng 20,950 U 1
Greetz, Agent327 |
Author: panda
Date: 16-05-2006, 15:32
| Is that just a coincidence? - the seeding threshold goes above the country co-eff of England (I mean what teams from Eng get having played no Euro football for 5 yrs) so in itself, it means that this is in favour of teams with a Euro record.
Or are you saying (I think probably you are) that as more teams from the big countries participate because now there are a lot of UC places through the UIC, they will start to push up their country co-effs?
I have to admit that if I look at Newcastle, it feels a bit 'back door' - they have a massive co-eff from past UC performances, they had a poor season, no real current reputation in EPL; they put together a good run at the end and just scraped the UIC place. Though I have to say, they have a lot of supporters, so many people will be happy they are in Europe. |
Author: drewvkamp
Date: 16-05-2006, 15:59
| As a Newcastle fan, I admit freely that it is entirely back-door. We're very very fortunate to have scraped through, and very fortunate to have scraped through in a season where the IT was completely overhauled. In essence, United start in the 1QR of the UEFA Cup with a very favorable opponent: Lillestrom, Keflavik or Dungannon Swifts. That's basically pre-season friendly calibre.
But this back door is also huge for Villareal, OM, and Hertha as well: biggish clubs who have snuck in barely.
Does anyone thing that the Intertoto Cup needs to exist anymore? Why not just absorb these spots into the UEFA Cup Qualifying rounds? Seems a bit silly to me to have a Cup Competition with ELEVEN champions... |
Author: panda
Date: 16-05-2006, 16:13
| Yes, Villareal, OM and Hertha - quite right.
On other threads there have been discussions of how the qualification process and the playing strength of the club can't, by definition be simultaneous; and that clubs might have a very different pre- and post- Christmas season.
And of course Everton (strong when they qualified; fell apart in the Euro bit of the season, stronger again in the second half), M'boro (useless in the middle, but recovered to put together their UC run) and Newcastle (terrible start, finished really strongly) are contrasting examples.
If I wanted to be pro-Newcastle, I would say: Roeder has done great and now been confirmed in the job; Owen will be fit next season; you have unbelievable numbers of supporters and of course a lot of European history. Plus of course it would be great to return to the heady days 75-85 when English clubs were top in Europe. Plus, on other threads I am saying: the whole point of the co-eff system is it works for 5 years, not 1 year; so likewise, by that system Newcastle deserves a chance. |
Author: Ricardo
Date: 16-05-2006, 16:15
| Yes drewkamp, exactly my idea: ELEVEN winners, it's way too much |
Author: panda
Date: 16-05-2006, 16:23
| Maybe at the least Cup loser spot should fall to the IT, not the last UC, now IT is a feeder competition for the UC.
It's a balance thing for me - I've got used to 4 CL places, and I suppose from an English and Scottish point of view there are 4 really strong Eng teams and 2 really strong Scottish ones, so - as I've said on other threads, it seems fair that if you play CL in these countries, you have to be good enough to displace one of those teams (as Hearts have done).
Previously, the IT meant playing a number of ties, and having only three go forward; it was a substantial commitment. Now, you get one game against an opponent who is likely to be much worse, and there you are in the UC. So yes, Ricardo, although I am glad to see another team from my country in there with a realistic chance of winning, I guess it falls the wrong side of the balance now.
But maybe if this format stays for 5 yrs, by then I will think it is normal and right?? |
Author: dawgs
Date: 16-05-2006, 16:30
Edited by: dawgs at: 16-05-2006, 16:36 | It's so easy to get used to a "good" thing.
IT for Bulgaria now looks like a up w/ 1 winner out from Italy, Bulgaria, Romania and Macedonia. I think it's better than the previous format.
The battle for the last seeded spot in the UCR1 will probably be affected by the CL final (Eng country bonus), the Romanian championship and the Czech cup. After the final access list is known I'd expect the QRs and IT to produce a shift of the treshold by two places down. |
Author: panda
Date: 16-05-2006, 16:36
| Yeah; I'm guilty.
But until English clubs are better than Spanish clubs I will still be unhappy. |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 16-05-2006, 16:49
| @Agent327
I don't think the new Intertoto will result in much higher country-coefficients for the top 5, as the results of these countries have to be divided by 1 team more. And most of the times the team qualifying through Intertoto won't do (much) better than the average of the other teams. On the other end their will be less places in later rounds for clubs for countries in the subtop, so their countrycoefficient could fall somewhat.
But I doesn't really matter if the top 5 runs away from the rest. They will stay the top 5 anyway, and keep the same number of spots in Europe, whether they are miles ahead of the rest in the countryranking or just above the others countries. |
Author: Kronsky
Date: 16-05-2006, 17:01
| Hi Forza,
Great job, as allways!
Jet, I saw an error regarding polish teams. Amica will represent Poland in Intertoto and thats correct. But You still have Amica in UCQ2 on Your list where from Amica should be removed as Zaglebie Lubin took 3rd place in polish extraklasa.
Best regards,
/Kronsky |
Author: badgerboy
Date: 16-05-2006, 17:42
| "Ironically at the moment England will be the most likely victim together with Bulgaria (looking at Forza's site) Just unseeded 41 CSKA Sofia Bul 21,016 U Q1 42 Tottenham Eng 20,950 U 1 43 West Ham Eng 20,950 U 1"
Don't forget there are two unknown Fair Play spots still to be decided which could knock these down a bit further.
Then again I'd be surprised if there wasn't the odd shock in the qualifiers which might help these teams all sneak in.
On that point who gets the seeded position in the case of two teams from the same country level on points. I'd assume Tottenham ahead of West Ham because Tottenham finished higher in the league (but West Ham would have got it if they'd won the cup). I'm also not sure where Charlton would come in. Above the other two because of qualifying round points?
And although I'm hoping (and expecting) Newcastle to get through their Intertoto tie I will just point out that Lillestrom are top of the league in Norway just now... |
Author: Maluyaca
Date: 16-05-2006, 17:55
| The Change of intertoto you can only see that in 2 or 3 years I think.
But I think that the minimum of points will rise up to 25 a 30 but that has also to do with the Group phase of Uefa cup.
I think the change of intertoto is a good thing for the subtoppers in the big leauges in the long term. |
Author: panda
Date: 16-05-2006, 18:08
| OK, so potentially no-one is unhappy.... |
Author: bert.kassies
Date: 16-05-2006, 18:34
| Like others I think that the new Intertoto format is just an intermediate solution. In due time it will be merged with UEFA Cup qualification.
It's quite simple to drop one more playing round, if you choose a format with 3 qualifification rounds in the same weeks as the qualification rounds of the Champions League. With the current access list the number of teams could be 80 in R1, 80 in QR3, 80 in QR2, and an adjustable number in QR1 (with title-holder and no bans 66 teams). |
Author: dinamozagreb
Date: 16-05-2006, 19:10
| @ricardo
Why did you put France (Marseille - ITC) in Central-Eastern region? On UEFA Cup regions chart it is in Southern Mediterranean. |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 16-05-2006, 21:36
Edited by: Forza-AZ at: 16-05-2006, 21:39 | @Kronsky
I indeed have Amica in UEFA-cup QR2, but that is because they are 1 of the 11 teams that will qualify via the Intertoto. And Zaglebie is also in my list. They start in QR1 as they are the 3rd Polish team in UEFA-cup, after Cup Winner Plock and 2nd placed Wisla. |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 16-05-2006, 21:43
Edited by: Forza-AZ at: 16-05-2006, 21:45 | @badgerboy
Charlton also has only the English country coefficient. And they finished below Tottenham and West Ham in the league, so they will be listed below both. Also the would be a Fair Play entrant, which would be below all other teams qulified on sporting merit I believe (??).
PS: Qualifying round points are only counted for the country-coefficient, so that won't be a argument to put one team above another. |
Author: badgerboy
Date: 17-05-2006, 01:31
| Thanks Forza-AZ. Your answer seems the logical one - I was just checking though... |
Author: putzeijs
Date: 17-05-2006, 13:52
| Little bit off topic. Yes Drewkamp and Bert, it's also mine opinion that Intertoto could/should be integrated in UEFA cup. And why not arrange the difference btween 8-9 place in number of teams. And you can play with numburs. If you change numbers you could play 16 groups of 5, with 160 teams in round 1, and just 1 qualyround to play.
More games for more teams |
Author: dawgs
Date: 17-05-2006, 16:12
| On the off-topic discussion about IT:
Did you guys consider the fact that the purpose for this competition is to provide for competitive games in June/July, when most domestic championships are in recess?
And you know how clubs react to moving the start of their season that early. |
Author: Nick
Date: 17-05-2006, 16:16
| dawgs: The same way all those UEFA QR1 teams would react. Accept it. I don't think CSKA, Litex, Steaua, Basel, Rapid, Brondby and Yound Boys are very happy to start their european campaign in the middle of july. I really don't envy the teams that will have to play in Cyprus on july the 13th. |
Author: dawgs
Date: 17-05-2006, 17:01
| But integrating the IT in the UC will mean moving the start of the new season - if not for Steaua and CSKA, as Romania and Bulgaria have moved ahead of the UCQR1 places - then CrvenaZvezda and DinamoZagreb - not in the middle of July, but in the middle of June!!!
No summer training camp for the top teams from countries ranked 18th and lower. |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 17-05-2006, 17:55
| If you play 3 QR's in the UEFA-cup at the sames dates as the 3 AR's of the CL, then there should be room enough for the 49 teams in the Intertoto. The start will be the same date as now. Only thing is that there won't be matches anymore in June for the TOTO's, but with World Cup, Euro's and Youth World Cups almost every year in June that shouldn't be such a big problem. |
Author: Kronsky
Date: 18-05-2006, 15:49
Edited by: Kronsky at: 18-05-2006, 16:27 | Thank You for Your information Forza!
I'm glad to see that Amica is "favourite" to enter UCQ2!
But... Amica have merged with Lech Poznan so it's necessary to remove Amica anyway, also from Intertoto. I recon that "new" Lech Poznan will take over Amica's coeff so there will be no change in this matter.
I just wonder who will now play on Amica's lovely playground (and surroundings). Maybee they will have second team based there, which means that a fourth division polish club will play in conditions that few fouth div. clubs in Europe can actually even dream of. And in the meantime, most of polish clubs of extraklasa are playing on lousy ground.
Polish reality...
Best regards Kronsky |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 18-05-2006, 17:20
| Also the only stadium with hotelrooms in the stadium with a view on the pitch. :D
I've been there in 2004 when AZ played Amica. Indeed a pity when that small but modern stadium won't be used any more by a topdivision team. |
Author: badgerboy
Date: 18-05-2006, 17:39
| What's the attitude to this in Poland?
In England it's seen as total anathema for a club to move like that -loss of fans, loss of identity, loss of history.
I know in the best known case in England it was a case of a club (Wimbledon) relocating to a brand new town (rather than replacing an older club in financial trouble) but the new club are generally loathed because of it. A new club was set up in the bottom rungs of the English pyramid and still manages to pull in average crowds of over 2,700 playing two tiers below the Conference.
Are the people of Wronki (or at least the people that follow football) in uproar because of these events? |
Author: dawgs
Date: 18-05-2006, 17:48
Edited by: dawgs at: 18-05-2006, 17:51 | The way I understand it, Poznan is something of a Manchester, where Wronki is more like a Milton Keys.
This has happened in Bulgaria as well - most notably LokoPlovdiv getting the VelbazhdKyustendil license to play in the top division in 2001 and BeroeStZagora getting the OlimpicGalata license about the same time... Trying to save the most heavily supported and decorated clubs from lower division obscurity, brought about by financial mismanagement is seen as a noble cause really.
And then there was the case w/ Fiorentina from a couple of years ago. Things that are probably unthinkable in England are common in Southern Europe. And the clubs that are sacraficed are all relatively young, founded less than a decade ago as commercial and promotional vehicles. |
Author: Kronsky
Date: 21-05-2006, 14:48
| Sorry to write this on Your topic Forza, apology.
Yes, I agree with Dawgs!
Amica get sponsor (Amica) in Wronki (never heard about the place before) witch i small village. Then they build up new Stadion with surroundings (yes, nice idea to watch the game from the hotel room ) ). They made good investment in excelent coach (according to polish realities) and start to climb from 4th division.
They won every year and made it to extraklasa in the end where they played fine. They also did ok in UC.
Lech Poznan is a club that played in CL before. Counting out Legia and Wisla, there are five "old" and "big" clubs in Poland: Ruch Chorzow (second division now - big club in 60's and 70's) Gornik Zabrze (played in EC finals and semifinals in 60's and 70' - great club before), Katowice and of course Widzew Lodz (back in extraklasa next season), Lech Poznan.
Poznan is a big city with potencial that is far bigger than in Wronki. Also, they got F. Smuda as coach (the smae man that took Zaglebie Lubin from last place to 3rd this year) witch is good. So, next year could be more interesting in Poland:
Legia and Wisla will fight for the champ as usual (Krakow against Warsaw, its classic in Poland). Then...
Groclin - is expected to do much better than this year. Lech Poznan - should be very strong Widzew Lodz - interesting comeback, good squad and very good coach Korona Kielce - very exciting new team Zaglebie Lubin- good team, but they lost good coach
The rest will not count in my opinion.
Best regards Kronsky |
Author: badgerboy
Date: 21-05-2006, 18:15
| Just to follow up on this Kronsky.
In your list for next season you class Korona Kielce as a very exciting new team. I know they have also risen from the lower levels of Polish football and I guess they need some investment to do this.
Is their situation completely different from that of Amica (I know Kielce is a much bigger place) or could they too find themselves being swallowed up (or transferred) in a few years to another big name club going through hard times? |
Author: Kronsky
Date: 22-05-2006, 21:33
| I think Kielce is big enough to stay in extraklasa. Also, they already have invested in new playground that is one of the best in Poland. So, I think that they will stay
Regards, Kronsky |
Author: badgerboy
Date: 23-05-2006, 11:27
| Good!
Since - because of their dramatic rise through the leagues - I've decided to make them my Polish team to "follow" I wouldn't want to see them erased from history for no good reason! |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 23-05-2006, 12:01
| Update 23 May
Main changes compared to 16 May:
Celtic up to Pot B in CL R1
Feyenoord down to Pot B in UEFA R2 |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 30-05-2006, 10:56
| Update 30 May
No seeding changes compared to last week. |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 05-06-2006, 10:58
Edited by: Forza-AZ at: 05-06-2006, 11:00 | Update 5 June
PS: I've excluded PAOK for now
Main changes compared to last week:
Mladá Boleslav now not seeded in CL QR2
Chornomorets now seeded in UEFA QR2
Espanyol up to Pot C in UEFA R2 H. Tel-Aviv up to Pot D
PS: I have not made the regional grouping yet. I will look into that now, since now the Fair Play teams are known. |
Author: skivaz
Date: 05-06-2006, 11:51
| AZ, always take into consideration that all Italian team can be changed afetr the end of the enquiry happening in Italy, so it may happen a complete change of seeded and unseeded teams... |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 05-06-2006, 12:06
Edited by: Forza-AZ at: 05-06-2006, 12:10 | @skivaz
You are right, but untill there has been made a desicion I will assume that the teams finished in the top 8 will play in the European Cups.
I have now also made the regional groupings. In QR1 I have shifted Roeselare to Central-East and Vaduz to South-Med. to make the numbers even (Roeselare is in North in QR2). In QR2 all teams are in their own region and I put Hertha in North and Marseille in Central-East to make numbers even.
Update with regional grouping
Changes compared to list without regional grouping:
Nistru, Kaunas and Suduva now seeded in UEFA QR1 Koper, Vardar and Oraje now unseeded
Start now seeded in UEFA QR2 M. Petach-Tikva now unseeded |
Author: bert.kassies
Date: 05-06-2006, 12:41
| I agree with Forza-AZ on the adjustments of the regional groupings. At first, in my QR2 list Roeselare was left in the Central group, while Club Brugge was put in the Northern group. But that's not the way UEFA will make these adjustments. So, just like Forza-AZ, I moved Hertha BSC to the Northern group. See Seeding in the UEFA Cup 2006/2007.
Of coarse, if there are any surprises in the IT qualification new adjustments will be necessary. |
Author: smilingsven
Date: 05-06-2006, 15:47
| Bert: I notice that Start Kristiansand is already seeded for UEFA QR2, while Brann Bergen is not, although both have excactly the same coefficient. Is this correct? |
Author: Nick
Date: 05-06-2006, 16:10
| It should be correct. Bran are a Fairplay team, so in case of same coefficients Start should have an advantage as they have i higher ranking in the league. |
Author: smilingsven
Date: 05-06-2006, 16:17
| OK, thank you. |
Author: Ricardo
Date: 05-06-2006, 20:46
| Regianal groupings: I moved Belgium(Brugge + Roeselare) to Central as they play in the central group for the intertoto. Germany(Hertha Intertoto) I moved to the North, though that too is a central-intertoto group.
P.S. in the Norht Intertoto are topseeds. In central they are already less at the top. In the south, an intertoto team will surely be unseeded: Macabi Petach Tikva has the highest coefficient in the intertoto-group(with Zrijnski, Marsaxlokk, Osijek, Ethnikos Ac and Partizani), but only has 9.108. not enough to be seeded! |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 07-06-2006, 11:14
| Update 7 June
I assumed Auxerre will start in round 3 of Intertoto in stead of Palermo. I have put Auxerre in Central-East in UEFA QR2 and shifted the only Austrian team (Mattersburg) to South-Med.
Changes because of this:
M. Petach-Tikva now seeded in UEFA QR2 Chornomorets now unseeded
Rangers down to Pot C in UEFA R2 |
Author: bluemo
Date: 07-06-2006, 11:48
| Hi Forza-AZ
Would you please explain to me why Rangers will drop down to Pot C in UC R2. From what I understand it is to do with Auxerre, however, they have a lower co-efficient than Rangers. Also I guess this would be dependant on all higher seeded teams from IT, UC and those dropping out of CL making it through to UCR2, which is unlikely so I guess I don't need to worry too much.
Many Thanks
Bluemo |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 07-06-2006, 12:03
Edited by: Forza-AZ at: 07-06-2006, 12:05 | @bluerno
Auxerre (53,757) will take the place of Palermo (36,020), so all teams with a coefficient between those 2 will move down 1 spot, which will result in Rangers (43,023) dropping from 16 to 17, so out of Pot B.
Off course the chance is big that 1 of the top 16 will drop out in round 1 or earlier, but on the other hand some seeded teams in CL QR3 can drop out there to move Rangers down again. So you have to wait and see if Rangers will still get into Pot B or just will miss out. |
Author: bluemo
Date: 07-06-2006, 12:11
| Thanks Forza-AZ
I see where I went wrong, for some reason I looked at the 2006 club co-efficient rather than the club rankings. |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 08-06-2006, 11:14
Edited by: Forza-AZ at: 08-06-2006, 11:15 | Update 8 June
With Lech in Intertoto, when using their coefficient in stead of Amica's, now Ried will be an Intertoto winner, which means 2 Austrian teams in UEFA-cup QR2. I had shifted Mattersburg to South-Med. UEFA always shifts all teams from 1 country to another zone. So now I shift Mattersburg back to Central-East and to solve the odd numbers I also shift Domzale (as only Slovenian team in QR2) to Central-East.
This results in these seeding changes:
Ried now seeded in Intertoto R3
Chornomorets and Sion now seeded in UEFA QR2 M. Petach-Tikva now unseeded |
Author: executor
Date: 08-06-2006, 13:51
| UEFA just released the access list for UEFA Cup. The only surprising thing is that there still is PAOK on the list, after even UEFA said that they will not participate. So it looks like PAOK managed to arrange their debts.
{a href="http://www.uefa.com/competitions/UEFACup/news/Kind=1/newsId=427955.html"> list {/a> |
Author: badgerboy
Date: 08-06-2006, 14:08
| Executor
I don't think the inclusion of PAOK means anything. The access list also has FC Astana for Kazakhstan whereas I understand they are replaced by Kairat Almaty. Karagandy is confirmed on Intertoto site too. I think UEFA just didn't take "licensing issues" into account on the list.
Since the Greek team is not listed on the Intertoto site I guess what was written here before is also true. Somehow the Greeks do have more time so tomorrow it will be confirmed if PAOK get a reprieve.
Finally I must hold up my hands to Bert and ForzaAz. Hardly surprising given their expertise perhaps but their knowledge of the (il)logical workings of UEFA did prove more accurate than mine. One Polish team does indeed start in QR1. |
Author: Ricardo
Date: 08-06-2006, 14:41
| Fantastic! that sentence: The end of the Romanian.....further fleshed out the list of 2006/07 qualifiers, subject to Uefa comfirmation. So they say this is a profisional listing, Uefa still has to confirm it. But who is this talking? Isn't this Uefa? |
Author: Floridian
Date: 08-06-2006, 15:17
| UEFA already updated the UEFA access list - now it shows Atromitos FC as las participant for Greece. However Astana is still in the list for Kazakhstan |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 08-06-2006, 16:30
| And HB Torshavn is also still on the list, while they are also on the Intertoto list. |
Author: Ricardo
Date: 08-06-2006, 16:50
| Atromitos, so no PAOK..... |
Author: Nick
Date: 08-06-2006, 16:58
Edited by: Nick at: 08-06-2006, 17:00 | Ricardo: I would regard it a complete joke if you can get a bank guarantee based on mortgage of TV rights for the next 5 years and this thing gets aproved by any serious instance. Who guarantees that PAOK won't be relegated next season and thus have no adequate TV rights income at all? We had a simiral case in Bulgaria 10 years ago when the owner of Levski mortgaged the transfer rights of all players to cover club deficit. But at that time the banks in Bulgaria were a complete chaos so this wasn't a poblem. I don't think this would be possible today. At least not with a serious bank. |
Author: Nick
Date: 10-06-2006, 12:57
| There seems to be some sort of problem still with PAOK because neither PAOK is confirmed for UEFA, not Atromitos for the UI Cup. |
Author: ubik
Date: 10-06-2006, 13:55
| According to greek media the final decision of UEFA about PAOK is expected on Monday 12th June. The Greek FA informed UEFA about decision of licencing committee Friday 9th June. There are some reactions against the decision from Atromitos side at central UEFA level. |
Author: Nick
Date: 12-06-2006, 16:39
| ubik: Any news on PAOK? UEFA.com still has the last greek spot as TBC. |
Author: ubik
Date: 12-06-2006, 19:01
| I have no news. Maybe later or tomorrow. |
Author: Kronsky
Date: 12-06-2006, 20:48
Edited by: Kronsky at: 12-06-2006, 20:50 | .. |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 19-06-2006, 20:24
| I have indicated on my page which teams are already certain of seeding in UEFA R1 and R2:
To see which teams are already seeded I assumed that in all rounds all seeded teams win, except in the 3rd QR of the CL, there I assumed that the unseeded teams win. To see which teams are certainly unseeded I assumed exactly the opposite.
UEFA R1 certainly seeded: 30,640 and higher certainly unseeded: 1,430 and lower
UEFA R2 certainly Pot A: 75,950 and higher certainly at least Pot B: 53,757 and higher certainly at least Pot C: 44,769 and higher certainly at least Pot D: 38,634 and higher |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 26-06-2006, 12:34
| All seeded teams in Intertoto R1 have progressed, so there is no change in the seedings, but because some teams with a low coefficient have been eliminated the border for certainly be unseeded in UEFA R1 has risen somewhat: from 1,430 to 1,595. |
Author: dinamozagreb
Date: 26-06-2006, 15:28
| @ Forza
You put Marseille and Auxerre to Central-East-zone in UC Qual R2.
@ Ricardo
You put Club Brugge and Roeselare to Southern-Mediterranean-zone in UC Qual R2. (I don't think Belgium will go to Southern-Mediterranean-zone just because Roeselare is in that zone for UC Qual. R1) and you also didn't put clubs from France to Southern-Mediterranean-zone.
@ Bert
You put Marseille and Auxerre to Southern-Mediterranean-zone in UC Qual R2 as they should be according to the Uefa cup regions map.
-----------------------
If I believe Forza, Varteks will be ceeded (last ceeded club in UC Q2).
If I believe Ricardo or Bert Varteks won't be ceeded if Auxerre, Marseille, Villarreal and Larissa all win ITC cup; or if Belgian club go to Southern-Mediterranean-zone.
So: 1) Why do you think clubs from France will go to Central-East-zone ? 2) Why do you think clubs from Beligium will go to Southern-Mediterranean-zone? |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 26-06-2006, 16:33
| @dinamozagreb
France is not included in any regional group, as French teams are not in QR's untill now. So I just put them in a region which I think is most likely. As Switzerland is also in Central-East and also because Marseille has been put in Central-East in the Intertoto-draw (they play Dnipro or Nitra) I decided to put them in Central-East, and when also Auxerre came into the picture, and because UEFA never has put teams from one country in different regions I also put them in Central-East. But UEFA could decide differently off course. We just have to wait and see. |
Author: dinamo_fan_4_ever
Date: 26-06-2006, 16:48
Edited by: dinamo_fan_4_ever at: 26-06-2006, 16:50 | well, who knows, reckon pashing going on a trip in saint petersburg against zenit because they were in the same geographical zone... it was postet on another thread i think that the regional splitting should be done AFTER the coefficient one so nobody gets suspicious. there will be some long distance travelling but for a proffesional club with proffesional players it musnt be a problem and if u think of it, in the R1 there is no regional splitting so it can happen there that one team must travel a long way.
on the other way i dont understand why strong teams are added in the south-m or central-e group qR2 when the nortern group is statistically the weakest, for example in the QR1 there were 28 teams in the nothern group , 20 in the central and 22 in the southern one 1st unseeded north 1.595 1st unseeded central 2.090 1st unseeded south 3.355 !! 4th unseeded south 2,760 !!!! so the nortern group is the WEAKEST AND THE LARGER , i think thtas unfair for teams like omonia or like the two georgian teams 1 seeded 1 inseeded with same coeff when adding the 2 teams from luxembourg in the central zone would have balanced the proportions of both coefficient and number of teams in the 3 reg groups
p.s. why not put luxembourg in the central group when u put roesenale in the southern, why makle compromises only on 1 half of the deal ??? |
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 26-06-2006, 19:47
| p.s. why not put luxembourg in the central group when u put roesenale in the southern, why makle compromises only on 1 half of the deal ???
If you had put both Luxembourg teams in another group you would still have a odd number of teams in 2 regions, so that was no solution.
I agree that they should first do the seedings and after that the groupings. |
Author: Ricardo
Date: 27-06-2006, 09:24
| Uefa had first put the France Intertoto team in the Central group (Marseille has to play Nitra or Dnipro). That's why I put France in the central zone. But all is open to Uefa, they will probably have a look at the participants of Q2 to see how they will divide the teams into groupings. It does make a difference if Auxerre or Farul wins! |
|
|