Champions League - Group E (CHE - VAL - LEV - GENK)
@Alan: well, time plays in Chelsea's favour, if their AVB knows how to put the pieces together. From Valencia I expect motivation similar to that they showed yesterday. Soldado-Torres (if he is ready in 2 weeks) might be an additional game then.
As for the handover, I expect a close game with Rayo with one goal that might be decisive. Valencia's already shown the depth of the bench, no it's time to do it again...
As for the handover, I expect a close game with Rayo with one goal that might be decisive. Valencia's already shown the depth of the bench, no it's time to do it again...
Goal Difference is the best method.JK wrote:But what other method could be used? I can't think of any other method, which don't have any flaws, too.Lusankya wrote:Btw. that's why I absolutely HATE H2H when 3 or more teams are involved.
I mean yeah, if Chelsea and Valencia draw 0:0, then Leverkusen losing or not losing decides whether Valencia or Chelsea are better? Makes perfect sense.
Or just prohibit that H2H is used with 3 or more teams tied on points.
You remember WC 1982 when Germany and Austria knew what result would put both of them through, because Algeria already played their last match teh day before? That's why nowadays the last matches of a group stage have simultaneous kick off times.
However with H2H as first tie breaker even simultaneous kick off times can't prevent such scenarios (e.g. Italy, Denmark, Sweden in 2004).
I like H2H and I can think of a better method!JK wrote:But what other method could be used? I can't think of any other method, which don't have any flaws, too.Lusankya wrote:Btw. that's why I absolutely HATE H2H when 3 or more teams are involved.
I mean yeah, if Chelsea and Valencia draw 0:0, then Leverkusen losing or not losing decides whether Valencia or Chelsea are better? Makes perfect sense.
The flaw in this method is, it is recursive, but not fully recursive:
- First step (overall table): They don't use goals, just points -> equal points -> mini table
- 2nd step (3-way-mini table): Now suddenly they use goals when 2 teams are equal on points
Best solution IMHO would be to not use goals in step 2, but form a new "mini-mini-table' (i.e. just H2H between the teams concerned).
Then the result of the team already out of the picture wouldn't influence the 2 teams concerned.
Seems like UEFA regulations didn't have in mind a 3-team-mini-table when they formulated the rules, hopefully they'll learn from that example and do it better in the future.
I think this is not a flaw, but a feature.flob wrote:The flaw in this method is, it is recursive, but not fully recursive:
The reason not just to use the goal difference in the main table is that it leads to unwanted results in an unbalanced situation, if there are two or three teams of similar strength plus one minnow - or plus one superior team.
In this case you do not want the the score against the minnow - or against the superior team - to make the difference.
Like in this group Valencia vs Genk 7-0, and Chelsea vs. Genk 6-1 "only", should not be the tie breaker, because it is obvious that Genk plays at eye level with neither Chelsea nor Valencia.
But this argument does not apply to what you call a mini table, because the teams from the mini table meet each other at eye level, obviously because they have the same amount of points in the main table.
Therefore there is no need for a recursion of H2H in a mini table, and goal difference from the mini table is good enough as a tie breaker.
I think Villareal is a level above Genk, I don't know anybody who thinks the opposite. But the fact is that Genk has 2 points and if Villareal doesn't get points in the last game they are a 0-0-6 team.nikola_belgrade wrote: For me, two points for Genk isn't proof that they are better than Villareal for example. I had chance to see them in qualifying rounds, they are equally bad now as they were this summer.
I hope that they get a positive result because they are a little club in comparation with the debthouses in their country.
Genk is a team who had squad problems a few years ago, some big contract (Genk standard) to players who were not good enough. After the season 2012 - 2013 the most contracts are over.
In the qualification there was a lot of buzz because or coach had got an offer he could not refuse. He got away after the first leg in the last round - he took the plain from in Israel to the Emirates - and also the pression to succeed was big.
But we got through with some help of the gods and Köteles (penalty stopper).
Then we got some injuries and all of them in the defence. Against Chelsea in the second half we played with 2 centre midfielders as centre backs. At full this team is EL group material for the moment, but we're compeating in CL group with 3 topteams of the 3 top countries and we got 2 points.
So the CB position:
Matoukou sold,
Joneleit out,
Nadson (back out of injury but is still looking for his best form),
Masuero (new signing on 31 august, injury played 1,5 games for Genk)
Sarr (new player loaned on 31 august because of big injury Joneleit) had some condition problems, first appearance yesterday
Simaeys (new signing out with injury)
If you play like us against teams who are way better you must rely on a couple of good CB, well we don't have them for the moment. If you're new coach wants to play - or try to - football at all time them the organisation isn't good and you're opponent will crush you.
Yesterday I saw Apoel defending with 11 on their own pitch, we were defending at 5-0 or was it already 6-0 with 3 players on almost their penalty area.
This team needs time and for now it's just surviving. We got 2 points in our home matches and that is a big result, I was expecting a 0-0-6 campaign. In european football our goal is achieved, we got into the CL and got 2 good results.
Why do you compare Genk to Villareal, I don't see the point?
Last edited by maluyaca on Thu Nov 24, 2011 20:13, edited 1 time in total.
It has also flaws. Then how badly you trash a minnow in a group might decide over the places. So one team who stopped playing seriously after a 5:0 may not advance, because another team played against the same opponent 6:0. That doesn't really make the second team better.Lusankya wrote:Goal Difference is the best method.JK wrote:But what other method could be used? I can't think of any other method, which don't have any flaws, too.Lusankya wrote:Btw. that's why I absolutely HATE H2H when 3 or more teams are involved.
I mean yeah, if Chelsea and Valencia draw 0:0, then Leverkusen losing or not losing decides whether Valencia or Chelsea are better? Makes perfect sense.
I think there is no perfect method. All have some disadvantages.
- nikola_belgrade
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2495
- Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:16
- Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Some people find interesting to guess which team will be 0-0-6 team in CL. I just don't see point to separate equally bad teams by that category, except for those people who are crazy for stats. For me, wining point or two doesn't put you much above zero points team. Maybe sometimes one team is lucky to get draw, other deserve it but still end with zero because was unlucky.maluyaca wrote:Why do you compare Genk to Villareal, I don't see the point?
Thanks for sharing info's about Genk and sorry for using Genk as example to help my opinion, I could have also used BATE performances this year.
Why did I compare to Villareal? Honestly, that was first zero points team that crossed my mind, but also maybe because remembered I read that you mentioned them.
And now I found your post from yesterday. Why did you compare Genk to Villareal?!
maluyaca wrote:Fuck Marca tomorrow, we have 2 points and Chelsea or Valencia will get out because we got those 2 points. How many has Villareal?
Last edited by nikola_belgrade on Thu Nov 24, 2011 21:14, edited 1 time in total.
- nikola_belgrade
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2495
- Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:16
- Location: Belgrade, Serbia
nikola_belgrade wrote:
And now I found your post from yesterday. Why did you compare Genk to Villareal?!
Because Marca will probably laugh with Genk, Spanish newspapers we're already dramatic about the 0-0 draw and I remember that after our 6-0 loss in Madrid in our first CL campaign they exagerated also. Back then Genk got till 40 minute without conceding a goal and then they had 2 stupid goals in 2 minutes what broke resistance.
I think in CL you have 2 sort of teams, the first who can perform and the rest who hope to perform but their european season is already a succes by reaching CL.
To be honest I think if we we're in the group with Barca then we could have fought with Bate for the 3rd place but in Barca we would have got double numbers.
I think at the moment there is no team in Belgium who would end up 3rd in the group of Genk, I think there is no team in Belgium who can perform - compete for 2nd place - in the group.
Genk is a team of Belgium - not a top ranking country - and is not even financially top in Belgium so why should they try to compete with teams with a lot of bigger budget.
- Dragonite
- Senior Member
- Posts: 12029
- Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 19:42
- Location: Lisboa, Portugal
- Contact:
Congratulations Bayer Leverkusen!
They will probably win the group, that’s more than I expected, my prediction was that they would finish 2nd behind Chelsea.
That can still happen if they don’t defeat Genk in the next round... but they are probably going to do it.
Valencia crushed Genk, but they still need to win in Stamford Bridge… or at least get a 1-1 draw.
And Soldado became Valencia’s CL all-time top scorer, with 11 goals, followed by Juan Sánchez with 9 and Carew with 8.
I thought about picking him for my Fantasy Football team this week, but I finally opted for André Ayew.
It was also Valencia’s biggest ever win in CL, and Genk’s biggest ever defeat.
But I would change any of them for Mr. Bean.
Vossen for Kléber wouldn’t be a bad deal, though.
All the teams should be able to “perform”/”compete”.
If they can’t, they shouldn’t even be participating.
Trabzonspor is competing. Napoli, Basel, Olympiakos, APOEL, they are all competing.
There are others like Villarreal and Shakhtar Donetsk who are having a shameful performance THIS season, but in previous seasons were competitive (EL semi finalist and CL quarter finalist last season, respectively).
And then there are “intruders” who aren’t competing and were never competitive in the last decade, but somehow think that there is a place for them in the CL!
There shouldn’t be.
What bothers me isn’t that Genk lost one game 7-0; it’s that Genk played 11 CL games and couldn’t win a single one.
They will probably win the group, that’s more than I expected, my prediction was that they would finish 2nd behind Chelsea.
That can still happen if they don’t defeat Genk in the next round... but they are probably going to do it.
Valencia crushed Genk, but they still need to win in Stamford Bridge… or at least get a 1-1 draw.
And Soldado became Valencia’s CL all-time top scorer, with 11 goals, followed by Juan Sánchez with 9 and Carew with 8.
I thought about picking him for my Fantasy Football team this week, but I finally opted for André Ayew.
It was also Valencia’s biggest ever win in CL, and Genk’s biggest ever defeat.
Vítor Pereira for Mario Been? No thanks.maluyaca wrote:We lost 7-0, but it was a clear penalty for us when it was 0-0.
It was a day that we wouldn't score, Sarr hit the crossbar - from our goal - .
We had luck that our GK was decent, the coach lost the game with the tactics.
Dragonite do you want to change coach with us? Please please please.
But I would change any of them for Mr. Bean.
Vossen for Kléber wouldn’t be a bad deal, though.
In my opinion, the second kind of teams shouldn’t be in the CL.maluyaca wrote:Because Marca will probably laugh with Genk, Spanish newspapers we're already dramatic about the 0-0 draw and I remember that after our 6-0 loss in Madrid in our first CL campaign they exagerated also. Back then Genk got till 40 minute without conceding a goal and then they had 2 stupid goals in 2 minutes what broke resistance.
I think in CL you have 2 sort of teams, the first who can perform and the rest who hope to perform but their european season is already a succes by reaching CL.
To be honest I think if we we're in the group with Barca then we could have fought with Bate for the 3rd place but in Barca we would have got double numbers.
I think at the moment there is no team in Belgium who would end up 3rd in the group of Genk, I think there is no team in Belgium who can perform - compete for 2nd place - in the group.
Genk is a team of Belgium - not a top ranking country - and is not even financially top in Belgium so why should they try to compete with teams with a lot of bigger budget.
All the teams should be able to “perform”/”compete”.
If they can’t, they shouldn’t even be participating.
Trabzonspor is competing. Napoli, Basel, Olympiakos, APOEL, they are all competing.
There are others like Villarreal and Shakhtar Donetsk who are having a shameful performance THIS season, but in previous seasons were competitive (EL semi finalist and CL quarter finalist last season, respectively).
And then there are “intruders” who aren’t competing and were never competitive in the last decade, but somehow think that there is a place for them in the CL!
There shouldn’t be.
What bothers me isn’t that Genk lost one game 7-0; it’s that Genk played 11 CL games and couldn’t win a single one.
Records and Statistics:
Champions League (all 141 participants - 1992/1993 to 2019/2020)
Europa League (all 215 participants - 2009/2010 to 2019/2020)
UEFA Youth League (all 162 participants - 2013/2014 to 2019/2020)
Champions League (all 141 participants - 1992/1993 to 2019/2020)
Europa League (all 215 participants - 2009/2010 to 2019/2020)
UEFA Youth League (all 162 participants - 2013/2014 to 2019/2020)
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 10487
- Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 22:36
- Contact:
Going on record, even if we disagree on football issues quite a lot, I do look forward to Dragonites sum up of the European football week after a round!
I understand your point.Lusankya wrote: Btw. that's why I absolutely HATE H2H when 3 or more teams are involved.
I mean yeah, if Chelsea and Valencia draw 0:0, then Leverkusen losing or not losing decides whether Valencia or Chelsea are better? Makes perfect sense.
If Chelsea - Valencia and Genk - Leverkusen are both 0-0 at 90' then Leverkusen are 1st and Chelsea 2nd.
But... if Genk scored and the games finished 0-0 in London and 1-0 in Genk, then Leverkusen would still be first while Valencia would take 2nd place!!!!
Criteria 1-4 that are applied to the teams tied on points are calculated as numbers all at once.
And as they apply they decide the better team.
If after they apply, we still have tied teams, they apply again just for the rest who are tied. If there is no tie-break using those, then they apply the next criteria.
Leverkusen on the tie between the 3 have 6 points and the others 5, with Valencia winning the 2nd place. Though, if Chelsea and Valencia were in the tie alone, Chelsea would be better with that 0-0.
Strange, but it is just a situation.
Every system has some situations that look like having no sense.
But it has sense, since Chelsea are better from Valencia, but worst in the tie between the 3, according to the rules.
A good football player plays where the ball is. A great football player plays where the ball is going to be.
The funny thing is that Leverkusen actually lost h2h vs both Chelsea (2-3) and Valencia (3-4)... and they still qualified, quite likely winning the group. Reminds me of when Schalke played in a group with Chelsea and Valencia a couple of years ago... Schalke only got 2 points in 4 matches against both, but reached the next round anyway because Valencia lost twice to Rosenborg.og2002gr wrote:I expected Bayer to be very competitive, but winning the group?
Last year they won against Atletico Madrid, now against Valencia (or..Chelsea?)