2024/25 access list

[dnina10]

Now that the rules are given into the hands of lawyers they are even more difficult to read Too much redundancy.

Personally I doubt that there should be any difference in the EL regulations between the text in paragraph 3.09c and 3.10b. I expect that the text of 3.10b is the correct text, so that CO title holder rebalancing of EL-Q1 involves promoting cup winners from the Conference League to the Europa League. Just as 3.09b and 3.10a seem to say the same things but with slightly different words

Yep, I had the same "question" reading the regulations: why would there be a difference if the ECLTH qualifies for the ELGS or EL qualifiers?

I'd go one step further: why should there be any difference in the TH scenarios? It the CL TH qualifies for EL LP domestically, that shouldn't be treated any differently from EL TH or ECL TH doing the same thing

[Fotcalc]

@bert.kassies, why do you still have NOR CW promoted to UEL Q2?

There is nothing in the regulations that state that happening when e.g. RUS are banned.

UEL regulations, 3.11 In the event of any other vacancies, and further knock-on effects in the UEFA Conference League, priority is given to the best ranked club(s) or cup winner(s) (or the club replacing it if it qualifies for the UEFA Champions League) of the association ranked highest in the access list for the previous round of the corresponding path.

3.11 should have been better written, but I understand this as LIE CW getting promoted from UECL Q2 to UEL Q1.

[Fotcalc]

Another thing, @bert.kassies; If the UCL or UEL TH qualifies for UEL, which of these will be used?
This:

or this (alternatively 3.10):


If 3.11 is used, why do they write "club(s) or cup winners", and not just "cup winners"? What do they mean when including "club(s)"? Is the CW from the highest ranked NA in Q1 promoted to Q3 when there is a vacancy in Q3 due to 3.11, just like when it's a vacancy in Q3 due to UCL league path rebelancing? Or are non-CWs in Q2 included in 3.11?

[bert.kassies]

@bert.kassies, why do you still have NOR CW promoted to UEL Q2?

There is nothing in the regulations that state that happening when e.g. RUS are banned.

UEL regulations, 3.11 In the event of any other vacancies, and further knock-on effects in the UEFA Conference League, priority is given to the best ranked club(s) or cup winner(s) (or the club replacing it if it qualifies for the UEFA Champions League) of the association ranked highest in the access list for the previous round of the corresponding path.

3.11 should have been better written, but I understand this as LIE CW getting promoted from UECL Q2 to UEL Q1.

We have discussed that before (a summary of that may be found at the bottom of https://kassiesa.net/uefa/2024-rebalanc ... nking.html).

Because I think that rebalancing priority for the cup winner(s) of the Conference League is only used for Conference League title holder rebalancing (article 3.09 and 3.10).

We do agree that article 3.11 applies here. There is no mention of priority for cup winner(s) of the Conference League in that article. So, I don't see any reason to use it.

[bert.kassies]

Another thing, @bert.kassies; If the UCL or UEL TH qualifies for UEL, which of these will be used?
This:

or this (alternatively 3.10):


If 3.11 is used, why do they write "club(s) or cup winners", and not just "cup winners"? What do they mean when including "club(s)"? Is the CW from the highest ranked NA in Q1 promoted to Q3 when there is a vacancy in Q3 due to 3.11, just like when it's a vacancy in Q3 due to UCL league path rebelancing? Or are non-CWs in Q2 included in 3.11?

In this case article 3.11 will be used (indirect rebalancing because it is a knock on effect of using the title holder spot in CL). Article 3.09 and 3.10 are explicitly written for rebalancing of the Conference League title holder spot.

I don't know why they write the regulations in this way. I suppose that happens when you give the rules designed by technical people to lawyers who convert it into regulations

I don't think that clubs will be promoted from EL-Q1 to EL-Q3. It is not in the regulations as far as I know.

[Fotcalc]

Thank you, but the cup winner of the highest ranked NA that starts in Q1 will be promoted to Q3 if there is a vacancy in Q3 due to UCL leauge path rebelanacing, right, @bert.kassies?

This applies in that case (from UCL regulations):


Now, when looking at the UEL regulations, UEFA explains what priority to CWs mean:

[bert.kassies]

Thank you, but the cup winner of the highest ranked NA that starts in Q1 will be promoted to Q3 if there is a vacancy in Q3 due to UCL leauge path rebelanacing, right, @bert.kassies?

This applies in that case (from UCL regulations):


Now, when looking at the UEL regulations, UEFA explains what priority to CWs mean:

No, I don't think so. It just says that there is an exception for clubs of the 2nd qualifying round. Not promoting clubs of the 2nd qualifying round does not automaticly mean that clubs from EL-Q1 move to EL-Q3. Other options are available, like moving more clubs from EL-Q1 to EL-Q2.

[dyermcryan]

Hi folks. Am I right in thinking that if the CL Title Holder spot is vacated (as it is most years), then there will be no champion(s) moved from the Champions Path of CL Q2 to Champions Path of CL Q3?

I ask because there is no mention of it in the "real-time" spreadsheet here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... =660663838

[eye]

Hi folks. Am I right in thinking that if the CL Title Holder spot is vacated (as it is most years), then there will be no champion(s) moved from the Champions Path of CL Q2 to Champions Path of CL Q3?

I ask because there is no mention of it in the "real-time" spreadsheet here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... =660663838

Yes you are right. There isn't any club that is starting at Q3 in order to have the need to replace it.

[dyermcryan]

Yes you are right. There isn't any club that is starting at Q3 in order to have the need to replace it.

Ahh yes thank you!

[Fotcalc]

No, I don't think so. It just says that there is an exception for clubs of the 2nd qualifying round. Not promoting clubs of the 2nd qualifying round does not automaticly mean that clubs from EL-Q1 move to EL-Q3. Other options are available, like moving more clubs from EL-Q1 to EL-Q2.

Assuming that you would be correct on this, how can you explain the exception for Q2 in UEL rebalancing due to UECL TH qualifying for UEL? Of course the highest ranked clubs in Q1 can't jump to Q3. That would be ahead of the clubs that has already been promoted to Q2. As I understand it, promoting clubs to Q2 doesn't make sense due to this.

[bert.kassies]

No, I don't think so. It just says that there is an exception for clubs of the 2nd qualifying round. Not promoting clubs of the 2nd qualifying round does not automaticly mean that clubs from EL-Q1 move to EL-Q3. Other options are available, like moving more clubs from EL-Q1 to EL-Q2.

Assuming that you would be correct on this, how can you explain the exception for Q2 in UEL rebalancing due to UECL TH qualifying for UEL? Of course the highest ranked clubs in Q1 can't jump to Q3. That would be ahead of the clubs that has already been promoted to Q2. As I understand it, promoting clubs to Q2 doesn't make sense due to this.

I don't understand the problem. Promoting clubs to Q2 is moving up clubs from Q1. That is exactly your highlighted sentence of the regulations.

[Fotcalc]

But don't they mean from Q1 to Q3, as they are saying club in singular form.

[bert.kassies]

But don't they mean from Q1 to Q3, as they are saying club in singular form.

I don't think that using singular form here has a specific meaning. But I agree with many that these regulations could have been more clear. Usually there is an update after some weeks. Let's hope all questions will be answered.

[eye]

I believe @Fotcalc is correct here and the rebalanced access list @bert.kassies has at the site is wrong (although it might end up with NOR-CW at EL-Q2).

From what we have seen from UEFA at the rebalancing based on country ranking whenever there is a missing club from a spot they are always replacing the club with the club from the highest ranked country from the previous avaliable round unless there was special reason not to do this (eg the draw conditions of current EL-Q3). They never create more pairs at previous round in order to replace the missing club, they never promote a club to a round that hadn't spot (give club bye). It wasn't problem if the club was not at the previous round. ECL is somehow the previous rounds of EL and last 3 years they are promoting clubs from ECL-Q2 to EL-Q3 skipping the clubs that were starting at ECL-Q3 and ECL-PO due to the priority of CWs. The same happens now at EL and that's why missing clubs of EL-Q3 will be filled by clubs from Q1 based on country ranking. The CW priority is also the reason Q2 clubs will not even take part at EL-Q3 rebalancing process due to ECL-W if needed but ECL-Q1 will.

Another issue with access list of @bert.kassies is promoting NOR-CW at EL-Q2 due to Russia's ban it means that NOR-CW wouldn't be able to take part at the rebalancing process of ECL-W which seems wrong. If this happens then it is possible a club of Q1 from a lower ranked country than Norway and lower coefficient that NOR-CW to be promoted to EL-Q3 only because of rebalancing due to Russia's ban while NOR-CW to be at EL-Q2.

I also believe that it is very possible UEFA not to publish any rebalanced access list due to Russia's ban because of the THs rebalancing. Thinking deeper the situation that was discussed I think UEFA at regulations actually gave us the whole order of the process that will be done.
At regulations eg of CL first is mentioned the placement of clubs based on the access list, the next article is about THs rebalancing, the next one for rest vacancies and finally the EPS spots. This process is also making sense. Changing the order of these processes after the placement we might have different outcomes so this makes me believe that UEFA might not publish rebalanced access list due to Russia's ban and might only do it if based on the qualified clubs that will be known till then the outcome will be same.