Platini proposes changes.

[AFII]

Michel Platini has revealed plans for a new format to UEFA Champions League qualification.

The Uefa president has proposed a shake-up to the final qualifying round, whereby the lowest-placed qualifiers from England, Spain, Italy, France, Germany and Portugal would play against each other.

The current seeding system usually allows clubs from the bigger European leagues to play against smaller sides in the round before the group stages.

However, Platini promised that smaller countries would be better represented in the Champions League if he was elected Uefa president and he intends to stay true to his word.

He is uncertain whether the likes of England, Spain and Italy should be allocated four spots at the expense of other countries' champions.

"It's not about disturbing England, Italy or Spain, but about finding a good balance," he insisted.

"My problem is that the two English, Spanish and Italian teams in the final qualifying round do not play against each other, they play against smaller teams.

"Perhaps the teams from the bigger countries, who have four and three qualifying teams, should play against each other.

"We want to add some of the other countries to the competition and to do that we have take some of the others away.

"I'm not sure that the fourth clubs from Spain, Italy and England are more important than the champions of Poland, Czech Republic and Denmark."

Platini's other ideas include banning players going on loan to teams playing in the same competitions as the club that owns them.

He explained: "If a player is on loan at one club it is logical for me that he is excluded in playing in the same competition as the club who owns him.

"He should not be able to play in the same league as his own club."

Platini also plans to prevent European clubs from signing players who are still owned by agents or companies - as happened with West Ham and the Argentine players Carlos Tevez and Javier Mascherano.

He is also keen for the image of the game to be improved, and wants to introduce tougher penalties for players who become involved in unsavoury incidents such as mass brawls.

Referees will also be encouraged to abandon games where there is overt racist abuse.

http://home.skysports.com/list.aspx?...oposes+changes

[Red Chilli]

Can't see this working. Why do we want more teams from France, Norway and Belgium (for example) at the expense of England Spain and Italy?

It'll just mean more teams making up the numbers and a less competitive tournament.

[Neil Young]

It's a climbdown from the position he took to get elected, i.e. a maximum of 3 teams per league entering the CL.

[Resu]

We want this because it evens the field more. It`s getting harder and harder for small teams to get a piece of the CL-pie, and the gap gets bigger. It might not be good news for the big clubs, but I belive it will make football more exciting.
It might also increase the chance for my norwegian team to get to CL, but that`s not going to happend anytime soon.

[Dhav]

We want this because it evens the field more. It`s getting harder and harder for small teams to get a piece of the CL-pie, and the gap gets bigger. It might not be good news for the big clubs, but I belive it will make football more exciting.
It might also increase the chance for my norwegian team to get to CL, but that`s not going to happend anytime soon.

I dont think it's good for the competition. There are so many piss-poor games in the group stages as it is, never mind if you start reducing the amount of teams coming from the top nations by a quarter and thus giving "smaller" teams a disproportionately better chance to get through. Games in the group stages will be even more one-sided and you'll get the top 2 teams being qualified after 4 matches and making the rest of the games in the group completely meaningless. With all due respect to the smaller sides, if they were good enough they would get through (didnt Helsingborgs knock out Inter a couple of years ago?), they dont deserve a free ride into the group stages any more than anyone else. The quality of the competition will only suffer if your forcing the top teams to knock themselves out at the first hurdle. From where I'm sitting it makes no sense whatsoever - I cant see the top clubs or the TV companies going for it.

On a slightly different note, is Platini single-handedly trying to ruin football with all his stupid ideas? Lawrenson was saying the other day he wants to make it non-contact!

[Rich]

I could understand the need to change things if the sport was dying - yet it keeps on growing, so why do the fools at UEFA and FIFA continue to try and change things?

If it ain't broke don't fix it

[ElRobbie]

We want this because it evens the field more. It`s getting harder and harder for small teams to get a piece of the CL-pie, and the gap gets bigger. It might not be good news for the big clubs, but I belive it will make football more exciting.
It might also increase the chance for my norwegian team to get to CL, but that`s not going to happend anytime soon.

That's a strange statement from a Liverpool fan, given we've been fighting for 3rd/4th every season, that would mean us having to play someone like Arsenal to qualify, which would obviously be much tougher than playing the Champions of a weaker European footballing league.

You're basically saying we should have a tougher game so that the champions of say Poland could get an easier game to qualify?

The current format is fine, it does what it was set up to do, create the highest quality and most competitive competition, times have changed, if they are going to go back to making sure the Champions of each country qualify then they may as well just scrap the current format all together. All you would have is weaker teams losing every game in the group stages, what would be the point? If that was the case they may as well go back to the old knockout format as the group games would be a formality anyway given the differences in quality, they already are to a certain extent anyway, imagine if the weaker teams were even weaker.

[dww]

I dont think it's good for the competition. There are so many piss-poor games in the group stages as it is, never mind if you start reducing the amount of teams coming from the top nations by a quarter and thus giving "smaller" teams a disproportionately better chance to get through. Games in the group stages will be even more one-sided and you'll get the top 2 teams being qualified after 4 matches and making the rest of the games in the group completely meaningless. With all due respect to the smaller sides, if they were good enough they would get through (didnt Helsingborgs knock out Inter a couple of years ago?), they dont deserve a free ride into the group stages any more than anyone else. The quality of the competition will only suffer if your forcing the top teams to knock themselves out at the first hurdle. From where I'm sitting it makes no sense whatsoever - I cant see the top clubs or the TV companies going for it.

On a slightly different note, is Platini single-handedly trying to ruin football with all his stupid ideas? Lawrenson was saying the other day he wants to make it non-contact!

Every few years someone brings up the non-contact thing. I doubt it will ever happen, but I do think that the increase in player protection in the last few years has extended the careers of some of the best players which is a good thing.

I agree that there is no point having worse teams in the CL group stages, but the current seeding system is weighted to help the bigger more financially able teams who have a good squad season after season. I think a compromise of not deliberately drawing big teams together but having a draw with no seeding would be fine.

[Neil Young]

Every few years someone brings up the non-contact thing. I doubt it will ever happen, but I do think that the increase in player protection in the last few years has extended the careers of some of the best players which is a good thing.

I agree that there is no point having worse teams in the CL group stages, but the current seeding system is weighted to help the bigger more financially able teams who have a good squad season after season. I think a compromise of not deliberately drawing big teams together but having a draw with no seeding would be fine.

I'd thought that might end up as the compromise too.

[Resu]

I`ll try and answer both you and Dahvlos.
First of all I`m not thinking purely as a LFC fan here, but as a football fan.
I agree that the idea about pairing the best ranked against each other in the qualifying phase is stupid, but the idea that smaller teams gets a chance isn`t.
My view on this is that smaller teams doesn`t get the chance to play CL very often, so they aren`t given the chance to really improve their squads. They have one good season, gets chance, then it might be 5-10 years to the next time. By then it`s almost as they`re in it for the first time again. This is something that the big clubs love, because it gives them an easier passage to the later rounds, and the big games.
I you look at Rosenborg 10 years ago they were in the CL every year, and after being well beaten the first years they became a club that many teams didn`t want to draw.
This is what I want, a chance for smaller clubs be able to compete with the big ones more regulary. I`m not necesseraly agreeing with Platinis way of doing it, but I agree with what he`s trying to do.

[mikeg]

thats not too bad, its not as if only the top 3 go into the champions league, the 4th placed team still gets a chance all be it to play a more tougher qualifiying game than usual, which in fairness if they lose it dont deserve to be in the competition anyway

[The_weatherman]

Every few years someone brings up the non-contact thing. I doubt it will ever happen, but I do think that the increase in player protection in the last few years has extended the careers of some of the best players which is a good thing.

I agree that there is no point having worse teams in the CL group stages, but the current seeding system is weighted to help the bigger more financially able teams who have a good squad season after season. I think a compromise of not deliberately drawing big teams together but having a draw with no seeding would be fine.

I could see that as a fair solution, gives everyone a fair chance at drawing TNS or someone like that, even Rosenborg would fancy their chances against them