Forum

xml	No replies possible in the archive

Author: Alan
Date: 17-03-2005, 23:03

Newcastle United are amassing a huge amount of co-efficent points from their progress in the UEFA cup over the last two years. They have no chance of qualifying for the Champions League next year and if they qualify for the UEFA cup again, they are a good bet to get another big total next year.

If they keep up at this rate, in three years time or so, they're going to be 10 to 15 points clear of the rest of the teams (Madrid, Barca, Milan, etc) without having played in the Champions League.

This just seems so wrong to me and the points earned from the CL in comparison to the UC should mirror the level of the two competitions. I know this has been discussed previously but I don't think such a blatant example of the discrepancy has ever come up before (look at 2008 database!).

Newcastle might qualify for the Champions League in a couple of years time and find themselves the number 1 seed (after the holders) without having played in the competition for the previous 4 or 5 years.

Maybe it's just me but this system seems very wrong.

Re: Newcastle making a mockery of co-efficient system
Author: ralfinho Date: 17-03-2005, 23:14	Alan, in principle (Radio Yerewan) I agree. So, that would mean a higher weighting factor for the points gained in CL (1.5 or so). On the other hand, that would favour the Big 5 again. I think that's the problem and is seen by UEFA, too. A little compensation was the increase of the CL bonus points made in this season.

Re: Newcastle making a mockery of co-efficient system
Author: joh Date: 17-03-2005, 23:47	Another weight factor would indeed benefit the G5, but this Newcastle 'situation' suggests that this is only fair. When you want some system to get your seedings right you should take into account the difference in level between CL and UC. It has been mentioned here before, but the new UC format probably has shifted the balance a bit too much.

Re: Newcastle making a mockery of co-efficient system
Author: martinjt Date: 17-03-2005, 23:49	As a Newcastle fan I'm delighted! I don't think seedings at the higher levels are that crucial. If Newcastle were in the top group of seeds in the CL, they would probably have to play one of the teams they've overtaken, and if that team is still superior, that team should still win.

Author: macaskil
Date: 17-03-2005, 23:58

Looking at Bert's database - see the Team Ranking for 2008. Even
now, with the 2005 season not finished, Newcastle are top, 6 pts ahead of Chelsea, and nearly 10 ahead of Real Madrid.

Of course it should be pointed out that Newcastle may not qualify for Europe next season. They need, basically, to (a) climb half a dozen places in the league or (b) beat Man U in the Cup semi final (and either win the final or lose to Arsenal) or (c) win the UEFA Cup

Re: Newcastle making a mockery of co-efficient system
Author: joh Date: 18-03-2005, 00:03	@martinjt: always nice when people are delighted But you got your statistics wrong. And an unfair system is an unfair system.

Re: Newcastle making a mockery of co-efficient system
Author: joaol Date: 18-03-2005, 00:17	What about 3 points for win in the champions league? Simple...and not unfair??what do you think?

Author: anita
Date: 18-03-2005, 00:23

I think that most of us that were awake when UEFA introduced the UEFA-cup group stage, saw it coming. Even before the group stage, the 3rd team in a CL group could expext to gain more points in UEFA-cup than 2nd team going to 1/8-finals in CL.

When UEFA skipped 2nd group stage in CL last year, Rosenborg didn't qualify for CL, and after the UEFA Q-round, they won four matches and one draw = 9 points. No way they would have picked up that many points in CLGS.

So the recipe (as mentioned umpteen times on Forum) for mediocre teams like Rosenborg that is fighting for (good) seeding (in primarily CLQ3), is to play every other season in UEFA-cup to improve their coeff., and every other season in CLGS to 'improve' their wallet.

That's why I am pretty laidback (believe it or not!) when it comes to Rosenborg-seeding next season. If they lose in CLQ3, and go through the keyhole UEFA round 1, they are probably in for much more points.

Author: Lunaris
Date: 18-03-2005, 00:25

well i don't think it's really unfair, the teams in the cl can't complain that newcastle has a good run, they get the money newcastle don't, so what does it really matter

did you ever think about the seeding system, just 1 of the top 8 this year (bayern) is still in the competition, so what would it help newcastle to be top seeded, they will have strong opposition either way

newcastle are succesful, thus they gain points and this way they will have some easier games next seasons (but how many easier games will they have in the end?), but it won't change the rule:

get the money in cl and the points in uc

is that really that bad a split-up between this two competitions?

Re: Newcastle making a mockery of co-efficient system
Author: anita Date: 18-03-2005, 00:37	Lunaris, the UEFA ranking/coeff system is meant/constructed to reflect the relative strength of the teams. If it doesn't, it have failed, and need a brush-up. Even Geordies (at least most of them ) will admit that Newcastle is not the best team in Europe this season.

Author: Lyonnais
Date: 18-03-2005, 00:40

Some are saying that changing the system would favor again Top 5 countries. I don't believe that this is the issue. The issue is that the current system is simply not fair.

I've read in another topic that AZ67 was currently ranked 6th (over the season). I certainly don't want to minimize their performance, but that does not make sense too. How can Newcastle or AZ67 have better coefficients than the 8 teams still in the Champions League ?

With the concentration of all top teams in the Champions League, the least that UEFA could do is to overweight again the points earned in the Champions League.

Re: Newcastle making a mockery of co-efficient system
Author: Alan Date: 18-03-2005, 00:48	Couldn't agree more with your first sentence Lyonnais. I compare the current system to saying that Wigan Athletic, current leaders of the Championship (second divison) in England, are better than most of the Premiership teams because they have got more points. By the way Anita, I am a Geordie! I am happy to accept the benefits given to Newcastle, but I can recognise when a system is unfair.

Re: Newcastle making a mockery of co-efficient system
Author: joaol Date: 18-03-2005, 00:52	Sorry ... but can u make a comment to my statement?...3 points for victory in the champions league...or even something like 3(win) 2 (draw) and 1(defeat) ..i know that 1 point for defeat is a little bit strange..but just to get the advantage of having a team palying in the champions league, just 1 bonus point for reaching off course or even none.

Re: Newcastle making a mockery of co-efficient sys
Author: Lunaris Date: 18-03-2005, 00:56	that would make 6 bonus points for the gs if you put it that way, every new entry to cl would start in pot 4, even if they could be considered better than other teams (compare villareal with sparta prag, nothing against prag, but villareal was more succesful than them recently, despite not playing in cl, but they wouldn't be better in your system)

Author: Alan
Date: 18-03-2005, 01:05

I would suggest that on top of the 3 bonus points for getting to the group stage, the teams qualifying for the next stage should get further bonus points (say 4 for top of group and 2 for second). Perhaps even give further bonus points on top of the current system for 1/4s, 1/2s and final.

At the moment, if a team wins every game in CL and a team wins every game in UC, they will end up with approximately the same amount of co-efficient points. I would suggest that the system is weighted so that winning the UC is comparable with reaching the last 8 or last 16 of the CL.

Re: Newcastle making a mockery of co-efficient system
Author: larmen Date: 18-03-2005, 01:13	If you give more bonus points, don't yo umake it "impossible" for smaller countries to get more spots in future years? If you give points just for participating countries who don't participate will not be able to catch up and enter more teams. Or do you want to separate team points and country points?

Re: Newcastle making a mockery of co-efficient system
Author: ralfinho Date: 18-03-2005, 01:16	joaol, 3 points for a win in CL would - to be proportional - mean 1.5 points for a draw in CL. There we are at my 1.5 -factor.

Re: Newcastle making a mockery of co-efficient system
Author: joh Date: 18-03-2005, 01:21	x 1.5 also seems fair considering the fact that the UC-teams have played 10 matches vs 8 for the CL-teams.

Author: joaol
Date: 18-03-2005, 01:33

Ralfinho:

I know but the 1.5 for a draw doesn?t make many sense, ot should be 3,1,0 with the actual bonus points or 3,2,1 having no bonus points in any stage... I think there sould be bonus point for a team hwho wins a competion... Valencia was the Top european team when they reached 2 finals in a row(before winning uefa cup).I think there should be something like 3 bonus points(without counting the victory points of the game) for the champions leauge and 2 for uefa cup. How were distributed the points by juve and milan in the 2003 champions cup final? 1 for juve and 1 for milan or 2 for milan??

Author: mark
Date: 18-03-2005, 08:57

Ommmm, I feel the need to repeat things I said in a similiar discussion about a year ago.

The system is not broken so there is no real need to fix it. The coefficient are NOT used to show the relative strength of team but rather as a means to determine seeding in seeding based draw. I assume (as was commented before) that seeding have some influance on the group stage but it is a minor one since even if a team got "by mistake" into a better group they still can meet stronger teams in the lower groups.

Today the only seeding based draws are in the QR stages and UC R1. A changed CL system will have no impact on the UC QR and R1 because those teams are already ensured to be seeded there. Those teams will also always be seeded in CL QR2. What we have left is CL QR3, and the analyz last year showed that the impact of changes in the coefficient calculation can have a minor impact only on the teams which are around the seeded/not seeded line, rosenburg, wisla, etc. And in my humble opinion there is nothing wrong if after a good run in UC, in the next year teams like new castle and AZ will be seeded in CL QR3.

Author: joh
Date: 18-03-2005, 10:32

The system is not broken so there is no real need to fix it.

There's a bug in the system. It's a matter of opinion how great the need is to fix it.

The coefficient are NOT used to show the relative strength of team but rather as a means to determine seeding in seeding based draw.

...and a fair seeding system is based on the relative strength of the teams. When it does not do that it's flawed. And yes, the coefficients are used to show the relative strength - I could show you examples.

I assume (as was commented before) that seeding have some influance on the group stage but it is a minor one since even if a team got "by mistake" into a better group they still can meet stronger teams in the lower groups.

They can meet stronger teams - the point is: they should.

Re: Newcastle making a mockery of co-efficient sys
Author: Gauss Date: 18-03-2005, 11:58	I think larmen raised an important point there. If you give more weight to points won in Champions League then that shouldn't be used for country ranking. To determine how many teams one country gets in CL and UEFA-Cup points won in both competitions should be weighted equally.

Author: MichaelCollins
Date: 18-03-2005, 12:27

Hmm, well Newcastle's record in Europe this season is

Won 9
Drawn 1
Lost 0

The only team who can beat that is Inter with a 6-4-0 European record, probably better because of the class of opposition. If you get the wins in Europe you deserve the points - I mean this is the same Newcastle who in prior years could have fallen to Bnei Sachneed in Round 1 on away goals. Newcastle have disposed of Hapoel, Aigaleo, Sochaux, Tbilisi, drawn Sporting, beaten Heerenveen home and away, and now thrashed Olympiakos. Now the last two might be the only two of real significance (not trying to upset fans of the might Aigaleo btw) but the fact remains the team most renowned in England for 4-3 games (either way) have looked a class apart (except for SPorting) with everyone they've stepped onto the pitch with WHEN it matters.

And one question...what deserves more points,
2 points in the CL,
Or reaching a Semifinal in a major competition (which, lest we forget the UEFA CUp still is!)

Author: macaskil
Date: 18-03-2005, 15:02

Sure, Newcastle have done well and in fact couldn't have done much better against the opposition they faced.

But is it fair that they have more points for 2004/5 than all 8 of the teams in the quarter finals of the Champions League, who must surely be regarded as better teams on any rational basis?

Say Milan win the ECL. They are likely to end up with:-

3 points for qualifying for the group stage
9 points from the group stage
1 point for reaching the 2nd round
5 points from the 2nd round
(say)
4 points from the quarter final
4 points from the semi final
2 from the final

Total: 28 - plus about 6 from the country coefficient - total 34

If Newcastle win the UC they could get at least 36!

And yet, look at their opponents:

Newcastle -

Bnei (214)
Panionios (138)
Tbilisi (240)
Sochaux (85)
Sporting (64)
Heerenveen (121)
Olympiakos (54)
Sporting(again) (64)
Villareal? (46)
Parma? (21)

Milan -

Shaktar (120)
Celtic (28)
Barcelona (3)
Man U (4)
Inter (13)
Lyon? (18)
Bayern? (5)

There's no point saying that the seeding doesn't matter - if you look at the stats on this site it is pretty clear that seeding IS important (and of course the extra points for Newcastle also count towards the country coefficient and thus influence how many teams from England will qualify in future seasons).

Of course much the same points were made with regard to Porto and Celtic in 2003 and Valencia in 2004. However at least those teams had to beat one or two high-ranking clubs to get to the final. For 2005, of the 10 top seeded teams in round 1 of the UC only 3 are still left in the competition, and the leading teams that dropped in from the ECL (Valencia, Ajax, Panathinaikos) have all obligingly fallen by the wayside. So much for the new format!

Author: Lunaris
Date: 18-03-2005, 15:48

well obviously the new format isn't good for your coeff-problems, but it's good in creating new surprising teams: austria, az, steaua

i know that newcastle can't be considered best team of europe unless winning cl, but they are succesful meaning they make points

maybe you could change it, the way that newcastles points are just counted full for the cuntry ranking but half for the team ranking, so the team coefficient can't become high enough for newcastle being top seed in cl

Re: Newcastle making a mockery of co-efficient system
Author: macaskil Date: 18-03-2005, 15:58	Ideally we should have a system that takes into account the strength of the opponents (like the ELO system in chess). Alternatively have a tournament based on the Swiss system (also as in chess) which would allow a league format, but limit the number of games in a season, and automatically produce a ranking order.

Re: Newcastle making a mockery of co-efficient system
Author: naaba Date: 18-03-2005, 19:56	Last year Celta de Vigo was in pot B in Champions League ahead Lyon, Panathinaikos, PSV, Celtic, Dinamo Kiev.... and they never played in Champions League before...

Author: Ricardo
Date: 18-03-2005, 20:19

Last year was still the 50%-rule: a team got 50% of the country coefficent plus all the opints itself got. This year they changed this in only 33%. Better I think.

If you see the current teamranking as what is says: team-ranking, than I do not thinkit is working correct: Newcastle does a fantastic job in the UC, but would not have had the same result in the CL.

A possible solution I see is having 2 opints system: 1 for the teamranking, in which all Cl- points count double (or maybe is 1.5 enough). Maybe let CL-qualification rounds also count for halve points
and 1 for the country-ranking in which all matches are equal. This is to avoid that there is a double advantage for the bigger countries(more teams in CL and so also more double points!)

Re: Newcastle making a mockery of co-efficient system
Author: ralfinho Date: 18-03-2005, 23:41	The last point of Ricardo (and Larmen and Gauss above) could be a solution. That's the problem I meant yesterday when I said that upweighting of the CL points would favour the Big 5. Larmen, sorry, I didn't catch your point yesterday. Was too late.