Forum

xml	No replies possible in the archive

Author: Malko
Date: 28-07-2005, 19:29

The UEFA_system of seeding is not fair.
Example:
In the first round of Uefa-Cup, Strasbourg and rennes are not seeded, but Berlin and Stuttgart are seeded....why?
because Berlin and Stuttgart made some points some years ago......
and now:
The leagues, where only a few good tems are all time in European Cups have so a big advantage compared to leagues, where it is much more difficult to get a european spot......

Author: pipoun
Date: 28-07-2005, 20:40

In fact, Strasbourg had an european experiment 4 yers ago :
Standard Ličge Bel RC Strasbourg Fra 2-0 2-2

So one point more than France default coef !

But this year, it is not enough to be seeded, but last year Aachen, with default german coef was seeded!

But maybe some good team will failed in preliminary as Ferencváros did tonigt against MTZ-Ripo Minsk
So if there is a lot of surprise, maybe, Strasbourg will be seeded

Re: Seeding is unfair
Author: spoonman Date: 28-07-2005, 20:41	Malko, you're suffering from a severe case of paranoia. What's "unfair" about the fact that a club like Rennes hasn't scored any points? Mainz hasn't got any points either, so they won't be seeded in first round proper. So what? That's life.

Re: Seeding is unfair
Author: Malko Date: 28-07-2005, 20:55	Spoonman, i just find it unfair, that a ...hum...league with less difference between the clubs , and that often qualifies new teams, is in disadvantage to a league like Scotland or Belgium, where always the same temas are on European spots. I think the country-ranking should count for 50%.

Author: spoonman
Date: 28-07-2005, 21:07
Edited by: spoonman
at: 28-07-2005, 21:10

Nonsense. The fact that in some countries it's always the same teams who qualify for Europe has nothing to do with the strength of the domestic league.

What about England for example? For years and years it has always been ManU, Arsenal, Liverpool, sometimes Newcastle, now Chelsea. And you wouldn't classify England as a "weak" country, would you?

If French clubs don't show enough consistency to qualify for Europe on a regular basis then that's their problem. The same applies to the Bundesliga, by the way.

Re: Seeding is unfair
Author: Pawelm_18 Date: 28-07-2005, 22:02 Edited by: Pawelm_18 at: 28-07-2005, 22:03	Unfair is fact that new teams (pause in EC for 5 years)in EC witch France, England, etc are seeded.

Author: Kronsky
Date: 29-07-2005, 00:59
Edited by: Kronsky
at: 29-07-2005, 01:27

To Pawelm_18:

THAT actually was little bit funny (but You have to understand why)

Malko,

French teams are allowed to have much more teams than polish teams in EC (6 against 4). And thats correct, becouse french are better by now and they should benefit of this.

This is first time polish team will play their first match in CLQ3 (normally from CLQ2). To qualify to group stage is MONEY, very, very important. Lyon AND Lille is already in the group stage and Monaco is seeded in CLQ3. That means lot of money to French clubs that participate in EC, whitch mean that they can afford to buy better players for next season (compare...Wisla K. budget is about 500.000 EUR).

But...when new club is entering EC, there should not be to much excemptions just becouse its a french team! If the team is good enough, they will pas anyway. If polish teams with budget of 1/40 of french tems can do it, then french can do it as well!

Therefore, no seeding for one french this year is ok. Show us that they are worth more, and You will gain our respect. You dont get respect and coeff. just being french. Last year Alemania was seeded, but in the GS they showed that their seeding was quite unfair, they just get lucky in the draw. Alemania against Trabzonspor, CSKA, Groclin and many, many other, not seeded teams, would not stand a chance. So this year Mainz is not seeded, but the french team shoul??? Why?

Look at seedings in UCQ2 and the geografic situation...north against central (where polish teams play). THATS unfair if You want to complain. But I and other polish dont complain on this site and You should not aswell about silly seeding (soory, I get upset sometimes...).

Furtheremore, think about Slavia Prag, then You maybee understand my point better. THATS unfair...

I dont feel sorry about french team beeing unseeding (0%).

Good luck to french teams in EC, specially Rennais!

Best regards
Kronsky

Author: byl
Date: 29-07-2005, 01:29
Edited by: byl
at: 29-07-2005, 02:00

@malko:

i think belgium, though they have only 4 places, had about 10 different clubs playing european football the last 10 seasons.
So it's not always the same teams!
eidt: looked it up, 19 different teams from belgium played UC,CWC or CL since 1995.

it's true brugge and anderlacht play every year, but monaco and lyon play in france every year as well. I think that counts for almost every country.

besides genk and standard, every belgium club would be unseeded in round 1 of the uefacup, as is the case with germinal beerschot this year. So i don't understand your point at all.

Re: Seeding is unfair
Author: MichaelCollins Date: 29-07-2005, 02:15	Ah the seeding system! Well both Hibs and Dundee United will be unseeded in UEFA Cup Round 1, as well as Rennes, Metalurgs and Mainz. So many likeable teams, so much hope for a kind draw (well in the first two esp!) Though, knowing the quality of United, I'm not counting them as getting past the 2nd Qualifier (there a bit "subgood" as someone on here once said)

Re: Seeding is unfair
Author: eldaec Date: 29-07-2005, 05:02	Only question you have to ask is 'how often do the unseeded sides beat their seeded opponent?' While the answer remains 'not often', the seeding is working.

Re: Seeding is unfair
Author: isidromv Date: 29-07-2005, 09:36	I think the seeding is unfair for the teams lying in the seeding border. One place up or down makes a big difference. I would propose to divide the teams in QRs and in UC R1 in four pots, instead of 2, according to the coefficients, like in CL. And then draw teams from pot 1 with teams from pot 4 and teams from pot 2 with teams from pot 3.

Author: topsi
Date: 29-07-2005, 10:35

@Kronsky
why do you think, that Allemania Aachen had only good luck in the seeding? If you look at the group stage, they played very well against all of those teams. The beat Lille at home (this year CL), lost against Sevilla after a really good match. They drew against a strong St. Petersburg team and won in Athens against AEK. Do you really think, that this was lucky draw? Honestly, when I saw the draw, I thought that they would lose every game without any chance as a second Bundesliga team. But they astonished nearly everybody in Germany with their enthusiastic matches, so that they passed the group stage. And if you have seen the next round against Alkmaar, who have been very strong last year: Aachen nearly beat even them, but they lost in the last 10 minutes of the second match ...
Then to the topic itself. Seeding is a difficult thing, so somebody will always complain, that it is unfair. But I think, it's good, so that there is not already a match like Milan-Real in the first round.
But this has been discussed for many years already ...

CU,
Topsi

Re: Seeding is unfair
Author: Lio Date: 29-07-2005, 13:17	i think malko wanted to say that nation that always qualify same teams (england) and that have 4 place needn't doing a good year in european cup to be seeded the next year.Why?like chinese demographic growth : the "mass effect". The uefa share points on number of club participating but it's not sufficient because they are seeded when they start.

Author: Kronsky
Date: 29-07-2005, 13:27

@Topsi,

Alemania did grat last year! Very, very good performance!

I didnt explain well what was in my mind. I was refering to the draw in R1 only when speaking of luck. Then, I might have been little unfair against Alemania and their performance in GS. They really proved that they can play the game

Are they not comming up to first bundesliga?

The oposite side is Dynamo Tbilisi that had difficult oponent in Wisla but make it through, then loosing all the matches in GS.

Best regards
Kronsky

Author: Akhen
Date: 30-07-2005, 03:35

Hi there,

I agree with the idea that UEFA's seeding calculation method is far from fair. The rules change almost every season and not only the smallest teams but also some of the biggest suffer from that. I'm not a regular on the forum, but I can imagine that subject has been discussed several times here. Nevertheless, that's a major issue of european modern football, and it deserves a big debate.

Taking in consideration yesterday draws, I find several complaints about the draws :

UEFA Champions' League :
- to process the draws of the 3rd qual. round before knowing the participants from the 2nd qual. round is an absolute nonsense, as getting a very good result in a two-legs tie will lead a team to take a seeded spot, something which is usually a reward for regular good performances during 5 seasons. As a consequence, it can lead to see 2 unseeded teams to meet for a place in the group stage, something which devaluates the general value of the competition (e.g. : the probable tie between Artmedia Bratislava and Partizan Belgrade).
- the difficulty level of the leagues where the teams come from should be more taken into consideration : it's easier for teams like Celtic and Rangers, Panathinaďkos and Olympiakos or Shakhtar Donetsk and Dynamo Kiev, who outshine their domestic leagues, to qualify for an european competition (CL or UEFA Cup) and then to score regularly UEFA points, than for a team like Betis or Villareal, who play in one of the most difficult championship in the world. However, we can't say that these spanish teams are inferior to all the previous quoted, on the contrary, but they are disadvantaged by that system (e.g. : Betis Sevilla / AS Monaco).

I will be happy to have your opinions about these 2 points, then I will add more arguments for the C.L. and then for the UEFA Cup.

Thanks for having read, see you.

Author: byl
Date: 30-07-2005, 05:58
Edited by: byl
at: 30-07-2005, 06:34

well all the teams you mentioned from "lesser" countries need results in europe, otherwise they aren't seeded either. Even if you enter europe every year, you still need decent results to get a coefficient of around 40 or more.

teams from the G5 are almost always seeded cause of the country coefficient, unless it's their first appearance in europe in 5 years. If they are good enough they will get results so they get seeded for sure next time they enter. If they are not good enough and loose from a seeded team, that means that they indeed not deserve to be seeded.

Another option is: all teams from G5 are automatically seeded, all the rest unseeded. But who wants that?

To get to the betis example: spain has 7 places in europe + 3? intertoto spots. Betis played europe once in the previous 5 years, so that means that they got among the first 7 in spain 1 time last five seasons and didn't win intertoto either. In that 1 season in europe they beat Chisinau and Zizkov and lost to Auxerre. If they had beaten Auxerre that year they would probably have been seeded now. Now tell me, do you really think betis deserves to be seeded then, simply because they are a spanish team?

Re: Seeding is unfair
Author: topsi Date: 02-08-2005, 09:22	@Kronsky Alemania didn't make it to first Bundesliga, and it will be difficult this year as well. But with the earnings of UEFA cup they could afford some good new players. Perhaps they manage it this year. CU, Topsi

Re: Seeding is unfair
Author: Malko Date: 02-08-2005, 12:35	I think, you understand the "idiotic" seeding-affair now, when you see, that there is a Sevilla-Monaco. What is the advantage ti bee seeded, waht not to be seeded?. i think, the best would be no seeding at all and a complete draw!

Author: kurt
Date: 02-08-2005, 13:27
Edited by: kurt
at: 02-08-2005, 13:28

i find the seeding fair, in the past it was 50 % of the country ranking, that was unfair, now it is 33 % of the countryranking,

5 years ago , on this site i already said it should be 25 %, with the increasing mathches, and mostly teams out the big 5, the countryranking of spain was so high that a newbie club in italy/engleand or spain/ would have a better seeding then regulars like anderlecht,brugge,celtic,rangers,kiev,rosenberg, the subtopteams

it it true that is very easy for anderlecht to be in europe every year, but they need a lot of points to be higher than sevilla, everton

and you must be honest, in spain and other countries almost the halve of the competition plays in europe,

becoming 1st to 3th in the small countries is even tough like to become 5th to 7th in the giant leagues

if brugge or anderlecht or celtic would play in france, germany they would also be playing in europe, no champions league that is true

Re: Seeding is unfair
Author: Malko Date: 02-08-2005, 13:43	I am not sure that Anderlecht or Bruges would reach a European Sčpot in France. Maybe UI-Cup......The difference between both leagues is huge.

Re: Seeding is unfair
Author: AdamL Date: 02-08-2005, 13:49	Malko. Don’t you really see the disadvantage for Real Betis of being not seeded?

Re: Seeding is unfair
Author: Malko Date: 03-08-2005, 12:02	..and where is the advantage of Monaco beeing seeded?

Re: Seeding is unfair
Author: Edgar Date: 03-08-2005, 12:50 Edited by: Edgar at: 03-08-2005, 12:55	I don't think the country coefficient should be included in the team coefficient. If a team plays for the first time (in the last 5 years) in Europe then it should have a 0 coefficient. Also, not every season should have the same weight in the rankings. Maybe something like 1/5, 2/5, 3/5, 4/5, 5/5.

Author: Malko
Date: 03-08-2005, 14:34

I see that most people in here are not according to my opinion (some normal on a website where the seeding ist just topic Number One...)
I stay with my opinion that:
- Seeding as it is done actually is in disfavor of Championships which do not qualify the same teams every year (as much for strong that for weak championships)
- To prevent that, only a very bigger part of country-coefficient in the Club-Coefficient could do.

Author: Gauss
Date: 03-08-2005, 15:13

Malko, seeding is not for leagues but for individual clubs.
Therefore generally clubs which regularly play in Europe get a higher seeding than clubs that only qualify from time to time. Clubs from more successful leagues get a bonus by adding a part of the country coefficient. If the team ranking is supposed to express the strength of a team based on its achievements in the european competitions the country bonus most be considerably smaller than the individually earned points. Of course you can argue if a third of the country coefficient is the right measure or if it should be one half or maybe a quarter. You will always find someone who will feel disadvantaged.

For me seeding has only the sense that teams that are expected to make it to say the quarterfinals don't eliminate each other to early in the contest (i.e. before the group stage) and to form groups of comparable strength for the group stage. I think for this purpose it doesn't matter at all how much of the country coefficient you add to the individual results.

Author: Malko
Date: 03-08-2005, 15:46

Gauss, did you read the beginningof this post?
Sure, seeding is on Club-Coefficients, and the Club-Coeff gets bigger if the tema gets some points in European Cups.
What I wanted to say ist that if the team doesn't get any points doesn't mean that its less strong that anotherone that got points! it is simply often the consequence of the fact, that this team didnt qualify for a European Cup, becuase there were better tems in the same legue. Rapid, austria all will get points and maybe be seeded one day......(for example). or it seems clear that teams like Toulouse, metz or Ajaccio are with no doubt stronger than the two Vienna-Clubs, and if one day they qualify for a European Cup, they won't be seeded......
I just do not agree with this kind of seeding. one should abolish it for good, so noone will be in advantage and noone in disadvantage......
Cause one thing is clear: Seeding like it is done actually doesn't avoid at all waht you say: That teams which could reach the quarterfinales ore more do not eliminate eac other!
Seeding like its done right now gioves uns much Big4-clashes (between Italy, Spain, france, England).....so the system failed!

Author: Gauss
Date: 03-08-2005, 16:45

Malko, I did read your initial post and I do understand your point. But I wouldn't say the system has failed because it gives Big4-clashes. Or would you say that any french team that qualifies for the first time (at least in five years) for the UC is a favorite for reaching the quarter finals? I would say that none of the teams that are unseeded under the current system is. Not Strasbourg or Rennes. Not Mainz or Rapid Wien or FC Kopenhagen. Also most of the teams in the lower part of the seeded list aren't.
Same thing in the CL. I don't think that Everton, Betis or Udinese could be expected to get past the group stage (I don't say they cannot do it, only they cannot be expected to do it). So in my opinion it's not wrong that they are unseeded.
In your initial post you were talking about Strasbourg and Rennes as compared to Berlin and Stuttgart. There is no way to get the french teams higher in ranking except taking ONLY the country coefficient and totally disregard the individual achievements. Berlin and even more so Stuttgart have not only played regularly in the european competitions but also made some progress at least in some of the years. The two french teams have not. If they are as strong as you say they can show it by eliminating a seeded team in the first round of UC and maybe they will be seeded next time they manage to qualify.
If you're talking about Rapid and Austria: Rapid has a lower coefficient than any french team and Austria has really earned their place on the seeded list by reaching the UC quarter finals last year. How can you say that a team that hasn't played in the UC recently will probably show a better performance than Austria?

But I really don't care about that, I can agree with you if you want to abolish the seeding system. But if you (or UEFA) want to avoid that the top favourites eliminate each other to early then the current system is appropriate.

Re: Seeding is unfair
Author: spoonman Date: 03-08-2005, 17:13	A club that qualifies for Europe for the first time (or for the first time in 5 years) doesn't deserve to be seeded. It's as easy as that.

Re: Seeding is unfair
Author: Malko Date: 03-08-2005, 18:00	"How can you say that a team that hasn't played in the UC recently will probably show a better performance than Austria?" Well , speaking more of rapid, which i have seen vs Dudelange...Rapid was quite better than Dudelange, but I would compare them to a medium Second-league-team in france, never same strenght than any Ligue-1-club. I know, it sounds hard, but its probably the truth.

Re: Seeding is unfair
Author: byl Date: 03-08-2005, 18:31 Edited by: byl at: 03-08-2005, 18:32	sorry, but to judge rapid wien as an average team in the french second league on 1 match that ended 1-6 against a team from luxemburg is pretty ridicilous.

Author: porto-1978
Date: 03-08-2005, 18:37

"it seems clear that teams like Toulouse, metz or Ajaccio are with no doubt stronger than the two Vienna-Clubs, and if one day they qualify for a European Cup, they won't be seeded......" ...Malko...
I only can laugh! You want those teams to be seeded? Why? Get real, french clubs level is not that high. The 2 or 3 best clubs of Austria could perfectly fit in the second half of french League1.
A club that never had been in Europe (at least once in the last 5 years) don?t deserve to be seeded. But it?s ok to give them some part of the country coefficient. 50% was too too much. 33% is better. 20% or 25% would be perfect for me.

Re: Seeding is unfair
Author: Philipp Date: 03-08-2005, 18:37 Edited by: Philipp at: 03-08-2005, 18:38	Rapid was after 5 minutes 3:0 in front, i dont think, that this game is representative. of course they played really bad, it was their worst match this season. i dont think, you can compare Rapid with another team after watching this single match.