This forum is read-only now. Please use Forum 2 for new posts
| xml | No replies possible in the archive |
| Format IUC | |
| Author: Agent327
Date: 22-08-2005, 10:45 | According to Uefa, the format of the Intertoto will possibly change. Changes will be number of participants (49 instead of 61), No. of rounds (3 instead of 5) and most important 11 teams going into the 1st qualifynig round Uefa cup (as opposed the 3 winners into the 1st round proper) See this article As stated it has all to do with the money involved, and I think this is bad news for the teams from lower ranked countries. What do you think? |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: isidromv
Date: 22-08-2005, 11:59 | The winners of IC R3, instead of playing each other for 3 places in UC, they will enter UC QR1 (and probably will be seeded even in QR2). They will be hard opponents for small teams in UC QR, but it will increase their income. What do you think an unseeded team from Malta will prefer: Playing a Slovenian team with a small probability of progressing, or playing an Spanish team with no probability of progressing. Another question: 49 participants, does it mean 1 per association? |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: MartinW
Date: 22-08-2005, 12:00 | It is obviously to the benefit of the larger countries. For example in this year's UIC several of the 'big' teams are paying against each other in the UIC and knock each other out before the final three are decided. The teams who lose include Lazio, Newcastle, Dortmund, Athletic. Now in the new method it seems there will be only 3 rounds of UIC with 11 qualifying for UC QR1. It seems that will make it easier for the majority of the 'big' clubs to get into UCQR1, and then their large coefficient should mean the seeding will give them a good draw for making UC group stage. I guess Newcastle would rather play an unseeded team with co-efficient 0.714 in UCQR1, instead of play Deportivo in UIC R4! |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: spoonman
Date: 22-08-2005, 12:08 | @ isidromv: Another question: 49 participants, does it mean 1 per association? That's what I've asked myself as well... It seems to be that way, according to UEFA's article: "If you look at the access list, in the big countries you have to finish in the top five or six to get into Europe. Now, especially with these proposed changes, there is one more place for all teams to aim at, and the incentive will be to get into the UEFA Cup." |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: AdamL
Date: 22-08-2005, 12:10 Edited by: AdamL at: 22-08-2005, 12:12 | It seems to look exactly like my proposalposted on forum in July, so probably we should treat our posts more seriously. Never know who reads Bert’s forum.  |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: Nick
Date: 22-08-2005, 12:41 | I don't like it. Really. This greatly reduces the chances for small teams in the UEFA Cup. Every single IT team will be seeded at least in UEFA Cup QR2 and most of them in QR2 and R1. This year 10 countries finished european season in july. Next year 15-17 countries will be out by the end of july and we will end up with 10 spanish teams in Europe. |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: AdamL
Date: 22-08-2005, 12:54 | Please study the case of Lithuania. This year Zaligiris Vilnius was a top 12 club in IT competition, so it is not only big countries who could benefit from this change. |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 22-08-2005, 13:01 | The first qualifying round of UEFA-cup was on 14 and 28 July this year. So that would mean the 3 rounds in Intertoto will have to be finished before that. That will mean that the first round of the Intertoto still has to be played half June, the same as now. So still the European top clubs might think that is to early for them. |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: Ricardo
Date: 22-08-2005, 13:10 | Strange thing is the new Dutch league format. There they play for 3 places in the Intertoto(this year only 1 applied) This was done after consulting Uefa. So if Holland can be sure of 3 places, the whole top 10 can be. That takes already 30 places of the 49. I don't think that's fair. Something must be wrong here I was really enjoying this year without Newcastle, Valencia(maybe) and more top clubs. With 11 more teams to qualify, more top-5 teams will qualify. I like it that they have to enter Q1. But 11 is much too much. number of participants is decided by country ranking. This should not be unbalanced by 11 IC-teams. 3 can be, 11 not. When they say '49 teams will enter ' it sounds very much like the plans have been completed. Why do they have to keep it a secret? Why not tell the whole plan as it is currently on the table??? |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: Agent327
Date: 22-08-2005, 13:16 | Not only that, but also the qualification for the UCQR's itself will be altered. If you want to have the same amount of teams in UC R1 proper (80), you'll have to increase the number of teams in those QR's. This mean less direct entries into the UC. Guess which teams will have to pay the prize. |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: AdamL
Date: 22-08-2005, 13:45 | Agent, if you extract 3 teams winners of Intertoto Cup (in the present formula) from the UCR1 you will gain extra 3 places for 6 winners of UCQR2 which means 12 places in UCQR1 for 11 winners of Intertoto Cup in a new formula. So, one country could gain direct access to UCQR2 instead of UCQR1. |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: Ricardo
Date: 22-08-2005, 13:49 Edited by: Ricardo at: 22-08-2005, 13:50 | Actualy, Agent327, that's not true. Instead of 3 in R1, there are 11 in Q1. the removal of the 3 in R1 makes place for 12 places in Q1. So actualy 1 team is promoted to Q2! I see Adam that you have seen te same thing in the time I was writing this - strang to see that my clock here says it's 13:44 while in the database it's noted as 13:50 |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: Ricardo
Date: 22-08-2005, 14:02 | I don't get the schedule. By letting winners after 3 round IC get into Q1, they need 2 more matches compared to this year. They will have to start on 5th of June! With also the worldcup going on in the same time(9/6 - 9/7) it won't be a succesful IC year, I would expect. |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: AdamL
Date: 22-08-2005, 14:18 | Maybe UC1QR will be moved later on and will be played together with CLQR2. |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: Lunaris
Date: 22-08-2005, 14:20 | at least for the big clubs, but we might end up with many more teams from smaller countries, who don't have to send players to wc |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: isidromv
Date: 22-08-2005, 14:30 | If it is 1 team per association, then it benefits other countries, not only the big ones. At least, the top 20 will have a possibility to qualify one more team to UC. The main problem is that UC qualifying will become very unbalanced with teams from the big 5 drawing unseeded teams from lower countries. |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: Ricardo
Date: 22-08-2005, 14:38 | numbers 71-80 from the 'prediction' qualification list for UC R1 this year: Metalurg D Djurgården Midtjylland Krylya Sovetov Rapid Bucharest Brann Maccabi PT MS Ashdod Esbjerg Tromsø These are the teams that will have to fight with teams like Valencia, Deportivo, Lens, Marseille for a spot in the UC-R1. It looks pretty obvious who the winners will be. (though sub-top like Leiria, Roda JC, Xanthi, can be real competition) |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: kurt
Date: 22-08-2005, 15:45 Edited by: kurt at: 22-08-2005, 15:54 | I AM AGAINST, winners should be in roud 1,not in qualifying rounds, now the last 5 years, i think 90 % to 100% of the intertotowinners were already seeded in round 1, so the clubs coming in the qualifying rounds makes no sense, and the big clubs gain a lot of points, so their countryranking will be even better in the future I agree, with 1 round less, it must be possible to do it in 4 rounds, and this with only a maximum of 1 team a country, in the past even 4 french teams has participated in 1 year, now every year 3 belgian, french,german teams , this is too many so intertoto should be : round 1 : 0 teams round 2 : 38 teams round 3 : 19 winners and 5 clubs of the top 5 countryranking round 4 : 12 winners round 5 : 6 winners so the tournament begins two weeks later, everybody happy and still 38 + 5 = 43 teams possible to enter the intertoto, what still is a lot of teams this year only 42 different countries participated in intertoto, if there are less countries that will participate then places, then other countries can sent more teams with a maximum total of 2 teams and the winners in round 1 ( not qualifying rounds ) what do you think of it ? |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: JPV
Date: 22-08-2005, 15:46 Edited by: JPV at: 22-08-2005, 15:47 | SPAIN Valencia CF 123326 this is the list of qualifiers if it had been introduced this summer... |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 22-08-2005, 18:01 Edited by: Forza-AZ at: 22-08-2005, 20:05 | When the new system was already played this year: QR1 UEFA-cup: 14 & 28 July round 3 UIC: 2 & 9 July round 2 UIC: 18 & 25 June round 1 UIC: 4 & 11 June So 2 weeks earlier than it was now. When they put back the UEFA-QR1 to the dates of CL QR2: (28 July & 4 August) they can start the same date as now. About the new Dutch league system. If there is only 1 place in the Intertoto available, then they should abolish the play-off's for teams finishing 10-13. That would be a good thing, because a lot of teams don't want to play Intertoto, so imagine 2 of those teams would play each other with the winner going to Intertoto. You could get teams losing on purpose to avoid Intertoto. |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 22-08-2005, 20:09 | By the way. How should they set up the system with 3 rounds and 49 teams. 3rd round obviously 22 teams. If no teams would get a bye to the 3rd round you will have 44 teams in round 2. Then you would only have 5 matches in round 1. Doesn't seem logical. So would some teams get a bye to round 3 (so they would only have to play 1 round in Intertoto)? When they give 8 teams a bye to the 3rd round (as it was in the old system) then you will have this: 22 teams in round 3 (14 winners round 2 + 8) 28 teams in round 2 (13 winners round 1 + 15) 26 teams in round 1 |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: Nick
Date: 22-08-2005, 23:40 Edited by: Nick at: 22-08-2005, 23:41 | This means that 8 teams will have the chance to "win" the tournament by just playing in 1 round!?!?! Seems ridiculous to me. This way IT will be the easiest possible way to get into the UEFA Cup for some teams. Why make the effort in the own league when you can do it with just 2 games in july? |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: iwan
Date: 23-08-2005, 00:35 | When 11 countries can qualify by intertoto than weeaker countries receives many less chance to qalify for the poolmatches!!! Maybe it can be possible 10 can be placed for the 1st round but all off them must play against each-otter and the 5 winners will be places in one pool. Ore: Give the highest ranked 25 countries each one member more, the 96 teams must play 3 to 5 rounds play-offs for 3,6 ore 12 places Than the dutch league can play with 3 teams in it!!! Now when a team in Holland qalifies for the IC, he must play 6 to 8 play-offs to can qualify for the UC-poolmatch what's very mutch maybe there are possiblities to make that nessissary play-offs less!! |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: Nick
Date: 23-08-2005, 07:50 Edited by: Nick at: 23-08-2005, 07:53 | This will also have a huge impact on the seeding in UEFA QR2 and R1. All QR1 teams that face an IT winner are doomed IMHO anyway. In QR2 teams from countries 17-25 will loose their seeded status for sure and in R1 the seeding treshhold will rise from currently 19 to 25. So chances to see teams like Dinamo Tbilisi ever again in UEFA Cup GS will be around 1%. Currently teams from countries like Macedonia, Albania, Iceland have at least the chance to reach QR2. With this IT format their european experience will be reduced to 2 clear defeats in july. Is this really what we want? |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: JPV
Date: 23-08-2005, 10:36 | There's 1 problem with the proposal: If you add 11 teams in Q1, you have an odd number... (67) A solution COULD be to add 1 team extra to Q1 (f.e. a team from country ranked nr 9). That way, you don't have to change anything else to your old system of the entry list This would be the system: Q1 68 teams start in Q1 => 34 qualified for Q2 Q2 36 teams start in Q2 34 qualified due to Q1 => 35 qualified for R1 R1 45 teams start in R1 35 qualified due to Q2 => 40 teams to group stage, etc.... |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: AdamL
Date: 23-08-2005, 10:52 | Forza, you may be right in your prediction of format. Such a format (26+15+8), under the condition that in Intertoto each country has one entry, makes that all teams has to play six more matches than they would play if qualify directly to UEFA Cup (or qualifying rounds of UEFA Cup) via national competition. |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 23-08-2005, 12:37 | @JPV You don't have to add a team in QR1. Just move 1 team from QR1 to QR2 and it's OK. Because no Intertoto-teams start in R1 directly, there are 3 spots available. So just let play 3 more matches in QR2. That gives 12 extra teams for QR1 (the 11 Intertoto teams + 1). Just give one team a bye to QR2 and the system is OK again. |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: Ricardo
Date: 23-08-2005, 12:45 | For the 11 qualified UIC teams it will be a bit easier to enter the UefaCup, but they still have to play the same number of matches. Instead of playing semi-finals and finals, they now will have to play Q1 and Q2. Opponents will be easier (there NEVER will be a Newcastle-Deportivo in Q1!!) I din't like the idea of so many IC teams. And if it happens there should indeed be only 1 per association. Can you imagine 3 more Spanish, English and Italian clubs in the UC? I already am hoping tonight for at least eiher HSV or Cluj to win(preferably both). |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 23-08-2005, 16:55 | 11 is to much indeed. Why don't they first admit 6 teams to QR2. So the semifinal-winners of the Intertoto. You won't get that many top-matches as now in Intertoto, but also not that many top-teams via Intertoto to UEFA round 1. |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: iwan
Date: 23-08-2005, 19:42 | Yes the 4th and 5th round off the intertoto are played at the same time like the UC-Q1 and UC-Q2 and in the IT the price-money and TV-rights are not worser than in the UC in the both called rounds!!! But in the IT, teams has many stronger opponents!!! 3 IT-teams each country isn't to mutch, but it will be better to let play them against each-otter in the 4th and 5th round. And what to do with Holland!?!? They've plans for 3 IT-spots but there's a real chance it becomes one!! In many Dutch newspapers stands:''The nrs-10 to -13 must play play-offs for the 3rd intertoto-spot!!'', what to do with that!?!? |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: hAABet
Date: 24-08-2005, 00:29 | Hi all One argument for a reducing of rounds, is that many countries are'nt finish before the deadline of entering the UIC. Like my country, Denmark. Secondly I am also a pro for reducing to ONLY one per country. Thirdly, a entering a Uefa Q1 is good for some minor teams, like this year Cluj and last year Esbjerg (lost in semi to Schalke 04). What I write is that they minor teams has no chance of entering the uefa in the present UIC anyway. |
| Re: Format IUC | |
| Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 24-08-2005, 12:23 | @hAABet With this plan they reduces the number of rounds indeed, but they also need to be finsihed a lot earlier, so the first round of Intertoto won't start later (maybe even earlier then now!!!). |