They only have themselves to blame. They were in third place with daylight ahead of Arsenal until Harry started paying more attention to what his friends on Fleet Street were saying about him than to his team. Had they not been miserable the last part of the season, they would have finished third. It's still a shit rule.
Same Old Tottenham, Always Bottling It
- Thread starter Carl
- Start date
Chelsea effectively threw the last few games of the season, which could have seen them finishing fourth place anyway, in order to concentrate on the CL final. They don't deserve to defend it for that reason alone.
Let them both in, the way Liverpool and Everton made it in. It's not going to come up very often. Just make an extra knock out game if you don't want to kick out the winner of Latvia, make them play Spurs to see who makes it to the qualifying rounds.
Nah, I disagree.
Personally, I think the cup's been devalued slightly over the years with the sheer number of non-"champions" being involved in the "Champions League". Spurs came fourth; at least Chelsea are the champions of something.
Spurs have won the league cup recently.
Personally, I think this is the way to go. I remember when Liverpool won it and people weren't sure if they'd make it, the chairman of a much smaller club (I think it may have been a Welsh team, now I think of it) said that he'd play them for the spot - so if Liverpool won, they could take his club's spot in the qualifying round.
He knew that the gate receipts from playing Liverpool would be far more important than playing against the champions of Slovakia - a match they'd probably lose anyway.
Did they win it this year? How is that remotely relevent?
Setting aside five places for teams from one country would be ridiculous.
I think it's absurd that Chelsea go straight into the pot for the group stages too. It's fair that the holders should have an opportunity to retain their crown, but reckon they should have to work for it a little bit more, after finishing outside the top four. (Even if the CL Qualifiers are usually a formality for the big European sides.)
Actually, that's not quite true for fourth place anymore - they have to play someone else from a pot involving fourth place in Spain and Germany, and third place in Italy, France, etc.
Arsenal got Fiorentina this year, if you remember, and almost went out. It's not a foregone conclusion, but Chelsea skip all that now.
Fair point. Shame that Chelsea won't have to endure that next season.
Think Arsenal faced Udinese btw.
Think Arsenal faced Udinese btw.
No Chaaampians League football for Spurs then..
This.
The 'Champions' League is really the European Cup. Do you not think if the top two places allowed entry to the competition and the Cup Winners Cup was brought back, teams like Arsenal and Spurs would have won trophies sooner or had a real push for the title?
Aye, you're right, I was scrabbling in the back of my hole-ridden memory for the Italian club and somehow grasped the name of Fiorentina.
Not at all; but if it comes down to a choice between a team that finished fourth or the current champions of Europe, I know which one deserves to be there more.
I think Chelsea should play Spurs in a play off for the C.l.spot...
And, of course, Arsenal are back in that situation again - effectively pushed down to 4th with City, United and Chelsea going straight into the groups.
Gary Cahill witha champions league winners medal.
Enough said.
Football is fecked.
Enough said.
Football is fecked.
How do you propose they get around the rule UEFA made in 2005 which decrees that the defending champions must participate in next year's competition? Anoint Spurs the European Champions if they beat Chelsea?
If Liverpool ever make it back into the Champions League spots, their spot should go to Spurs because they started this stupid crap.
Maybe you lot can give sp*rs some tips on how to navigate the Europa League.
To be fair he was immense for them last night. Him and Cole carried Luiz and Bosingwa.
People talk about Hazard and Kagawa - but with Spurs out of C.L next season - Ferguson should try to get Modric and / or Bale
Any one of those 2 would lift or team A LOT
Any one of those 2 would lift or team A LOT
From the figures mentioned in the press, I think both of them cost a lot.
They already have enough experience as it is...
He is a really good defender, what's the problem here?
It may be that 4th placed team missing out isn't right and should be changed, but the champions should always be allowed to challenge the trophy. This is and should be an absolute in football.
Maybe you could stop gloating considering you have won feck all for seven years and will be a collosal bunch of bottling cnuts again next season.
Gary Cahill was excellent last night especially with playing with hamstring problems. Maybe if his name was Cahillio and Chelsea bought him from some midtable foreign club you would be giving him much more credit.
He was brilliant against Barcelona as well. I remember this one brilliant challenge on Messi which blocked his shot. I haven't seen him otherwise but I hope these two rounds of the CL aren't indicators of how much potential he has.
I dunno. You always have to consider that a team like Chelsea will have a top defender. If Cahill doesn't make it, they'll just go out and buy another defender until they get one that's brilliant.
That being the case, it's always nice if their best players are English. So I'm quite pleased for Cahill. Arsenal must be kicking themselves, though; they could have signed him last year but dicked around with wages and the asking price and instead let him go to Chelsea. And now he looks like he'll be immense.
Also, he seems to be hugely less of a cnut than Terry is.
Cahill's certainly in the top 3 "All-American" look in the Premier League, probably second behind Nathan Baker of Villa.
I dunno. You always have to consider that a team like Chelsea will have a top defender. If Cahill doesn't make it, they'll just go out and buy another defender until they get one that's brilliant.
That being the case, it's always nice if their best players are English. So I'm quite pleased for Cahill. Arsenal must be kicking themselves, though; they could have signed him last year but dicked around with wages and the asking price and instead let him go to Chelsea. And now he looks like he'll be immense.
Also, he seems to be hugely less of a cnut than Terry is.
Bale would probably cost £35-40 million - but he would be worth it as he could be our player for 10 seasons
surely we wouldn't want to do that.
He was brilliant
Defenders like him and Terry are fantastic in the trenches, when it's win headers and block shots and throw your body around and in the way, not many better than Terry when it comes to defending that area in a backs to the wall style
And Cahill is in that mould, get them higher up the pitch and you've got problems, but hey, that wasn't how Chelsea wanted to play was ti
Bottlers you say....hmmmm.
Yea but we have 3 very very good wingers who have plenty of years left.
What we need is a central mid.Isn't that obvious?
To snatch Bale and Modric away from Spurs will definitely cost a lot, even though they've unfortunately dropped out of the Champions League. I think if Spurs do sell both of those players, they'll make at least £50million. Probably a fair bit more than that, really.
I'd like us to sign Modric if possible.
Also, when Spurs don't 'bottle it' they still miss out