If we win the CL, it will overshadow City.
What would be the most worthy ‘double’ ?
- Thread starter dogwithabone
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
A gigantic if.
Yep
what a load of crap
Chelsea were more impressive in 04-05 than Liverpool were.
Did it do Liverpool world of good winning that CL final in 2005?
Worst thread of the year.
Probably because they can say “five times” whenever they are losing an argument.
We’re not going to win it this year obviously but as a top club we should have won the CL more times particularly under Fergie. I’d take CL triumph over the League this year. Anyway I hate this thread as we will probably get knocked out by Sevilla now!
There is already too many nominees for that award.
I would happy with the FA cup. I cannot even conjure up a dream of winning the champions league at this stage. Winning the champions league and a domestic cup or title would be the most worthy double.
Maybe but did they build on it they built on it? I would say no. So in the long run it didn't do them any good. I know they won FA cup year after an since then 1 League cup in 2011.
And probably rightly so, given that the English league is generally more competive than the continental leagues.
If there is a year to win the CL then it's this one. No side looks too strong...PSG loses against off-form Real, Barca can always struggle in the defense, bayern is meh.
Don’t think their fans care too much about it. In any case that CL win for them was arguably a culmination after winning the mini treble few years before. Long run it doesn’t matter, they wouldn’t have won much following regardless.
I don't see why it is obvious why we are not going to win it this season, talk about being negative just for the sake of things.
Could be worse, I could have said there was no way Liverpool could catch up with United this season.
A trophy is only a piece of metal. The prestige comes from being able to call yourselves the best. You can get a fortunate draw and win a Champions League without being the best but you cannot win the Premier League without being the best side in England over 38 games. A League and European Cup double is massive - nobody can doubt you then.
A European Cup on it's own is an incredible achievement but ask me if I'd prefer to win the league and lose in the CL final or win the CL and come second in the league and I'll chose the first one every time.
The CL would be more prestigious, especially outside of the UK. Look at Real Madrid, their domestic record is no better than Atlético over the past decade. It is to Barcelona worse to what Monaco's to PSG. Yet the narrative around them is that of prestige and brilliance, that's how powerful the CL is. However, as far as indicators of quality go, that's a different matter. Us winning would mean we are no closer to excellence than Liverpool were in 2005. That's not of course to say it would not be one of the greatest nights in our history.
This is not really true, City were the best team in England in 2012 but if Aguero doesn't score then United are the better team? Ref mistakes, injuries and luck plays its part and those things may not even out. Teams that aren't in Europe and have less games have a big advantage for example.
The prestige comes from being able to call yourselves the champions, no Chelsea fan gives a shit they weren't the best team in 2012 and no portuguese gives a shit we weren't the best team in the Euros for example.
The CL tops everything. Shouldn't even be a question. The only thing that comes close is a PL and FA Cup double, and even in that scenario I'd probably choose the CL by itself.
This. CL when it was champions only had a real ring to it,you were champions of the champions. I still think being king of your own league is the highest honour. Knock out competitions do have the luck of the draw factor to them.
Yes it is. La Liga 3x and Copa del Rey 2x vs Atlético's 1 and 1.
Liverpool finished 5th in the league. We're still 2nd and can still win the FA Cup and the previous year we won 2 cups whilst Liverpool had only won the league cup 4 years prior.
Yes. 100%.
City found a way to win the tightest of races right at the death and because of that, they were the best side. If Aguero hadn't scored that goal then United would have been the best side and won the league.
City weren't dominant in 2012 in the way they have been so far this season. The margins were incredibly tight then.
Not for me it doesn't. I appreciate others feel differently but that's the beauty of opinions.
I understand that European football is the elite, and if the Champions League was somehow a league format I would probably feel differently. But for me, there will always be something a bit hollow about calling yourself European Champions when another European side has bested you over a 38 game season.
Last edited:
My bad. My maths was off but what I meant to say is that their image on the world stage currently is slightly overrated considering how inferior they have been to Barcelona domestically. I was trying to point out what a massive difference success in the CL can make and how it can elevate the image of a club more than domestic titles. Another example of this would be AC Milan in the '00s. Another team that had very mediocre domestic success but thanks to their CL performances, some consider them to this day one of the best European sides since the turn of the century.
I was not comparing Liverpool and us directly. We are a much much better team than them in 2005. Even in 2005, we were better than them and our team back them was very average. What I was saying is that winning a cup competition is not an indicator of quality. We have not been playing like a top team this year and winning a cup competition is not going to suddenly change that.
United threw that 2012 title away. That season should never have gone down to the wire. United threw away 12 point lead.
I don't think it's as black and white as that. If a league season finishes with two teams separated by only 1 or 2 points or even closer, goal difference like it was in 2012, I think both those teams would be deserved winners. You cannot be the undisputed best when winning came down to a single game over 38. That is rarely the case however isn't it? I only remember 2008, 2010 and 2012 where it was that close and one of them went in our favor.
That's definitely true. But again, it's about expectations and status. Of course Portugal don't care about not being the best. Their history and status in world football means they are in no position to turn down their noses on an achievement like that. The same goes for Chelsea in 2012 and before you think I am being entitled as a United fan, I think we are the same when it comes to the CL. Our return of 3 puts us in a similar position where we need to improve that number regardless of how. But of course the ultimate aim for any club, especially one with the resources of ourselves, Real Madrid, Barcelona and co is to be the best. And for that to be reached, winning the CL in itself is not going to do it.
If there was a European superleague, then winning that league would be the most prestigious trophy in club football. However, since that league does not exist, the Champions League is the most prestigious trophy in football.
What is your point here?Could be worse, I could have said there was no way Liverpool could catch up with United this season.
Liverpool will not catch up with ourselves, that much is for sure, so not quite sure where you are going with this.
I don't think Portugal winning the European Cup is a relevant argument here anyway. To suggest Portugal weren't the best side at Euro 2016 is entirely subjective because there was no other concurrent, league format tournament involving Portugal and other European nations to prove that someone else was better.
In the case of the European Cup, a knockout tournament with a degree of luck involved, it is played during the same season as a league format tournament in each of the participating countries. In 2005 for example, you can objectively say that Liverpool were only the 5th best side in England, and as such - could not be the best side in Europe even though they won the Champions League.
The league should always be the first trophy on our list. CL is second. Everything else is just a shiny bonus.
That's a fair point. I was only responding to the post that suggested Portugal were not the best team in the tournament. I am not sure I have a strong opinion on that to be honest but one can argue that looking at Germany only a couple of years before and them right now, it is easy to see why some would argue they are clearly the best team in the continent and if it was not for the luck of draw, they might have gone on to win it. Yes there is nothing like a league a campaign to end the debate but I am not sure many would be betting on Portugal finishing ahead of Germany in a mini league competition.
CL = PL
FA Cup > League Cup
So the latter.
FA Cup > League Cup
So the latter.
City are probably odds on to win both LC and PL, United are probably between 25/1 and 30/1 to win FA and CL.
Utd are 50/1 to win both cups.(16/1 Cl and 2/1 Fa Cup.
City are 6/1 to win their remaining 3 comps and basically 1/2 to win LC and PL title.
Utd are 50/1 to win both cups.(16/1 Cl and 2/1 Fa Cup.
City are 6/1 to win their remaining 3 comps and basically 1/2 to win LC and PL title.
Last edited:
Winning CL but not domestic league is a bit funny.
It's like becoming the Best Team in Europe, but not the best team in England.
Conflicting and confusing.
But I guess that's how CL is, semi-cup kind of tournament, knock-out style.
It's like becoming the Best Team in Europe, but not the best team in England.
Conflicting and confusing.
But I guess that's how CL is, semi-cup kind of tournament, knock-out style.
Agree.
To say we can’t win it is ridiculous. We’ve got a good chance as any if we can get into last eight. It’s a straightforward cup knockout and we’ve got a manager who has plotted his way to winning it twice before with inferior teams to the one he’s currently managing.
Came here to make this joke.
With that done, my serious take on this is the CL + FA Cup. I'd probably take the CL alone over the PL + LC.
Pretty much.
Seriously? No one cares! They won the CL. Full stop.
Obviously CL and FA Cup, would be a greater accomplishment. Even if it was only the CL, a cup never won twice in succession until last year by RM. Having to beat the best teams in Europe out weighs any domestic cup, internationally winning the CL gets more recognition than any other cup. As we know in most countries the league is decided by 2 or 3 at max teams, in the PL any of the top 6 could win it but besides for the year that Leicester won it, history has shown of the top 6 only 3 of the teams are real contenders to win it.
feck you Moby, always ruining the fun, first with your crappy music and now with no pics of her, ugh, i'm writing to my lawyer.
Wouldn't it be lovely to be able to sing Champions of Europe, Champions of the World again?