Could it happen in MotoGP?

Jumkie said:

There are also major cash rewards for the European tournament called "Champions League" (which is NOT a "league").


Povol, I mentioned the inherent problem with the European tournament in question, for example, no seeding, a blind draws (yes, plural, more than once during the tournament), playoffs a year after qualifing for the contest, the affect on teams who must compete in an actual formidable league as opposed to teams who compete against a bunch of scrub 2nd tier teams in their domestic series, etc.

Check this out. Two teams just played to decide who advances to the final:

Team A beat Team B in the first game 1-0.

Team B beat Team A in the second game 2-1.

The contest was not decided by penalty kicks.

Without any more info, which team do you think advanced to the final?

Click to expand...

If it's anything like motocross team b would advance. I tried watching soccer one day and when the time was up on the clock, for some reason they extended the game. Wtf is up with that

povol said:

If it's anything like motocross team b would advance. I tried watching soccer one day and when the time was up on the clock, for some reason they extended the game. Wtf is up with that

Click to expand...

You play a complete 90 minute game. Or two full 45 minute halves. Since the clock does not stop for game delays, such as injuries, the time lost to these delays is added on to the end of each half. Therefore a 90 minute game does not become a 80-85 minute game due to delays.

povol said:

If it's anything like motocross team b would advance. I tried watching soccer one day and when the time was up on the clock, for some reason they extended the game. Wtf is up with that

Click to expand...

Nop. Team A advanced. Why? Because arbitrarily the rule is away goals weigh more than home goals. What is interesting is that they keep an "aggregate" score. In this case it was "2-2". A seemingly "equal" 'aggregate'. Normally in an elimination round when teams remain tie the winner is decided by a "penalty kick shootout". For the semi-final legs of the "Champions League" they don't use the penalty kick shootout. Why? Because of what is called "the away goal rule". Tadah.

In the other leg there is an English vs Spanish team, it was 0-0 game 1. Likely the Spanish team will advance. Then there will be two Spanish teams in the final. Then those who believe the Spanish "league" is meaningful will declared, you see, two Spanish teams in the final. Except they won't tell you two teams in Spain (Barcelona & Real Madrid) are designed for this tournament, since their domestic "league" is of no consequence. None at all.



"Extended time"

The rationale for the seemingly additional time, called "injury time" (sometimes called "stoppage time") is so that play fulfills the total of 90 minutes. The referee has two watches on. When the play on the field is interrupted the ref stops one of the watches. This time is added back into the 90 min running clock we all get to see. The "extra time" is not really extra in terms of play on the field, but rather the notion is it's time put back to fulfill the 90 mins of play.

Of course there are problems with this despite notional, because only the ref is privy. However they do announce the number of minute to be played beyond the 90 running clock.

Fergie time is another name for it!

Jumkie said:

Nop. Team A advanced. Why? Because arbitrarily the rule is away goals weigh more than home goals. What is interesting is that they keep an "aggregate" score. In this case it was "2-2". A seemingly "equal" 'aggregate'. Normally in an elimination round when teams remain tie the winner is decided by a "penalty kick shootout". For the semi-final legs of the "Champions League" they don't use the penalty kick shootout. Why? Because of what is called "the away goal rule". Tadah.

In the other leg there is an English vs Spanish team, it was 0-0 game 1. Likely the Spanish team will advance. Then there will be two Spanish teams in the final. Then those who believe the Spanish "league" is meaningful will declared, you see, two Spanish teams in the final. Except they won't tell you two teams in Spain (Barcelona & Real Madrid) are designed for this tournament, since their domestic "league" is of no consequence. None at all.



"Extended time"

The rationale for the seemingly additional time, called "injury time" (sometimes called "stoppage time") is so that play fulfills the total of 90 minutes. The referee has two watches on. When the play on the field is interrupted the ref stops one of the watches. This time is added back into the 90 min running clock we all get to see. The "extra time" is not really extra in terms of play on the field, but rather the notion is it's time put back to fulfill the 90 mins of play.

Of course there are problems with this despite notional, because only the ref is privy. However they do announce the number of minute to be played beyond the 90 running clock.

Click to expand...

It is not all bad what you don’t understand or you are not used to. You just have to open your mind a little bit.
Also, I am at work right now and don’t have a lot of time to make sure I write the best possible paper. My writing skills and the dominance of the English language might not be up to your level or standards but I appreciate you not making too much fun of it.
Away goals
Yes, we in soccer believe that an away goal is a little bit more worth then scoring at home. This rule only comes into play if the aggregate of scored goals is the same at the end of a two game elimination. In any playoff (hockey, baseball, basketball, etc.) every team wants to be as high up in the ranking during regular season (why even have a regular season if it does not count for much anyway) so that they can have home field advantage. Why is that? Is it because statistically the team is more likely you win at home than away? So in average winning away is more difficult? In order to win you have to score so if you score away you achieved something a little bit more improbable or statistically more difficult than at home, right? So, why is it soo difficult to understand that weighing an away goal a little bit heavier than a home goal can make sense. On top of that it will motivate the visiting team to be a little bit more aggressive than it otherwise would.

Extended Time
Yaya, another thing Americans have a hard time understanding because they are simply not used to. The average actual playtime in soccer is between 60 and 70 minutes and that is what they are trying to achieve rather than playing actual 90 minutes. With as much theatrical falls, flops and other time wasting tactics used in soccer this makes sort of sense that you would want to bring it back to 65ish actual playing minutes just to be fair to the other team that wants those minutes to try and win. In the USA almost every sport the time gets stopped as soon as the game is interrupted for any reason: Hockey plays at least a full 60 but each player is really on the field for an average of 20 to 25 minutes, basketball 48 minutes, baseball there is no time limit but then again nobody really moves very much or very fast, then you have American football who also plays 60 minutes but sometimes you stop the time, sometimes you don’t, then the time starts again when the ball is ready to be played and then it start when the snap happen.
Different stroke for different folks but none are better than the other at least from my point of view.

League strength
Not sure where your hard-on for Spanish league and Spanish teams comes from and you are allowed your opinion of course. I still believe that those useless tournaments are meaningful, great to watch and do give you an indication which leagues are stronger and which ones are not so strong. If the British teams that work so hard and intense are so much better than the Spanish teams why is it that the British teams can’t get out of the initial stages and kick everybody out of the tournament? Early in the season they shouldn’t be a big different between those teams as to the physical shape of the players as neither of those nations played a whole lot more games than the other. And by the way, at this stage Manu played under 50 games a season whereas Barcelona and Madrid might be up there in the sixties not counting the games most of the players in these two teams played with their national teams.
Spain has La Liga that, which you correctly stated earlier, is won more often than not by Barcelona and Real Madrid with usually another team close such as Atletico Madrid, Sevilla, Valencia (who also might win the league once in a while). We have to remember that right now there is Barcelona who possible is (and definitely was not too long ago) one of the best teams that every played the game. That Barcelona would have won the Premier League just as easy and as many time as they did the Spanish league I think nobody that is neutral will dispute. So the difference between these two teams and the ‘second’ tier teams in La Liga is bigger right now than it ever was and yet these second tier teams who also play the Spanish Cup and the league (England is not the only country that has cups where every team plays or can play against every other team) still qualify higher than British teams and that with spending less money than a lot of the English teams in the last two years.
Champions League
I see your knowledge is not really up-to-date or you just don’t want to write all the details. There is a seeding, just not what you are used to. They classify teams based on their strength and put then in Groups. So the teams in the strongest group will not play against each other until a later round and the ‘smaller’ teams will play the big boys in their field which is an event in itself and brings some extra cash. Once the group stage(s) are over then the drawing starts for each round. What is wrong with that? Or just because you are the strongest team you think you need to play the weakest team all the way to the finals? How about tackling any team that ‘luck’ has made you play against? If you are the best you will be any team and then this also allows for sometimes smaller teams to play other smaller teams and get further than they would have ever dreamed off. Does the best team always win the tournament? No but one of the best for sure and it rarely is one from the Premier League with all its money, all its competitiveness, all it’s games (not that different from other leagues).

Again, I know Spain isn’t perfect, I know Italy isn’t perfect, or Germany and nobody disputes it what I dispute is your statement that England is and has the pinnacle of soccer when they have no results to show it.

Bien dicho!

baturro said:

Bien dicho!

Click to expand...

Because 'Loco' has based his entire premise on the results of two outliers in a tournament to then stretch it to conclude the domestic Spanish "league" is formidable?

I don't think Barcelona would win the prem quite as easily as you think cucoloco, it's not the same difficulty as la liga which is more technical football than is played in epl, to win the prem you must overcome teams that play a very negative game, defend very physically and take a lot of effort from you to even get a chance to score. And you have to do that 38 times while coping with injuries because Stoke City have kicked lumps out of you. Spanish teams do well in cl because it's a technical competition, premier league isn't, more a war of attrition than the beautiful game.

Daniboy said:

I don't think Barcelona would win the prem quite as easily as you think cucoloco, it's not the same difficulty as la liga which is more technical football than is played in epl, to win the prem you must overcome teams that play a very negative game, defend very physically and take a lot of effort from you to even get a chance to score. And you have to do that 38 times while coping with injuries because Stoke City have kicked lumps out of you. Spanish teams do well in cl because it's a technical competition, premier league isn't, more a war of attrition than the beautiful game.

Click to expand...

Daniboy, I might have exaggerated a little bit there although I believe they would have won a lot, unless you are telling me they are all at the level of Atletico Madrid which is not possible during 38 rounds. Yes, the Barcelona that used to score regularly 3, 4 goals to teams such as Real Madrid, Bayern, Munich or any team in front of them would have won the EPL multiple times the last 5 oor 6 years. I don't even like FC Barcelona too much. Stoke City and the likes would crumble after minute 60 after running out of gas like most teams did.

Again, I hope this is clear. I respect EPL a lot, I love watching it because of the competitiveness, because flopping is not as bad as in other countries (although that changed after the Bossman ruling) and because of the direct soccer they are playing. Nevertheless, it does not mean they are the pinnacle of the sport no matter how much Jumkie kicks and screams and discredits the tournaments that british teams have a hard time getting anywhere close to winning it despite of how much better they are then the rest of the world (based on Jumkie). How else do you want to compare leagues? Because if you tell me it is not possible to compare leagues then then the statement that EPL is the pinnacle stands on less legs than what I thought.

Jumkie said:

Because 'Loco' has based his entire premise on the results of two outliers in a tournament to then stretch it to conclude the domestic Spanish "league" is formidable?

Click to expand...

Well you have even less of a measuring stick as to why the EPL is supposed to be so much better. Are results not the main benchmark in Sports (I am aware that it is not applicable all the time) and are games where these teams/leagues compete at the same time not a good indicator? And, it is not just Barcelona and Real Madrid. You forget Sevilla that seems to own the Euro League year after year and if not win get very far without a British team being anywhere close. You forget the fact that in the last couple of years there were a huge amount of Spanish teams in the 1/8, 1/4, semi and finals in any tournament, by your standards ALL teams are then geared toward winning the tournament and don't give a .... about the league, right? Or is this only because they are not British?

The only way for La Liga teams to play agains EPL teams is either in the Champions league or Europa League. For the past few years, both competitions have been dominated by Spanish teams. Every team on the continent has a goal of being as high in their respective league to play in either the Champions or Europa, precisely to measure themselves agains other European leagues, and make a bunch of money... But this is the only competitive way they will meet.

I, like Cuco, love watching Futbol, and watch any league, even MLS wich is a bit of a retirement league. Each one is different and has it's own particular "style" of play. But at this moment there is one league that is sending teams to the Champions and Europa leagues and winning, La Liga.

That said, any team can win on the day.

Right now though the FINAL of the World for the Champions League is being played by 2 Spanish teams. Real Madrid against Atletico Madrid.

The Europa league final will be decided tomorrow. In the semis there is Liverpool (EPL) against Villareal (Spanish) and Shaktar Donesk (Ukraine) agains Sevilla (Spain)

Notice the common denominator?

cucoloco said:

It is not all bad what you don’t understand or you are not used to. You just have to open your mind a little bit.
...
Away goals
Yes, we in soccer believe that an away goal is a little bit more worth then scoring at home.
...
Extended Time
Yaya, another thing Americans have a hard time understanding because they are simply not used to.
...

League strength
Not sure where your hard-on for Spanish league and Spanish teams comes from and you are allowed your opinion of course. I still believe that those useless tournaments are meaningful, great to watch and do give you an indication which leagues are stronger and which ones are not so strong. If the British teams that work so hard and intense are so much better than the Spanish teams why is it that the British teams can’t get out of the initial stages and kick everybody out of the tournament? Early in the season they shouldn’t be a big different between those teams as to the physical shape of the players as neither of those nations played a whole lot more games than the other. And by the way, at this stage Manu played under 50 games a season whereas Barcelona and Madrid might be up there in the sixties not counting the games most of the players in these two teams played with their national teams.

Spain has La Liga that, which you correctly stated earlier, is won more often than not by Barcelona and Real Madrid with usually another team close such as Atletico Madrid, Sevilla, Valencia (who also might win the league once in a while). We have to remember that right now there is Barcelona who possible is (and definitely was not too long ago) one of the best teams that every played the game. That Barcelona would have won the Premier League just as easy and as many time as they did the Spanish league I think nobody that is neutral will dispute. So the difference between these two teams and the ‘second’ tier teams in La Liga is bigger right now than it ever was and yet these second tier teams who also play the Spanish Cup and the league (England is not the only country that has cups where every team plays or can play against every other team) still qualify higher than British teams and that with spending less money than a lot of the English teams in the last two years.

Champions League
I see your knowledge is not really up-to-date or you just don’t want to write all the details. There is a seeding, just not what you are used to. They classify teams based on their strength and put then in Groups. So the teams in the strongest group will not play against each other until a later round and the ‘smaller’ teams will play the big boys in their field which is an event in itself and brings some extra cash. Once the group stage(s) are over then the drawing starts for each round. What is wrong with that? Or just because you are the strongest team you think you need to play the weakest team all the way to the finals? How about tackling any team that ‘luck’ has made you play against? If you are the best you will be any team and then this also allows for sometimes smaller teams to play other smaller teams and get further than they would have ever dreamed off. Does the best team always win the tournament? No but one of the best for sure and it rarely is one from the Premier League with all its money, all its competitiveness, all it’s games (not that different from other leagues).

...

Click to expand...

Your English is excellent, better than my non-existent German, French, or Italian, which I assume you speak; your language skills are fine, it is your logic that may need a polish.

Away goals rule, it is an arbitrary tie-breaker, a rather absurd one, it has less merit than a coin toss. Of course we recognize that away vs home games offer an advantage, this is why seeding of teams allows for what we call "home field/court advantage", but we don't go counting points more valuable in one venue over another, that is stupid. The ‘advantage’ is in playing the game at home, not that a point is worth more at home (or away). Last I checked the dimension of the field are the same whereever one plays. I see the supposed "logic", but it is ridiculous given there is an 'actual' system for tie breakers in soccer, it is call extra time, then a penalty kick shoot out.

As far as the clock, I also think it’s a bit ........ given only one man in the universe knows the time, and that is the ref. When everyone is aware of the clock and how much time is left, strategy is more likely. It is not really a point of contention for me, as I already explained the rationale. But let us not pretend it is a great system for the "stoppage time" to be a mystery. It is as reasonable as the score card in boxing, nobody knows exactly how the thing is determined until the decision is known.

League strength and Champions "League". I think you glossed over my post that covered most of it. You seem to base your entire premise on the two outlier's success in the tournament to then stretch a very long bow to conclude the Spanish "league's" strength. So before you go on, read my post again:

Jumkie said:

Yes, the English Premier League is the pinnacle of the sport! In terms of a season long competition over 38 matches, the winner we can safely say is the world champion amongst the top flight of soccer. What you are mistaking for a "league" is a European TOURNAMENT, in short called "the Champions League" though North American also has a "champions league" too, did you know? I doubt you'd recognize it as equal to the European one, as much as I wouldn't equate the English Premier League to what is referred to as the "Spanish League." But it can be called whatever actually, however a champions "league" it is not, it is a tournament.

Top to bottom, the English Premier League (EPL) is by far the most competitive 'league' in the 'world'. The European tournament doesn't determine the parity amongst each individual leagues (though indirectly it does shed some light on the matter, though beyond the scope of this post). The Spanish "league" doesn't come close. You have two outliers, which we could call 'fantasy league teams'. Barcelona and Real Madrid exist because of the unique culture in Spain that allows and encourages lopsided competition for a group of teams which they call "league" play. Make no mistake, La Liga is a "league" in name only, no more representative as the Champions League 'tournament' being a "league" (which is not). What you have in the Spanish "league" are two teams with 17 fillers. The only team worthy of respect is Atletico Madrid. And even today Atletico is tied in points, which should give you an idea whether Barca or RM could survive an entire season in the EPL, given they'd face the equivalent of a Atleticoesk match 'every' match day. Not just twice in a whole season.

Barcelona and Real Madrid each get about 140 million Euro from TV revenue, the next closest Valencia and Atletico get about 45, the lower table teams get 18. EPL has a more level distribution because frankly people tune in to watch lower table teams and see a high level of competition. Here you hardly if at all see lower Spanish matches televised, why, because the competition is a joke, which makes the Spanish "league" a joke. It is not a league at all, it is a typical Spanish system that allows for two super teams to operate in a group of teams, appearance of competition that appears as a "league" wilst racking up hollow records for those two teams (and players) because they are super teams competing against 2nd division teams in terms of parity. A goal in the Spanish league does not equal a goal on the Premier League, much less a win! It's why regularly you see Barca & RM rack up multiple goals, often multiple hat tricks. José Mourinho (generally accepted as one of the great managers currently in the sport) last year's manager who led Chelsea to the EPL title, said when he managed Real Madrid he "knew going into games he would absolutely win" and added, this is a "bad thing" because it showed how lopsided the parity is in the Spanish "league"; and made the point in the EPL no match can be predicted. A last place team can beat a first place any given match. It is why the Spanish make such a big event out of the two times Barcelona and Real Madrid play each other, they even gave it a pompous name "El Clasico", because it is one of very few games in the entire Spanish season that the outcome is not predictable. Notice even in your post you couldn't manage to name more than 3 teams for the Spanish "league". Atletico is a special case, because they play with such determination but every time they play either RM or Barca they go in as heavy underdogs.

Italy and Germany are inferior leagues to the English Premier League, I doubt you can get anybody to dispute this, however, they also have outliers, which makes my point rather nicely. Bayer Munich and this year, Juventis are examples of these outliers. But past these top 2-3 teams the drop off to the rest of their respective leagues are a significant step down.

Click to expand...

cucoloco said:

Well you have even less of a measuring stick as to why the EPL is supposed to be so much better. Are results not the main benchmark in Sports (I am aware that it is not applicable all the time) and are games where these teams/leagues compete at the same time not a good indicator? And, it is not just Barcelona and Real Madrid. You forget Sevilla that seems to own the Euro League year after year and if not win get very far without a British team being anywhere close. You forget the fact that in the last couple of years there were a huge amount of Spanish teams in the 1/8, 1/4, semi and finals in any tournament, by your standards ALL teams are then geared toward winning the tournament and don't give a .... about the league, right? Or is this only because they are not British?

Click to expand...

Again, you've build your whole case on a tournament to then make some indirect stretch regarding the domestic league. No tournament, and you got nothing. That is the extent of your ability to reason? I should hope not.

As I said above, you have two super teams in the Spanish "league" because the culture and model of Spain allows for such an absurd duopoly (like monopoly, but of two). You have a situation in Spain where one player transfer fee ($120M) is twice as much as the whole team gets from TV rights in a year ($48M) and that is for a 3rd place team, its even more lopsided, 18M for the last place! That is to say, one player is worth more than the entire team’s TV revenue! You're going to build your entire premise on the success of Barcelona and Real Madrid and reason that because they are sooo great… therefore the "league" of the other 18 teams must be great too? Your languages are impressive, your logic, not so much. But that is the reality, the concentration of talent is so dense that you should be embarrassed to argue this somehow means the rest of the "league" is better for it. The top players in the world (and the Spanish "league") are all concentrated in two teams: Gareth Bale (the greatest transfer fee in history) Ronaldo, Benzema, Naymar, Messi, Suarez, James, etc. are all on just two teams! That is silly and laughable when you speak in terms of an entire LEAGUE. Which is where I think you seem to be getting lost. You keep pointing to these two team's success and making the conclusion, you see, the other 18 teams must be great too.

So take a step back, get familiar with the concept of an entire 'league', that is a 20 team unite as a whole, not just two outliers.

So why is the English Premier League the best LEAGUE?

1. Players. Beyond the fact that all the top players are concentrated in two teams (as I listed above) in the Spanish "league", past Atletico, the drop off of the other 17 clubs is a joke. The EPL fields the most internationals than any of the European leagues, and those players are evenly distributed amongst the 20 clubs, making the 'league' as a unit stronger in terms of competition on a match-by-match basis. When Barca and Real Madrid face Rayo Vallecano there is little to no chance you will see a reasonable competition, unlike any top 5 EPL team against low table teams such as a NewCastle or Sunderland, which is a war. You may tune in to watch Barca or RM destroy a lower table team, but that is just cruel and unusual punishment, entertaining? Perhaps. But in terms of highlighting player talent, what a joke. You get impressed when Messi and Suarez combine to score against scrubs? That is why people tune in to watch the EPL, because in any given match, even a last palace team you will see top internationals, where the outcome is unpredictable--a staple of sports.

2. Parity, depth. Again, what chance do the 17 clubs in the Spanish "League" have against thee two super teams? Little to none. And the scoring bears this out. It's even laughable, but Real Madrid and Barcelona have each scored over 100 goals, the next big club? Atletico with 60, and it gets quickly worse, a steep drop off to the next somewhere in the 40-50s (I don't know for sure the exact number because all the coverage on TV hardly talks about anybody else in "La Liga", there is a good reason, because they all suck). Honestly they should rename the league BarcaMadrid League. Motto: Atletico the step child. Do you sit around watching Spanish lower table teams? If so, why?

3. TV coverage. Do you know why the EPL is the most watched league in the world? Because soccer people can discern a superior overall product. Popularity in of itself is not proof, but unlike you, I'm not basing my entire argument on one single point, as you have with the "Champions League" (though I will get to that, despite already covering it in my above post). The EPL is watched and anticipated by most of the world, I think I heard over 200 countries. You will get a big audience to tune in for "el clasico" when Barca and Real Madrid play eachother, but that is about it. The other biggy is the Madrid derby, but if you want to compare derby's ...., where to start in the English Premier League?

4. Derbys. In Spain you got, oh let me see. Uhm. Oh yeah, one! Real Madrid vs Atletico Madrid. They may have others, but who tunes in to watch? Nobody! For the English Premier League? Where should I start? London Derbys (of which there are north/south etc), Manchesters, Midland Derbys, North Derbys, South Derbys, Central Derby’s? Jesus. Even the 2nd tier division derbys are wars. Spain? Oh yeah, they got one. Cucoloco did you happen to watch Chelsea vs Tottanham on Monday? How nobody was stretchered off or ejected is mind-boggling. In the EPL to name a few: Arsenal vs Tottenham, Manchester United vs Manchester City, West London, QPR, Fullham, Leicester vs Notitngham, Everton vs Liverpool, Liverpool vs Manchester United, Newcastle vs Sunderland, Southampton vs Bournemouth, etc. etc. Arrabi will know more.

5. Competition. I’ve already said the competition between clubs in the EPL is fierce. Every match is unpredictable. Because the top clubs have reasonable parity with the lower tables. That is to say, the lower cubs can match against these great clubs that enter such competitions as the Champions League. Do you see why you can conclude these lower EPL teams are better as a unit? Because even the lower clubs can hold their own with the top 6. Unlike the Spanish “league”. Sure the lower clubs fight it out amongst eachother in both leagues, but the lower table teams can NOT hold a candle to the top clubs in La Liga. As I said above, 100 goals compared to half that in scoring. There are at very least 6 clubs in the EPL that have a reasonable chance chasing the title. Last year Southampton was top halfway through the season. I won’t mention Leicester City this year because I think we will both agree that was extraordinary. Of the top 4 clubs, there are 2 others chasing. The mid-table teams often beat the top 6, certainly bother them enough to make the match unpredictable. In Spain? Its inevitable, 2 clubs, and recently Atletico with their outstanding manager Diego Simeone.

6. Scoring. The EPL doesn’t have as many lopsided scoring and goals, why? Because the competition are not a bunch of 2nd tier scrubs going against super teams. Again, as I said above, you base your entire premise on the success of BarcMadrid, each scoring over a hundred goals. Well no ...., who did they play against? That outlier doesn’t tell you something? You don’t have fat clumsy defenders letting goals go past like they’re giving out candy for it. Every goal is a contest of wits and wills, defenders will tackle you and not give two ..... who you are, unlike the light hand given to the superstars all concentrated in two teams like in Spain.

7. International tournaments. This seems to be your only argument. Barcelona and Real Madrid have 15 Champions League titles among them (one team alone has 10). You look at this and conclude…oh so their domestic series is great? How you got from there to there is an impressive convoluted calisthenic of “logic”. What do those titles mean by these two teams: it does mean that Barcelona and Real Madrid are super teams. What it does NOT mean is that the “league” they are from is any better as a consequence. In fact I argue the opposite, because their leagues are so weak Barca and Madrid can walk in unscathed into the Champ League. How you can get beyond this logic to make your erroneous conclusion is amusing. The EPL have had 5 various ‘teams’ win the title combined for 12 champions. The German side Bayern Munich won it 3 years ago, but you won’t conclude because they did therefore the Bundesliga is the top league in the world, right? The finalist last year was between Juventis (Italian) and Barca, but you won’t conclude the Italian league is the best in the world, right? That is to say, you base your entire argument on one single achievement. Talk about shallow.

Before I reply to your post, which has a lot if points with which I agree and never disputed, I would like for you to do something for me to make sure we are on the same page.

Can you please define for me what you mean when you say 'pinnacle of soccer/football"?

faaark me
Jumks is an expert on footie nar

.... soccer. Its money, money, pretend broken leg, money, money, money. Whistle. Pretend eye was removed even though the guy glanced your chest, money, money. Disabled competitor; oh the humanity, oh it's ok his leg is still attached. Watch him kick a goal. He must be god.

Barbedwirebikerr and #22

That is another reason I like EPL a little bit more than other leagues although since the Bosman ruling this started to happen in the EPL as well. In the EPL you used to have to break somebody's leg for them not to get up and keep plaing. But this is nor here or there in respect of this conversation.

I still love this game though.

lil red rocket pilot said:

faaark me
Jumks is an expert on footie nar

Click to expand...

Not at all. New to it actually, thanks to your paisas, Rog, Wills, and Arrabi who turned me on to their teams, now adopted by yours truly.

For most of my life I felt about soccer like Barber & 22 have expressed. There are many aspects I don't like, which I've moaned about to buddies that would listen, but I've started to appreciate it. Frankly I grew up a baseball guy. Not many here. But you know me, just like a good soapbox to debate ......... It's my form of entertainment, like old men golf, dumb I know, but the .... smirk I have when typing (though futile) is amusing to the audience of me. I'm what we call a blowhard on the interwebs. I admit.


Cucoloco, we debate here for the sheer hell of it. Obviously we've gone off on a tangent, but that's what we do, the forum does what it does. The English Premier 'League' is the pinnacle of soccer, that is, the top level, most prestigious competitive 'contest' of a 'group' of teams over a season in the world.

Jumkie said:

Not at all. New to it actually, thanks to your paisas, Rog, Wills, and Arrabi who turned me on to their teams, now adopted by yours truly.

For most of my life I felt about soccer like Barber & 22 have expressed. There are many aspects I don't like, which I've moaned about to buddies that would listen, but I've started to appreciate it. Frankly I grew up a baseball guy. Not many here. But you know me, just like a good soapbox to debate ......... It's my form of entertainment, like old men golf, dumb I know, but the .... smirk I have when typing (though futile) is amusing to the audience of me. I'm what we call a blowhard on the interwebs. I admit.


Cucoloco, we debate here for the sheer hell of it. Obviously we've gone off on a tangent, but that's what we do, the forum does what it does. The English Premier 'League' is the pinnacle of soccer, that is, the top level, most prestigious competitive 'contest' of a 'group' of teams over a season in the world.

Click to expand...

Trust me I love debating too ask my wife she hates it when I start debating and asking questions to put together my argument. I thought we were having a good debate until you run out of arguments . Let's leave it at "The English Premium League title is the most popular and most contested the top level, 'contest' of a 'group' of teams over a season in the world'"

So Jum, why no comment on how the Europa League (Europe's second tier international league) is also dominated by La Liga teams? You know, the teams in La Liga other than Madrid and Barcelona that you didn't think much of, but still win? Sevilla being the only team that has successfully defended the Europa Cup?