- This topic has 36 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
seriously I don’t know who Alan Carr is, now I know of Jimmy Carr and he’s funny.
Oh, he’s just a camp English comedian who says things like "end of."
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
I did a google search on this Alan Carr and found this…
He looks more like one of your lot in that pic!
I did a google search on this Alan Carr and found this…
He looks more like one of your lot in that pic!
LOL … yes, apparently he’s saying :
” Yeh, and speaking of Rangers’ Champions’ League aspirations…
well, what can I say other than … END OF !”
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
It still doesn’t take away the fact that he looks like one of your lot
Yep, the Champions league campaign is over for another season, it’s a pity we couldn’t get any help from other teams in the group to help us get through like Celtic did, we picked the wrong time to play poorly and paid the price, ah well Celtic will be out soon too but at least we still have the dreaded Uefa cup to play in though
Serious question to Jim and Himself (that’s two different people, not Jim and Jim again
)In all honesty, and if you’re honest yourself, it’s likely that Celtic will be knocked out in the next round…. and if Rangers had got to the last 16, then the same would have happened to them. I know what I’ve just said is not cast in stone, but I would say 8 or possibly 9 times out of 10 both Rangers or Celtic would fail at the next hurdle.
Given the above is accurate, Jim, are you happy to be in the UEFA Cup, with a great chance of getting quite far, than being in the next round of the Champions League, where you would probably have fell at the next hurdle?
Same question to Himself really. No doubt you will be delighted to be in the Champions League last 16 – but if you do get beat in the next round and Rangers progress quite far in the UEFA Cup, would you have preferred to be in the same situation as them, progressing in a competition you have a chance of winning?
I dare say neither Celtic or Rangers need the money, but I believe the cash you get for getting to the CL last 16 is massive, whereas you get peanuts in the UEFA Cup. But what do you want, silverware or cash?
Thanks for answering (if you do answer) in advance, and good luck to both Celtic and Rangers in their next European games.
Mike
Mikky this may come as a surprise but I’m a realist and for me only champions of their country should be allowed into the champions league, therefor as we didn’t win the league last season we really shouldn’t be there anyway, reaching the last 16 in the champions league is the aim of Rangers and Celtic and anything else is a bonus, we both play in a league that is not as weak as some may think but you do tend to hit a lull in form as we see too much of the same faces every week, Jorg Albertz said a few years ago that he got bored meeting the same teams week in week out and it was only a matter of time before they got a result against you, we should meet each other no more than twice in a season like every other country. There is virtually no money up here in the game and if both Rangers and Celtic were somehow miraculously allowed into the Premiership only then would you see progress in Europe as there would be more money available (especially from TV) and top players would want to play for both sides because of the league they were playing in and both Rangers and Celtic would have better teams and after a few of years it’s possible they could be up there challenging for the title, there are so many teams that are also rans in the Premiership and not much changes every year, yet no-one seems to speak about this.
About the last 16? YES I would bet that Rangers and Celtic would fail to progress even though we were very unlucky not to progress a a few seasons back when Villarreal scored that "goal" – you know the offside one, that phase 2 offside garbage that to my eye has never ever happened again in any country.
It isn’t impossible but you’d have to draw the "weakest" team left in the last 16 to have a chance, at the time people said Villarreal were the weakest when we drew them.
On the Uefa cup entry – I’m not happy we dropped out of the champions league and into the Uefa cup as it’s a stupid thing to begin with, how do the teams in there right now feel when champions league contenders join in for the last 32? it’s madness, I’d love to go back to WINNERS only in the champions league and no dropping into "lesser" cups when beaten.
Celtic have one the best, if not the best home record of any team in Europe over the last few years, so they need fear no one at home, and we won’t. Our away record needs some working on to say the last, and hopefully we can rectify that situation.
I recall the Uefa Cup a few years ago, when Celtic, after having drawn Blackburn, that they had no chance of progressing against Graeme Souness’s premiership team. Result – 3-0 agg to Celtic. Then Liverpool: that’s it the English press arrogantly proclaimed, "you’ve no chance Bhoys". Hmm… 3-1 agg to Celtic.
You get my drift… underestimate Celtic at your peril.
As for getting help from other teams to progress in the CL. Well, maybe I’m missing the point here, but do not the rules of the competition state that two of the four teams in the group stages must accrue more points than the other two from their six matches in order to progress to the knockout phase? Oh, that’s right, Celtic finished second with nine points; two more than Shakhtar Donetsk and let’s not forget, two more than Rangers from another group, who failed to acheive the requisite number of points – even though they only required one point from their final home match but blew it ( sorry, bottled it) big time.
Like Jim, I too am a realist. Both Celtic and Rangers do not have the vast amounts of funds available to spend on players that the so callled "big teams" have at their disposal – therefore, they are put at an immediate disadvantage. However, consider the potential if they were afforded that luxury. There would be more than just Barcelona, Real Madrid and Manchester United quaking in their boots, that’s for sure.
Bring on the Chelsea, I say. Bring ’em on !
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
Great replies guys, thank you very much.
I totally agree that if Ranger and Celtic were in the Premiership they would make dramatic progress within a few years. Such teams, with 60,000 fans behind them, can’t really fail to do well. Yes, I know Newcastle have 50,000 fans but haven’t won anything, but I think that’s generally down to bad management at the top.
Clubs like Rangers and Celtic (and Newcastle) will always attract quality players if playing in the Premiership because of their standing and their support. It seems impossible to work out a way to get the Scottish teams in our Premiership, but I would love it if could ever happen.
I also agree with Himself, underestimate Celtic at your peril – but that away form has to improve if they are to progress. The away goal is worth it’s weight in gold now we are at the last 16, but Celtic just can’t seem to score away from home lately. Yes they have an excellent home record, but they do concede the odd goal or two. I think they have got a massive task to progress, but I would love them too as I love watching them (and Rangers) at home on European nights.
Good luck to you both.
Mike
No probs Mikky, I could talk about football all day but sometimes it’s difficult to put this into words.
Rangers didn’t bottle anything as Himself puts it, we lost a few of our more pacier players on the night that would’ve probably helped against Lyon, but lets not forget who we were up against in this group Barcelona (no introduction needed), Lyon (French champions and have dominated French football for years), Stuttgart (German champions, who admittedly looked average and it was our defeat to them that knocked us out), we were 4th seeds in our group yet we had a decent go at it, we were losing 0-1 to Lyon with 10 mins remaining and we hit the bar from around 4 yards out, had that gone in I’m sure the game would’ve died and finished 1-1 and we’d have gone through, it’s all ifs and buts, that’s football
I’ll be there on Saturday as usual and the champions league game will be forgotten about.
I totally agree Jim.
You had a mammouth task to escape out of that group but you nearly did it. Beating Stuttgart, holding Barcelona, thrashing Lyon on their home turf shows you can compete at this level. Yes all the reverse fixtures were lost, but that shouldn’t take anything away from Rangers performance overall. If only people could score from 4 yards out
. But like you say, it’s all ifs and buts.I think you saying that you will be there on Saturday is sort of the point I was trying to make – it doesn’t matter whether it’s Barcelona or Gretna, there will still be 60,000 fans cheering Rangers on at Ibrox.
Last season Middlesbrough (my team if you didn’t already know) played a UEFA Cup game in front of 10,000 fans. It took us over 100 years to get into that competition, and when we did the fans stayed away. No surprise to see a full house in the semi-final and 40,000 travel over to Eindhoven for the final though – I think you get my point.
No matter who Rangers play in their next UEFA Cup game, and despite being in the competition being labelled as ‘a poor consollation’, you can bet your bottom dollar you will have a full house. The same can be said of Celtic. I would much rather watch a Celtic or Rangers game on tv if they are playing at home, than someone like Chelsea. As much as it’s good to see world class players, nothing beats a fantastic atmosphere in my opinion.
I think I’m wittering on now
Mike
MikkyMo wrote:
"I think you saying that you will be there on Saturday is sort of the point I was trying to make – it doesn’t matter whether it’s Barcelona or Gretna, there will still be 60,000 fans cheering Rangers on at Ibrox."
———————-Since when did Rangers’ capacity rise by 9,000 Mikky ? Only one team in Glasgow (nay Scotland) who play in front of 60,000 home fans, and it sure aint Rangers.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
MikkyMo wrote:
"I think you saying that you will be there on Saturday is sort of the point I was trying to make – it doesn’t matter whether it’s Barcelona or Gretna, there will still be 60,000 fans cheering Rangers on at Ibrox."
———————-Since when did Rangers’ capacity rise by 9,000 Mikky ? Only one team in Glasgow (nay Scotland) who play in front of 60,000 home fans, and it sure aint Rangers.
It was just a guess, my apologies.
Mike
I think the problem with the Scottish clubs moving to the English Premier League is that UEFA may well then question why England and Scotland remain as seperate national teams and there may be a question around the number of seperate votes they have. There are people in UEFA and FIFA who don’t like the fact that one nation (Britain) has four seperate national sides.
You’re probably correct Aranalde but there are Welsh teams playing in England and have been for years.
It won’t happen anyway there are too many complications, I’d prefer it to stay as it is to be honest but I really wish there was more TV coverage and money in the game in Scotland.
Mikky, even though you had your ground capacity figures wrong I still knew what you meant
Ibrox Stadium holds 51,082 and is one of only 12 grounds throughout Europe that is rated five star status, Celtic park which holds 60,335 doesn’t have five star status.
At the recent Celtic v Falkirk game only around 30,000 turned up, even though in some newspapers it was reported as being nearer the 55,000 mark
The current rules are simple. Any team can play in any league they choose too if invited. However, a team cannot not represent a league in European competition outside of their geographical location.
Therefore, should Celtic and Rangers finish in the top four of the English Premiership they would be barred from the Champions League …likewise and technically this also applies to Cardiff, Swansea and Wrexham. However, in the case of the Welsh clubs these rules were introduced long after all three were firmly established playing in England and it is probable they would be granted an exemption, but not guaranteed.
There you go. That’s what I like about this forum – there’s always someone who knows.
There are people in UEFA and FIFA who don’t like the fact that one nation (Britain) has four seperate national sides.
I can quite understand that; it’s long struck me as a most strange situation. Anyone know how and why this decision was made, presumably way-back-whenever?
Perhaps the 35 principalities and duchies that became subsumed into the German Empire in the 1870s and the 4 kingdoms of Bavaria, Prussia, Saxony and Wurttemburg added to form the Weimar Republic in 1919 feel, with some justification, aggrieved that they can’t field ‘international’ footie teams.
Alsace-Lorraine v Mecklenburg-Schwerin anyone
. But like you say, it’s all ifs and buts.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.