We get enough attack vs defence games in domestic football across a 9 month season, don’t want it throughout the summer as well. Iceland were at it vs Argentina the other day and then you had Tunisia who started wasting time from about 40 mins onwards. Pathetic.
32 teams is plenty. The euros should go back to being 16 teams as Euro 2016 was the worst of all the tournaments I’ve seen.
Strange that someone sees "luck" the same as "fair".
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not sure i really see what you mean by that?
a non seeded draw would be the only real fair way to do it and leave it to the luck of the draw.
comment by Willmcq (U9152)
posted 1 minute ago
Strange that someone sees "luck" the same as "fair".
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not sure i really see what you mean by that?
a non seeded draw would be the only real fair way to do it and leave it to the luck of the draw.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Luck isn't fair.
I think it is more than fair that a team and nation is judged on its recent performances and judged on that.
One team having to play Real Madrid, Barcelona, Man City, Juventus and Bayern to get to a final while another plays Crusaders, HJK, Drita, Videoton and Flora Tallinn to get to the same stage doesn't scream out fair to me.
"Luck of the draw" is just something crap teams want to get an undeserved run to the latter stages of a competition.
Totally disagree with the post. Tunisia got there through winning. They are rated as the best African team. Even the best/worst teams/players can surprise, either way.
Just imagine, the you could predict, no guarantee that team X will beat team Y and Z will score a hat trick. Who would want to watch it? Why? They know the score already. As our manager has said, time and again, especially in the PL, any team can win, and that's the beauty of the game.
comment by JimmyTheRed (U1682)
posted 1 minute ago
Totally disagree with the post. Tunisia got there through winning. They are rated as the best African team. Even the best/worst teams/players can surprise, either way.
Just imagine, the you could predict, no guarantee that team X will beat team Y and Z will score a hat trick. Who would want to watch it? Why? They know the score already. As our manager has said, time and again, especially in the PL, any team can win, and that's the beauty of the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But if that team is using dirty tactics to "win" (they lost by the way) then it's not exactly going to attract spectators is it.
Football is entertainment, and the World Cup is a brilliant way of attracting new fans (customers) to the game. Tunisia's play last night is one of the reasons people don't bother watching football.
Why are you under the impression that every side that isn't at this years WC, but would be at the next 48 team one, play the exact same way as Tunisia?
32 teams is enough imo although I can understand why they'd want to expand it, especially since several prominent nations fail to qualify. It's all about the money.
The Euro's definitely should go back to 16 teams but again, money talks.
comment by John Achterberg's 175 Hour Week (U3979)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JimmyTheRed (U1682)
posted 1 minute ago
Totally disagree with the post. Tunisia got there through winning. They are rated as the best African team. Even the best/worst teams/players can surprise, either way.
Just imagine, the you could predict, no guarantee that team X will beat team Y and Z will score a hat trick. Who would want to watch it? Why? They know the score already. As our manager has said, time and again, especially in the PL, any team can win, and that's the beauty of the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But if that team is using dirty tactics to "win" (they lost by the way) then it's not exactly going to attract spectators is it.
Football is entertainment, and the World Cup is a brilliant way of attracting new fans (customers) to the game. Tunisia's play last night is one of the reasons people don't bother watching football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dirty tactics is the game now. We lost the CL to dirty tactics (and Karius).
comment by Mike (U1170)
posted 9 minutes ago
Why are you under the impression that every side that isn't at this years WC, but would be at the next 48 team one, play the exact same way as Tunisia?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because you get it with a lot of the weaker teams. I'm not, let's clear this up right now, saying any weak team plays the way Tunisia did, and in an ideal world teams that do play the way Tunisia did would get punished harshly to stop that kind of anti-football.
But surely you must agree that extending the number of teams isn't going to increase the number of high quality teams, but only increase the number of low quality teams therefore leading to more of these sorts of tactics.
Also, I accept the point that some of the strong teams result to this sort of playacting, but actual this is down to likelihood of it happening rather than isolated teams.
comment by John Achterberg's 175 Hour Week (U3979)
posted 2 hours, 31 minutes ago
No I find the qualifiers boring as they're qualifiers. I don't regard others as dross as I'm not an arrogant ass hole but instead understand there are smaller, less developed countries that need some help to take their game to the next level, to generate interest within their country and to improve competition within it. In some cases even to make football the top sport in their country.
I also don't agree with seeding, helping the best teams have an easier time of it. Instead it should be fair, luck of the draw and perhaps we'd have other countries standing a chance.
________________________________
Get off the high horse there TOOR. Who would you prefer see at a world cup, Italy and the Netherlands or Tunisia and Panama?
A world showcase of football and we have teams like Tunisia who are so crap they have to cheat to scrape a draw. Still weren't even good enough to scrape a draw.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your point is a stupid one as we would have seen Italy and the Netherlands with the increased number of teams in it, along with the two deserving qualifying teams you mentioned.
Luck isn't fair.
I think it is more than fair that a team and nation is judged on its recent performances and judged on that.
One team having to play Real Madrid, Barcelona, Man City, Juventus and Bayern to get to a final while another plays Crusaders, HJK, Drita, Videoton and Flora Tallinn to get to the same stage doesn't scream out fair to me.
"Luck of the draw" is just something crap teams want to get an undeserved run to the latter stages of a competition.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ok i partially agree with that. However if you are good enough to win it you will still win it even though the progress to the final would in your scenario be a far greater one. What would appear to be at the root of FIFA'S case for the expansion is to allow more countries to gain greater exposure at the worlds stage and possibly increase their level of ability and generate more money to their local FA through increased TV funds. However i don't seem to remember too much uproar when UEFA used the extra TV issue to let non league winners into the CL which by its very name is a competition clubs like Arsenal and Spurs should not be anywhere near currently.
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 hour, 4 minutes ago
comment by Willmcq (U9152)
posted 1 minute ago
Strange that someone sees "luck" the same as "fair".
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not sure i really see what you mean by that?
a non seeded draw would be the only real fair way to do it and leave it to the luck of the draw.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Luck isn't fair.
I think it is more than fair that a team and nation is judged on its recent performances and judged on that.
One team having to play Real Madrid, Barcelona, Man City, Juventus and Bayern to get to a final while another plays Crusaders, HJK, Drita, Videoton and Flora Tallinn to get to the same stage doesn't scream out fair to me.
"Luck of the draw" is just something crap teams want to get an undeserved run to the latter stages of a competition.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well its not exactly luck, every team has the potential to draw the other, instead of the weaker teams having to play the better ones from the start. It puts the teams already at a disadvantage with an even greater disadvantage.
Could not agree more TOOR.
I'm biased of course cause a 48 team WC means we (Ireland) have a better chance of qualifying, but this notion of "bad tactics" is ridiculous, it's football and teams use the tactics that will best help them win (in most cases).
Knee to be fair i would imagine knee a fair few clubs do it, i would imagine even some of the better clubs in the EPL don't go out and attack clubs like Barca of a few years ago knowing full well they would get an A$$ whipping. Just complete and utter nonsense it is called tactics and some of the best managers in the game have deployed the park the bus tactic when needed. However i do concede as a viewer sometimes it is not exactly easy on the eye
However if you are good enough to win it you will still win it
==========
That rings very true for seeded competitions. If you are good enough to get to the final you will. That doesn't ring true all the time with non-seeded competitions. They are more if you get lucky you may get to the final.
Seedings didn't harm Liverpool in the CL. Nor Costa Rica in 2014 WC.
========
However i don't seem to remember too much uproar when UEFA used the extra TV issue to let non league winners into the CL which by its very name is a competition clubs like Arsenal and Spurs should not be anywhere near currently.
=======
Bit of a myth there. The Champions League is a competition to find the champions of Europe rather than a competition for champions.
The increase of teams was to counter the increasing gaps of quality and the growing UEFA members.
======
Well its not exactly luck
=======
It is though.
Teams are at a disadvantage through their own performances (at CL level, fellow clubs as well). Thats fair, imo.
The last 16 of a tournament should be the best 16. Not teams who have benefited from the luck of the draw imo. Seeding gives us the best chance to achieve this most regularly - and it isn't always the seeds who prove to be the best.
comment by Willmcq (U9152)
posted 4 minutes ago
Knee to be fair i would imagine knee a fair few clubs do it, i would imagine even some of the better clubs in the EPL don't go out and attack clubs like Barca of a few years ago knowing full well they would get an A$$ whipping. Just complete and utter nonsense it is called tactics and some of the best managers in the game have deployed the park the bus tactic when needed. However i do concede as a viewer sometimes it is not exactly easy on the eye
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I get that but it's part of the game, like I would happily watch Ireland in a WC play a low block and hit and hope v any top side, yeah wouldn't be the best game to watch but it might just get us the result we need.
But I wouldn't expect Liverpool to do the same as the club have the resources to play in a more progressive manner.
And I have to say I really enjoyed Iceland's performance v Argentina, they got the goal they needed and defended really well v a far (on paper) superior team, even that midgit couldn't break them down, was good to watch especially some of the last ditch stuff.
The notion that the WC should be this exhibition of top class football is wrong, and also the idea that there is only one type of football a fan can enjoy is also wrong.
Bit of a myth there. The Champions League is a competition to find the champions of Europe rather than a competition for champions.
The increase of teams was to counter the increasing gaps of quality and the growing UEFA members.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I Fail to see what part of it is a myth, i wait for you to show me the UEFA statement advising the above? more likely that is just your take on it. The increased numbers was due to the pressure from the top leagues threatening to move to a Super League everytime UEFA tried to help increase the smaller leagues chances via things like Wage Caps and locally produced player Quotas.
However if you are good enough to win it you will still win it rings equally true in both seeded and non seeded competitions.
And I have to say I really enjoyed Iceland's performance v Argentina, they got the goal they needed and defended really well v a far (on paper) superior team, even that midgit couldn't break them down, was good to watch especially some of the last ditch stuff.
The notion that the WC should be this exhibition of top class football is wrong, and also the idea that there is only one type of football a fan can enjoy is also wrong.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
i agree completely Knee.
And how many games v big nations in the WC have actually let you down over the years when you think about them, happens allot, something to be said for a small nation holidng off a large one through sheer will and determination.
Like Iceland v England at the euro's for example
It's annoying seeing teams like that in the tournament when teams like Italy, Holland and even the other British sides would offer a lot more.
comment by Shaun M - You're only here, to watch Saiz... (U9955)
posted 3 minutes ago
It's annoying seeing teams like that in the tournament when teams like Italy, Holland and even the other British sides would offer a lot more.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah. Dunno why we don't just make the World Cup open to European teams.
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 hour, 10 minutes ago
However if you are good enough to win it you will still win it
==========
That rings very true for seeded competitions. If you are good enough to get to the final you will. That doesn't ring true all the time with non-seeded competitions. They are more if you get lucky you may get to the final.
Seedings didn't harm Liverpool in the CL. Nor Costa Rica in 2014 WC.
========
However i don't seem to remember too much uproar when UEFA used the extra TV issue to let non league winners into the CL which by its very name is a competition clubs like Arsenal and Spurs should not be anywhere near currently.
=======
Bit of a myth there. The Champions League is a competition to find the champions of Europe rather than a competition for champions.
The increase of teams was to counter the increasing gaps of quality and the growing UEFA members.
======
Well its not exactly luck
=======
It is though.
Teams are at a disadvantage through their own performances (at CL level, fellow clubs as well). Thats fair, imo.
The last 16 of a tournament should be the best 16. Not teams who have benefited from the luck of the draw imo. Seeding gives us the best chance to achieve this most regularly - and it isn't always the seeds who prove to be the best.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Their own performance is reduced as they have less of a chance due to not being able to compete with bigger and richer clubs. Not being put at a greater disadvantage would give them a better chance of reducing the gap and increasing their performance.
Sign in if you want to comment
48 Team World Cup
Page 3 of 5
posted on 19/6/18
We get enough attack vs defence games in domestic football across a 9 month season, don’t want it throughout the summer as well. Iceland were at it vs Argentina the other day and then you had Tunisia who started wasting time from about 40 mins onwards. Pathetic.
32 teams is plenty. The euros should go back to being 16 teams as Euro 2016 was the worst of all the tournaments I’ve seen.
posted on 19/6/18
Strange that someone sees "luck" the same as "fair".
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not sure i really see what you mean by that?
a non seeded draw would be the only real fair way to do it and leave it to the luck of the draw.
posted on 19/6/18
comment by Willmcq (U9152)
posted 1 minute ago
Strange that someone sees "luck" the same as "fair".
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not sure i really see what you mean by that?
a non seeded draw would be the only real fair way to do it and leave it to the luck of the draw.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Luck isn't fair.
I think it is more than fair that a team and nation is judged on its recent performances and judged on that.
One team having to play Real Madrid, Barcelona, Man City, Juventus and Bayern to get to a final while another plays Crusaders, HJK, Drita, Videoton and Flora Tallinn to get to the same stage doesn't scream out fair to me.
"Luck of the draw" is just something crap teams want to get an undeserved run to the latter stages of a competition.
posted on 19/6/18
Totally disagree with the post. Tunisia got there through winning. They are rated as the best African team. Even the best/worst teams/players can surprise, either way.
Just imagine, the you could predict, no guarantee that team X will beat team Y and Z will score a hat trick. Who would want to watch it? Why? They know the score already. As our manager has said, time and again, especially in the PL, any team can win, and that's the beauty of the game.
posted on 19/6/18
comment by JimmyTheRed (U1682)
posted 1 minute ago
Totally disagree with the post. Tunisia got there through winning. They are rated as the best African team. Even the best/worst teams/players can surprise, either way.
Just imagine, the you could predict, no guarantee that team X will beat team Y and Z will score a hat trick. Who would want to watch it? Why? They know the score already. As our manager has said, time and again, especially in the PL, any team can win, and that's the beauty of the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But if that team is using dirty tactics to "win" (they lost by the way) then it's not exactly going to attract spectators is it.
Football is entertainment, and the World Cup is a brilliant way of attracting new fans (customers) to the game. Tunisia's play last night is one of the reasons people don't bother watching football.
posted on 19/6/18
Why are you under the impression that every side that isn't at this years WC, but would be at the next 48 team one, play the exact same way as Tunisia?
posted on 19/6/18
32 teams is enough imo although I can understand why they'd want to expand it, especially since several prominent nations fail to qualify. It's all about the money.
The Euro's definitely should go back to 16 teams but again, money talks.
posted on 19/6/18
comment by John Achterberg's 175 Hour Week (U3979)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JimmyTheRed (U1682)
posted 1 minute ago
Totally disagree with the post. Tunisia got there through winning. They are rated as the best African team. Even the best/worst teams/players can surprise, either way.
Just imagine, the you could predict, no guarantee that team X will beat team Y and Z will score a hat trick. Who would want to watch it? Why? They know the score already. As our manager has said, time and again, especially in the PL, any team can win, and that's the beauty of the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But if that team is using dirty tactics to "win" (they lost by the way) then it's not exactly going to attract spectators is it.
Football is entertainment, and the World Cup is a brilliant way of attracting new fans (customers) to the game. Tunisia's play last night is one of the reasons people don't bother watching football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dirty tactics is the game now. We lost the CL to dirty tactics (and Karius).
posted on 19/6/18
comment by Mike (U1170)
posted 9 minutes ago
Why are you under the impression that every side that isn't at this years WC, but would be at the next 48 team one, play the exact same way as Tunisia?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because you get it with a lot of the weaker teams. I'm not, let's clear this up right now, saying any weak team plays the way Tunisia did, and in an ideal world teams that do play the way Tunisia did would get punished harshly to stop that kind of anti-football.
But surely you must agree that extending the number of teams isn't going to increase the number of high quality teams, but only increase the number of low quality teams therefore leading to more of these sorts of tactics.
Also, I accept the point that some of the strong teams result to this sort of playacting, but actual this is down to likelihood of it happening rather than isolated teams.
posted on 19/6/18
comment by John Achterberg's 175 Hour Week (U3979)
posted 2 hours, 31 minutes ago
No I find the qualifiers boring as they're qualifiers. I don't regard others as dross as I'm not an arrogant ass hole but instead understand there are smaller, less developed countries that need some help to take their game to the next level, to generate interest within their country and to improve competition within it. In some cases even to make football the top sport in their country.
I also don't agree with seeding, helping the best teams have an easier time of it. Instead it should be fair, luck of the draw and perhaps we'd have other countries standing a chance.
________________________________
Get off the high horse there TOOR. Who would you prefer see at a world cup, Italy and the Netherlands or Tunisia and Panama?
A world showcase of football and we have teams like Tunisia who are so crap they have to cheat to scrape a draw. Still weren't even good enough to scrape a draw.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your point is a stupid one as we would have seen Italy and the Netherlands with the increased number of teams in it, along with the two deserving qualifying teams you mentioned.
posted on 19/6/18
Luck isn't fair.
I think it is more than fair that a team and nation is judged on its recent performances and judged on that.
One team having to play Real Madrid, Barcelona, Man City, Juventus and Bayern to get to a final while another plays Crusaders, HJK, Drita, Videoton and Flora Tallinn to get to the same stage doesn't scream out fair to me.
"Luck of the draw" is just something crap teams want to get an undeserved run to the latter stages of a competition.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ok i partially agree with that. However if you are good enough to win it you will still win it even though the progress to the final would in your scenario be a far greater one. What would appear to be at the root of FIFA'S case for the expansion is to allow more countries to gain greater exposure at the worlds stage and possibly increase their level of ability and generate more money to their local FA through increased TV funds. However i don't seem to remember too much uproar when UEFA used the extra TV issue to let non league winners into the CL which by its very name is a competition clubs like Arsenal and Spurs should not be anywhere near currently.
posted on 19/6/18
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 hour, 4 minutes ago
comment by Willmcq (U9152)
posted 1 minute ago
Strange that someone sees "luck" the same as "fair".
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not sure i really see what you mean by that?
a non seeded draw would be the only real fair way to do it and leave it to the luck of the draw.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Luck isn't fair.
I think it is more than fair that a team and nation is judged on its recent performances and judged on that.
One team having to play Real Madrid, Barcelona, Man City, Juventus and Bayern to get to a final while another plays Crusaders, HJK, Drita, Videoton and Flora Tallinn to get to the same stage doesn't scream out fair to me.
"Luck of the draw" is just something crap teams want to get an undeserved run to the latter stages of a competition.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well its not exactly luck, every team has the potential to draw the other, instead of the weaker teams having to play the better ones from the start. It puts the teams already at a disadvantage with an even greater disadvantage.
posted on 19/6/18
Could not agree more TOOR.
posted on 19/6/18
I'm biased of course cause a 48 team WC means we (Ireland) have a better chance of qualifying, but this notion of "bad tactics" is ridiculous, it's football and teams use the tactics that will best help them win (in most cases).
posted on 19/6/18
Knee to be fair i would imagine knee a fair few clubs do it, i would imagine even some of the better clubs in the EPL don't go out and attack clubs like Barca of a few years ago knowing full well they would get an A$$ whipping. Just complete and utter nonsense it is called tactics and some of the best managers in the game have deployed the park the bus tactic when needed. However i do concede as a viewer sometimes it is not exactly easy on the eye
posted on 19/6/18
However if you are good enough to win it you will still win it
==========
That rings very true for seeded competitions. If you are good enough to get to the final you will. That doesn't ring true all the time with non-seeded competitions. They are more if you get lucky you may get to the final.
Seedings didn't harm Liverpool in the CL. Nor Costa Rica in 2014 WC.
========
However i don't seem to remember too much uproar when UEFA used the extra TV issue to let non league winners into the CL which by its very name is a competition clubs like Arsenal and Spurs should not be anywhere near currently.
=======
Bit of a myth there. The Champions League is a competition to find the champions of Europe rather than a competition for champions.
The increase of teams was to counter the increasing gaps of quality and the growing UEFA members.
======
Well its not exactly luck
=======
It is though.
Teams are at a disadvantage through their own performances (at CL level, fellow clubs as well). Thats fair, imo.
The last 16 of a tournament should be the best 16. Not teams who have benefited from the luck of the draw imo. Seeding gives us the best chance to achieve this most regularly - and it isn't always the seeds who prove to be the best.
posted on 19/6/18
comment by Willmcq (U9152)
posted 4 minutes ago
Knee to be fair i would imagine knee a fair few clubs do it, i would imagine even some of the better clubs in the EPL don't go out and attack clubs like Barca of a few years ago knowing full well they would get an A$$ whipping. Just complete and utter nonsense it is called tactics and some of the best managers in the game have deployed the park the bus tactic when needed. However i do concede as a viewer sometimes it is not exactly easy on the eye
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I get that but it's part of the game, like I would happily watch Ireland in a WC play a low block and hit and hope v any top side, yeah wouldn't be the best game to watch but it might just get us the result we need.
But I wouldn't expect Liverpool to do the same as the club have the resources to play in a more progressive manner.
posted on 19/6/18
And I have to say I really enjoyed Iceland's performance v Argentina, they got the goal they needed and defended really well v a far (on paper) superior team, even that midgit couldn't break them down, was good to watch especially some of the last ditch stuff.
The notion that the WC should be this exhibition of top class football is wrong, and also the idea that there is only one type of football a fan can enjoy is also wrong.
posted on 19/6/18
Bit of a myth there. The Champions League is a competition to find the champions of Europe rather than a competition for champions.
The increase of teams was to counter the increasing gaps of quality and the growing UEFA members.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I Fail to see what part of it is a myth, i wait for you to show me the UEFA statement advising the above? more likely that is just your take on it. The increased numbers was due to the pressure from the top leagues threatening to move to a Super League everytime UEFA tried to help increase the smaller leagues chances via things like Wage Caps and locally produced player Quotas.
However if you are good enough to win it you will still win it rings equally true in both seeded and non seeded competitions.
posted on 19/6/18
And I have to say I really enjoyed Iceland's performance v Argentina, they got the goal they needed and defended really well v a far (on paper) superior team, even that midgit couldn't break them down, was good to watch especially some of the last ditch stuff.
The notion that the WC should be this exhibition of top class football is wrong, and also the idea that there is only one type of football a fan can enjoy is also wrong.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
i agree completely Knee.
posted on 19/6/18
And how many games v big nations in the WC have actually let you down over the years when you think about them, happens allot, something to be said for a small nation holidng off a large one through sheer will and determination.
Like Iceland v England at the euro's for example
posted on 19/6/18
Spoilt bangers
posted on 19/6/18
It's annoying seeing teams like that in the tournament when teams like Italy, Holland and even the other British sides would offer a lot more.
posted on 19/6/18
comment by Shaun M - You're only here, to watch Saiz... (U9955)
posted 3 minutes ago
It's annoying seeing teams like that in the tournament when teams like Italy, Holland and even the other British sides would offer a lot more.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah. Dunno why we don't just make the World Cup open to European teams.
posted on 19/6/18
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 hour, 10 minutes ago
However if you are good enough to win it you will still win it
==========
That rings very true for seeded competitions. If you are good enough to get to the final you will. That doesn't ring true all the time with non-seeded competitions. They are more if you get lucky you may get to the final.
Seedings didn't harm Liverpool in the CL. Nor Costa Rica in 2014 WC.
========
However i don't seem to remember too much uproar when UEFA used the extra TV issue to let non league winners into the CL which by its very name is a competition clubs like Arsenal and Spurs should not be anywhere near currently.
=======
Bit of a myth there. The Champions League is a competition to find the champions of Europe rather than a competition for champions.
The increase of teams was to counter the increasing gaps of quality and the growing UEFA members.
======
Well its not exactly luck
=======
It is though.
Teams are at a disadvantage through their own performances (at CL level, fellow clubs as well). Thats fair, imo.
The last 16 of a tournament should be the best 16. Not teams who have benefited from the luck of the draw imo. Seeding gives us the best chance to achieve this most regularly - and it isn't always the seeds who prove to be the best.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Their own performance is reduced as they have less of a chance due to not being able to compete with bigger and richer clubs. Not being put at a greater disadvantage would give them a better chance of reducing the gap and increasing their performance.
Page 3 of 5