Kaizero

You do know that the only person senior to Yasir in the PIF is Bin-Salman, right? Or was that the implication?

Found what might be a better site for this information: https://kassiesa.net/uefa/clubs/ 30 Spanish teams have played in Europe according to that. 24 Italian clubs, and 38 English – equalling Germany who's also listed with 38 teams. According to that site's lists, Romania is the #1 country when it comes to the amount of teams to have competed in Europe with its 41.

Blame Wiki, literally just copied their list

Even though the numbers in your post weren't correct, the implication that England was streets ahead of the rest when it came to the number of different teams that have competed in Europe wasn't wrong: 🇪🇸 (14): Real Madrid, Barcelona, Atlético Madrid, Valencia, Sevilla, Villarreal, Athletic Bilbao, Espanyol, Alavés, Real Zaragoza, Mallorca, Celta Vigo, Málaga & Deportivo La Coruna 🇮🇹 (25): AC Milan, Fiorentina, Juventus, Inter, Bologna, Cagliari, Lazio, Torino, Roma, Hellas Verona, Napoli, Sampdoria, Parma, Udinese, Chievo, Atalanta, Cesena, Vicenza, Perugia, Genoa, Palermo, Livorno, Empoli, Sassuolo & Brescia 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 (40): Man Utd, Wolves, Burnley, Tottenham, Ipswich, Everton, Liverpool, Man City, Leeds, Arsenal, Derby, Nottingham Forest, Aston Villa, Blackburn, Newcastle, Chelsea, Leicester, Southampton, Stoke, QPR, West Bromwich, Watford, Sheffield Wednesday, Norwich, West Ham, Fulham, Millwall, Middlesbrough, Bolton, Portsmouth, Birmingham, Wigan, Hull, Burnley, Brighton, Sunderland, Coventry, Wimbledon, Crystal Palace & Bradford

Even Norway's had 26 teams in Europe: Aalesund, Bodø/Glimt, Brann, Bryne, Fredrikstad, Fyllingen. Gjøvik-Lyn, Haugar, Haugesund, Hødd, Kongsvinger, Lillestrøm, Lyn, Mjøndalen, Molde, Moss, Odd, Rosenborg, Sarpsborg 08, Skeid, Stabæk, Start, Strømsgodset, Tromsø, Vålerenga & Viking Weird fake stat, that

I'm five years old mentally Lost it at that typo

Just gonna stop posting tbh, not been able to participate in any discussions on here without immediate derailment for eons now.

I literally pointed out how rarely it's happened that a team placed in the top four after 26 matches ended up outside the top four, I just added the * part to avoid ending up having to deal with someone deciding to start this exact kind of interaction! 5 times out of 29 returns the an historical mathematical probability of 17.2% that Forest will finish the season outside the top four when all is said and done. Essentially meaning 4 times out of 5 they'd finish there based on how teams before them fared when they found themselves in the same position on the table at the same time of the season. In addition, 29 times out of 29 no team that found themselves in the top four at this stage of the season ended up finishing lower than 6th. I genuinely don't think I've missed out on anything when I looked through past seasons, but from experience I'm aware that in the event I'd actually done it, I'd get stuck discussing something completely irrelevant to the topic I wanted to discuss when I made the choice to engage. Instead, as has been the case for a long time now, the only thing that happens on here when trying to actually discuss a topic relevant to its thread is that I end up in a meaningless discussion about something obviously irrelevant for the topic being discussed. You're genuinely one of the brightest people I've had the pleasure of discussing shit with on here over the past 19+ years, so I can't make myself believe you'd not understand the intent behind the * inclusion, and rather chose to do the exact thing I included the * part in my post trying to avoid

Ah well, thanks for engaging in discussing any of the actually relevant topics raised rather than pointing out the fact English is my second language

Your belief in Forest being in a "false position" in the league table after 26 out of 38 matches has been played is a statement that doesn't have any empirical evidence for it. Looking through the PL seasons going back to the first with 20 teams in 95/96, I count a grand total of five times out of a possible twenty-nine, and none of the teams that fell below the "top four" in that time finished lower than 6th when all was said and done*. They're in the position they're in because they deserve to be in it, as whilst it's of course theoretically possible to "luck" your way through 26 matches – the chances of that actually being the case doesn't feel realistic whatsoever. I'd argue that the reason you, as well as countless others, keep claiming that Forest's in a "false position" they don't "deserve" to be in, is simply because they're Forest. Just as the season Leicester went all the way, everyone sat around waiting for the moment they'd start to trail off as they, like Forest, apparently were in a "false position" they actually didn't deserve to be in * I only skimmed through the seasons, so I'm aware I might've missed out on a team or two when skimming through it. I don't feel like I did, but I know it's a possibility, so wanted to acknowledge that in the event that's the case and someone would rather approach a discussion about this by dismissing the actual point I've tried to make in this post in favour of trying to start a back-and-forth about the number of time's it's happened

It's weird how I on one level feel desperate to agree with you, yet on another feel like it's been a long time since the days Man Utd were a club that were given a disproportionate amount of special treatment compared to other clubs. Feels like we all just still suffer the after effects of our collective Fergie-Time induced PTSD

Never bought into the Højlund hype, always felt he was a damp squib – like most Danes

Something that's been grinding my gears for quite a while has been the use of the argument "their announced attendance isn't reflective of the real amount of people that were present in the stadium at the match". There's already tons of actual things one could knock them for, even something fairly close to the "diss" in question, so mocking them for doing what every professional football club in the world does? That feels counter-productive diss-wise. Clubs don't report the real number of people physically present at their stadium during a match, they report the number of tickets that's been sold or given away, regardless of whether or not the people that's bought or received tickets actually show up on the day. That said, the fact that their fans refuse to acknowledge that reality and choose to die on the hill claiming that the reported number of tickets sold/given away is the same number as the amount of people physically present in the stand during a match. We all have eyes, as do they, so everyone's well aware of the fact that the reported attendance isn't the same as the real attendance on the day. Also, them giving out the amount of tickets for free before each match that they do doesn't help their cause, as their reported attendance continually remain at an artificially high number compared to the amount of people present in the stadium on match day – making their weird masochistic urge to die on a hill where they argue their artificially high attendance number is the genuine number of people that showed up even weirder But, yeah... all clubs report artificially high attendance and not the genuine number of people physically present in attendance. So knocking them for their club doing that doesn't feel like a good way of mocking them, especially when considering they're offering up a genuine argument to mock them with as they continue to try making an argument for the attendance number reported being the genuine number. They genuinely can't get people to attend their matches when offering the opportunity, for free, to their supposed "fans" – yet nobody actually care enough about them to bother showing up Feel like I lost track of where I meant to go with this post somewhere around the middle, so apologies in advance if it didn't end up making much sense in the end

On a more serious note, I'd call the box office to check the procedure for PL U18 tickets. A quick Google search shows QF tickets for the U18 FA Cup are available through the official team website – but not for any league games. I'd say that suggests a person might need approval to attend through something like being a scout, agent or similar, and the matches just not having tickets on general sale. Either that, or it’ll either be overly complicated (booking through the box office etc), or something as simple as showing up on the day and buying a ticket at the door. Not really sure why I, a foreigner, decided to attempt answering this question when this forum undoubtedly has a ton of local posters with genuine knowledge about how to attend a Academy matches... Ah well, at least I tried being helpful

Disgraceful choice of music aside, my favorite part of that video was when I for some reason thought the kitchen sink in the back was a bathtub for several seconds. Couldn't for the life of me fathom why the fuck there'd be a bathtub in the team bus, let alone who'd ever use it given that it didn't have any privacy It took enough seconds for the camera to get back to that section after it'd looked at the seats for a bit, for me to picture a scenario that meant whoever was crowned the team's MOTM would get to take a bath on the ride home whilst everyone else would have to make do with regular bus seats

Just popping by this thread with a quick reminder that this is the ranking for notable Man Utd managers when it comes to league matches with Points Won vs No Points Won: Sir Alex Ferguson‎‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ –‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ 85.92% Jose Mourinho‎‎‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ –‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ 81.72% Ole Gunnar Solskjær‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎–‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ 77.98% Louis Van Gaal‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎–‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ 76.31% Ernest Mangnall‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎–‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ 74.53% Matt Busby‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎–‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ 73.79% Ralf Rangnick‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ –‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ 70.83% David Moyes‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎–‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ 67.64% Erik Ten Hag‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ –‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ 66.23% Ruben Amorim‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎‎ ‎ ‎ ‎‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎–‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ 42.85%

Ruud should be on thin eyes at this point, no? Worse record than Cooper in the same amount of games and all...

Honestly the only European club tournament I've found any joy watching (other than when we've been participating in any). Absolutely can't stand the repetitiveness of the CL, and up until this season the EL was pretty much guaranteed to end up being won by a team that got knocked out of the CL in the group stage so there was no point watching any group stage matches or really pay attention to the knock-outs. The Conference League has tons of former giants of European football playing in it, and it has teams from more nations than probably the CL and EL combined. Vikingur Reykjavik and Shamrock Rovers almost managed to get through to the proper Round of 16! Fuck watching Barcelona/Real Madrid/Bayern play Barcelona/Real Madrid/Bayern over and over, give me a final featuring teams like Roma, Feyenoord, Fiorentina, Olympiakos and so on any day of the week! With that in mind, bar the fact the new "league" system has added potentially 4 extra fixtures to CL/EL teams and potentially 2 extra fixtures for ECL teams to an already stacked schedule that's ruining the longevity of footballer's careers, I don't mind the new set-up one bit. Was excitement all the way through the last game in the "league" regarding who'd advance straight to the pR16 vs who'd have to go to the extra R16 for the chance to get there, as well as excitement regarding which teams would be knocked out and which teams would get an extra life by getting sent to the extra R16 round. First time in what feels like decades where I've paid any attention whatsoever to the last couple of group matches in Europe.

I like how you seem to think I'll somehow win another

Bodø/Glimt just straight up giving it to Twente right up their bum, without lube, tonight!

Honestly not sure what the fact I've never felt "disgust" towards our owners, even with Saudi Arabia's beyond horrible human rights record, until I saw this image

I get that sometimes a team theoretically could benefit if they "lucked out" with the timing of certain fixtures on their scheduled, such as if they get to face an out-of-form opponent instead of an in-form one – and how that could give the impression that a team's set of remaining fixtures could make it seem like they'll have it easier than other teams. However, I refuse to acknowledge this as being meaningful in the grand scheme of things whatsoever... Every team plays all 19 opponents twice, home and away. Any points gained from those fixtures will, when the season is done, be tallied up with the points teams gain from all the other fixtures they've played against the other teams throughout the season. Yes, sometimes a team will end up playing a "tough" opponent at a time where circumstances are kind to them and offer up a tiny bit of an advantage when comparing the fixture "Team Us vs. Team Tough" with the equivalent fixture, "Team Not-Us vs. Team Tough", for the other teams. At the end of the day, 99.99% of the time – even if a team should luck out and be given a one in a million set-up for success through pure, random, circumstantial chance – to the degree a person could look back at a completed season and point to that particular fixture as having been an advantageous one when comparing it to the same fixture for all the other teams. But when spread out across a complete season, any circumstantial advantage gained from when any one particular fixture ended up being scheduled for will inevitably balance out, because just the same way as you felt your team got "lucky" with when a specific fixture ended up being scheduled for – teams you feel your team should defeat will be looking at your team, thinking exactly the same thing you thought your team got lucky with when they played a "tough" opponent. I can accept that there are moments in any team's fixture list where you could realistically be "lucky" with when the fixtures were scheduled, to the degree it'd actually manage to make a tiny, tiny, bit of difference compared to other teams. Those fixtures t are either among the first matches of the season (if your team's prepared and up to full fitness vs. "tough" opponents perhaps not being equally prepared going into the season, perhaps even lacking when it comes to 100% fitness). That "advantage" is pretty much impossible to replicate/even out, even over a full season, if you somehow managed to get the beyond belief amount of unrealistic luck required for that scenario to become reality. You can also include the last two-three matches of the season if your team still has something to play for and ended up getting two-three teams scheduled to play you that no longer have anything but honor to play for, with their players most likely already mentally checked out and well on their way to complete planning their summer holiday. One factor that realistically could provide your team with a scenario where you could be given some form of advantage in a fixture, when comparing it to the other teams playing the same one, would be if you somehow ended up having even more luck with when you got scheduled to play out a fixture against a "tough" opponent and saw the fixture end up being a "damp squib" in the "tougher" opponents own fixture list. An example of such a fixture being set to occur is just around the corner, as Brentford will be playing Villa just four days after the first R16 CL leg, which already came just four days after Villa will have played Chelsea in the FA Cup, and the second leg in the CL R16 taking place only three days after the Brentford fixture. With Villa being placed where they currently are in the league, potentially still competing in both the FA Cup and the CL, I'd say it'd be more likely than not that Villa would use the opportunity to rest key players against Brentford – which would give Brentford an advantage other teams playing the same fixture at a different point of the season wouldn't be able to replicate. Even then, a single favorably timed match is unlikely to significantly impact the final standings. Unless blatant fixture manipulation occurs (which would be obvious and widely discussed/criticized), any perceived advantages will almost certainly even out over the season – like they always have. TL;DR: I can’t stand the feeling that the majority of football fans begin obsessing over fixture lists and remaining "strength of schedule" at the exact same time of the season, every season, heading into the final third. Every team plays the same opponents, and every team play them twice. When a "tough" fixture is scheduled to be played didn't matter before the season began, it hasn't mattered during the season so far and it won't matter when the season is done. The only thing that actually matters (If you want to finish as high in the table as possible) is that you have to get results. No matter when you play a team – if you want to finish higher up in the table than others when the season is over – is that you get results when you play matches. It matters fuck all when you play or who you play against – because everyone will play the exact same fixtures, once home and once away.

That's not very funny though, is it? The world's going to shit, gotta try to have some fun when and where the possibility arises.