Jump to content

Still Not Worthy Of A Thread


joeyt

Recommended Posts

At which phase of the CL would the EL winner enter?

 

From wiki:

 

The winner of the UEFA Europa League qualifies for the UEFA Super Cup and from the 2015-2016 season onwards the winners of the previous season's UEFA Europa League will qualify for the UEFA Champions League, the winner entering at least at the play-off round (assuming they do not already qualify through domestic performance), and will enter the group stage if the berth reserved for the Champions League title holders is not used.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Under the changes the Europa League winner will usually qualify directly for the group phase of the Champions League although under some circumstances they may have to go into the final qualifying round.

 

UEFA said the Europa League winners will go into the next season's Champions League at the final qualifying round at least.

 

A UEFA statement said: "The Europa League winners could even gain direct access to the group stage, should the Champions League title-holders also qualify via their domestic league, thus freeing up a place in the Champions League group stage.

 

"As an effect of the Europa League winners qualifying for the Champions League, the current limit of a maximum four teams per association will be increased to five.

 

"Further changes were made to the access list, whereby, in principle, all associations will now have a maximum three teams entering the Europa League."

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/european/uefa-confirm-champions-league-reward-for-winning-the-europa-league-8630925.html

 

Pardew needs to finish in 9th spot or lower from 2015 to be safe then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just saw this on the guardian

 

Norwich City were the first club to come out and say they would not be sporting Stonewall's rainbow laces this weekend in support of removing homophobia from football. Stephen Fry, board member and ardent supporter of the campaign is sure to be pleased. But what is the club's noble reason for turning down the request? Apparently 'Norwich have discussed the matter with Stonewall, explaining that the organisation's partnership with Paddy Power conflicts with their own relationship with SBOBET and use of the promotional material would set a precedent other good causes would attempt to follow.' So their bookie of choice conflicts with Stonewall's? An insurmountable problem. What an awful signifier of the state of the modern game when puny commercial interests can get in the way of an undeniably good cause. And this at a club with an openly gay board member and where Justin Fashanu began his career. Toby Moses

 

http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2013/sep/20/premier-league-10-things-weekend

 

I could understand if they thought it was way too tokenistic, but that is one shitty reason

Link to post
Share on other sites

Supposedly, this is how the clubs have responded to the Stonewall initiative:

 

ARSENAL: Maybe

ASTON VILLA: Maybe

CARDIFF: Maybe

CHELSEA: Players choose for themselves

CRYSTAL PALACE: Players choose for themselves

EVERTON: Yes

FULHAM: Players choose for themselves

HULL: Players choose for themselves

LIVERPOOL: No

MAN CITY: Players choose for themselves

MAN UTD: No

NEWCASTLE: Players choose for themselves

NORWICH: No

SOUTHAMPTON: No

STOKE: Maybe

SUNDERLAND: No

SWANSEA: No

TOTTENHAM: No

WEST BROM: Maybe

WEST HAM: No

 

So no means that the players are not allowed to do this, even if they want to. I can understand that the clubs wont force it upon they're players, even if this is something everyone should be perfectly fine with (apart from the odd superstition), but refusing the players to do this is just plain wrong. I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

ARSENAL: Maybe

ASTON VILLA: Maybe

CARDIFF: Maybe

CHELSEA: Players choose for themselves

CRYSTAL PALACE: Players choose for themselves

EVERTON: Yes

FULHAM: Players choose for themselves

HULL: Players choose for themselves

LIVERPOOL: No

MAN CITY: Players choose for themselves

MAN UTD: No

NEWCASTLE: Players choose for themselves

NORWICH: No

SOUTHAMPTON: No

STOKE: Maybe

SUNDERLAND: Any players caught doing so will be sent to re-education camps.

SWANSEA: No

TOTTENHAM: No

WEST BROM: Maybe

WEST HAM: No

 

 

FYP.

 

---

 

Good on those clubs allowing it btw :thup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Supposedly, this is how the clubs have responded to the Stonewall initiative:

 

ARSENAL: Maybe

ASTON VILLA: Maybe

CARDIFF: Maybe

CHELSEA: Players choose for themselves

CRYSTAL PALACE: Players choose for themselves

EVERTON: Yes

FULHAM: Players choose for themselves

HULL: Players choose for themselves

LIVERPOOL: No

MAN CITY: Players choose for themselves

MAN UTD: No

NEWCASTLE: Players choose for themselves

NORWICH: No

SOUTHAMPTON: No

STOKE: Maybe

SUNDERLAND: No

SWANSEA: No

TOTTENHAM: No

WEST BROM: Maybe

WEST HAM: No

 

So no means that the players are not allowed to do this, even if they want to. I can understand that the clubs wont force it upon they're players, even if this is something everyone should be perfectly fine with (apart from the odd superstition), but refusing the players to do this is just plain wrong. I think.

 

Its a marketing ploy by paddy power.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Awareness. The same way any of these things work. Telling the general public that it's not okay.

 

I don't see the need for the risque slogan mind you. It's about as subtle as "The Stonewall Initiative: Boshing homophobia right up the arse".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Awareness. The same way any of these things work. Telling the general public that it's not okay.

 

I don't see the need for the risque slogan mind you. It's about as subtle as "The Stonewall Initiative: Boshing homophobia right up the arse".

 

:lol:

 

Dan is spittin' hot fire right now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can push it off as a marketing ploy by paddy power if you want, but its pretty pathetic how few clubs have been willing to join in with an attempt like this to try and show support for the LGBT community. Absolute disgrace that in 2013 were still in a situation where gay footballers can't be open about their sexuality.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...