Champions League Semi Finals (24th April - 2nd May)

[SRV]

I don't think the argument is that they haven't had any luck en route to winning two (and possibly three) CLs in a row, it's that this level of consistent achievement in Europe demonstrates the caliber of team they are. To flip your argument, instead of starting with Real's chance to win a given tournament, start with the scenario of them having won three in a row and estimate what their odds for a given tournament are likely to be. The only conclusion is this is a team head and shoulders above everyone else when it comes to the Champions League knockout stages.

Basically that's where I disagree At this level, for the event "Real winning the CL 3 times in a row" they must be so, so much better than the rest for it not to be considered luck.

So, just to follow your train of thought, if we assume every event <0.5 is considered luck (because the odds of the complementary event being bigger), this would mean that Real odds must at least satisfy the equation 0.5 = x^3, where x is the odd of winning one CL. Or, in other words - Reals odds must have been 0.8, 80%, for each of the past three years to win the Champions League. I know what you're trying to say, they have a certain quality that makes them lethal in knockout games, but it's hard to argue that there is no luck involved (and if I understood you correctly you agree with that).

 

[Pagh Wraith]

What I actually wanna write about is the assumption of some people around here that it isn't luck at this point if Real wins the Champions League three times in a row. If you just take some simple math into account, it becomes very clear that it must be luck. If you assume that Real has a 50% overall chance of winning the Champions League (already super unrealistic, because this means all the other teams combine for the other 50%), chances are (0.5)^3 = 0.125 or 12.5% to win it three times in a row (assuming all events are independent from each other, so winning it once doesn't increase chances to win it in the year after). This means that it's seven times as likely that the complementary event occurs: at least one other team wins the Champions League in those three years. And this is with the (ridiculous) assumption of Real having a 50% overall chance to win it. If you decrease Reals chances to 30% (probably still too high), the odds of them winning it three times in a row shrink to 2.7%. I'm curious to hear what others think.

Don't try to argue with stats and numbers on this forum. People like to think in black and white, zero or one.

You are correct of course although I'm not sure luck is the word. But it would be a highly improbable event and a huge overachievement. Real had a market implied chance of winning the CL of ~18% before the start of the season. I can't access odds from the previous two seasons but that would put the chance of winning it three times in a row well below 1%.

 

[OutlawGER]

How big is that guy anyways? Remember seeing him in the huddle before the pk in the supercup and looked as big as lewandowski and renato sanches put together

Your team's much worse than last season. Maybe down to Vidal and Robben missing? You played at twice the pace last season, with more quality. James and Ribery are about the only guys who played well among your attackers

Well it's easy to say that they had "bad games", but as @SRV pointed out, i do believe that this was down to very good defending. Lewandowski and Ronaldo were totally out of game. It wasn't as exciting to watch, but i think this game was still on another level than the LFC vs Roma game quality wise.


Really unfortunate that Robben and Boateng got injured so quickly, especially if you consider how shocking Thiagos performance has been. I thought that missing Alaba, Neuer and Vidal would be enough.

 

[BusbyMalone]

It's a possibility but not a realistic one.

I mean, we'll just have to agree to disagree with this one. I just fail to see how you can say that if they get to the final. It's one game. They've already beaten Man City who were one of the favourites to win the thing. They wiped the floor with those.

the gap between the Liverpool and Real/Bayern squads in terms of quality is huge.

Yes, on paper of course they are. And if they do meet in the final then Real will be favourites, but that's not how football works. The best team doesn't always win the thing. That's just the nature of cup competitions. It's one 90 minute game (providing it doesn't go into extra time, but you know what i mean) so of course the notion of one team winning it over the other is a realistic one. Again, i'm not saying Liverpool are going to win it (i really fecking hope they don't) but it's got to a point where it's a realistic possibility. Unless Roma do something crazy which would be amazing.

And the less said about their keeper and defence the better.

The keeper is garbage tbf. But did you watch the game last night? keylor navas is a liability. With Salah scoring from anywhere he could have a field day.

Actually, other than a functioning rapid front 3 which mostly down to Salah, they have nothing to worry about. Their vulnerability at defending set-pieces is also a concern for them

That's not really true though is it? Firmino and Mane work extremely hard up front and stretches the oppositions back four/three which leaves more room for Salah. Firmino in particular is great at this as he showed against Roma. Salah is obviously getting the plaudits because of the stats, but the others are just as important and are extremely dangerous. Yeah, their defending isn't great and Ronaldo could have a lot of joy (hopefully), but if you watch Madrid the space that Marcello gives to the oppositions wingers is crazy. He's a very attacking fullback and i doubt that will change for this game (if it happens).

Again, just to reiterate, i'm not saying they are going to win it (be devastated if they do) and Madrid will be favourites. But if they get there, of course it's realistic that they could. I just can't fathom how you could say it's not.

 

[hasanejaz88]

Well it's easy to say that they had "bad games", but as @SRV pointed out, i do believe that this was down to very good defending. Lewandowski and Ronaldo were totally out of game. It wasn't as exciting to watch, but i think this game was still on another level than the LFC vs Roma game quality wise.


Really unfortunate that Robben and Boateng got injured so quickly, especially if you consider how shocking Thiagos performance has been. I thought that missing Alaba, Neuer and Vidal would be enough.

Well Real didnt defend that well because Lewandowski had two clear chances he should've scored from but missed. Bayern were just a lot less accurate with their chances.

 

[Retrokicks]

I keep coming across annoying posts which are talking up Roma's chances! Would anyone truly want to see a team that conceded five goals, in a semi final, progress to a final? In all honesty, they'll probably end up conceding 8 over the 2 legs.

Also, Heynkes is now starting a war cry about how vulnerable Real looks and how they can be got at. Odd that Bayern didn't 'get at them' yesterday.

Maybe it's just UEFA plants trying to inject some interest into, what essentially were, 2 underwhelming (for different reasons) matches.

 

[HerrLeinad]

16 in 10 on the road to russia, i wonder what he does *when* he shows up

Then he would be similar to Gomez in terms of performance at the highest level.
Lewandowski didn't show up at the last EC and if you ignore his penalty Goals he wastes too many chances for us in big games or is simply invisible/doesn't add anything else to our game (last night he actually managed to prevent Müller from scoring). Compare him to someone like Firmino who offers so much for his teammates.
Lewandowski is certainly a very good and consistent striker but at the hightest Level he might even provide less than Gomez oder Mandzukic did for us.

 

[Akshay]

Basically that's where I disagree At this level, for the event "Real winning the CL 3 times in a row" they must be so, so much better than the rest for it not to be considered luck.

So, just to follow your train of thought, if we assume every event <0.5 is considered luck (because the odds of the complementary event being bigger), this would mean that Real odds must at least satisfy the equation 0.5 = x^3, where x is the odd of winning one CL. Or, in other words - Reals odds must have been 0.8, 80%, for each of the past three years to win the Champions League. I know what you're trying to say, they have a certain quality that makes them lethal in knockout games, but it's hard to argue that there is no luck involved (and if I understood you correctly you agree with that).

Yup, I agree there is luck involved but I also think that Real's chances at winning the CL were closer to 70% than say 30%. They raise their game to a different level for these matches, it's a bit like AC Milan circa and pre-Calciopoli. Even when they were underachieving in Serie A they were usually dangerous in the CL. Madrid's core players have a lot more experience at winning these big encounters than pretty much every other club. It's making the difference even when the overall performance levels aren't at their best.

 

[redflair]

Kroos got hurt in the early knockout stages for Bayern Munich. Robben came in and Bayern never looked back on the way to the title. Mustafi got hurt for Germany against Algeria, Lahm moved back into his natural RB position and Kroos/Schweinsteiger/Khedira bossed the midfield to the World Cup win. Of course afterwards the managers were heralded as genius, when it was a lucky break that improved their line-ups.

Some nice examples there. But I don't think Arjen Robben going off early against Madrid last night was anything but a blow to them - and disrupted the whole team. In a Wembley play-off final in 2015 Sam Saunders was injured in the first minute and Wycombe never really recovered and lost the game. My point is, in general, early injuries and substitutions are generally bad for the team that has to make them and limits the possibilities of the manager making crucial changes late in the game. Generally, it doesn't work out well for them but are there are exceptions, of course, which you've pointed out.

 

[podurban2]

I keep coming across annoying posts which are talking up Roma's chances! Would anyone truly want to see a team that conceded five goals, in a semi final, progress to a final?

No I’d rather want Liverpool go to the final.

Are you fecking serious? Do you know what forum this is?

God I hate the newbie system.

 

[extincti fugax hominum]

I mean, we'll just have to agree to disagree with this one. I just fail to see how you can say that if they get to the final. It's one game. They've already beaten Man City who were one of the favourites to win the thing. They wiped the floor with those.

Again, just to reiterate, i'm not saying they are going to win it (be devastated if they do) and Madrid will be favourites. But if they get there, of course it's realistic that they could. I just can't fathom how you could say it's not.

Let's agree to disagree then. The real point i was trying to make was some people are (including our fans who most probably are simply trying to jinx that or preparing themselves to the worst possible scenario with their ultimate pessimism which they also show in the match-day threads) too busy trying to behave like it's 2005 İstanbul all over again when it's not. (i'm sure British media will probably do the same and it will be unbearable )

And i just say that i'm quite confident Liverpool will not be winning CL this year. Let's not also forget that they reached another final 2 years ago in UEL and fecked it up badly against the competition's master team in the last 15 years (Sevilla) and will be up against the Champions League master team this time too. Actually, it's a pretty similar situation when it was Sevilla's 3rd consecutive title in 2016 and will be Real's 3rd consecutive title this year. If some of you lot want to emulate something, that similarity is much better i would say

 

[Theonas]

I don't know what kind of answer this is. First of all I never mentioned the word "brilliant".

Second, if I apply some of your methods on some well remembered teams of the past I can make them look very bad too. Did you know Bayern only won one league in the first three European Cups? Did you know they finished 10th in the German league when they won their third one?

Then you choose the odd game with Illarramendi and without Ronaldo at Dortmund (superb team btw) after a 3-0 advantage to prove what exactly? Did you watch the first game? Because in terms of chances Real Madrid were far superior in it. Plus 9-2 aggregate score vs Schalke, 5-0 aggregate score vs Bayern, 4-1 vs Atletico. You get saved by a goal you look for the last 20 minutes with Isco and Marcelo coming in to make the team super offensive? I guess that makes Man United 99 lucky and non brilliant too? Flawless.

Seriously enough, it's hard to take this kind of posts seriously.

First of all, you need to behave yourself and stop this juvenile style you write with.

I did not pick the odd game, I mentioned all their games bar one in their CL winning runs in 2014 and 2016. The way most of them went does not suggest a team that is so "much" better than the current version which you seem to argue for. Since this team has beaten PSG, Juventus and very likely Bayern now, I assume that in order to be so "much" better than them, you need to be brilliant.

Your argument seems to amount that those teams had great moments or games to which is very silly. Of course they did, you cannot win CLs without producing some fine displays along the way. The point is how good were they and can they be really called a much better team than this year's. To me, all those teams are very similar in terms of having an unbelievable level of individual brilliance where they always find decisive goals at crucial moments, being able to produce a very high level of ball circulation and game management to protect games. But on the flip side, teams that can always look vulnerable and always give you chances to get at them, something which the true brilliant teams allow much less of.

The point is there might be a difference of level between Real 2014, 2016 and 2018, but it certainly is not a huge difference as you imply. They were three teams capable of brilliant performances just as they were likely to seriously underwhelm. On those three seasons though, they managed to make it work even in those underwhelming moments.

 

[el3mel]

What the 2 games did is show a comparison of styles, & Spurs came out on top over the 2 matches. Doesn't mean it would happen in a one-off match of course. But I'm pretty sure if Real had gotten the better of Spurs in those group games, then I imagine your opinions of the results in group stages might take on a different relevance.

It doesn't show anything. If you believe Spurs defeated Madrid because they have a better counter style, you will be in for a surprise.

 

[Retrokicks]

No I’d rather want Liverpool go to the final.

Are you fecking serious? Do you know what forum this is?

God I hate the newbie system.

Roma's even worse with their scum supporters and that's without mentioning the fact they conceded 5 goals (in a CL semi-final.

Not sure why are you so interested in local rivalries. I doubt most on here would give a shite about 2 Swedish rivals battling it out for honours.

If you care that much, they'll have to face Real in the final. My point is that Roma doesn't deserve to be anywhere near that final (after their first leg showing).

 

[Varun]

Roma's even worse with their scum supporters and that's without mentioning the fact they conceded 5 goals (in a CL semi-final.

Not sure why are you so interested in local rivalries. I doubt most on here would give a shite about 2 Swedish rivals battling it out for honours.

If you care that much, they'll have to face Real in the final. My point is that Roma doesn't deserve to be anywhere near that final (after their first leg showing).

Yeah, the interest in the Utd-Liverpool rivalry on the Utd forum baffles me too.

 

[GatoLoco]

First of all, you need to behave yourself and stop this juvenile style you write with.

I did not pick the odd game, I mentioned all their games bar one in their CL winning runs in 2014 and 2016. The way most of them went does not suggest a team that is so "much" better than the current version which you seem to argue for. Since this team has beaten PSG, Juventus and very likely Bayern now, I assume that in order to be so "much" better than them, you need to be brilliant.

Your argument seems to amount that those teams had great moments or games to which is very silly. Of course they did, you cannot win CLs without producing some fine displays along the way. The point is how good were they and can they be really called a much better team than this year's. To me, all those teams are very similar in terms of having an unbelievable level of individual brilliance where they always find decisive goals at crucial moments, being able to produce a very high level of ball circulation and game management to protect games. But on the flip side, teams that can always look vulnerable and always give you chances to get at them, something which the true brilliant teams allow much less of.

The point is there might be a difference of level between Real 2014, 2016 and 2018, but it certainly is not a huge difference as you imply. They were three teams capable of brilliant performances just as they were likely to seriously underwhelm. On those three seasons though, they managed to make it work even in those underwhelming moments.

Ok, let's get straight to the point. These are the reasons why I think those teams were much better:

- Benzema and Bale didn't look like former players those years. The whole opposite, they were among the best players in their positions. Now Zidane doesn't trust any of them and Bale doesn't even play.

- Casemiro and Modric were at much better form in 2016. Modric was also at much better form in 2014. Carvajal is out of form now, while he was superb in 2014 and 2016.

- Ronaldo wasn't forced to play as a number 9, thus out of position because Benzema didn't look like a former player in 2014 and 2016. The best version of Ronaldo always happened with Benzema next to him.

- Those teams in 2014 and 2016 defended much better than the current team. They also depended less on Ronaldo to score. They were more balanced and solid. The run in the league in 2016 since Zidane is the coach was quite good, actually the best out of Madrid, Atletico and Barcelona. There was a lot consistency in the way they played. That consistency is yet to be seen in 2018.

- This team would never beat Bayern 0-4 away from home. They would be too scared of Bayern's attack and would choose to play Lucas Vazquez to defend the right wing instead of placing the BBC upfront to intimidate their defense as it was done in 2014.

- 9-2 scores like the one vs Schalke in 2014 would be unthinkable now. As I said, this team is much worse both offensively and defensively.

 

[mitchmouse]

as I've been saying since just before Christmas, the bloody dippers are going to win the CL

 

[belanglos]

Absolutely not. The thought gives me chills. Worst defender in the league.

Just have to pray Boating is alright. Would be nice for Germany to go into a WC without losing a key player a month prior for once.

We are fine even without Boateng - Süle and Rüdiger can be a good replacement. Behind those two we still have Tah before we are stuck with Mustafi. I could even see Waldemar Anton as an option.

Germany has a lot of material for that position.

 

[schwalbe]

Two things.
1. Thiago is shit. Sell him as long as people still believe he's any good. Doesn't Barca need a CM they can spend 100m€ on?
2. Lewandowski isn't even close to being as good as he thinks he is. If he were, Bayern would have won by 5 in 2016 against atletico and won yesterday. The polish Higuain.

 

[carvajal]

Two things.
1. Thiago is shit. Sell him as long as people still believe he's any good. Doesn't Barca need a CM they can spend 100m€ on?
2. Lewandowski isn't even close to being as good as he thinks he is. If he were, Bayern would have won by 5 in 2016 against atletico and won yesterday. The polish Higuain.

I wouldn´t mind Thiago in Madrid, but not for 100m

 

[hasanejaz88]

I wouldn´t mind Thiago in Madrid, but not for 100m

How much? 40 MP? Even for that price they should flog him. Bayern have really lacked those big match players recently and Thiago is big culprit in that, Lewandowski another.

Tollisso has been a poor signing, just seems like a French Wijnaldum with nothing special to him. A 40 MP squad player, they need major quality to play in central midfield next season. Goretzka is there but they need someone who can pass and control possession as well.

 

[schwalbe]

I wouldn´t mind Thiago in Madrid, but not for 100m

Oh, you would. I'm certain of that. After seeing him misplace one of his half assed attempts at 5 meter passes you'll get furious rather quickly. If those are not enough, then his outside of the foot passes to buttfeck nowhere will definitely do the trick.

 

[carvajal]

Oh, you would. I'm certain of that. After seeing him misplace one of his half assed attempts at 5 meter passes you'll get furious rather quickly. If those are not enough, then his outside of the foot passes to buttfeck nowhere will definitely do the trick.

How much? 40 MP? Even for that price they should flog him. Bayern have really lacked those big match players recently and Thiago is big culprit in that, Lewandowski another.

Tollisso has been a poor signing, just seems like a French Wijnaldum with nothing special to him. A 40 MP squad player, they need major quality to play in central midfield next season. Goretzka is there but they need someone who can pass and control possession as well.

I think Madrid need someone else for midfield. Ceballos is a great bet for the future, but it seems that Zidane does not want more experiments.
My personal bet would be Fabián, from Betis, but maybe he would suffer the same fate as Ceballos, so Thiago, who has class and more experience could be a good option. 45 million euros seems a good price seeing the current market.

 

[hasanejaz88]

Then he would be similar to Gomez in terms of performance at the highest level.
Lewandowski didn't show up at the last EC and if you ignore his penalty Goals he wastes too many chances for us in big games or is simply invisible/doesn't add anything else to our game (last night he actually managed to prevent Müller from scoring). Compare him to someone like Firmino who offers so much for his teammates.
Lewandowski is certainly a very good and consistent striker but at the hightest Level he might even provide less than Gomez oder Mandzukic did for us.

Gomez has actually scored against Madrid for Bayern And a goal against Barca when the match wasn't already lost.

Firmino would be a perfect signing for Bayern though. Especially if you pair him with Martial on one side and possibly Coman on the other. Though the combined cost of those two would be close to 120-140 MP in today's market.

 

[Water Melon]

I don't even wanna go into last nights game too much. Two quick things: To me, Bayern were the far better team, it's unfortunate to concede two goals like that while they had far better chances. Second, I think some people around here underestimate the level this game was played at. Not every time a pass is intercepted it's because of bad offense, sometimes it's just down to good pressing, closing the gaps, anticipating the pass - in short: good defense. And I think both teams did very well yesterday, up to the 60th minute it was a very exciting game, where it started to slow down a bit.

What I actually wanna write about is the assumption of some people around here that it isn't luck at this point if Real wins the Champions League three times in a row. If you just take some simple math into account, it becomes very clear that it must be luck. If you assume that Real has a 50% overall chance of winning the Champions League (already super unrealistic, because this means all the other teams combine for the other 50%), chances are (0.5)^3 = 0.125 or 12.5% to win it three times in a row (assuming all events are independent from each other, so winning it once doesn't increase chances to win it in the year after). This means that it's seven times as likely that the complementary event occurs: at least one other team wins the Champions League in those three years. And this is with the (ridiculous) assumption of Real having a 50% overall chance to win it. If you decrease Reals chances to 30% (probably still too high), the odds of them winning it three times in a row shrink to 2.7%. I'm curious to hear what others think.

Maths does not work here, you can not calculate it accurately. It is no coin flipping or winning a lottery.Even the term "luck" is quite vague when it comes to football. I do not like Real Madrid, but credit where it is due. They are undoubtly the kings of football in the last couple of seasons. Hopefully, they will meet my expectations this season too and ruin one more final for Klopp.

 

[Dumbstar]

as I've been saying since just before Christmas, the bloody dippers are going to win the CL

You've said this a few times now. Just because the last time the semi finalists were from Italy, Germany, Spain and England and Liverpool met Real in the final was 1981 means nothing.

 

[giorno]

I did not pick the odd game, I mentioned all their games bar one in their CL winning runs in 2014 and 2016. The way most of them went does not suggest a team that is so "much" better than the current version which you seem to argue for. Since this team has beaten PSG, Juventus and very likely Bayern now, I assume that in order to be so "much" better than them, you need to be brilliant.

Let me get this straight: you are arguing with a madrid fan about whether our 2018 version is better or worse than the 2014, 2016 amd 2017 versions? Take it from another madrid fan then: 2014>=2017>>2016>=2018

 

[Theonas]

Let me get this straight: you are arguing with a madrid fan about whether our 2018 version is better or worse than the 2014, 2016 amd 2017 versions? Take it from another madrid fan then: 2014>=2017>>2016>=2018

No. I was arguing with a Real fan that his assertion that this year's team is "much, much, much worse" than the 2014 and 2016 incarnations is ludicrous. Your ranking seems about right to me even though I think the 2017 version was superior with the full backs and the Kroos/Modric combo being especially brilliant.

 

[giorno]

No. I was arguing with a Real fan that his assertion that this year's team is "much, much, much worse" than the 2014 and 2016 incarnations is ludicrous. Your ranking seems about right to me even though I think the 2017 version was superior with the full backs and the Kroos/Modric combo being especially brilliant.

It is worse than the 2014 one. Clearly so. Don't think it's all that inferior to the 2016 one. Unless he's judging the team as a whole and the entire half season under zidane instead of just the CL performances? In that case yes, 2018 is a bit worse than 2016 as well

 

[redman5]

You've said this a few times now. Just because the last time the semi finalists were from Italy, Germany, Spain and England and Liverpool met Real in the final was 1981 means nothing.

Real Madrid also finished 3rd in La Liga in 1981. They currently stand in 3rd place.

 

[MVBDX]

I agree with Theonas here, for me 2017 > 2014 2016 > 2018.

2014 was mostly a very fast-paced counter-attacking side with speedsters in Di Maria, Bale and Ronaldo, but 2017 was a more flexible, mature all-arounder (and with a more balanced midfield) that could harm you in more ways.

 

[JamesO]

Real Madrid also finished 3rd in La Liga in 1981. They currently stand in 3rd place.

And we came 5th. Best not to repeat that just incase!

 

[Dumbstar]

And we came 5th. Best not to repeat that just incase!

with gossip of Mane's injury 5th might be closer to the truth.

 

[GatoLoco]

It is worse than the 2014 one. Clearly so. Don't think it's all that inferior to the 2016 one. Unless he's judging the team as a whole and the entire half season under zidane instead of just the CL performances? In that case yes, 2018 is a bit worse than 2016 as well

As a matter of a fact. How much better was Bale in 2016? He was terrorizing Atletico in the final in the first half. It would be impossible for him to do something like that now.

Benzema? He looks like an ex footballer now.

Casemiro? Commanding in 2016, very out of shape now.

Modric now is one step below the vintage Modric.

Carvajal was stunning back then. He's looking much worse of late.

How much better was the team defensively both in terms of conceding chances and goals? The mistake that lead to Kimmich's goal in midfield was nowhere to be seen in 2016. The reaction after the defeats vs Atletico and Wolfsburg was extraordinary and the run of results was the beginning of a record of straight matches without a defeat.

The only difference against my argument is Asensio, but other than that I do find very relevant differences between 2016 and 2018.

 

[giorno]

I agree with Theonas here, for me 2017 > 2014 2016 > 2018.

2014 was mostly a very fast-paced counter-attacking side with speedsters in Di Maria, Bale and Ronaldo, but 2017 was a more flexible, mature all-arounder (and with a more balanced midfield) that could harm you in more ways.

Funny, i think it's the other way around. 2014 was a chameleon, able to adapt to different styles and capable of matching their opponents and even overwhelm them at their own game. 2017 was a much more mono-thematic team, that played always in the same way. It was also less balanced and worse defensively, and more dependant on Cristiano to score. Just incredibly mentally tough and with more technical quality throughout, and further improved on set pieces

team defensively both in terms of conceding chances and goals? The mistake that lead to Kimmich's goal in midfield was nowhere to be seen in 2016.

Overall yes, in CL no way. Did you forget the Roma game? Or the wolfsburg game? I mean, we managed to lose 2-0 to a team that was relegation fodder in germany

 

[Prometheus]

What I actually wanna write about is the assumption of some people around here that it isn't luck at this point if Real wins the Champions League three times in a row. If you just take some simple math into account, it becomes very clear that it must be luck. If you assume that Real has a 50% overall chance of winning the Champions League (already super unrealistic, because this means all the other teams combine for the other 50%), chances are (0.5)^3 = 0.125 or 12.5% to win it three times in a row (assuming all events are independent from each other, so winning it once doesn't increase chances to win it in the year after). This means that it's seven times as likely that the complementary event occurs: at least one other team wins the Champions League in those three years. And this is with the (ridiculous) assumption of Real having a 50% overall chance to win it. If you decrease Reals chances to 30% (probably still too high), the odds of them winning it three times in a row shrink to 2.7%. I'm curious to hear what others think.

What's luck? Events in a sample space having equal probability of happening?

Why are events... independent? Has anyone ever won the CL without "luck"?

 

[GatoLoco]

Funny, i think it's the other way around. 2014 was a chameleon, able to adapt to different styles and capable of matching their opponents and even overwhelm them at their own game. 2017 was a much more mono-thematic team, that played always in the same way. It was also less balanced and worse defensively, and more dependant on Cristiano to score. Just incredibly mentally tough and with more technical quality throughout, and further improved on set pieces

Overall yes, in CL no way. Did you forget the Roma game? Or the wolfsburg game? I mean, we managed to lose 2-0 to a team that was relegation fodder in germany

I'm considering the second half of the season under Zidane. The players were completely against Benitez since pre-season. The Wolfsburg game happened just after Zidane took charge, it was early to change things but the reaction after that was exceptional both in the league and CL.

 

[redman5]

https://www.football-italia.net/120527/rome-police-expect-1000-hooligans

I see the propaganda has already started. The Italian police feeding the narrative that 20% of the Liverpool fans attending next weeks 2nd leg tie in Rome are dangerous hooligans. The media & the police colluding in an attempt to smear, & then justify. So it doesn't just happen here in the UK then.

 

[Lagger]

It is what happens when the attacker beats the defender.

Anyone has a video of CR7s best scenes from the match?

That should be a fairly short video, considering he had like a dozen contacts or so. :P

 

[SRV]

What's luck? Events in a sample space having equal probability of happening?

Why are events... independent? Has anyone ever won the CL without "luck"?

No, as I specified in my later post, an event having equal or less than 50% probability of happening is a fair definition, I'd say - or, in other words, the complementary event is more likely to happen. But that's something you can define for yourself, in my theoretical framework I defined it as such.

Maths does not work here, you can not calculate it accurately. It is no coin flipping or winning a lottery.Even the term "luck" is quite vague when it comes to football. I do not like Real Madrid, but credit where it is due. They are undoubtly the kings of football in the last couple of seasons. Hopefully, they will meet my expectations this season too and ruin one more final for Klopp.

Re: luck, see above. I'm curious to hear why math doesn't work here, can you elaborate a bit? Because I personally think there's almost no case where math doesn't apply or where observations can't be abstracted in math (this is what kinda defines math). Plus, every bookmaker would be in big time trouble if stochastics didn't work in football.