2002 Both Dortmund and Leverkusen made European finals and both lost
2024, Halfway there
2024, Halfway there
German Football 23/24 |
- Thread starter do.ob
- Start date
- Status
Looks like Bochum is going down after the first game of the relegation. Pretty surreal implosion after they beat Bayern not long ago.
Scared about what exactly? I think Leverkusen will play for the Champions League qualification next year.
Meanwhile down to ten men against Lautern now while leading 1:0... I wonder if the 'roten Teufel' would have taken this before the game.
I'm sure rooting for them.
We have a relegation match...
0:3 in Bochum
Now it is 0:3 in Düsseldorf with 20 minutes to go....
0:3 in Bochum
Now it is 0:3 in Düsseldorf with 20 minutes to go....
5 minutes to go... Just started watching, didn't expect this to get interesting at all 
5 minutes to go... Just started watching, didn't expect this to get interesting at all
Just had it in the background. Now 15 minutes left in overtime... And maybe penalties...
Pure drama takes shape. Wouldn't bet on anything here today.
Stöger absolutely a class anove everybody else at the moment. Time for a cheeky bet on him missing the final and decisive penalty?
Bochum stays...
Wow... really would not have expected this result. Sad for Düsseldorf.
On the other hand, next season we will see a proper Rhine derby again, Köln vs Düsseldorf
On the other hand, next season we will see a proper Rhine derby again, Köln vs Düsseldorf
Since the introduction of the play-off have 2. teams ever won it? It feels like a scam honestly
Rarely. It was introduced in 2009, since then only Nürnberg (2009), Düsseldorf (2012) and Union Berlin (2019) made it.
It's shite and got only reintroduced because of money. Which is fine but they should've just gone with the English model of 3-6th place playoff for the third spot instead.
Wouldn't have minded that this season
It does indeed seem unfair. But honestly, if you don't make it after a 3-0 away win you only have to blame yourself.
(Make no mistake: I am in favor of automatic promotion for the 3rd place team.)
We've talked about this before but it really seems to come down to who can handle the pressure better.
Bundesliga teams play the first leg at home and they really struggle: only 6 wins, 5 draws and 5 losses.
But once they meet again and the 2. Bundesliga clubs have a chance to finish them off in their own stadium, the Bundesliga clubs destroy them: 10 wins, 5 draws and only 1 loss.
A single game in a neutral stadium would probably give the lower-league teams a much better chance.
What's also weird is that the 3. Bundesliga teams are very succesful when playing the same type of games against 2. Bundesliga teams, getting promoted 12 times in 16 attempts. They also play the first game at home just like the Bundesliga teams so that really seems to be an advantage for some reason.
Bundesliga teams play the first leg at home and they really struggle: only 6 wins, 5 draws and 5 losses.
But once they meet again and the 2. Bundesliga clubs have a chance to finish them off in their own stadium, the Bundesliga clubs destroy them: 10 wins, 5 draws and only 1 loss.
A single game in a neutral stadium would probably give the lower-league teams a much better chance.
What's also weird is that the 3. Bundesliga teams are very succesful when playing the same type of games against 2. Bundesliga teams, getting promoted 12 times in 16 attempts. They also play the first game at home just like the Bundesliga teams so that really seems to be an advantage for some reason.
I think a more likely explanation simply is that the quality gap between the second and third league is smaller than between the first and second.
I don't think it's that strange to see the better team hold back a bit in the first leg. It's somewhat logical to be a bit risk averse.
And I think the rest can be explained by the gap in quality: I mean Bochum were probably one of the weaker teams to play it and even they had someone like Stöger and while Hofmann doesn't exactly look special in Bundesliga he's in his "prime" years and scored about 20 goals last time he played in the second division.
If you look at other years, in particular Stuttgart last season, but also Wolfsburg twice or even Köln with Hector, Wolf, Kainz, Bornauw, Skhiri. It's just a different level and usually these teams aren't entirely dysfunctional either.
The gap towards the third division probably just isn't nearly as big.
Last edited:
Dortmund with today's sponsorship decision has lost all credibility as a football club. For who haven't followed the news, they have accepted Rheinmetall as one of their sponsors, one of the most ruthless and unethical companies in the world. And in case anyone wants to make comparisons here: Yes, I was always against Bayern's Qatar and Ruanda sponsorships, but this is on a whole new level.
Rheinmetall even tried to sue the German government when they did not allow them to sell arms to Russia after the Krim annexation to push through. There can be a debate about that defense is a necessary evil in this world and that therefore we need these type of companies, but Rheinmetall particularily is the worst of them all and only care about profits and nothing else.
I can't believe that this type of sponsorship even gets approved by the Bundesliga.
Shame on you, BVB! After this, I hope you get smashed very badly by Real in the final.
Rheinmetall even tried to sue the German government when they did not allow them to sell arms to Russia after the Krim annexation to push through. There can be a debate about that defense is a necessary evil in this world and that therefore we need these type of companies, but Rheinmetall particularily is the worst of them all and only care about profits and nothing else.
I can't believe that this type of sponsorship even gets approved by the Bundesliga.
Shame on you, BVB! After this, I hope you get smashed very badly by Real in the final.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but considering Russian aggression, rising fascism and the US disappearing up its own backside it's of great importance to strengthen the arms industry and Rheinmetall is the logical center of that effort.
So I don't see the moral wrong in helping their lobbying efforts.
As far as Russia goes, it looks to me like the main culprit in that story was the government, not Rheinmetall suing to get some money back.
https://www.tagesschau.de/investigativ/wdr/rheinmetall-russland-streitkraefte-100.html
I haven't looked much into their behavior, so if there are other questionable incidents, feel free to highlight them.
For me it's more the general question of mixing entertainment with war, which I'm against.
I don't know how many million Euro this deal is worth but I find it rather strange from the Rheinmetall viewpoint.
I don't think they need to spend on marketing or to bolster their brand-name at all.
Their books are full for at least the next 5 to 8 years and they can't even meet demand.
So why waste money on a sponsorship deal with a Bundesliga team?
I don't think they need to spend on marketing or to bolster their brand-name at all.
Their books are full for at least the next 5 to 8 years and they can't even meet demand.
So why waste money on a sponsorship deal with a Bundesliga team?
Strongly linked with Greenwood too.
I don't understand what the link you shared is supposed to show? It summarizes what I mentioned in my post. Despite Russia's annexation of the Krim, Rheinmetall wanted to push through with the deal. if it would have gone Rheinmetall's way, Ukrainian soldiers would now fight against an army which has been heavily armed and trained by Rheinmetall.
They are also doing everything they can to deliver weapons to countries where weapon deliveries are restricted by founding subsidiaries e.g. in the Emirates.
They have no problems at all to deliver weapons to dictators, military regimes etc.
They try to circumvent restrictions either via subsidiaries or by putting pressure on the German government. Here for example an article how they were to sue the German Government over a Saudi arms embargo:
https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1PE0PH/
The idea that Rheinmetall would be primarily interested in keeping the world at peace and defend Western democracies is a bit naive. All they care about are profits, and if those are generated by delivering weapons to the worst of the worst, they'll do everything they can to make it happen.
That deal wasn't about arms, it was about digital training centers that explicitly replaced weapons with laser pew-pew. The lawsuit also was about claiming damages from the government, not to "push through with the deal" as you claim, as Rheinmetall claimed that the government had been strongly pushing for the deal prior to then forbidding it, which is not hard to believe at all given the change-through-trade/Wandel-durch-Handel policy that German governments kept pursuing pretty much all the way until 2022. Hells, not even the Crimea annexation put a significant stop to that, other high-profile deals like Nordstream II went ahead right until the start of the current war. Rheinmetall's deal was one of very, very few big trade deals that were impacted by the Crimea annexation.
I'm not saying that Rheinmetall is squeaky clean, far from it. I know how they've been trying (sometimes successfully) to circumvent export limitations. I actually agree that they are a highly questionable sponsoring choice from Dortmund. But they're also so far off of being the most morally corrupt company in the world, that it's laughable.
Not sure if it's really that laughable, after all Rheinmetall also won the "Black Planet Award" because they were kicking 'human ethics with their feed in a shocking manner":
https://www.ethecon.org/ethecon/jaehrliche-preisverleihungen/preisverleihung-2017/
So I think it is very fair to say that they are up there with the worst of the worst...
Forgive me when I'm not taking an absolute nobody of a trust with it's main seat address being an random Berlin apartment complex as an authority on the matter.
Just skipped through their most recent speech against Rheinmetall, they're sounding like one of those nutcases who condemn any and all weapons and think we'd all just be the greatest of friends if everybody just agreed to get rid of all weapons.
Again, I'm not claiming they didn't do loads of sketchy stuff, but they're lightyears off from being amongst the worst there is.
Last edited:
I'm sorry but an ad hominem attack is not a very convincing argument against an 8 pages long report.
Last edited:
I had never heard of this organisation(?) and therefore clicked on their website. Regardless of how you feel about Rheinmetall, there is a certain "a bit" of a bias towards the defence industry, to put it a little euphemistically.
This bias seems to change a bit and I think Rheinmetall wants to support this shift in the society by getting involved as a sponsor.I had never heard of this organisation(?) and therefore clicked on their website. Regardless of how you feel about Rheinmetall, there is a certain "a bit" of a bias towards the defence industry, to put it a little euphemistically.
No no no. I meant that guy's homepage which reeks of political bias.
A yes... if you have a thought and only write it down. Yes, you were referring to that homepage. I was thinking about how that bias against everything military is (has been?) quite typical for German society as a whole and that that changes.
I wonder what @do.ob would have to say about this if that decision had been made by any other football club I guess Dortmund now is a plastic (explosives) club as well. So much for their integrity and moral high ground.
On a more serious note, weapon manufacturers are a necessary evil as Russia's war on Ukraine has showcased impressively. But that doesn't mean that they should be sponsoring football clubs. Especially no companies who would have happily sold weapons and expertise to Russia even after the annexation of Crimea. That company should be kept at a short leash instead of paying football clubs for whitewashing. Actually, I think not even a morally integer weapon manufacturer should sponsor sports clubs. A sport should promote peace and collaboration, not deterrance.
I guess Dortmund now is a plastic (explosives) club as well. So much for their integrity and moral high ground. On a more serious note, weapon manufacturers are a necessary evil as Russia's war on Ukraine has showcased impressively. But that doesn't mean that they should be sponsoring football clubs. Especially no companies who would have happily sold weapons and expertise to Russia even after the annexation of Crimea. That company should be kept at a short leash instead of paying football clubs for whitewashing. Actually, I think not even a morally integer weapon manufacturer should sponsor sports clubs. A sport should promote peace and collaboration, not deterrance.
I never claimed their report was wrong. I couldn't, I didn't bother wasting my time on reading it when I already know plenty of things that Rheinmetall did, and never pretended that they had done no wrong. What I do doubt is that this trust is professional and objective, instead I think that their award choices are highly ideologically biased. In conclusion I do not think that their name or their awards have much weight.
I have further corrected your incorrect claims about what Rheinmetall wanted to deliver to Russia and what the lawsuit was about.
And finally, I simply disagree with you and this trust that Rheinmetall is anywhere close to the worst companies out there. Feel free to think differently.
As I already said, I don't think that the BVB made a good choice for a sponsor. I am certainly nowhere near as anti-weapons /anti-arms industry as that trust, but I certainly do not like the idea of any football club advertising companies that happily sell weapons or arms-related equipment to countries like Russia and Saudi Arabia. Were I a fan of Dortmund, I'd be every bid as ashamed of this sponsor as I'd have been of Qatar as a sponsor if I were a Bayern fan.
It's hilarious people are trying to justify this decision by Dortmund claiming it's important with respect to Russia etc but ofcourse ignore that the company supplies weapons to Saudi in their war against Yemen and Israel.
But ofcourse, lets only protest against being sponsored by Qatar Airways
But ofcourse, lets only protest against being sponsored by Qatar Airways
Livin' on a prayer?
When you conveniently leave out another current major conflict, of course you don’t see the moral wrong.
Going by your reply I'm not sure you read my post. Other conflicts don't change the need for Germany to focus on its arms production, if anything they'd increase it further.
I read your post, but you missed my point. I’m suggesting you extend your moral compass beyond Germany.
If you want people to get your point, maybe you should write more than a one liner.
Give yourself some credit. You’re a smart guy. You know exactly what I mean. You’re just trying to muddy the waters.
All those years bragging about your moral superiority and mocking others, only for it to end like this. And you’re still digging in and playing dumb. Everyone else can see through it though. Not totally unexpected, but sad nonetheless.
I’ve made my point, don’t bother responding.
- Status