Premier League or Champions League?

Señor said:
Not really. I mean you have to be good but you can certainly fluke your way to the CL. Chelsea and Liverpool have shown that, in recent years. Heck, we even nearly did it last year. It is a cup after all. Luck plays a big part in winning it and individual mistakes or errors or refereeing blunders are amplified tenfold.

And rarely does the best team in the CL win it whereas most of the time, the best team over 38 games wins the Premier League.
Click to expand...
It's still a harder competition to win, United have dominated the league over recent years but only turned that domestic success into 1 CL title in that period of time.

Sure some teams do luck their way to a win like Liverpool and Chelsea who were definitely not the best teams in the competition when they won it but that just goes to show how unpredictable the competition is and how hard it is to win it.

The league shows consistency i completely agree but the CL is the competition where all the best teams and players in the world play in.
 
Other than the World Cup (and maybe the Euros) the Champions League is the biggest competition in world sports. We've only won in twice in its current guise, if I had the option of CL or back to back titles I'd still pick the Champions League.
 
I am forever going to be amazed that we went within 3 points of winning 7 league titles in a row.

That's how spoilt every United fan has become over the last decade... not even thinking about the preceding decades of spoils we have had.
 
rcoobc said:
I am forever going to be amazed that we went within 3 points of winning 7 league titles in a row.

That's how spoilt every United fan has become over the last decade... not even thinking about the preceding decades of spoils we have had.
Click to expand...

Don't bring it up! It makes me ill to think of those margins :p

You could also phrase it "just 3 goals away from 7 titles"!
 
Champions league by quite a distance.
 
Champions League by some distance... it'd be nice to get back ahead of Chelsea/City, but getting ahead of Real & Bayern will be a dream.
 
The English prem > UEFA Champions League

The problem with the CL is that it's really a crap shoot. The best team usually wins it, but luck plays such a huge factor in who goes through round by round and wins it all.

Great luck in 1999, when Bayern hit the bar once or twice and then switched off in added time. Bad luck v Porto, a year when we should have won it. Great luck in 2008, Terry slipping on the match winning pk. Bad luck v Bayern in the semis. Bad luck when Nani got sent off, though we were never going to win the CL trophy that season I suppose.

On the other hand, luck plays only a tiny role in determining who lifts the prem trophy. Sure, Simon Beck did us in when he insanely ruled Drogba onside and that one decision robbed us of the points that would have made us prem winners. But in general, the table truly does not lie.
 
Winning anything is nice. Either trophy is great. CL more from a historic standpoint.
 
Does anybody else feel like you're not a true European Champion unless you've won both your domestic league and the UCL?

It just feels like to be the "Champion of Europe" is to be the best team in Europe, and you can't really say that if you haven't even won your home league first.
 
Champions League everytime. You make history when you win it because it so rare unless you're Real Madrid and each and every triumph is bound to be remembered forever. The atmosphere and glamour of European trophy is second to none.
 
Champions League. We're so far ahead of our challengers in PL titles but we should have won more in Europe.
 
SirAF said:
In a league competition over a longer period of time, like the Premier League the strongest team will always end up winning it.
Click to expand...

Why is this always presented as some kind of irrefutable truth? Does that mean that City 11/12 became the best team in the Premier League with Aguero's goal and 1 second before the ball went past the goal line they weren't?

When a league is won by a tiny margin how is that bigger proof of being stronger than in the CL for example? If you can fluke past a knockout you can also fluke 3 points.
 
Arruda said:
Why is this always presented as some kind of irrefutable truth? Does that mean that City 11/12 became the best team in the Premier League with Aguero's goal and 1 second before the ball went past the goal line they weren't?

When a league is won by a tiny margin how is that bigger proof of being stronger than in the CL for example? If you can fluke past a knockout you can also fluke 3 points.
Click to expand...

Yeah obviously, but you don't consecutivly fluke 3 pointers throughout the season to win the league.
 
Gannicus said:
The English prem > UEFA Champions League

The problem with the CL is that it's really a crap shoot. The best team usually wins it, but luck plays such a huge factor in who goes through round by round and wins it all.

Great luck in 1999, when Bayern hit the bar once or twice and then switched off in added time. Bad luck v Porto, a year when we should have won it. Great luck in 2008, Terry slipping on the match winning pk. Bad luck v Bayern in the semis. Bad luck when Nani got sent off, though we were never going to win the CL trophy that season I suppose.

On the other hand, luck plays only a tiny role in determining who lifts the prem trophy. Sure, Simon Beck did us in when he insanely ruled Drogba onside and that one decision robbed us of the points that would have made us prem winners. But in general, the table truly does not lie.
Click to expand...

Quite the claim when you were knocked out in the final 16.
 
SirAF said:
Yeah obviously, but you don't consecutivly fluke 3 pointers throughout the season to win the league.
Click to expand...

Neither do your opponents who won or lost by goal difference. I think what you mean is that a team that wins the league is obviously better than the vast majority of it's opposition, which isn't necessarily true in a cup competition. That said, how can one be conclusive with so tiny margins? What if Aguero had scored with his hand instead of his foot, would you still conclusively claim they were the better team, even when it was an external factor (referee mistake) that made the difference?
 
Arruda said:
Neither do your opponents who won or lost by goal difference. I think what you mean is that a team that wins the league is obviously better than the vast majority of it's opposition, which isn't necessarily true in a cup competition. That said, how can one be conclusive with so tiny margins? What if Aguero had scored with his hand instead of his foot, would you still conclusively claim they were the better team, even when it was an external factor (referee mistake) that made the difference?
Click to expand...

Yes.
 
The Premier League is 38 games though. It's horrible for the season to amount to nothing. All those big moments effectively worthless. For me, the CL is a big bonus. If we do well, great, I'd love it, but if we don't, it's easily forgotten about. But the Premier League is where you invest most of your time and where you play your big rivals. Winning that should always come first as far as I'm concerned.
 
Premier League I think, that always has to be the main aim IMO. Champions League is obviously bigger, but I look at it as more of a bonus.
 
Arruda said:
A ridiculous assertion in my opinion. :) Even more so if you refuse to use the same blind objectiveness in Cup competitions.
Click to expand...

:lol:

I'm just being a bit difficult with you, because I interpreted your first answer as a defensive position because most people think Porto fluked it in 2004 ;)

However - as a general rule - I think we can agree that normally the winner of a league competition will be more deserving than the winner of a cup competition, right?
 
Perhaps it's the general attitude towards the CL that in some ways hold United back, if you ask a Real Madrid fan, I'm sure 99.999% will say the CL ahead of La Liga.

A lot of United fans see the CL as a bonus rather than the aim of the season.
 
Premier League should always be the first priority, then comes CL. In a few years, we could switch the priorities around for a season.
 
Cal? said:
Perhaps it's the general attitude towards the CL that in some ways hold United back, if you ask a Real Madrid fan, I'm sure 99.999% will say the CL ahead of La Liga.

A lot of United fans see the CL as a bonus rather than the aim of the season.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but I think it is important to be best in your own country. That's the bread and butter of every club in my opinion.

If we don't win the PL it is because we are not the best team (normally), however that doesn't have to be the case with the CL.
 
It's the CL for me. If we won it in the next few years, I'd be the happiest man alive. Need to get a few more, amazing how we haven't gotten 4 or even 5 by now.
 
SirAF said:
Yeah, but I think it is important to be best in your own country. That's the bread and butter of every club in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Why obsess about if you're best in ENgland when you can be best in Europe?
 
Crackers said:
It's the CL for me. If we won it in the next few years, I'd be the happiest man alive. Need to get a few more, amazing how we haven't gotten 4 or even 5 by now.
Click to expand...
Ovebro's incompetence is the answer re: 4.
 
SirAF said:
Yeah, but I think it is important to be best in your own country. That's the bread and butter of every club in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Arguably if you won the CL by being the best team in it, you'd be looking like a serious contender for the best in your country. Barca could win the CL and Real could the league, and I'd probably consider Barca a better team that year. Unless Real were monsters and walked the league. It's hard to judge how good a team unless you judge the scope of their win.
 
Cal? said:
Why obsess about if you're best in ENgland when you can be best in Europe?
Click to expand...

Because being best in Europe means less if you haven't "even" managed to be best in your own backyard. That's just my opinion on the matter. I can't stand watching another English team winning the league ahead of us - that's the most important thing.
 
Crackers said:
Arguably if you won the CL by being the best team in it, you'd be looking like a serious contender for the best in your country. Barca could win the CL and Real could the league, and I'd probably consider Barca a better team that year. Unless Real were monsters and walked the league. It's hard to judge how good a team unless you judge the scope of their win.
Click to expand...

That is also true. But think Liverpool 2005. It was a joke. Or indeed the final between Monaco and Porto - even worse! Has to be said that it was a rarity of course.
 
Arruda said:
Quite the claim when you were knocked out in the final 16.
Click to expand...

Quite the claim indeed, but nevertheless a valid statement. Porto's toughest opponent in the knockout rounds, by far, was Manchester United.
 
SirAF said:
That is also true. But think Liverpool 2005. It was a joke. Or indeed the final between Monaco and Porto - even worse! Has to be said that it was a rarity of course.
Click to expand...
:nono: Porto defeated everyone put in front of them that year (with the help of a blind linesman).
 
SirAF said:
Because being best in Europe means less if you haven't "even" managed to be best in your own backyard. That's just my opinion on the matter. I can't stand watching another English team winning the league ahead of us - that's the most important thing.
Click to expand...
I'd be very happy with United winning the CL and finishing 17th in the league.

The CL is the bigger trophy and hence the most important.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.