The Official Champions League Final Matchday Thread!

[Rich Pullen]

BWB is clearly on the wind-up.

[pauld]

The table doesn't lie is one of those phrases that's just not true. The table isn't a list of the best teams from 1st to last, it just gives you a rough idea based on a small sample of games and better teams finish below worse teams every season due to all kinds of random factors, as should be expected in a sport where the best teams often have a very small edge over other sides.

It's a good point. As Swindon fans we should march on Geneva now and demand that Platini hand over the CL title to Town as we are clearly "by far the greatest team the world has ever seen" - a fact that would have been amply demonstrated on ITV last night were it not for UEFA's collyfuddledness about tables

[Arriba]

bwb would have arsenal bottom of the league

[Ben Wah Balls]

So you're saying that Liverpool are still better than Man Utd despite picking up less points and winning less games? Doesn't really make sense.

It proves my point that you don't think it makes sense. People find it so hard to understand that winning one more game over 38 games does not mean that one team is definitely a better side which can only be due to a very flawed understanding of variance. The difference between winning the premiership title and not winning the title is two goals this season, two goals which were the difference between draws and narrow victories, is it so difficult to understand that you cannot draw very many conclusions purely from league positions when the table is that close? All you can say is they're probably very closely matched. How close do they have to be before you realise it doesn't prove much? Level points? Level goal difference? Level goals scored?

It seems some people think that beating Man United 2-0 means Barcelona are definitely a better side but Liverpool beating Man United 4-1 means nothing at all. There's just no logic behind it.

I find it's the element of luck which makes football interesting. If the better side won every game it would be  pretty dull. By the way Arriba 4th is probably about right for Arsenal, they are about the only premiership team that have a big enough gap surrounding them that their position means much. Of course I would prefer if they were bottom of the league though.

[Rich Pullen]

To hell with all this variance football intellectual nonsense.

Premiership

38 Games - whoever finishes on the most points at the end is the best. BOOM.

[pauld]

To hell with all this variance football intellectual nonsense.

Premiership

38 Games - whoever finishes on the most points at the end is the best. BOOM.

*Subject to Sheffield Utd's legal advisers

[Rich Pullen]

*Subject to Sheffield Utd's legal advisers

Of course.

[chalkies_shorts]

BWB has it all cracked. Fuck all this 46 game mallarkey just buy a lottery ticket, do the bingo. Fuck tactics. Fuck buying and selling players. Fuck having the bottle to keep a lead. We've not actually been shit for 15 years, we're just on a bad streak of luck. Maybe when the Pikeys pitch their caravans up next year we should clear their stock of heather.
BWB - I talk bollox but I think you've trumped me - just my luck. 

[Ben Wah Balls]

No, trust me you have the monopoly on talking bollocks. Is it such a difficult concept for you to comprehend chalkie that the best team doesn't always win in football. Of course I am not saying that the result of every game is ONLY luck but if you think there isn't ANY luck involved at all I just don't understand how you can be that deluded. Never play poker, you won't be able to understand it.

[4D]

I think it would be pretty dull to support a team who won (or were expected to win) most or all of their games, week in week out. Some of my favourite Town games involved teams that we weren't expected to beat, but we did. It doesn't mean that the football is pretty at times, but it has you on the edge of your seat. I must be in the minority though judging by all the Prem shirters you see around 

[chalkies_shorts]

The best team may not win an individual match but over 46 games the luck evens out across all teams. You do finish where you deserve to be. You don't fluke a title. Other teams may fuck it up to give you a clear run but shit teams do not win titles. As for Liverpool being better than Man U - head to head yes, but over a season no.
You are giving me some serious competition on the bollox front. Check what kind of mushrooms you are eating.

[Simon Pieman]

Ben's just a fun guy

[chalkies_shorts]

I think he talks a lot of shit-ake

[Ben Wah Balls]

The best team may not win an individual match but over 46 games the luck evens out across all teams. You do finish where you deserve to be. You don't fluke a title. Other teams may fuck it up to give you a clear run but shit teams do not win titles. As for Liverpool being better than Man U - head to head yes, but over a season no.
You are giving me some serious competition on the bollox front. Check what kind of mushrooms you are eating.

46 games is no way near enough for the luck to even out. You're correct that shit teams don't win titles (shit in comparison to their league anyway) but it doesn't mean that a team is significantly better than a lower placed team just because they got a couple of points more than the other team over a season -it's such a marginal difference that it really doesn't tell you a lot at all.

[chalkies_shorts]

But the league is 46 games and you know what the rules are when you start - so if you're better over 48 games and don't win the tilte then tough shit. Its what you do in that 46 game period that matters. That all comes down to preparation, buying the right players, gelling them etc - not luck.