Champions League 2015/6

Dunphy was as ever harsh calling Man City "chancers". They put up a reasonable show in the backyard of one of the great European clubs who hadn't conceded a goal there in the CL (I think). De Bruyne looked off form from the very first kick and losing Kompany seemed to deflate them after a good start. What George Hamilton was going on (twice) about Man City's record in Milan I have no idea - ok, the Final is going to be there but it was irrelevant to the game in front of him. Ray Houghton did what Ray does, moan all commentary long.

Anyway, we have an all Madrid Final but can Atletico keep 11 on the pitch and see the game through this time?

I may miss the Final but being the year of the underdog (occasionally), I will go for Atletico especially if Ronaldo is not 100% fit. Should be a good game and Mark Clattenburg could have his hands full. Hope he allows a advantage a bit better than he did at Wembley at the weekend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeLorean

They say that goalkeepers can only make themselves heroes in a penalty shoot-out, well the two guys last night put that to the test. They were brutal, especially Oblak. It seemed the only way somebody could miss was by failing to hit the target and Narsingh eventually obliged.

---

Worst penalty goalkeeper ever. Although Darragh Maloney said he's stopped ten in his career, which seems good for a 23 year old.

A shame because he's a quality keeper. It looked like he was trying to cover two bases: the straight down the middle or the poorly struck wider penalty. I always feel that the best way to take that approach is to guess wildly for the first two. You might get lucky, but even if not you then send the signal you're a guesser and that'll tempt someone to go down the middle!

Couple of good Oblak impressions doing the rounds on twitter - this is my favourite I think.

The Real penalties were interesting though - kind of like Neymar's effort in the last World Cup v Chile. Made it quite hard to predict even when the ball was going to be hit - so the keeper moved first, and Real just went the other side.

Ugly game overall though. Not sure why Pepe wasn't sent off - Gabi (correctly) got an immediate yellow for calling for a red after a Real foul, but nothing for Pepe for two absurd dives right in front of the ref, designed to get the Atletico player sent off. I don't know is it just not in the rules that that kind of crap gets a yellow?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

I always feel that the best way to take that approach is to guess wildly for the first two.

---

Yeah, I always think it's good to dive properly, at least at the start. You are forcing the taker to take a really good one (close to corner/bar, more potential to miss) or to just hope you go the wrong way.

Overall, I wanted Atletico to win for most of the match, but as the game slowed to a crawl in ET I started to care less.

Is there anything to be said for just following the ball after it's struck, as opposed to guessing? So many penalties are poorly struck or not in the corner and it can put extra pressure on the taker when he's waiting for the keeper to move, but he doesn't. It always wrecked my head when Gaelic Football goalkeepers picked a side despite the goals being smaller and the kick being taken further out, although it's been moved closer to goal in recent years.

I enjoyed that Final immensely and it was one where players went beyond 2nd winds and pain barriers. i thought Clattenberg was for the most part excellent and I thought his big decision to award a penalty was correct.
Perhaps the last el clasico was better quality but it wasn't a CL final. I was reminded a bit of our WC game last 16 v Spain where we lost it by not nailing a clearly wilting team in ET.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeLorean

Is there anything to be said for just following the ball after it's struck, as opposed to guessing?

---

If the penalty is struck remotely powerfully, you simply won't have a chance of reacting quick enough.

And the point of the shimmy the Real players threw in was to trick the keeper into when the ball would be struck anyway - so the keeper would move one way early, and the ball would go the other way.

Most keepers - at the top level certainly - will know how to read a run-up or will know a penalty taker's preferred side to give them the best chance of going the right way and saving.

I know they wouldn't have much chance of keeping out the good ones, it can be difficult to generate power after a slow run up though and so many penalties aren't into the corner. In terms of the shimmy, I think that's where the keeper could just stand his ground but, yeah, easier said than done maybe. Did Packie just follow the ball for all five in Genoa? I think he may have.

You have to be ready to dive though - even the step forward is important to be able to kick off your dive.

So timing the dive is quite important for the keeper. If you don't get that right, it's quite hard to dive across to cover the corner.

The point of the slow run up is to delay the kick by, say, half a second to make the keeper blink first. I think the slightly weaving run-up must help there - again, adding an unexpected delay and making it difficult to tell when the kick is coming.

Once the keeper blinks, the taker goes to the opposite corner. But that requires quick thinking and the ability to adjust at short notice to kicking to either corner.

Stutts may correct some or all of that! But that's my experience from facing penalties anyway. You'll go the right way more often by waiting for the kick to be taken - but you'll save more by either guessing correctly or trying to read (physically or psyhologically) which way the shot is going

I presume you're right as the vast majority of goalkeepers guess, they can't all be wrong I suppose.

They make educated guesses - huge difference.

It's all about trying to swing the odds in your favour as much as possible.

If you know the taker goes to the right 80% of the time, you go right. If the kicker goes left - not your fault; you maximised the odds as much as you could.

Of course, if the kicker knows the keeper knows he goes to the right, he's advised to go left. But if the keeper knows the kicker knows the keeper knows, then...

By guess I meant to go before the ball is kicked. Obviously he bases his choice on various things, research, instinct, etc. But how educated can you really be? Like you said, the kicker probably knows as much as the keeper, probably even more in a shoot-out situation.

I agree with Stu. Just waiting won't work.

There's an alternative option which is what I think Oblak did. Put your weight to one side meaning that if the ball goes that side you can react, dive and have a chance if it's not a great penalty. It also allows him to stay on his feet if it's down the middle, as many are. But it rules out any chance of saving anything the other side. I think the Marcelo penalty is the best example. He did go the right way but nowhere near committed enough. He was clearly waiting but it was a good kick. If he had guessed he'd have got there quicker. And yes, you can make an educated guess. A non expert peaty taker may give some clues by his run up or body position. I think you can sometimes tell by a player's chest angle rather than looking at the ball / foot.

Any keeper will tell you it's a great feeling guessing and seeing the ball go that way!

Real's penalties were expertly taken, as were 3 of Atletico's. However I think I read recently that IFAB are introducing a new rule outlawing the staggered run up. How they define it I don't know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

And yes, you can make an educated guess. A non expert peaty taker may give some clues by his run up or body position. I think you can sometimes tell by a player's chest angle rather than looking at the ball / foot.

---

This is it. There's a good book on penalties, Twelve Yards by Ben Lyttleton. He talks to, I think, the Chelsea goalkeeping coach and he said there's about 20 different things you can read into a taker's run-up (he wouldn't list any of them of course! Trade secret). You still won't always go the right way - and if you do go the right way, you still mayn't save - but it just increases your odds.

So on that basis, the keeper is at an advantage over the taker.

Banning the staggered run-up is an obvious step of course - just like Aldridge's full stop was banned around 1990. Though I think it's still an interesting development in the evolution of the shoot-out. But if it completely flummoxes keepers, then obviously it becomes an unfair contest and should go.

I wonder if the rule change will actually benefit the keeper? I always feel more confident when a player has a normal forceful run up where he can strike the ball hard and accurately. It's the way I would take a penalty myself, not that that counts for much. :) I remember Ruud Van Nistelrooy having a fairly straight forward, no frills, approach to his penalties, when he just smacked them low and hard to the keepers right. The keeper knew where it was going but was still helpless. Van Nistelrooy seemed to mix up his style in later years without nearly as much success.

Any opinions on Packie in Genoa? Did he follow the ball or just read the takers body language well? He got pretty near most of them, even the ones that were well struck. How was Packie for penalties otherwise do ye know? I wouldn't have seen any of his Celtic days really and can't remember him facing too many with us.

A week before the World Cup Psckie lost a shoot out to Aberdeen in the SFA Cup Final. They lost and I think he went the wrong way for all 8. A Donegal thing maybe?!

He went the right way for all 5 in Genoa yet was a bit away from them all, bar Timofte. Shilton was the same in the semi final. Right way but not really close. I'd say in each case they waited.

I remembering reading about a very high scoring shoot-out between Celtic and Aberdeen alright actually. That's interesting though, he obviously felt he had to change his tactic. I felt he waited against Romania myself but their penalties were of a high quality until Timofte's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeLorean

I wonder if the rule change will actually benefit the keeper? I always feel more confident when a player has a normal forceful run up where he can strike the ball hard and accurately. It's the way I would take a penalty myself, not that that counts for much. :) I remember Ruud Van Nistelrooy having a fairly straight forward, no frills, approach to his penalties, when he just smacked them low and hard to the keepers right. The keeper knew where it was going but was still helpless. Van Nistelrooy seemed to mix up his style in later years without nearly as much success.

Any opinions on Packie in Genoa? Did he follow the ball or just read the takers body language well? He got pretty near most of them, even the ones that were well struck. How was Packie for penalties otherwise do ye know? I wouldn't have seen any of his Celtic days really and can't remember him facing too many with us.

---

Packie tried to read the run up of the penalty taker and make his decision on where to dive based on that reading, this is what he was doing at WC90, I don't know what he practiced before then
With a penalty taker coming in at a 45deg angle, the taker would likely hit it to the same side he was coming from and this is what happened with Timofte, but it helps when it's bleedin' obvious and the ball is hit at the perfect height and distance for the goalie to save.

I remember some other keeper saying he judged both the poise/angle of the penalty taker (as geysir mentioned above) and the distance between the penalty taker's 'non-kicking' leg and the ball as he planted it before actually kicking the ball. The closer it was to the ball, the more likely the penalty taker was to sidefoot it to the keeper's left (if the penalty taker was right-footed). The farther away it was planted from the ball, the more likely he was to put it to the keeper's right. If the kicker's left arm moved away from his body for balance, that was another sign he would put it to the keeper's right.

Steven Gerrard is one who used to do this - look like he was going to smash it in the run-up and then open up his body and place it to the keeper's left.

I've asked on foot.ie before about just how much of 'send the keeper the wrong way' is real and how much is nonsense, but when you see some of the penalties from that shootout (Griezmann in particular), you have to wonder - to hit it so far from the corner, they'd need to be very confident that the keeper would go the other way (or that they had delayed it just enough to see him go the other way). Either way, balls of steel.

If you see the number of times the keepers go the wrong way, there must be something in it. If I was a keeper, I'd say to myself that if I think he's going to hit it to the left, I will go to the right (Shay Given please note).

Yikes! Sounds very fishy (sorry).

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7af1f348-4...#axzz4DQLiQeQk


China’s richest man is backing plans to launch a rival to the Uefa Champions League, pushing for European leagues and clubs to join a new competition that would redraw the power structure and finances at the top of the sport.

Dalian Wanda Group, the property and entertainment conglomerate run by billionaire Wang Jianlin, said it is in talks with the game’s power brokers across the continent to create a breakaway tournament to Europe’s most prestigious club competition.

Wanda is promising more places for the sport’s heavyweight teams and a steep increase in broadcasting rights revenues.

The ambitious proposals are part of China’s designs on conquering the world’s most popular sport — on and off the pitch.

Chinese groups have spent billions of dollars acquiring stakes in European football clubs and sports companies in recent years. This buying spree was sparked by President Xi Jinping, whose stated desire is to transform football-mad China into a “great sports nation” capable of winning a World Cup.

Marco Bogarelli, strategic director of Wanda Sports Holding, the privately owned Chinese group’s sports arm, said its aim was to gain participation from the national leagues in Europe’s “big five” TV markets — England, Spain, Italy, France and Germany — that contribute the majority of Champions League broadcasting revenues.

“Many talented players are deciding to play in Asia instead of coming to Europe,” he said. “One day Asia will have the money for Cristiano Ronaldo to play there . . . It is in the common interest for these five leagues to have football growing in Europe [in order to] maintain its leadership.”

He said talks have begun with Spain’s La Liga and Italy’s Serie A, with plans to initiate discussions with England’s Premier League, Germany’s Bundesliga and France’s Ligue 1 after the Euro 2016 championships, which stages its final match on Sunday.


Wanda also hopes to win backing from Uefa, European football’s governing body, but is willing to propose a separate competition should it object to the plans. “There has to be a future that has more freedom, based on the needs of the clubs and the leagues where they can make a choice,” said Mr Bogarelli.

A senior executive at one of the big five leagues said: “This is very well planned. The proposal is realistic.”

Uefa is already under pressure to enact major changes to the existing Champions League, the lucrative annual competition that pits Europe’s top teams against each other, as clubs push to secure greater financial rewards.

“It is not the first time that there has been speculation regarding the possibility of a breakaway league, and it probably won’t be the last,” said Theodore Theodoridis, Uefa’s interim general secretary.

“When taking any decisions, we will take into account not only financial rewards to clubs but also the greater good of the game and its development across the continent.”

Two people familiar with the talks said the proposals were being driven by the interests of a “handful” of clubs in Spain and Italy, particularly Real Madrid, last season’s Champions League winners and the highest-earning club in the world. Real Madrid did not respond to requests for comment.


Uefa holds two annual club competitions, the Champions League featuring the 32 top teams across Europe, and a second-tier tournament dubbed the Europa League.

Wanda’s proposal is to create a single expanded competition that would feature more than 32 teams, but fewer than 64. It would guarantee at least six places for each of the big five leagues. Currently, England, Germany and Spain are granted four slots in the Champions League, while France, Italy and Portugal are allotted three places each.

Smaller nations would have fewer places overall in any new European competition.

Traditional powerhouses, such as Inter Milan in Italy and Manchester United in England, would have gained from Wanda’s proposed set-up this year. Each has failed to qualify for next season’s Champions League after finishing just outside the qualification positions in their domestic leagues.

Wanda said its proposed competition would be more attractive to broadcasters, creating more high-profile clashes that would attract audiences in Europe’s largest markets, with revenues expected to rise 30-35 per cent.


In the UK, BT has paid £897m for a three-year deal to broadcast the Champions and Europa League competitions. Mediaset has reportedly paid €700m for the rights to screen the tournaments in Italy for the three years to 2018.

La Liga said it was reviewing the proposals but declined to comment further. Didier Quillot, chief executive of France’s Ligue de Football Professionnel, said that though he was aware of clubs being disgruntled with the status quo, he had not been approached by Wanda and was “not favourable” to its plans.

Serie A, Bundesliga and the Premier League declined to comment.

Wanda’s move comes during a power vacuum at Uefa. Its president Michel Platini resigned in May after failing to overturn a ban from football. The body is due to elect a new leader in September.

The continent’s biggest clubs are already pushing Uefa to institute substantial format changes to the Champions League. Clubs, particularly in Spain and Italy, are battling for more matches between Europe’s biggest teams that could prove more lucrative in terms of commercial rights and match-day revenues. But smaller nations are resisting proposals that would reduce their participation.


Leagues in Spain, France and Italy may be the most interested in joining a breakaway tournament, as their top clubs are more reliant on revenues from pan-European competitions than are their English and German rivals.

This year, English clubs will each earn at least £100m from the Premier League’s £5.1m broadcasting deal with Sky and BT. German teams will soon benefit from the €4.6bn deal with Sky and Eurosport to screen live Bundesliga matches.

A new competition would help Mr Wang — whose estimated $28.7bn fortune was built in domestic real estate — to achieve his goal of creating a global leisure and entertainment empire that can satisfy the tastes of China’s burgeoning middle class.

Wanda has acquired a 20 per cent stake in Atlético Madrid, the runner-up in this season’s Champions League. The company bought the Ironman Triathlon in August for $650m and has acquired ski and golf resorts around the world.

Last year, it paid $1.2bn for Infront Media, the Swiss company led by Philippe Blatter, the nephew of disgraced former Fifa president Sepp Blatter, which distributes TV rights for some of the world’s biggest sporting events.

Executives at Infront, now part of Wanda Sports Holding, are leading the negotiations over the proposed tournament for which it wants to sell worldwide broadcasting rights. Champions League rights are distributed by rival Swiss sports rights agency Team Marketing AG.

Wanda’s proposals are for games to be played over two-week rounds on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday nights. This would create six “prime time” slots for broadcasters, with each match night featuring a club from England, Spain, Italy, Germany and France in the tournament’s early stages.

One leading European football official said Wanda must contend with the game’s complex politics. “It’s naive to say, because we have the money, we will make this happen,” he said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

One leading European football official said Wanda must contend with the game’s complex politics. “It’s naive to say, because we have the money, we will make this happen,” he said.

---

I'd say that comment is naive. Where the money is the clubs will follow.