My Pick to win the 2014-15 Champions League

[~Utah]

I've never actually bet this, but I figure why the hell not.

I obviously considered the usual suspects and that pretty rounded it but I am going with :

Chelsea +850

I see this team winning both the premier league and the champions league. With the additions of the summer I think they have what they were missing last year. Of course the primary concern is how deep is this team really. Too many injuries can hurt this team badly. But I expect Mourinho to figure it out if it comes down to that.

 

[braves]

Pretty thin at striker. Jose will park the bus if he goes against Madrid or bayern. Those two are clearly the class, don't think Chelsea is on same page as either even if they are healthy

Good luck, hopefully the draw works out for them and you

 

[~Utah]

thanks mate, the draw matters a lot obviously. Think I will have a bunch of chances to hedge in the knockout stages

 

[Toronto_Mike]

do think Mourinho is a tournament coach and his tactics suit tournament play. Good D ends up winning the CL and he certainly has the pedigree. He doesn't always have the most attractive brand of football but he does get the job done.
Pretty sure he'd love a crack at Real Madrid.

GL Alex, think this has a great shot considering everyone is all over Real Madrid. Plus Chelsea has the financial backing to buy more players come January if needed.

 

[~Utah]

bunch of blokes

 

[Lareux]

I just looked it up, because I was confused as to why the extra time counted in the determination of away goals in the Champions League. Some leagues only use the full time results to count towards the away goals rule, but the Champions League, obviously, does not.

That's a tough one, I can see it both ways I guess. In this case, PSG and Chelsea were tied on aggregate at 2-2 after 90 minutes today, as well as tied in away goals. The only reason I'd give that ET shouldn't necessarily count towards the away goals is the fact that the first leg didn't go to ET after the first 90 minutes ended in a draw. So, even though PSG did score more away goals, they had 30 extra minutes to do so.

I'd think that you would have to play ET in the first leg in order for the ET goals in the 2nd leg to count....taking today's example, they would have been tied on aggregate 3-3 after ET, but still tied at 2-2 on away goals since the goals in ET wouldn't count towards those away goal totals. Obviously, that's not how they do it in the Champions League, but does anyone else thinks my reasoning makes sense for not counting ET goals towards the away goals since PSG essentially got 30 more minutes to score more away goals?

 

[Lareux]

For reference, CONCACAF, and now the MLS, use the more logical way to determine away goals in a 2 game 'series.'

CONCACAF has a different rule for its CONCACAF Champions League, employing away goals at the end of full-time of the second leg, but not applying the rule at the end of extra time. MLS adopted this version of the rule for its playoffs in 2014.[SUP][7][/SUP] For example, thesemifinal of the 2008–09 CONCACAF Champions League between Cruz Azul and the Puerto Rico Islanders had the following scorelines:

• First leg: Puerto Rico Islanders 2 – 0 Cruz Azul
• Second leg, after 90 minutes: Cruz Azul 2 – 0 Puerto Rico Islanders
• Second leg, after extra time: Cruz Azul 3 – 1 Puerto Rico Islanders

Since CONCACAF does not apply the away goals rule for goals scored after extra time, the game went to a penalty shootout, which Cruz Azul won 4–2.

 

[Alan Tongue]

I just looked it up, because I was confused as to why the extra time counted in the determination of away goals in the Champions League. Some leagues only use the full time results to count towards the away goals rule, but the Champions League, obviously, does not.

That's a tough one, I can see it both ways I guess. In this case, PSG and Chelsea were tied on aggregate at 2-2 after 90 minutes today, as well as tied in away goals. The only reason I'd give that ET shouldn't necessarily count towards the away goals is the fact that the first leg didn't go to ET after the first 90 minutes ended in a draw. So, even though PSG did score more away goals, they had 30 extra minutes to do so.

I'd think that you would have to play ET in the first leg in order for the ET goals in the 2nd leg to count....taking today's example, they would have been tied on aggregate 3-3 after ET, but still tied at 2-2 on away goals since the goals in ET wouldn't count towards those away goal totals. Obviously, that's not how they do it in the Champions League, but does anyone else thinks my reasoning makes sense for not counting ET goals towards the away goals since PSG essentially got 30 more minutes to score more away goals?

Getting the ET at home and the whole deal you mentioned above is the advantage of topping the group. You say PSG got 30 more minutes to score an away goal, but Chelsea got an extra 30 minutes to score at home

this is why when given the option, teams always choose to play the second leg at home

 

[braves]

Up a man for 100 mins, not excusable

 

[braves]

Did you hedge a little..after the psg red they must have been a big price to advance

 

[~Utah]

I just looked it up, because I was confused as to why the extra time counted in the determination of away goals in the Champions League. Some leagues only use the full time results to count towards the away goals rule, but the Champions League, obviously, does not.

That's a tough one, I can see it both ways I guess. In this case, PSG and Chelsea were tied on aggregate at 2-2 after 90 minutes today, as well as tied in away goals. The only reason I'd give that ET shouldn't necessarily count towards the away goals is the fact that the first leg didn't go to ET after the first 90 minutes ended in a draw. So, even though PSG did score more away goals, they had 30 extra minutes to do so.

I'd think that you would have to play ET in the first leg in order for the ET goals in the 2nd leg to count....taking today's example, they would have been tied on aggregate 3-3 after ET, but still tied at 2-2 on away goals since the goals in ET wouldn't count towards those away goal totals. Obviously, that's not how they do it in the Champions League, but does anyone else thinks my reasoning makes sense for not counting ET goals towards the away goals since PSG essentially got 30 more minutes to score more away goals?

I think the home team has the advantage, as they are at home. But I could see either side of the argument

 

[~Utah]

Did you hedge a little..after the psg red they must have been a big price to advance

nope, never even considered them losing in this round, lol

 

[braves]

Doubt I would have either

 

[Lareux]

Getting the ET at home and the whole deal you mentioned above is the advantage of topping the group. You say PSG got 30 more minutes to score an away goal, but Chelsea got an extra 30 minutes to score at home

this is why when given the option, teams always choose to play the second leg at home

I didn't know the teams are given the option to play the 2nd leg at home. Thanks Alan.

Yes, Chelsea had the extra 30 minutes at home, but they did score today in ET and still lost because they let one up as well. I understand the reasoning though that you're at home and should expect to get the better of it, or be the better side.

 

[Lareux]

I think the home team has the advantage, as they are at home. But I could see either side of the argument

:shake:

I never even really thought about it, haven't seen a 2 game set finish the way it did today with the ET and the away team in the 2nd leg then advancing on away goals due to the ET goal. I'm sure it's happened many times, I just had never noticed it.

I think I just figured they would either play ET in the 1st leg, or would stop counting away goals after 90 minutes of the 2nd leg if they didn't play ET in the first leg. It brings a little more drama the way the CL does it....I like it. Don't fuck up at home.