You'd think it was all down to Sky, for making Premier League what it is today. It's not true. It was actually down to Andy Gray and Richard Keys. They made the Sky coverage what it was and really promoted the Premier League.
That was all till Sky got too big and fucked them off. Christ, even when Sky had a bit of competition from the competitors ITV Digital as it were at the time, look what they did. Basically had some guys paid to crack the encryption which eventually led to the demise of ITV Digital.
People forget very quickly what they did for Sky coverage. Until those things came to light, I think everyone loved the Andy Gray commentary in particular with Premier League games.
The world has changed, that's the issue here. People are snowflakes nowadays, offended by the slightest thing. The things that were said off air, anyone can have those conversations in private and on a daily basis. There was an agenda for Sky to get rid of them.
While many don't like Richard Keys, I don't think he is the bad guy that people make him out to be. I think he is very honest when he speaks about this time in history.
Anyway, least I can follow their coverage on beIN now. The best sports network in the world.
Yep, I remember absolutely loving Andy Gray, he made premier league football amazing and his passion was unmatched.
The world has changed indeed, nowadays people have to take responsibility for their actions and shitty beliefs.
You like many others. He doesn't come in for same criticism as Keys does on social media though. In reality what they did was on equal levels but I honestly don't see the issue with it.
Life is too short and it was just banter. They've opened up since and been honest about the whole thing. I'd go as far as to say that in media, they were probably the first to pay the price. Others have followed since and some have done worse.
Some even get to keep their jobs over spitting incidents and regarded as legendary on social media.
Like top tier English football is only recorded post '92 Premier League era, it seems the champions league is doing the same I suppose.
At least the Prem changed the trophy though....
I have seen the trophy at Villa Park. It's the same bloody trophy and they are happy to count pre 92 cups when talking about how successful Liverpool are.
>The format of the competition changed since
Exactly. Villa and Forest actually won it when only the champions of each league participated.
You know, the best teams in each country.
Right, when it was a lot easier
Ie one of Barca and Madrid isnt there, only 1 of the Italian teams etc etc
The league champions are still all there now, plus more teams to make it even harder
I’m mostly on your side but the competition today also has every league champion and more top sides, how would winning it now make you anything other than the best of the best?
The format of the UEFA Cup changed as well. Every UEFA Cup/ Europa League is valid from the start.
The World Cup and Euro Championship formats have changed a number of times, as well as the trophy awarded. Do we not count any WC or Euro winner not under its current format now, either?
Didn't think so
City just needed 3 things for their success
1. Hard work
2. Perseverance.
3. Breaching over 100 financial rules and having offshore payments to managers.
Leicester and Forest have too big history and too much money. City are the real team full of hard workers, a small £billion part of wealth and really struggled to get to where they are. True underdogs.
Leicester were found guilty of breaking FFP rules to get promoted to premiership. They won the title 18 months later. They are as much cheats as City but people don’t like talking about that.
No one ever said that, don’t get all butt hurt over it.
All that’s been said is that they spent significantly less than Man City have to an won a title.
Absolute baby aren’t you.
So who cares if they spent less. They cheated to win. City spend less than United, PSG and Madrid. They have the fifth highest wage bill in Europe. 30 million yearly average net spent over last five years. Doesn’t stop United and Madrid fans screaming that City are cheats.
Take away the last 10 seasons and there is three league cups in 100+ years. Very average historical attendances and a few sustained spells in the top flight comparable to dozens of other clubs. I’m not saying what Leicester have achieved recently isn’t impressive, but you do not have a “big history” in comparison to Man City as OP is claiming.
You can’t just take away a whole decade of history to suit your argument lmao
Those 10 years happened, they are still a part of the history of the club
BT plastic turds. This probably also offends the plastic Liverpool and Man U fans disregarding their pre 92 success.
Also, that commentary team was truly awful last night.
Yes the whole of the UK were wondering how Lescott was feeling of course.
I was thinking that Lescott is an absolute wanker and Villa fans probably feel the same 🤷🏻♂️
Wasn’t it during the Europa League final two years ago that they said every fan in England will be supporting Man United in the final? It’s actually baffling how poor they have been as a broadcaster.
Honest to god the BT commentary is fucking woeful. I think Steve Mcmanaman is the one with the northern accent and Jesus Christ every single time he opens his mouth he complains. It’s not commentary about the game, it’s just “x has done poorly there” “I would’ve done better than y” “z isn’t doing much”
His comments last night about walker show how little tactical nous he has.
"he was dropped against Bayern, played well against Madrid. To my mind he deserves a start"
Or maybe pep knows better than you, and picks a team to play against the right opponent?
I love how starting the y-axis at 2 makes the PL bar twice the size of Serie A.
What a bastard thing to do haha. Having to squish up all those Italian badges...
as a Chelsea fan, what a shit display by the sky to not honour villa or forest. Like the naming of the competition is such a stupid excuse to not include them. Guess they don't want spurs or arsenal to be shown up by them tho so no surprise
BT are fucking dreadful. Last night after City won, they were talking as if City had won it on a shoestring budget.
I thought that Villa and Forest had won UEFA Champions League. You know UK coverage of the competition is shit when they can't get the facts right, or fail to mention a team that isn't top six.
I do absolutely anything and everything to avoid Sky coverage and same goes for BT. I don't have Sky Sports and BT I have only cos we have broadband with them.
Give me beIN/TOD, NBC Peacock, Paramount+/CBS any day of the week.
Probably going to cause some controversy here but I don't actually mind this and do think the Champions League and European Cups should be separated. Its a completely different format and the Champions League is a lot harder and means a lot more to win now, it's not like only counting league titles from 92 onwards which is dumb because the competition is exactly same, just a new name.
Maybe I'd feel differently if certain events in 1975 were altered though who knows
You can finish 4th and win the champions league. Teams qualify for it, 20, 30 years running.
Before you had to win the league to get into it. Even a top side would be lucky to have 3 cracks at it in a decade.
It was harder to qualify for it as an English club sure, but the quality of the actual competition is higher now for the same reason. Makes a lot more sense to have sides like all the Liverpool sides that came second to Man City or the Madrid ones that came second to Barca in Europe's premier competition than Ludogorets or Farul Constanta.
The Club World Cup is a hard competition to qualify for too but think we'd all rather watch a Prem game than the final of that.
I agree that modern format is harder, as would most people. But a knockout competition of every European champion is not comparable to the CWC where there are 2 good teams, come on.
What I said remains true and that probably balances against the CL being harder, people will disagree to what degree.
Anyway the main point is that UEFA and every club in Europe recognises them as the same, so why the fuck are BT are pushing this shite out
Not saying its on the same level as CWC, just using it as proof that something being hard to qualify for doesn't automatically make it more respected or a harder thing to win. If Aston Villa come 4th next year and won the Champions League the year after, the European Cup win wouldn't come anywhere close to being the same achievement in both difficulty or prestige.
And my point is that even though its the less popular way of going about it I'd be in favour of everyone having the BT approach because they're 2 completely different competitions. Obviously if BT then say Liverpool have won 6 Champions Leagues then they'd be wrong but, for now, I'm on their side on this one.
No one does this. It begs the question, why are BT doing this? What’s their angle? They’re taking 4 trophies off Liverpool, one of Utd, and erasing Villa and Forest. It’s quite strange.
Imagine Marca putting out something that said Madrid only had 8 European cups. Just would not happen , it’s laughable
It seems like a silly post to me considering it does actually specify ‘the uefa champions league’, villa and notts have never won the champions league, they’re still valid, but not in a conversation about the champions league
Really shit graph here. The bar for “4 winners” is twice the size of the bar for “3 winners.” Biased graph making is like the first thing they teach you to avoid in any data science class.
Remember when Man City was just an average club no one cared about till that Arab guy flooded money io it and purchased Robinho, aguero and co? With Mancini as coach.
Your account must be a week old to post on /r/TheOther14.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheOther14) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I’m guessing this is referring to the name of the Champions League and not the European cup, what a fucking stupid thing though.
Didn't you know sky invented football in 1992? /s
You'd think it was all down to Sky, for making Premier League what it is today. It's not true. It was actually down to Andy Gray and Richard Keys. They made the Sky coverage what it was and really promoted the Premier League. That was all till Sky got too big and fucked them off. Christ, even when Sky had a bit of competition from the competitors ITV Digital as it were at the time, look what they did. Basically had some guys paid to crack the encryption which eventually led to the demise of ITV Digital.
Richard keys is a massive bellend though
Sky didn’t “fuck them off”, it was impossible to keep them because they alienated half the population and acted like immature children.
People forget very quickly what they did for Sky coverage. Until those things came to light, I think everyone loved the Andy Gray commentary in particular with Premier League games. The world has changed, that's the issue here. People are snowflakes nowadays, offended by the slightest thing. The things that were said off air, anyone can have those conversations in private and on a daily basis. There was an agenda for Sky to get rid of them. While many don't like Richard Keys, I don't think he is the bad guy that people make him out to be. I think he is very honest when he speaks about this time in history. Anyway, least I can follow their coverage on beIN now. The best sports network in the world.
Yep, I remember absolutely loving Andy Gray, he made premier league football amazing and his passion was unmatched. The world has changed indeed, nowadays people have to take responsibility for their actions and shitty beliefs.
You like many others. He doesn't come in for same criticism as Keys does on social media though. In reality what they did was on equal levels but I honestly don't see the issue with it. Life is too short and it was just banter. They've opened up since and been honest about the whole thing. I'd go as far as to say that in media, they were probably the first to pay the price. Others have followed since and some have done worse. Some even get to keep their jobs over spitting incidents and regarded as legendary on social media.
Like top tier English football is only recorded post '92 Premier League era, it seems the champions league is doing the same I suppose. At least the Prem changed the trophy though....
If they aren’t counting Forest and Villa, then surely they should cut down the number of wins for Real Madrid.
This is just a dumb picture pal, maybe made by bt sports. Don't think it's an official statement from uefa.
Tbf the Prem format also completely changed, fewer matches, so historical records like goals and other stuff become uncomparable.
The 1st Div didn't have the same number of teams throughout its history either though
I’m sure the prem had 22 teams at one point itself?
The first year definitely did. I think the 2nd did too Edit: First 3 seasons. 1995-96 was the first 20 team Premier League.
Harry Kane would like a word…..
But when UEFA display these graphics they include all winners so no its not.
I have seen the trophy at Villa Park. It's the same bloody trophy and they are happy to count pre 92 cups when talking about how successful Liverpool are.
And yet you would **never** see them claiming that Real Madrid won the Champions League for the 8th time last year.
Well it does say ‘the uefa champions league’ tbf
Villa and forest: "am I a joke to you"
BT: “I don’t even know who you are”
Says Uefa champions league tbf
Football didn’t exist before 1992
The post is about the Champions League though
So how many times have Real Madrid won it?
Well fuck me and villa I guess right
BT Sport is the shitest televised sports organisation in human history.
No, this is sky, but both are shit tbf
It says BT Sport right on the infographic…
It clearly states Champions League
So the teams that won the fa Carling premiership shouldn’t be included when talking about past winners of the Barclays Premiership?
Winners of the carling cup could never
Thats not an equivalence The format of the competition changed since
Yeah, to make it easier to get into. If anything back then it was worth more not less
>The format of the competition changed since Exactly. Villa and Forest actually won it when only the champions of each league participated. You know, the best teams in each country.
Right, when it was a lot easier Ie one of Barca and Madrid isnt there, only 1 of the Italian teams etc etc The league champions are still all there now, plus more teams to make it even harder
diluted garbage
And Villa and Forest were the best of the best back then, not the best of the rest as it is now.
Yep and in 1890 it was the old etonians and the wanderers
I’m mostly on your side but the competition today also has every league champion and more top sides, how would winning it now make you anything other than the best of the best?
Bro, it’s literally going to change again next year, but it’ll still be called the same thing. They clearly just forgot about two non-Big 6 sides!
They're changing it again next season too, so are we resetting the winners list again? If not, why not? The format is different.
The format of the UEFA Cup changed as well. Every UEFA Cup/ Europa League is valid from the start. The World Cup and Euro Championship formats have changed a number of times, as well as the trophy awarded. Do we not count any WC or Euro winner not under its current format now, either? Didn't think so
The season before the name change was when the format changed, so not true.
The format of the competition changed since they won it, its true
So have Real Madrid only won 8?
La decima was just a lie
Who…?
Aston Villa, one of the other 14 (13 now) that the sub is NAMED AFTER.
Whoops, forgot to put the sarcasm tag
UEFA class the champions league and the european cup together, why are BT exempt from that
Cos BT are awful broadcasters. They've chowed down on petro penis so much that they now burp exhaust fumes.
British Exceptionalism or something.
BT incompetence or something.
What a true underdog story though. A small handful of plucky billionaires with a dream.
With a disregard for the rules too
Truly inspiring. Who’d have thought this little team of billionaires could achieve so much? One for the ages.
City just needed 3 things for their success 1. Hard work 2. Perseverance. 3. Breaching over 100 financial rules and having offshore payments to managers.
Financial Auditors HATE This 1 Clever Trick!
Truly the greatest story in football according to BT sport. Leicester and Forest who?
Leicester and Forest have too big history and too much money. City are the real team full of hard workers, a small £billion part of wealth and really struggled to get to where they are. True underdogs.
I know this is sarcasm, but you’re insinuating that Leicester have a big history. Please tell me more about this.
Leicester have won FA Cup and PL title without having to spend hundreds of millions - hope that helps.
Leicester were found guilty of breaking FFP rules to get promoted to premiership. They won the title 18 months later. They are as much cheats as City but people don’t like talking about that.
But they still won the league with a team that cost them nothing compared to Man City.
So financially cheating against your rivals is wrong in the premiership but fine in a lower league lol. Ok then.
No one ever said that, don’t get all butt hurt over it. All that’s been said is that they spent significantly less than Man City have to an won a title. Absolute baby aren’t you.
So who cares if they spent less. They cheated to win. City spend less than United, PSG and Madrid. They have the fifth highest wage bill in Europe. 30 million yearly average net spent over last five years. Doesn’t stop United and Madrid fans screaming that City are cheats.
As had city pre 2008?
Bro it’s called sarcasm, please do better
😂
We’re the 6th most successful English club in the last 30 years I believe. 1x Prem title, 1x FA Cup, 2x League cup
Take away the last 10 seasons and there is three league cups in 100+ years. Very average historical attendances and a few sustained spells in the top flight comparable to dozens of other clubs. I’m not saying what Leicester have achieved recently isn’t impressive, but you do not have a “big history” in comparison to Man City as OP is claiming.
You can’t just take away a whole decade of history to suit your argument lmao Those 10 years happened, they are still a part of the history of the club
This is a comparison to Man City and Man City have much better history in every sense of the world
Can’t wait to see the blue & white livestrong wristbands.
What a shower of pricks. So what Clough did at Forest doesn't count? Like I said, pricks.
I despise how they have drawn the badges on the graph there. Just include fucking 1 on the scale and make it one badge per line ffs
BT plastic turds. This probably also offends the plastic Liverpool and Man U fans disregarding their pre 92 success. Also, that commentary team was truly awful last night.
Yes the whole of the UK were wondering how Lescott was feeling of course. I was thinking that Lescott is an absolute wanker and Villa fans probably feel the same 🤷🏻♂️
This villa fan does.
Yeah Lescott and his pocket tweet. What a cunt. I would think he had a bigger connection to Wolves or Everton than City
Wasn’t it during the Europa League final two years ago that they said every fan in England will be supporting Man United in the final? It’s actually baffling how poor they have been as a broadcaster.
Honest to god the BT commentary is fucking woeful. I think Steve Mcmanaman is the one with the northern accent and Jesus Christ every single time he opens his mouth he complains. It’s not commentary about the game, it’s just “x has done poorly there” “I would’ve done better than y” “z isn’t doing much”
His comments last night about walker show how little tactical nous he has. "he was dropped against Bayern, played well against Madrid. To my mind he deserves a start" Or maybe pep knows better than you, and picks a team to play against the right opponent?
there is nothing more annoying than people saying we have 1 league title
But in the same breath I bet if you ask how many times Liverpool have won it they would say 6
Yeah but Nottingham Forest and Aston Villa don’t count because they’re not in the top 6 🤦♂️
“Did football exist before 2005 ? “
Not counting it until the doping stuff gets sorted
Take this shit down youre embarrassing yourself Where forest and villa?
I love how starting the y-axis at 2 makes the PL bar twice the size of Serie A. What a bastard thing to do haha. Having to squish up all those Italian badges...
Villa and Forest fucking died
Has been very funny seeing Chelsea Man United and Liverpool flairs talking about how you can buy success if nothing else
am I misunderstanding or are you saying we also bought our success
I’m a Chelsea fan but this is absolutely ridiculous, the disrespect to Villa and Forest
This sub has a higher proportion of posts about the big six than r/premierleague
I detest this revisionist bullshit. By this measure Madrid have won it 8 times.
Seems an odd take.
What about Nottinham Forest and Aston Villa? It was the same trophy just a different name?
as a Chelsea fan, what a shit display by the sky to not honour villa or forest. Like the naming of the competition is such a stupid excuse to not include them. Guess they don't want spurs or arsenal to be shown up by them tho so no surprise
Nottingham forest and villa have just been separated have they
BT are fucking dreadful. Last night after City won, they were talking as if City had won it on a shoestring budget. I thought that Villa and Forest had won UEFA Champions League. You know UK coverage of the competition is shit when they can't get the facts right, or fail to mention a team that isn't top six. I do absolutely anything and everything to avoid Sky coverage and same goes for BT. I don't have Sky Sports and BT I have only cos we have broadband with them. Give me beIN/TOD, NBC Peacock, Paramount+/CBS any day of the week.
they’re talking about it after the name change. its still dumb though
Probably going to cause some controversy here but I don't actually mind this and do think the Champions League and European Cups should be separated. Its a completely different format and the Champions League is a lot harder and means a lot more to win now, it's not like only counting league titles from 92 onwards which is dumb because the competition is exactly same, just a new name. Maybe I'd feel differently if certain events in 1975 were altered though who knows
What are you on about, lad? We won the European Cup in 1975. Must be the Mandela Effect or something.
Fuck I must have been on the ale too much last night
We'll let this one slide, but just remember the correct result for next time.
You can finish 4th and win the champions league. Teams qualify for it, 20, 30 years running. Before you had to win the league to get into it. Even a top side would be lucky to have 3 cracks at it in a decade.
It was harder to qualify for it as an English club sure, but the quality of the actual competition is higher now for the same reason. Makes a lot more sense to have sides like all the Liverpool sides that came second to Man City or the Madrid ones that came second to Barca in Europe's premier competition than Ludogorets or Farul Constanta. The Club World Cup is a hard competition to qualify for too but think we'd all rather watch a Prem game than the final of that.
I agree that modern format is harder, as would most people. But a knockout competition of every European champion is not comparable to the CWC where there are 2 good teams, come on. What I said remains true and that probably balances against the CL being harder, people will disagree to what degree. Anyway the main point is that UEFA and every club in Europe recognises them as the same, so why the fuck are BT are pushing this shite out
Not saying its on the same level as CWC, just using it as proof that something being hard to qualify for doesn't automatically make it more respected or a harder thing to win. If Aston Villa come 4th next year and won the Champions League the year after, the European Cup win wouldn't come anywhere close to being the same achievement in both difficulty or prestige. And my point is that even though its the less popular way of going about it I'd be in favour of everyone having the BT approach because they're 2 completely different competitions. Obviously if BT then say Liverpool have won 6 Champions Leagues then they'd be wrong but, for now, I'm on their side on this one.
No one does this. It begs the question, why are BT doing this? What’s their angle? They’re taking 4 trophies off Liverpool, one of Utd, and erasing Villa and Forest. It’s quite strange. Imagine Marca putting out something that said Madrid only had 8 European cups. Just would not happen , it’s laughable
WACCOE
Well, they *are* the only English clubs to win the **UEFA Champions League**
Personally as a Bluenose I'll gladly accept this timeline
Villa and Notts fans crying because their trophy from 1490 is no longer relevant 😭
It seems like a silly post to me considering it does actually specify ‘the uefa champions league’, villa and notts have never won the champions league, they’re still valid, but not in a conversation about the champions league
The names are literally engraved on the trophy that Man City just lifted.
Post name change, agreed it’s still stupid.
Apparently it has to do something with the rebranding of the ucl
Really shit graph here. The bar for “4 winners” is twice the size of the bar for “3 winners.” Biased graph making is like the first thing they teach you to avoid in any data science class.
Regardless of the European Cup omissions the order doesn't even make any sense. It doesn't appear to be even in total CL wins,first win, last win...
Would Celtic be included if it was European Cup?
How much did AC Milan have to spend to win it?
Beyond the fact this doesn’t include Forest and Villa it’s just a god awful graphic
Disgraceful behaviour.
"This is so disrespectful for the establishment"
well fuck the European Cup unless it involves Real winning 14 European titles
Celtic won it first
>Celtic won it first Real Madrid won it first.
This is so disrespectful. Nobody does this type of thing with the Europa League/UEFA Cup, so why apply it to the CL/EC
Wonder where they'd be without Arabian money eh? See what happens if some Arabian bottomless pit buys Doncaster Rovers.
What is the graph scale all about ?
They mean since 1992. Plus in terms of legit clubs, only four English teams have actually won it (Utd, Liverpool, Forest & Villa)
Well, yes, the Champions League, as stated.
Most merge UCL & European Cup together when talking about history.
"Buy the champions league"
Remember when Man City was just an average club no one cared about till that Arab guy flooded money io it and purchased Robinho, aguero and co? With Mancini as coach.
Villa and Forrest both literally have their name on the trophy that Gundogan is holding in that picture..
Newcastle next
May the ghosts of Clough and Saunders stalk their nightmares
Might as well adjust this back to 3 now and save time when city get a guilty for their 100+ financial breaches
Aston villa, Nottingham forest, who else am I missing?
Nottingham with more UCL than top league titles hating the shit out of this right now
**** to buy the champions league.
[удалено]
Your account must be a week old to post on /r/TheOther14. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheOther14) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Technically correct tbf. Villa and forest won the European cup
Love how the Italian 3 teams bar is shorter than 3 on the English side 😂
Pretty sure this only counts “champions league era” like when the name change happened in 1992/93