UCL Draw Thread

[Barbara 15,149]

I love the whole pointless debate about UEFA or ethics or whatever people are having here!

At the end of te day, we will just allow him to play and end of story...

Chelsea is capable of beating Atletico even if Courtois!!!

but that isn't even the point (being capable of beating them). We don't want to be investigated because of something stupid just because someone may want to demoralize or bring instability towards us and we all know they'll do with the smallest breach the tie may bring (unless we lose).

But I get what you and others mean (about being capable of beating them with him). I'm still against it and whether he plays or not, I see us in the final. As I said I think we have a slight edge (Mourinho, experience, players who've been there, doing it before in recent years) while the teams are sort of equivalent technically.

I think with La Liga still being so tight, with their lack of experience in this level, we're more (even if little) comfortable than them. It means little or nothing to some, but it made the difference against PSG imo and I can see it making a difference against Atleti too.

[duo11bluecl 207]

Just got home noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo we got the best team in the competition would have wanted the other 2 but ah well, hope we can manage a draw in 1st leg and just edge it in the 2nd.

[haranr 485]

Don't forget Cole will be in for this game, Ivan is suspended

That is not a problem.

[haranr 485]

Just got home noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo we got the best team in the competition would have wanted the other 2 but ah well, hope we can manage a draw in 1st leg and just edge it in the 2nd.

Best draw we could have wished for. We actually are equal to this team.

[superfrank8 23]

Cant lose at the Calderon by more than one goal. 2-1 will do, 1-1 will be good, 0-1 or 1-2 would be ideal. Dont want Courtois to play, Aranzubia has played for what, one or two games? Got to take advantage of that, hate that Uefa are sticking their noses into matters that are none of their concern. Atletico should honour the contract and just pretend Uefa didnt say anything.

[Barbara 15,149]

Regarding the talk about the contract and the agreement and people should honor their agreements, I have absolutely no problem with that. I to totally agree. Why have an agreements if you can't put them in effect? Having said that, him playing should not be a problem. If they pay the fee that BOTH CHELSEA AND ATLETICO agreed on, then surely he should play. Them agreeing on a fee for it, is saying that it is ETHICAL according to their standards. It is ok for both clubs to have him play at a price . You see ethical is a very flexible thing here.

I hardly see any conflict of interest. I don't see Atletico playing him against us if they don't trust him therefore he has to be trusted. I don't see a kid rising to be one of the top goalkeepers in the world giving up a match for the sake of his parent team that he MIGHT start playing with next season. I don't think a player who progresses will not want to win and play hard to earn a trophy and add it to his credentials. I don't think Chelsea will be harmed either. After all they will get to see their player, rise and gain more experience and be mentally tested, therefore IF he comes back next year he will be more ready.

With all respect, but people who think that Courtois playing against us means that we can't go through (and I don't mean you here but I thought I should point it out while I am at it ), should re-evaluate their thoughts. When we had the PSG firs leg game, I clearly remember people saying that PSG are not tested, they just play for money, If they wanted to test themselves they should go play in the EPL, and you know what I agree. We had arguments about Chelsea playing against top teams and proving themselves while PSG only played against Monaco. Again I agree. But now the same people are afraid to play against a team who has a good goal keeper. So much for testing and challenging themselves day in and out . I find that strange and doesn't make sense. PSG is not good enough because they are not being tested and at the same time Chelsea should play against a weakened side to win the trophy!!! People should not change their opinion whenever it serves them best. I don't know if that is ETHICAL or HONORING their words.( Again not you )

Again about the contract, I absolutely concur. But if UEFA is the bad guy and decides he should play, or if Atletico pay the money and TRUST him to play, or if Chelsea didn't mind him playing and find it ethical/acceptable, we shouldn't worry much about it from the prospective of the match. Chelsea afraid to play against Atletico because of ONE guy is quiet degrading. Whether he plays, Costa plays, Messi, or whomever plays we shouldn't worry. We should believe more in our team that hasn't let us down, believe in the manager that we keep praising and admire his tactics. It is like we all of a sudden forgot the PSG games and how those MEN rose to the occasion.

well, I can tell you from an auditor POV and that's how it works: Julius Cesar's wife not only should be the most faithful woman in the world but LOOK like the most faithful woman in the world. That's the basic principle in audits, ethics and laws. The regulation in place should assure that nobody can have the chance to take advantage of breaches. It doesn't mean people involved will. I'm not questioning ours, Atletico's or Thibaut's integrity. I'm questioning how this opens breaches for questions from people who are there to make those questions. The moment a situation provides a conflict of interest it doesn't matter at all if people take advantage of that or not, it shouldn't exist. That's the basic principle.

All three involved could act in absolutely integrity and honesty, but one mistake, one unpredictable or unexpected situation could lead others to question those things and it's unnecessary. And I don't think we're above of using this situation regarding a potential Costa negotiation, a potential new loan involving Courtois (and maybe even other players). Atletico may also have interests that aren't above their work ethic. In a comrade agreement between the parts one side could make concessions now about things for the future - which while isn't illegal and maybe not even unethical, it shouldn't exist. Chelsea shouldn't have any advantages allowing him to play the same way Atletico shouldn't have any by preventing him from playing. Thibaut can feel like making a decision himself to avoid those situations as well. Anyway, I'm not talking about shady stuff happening, I'm talking about opportunities being created for shady stuff being speculated and situations such as those players futures being affected by the decisions made. We don't know if the rumor about Chelsea conditioning the loan renewal on his absence is true or not, but if there was a rule prohibiting him from playing no questions would be made. Clean cut business. The way it stands it's too inviting to all sort of rumors and even investigations depending on what happens. And I'm not naive to believe Chelsea and Atletico won't have interests that conflict here. They certainly do if not involving Costa as well, at least Thibaut's future...

[iseah100 5,612]

Fuck that ethically right stuff, if UEFA says they don't need to pay, they shouldn't. Chelsea should be worrying about how to beat this team that has not lost in the tournament yet, not trying to get advantages.

[LAM09 7,043]

Fuck that ethically right stuff, if UEFA says they don't need to pay, they shouldn't. Chelsea should be worrying about how to beat this team that has not lost in the tournament yet, not trying to get advantages.

UEFA has nothing to do with a contract that was signed by both clubs. It is up to the parties involved what should and shouldn't happen. Secondly, AM haven't played a difficult match in the CL par Barca to an extent. They were yet to lose to Barca prior to the CL matches, so there was no surprise on my behalf they progressed quite comfortability IMO.

[duo11bluecl 207]

LOL at people writing essay style posts on non-important issue. He wants to play so let him, are we that coward we want the easy way out? If Madrid had CR7, Bale and Ramos out of final of CL for example I would be disappointed if we play them and win, there will always be people question us and say that we wouldn't have won if,,,etc. I want it to be like 2012 CL final where we had like 5 1st team players out and still win, that victory will be remembered for years to come as one of the greatest upset in CL history.

Courtois deserves to play and we shouldn't do anything against that, more like focusing on how to beat them rather than the advantages we might have if they have players out.

[iseah100 5,612]

UEFA has nothing to do with a contract that was signed by both clubs. It is up to the parties involved what should and shouldn't happen. Secondly, AM haven't played a difficult match in the CL par Barca to an extent. They were yet to lose to Barca prior to the CL matches, so there was no surprise on my behalf they progressed quite comfortability IMO.

UEFA doesn't recognize it, right? Can't be enforced?

You realize we had the easiest group, right? Atletico did what they had to do. We lost twice to BASEL.

[cosmicway 1,333]

Eliminated by Aris Salonika (!) in 2010.

They had Aguerro-Forlan also then:

[duo11bluecl 207]

Eliminated by Aris Salonika (!) in 2010.

They had Aguerro-Forlan also then:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjnbjKY82fc

lost 2-1 at home to Basel despite having full strength team and they just lost 5-0 at Valencia yesterday in this same season. The point is that is the most pointless video ever.