Champions League 2016/17

[Jenks]

Because you wouldn't give a shit about the weather at all and you would play any game in ideal conditions and even temperature given the fact England is a cold country apart from being extremely rainy.
Not even Wembley has a roof to cover the pitch and most stadiums with seated roofs still don't cover the first rows, we're in the 21st Century, seems only some are evolving.

It's a waste of money. We're not so soft that a bit of rain is going to discourage people from going to watch football.

 

[BarcaOG]

Sporting was fantastic at the Bernabeu. By far the better team. Football of course is a cruel and unforgiving sport.

For what it's worth, I enjoyed watching Sporting run circles around Real. Hopefully they can get the 3 points when they play them in Lisbon.

 

[Pablo Escobar]

England isn't particularly cold, it's just not very warm. And a little rain isn't a big deal. England is the country of shit weather, not of Blizzards and Monsoons. Totally unnecessary to build a roof because of fucking rain. It's water, noone dies.

In England in can be cold even in the summer, not to mention, what monsoons and blizzards in Los Angeles or Phoenix? That's paradise compared to Britain or anywhere in Europe.

 

[Luftstalag14]

Football is a tough sport, people play in rain, sleet or snow or whatever condition that allows the game to be carried on as long as it is not deemed harmful to the players. I prefer it stays that way.

 

[Yannik]

In England in can be cold even in the summer, not to mention, what monsoons and blizzards in Los Angeles or Phoenix? That's paradise compared to Britain or anywhere in Europe.

Cold in summer = 15-18C degrees? Man those poor people in there better pull their shirt sleeves down.
Might aswell ask Barca to climatize Camp Nou while we're at it.

 

[Flavia]

Football is a tough sport, people play in rain, sleet or snow or whatever condition that allows the game to be carried on as long as it is not deemed harmful to the players. I prefer it stays that way.

It'd be better if all stadiums were covered, with the pitch in great condition all the time.

 

[Luftstalag14]

It'd be better if all stadiums were covered, with the pitch in great condition all the time.

In my opinion that makes this sport more boring.

 

[Yannik]

It'd be better if all stadiums were covered, with the pitch in great condition all the time.

Apart from the issue that it would financially trouble 80% of european football clubs to remodel their stadiums, I as a spectator prefer to not watch the game in a stuffy giant thermos bottle in 35C degrees just so that the ball can roll 0,53% slicker than it already does. It is an outdoor sport for a reason. The Veltins Arena does already have a retractable roof and they only use it for Rihanna concerts.

 

[Flavia]

Apart from the issue that it would financially trouble 80% of european football clubs to remodel their stadiums, I as a spectator prefer to not watch the game in a stuffy giant thermos bottle in 35C degrees just so that the ball can roll 0,53% slicker than it already does. It is an outdoor sport for a reason. The Veltins Arena does already have a retractable roof and they only use it for Rihanna concerts.

Retractable would be great too. But the stadium would also need air conditioning. It'd be too expensive and will not happen, but that would improve the quality of the matches.

In my opinion that makes this sport more boring.

Having a pitch were the game can be properly played would make it boring? I really disagree. Football badly played is what's boring. Matches in potato fields make the game ugly and boring too. That's what I see every time I watch the brasileirão, for instance. Bad pitches and a game badly played. Any player with a good technique suffers with bad pitches.

 

[Ritchie]

Well, who cares, if they're going to win the UCL, and chances are they won't, its not this game that would make the difference.

Remember when we started shaky with Milan and won the rest of the 5 games ( I was nervously projecting that after the last gasp equalizer while at the bar filled with Milan fans and closet rma fans stating their milan tifosi ), we were at our European competition peak in the Pep era by March, its just we didn't win it but things aren't gonna be decided in GS... def not in the 1st day.

The CL is too often becoming a competition won on blind luck rather than the best team. Barca are always at least in the quarters but we always get really tough draws and sometimes narrowly lose in the quarters or semis and sometimes Messi magic (Bayern 15) can tip the balance.

Real get dream draws every year and sheer luck in finals every time they get to one. Ronaldo never tips the balance though, he'll just smash in a Penaldo to get the glory.

Chelsea in 2012 was sheer fluke. Inter in 2010 was sheer fluke. Barca's three wins was down to having the best team and the GOAT playing. Bayern in 2013 was down to being the best team.

At least 6 teams would have made the final with Real's draw last season, maybe even double that.

 

[Pablo Escobar]

So no Reus for Borussia, it seems rma are lucky again.

Also no Durm, Bender and Bartra, so they will have to defend with Ginter next to Soktratis?

 

[Devils]

Doesn't matter.

Dortmund are a bunch of chokers anyway. Real Madrid feed off teams like Dortmund.

 

[te amo barca]

So no Reus for Borussia, it seems rma are lucky again.

Also no Durm, Bender and Bartra, so they will have to defend with Ginter next to Soktratis?

Reus didn't even play this season, it's not like he got injured right before the fixture. Durm and Bender are not starting line-up players.

 

[Pablo Escobar]

If Bartra is missing then Bender was probably the starting CB along Sokratis while Reus is a their nr. 1 player whether he played or not this season, rma's life is easier without him.

 

[barcafan161]

Reus is always hurt..think Dortmund should cash in and get somebody who's going to play more