Champions League, Round of 16

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
41,935
If the point is comparing 2020 TV services to 2004 TV services, I don't really get the point.
 

tmracht

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 19, 2009
1,432
If the point is comparing 2020 TV services to 2004 TV services, I don't really get the point.
Yeah I was happy to pay for stuff in 2004. I also paid per month for Sportchannel out of my allowance money when I was a teenager to watch UMass basketball. Times change and this is really scummy in 2020.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
13,060
I don't think it is scummy, it is a way to get a niche fanbase to buy into a new streaming service. I am very annoyed by having the matches go from cable television to a streaming service, but that is SOP for any streaming service looking to get people to subscribe, you have to give them something they want and put it behind a paywall so they will pay to get it. NBC basically forced all EPL fans to make Peacock accounts two weeks ago, and while I was annoyed the games just couldn't be on NBCSN, that is the reality of the streaming world.
 

tmracht

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 19, 2009
1,432
I don't think it is scummy, it is a way to get a niche fanbase to buy into a new streaming service. I am very annoyed by having the matches go from cable television to a streaming service, but that is SOP for any streaming service looking to get people to subscribe, you have to give them something they want and put it behind a paywall so they will pay to get it. NBC basically forced all EPL fans to make Peacock accounts two weeks ago, and while I was annoyed the games just couldn't be on NBCSN, that is the reality of the streaming world.
NBC had a lot of games on NBCSN among others. They still had multiple games on cable.
I guess it's not much different than FA Cup being on ESPNplus but when the Champions League final can't make CBS or 1 of the semi finals cant make CBSSN it doesn't sit well with me. But I can definitely see the counter point. I just won't be paying for it.
 

Vinho Tinto

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 9, 2003
6,140
Auburn, MA
Times change and this is really scummy in 2020.
It's not scummy. It's $6 for the remainder of the tournament in English. If that is too much, or doesn't feel right to pay, you can fairly easily find another way to watch it for "free".

People who cord cut, and some who still have have cable, don't know what they want. Is it get mad when services raise prices (Like many subscribers did when Youtube TV raised rates by $15 per month ) for including more product you don't want or accept that you will pay for things that may have been bundled prior. The comparison to 2004 is that once upon a time soccer was less popular than it is now and we were more beholden to what cable operators offered. So I had to pay a premium to watch a major event or not watch. Then it became pay or pirate. Now I can pay; but pay a lot less and my overall TV bill has decreased. I also don't get charged fees for cancelling services.

You aren't being screwed because CBS is breaking this out to the streaming service. Many people don't want to subsidize what I want to watch. The average consumer clearly hasn't felt like they have received a good deal over the last 15 years of subsidizing me watching ESPN and NESN based on how many left cable as soon as they could. CBS wants to add subs to their pay service while targeting a niche audience.

And let's get real for second - they aren't going to make a dime of profit on this.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
13,060
It's not scummy. It's $6 for the remainder of the tournament in English. If that is too much, or doesn't feel right to pay, you can fairly easily find another way to watch it for "free".

People who cord cut, and some who still have have cable, don't know what they want
. Is it get mad when services raise prices (Like many subscribers did when Youtube TV raised rates by $15 per month ) for including more product you don't want or accept that you will pay for things that may have been bundled prior. The comparison to 2004 is that once upon a time soccer was less popular than it is now and we were more beholden to what cable operators offered. So I had to pay a premium to watch a major event or not watch. Then it became pay or pirate. Now I can pay; but pay a lot less and my overall TV bill has decreased. I also don't get charged fees for cancelling services.

You aren't being screwed because CBS is breaking this out to the streaming service. Many people don't want to subsidize what I want to watch. The average consumer clearly hasn't felt like they have received a good deal over the last 15 years of subsidizing me watching ESPN and NESN based on how many left cable as soon as they could. CBS wants to add subs to their pay service while targeting a niche audience.

And let's get real for second - they aren't going to make a dime of profit on this.
I'm not sure cord-cutters are really the people getting mad. Cable subscribers like myself, who up until the pandemic were expecting to get at least the major UCL matches as part of our cable subscriptions, are now being asked to subscribe to something else when they already pay for cable, are annoyed. I understand the business behind it, but it is frustrating to already be paying for a bunch of different services and then be asked to pay for one more thing because CBS is trying to get its streaming service off of the ground.
 

tmracht

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 19, 2009
1,432
Cable subscribers like myself, who up until the pandemic were expecting to get at least the major UCL matches as part of our cable subscriptions,
Thank you maybe that's a better way to phrase it!
 

Vinho Tinto

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 9, 2003
6,140
Auburn, MA
And Turner was expecting to get double the quarterfinal and semifinal matches before they dropped the CL like sour milk. Everyone is adjusting. No one likes unexpected fees. I prefer to pick what I want to watch and pay less overall. When you pay a premium for a all in one service, I appreciate that this will rub you the wrong way.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
14,504
Pittsburgh, PA
I'm not sure cord-cutters are really the people getting mad. Cable subscribers like myself, who up until the pandemic were expecting to get at least the major UCL matches as part of our cable subscriptions, are now being asked to subscribe to something else when they already pay for cable, are annoyed. I understand the business behind it, but it is frustrating to already be paying for a bunch of different services and then be asked to pay for one more thing because CBS is trying to get its streaming service off of the ground.
Yes, that's exactly it, it feels like we're being nickel-and-dimed.

We pay every month for CBS Sports Network, and on that network they just air some talking heads time-filler show while the best football in the world is being played live. If they were an online-only platform who'd bought the rights and, like, this was the whole idea, then fine. On the other hand, if the goal is to get cord-cutters, then put it on BOTH platforms, so that people don't have to have cable to watch - they can either have cable, or they can pay for the unbundled subscription streaming service. That's great, either way you're paying for your content. It just feels like they're pissing on our heads and telling us it's raining.
 

Zososoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2009
6,226
South of North
That just seems...awful? I get it, but it stinks.
+1. I appreciate the discussion about cord cutting (I'm a cutter myself) but the basic fact here is that some of the best sports entertainment in the world is not being broadcasted in the easiest and best way possible in the US and that sucks and isn't necessary. However, UEFA has to take a lot of the blame here for not recognizing that in order to continue growing the game in the US (and the market that comes with it) they need to negotiate ubiquitous US TV broadcasting rights.
 

teddykgb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
7,520
Chelmsford, MA
Not happy to see Gundogan starting today. He and Rodri make for a slow midfield and both prefer passes sideways and backward. Citys record when both play is pretty bad consodering the strength of the side
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
14,504
Pittsburgh, PA
Konrad de la Fuente is in the travel squad for Barcelona. With the extended benches allowed for the match day, this means he'll almost certainly be in the matchday squad, though it's rather unlikely he'll get in the game.
Holy crap. Great news for him, even if he's never getting on the field for the big boys. Almost nobody has done that out of La Masia in the last few years - Ansu Fati is like the only one who's really made the rotation that way lately. Maybe Carles Aleña, but now he's out on loan. So even getting close is great progress for Konrad.
 

Royal Reader

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2005
1,807
UK
Is there a good reason for not staggering the times the two matches are played?
Is there a good reason TO stagger? You'd lose more sponsor revenue by showing one game in a less optimal time in its home markets than you would gain from being able to show both. I don't think you'd get many Englishmen wanting to watch Juve-Lyon or Italians plumping for Real-City.
 

Vinho Tinto

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 9, 2003
6,140
Auburn, MA
Is there a good reason TO stagger? You'd lose more sponsor revenue by showing one game in a less optimal time in its home markets than you would gain from being able to show both. I don't think you'd get many Englishmen wanting to watch Juve-Lyon or Italians plumping for Real-City.
I don’t think your theory holds water universally across the continent. There would be Real fans In Spain who would prefer to watch a match that doesn’t involve Atletico. I don’t see soccer fans in Lisbon preferring to watch FC Porto over a glamour club. Most leagues in the US try to avoid having multiple playoff overlapping. I’d think there is a financial point to their actions.
 

coremiller

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
4,636
Is there a good reason TO stagger? You'd lose more sponsor revenue by showing one game in a less optimal time in its home markets than you would gain from being able to show both. I don't think you'd get many Englishmen wanting to watch Juve-Lyon or Italians plumping for Real-City.
The NFL staggers its playoff games so that there's no overlap. NBA/NHL/MLB schedule their conference finals to air on alternate nights.

In a continent with 500 million people and a potential global audience of close to 1 billion, I don't think maximizing home market viewership is the most important objective.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
18,046
Philadelphia
Just catching up on replays.

The penalty against Juventus was super soft and situationally a huge blow since it was an away goal as well. They got one back but need two more to win the tie now.

Benzema is just a boss. Amazing player.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
14,504
Pittsburgh, PA
what's with Sergio Ramos and Marcelo not being out there for Madrid?

Googled it: Ramos was sent off at the first UCL leg vs City. Gotta feel for him, couldn't have happened to a nicer guy. Says Marcelo is available coming back from injury but they put Mendy in there instead.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
18,046
Philadelphia
what's with Sergio Ramos and Marcelo not being out there for Madrid?

Googled it: Ramos was sent off at the first UCL leg vs City. Gotta feel for him, couldn't have happened to a nicer guy. Says Marcelo is available coming back from injury but they put Mendy in there instead.
Mendy and Marcelo have been splitting time this year. Mendy is really good and pretty clearly the more solid of the two defensively so maybe Zidane favored him for that reason.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
29,635
AZ
Madrid really seems confident in their ability to relieve pressure by dribbling and passing out of it instead of clearing the ball. I guess they need a goal so they can take chances but it seems like it has already cost them and their overconfidence feels like

False edit: There it is.
 

OCST

Sunny von Bulow
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2004
19,368
The 718
What a boner. Terrible backpass and Jesus pounces. RM need two in 20 minutes now.

Jesus is such a good finisher. HOT TAKE: I suspect that he might do better than Aguero if given the chance.
 

Royal Reader

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2005
1,807
UK
The NFL staggers its playoff games so that there's no overlap. NBA/NHL/MLB schedule their conference finals to air on alternate nights.

In a continent with 500 million people and a potential global audience of close to 1 billion, I don't think maximizing home market viewership is the most important objective.
Why is what American sports leagues do relevant? They are watched in completely different ways. Soccer fans will rarely watch two games on the same day, and if they do it'll be at a weekend. Viewing for European games not involving teams from the same country is really low - I would imagine total viewership for City-Real in England and Spain easily exceeds total viewership in the rest of the world. So if basically no-one cares about watching Juve-Lyon in England or Spain (and you'd lose ad revenue by moving the City game out of prime time) and hardly anyone in say, Germany (to pick a major country with no teams playing tonight) would care enough to watch both, what have you gained?
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
29,635
AZ
The announcers in the Juve/Lyon game are talking about the all time greatest players in history at hanging in the air for headers. Is that actually a thing? I mean, I know watching the NBA it feels like some players are able to stay at the top of their jump longer than others, but it's clearly and illusion, right? Gravity doesn't give a shit.
 

Titans Bastard

has sunil gulati in his sights
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 15, 2002
11,322
The penalty against Juventus was super soft and situationally a huge blow since it was an away goal as well. They got one back but need two more to win the tie now.
Karma dictates that there needs to be around 175 more soft penalties called against Juventus.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
14,504
Pittsburgh, PA
You know everyone has been giving Raphael Varane shit for the last two hours, but even if he clears his two balls and doesn't give up either of those goals, Madrid still loses (on away goals). They needed to score at least 2 today, and they didn't, despite a couple decent chances.
 

coremiller

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
4,636
You know everyone has been giving Raphael Varane shit for the last two hours, but even if he clears his two balls and doesn't give up either of those goals, Madrid still loses (on away goals). They needed to score at least 2 today, and they didn't, despite a couple decent chances.
Yeah, Madrid went into this game knowing they needed to score 2, and got outshot 20-9. City were just better.
 

Mighty Joe Young

The North remembers
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 14, 2002
5,522
Halifax, Nova Scotia , Canada
Very unimpressed by RM .. they seemed very passive and totally lacked any sense of urgency. Do they normally play such a passive game? No pressing at all.

I think City is vulnerable defensively and are going to be ripped by Bayern if they get that far.
 

wonderland

lurker
Jul 20, 2005
328
You know everyone has been giving Raphael Varane shit for the last two hours, but even if he clears his two balls and doesn't give up either of those goals, Madrid still loses (on away goals). They needed to score at least 2 today, and they didn't, despite a couple decent chances.
A game doesn’t happen in a vacuum. If RM doesn’t give up that first goal then maybe they grow into the game more and score after breaking the high press. The second goal came at a juncture where it was pretty open. It was a killer for RM because they had to score two and allowed City to approach the game differently.
 

OCST

Sunny von Bulow
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2004
19,368
The 718
Very unimpressed by RM .. they seemed very passive and totally lacked any sense of urgency. Do they normally play such a passive game? No pressing at all.

I think City is vulnerable defensively and are going to be ripped by Bayern if they get that far.
Agree on both counts.
 

OCST

Sunny von Bulow
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2004
19,368
The 718
He gone.


Sarri's future had been previously called into question despite leading the club to a ninth-successive Scudetto, with the former banker admitting himself that he had been struggling to impose his famous 'Sarriball' style on the squad.

Indeed, following the first-leg defeat against Lyon, Sarri stated that his charges had been moving the ball too slow but that he would continue working with his players until "sooner or later this concept will get into their heads".
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
14,504
Pittsburgh, PA
I understand that away goals is a better tiebreak than penalties, but I’m surprised they don’t play 30 minutes of extra time when the aggregate is tied.
Playing 120 minutes is way more than 33% more exhausting than playing 90. You really only want to do it when there's no practical alternative, like in single legged tournament matches.

In any case, we won't see any more of that, EL and CL are all single legged from here out.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
29,635
AZ
I understand that away goals is a better tiebreak than penalties, but I’m surprised they don’t play 30 minutes of extra time when the aggregate is tied.
It was a little unfair this round because Juventus did not get a proper home field advantage, but, well, fuck Juve. I wonder if anyone has ever done a real breakdown of the rule to see if it serves its intended purpose of encouraging teams not to play negative on the road, and it would also be interesting to know how much relatively rarer away goals are. I did a quick search but my google skills are not great.
 

SocrManiac

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 15, 2006
3,591
Somers, CT
I’d take a potted plant over Sarri. I haven’t even thought about who I might lust over, but it’s hard to imagine a worse fit.
 

Mighty Joe Young

The North remembers
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 14, 2002
5,522
Halifax, Nova Scotia , Canada
It was a little unfair this round because Juventus did not get a proper home field advantage, but, well, fuck Juve. I wonder if anyone has ever done a real breakdown of the rule to see if it serves its intended purpose of encouraging teams not to play negative on the road, and it would also be interesting to know how much relatively rarer away goals are. I did a quick search but my google skills are not great.
in general I love the away-goals rule as it creates the knife edge wher you can go from losing to winning with a single goal. But I think it should not be applied if the tie goes to extra time , in that the Road team gets an extra 30 minutes with that advantage that’s not available to the Home team.
 

bosox4283

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 2, 2004
4,014
Philadelphia
I’d take a potted plant over Sarri. I haven’t even thought about who I might lust over, but it’s hard to imagine a worse fit.
I just looked at his coaching history. He's been at like a dozen clubs for 2-4 years at each club. It is basically "I'm not that good and probably make things worse but somehow I end up getting another job".
 

OCST

Sunny von Bulow
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2004
19,368
The 718
With his chain smoking he just gives off a vibe of some guy hanging around an OTB
 

teddykgb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
7,520
Chelmsford, MA
I think the away goals rule is among the best in all sports. It leaves every tie in the balance and discourages bus parking or at least relegates it to a very risky strategy. It would probably be less of a problem to eliminate today as we are in a wave of teams who attack no matter what but I think it’s better for the sport for that to have advantage. In a world without away goals rule more teams would setup like Atletico and while I have nothing against that squad and even think it is good to have a few like that the sport would be much less watchable if every two legged tie had the team with the second leg at home turtle in the first
 

Schnerres

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 28, 2009
1,525
Germany
in general I love the away-goals rule as it creates the knife edge wher you can go from losing to winning with a single goal. But I think it should not be applied if the tie goes to extra time , in that the Road team gets an extra 30 minutes with that advantage that’s not available to the Home team.
I agree on the love for the away-goal-rule if it´s tied. And I agree the tie should be set at 0-0 going into extra time. Because to me (isn´t that obvious?), the advantage is 99% on the home team if it gets into extra time (doesn´t mean 99% of home teams advance, obviously).
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
I think the away goals rule is among the best in all sports. It leaves every tie in the balance and discourages bus parking or at least relegates it to a very risky strategy. It would probably be less of a problem to eliminate today as we are in a wave of teams who attack no matter what but I think it’s better for the sport for that to have advantage. In a world without away goals rule more teams would setup like Atletico and while I have nothing against that squad and even think it is good to have a few like that the sport would be much less watchable if every two legged tie had the team with the second leg at home turtle in the first
If the objective of the rule is to prevent “bus parking,” it abjectly failed last night.

As I said, I prefer away goals as a tiebreak to penalties, but I would’ve liked to have seen Juve get an extra 30 minutes to get one more past that Lyon parked bus.
 

wonderland

lurker
Jul 20, 2005
328
I just looked at his coaching history. He's been at like a dozen clubs for 2-4 years at each club. It is basically "I'm not that good and probably make things worse but somehow I end up getting another job".
He was pretty successful at Napoli. The team was coming off a fifth place finish and they went 2, 3, and 2 his three years there.

Chelsea started off slow last year but played well down the stretch. Go back and see people wondered how his style would work with the players at Juve. Especially Dybala.
 

teddykgb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
7,520
Chelmsford, MA
If the objective of the rule is to prevent “bus parking,” it abjectly failed last night.

As I said, I prefer away goals as a tiebreak to penalties, but I would’ve liked to have seen Juve get an extra 30 minutes to get one more past that Lyon parked bus.
Lyon held Juventus scoreless at home and scored an away goal. Juves problem yesterday was that they had already played Lyon for 90 minutes and not scored. I’m not sure they really deserved another half hour