Recent Posts
18,555 posts(s) found
I’m for option 2b.
.
Whats the attraction, when 50% or more of the league plays international. Champions league without any national champion? I dont like that idea much – thats UEFA cup or a new cup/league e.g. the “Cesario-Castilho-cup” ;-)
.
Then establish a 1st world league (CL+LA), a 2nd world league (UEFA+CS) and the 3rd world league (places 6-9 in national leagues) … this declination would make more sense, though i still like option 2b best!
@Samir: Not necessarily, I’ll probably keep the number of spots for the current competitions, they will just be “moved down” to give room for the World Cup spots.
I’m glad you guys understand that we’ll probably go for the first option. And yes, it is going to be great, DaMaGo \o/
I am the Manager of Niort currently fighting for a qualifying position for the UEFA, and I do not think its fair.
I guess that you can play your team as you please. but I do not think its fair for the rest of us that are fighting to become great teams and lets face it we all want to have a spot in International Competition.
I think this is what the GAME MASTERS should be monitoring, and ask themselves if this is “CHEATING”
DaMaGo, what is Danilo’s way? I only saw Gabriel’s.
By the way, based on your the first option Gabriel, you will change the number of spots for LA/SA right? So, you will remove that Qualifying round?
BRAVO, you guys nail it, it was worth to keep trying, i think this is going to be great, now i see the rubbyfutbol community growing fast.,….you guys rock, keep it up!!!!….by the way i like Danillo´s way, but any other option its fine with me.
SALUD2
I like the first option better.
yeah focus on cl and with next season only uefa..smart move..but he only had a small chance to win i guess from monaco, so maybe a good choise to set hid friendly team in there.
Sorry for the long post, it’s worth reading :)
As those following our Twitter already know, we will have a World Cup with clubs AND the current international cups. When this new competition is ready, three things WILL change:
>National cups will end late in the season, there will be 6 turns between same round matches and 12 turns between rounds. Countries with more than 32 clubs will have their cups ending on turn 97 and the other countries will have their cups ending on turn 79. Some may say it should end even later, but I want to keep this formula so we can have countries with even more clubs when lower divisions are added.
>Current Club World Cup will be replaced by this new World Cup. It makes no sense to keep 2 so-called World Cup competitions.
>Champions League, UEFA Cup, Libertadores and Sudamericana will start in the beginning of the season. When they will end depends on what is written below.
My intention is to create a 32 clubs World Cup split in 8 groups of 4. From there, same formula currently used in the international cups will apply (teams play each other twice in each group, 2 first of each group qualify, following rounds have 2 legs, except for the final). Alternatively, we could have 16 teams instead of 32.
Now, there is another decision to make. How do we choose the 32 (or 16) teams that will be part of the World Cup? I see a few options: (in order of personal preference)
1) Use national leagues to qualify for World Cup. This way teams in the World Cup won’t play other international competitions. For example: on country ABC, the 3 teams better qualified in the first division will be part of next season’s World Cup, 4th, 5th and 6th places will be part of Champions League and 7h, 8th and 9th places will be part of UEFA Cup. How many teams will go to each competition will depend on the current country ranking position, as we have today.
2) Use current international cups to qualify for World Cup. This way the best qualified teams on these competitions would go to the World Cup.
2a) 16 best on CL + 16 best on LA (or half if we have only 16 teams in the World Cup)
2b) 12 best on CL + 12 best on LA + 4 best on UC + 4 best on CS (or half if we have only 16 teams in the World Cup)
Why do I prefer the first option? Well, if we use the first option more teams on each country will have the chance to participate in an international competition, which means a better balance regarding money distribution (from ticket income) and player evolution (for playing international competitions) and more people having fun from these competitions. Using the second option will make a few teams concentrate the benefits of participating in 2 international competitions in the same season. I’m pretty sure that is not good for the game.
I wrote too much already, now let’s read some comments :)
You guys have to slow down your imagination a little bit :D.
Wow! PSG really want to focus on CL!
Monaco 21 × 0 PSG
That was illegal ! =)
Monaco 21 × 0 PSG
That was illegal ! =)
For loan:
Gilmar Carvalho
Attributes
Position: M
Side: LC
Tackle: 61
Passing: 86
Shooting: 69
Speed: 75
Dribble: 81
Control: 73
Header: 75
in Libertadores:
1st leg – Tacuarembó x River Plate 6 × 1
2nd leg – River Plate x Tacuarembó 5 × 0
what a clash…no friendly squads, main teams only…..
I think in real life shots from angles are very effective. So many teams play with LC+RC and it works. But why did I waste all those 400M+ on midfielders with 80+ in shooting ? In real life midfielders score VERY OFTEN, in Ruby only by chance, once in 20 matches, maybe more often…
thanks gab:)
you can’t beat our imagination;)
I think it shouldnt be just about distance, lets not forget about the shooting angle. Diagonal shots should be less accurate or less likely to result in goal as apposed to shots facing goal.
The difference is that attackers on LC or RC will have to run a little bit more to be closer to the goal, once they are in the range their shots are as effective as an attacker on C position. But of course, the C attacker is more likely to shoot more and be closer to the goal.
i thought i would be online this tick…but i can’t find it!!!! you are to lazy!! ;)
season 25:
cl;
1. monaco
2. hertha
3. benfica
uefa;
1. genoa
2. VfB Stuttgart
3. U. Leiria
Libertadores;
1. América-RN
2. Flamengo
3. Santo André
Copa Sudamericana;
1. Fortaleza
2. Avaí
3. Tigre
I will be releasing new newspaper sections gradually, very soon. Hopefully sooner than you guys imagine :D.
hehe sorry, didn’t look at the admin only part ;)
.
Gabriel, they may be closer / in range to shoot…but won’t there shots still be less effective as the AC ? Stronger shots will results in more goals and a more tired keeper. Shooting from A LC or A RC won’t do that enough?
You’re right when you said it wouldn’t take long Parag, it is done :)
I didn’t but will do now.
from Vaughn:
w00t w00t nice news !!! (on twitter)
RubySoccer is now on Twitter!
Maybe it’s because even when the player miss the pass, if a teammate gets the ball it is considered a good pass.
yeah, still long pass is 90%+
I agree with all that you said, guys. This kind of investigation is never easy for us and of course we want to improve that. The newspaper is currently on Danilo’s hands (keep complaining, maybe he’ll do things faster ;) ) and this history page (already planned) shouldn’t be hard to build now that we have transfer information stored. I’ll take care of that.