Had a chat with Tony Currie on Saturday

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Darren said:
For the 732nd time, we didn't miss out on Europe by 1 point. They changed the rules meaning even had we won at Birmingham we would not have qualified.
Click to expand...
So why not quote the post where it says we would have?
 



brownie4583 said:
Changed the rules??
Click to expand...

It's been said 732 times before, but :-)

Up until 1974-5, qualification for the UEFA Cup had a one city one club rule - only one club could qualify from the same City. In England, there were 4 places - one for the League Cup winners and then the 2nd, 3rd and 4th teams in the League. However if 2 teams from the same city qualified only the highest got a place and the place went down to the next highest place team.

In 74-5, before the Birmingham game, placings were as follows:

1. Derby
2. Liverpool
3. Ipswich
4. Everton
5. Stoke
6. Sheffield U

We could only overtake Stoke if we won at Birmingham.

Villa had won the League Cup so, they qualified for the UEFA Cup and Liverpool and Ipswich were also in. Everton could not qualify as Liverpool were in. Hence the last place would go to the 5th place team - United or Stoke. As United failed to win at Birmingham, Stoke were in.

Or so we thought. In the summer of 75 UEFA abolished the one club one city rule so Everton were in after all and Stoke not. Hence United would not have qualified even if they had won at Birmingham and finished 5th.
 
Darren said:
It's been said 732 times before, but :)

Up until 1974-5, qualification for the UEFA Cup had a one city one club rule - only one club could qualify from the same City. In England, there were 4 places - one for the League Cup winners and then the 2nd, 3rd and 4th teams in the League. However if 2 teams from the same city qualified only the highest got a place and the place went down to the next highest place team.

In 74-5, before the Birmingham game, placings were as follows:

1. Derby
2. Liverpool
3. Ipswich
4. Everton
5. Stoke
6. Sheffield U

We could only overtake Stoke if we won at Birmingham.

Villa had won the League Cup so, they qualified for the UEFA Cup and Liverpool and Ipswich were also in. Everton could not qualify as Liverpool were in. Hence the last place would go to the 5th place team - United or Stoke. As United failed to win at Birmingham, Stoke were in.

Or so we thought. In the summer of 75 UEFA abolished the one club one city rule so Everton were in after all and Stoke not. Hence United would not have qualified even if they had won at Birmingham and finished 5th.
Click to expand...
I'm staggered. That's effectively changing the rules halfway through the competition.
 
BushBlade said:
I'm staggered. That's effectively changing the rules halfway through the competition.
Click to expand...

Makes it surprising that we didn't get 5th. It's the United way, we qualified for Europe once but they changed the rules to stop us getting in, would have been quite appropriate.
 
Bath Blade said:
Makes it surprising that we didn't get 5th. It's the United way, we qualified for Europe once but they changed the rules to stop us getting in, would have been quite appropriate.
Click to expand...
Was just thinking the same.

Maybe they thought 'Blades were a bit close this season, best change the rules to make sure'. Like they've done with European qualification for Cup finalists.
 
Silent Blade said:
Everton appealed not long after the 1974-75 season and the UEFA changed the rules before the 1975-76 cup draw was made
Click to expand...
Yes, but the point is, you start season A with a set criteria for qualification for Europe in season B. Stoke met that criteria and thus qualified. Then they changed the rules and Stoke no longer qualified. Everton knew the rules before season A started.
What should have happened is that the rule change started in season C.
 
BushBlade said:
Yes, but the point is, you start season A with a set criteria for qualification for Europe in season B. Stoke met that criteria and thus qualified. Then they changed the rules and Stoke no longer qualified. Everton knew the rules before season A started.
What should have happened is that the rule change started in season C.
Click to expand...

Didn't something similar happen a couple of years ago with Everton and Liverpool, something to do with Everton finishing fourth but Liverpool winning the European Cup. I think UEFA relented and allowed them both to compete.
 
BushBlade said:
Yes, but the point is, you start season A with a set criteria for qualification for Europe in season B. Stoke met that criteria and thus qualified. Then they changed the rules and Stoke no longer qualified. Everton knew the rules before season A started.
What should have happened is that the rule change started in season C.
Click to expand...
True but I thought the "One club per city" rule was silly
 
Bath Blade said:
Didn't something similar happen a couple of years ago with Everton and Liverpool, something to do with Everton finishing fourth but Liverpool winning the European Cup. I think UEFA relented and allowed them both to compete.
Click to expand...
Yes, the winners didn't automatically qualify and serial underachievers Liverpool finished fifth the following season so they didn't qualify.
Uefa changed the rules so that the club who wins it automatically qualified but realising it was intrinsically unfair to 'punish' Everton because of Liverpool's failure made a one off exemption so they were allowed in but for future tournaments made it clear that in a similar scenario the fourth placed club didn't get a place.
Which is what did for Spurs a couple of seasons later.
 
BushBlade said:
Yes, but the point is, you start season A with a set criteria for qualification for Europe in season B. Stoke met that criteria and thus qualified. Then they changed the rules and Stoke no longer qualified. Everton knew the rules before season A started.
What should have happened is that the rule change started in season C.
Click to expand...

According to this

https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=0oMuAAAAIBAJ&sjid=e30FAAAAIBAJ&pg=3071,5420035&hl=en

It was the English League who insisted on the one club one city rule, not UEFA. It seems that by 1975 UEFA had had enough and insisted that the League drop the rule under threat of banning English clubs.

As you say, it would have fairer had the change been made pre season.
 



Darren said:
It's the league and they were in favour of us!
Click to expand...
Not with you. Who ran 'the league'? And how were they in favour of us?
And anyway, my point is it was an unfair fuck up that could have been quite easily avoided without stitching Stoke up. Nowt to do with us.

Are you applying your interpretation of my post in the mistaken belief that I genuinely think the FA have got it in for us? I don't. I just think they're a bunch of useless old cunts in blazers claiming more in expenses that most of us earn.
 
BushBlade said:
Not with you. Who ran 'the league'? And how were they in favour of us?
And anyway, my point is it was an unfair fuck up that could have been quite easily avoided without stitching Stoke up. Nowt to do with us.

Are you applying your interpretation of my post in the mistaken belief that I genuinely think the FA have got it in for us? I don't. I just think they're a bunch of useless old cunts in blazers claiming more in expenses that most of us earn.
Click to expand...

The Football League and Football Association were and are 2 separate bodies. In this case, it was the Football League's rule.

It appears from that article that, for reasons best known to themselves, the league had had this rule for a number of years and UEFA didn't like it, but had not previously insisted they cancel it. If UEFA said in June 1975 either it's our rules or no English clubs can compete, then the league didn't have much choice.
 
Darren said:
The Football League and Football Association were and are 2 separate bodies. In this case, it was the Football League's rule.

It appears from that article that, for reasons best known to themselves, the league had had this rule for a number of years and UEFA didn't like it, but had not previously insisted they cancel it. If UEFA said in June 1975 either it's our rules or no English clubs can compete, then the league didn't have much choice.
Click to expand...
Aah, got you. I thought prior to the establishment of the Premier League, governance and administration fell to the FA.
 
Guesty said:
I met Currie many years ago at one of his four day football camps they ran during the school holidays. The only time I spoke to him was when I posed for my photograph at the end - he was perfectly pleasant.

On the whole though he was a miserable sod when he was going around. I'm not sure kids are his forte.
Click to expand...

My brother did a couple of those when he was younger and he said the only downside to it all was TC. Miserable and no time for the kids according to him.
 
the english FA had requested the one city one club rule to block italians ac and inter and spanish real and atletico madrid .
that season we finished 6th was one of the tightest ever finishes , our penultimate away gam e win at Everton put paid to them winning the title
still one of my best ever away days
 
BushBlade said:
I think it's quite poignant that our greatest post-war achievement was, essentially, failure.
Click to expand...


Depends what you consider to be our greatest post war achievement.

We finished higher than that in 1961-2, and we were the football league north champions in 1946.
 
blade too long said:
1 Derby County 42 21 11 10 67 43 53 WDWWDD
2 Liverpool 42 20 11 11 60 39 51 WLWWLW
3 Ipswich Town 42 23 5 14 66 44 51 DWWLDW
4 Everton 42 16 18 8 56 42 50 WDLWLD
5 Stoke City 42 17 15 10 64 48 49 DWWLDD
6 Sheffield United 42 18 13 11 58 51 49 DWWDWD

to finish 4 points off the title , 2 points off runners up ,what we would give to be that close now
Click to expand...
I remember the midweek home game against Derby in October. It was end to end stuff with Derby getting a late winner. If the scores had been reversed then in the last game at Birmingham we would need to win there to clinch the title
 
Darren said:
For the 732nd time, we didn't miss out on Europe by 1 point. They changed the rules meaning even had we won at Birmingham we would not have qualified.
Click to expand...

You are wrong there Darren. This is definitely the 733rd time.....
 
Pittsburg Blade said:
Three points for a win would have put us in 4th place wouldn't it?
Click to expand...

and the rules in 1950 left the table like this

Second Division
Pos Club P W D L F A GA Pts
1 Tottenham Hotspur 42 27 7 8 81 35 2.314 61
2 Sheffield Wednesday 42 18 16 8 67 48 1.396 52
3 Sheffield United 42 19 14 9 68 49 1.388 52

we lost out on 0.006 of a goal , but today wed have gone up on account of scoring more goals

always been lucky the pigs , their last promotion to the top division was as 3rd placed club , the last team to benifit from it ,avoided the dreaded play offs
 
Last edited:
On the subject of TC and the Birmingham game, I posted this ages back on another thread but never got a response:

"As for the match itself, the only thing I can remember is TC missing that sitter near the end. It's funny how people recall these things differently. Len Badger, in Currie's biography by Elliott Huntley, says this: "He went round three people and side-footed the ball past the post." My recollection is completely different. In my mind's eye, the ball drops at his feet possibly after there's been a challenge on their keeper. He's about six yards out and nobody near him but he scoops it over the bar. Anybody else care to give their version?"

Anyone?
 



Shalalalafenoughty said:
On the subject of TC and the Birmingham game, I posted this ages back on another thread but never got a response:

"As for the match itself, the only thing I can remember is TC missing that sitter near the end. It's funny how people recall these things differently. Len Badger, in Currie's biography by Elliott Huntley, says this: "He went round three people and side-footed the ball past the post." My recollection is completely different. In my mind's eye, the ball drops at his feet possibly after there's been a challenge on their keeper. He's about six yards out and nobody near him but he scoops it over the bar. Anybody else care to give their version?"

Anyone?
Click to expand...

:tumbleweed:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Bartleby
WBA away Press Conference
Replies
14
Views
2K
Ndiayewillalwaysloveyou
Ndiayewillalwaysloveyou
A
Presser v Oxford
Replies
19
Views
2K
reedy63
R
Bartleby
Blades v Birmingham City Pre-match press conference summary
Replies
0
Views
505
Bartleby
Bartleby
ucandomagic
Pre-Stoke – Graphs, Charts and Chat – Like Bread, We’re On the Rise
Replies
4
Views
703
ThirdGenBlade
T
Maurice Maurice
A few thoughts.
Replies
20
Views
2K
MadDad38
M

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom