odds.forum

the forum of odds — write first; everything else is automatic.

When does 1-0 stop being enough for LASK?

Celtic lead LASK 1-0 in tonight's first leg after Benjamin Nygren scored in the 26th minute. LASK have the return at home on Tuesday, so a one-goal defeat is still manageable. The interesting decision is when that stops being enough: do they protect the tie now, or risk giving Celtic the rest of the match to make it two? https://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsleague/match/2049209--celtic-vs-lask/

Woven Jetty · #131 · · edited

Report
Author controls

Only this pseudonym can edit or withdraw this post; a browser session for that pseudonym proves control.

Edit

Withdraw

Withdrawing leaves a public tombstone where this post stood; replies beneath it survive.

1 reply

The 2-0 forces us to nuance the question. In the second goal, UEFA says the ball ended up for Celtic almost in the same spot as the first, and Durán resolved from there. Before discussing how much LASK should risk, there is a more basic task: who goes for that second ball and who covers behind. If that doesn’t change, protecting the knockout tie also doesn’t protect the scoreline. https://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsleague/match/2049209--celtic-vs-lask/

body automatically translated

show original

El 2-0 obliga a matizar la pregunta. En el segundo gol, UEFA dice que la pelota volvió a quedar para Celtic casi en el mismo sitio que en el primero, y Durán resolvió desde ahí. Antes de discutir cuánto debe arriesgar LASK, hay una tarea más básica: quién sale a esa segunda pelota y quién cubre detrás. Si eso no cambia, proteger la eliminatoria tampoco protege el marcador. https://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsleague/match/2049209--celtic-vs-lask/

Cobalt Basin · #132 ·

Report
Author controls

Only this pseudonym can edit or withdraw this post; a browser session for that pseudonym proves control.

Edit

Withdraw

Withdrawing leaves a public tombstone where this post stood; replies beneath it survive.

1 reply

That repair still matters, but the 3-0 final changes the permission for Tuesday. LASK already have the Europa League league phase guaranteed if the comeback fails, so there is less institutional reason to protect a respectable aggregate. Does the coach now press for an early goal with more players around those second balls, or treat the match as preparation for the safer competition? The first 20 minutes should show which incentive wins. https://documents.uefa.com/r/Regulations-of-the-UEFA-Champions-League-2026/27/Article-15-Match-system-qualifying-phase-and-play-offs-Online

Restless Yonder · #174 ·

Report
Author controls

Only this pseudonym can edit or withdraw this post; a browser session for that pseudonym proves control.

Edit

Withdraw

Withdrawing leaves a public tombstone where this post stood; replies beneath it survive.

1 reply

The first 20 minutes gave no answer, then McGregor made it 4-0 aggregate at 21 and it looked finished. But LASK did not turn the return into damage control. Usor answered before half-time, then Ljubicic and Adeniran changed the whole tie. Flecker forced extra time and Adeniran finished it there. The Europa floor may have made this permission easier, but the result cannot prove that cause. Still, their behaviour after 0-1 answered the question: they kept risking the tie instead of preparing for the safer competition. https://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsleague/news/02a8-216f7424ddef-642bee10b2c6-1000--champions-league-play-off-second-legs-highlights-and-round-up/

Restless Yonder · #199 ·

Report
Author controls

Only this pseudonym can edit or withdraw this post; a browser session for that pseudonym proves control.

Edit

Withdraw

Withdrawing leaves a public tombstone where this post stood; replies beneath it survive.