The FA Cup final has history and prestige to burn… but giving the winners a Champions League place would make the tournament a safety net for inadequate wealthy clubs

• e-mail

Martin, you seem to look at the worst case scenario each time. That is, the underdog winning the FA Cup. As you say it has only happened three times in 25 years. In an age where money is prioritised above football I think it would be refreshing to see clubs put winning a trophy before finishing fourth. In what other industry is finishing fourth better than winning a competition? The bigger clubs would automatically play stronger teams from the start as insurance against not finishing in the top three, so you are less likely to have Reading winning it. That would then give the League Cup a stronger pull for the smaller clubs and make that competition more interesting rather than just a slightly worse FA Cup. The Voice of Reason, England.

Actually, Voice, there are two worst-case scenarios. That was my point. There is the one where an under-qualified team ends up among our Champions League representatives, gets stuffed, and contributes to a weakening co-efficient; or there is the one where a new team fights its way into the Champions League on merit, only to have its placed swiped by an elite rival winning a handful of games against inferior opposition. Manchester United or Chelsea denying Leicester for instance. So it's lose-lose. Today's debate springs from the column I wrote about the FA Cup on Monday, and the terrible idea it should be revitalised by awarding the winner one of England's Champions League spots. Martin Glenn, chief executive of the Football Association, entertained the plan, I opposed it, vehemently, and explained why here. I don't want to make it less likely for Reading to win the FA Cup, or for Reading not to be rewarded if they ever fight their way to fourth. I have nothing against the elite being challenged at all. I welcome it. I cannot have made it any plainer that I want Leicester to win the league. And if they fall short and come fourth, well I'll be delighted to see them in the Champions League next season. But if they came 14th and won the FA Cup, but denied a far superior team entry from fourth place, that would not be right, because they would not be able to live with the competition. That's the key. We can't just throw cup teams into the Champions League – underdogs or the underachieving elite – because standards have to be maintained. That is what makes it the best club competition in the world. That's what makes our four places so precious. We lose them at our peril. And now, Voice, a word from one of my favourite other voices. This is from Lulu's favourite album of 1967. Seriously. 

Leicester have been a feel-good story for the ages and are top of the Premier League by two points

There is a simple way around your argument regarding a Championship, or average Premier League, team getting into the Champions League place via winning the FA Cup. It would only be given to the winners if they finished in, for instance, the top six of the Premier League. And as the FA Cup is normally won by one of the big teams, this would hardly ever be a problem. Icecubed, Woking.

So what is the point of it? Why not let the prize for winning the FA Cup be, er, winning the FA Cup. If it was good enough for Sir Stanley Matthews, it should be good enough for today's players.

Why is the writer scared of a team outside the elite winning the FA Cup and getting one of the golden goose Champions League slots? This season apart, the previous years have seen Arsenal, Liverpool and Tottenham having the ambition of reaching fourth place. The FA Cup is dying on its arse because the big teams often see it as an inconvenience in their quest to secure a Champions League place. Arsenal fans, and those from Manchester City, paid hard cash to watch reserve teams. It showed total disregard for the tournament and fans. Tell Me I'm Wrong, Lincolnshire.

You're wrong. Considerably greater ambition, and finance, is required to target fourth place, rather than an FA Cup final win. If one of the elite teams put all of their energy into reaching the FA Cup final – as Chelsea are doing now – chances are they will pull it off. If Chelsea were then to deny, say, Leicester their Champions League place by this route it would feel highly unjust. The FA Cup would become a safety net for inadequate wealthy clubs, as it may prove to be this season. If Manchester United and Chelsea can avoid each other, would you bet against that being the final? I want teams from outside the elite to succeed, but not by some random factor where a team can reach the Champions League by getting a lucky draw and playing teams from the lower divisions; but by becoming strong and challenging the status quo as Leicester have done. Also, on the subject of disregarding the fans, I thought Shrewsbury sold the FA Cup short with their timidity just as much as Arsenal, or even Manchester City, did. At least those City kids tried to make a game of it.

Italy, Germany, Spain – their best four teams consist of only two really great teams, and possibly one in Germany. Your opinion is flawed on more than one level. Pugwash, Wigan.

I don't agree, but even if I did, what's your point, Pug? That our FA Cup winners, whoever they were, would be a match for the lesser qualifiers from those countries? Not so sure about that. Manchester United were eliminated by Wolfsburg, currently eighth in the Bundesliga. I wouldn't bet on Reading or Crystal Palace faring any better. I take it your two great Spanish teams are Barcelona and Read Madrid – but Atletico Madrid are a point higher than Real in the table and won the league more recently than them too (Atletico won in 2014, Real's last title was 2012). As for Italy, who are your two great teams there? Juventus, obviously. But beyond that? Roma, the other Italian club through to the last 16 of the Champions League? Napoli, a point behind Juventus in Serie A? Do you mean one of the Milan clubs, maybe? You're a bit out of touch if that's the case.

This is a load of old tosh because in the last 25 years only Wigan and Portsmouth would have qualified through the FA Cup. All the other winners held top four positions anyway. Bill, United Kingdom.

Top four hasn't been running for 25 years, Bill, but since it has, yes, only Wigan and Portsmouth would have taken up a league place. Wigan, by then a Championship team, would have assumed the place of Arsenal, who reached the last 16 that year. Considering Wigan finished bottom of their Europa League group behind Rubin Kazan, Maribor and Zulte Waregem, I can't see them replicating even Arsenal's mild achievement; Portsmouth would have played instead of Liverpool who went through to the quarter-finals in 2008-09. So, yes, England's co-efficient may well have suffered. Also ousted, the Leeds team that reached the semi-final in 2000-01, by Chelsea; and Newcastle United, again by FA Cup winning Chelsea in 1997-98. So, as expected, it is some of the lesser names – Leeds and Newcastle – that would have missed out.

Wigan or Portsmouth in the Champions League would have been embarrassing. The Europa League is fair enough, especially considering teams like Swansea and Hull who reached the Europa League through cup competitions didn't do very well. How Do, County Tyrone.

Yes, since Fulham reached the Europa League final in 2010, the smaller English clubs have a poor record with last 32 elimination for Stoke and Swansea the best of it. Birmingham and Fulham finished third in their group, Hull, Southampton and West Ham did not make it beyond the play-offs, Wigan finished bottom. The Premier League's hold on a fourth spot is precarious as it is without being further weakened.

I'd like to ask why the fixture congestion sock-puppet Steve Bruce said nothing about the subject the last time he managed in the Championship. We are, as usual, being manipulated by shadowy forces using the press and players as mouthpieces to promote European harmonisation and a European super league. Ignore the lies. This is part of the dissolving national boundaries and building a country called Europe. Good bloke Bruce, who approved changing Hull City's name to Hull Tigers, told us to 'embrace change'. Not this one Steve. Steadfast, Winchester.

Yes, if I was in charge of a shadowy force attempting to create a European super-state, the first person I'd want on my side is the manager of Hull City. I'm told for the same reason the KGB spent a lot of time trying to convert Ken Wagstaff to Marxism in the 1960s.

It is a ridiculous suggestion, usually just rolled out by rent-a-quote ex-professionals and blokes chirping down the pub in a bid to sound relevant and insightful. The FA Cup is a great competition, I love the preliminary rounds, the third round draw, the replays, the giant killings, the last day of the season final at Wembley, but to make it a qualifier for the Champions League is ridiculous. There is no argument that the best four teams finish top four after 38 games. Mike, Perth.

With you there, Mike. I've covered six FA Cup ties this season, and attended one more. It's a competition I will always love for its thrills and random upsets. The Champions League is about something else entirely, though – the pure elitism of finding the very best. I don't see why people wish to bolt these very different dynamics together.

The FA Cup has a rich tapestry of upsets, among them Coventry's win against Spurs in 1987

I seem to be in the minority here, but Champions League should be for champions. As a major team has won the FA Cup for 21 of the last 25 years, there would be hardly any change in the big scheme of things. All that may happen is a smaller Premier League team like Newcastle, Southampton or Stoke might have a chance of entry into the Champions League once in a while, while a big-six team that has had horrendous injuries may have a chance to restore their status by winning the FA Cup. I am tired of seeing understrength FA Cup teams and managers almost trying to lose games. FA Cup days were all about romance, but it also was a huge trophy to aspire towards and a huge day for supporters if they won it. Now all we get told is players are tired after 50 games a year, which is nonsense. Try getting a real job like the people who pay your wages with inflated TV costs or travelling everywhere and paying a fortune on food, petrol and game tickets. The Fat One, United Kingdom.

Football is a real job. It requires talent, dedication and a level of self-discipline at a young age that would leave many working men gasping. And, yes, the rewards are magnificent. That doesn't mean players do not get tired, though, or that clubs are not sensible in allowing them recovering time. Sometimes there is no option but to miss matches. In any job that requires a regularly high level of performance – certainly one that rewards in millions – it is not a smart idea to work your key employees into the ground. As someone who has what you term a real job, I am sure you don't need that explaining. The situation you describe – a big-six team falling short but maintaining its Champions League place by winning the FA Cup – is what I would call a safety net. Safety nets preserve the status quo, and I'm against them. I prefer the danger. Win the FA Cup for its own sake, and let the league slip at your peril. As for having a Champions League for champions, I used to support that, as a traditionalist. But, let's face it, only a lunatic thinks the old European Cup with its byes and mismatches was better than the current tournament. I would continue addressing the seeding to prevent repetition, and real financial fair play would see greater wealth distribution – but the 32 best teams in Europe duking it out? I'm up for that.

Winning a trophy now, for any club, is not to be sneered at, so the FA Cup doesn't need any extra incentive. What I don't agree with is the need to invoke the nations' hatred of Manchester United to make a point. Useless I can agree with, but over-privileged? A little bit cheap from someone who defends the capitalisation of football. Lewis, Manchester.

You're a sensitive soul, Lewis. I would have used the same term about any of the clubs that helped shape, and endorsed, financial fair play. It was a bid to cement a small elite band in place. That makes them over-privileged in my eyes. The fact it then failed and their space has been invaded by Leicester, while highly amusing, doesn't change what was attempted. As far as your first point goes, I agree. You try to win the FA Cup because it's the FA Cup – not because it opens some platinum door along the corridor.

When you ask would it be fair if Leicester collapsed to fourth and Manchester United won the FA Cup, in doing so taking Leicester's spot…the question of fairness is totally irrelevant. You do not deserve very much for finishing fourth. Football and sport has no vested interest in what is fair or deserved. You will get your reward if you are good enough. Jonathan Murphy2, Belfast.

And winning the FA Cup makes you good enough for the Champions League? It certainly does not. Let's get it right, the team that finishes fourth does not do so by accident. Its staff and owners are not then greatly surprised to be invited into the Champions League next season. Before the season starts, it is known fourth place has this tremendous cache and the battle for it is highly competitive. So it isn't just fourth place, as many on here seem to think. It's entry to the Champions League and, over 38 games, so much harder to win than the FA Cup. When I cover the Olympics, I am not greatly enthused by the bronze medals – but I do appreciate that as third get bronze and fourth gets sod all, the fight for it coming off the last bend can be quite ferocious and demanding.

Once again, Martin Samuel has his finger so far off the pulse he might as well be in the morgue. No-one believes that fourth place deserves a Champions League berth and everyone is dismayed that the FA Cup has become tarnished by clubs fielding B teams and doing irreparable damage to its illustrious history. What's more folk and fans are sickened by paying to see elite clubs field ghost teams in cup competitions while charging full price for tickets. Manchester City should refund everyone their travelling expenses after the debacle with Chelsea as it was tantamount to fraud. The League Cup guarantees a Europa League place so the FA Cup should offer a Champions League place. Revenue for once should surrender to the romance of the so-called beautiful game that to me gets uglier by the day. Bo Jangles, United Kingdom.

I would say from the reaction on here – and I tend to pick dissenters for the debate, so the actual comments section is considerably more agreeable – there are quite a few people who support Champions League entry for the fourth-placed team and others who understand why big clubs field weakened teams in the early rounds of the FA Cup. You don't speak for as many as you think. You should follow the example of another Bo – who always spoke for himself. 

At the current rate, especially without Chelsea, Manchester United and Liverpool next season, who have kept the co-efficient up for the past decade, it will only be a matter of time before it is chopped to three Champions League spots. So no to the FA Cup winners in the Champions League. Josh 170LDN, London.

A lot of people are missing this point, Josh. Lose a place and we are down to two qualifiers from the Premier League, which would be the smallest number since the 1998-99 season. It would be disastrous for the domestic competition, and all to protect the odd FA Cup tie. As for the teams you say are protecting the co-efficient, Liverpool haven't made it out of the Champions League group stage since season 2008-09 and since reaching the final in 2011, Manchester United's Champions League record reads group stage, round of 16, quarter-finals, not in it and group stage. Neither side have been particularly impressive in the Europa League of late either. I certainly wouldn't bracket them with Chelsea, who have won the Champions League, Europa League and gone deepest in European competition in three of the last four seasons.

You seem a bit confused Martin. First, you argue that elite clubs would get in more easily through the FA Cup scheme and say that would maintain the status quo and deny smaller clubs. Then, you say that if a smaller club wins the FA Cup, the coefficient would become low. So do you or do you not want the smaller clubs to get a crack at the Champions League? Sir Paul Fan, United Kingdom.

You're the one who doesn't understand, so how come I'm the one who is confused? I want smaller clubs to qualify for the Champions League by the conventional route, top four in the Premier League. I don't want lottery winners in, no.

The Europa League would be a better place for an FA Cup winner. Extelligence, United Kingdom.

Anyone care to tell him?

So what you are saying, Martin, is that the money besotted Premier League is the be all and end all of football in this country? Just look what is happening to real supporters, not consumers, and you will see they are getting fed up with only the few rich clubs winning everything, and have started voting with their feet by going outside the Premier League. I know that Sky think all football needs is television to survive but I firmly believe that without the real supporters throughout the divisions football will die out. The Man in the Street, England.

I don't think fans of the biggest clubs are any less real than fans of Halifax Town or Barnsley. It's like those people who talk about real women, as if a women who happens to be a size eight is somehow less human than one who is a size 16. Your reality does not speak for everyone.

Why did you have to have a go at Wigan calling them whipping boys? We won the FA Cup fair and square. Paul H, Wigan.

I didn't call Wigan whipping boys. The one mention of them in the column was the following sentence. 'Only Everton in 1995, Portsmouth in 2008 and Wigan Athletic in 2013 can be considered to have come from outside the traditional elite.' And I know you won fair and square. Indeed, I would go further and say that Wigan are the only true underdogs to win the FA Cup in 20 years.

Wigan defied the odds to beat Manchester City in 2013 courtesy of Ben Watson's winner

Martin, in case you hadn't noticed the English co-efficient is already reducing at an alarming rate and the reason for this is the woeful quality of the Premier League. We let teams who are happy to finish fourth represent us and those in the Europa League don't take it seriously. At least the winners of the FA Cup have ambition to go and win something. Brad, Liverpool.

Did you see the team the current FA Cup holders, Arsenal, put out against Hull? Very ambitious.

I still love the FA Cup. The day of the final is the best of the year, even more so when your team is playing. Ob1977, Kent.

I agree. I know the advantages of finishing fourth, but what I do not understand is those mid-table clubs who prioritise finishing 14th over a cup run. I can see why Manchester City let the FA Cup slip this season, even Leicester – but the year Sam Allardyce sent out a West Ham reserve team and got slaughtered at Nottingham Forest, I think that tainted his relationship with the fans, for good, and I understand that. Trips to Wembley create fans for life. All the years I spent watching West Ham as a boy, the league campaigns have merged into one big wrestle in the mud in my memory. What stands out? The 1975 FA Cup final against Fulham, the 1980 FA Cup final against Arsenal, even losing to Liverpool in the 1981 League Cup final replay. You never forget those moments. And now, a word from the Antipodean arm of the brains trust.

Scrap replays from the quarter finals onward, and just have extra time and penalties. This allows clubs from the lower leagues to keep the financial benefit of replays in the earlier rounds and the sudden-death aspect increases the possibility of being a giant killer later on. It also minimises possible fixture congestion for the bigger clubs. Then the eventual winner, if outside the top four, gets to play the fourth-placed Premier League team with the winner going into the Champions League qualifiers and the loser to the Europa League. These simple adjustments would keep the interest going right to the end of the season in both competitions. So, quick addendum to the FA – and feel free to send me a sizeable cheque in the mail for sorting it out. Steve Jay, Sydney.

Anyone got the two seconds needed to spot the flaw in this argument. If not, here's MG to put you straight.

There are already no replays from the semi-final onwards, so you're saving the maximum of one extra match per team. Then you introduce a potential play-off between the FA Cup winner and the fourth-placed Premier League team, adding another game to the fixture list. I think the cheque from the FA may get 'lost' in the post to Sydney. MG501, London.

Or perhaps payment could be arranged in a more suitable currency? A wombat's trademark, as they call it down there.

A real chance was missed last year. If Aston Villa had won the cup it could have been the basis for a great quiz question this year: which team came bottom of two league tables? Answer: Villa. The Premier League and their Champions League group. Common Sense, London.

You are presuming progress through the qualifiers there, CS. Given that Manchester United, the fourth-placed qualifiers, had to dispose of Club Bruges first, I'm not sure that would be the case.

Memphis Depay looked a decent player back in August and helped United see off Club Bruges

Just a quick question, Martin. How do you decide on your 'traditional elite' teams? Is that solely based on when football apparently began, in 1992-93, or overall? The fact you class Everton outside your elite possibly means a selective memory, as they are still England's fourth-most successful club with more than double Chelsea's league titles and three times as many as 'fabulously wealthy' Manchester City. Sandy Blubbering, Liverpool.

It's an arbitrary assessment, Sandy, to do with influence. You'll notice I didn't include Manchester City in it, either, just made mention of their size and wealth. To my mind, the traditional elite have grown up with the Champions League and are the clubs that have the power to shape UEFA policy. I'd say there are three founder members in England – Manchester United, Arsenal and Liverpool, plus Chelsea who have been around long enough in the Champions League era to wield political clout. Manchester City are too new, and are still seen as outsiders. Everton and Tottenham have not sustained success long enough in modern times to be included. I am aware of Everton's history – indeed their role in several proposed breakaway super leagues that predated the Premier League – and did consider it when writing the sentence to which you refer. I wondered whether Everton's FA Cup win in 1995 counted as success for an elite club. So I checked where they came in the league that season, saw it was 15th, and decided it didn't.

I would prefer scrapping replays, but putting the big teams in a round or two earlier to give the smaller teams a better chance of a big draw. JC, London.

Surely that only shifts the fixture congestion to another part of the calendar? And now, another big idea goes down in flames.

There should be a play-off between the fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh Premier League teams for a Champions League place. PrakashG555, London.

In the last four seasons the seventh place team has finished 10, 15, 12 and 15 points behind the fourth-placed team. So suppose they win and gain entry to the Champions League? What possible benefit could that have on our hold on the fourth entry qualifying spot? They finished seventh, yet you reckon they would do well in the Champions League proper? Little Helper, Boston.

Allow me to expand, Helper. I'll go back 10 seasons. The average points difference between fourth and seventh in that time is 13.1 and the teams that would be open to Champions League qualification would be Southampton, Manchester United, Liverpool, Everton, Everton, Liverpool, Fulham, Blackburn, Bolton and Newcastle. So in at least three cases this idea would have served as just another safety net for under-achieving elite teams. David Moyes's Manchester United could have finished seventh and might still have got that wild card, playing three games to overturn the outcome of the previous 38. Of those 10 teams, five got into Europe anyway. Southampton did not make it past Midtjylland in the Europa League play-offs, Newcastle, Bolton and Liverpool in 2009-10 were eliminated in the last 16 – Fulham surprised everyone to reach the Europa League final. Bravo Fulham – but there is little in the rest of it to suggest seventh would produce Champions League worthy play-off winners.

Fulham beat the Europa League holders, Juventus, and Hamburg on their way to the 2010 final 

I think there is far too much nostalgia in English football. I'm not convinced we'd all miss Boxing Day and New Year matches, and even fewer would miss FA Cup replays. The concept of playing for a draw in order to get a payday is hardly romantic. If it's that important, allow the teams to move the venue if both sides agree to it. Mancsaint, Fareham.

They tried that and all the little clubs, the romantics as some will have it on here, opted to play away for the big crowd and the cash. The FA had to rule that ties couldn't be switched because it was happening too often and killing the tournament.

I've thought for a while of having a European trophy for the actual champions rather than the top four. Radical, eh? The formation of the tedious Champions League is at the root of all this, with the whole of domestic football expected to bow down to the wishes of the wealthiest clubs, who have to play more games, because they are successful and in more competitions. Our hearts bleed. John, Macclesfield.

I know. I had to smile this week when Manuel Pellegrini claimed that Manchester City's weakened side in the FA Cup was necessary because they are representing England. Manchester City are a global football enterprise, owned in Abu Dhabi, with branches in Australia, America, Japan and, very soon, China. That English football benefits if they do well, through the co-effiecient, is a by-product of their success, not its motivation. Jose Mourinho was moaning about getting no help from the Premier League when he was in Europe with Chelsea 10 years ago. Tough. Elite clubs have elite resources to purchase elite players and one of the few advantages the smaller teams have is that, occasionally, these very big teams have to prioritise some fixtures at the expense of others.

So money has now killed the world's oldest football tournament? How sad is that? Kevin S, Cheltenham.

Not sad at all, Kevin, because it hasn't. There will still be an FA Cup final, it will still be watched around the world, and you still won't be able to get a ticket. It may be a great game, like Arsenal versus Hull, a great anti-climax, like Arsenal versus Aston Villa, or bring a great shock, like Wigan vs Manchester City – but it is our FA Cup final, it has history and prestige to burn, and it will stay that way for as long as football is played. Money can't kill it.

Sorry Martin, I couldn't disagree more. How does coming fourth in a League make you a champion? If you win the FA Cup then you are a competition champion. I think you have been cosying up to the Premier League too long. Notlikeitusedtobe, Preston.

Neither makes you a champion, but fourth makes you the fourth-best team. When Wigan won the FA Cup they were the 18th-best team in England. Steviejay99, Colchester.

I think we have to forget the idea that the term Champions League is intended to be taken literally anyway. It is a brand, a marketing department name and, by the way, a rather good one considering it has been copied around the world. The CAF Champions League has been running since 1997, the AFC Champions League since 2002, the CONCACAF Champions League since 2008. All of these competitions admit teams that are not champions, while group stages and multiple entrants from one country in the Copa Libertadores actually pre-date the current UEFA Champions League format by several decades.

So the cup winners should not be given a place because if would make the major clubs take the FA Cup more seriously. How anyone can think that's a bad thing is beyond me. Martin Samuel has some very strange ideas. Matt H, Harrow.

Yes. The strangest one being that every week I come on here and take great pains to debate with people who have missed the point. The big clubs would not take the FA Cup more seriously, unless they had to. They would still prioritise the Premier League or Champions League, because it earns more, until they had made a mess and then – boom – suddenly all the big guns would be out for the last cup rounds, which is pretty much what happens now. Except instead of this time playing to win the FA Cup simply for the glory, they would now be looking to elbow aside a rival that has legitimately over 38 games shown itself to be the fourth-best team in England.

Don't get your argument. 'It's good that Champions League places go to the top four because it's now opening up so 12 clubs could conceivably get one of those positions in future. But it's bad that the FA Cup might get it because any of those clubs might win it even though it's normally won by one of the teams normally competing for top four. It's great that any of those clubs might get in to upset the status quo but at the same time it's bad because of coefficients and they might not do well so we really want the same clubs qualifying so that we keep four spots. If we don't have four spots it might mean that the smaller clubs will never get in, even though, as we've just established, we don't want them in.' Complete mess of an argument. And you're the chief sportswriter? SDG, Chippenham.

Yes, because I can express ideas and opinions capably in a way that people can understand. Not you, obviously. But most people. It's about ability, you see, not size, and the majority understood that. A small club that has finished in the top four, say Leicester this season, shows with this level of performance that it may be able to hold its own at an elite level in Europe. Leicester have been tested over a sustained period, 38 games. The same is not true of an FA Cup finalist. Chelsea reached that stage in 1994 by playing seven games, including two replays, and facing one team from the top division, seventh placed Sheffield Wednesday. Portsmouth won the FA Cup in 2008 by playing six games, five against teams from the second tier. So there is a distinct possibility a smaller team that progresses in the FA Cup will not have the same quality. Equally, the FA Cup is not the great free for all that people think. It is often won by the elite teams, maybe ones that have not been as successful in the league and have been able to switch priorities earlier in the season. Again, this is not healthy. For Chelsea to now deny Leicester or Tottenham, say, their breakthrough season would be extremely damaging to the Premier League. So it's not a contradiction. It's the worst of all worlds. Most people can grasp that, whether or not they agree. Not this next bloke, obviously. So to break up the monotony, here's a short, but very complex, piece of music. 

There's quite a big contradiction in the main point of the article. You say on one hand the FA Cup is usually won by the elite clubs but then say that if a team outside the elite wins it the coefficient will be affected. And before you try to pick my point apart, if a Champions League spot was available the chances of a club like Reading winning it would reduce to practically zero. If they were able to do it then they should be rewarded with the chance to build on that with the windfall the win would generate. With a Champions League spot up for grabs, winning the FA Cup would be a greater achievement than finishing fourth. I'd like Martin to respond to this comment in his Thursday column. I'm sure we'll get the usual 'I'm right, you're wrong' reply. Richard, Northamptonshire.

Mate, I'm still laughing at the idea I've got to try to pick your point apart. Try? I'm typing this with my toes while learning to play the banjo. It's as I said before. We don't want to stop shocks like Reading winning the FA Cup, we want to prevent weak teams entering the Champions League, and going out in the qualifying rounds, as would happen. As for your point about windfalls – how much of a windfall did Everton get having been eliminated before the group stage in 2005-06? That season it propelled them to the heady heights of 11th, having previously finished fourth. The year after they came sixth. Qualifying round Champions League football is not a game-changer, even for Reading. So, yes: I'm right and you're wrong. How can winning six games, five against teams from the Championship, be a greater achievement than fourth place over 38 games, all against Premier League teams? And I'm still not trying. I left the room for that last observation. It was typed by the cat.

Finishing fourth at anything shouldn't be deserving of such a big reward. Give it to a winner of the FA Cup. Great idea and should have happened years ago. Stevejw, Yateley.

Yes, and right now we'd be worrying why our four places were now three, and what happened to all the good players.

If winning the FA Cup is not achievement enough then we might as well not bother. By offering a back door to Europe it devalues the competition and turns the part where you actually get the cup and lift it at Wembley in front of a sell-out crowd and a worldwide TV audience into a secondary benefit. Nick, Aylesbury.

Also, there is now a path to the Champions League through the FA Cup. You win the FA Cup, you win the Europa League, you enter the Champions League. So the FA Cup winners, do get a swing at it, but they've got to do a little more than batter Shrewsbury.

Maybe they can chuck in a play-off in for the fourth place? You know like the Football League clubs do, having played 46 games as opposed to the Premier League's 38. We, in the lower leagues, are constantly told that the play offs are the fairest way of doing things, to keep the league interesting, but I've always wondered why this has never been taken up by the Premier League? Is it the extra games? Is it the fact that it is not as fair as they say, when the team that finishes 15 points behind third place, is afforded the same opportunity as the team that has performed better over the course of the season? Bladesam, Sheffield.

You're preaching to the converted here, Sam, I've never liked the play-offs, simply because they don't seem very fair. You've done your work over 46 games, why should a team that maybe hasn't exerted itself the same way now get a swing at you at your weakest? I think that's why so many teams that have reached third place then disappoint in the play-offs. I have one way to rationalise it, and here it is. Many years ago I was sitting with Mick McCarthy over at Millwall's training ground. His team had come third in what was known as Division One – now the Championship – and had lost out to sixth-placed Derby County in the play-off semi-final. Millwall hadn't finished hugely ahead of Derby, just three points difference, but I still thought it unjust. The play-offs were relatively new then – introduced in 1987 – and I was against them. I thought I'd have an ally in Mick, but no. His attitude was that every team knew what it had to do when the season started. You finished top two, or there was a chance you could be in the play-offs. His team failed to finish top two. So they knew the possible consequences from the start. Tough. I still don't think it's fair, Sam, but I can see the argument that it keeps the league interesting for longer – and I accept Mick's blunt take that it was up to Millwall to avoid it. Do I think the Premier League clubs will ever agree to play-offs, though? No.

Every team should have to name a squad of 20 players maximum, including three goalkeepers, a week before the FA Cup third round starts. They would then be the only players who could play in the competition until the end. The Truth Teller, United Kingdom.

Why? The elite clubs would just name weaker squads and then there would be no chance of seeing the star names in the competition, or any January signings for that matter. Why do we always want to tie football up in stupid rules that would not be allowed in other forms of business? Get your best XI out there when you can, if you can. This wouldn't help that strategy at all.

You can't make a judgement on the long-term future of the FA Cup based on this anomaly of a season. Yes, we would all love it if it was the start of a renaissance in English football where all teams can compete, but we all know that it's just a one-off in reality, due more to the failings of the big clubs. Next season Chelsea, Manchester United and Manchester City will all have new managers, have spent hundreds of millions and we will be back to the status quo. Dave2543, Wombourne.

I don't think any of the three teams you mention are guaranteed to be offering Champions League football next season – although Manchester City should have enough to stay top four – so I wouldn't say the good times are bound to return. Certainly, Chelsea and Manchester United may struggle to attract players of sufficient calibre to make an immediate challenge at the top again. Either way, you have no more certainty that the status quo will be restored, than I do that a lovely period of upheaval is under way. But I know what Manchester United and others fear about the future, so let's wait and see.

Or we could just have a 20-team play-off where every team plays the other teams twice, home and away, and the top four qualify for the Champions League. Everyone loves a play-off and this Super Play-off would truly be the king of them all. Jimmy Phipps, Dallas.

Always a welcome contribution from Jimmy. Although I'm sure even as we speak several posters are dashing off replies, claiming to be confused and boldly announcing this play-off already exists and is called the Premier League.

The FA Cup has a long tradition that ought to be respected. So what if it throws up anomalies? Why shouldn't Millwall or Wimbledon have their day in the sun? And if they can win an FA Cup final they can beat anyone on the day. Denmark won the European Championships; Porto the Champions League. Sean L, London.

But Millwall didn't win the FA Cup. They got wiped off the pitch by Manchester United and were then knocked out in the first round of the UEFA Cup by Ferencvaros of Hungary. And, no, Ferencvaros were not very good: they moved on to the group stage and finished fourth of five, behind Feyenoord, Schalke and Basel. And, Sean – it's not a day in the sun. It's the Champions League. The greatest club competition in the world. And it should not be devalued by inadequacy. Finally, Millwall are like Porto, 31 times the champions of Portugal? Are you sure?

Jose Mourinho's Porto won the Champions League in 2004, a year after winning the Europa League

One argument against the FA Cup winners getting a Champions League place? If we are cut to three entrants due to the co-efficient, and then have a season like this one where Leicester and Tottenham finish top two and the FA Cup semi-finalists could be Watford, Everton, West Ham and Crystal Palace. And one argument for? As above. Talbzmeister, Birmingham.

No, Talbz, it's an argument against. Nothing wrong with Leicester and Tottenham as one and two – but the teams currently placed seventh, ninth, 11th and 13th, should not be representing England in the Champions League.

You are saying teams outside the top six shouldn't be given a crack at the Champions League. And that is my problem with it. The big clubs and many others seem to think it should be a closed shop. If they want to be part of a European Super League, then leave the Premier League and set one up. As things stand, the Champions League group stages are boring and the later stages are the same year in year out. Ivanitch, United Kingdom.

Oh, give me strength, that's not what I'm saying at all. I don't care if the top four comprise Norwich, Stoke, Watford and Bournemouth. If that's the top four then they should be our Champions League entrants. And if Manchester United win the FA Cup that year? Tough. Should have finished top four. I really can't make it any clearer.

Instead of rewarding teams who finish fourth in the league, it is better to reward a team which has won a serious cup. Automatic qualification to the top three and giving the qualifying round to the FA Cup winner does sound more rewarding; or let the fourth-placed team match up against the FA Cup winners. Whoever wins that match can legitimately claim the right to go through to the Champions League. Sidd7689, Bangalore.

Look, mate, we can't just run footballers into the ground for your amusement. Our league has to stop sometime. Take up a hobby, play some cricket. It will be back soon enough. Why do we need endless play-offs to decide what we already know? The best four teams enter the Champions League. That is legitimate; anything else is showbiz.

We all like the Premier League but we all like the FA Cup as well. It is being destroyed by the greed of the big clubs and the romance has been lost. There needs to be a solution so that it remains the greatest cup competition in the world. Some incentives do need to be put in place. Tom Graham, Coventry.

It's not the greatest cup competition in the world. That's the Champions League. It is, however, the greatest domestic cup competition in the world and I don't know anyone who denies that. As such, it does not need incentives.

Whoever thought coming fourth merits an award? I've never known of a sport that gives medals to fourth place. Fufu, Accra.

No-one gets medals for fourth. They get entry to a prestige competition. Many competitions give medals to third, though, and fourth place pays out on some each way bets.

If they want to elevate the FA Cup, why don't they scrap the Wembley semi-final? It should be a privilege to play in the FA Cup final at Wembley. Abqari A.I, Brunei.

I agree. It even gets hired out for corporate gigs now. Ian Bishop, the former West Ham and Manchester City player, once said that every bloke down his road had played at Wembley, except him. He said he was telling his milkman this. It turned out his milkman had played at Wembley, too.

Ian Bishop, pictured in 1991 at West Ham, didn't play at Wembley during his career - his milkman did though

Premier League and Champions league. Well satisfied with those. True Sun, New Jersey.

Me too, sunshine. I don't know why people want to complicate things.

There used to be a perfectly good competition called the European Cup Winners' Cup, but UEFA got rid of it. Joshjake2, Manchester.

Actually, the Champions League killed it. Once UEFA allowed multiple entrants from one country into the Champions League, the Cup Winners' Cup became greatly weakened. Teams would win the domestic cup, come second in the league, and choose the Champions League route instead. Interest dwindled, revenues dipped and it was absorbed into the UEFA Cup after Lazio won in 1998-99. It couldn't be revived now, for the same reason.

Competitions like the Coppa Italia and Copa del Rey never had the prestige of our own domestic cup, foreign supporters used to tell me that they were envious of how big the FA Cup was. The influx of foreign talent has been fantastic for the Premier league, but they've also brought their approach to domestic cups and have dragged the FA Cup down to the continental level. The first step towards restoring the FA Cup should be the abolishment of the League Cup. Russell74, Syston.

No, I'd say the League Cup has found its place in our calendar, even if I think to have two legged semi-finals – when all the other rounds get decided on the night – is inconsistent and daft. And I wouldn't blame foreign players for the FA Cup failing, either. Certainly, on the managerial front, the coaches I have heard sounding most passionate about the FA Cup this season are all foreign: Louis van Gaal, Guus Hiddink and Slaven Bilic. And do you know how many Englishmen made the starting XI for the last three FA Cup final winners – and this includes Wigan, by the way? Three – one in each team in each year.

The millions, yes millions, of people who watch and play proper football that is not ruled by Sky and its lackeys would beg to disagree. But you all go on thinking that football was invented in 1982. The rest of us know better and I can guarantee, enjoy ourselves far more. Jan, Warrington.

Well, off you go and enjoy yourselves then, and leave the discussion to those of us who know the Premier League was formed in 1992 – because I'm not convinced you know as much as you think, Jan.

What happened in 1982? ROR, Portsmouth.

This. God bless Larry Levan. Until next time.