Euro 2016

[flibbertyjibber]

Money. Only reason for it. Uefa want more money from their competition.

Terrible idea, as GIMH says will dilute the quality.

[Scaly piscine]

Originally Posted by wpdavid

OK in principle, but how would you use knock out to choose 4 teams from 6?

Hmm yea I got it into my head there were 8 3rd places for some reason.

Pretty much every format with 24 teams stinks really.

[Uppercut]

Originally Posted by sledger

If you're a neutral it's pretty much the only reason you would watch it I'd say. At the last World Cup how many people can honestly say they were thrilled at the prospect of watching Slovenia vs Algeria?

Quite a lot in Algeria and Slovenia, I'd imagine. But even from an Anglo-centric perspective, I don't see how that match taking place harmed the tournament. If it doesn't interest you, you can watch exactly as many games as you did under the 16 team format and experience no "dilution" of quality at all.

[sledger]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

Quite a lot in Algeria and Slovenia, I'd imagine. But even from an Anglo-centric perspective, I don't see how that match taking place harmed the tournament. If it doesn't interest you, you can watch exactly as many games as you did under the 16 team format and experience no "dilution" of quality at all.

Yes, but quite a lot of people in Algeria and Slovenia are not likely to be neutrals are they? In truth, I think you'd be hard pressed to make an argument that there were many non-Algerian/Slovenian people in the world who were particularly interest in the match.

It may not harm you per se, if you avoid such matches, and yes, these teams would probably go out anyway. But bulking up a tournament to include teams that are too poor to qualify ordinarily serves to benefit other than those raking in the money and the supporters of these nations. These tournaments are meant to provide a showcase for the World's/Europe's most elite talents, adding in a load of dross would cheapen rather than enhance the experience. I would rather see good football rather than more football.

[wpdavid]

Originally Posted by Scaly piscine

Pretty much every format with 24 teams stinks really.

I think so. I suppose that the best four third placed teams is the least bad option insofar as, although your previous point was fair enough, I can't find much sympathy for a team in 3rd position not progressing even if they have been slightly hard done by.

That being said, I could put a decent case for having 32 teams - 8 groups of 4 and an additional knock out round - and a substantially reduced qualification system, with 15 or so qualification groups roughly half the size of the present ones. Given that most of the qualifiers are a waste of time for the top 10 or so countries, the less of them the better.

[Scaly piscine]

Yea I think 32 teams with a drastically reduced qualifying would make more sense than 24 teams.

It would then be more fun to have Scotland not qualify or get knocked out in the first round again.

[FaaipDeOiad]

The wildcard system does create more "live" matches which I imagine has an impact on viewership too. Would be a chance to get out of the group stage even after going 0-2 etc.

[GIMH]

Also means it's harder to map your route through the tournament because of the way the 3rds are distributed, if the 94 WC is anything to go by anyway. Which I guess adds a level of intrigue.

[BoyBrumby]

Have to say, for any continent in which Greece are one of the best sixteen sides, twenty four teams is way too many.

Boy do they suck. All endeavour, running and bereft of ideas. Like a swarthier Notlob.

[GingerFurball]

The first round of the World Cup is absolute arse because there's so many joke sides.

I love the Euros because it's a tough tournament to win. In 2000, France had to get through a group with the Netherlands, Czech Republic and Denmark, then grt past Spain, Portugal and Italy in the knockouts.

Can't remeber their group in 98, IIRC it contained South Africa and some other dunce side like Saudi Arabia, then Paraguay in the last 16.

[BoyBrumby]

Originally Posted by GingerFurball

The first round of the World Cup is absolute arse because there's so many joke sides.

I love the Euros because it's a tough tournament to win. In 2000, France had to get through a group with the Netherlands, Czech Republic and Denmark, then grt past Spain, Portugal and Italy in the knockouts.

Can't remeber their group in 98, IIRC it contained South Africa and some other dunce side like Saudi Arabia, then Paraguay in the last 16.

Needed their current manager to score a golden goal to beat the Paras too.

[wpdavid]

Originally Posted by BoyBrumby

Needed their current manager to score a golden goal to beat the Paras too.

As a side issue, wasn't it Bilic who got Blanc sent off in the 1998 WC?

[BoyBrumby]

Originally Posted by wpdavid

As a side issue, wasn't it Bilic who got Blanc sent off in the 1998 WC?

Yeah, outrageous dive clutching his face when Larry had completely missed him. Not often I enjoy a French win, but did on that occasion. Meant Le Beouf (sp?) played in the final IIRC.

Not a fan of the Croats, me.

[Pothas]

Originally Posted by BoyBrumby

Needed their current manager to score a golden goal to beat the Paras too.

Yeah and they gave Spain an actual game of Football in the last World cup

South American football is bloody strong right now, even if Brazil and Argentina have not been excelling.

I would not deny that recent Euros have definetly been better competitons to watch than the recent World Cup but they are still easier to win. Is also worth pointing out that many of the dire world cup games we have seen in the last two tournaments have been between European sides.

Personaly I will always love the group stages in both tournaments, the Euros because you get fixtures like we are seeing today and the World cup because of great variety in quality and style, it's the bloody World cup I don't just want an elite few playing.

[Johnners]

Originally Posted by Pothas

Yeah and they gave Spain an actual game of Football in the last World cup

South American football is bloody strong right now, even if Brazil and Argentina have not been excelling.

I would not deny that recent Euros have definetly been better competitons to watch than the recent World Cup but they are still easier to win. Is also worth pointing out that many of the dire world cup games we have seen in the last two tournaments have been between European sides.

Personaly I will always love the group stages in both tournaments, the Euros because you get fixtures like we are seeing today and the World cup because of great variety in quality and style, it's the bloody World cup I don't just want an elite few playing.

Very much awta, I love these tournaments from start to finish. The more games the better imho, it's such a rare opportunity to see players from all over the world that you barely knew existed.