As if it should matter when choosing a nation to host a tournament
France to host Euro 2016
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
Said my piece, not getting into it again. Big sales of ABF t shirts in Ireland by the way all the big stores selling them, even England seems to be more popularAs if it should matter when choosing a nation to host a tournament
Wish there was a new series of Chappelle's Show!I would of preferred Italy IMO. Only because i love the San Siro.
I was joking.I remember we had some e-debates about it.Fair play for not reacting
Anyone who buys an "Anyone But France" shirt is a moron.
Good decision; fortunately, Turkey did not get it.
I have got plenty of France there so hopefully will be able to see some games.
I have got plenty of France there so hopefully will be able to see some games.
Interestingly they are not ruling out returning to 16 teams after 2016.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...fa-give-go-ahead-to-goal-line-technology.html
How are they going on about the group stages? 4 groups of six teams?
Whatever way it'll be organised France will get a bye to the final.
What? It with be 6 groups of 4 with the top 2 in each group qualifying and the next 4 best runners up. Same as the World Cup was from 1982 to 1994 although 1982 and 86 had a second group phase.
It with be 6 groups of 4 with the top 2 in each group qualifying and the next 4 best runners up. Same as the World Cup was from 1982 to 1994 although 1982 and 86 had a second group phase.I imagine it'll mirror the approach taken for the world cup when it was 24 teams: six groups of four. Top two automatically qualify as does the four best third-placed finishers. Bit clunky.
Convenient due to proximity, language and ambiance
So basically the group stages will be round two of the qualifiers since the format will result in 16 teams in the knockout - the same number of teams in the current tournament.What?
Well, kinda. The Euros has a weird history anyway, more so than the world cup. Didn't the First European Championship have only 4 teams in the "tournament" part.
Group stages are weird anyway, more often than not they don't go down to the last day. The last sensible thing Sepp Blatter has said was that FIFA should look into changing the Group Stages of International competitions. Just don't randomly add penalty shoot-outs.
I doubt they'll stick with the 24 team idea for long though. Shame it happened during France's tenure, France would have been perfect for a 16 team tourney.
I also doubt it. 24 teams is just too high a proportion of the UEFA teams. I think they're trying to ensure that all the 'big' teams make the tournament but the truth is that if one of those teams can't make a final 16 then they simply aren't good enough.
Their new 24 team format gives 51 games compared to 31 for the 16 team one, that is the reasoning they keep going on about.
More games = more revenue
Don't see why it would be more boring. What's so great about the qualifying now? There's way more chance of an upset in the Euros themselves than the qualifying.
I'm loving the new format. Ireland should qualify every 4 years
I don't mind 3 of 4 teams in a group qualifying, I can accept that, but what I don't like is that a team that finishes top may get the same advantage as one finishing second (playing a second place team in the next round), or even less than that if they muck up the format, and that because all 6 groups don't play at the same time teams could know that a draw qualifies both teams. We don't want to start seeing that again.
That and from a practical point of view you can't write down all the fixtures. With the World Cup you know winner of Group A will play Runners up of Group B, and that Winner of Group B will play the runner up of Group B... anyway you know that your team will play in either this stadium or that stadium, on this day or that day. With the ranking of teams, teams get moved about.
It's only 24 teams so there won't be 4 teams from any group. The qualifying groups will still be 7x6 and 2x5 so that's the top 2 teams will qualify and then 6 of the 9 3rd placed teams.
Usually the whole group plays on the same day in the last group match. So you can't be trusting on other results.
Usually the whole group plays on the same day in the last group match. So you can't be trusting on other results.
There arent many countries where language is a bigger barrier than France. Insular mindset means most of the population speak shit English, which is a problem as no one learns French nowadays.
No I mean in the tournament proper. You can have 3 teams qualify from Group A, or 2 teams. Who do they play? Group A winner vs Group C 3rd place? or Group C second place? Logistically it's much harder.
4/6 3rd place teams qualify, so if your group is the last one to play you have an advantage, knowing if you need to get second, or could qualify from 3rd.
4/6 3rd place teams qualify, so if your group is the last one to play you have an advantage, knowing if you need to get second, or could qualify from 3rd.
Format of the actual tournament will be identical to how the WC used to be. I assume they are adding a 2nd round?
No 2nd group phase.
Not a 2nd group, but a 2nd round knockout stage before the 1/4's.
Yup.
Depends on how many groups. With 24 teams they could do a lot of variations but the obvious ones are 6x4 or 4x6. It also depends on if they have a quarter final straight from the groups or last 16. Either way the team that finishes 1st in it's group will have an advantage and that's what matters the most.
I don't think so, too many half-decent times cannot get a look in - nearly as many teams from Europe get places in the World Cup as they do the European Championships at present so it makes sense to expand it, especially so when you get the likes of Serbia, Croatia, Russia and Turkey missing out more often than not.
I'd consider going straight to 32 and use the opportunity to downsize the qualifiers - the lesser sides would hardly be weaker than some of the sides at the last world cup.
It's also better for smaller teams that perhaps are able to get a great side by their standard once every 20-30 years. Still not good enough to get 1st, barely could get 2nd but 3rd is a real probability. Iceland is low on the FIFA rank but a realistic aim in the next WC qualifying should be 3rd.
I'd love to see 4x6, but its 6x4.
The other side of that argument would be that it gives continuity and makes qualifying for the Euroes as difficult and important as qualifying for the World Cup, which is what they are breaking. In the other confederations, the South American and big North American nations don't have to qualify, Asian nations have a 4 team group, and African do it as part of World Cup qualification.
Only Europe does almost the exact same system as World Cup qualification.
Maybe Scotland finally have a chance of qualifying this time round.
Finally? I remember you lot in '96. My nation has never qualified.
24 teams is always shit.
20 teams would be much better.
20 teams would be much better.
5x4 with 5 group winners and 3/5 best runners up "qualifying" for knock-outs?
I do agree with you, by expanding the actual tournament to 24 and possibly further in the future you take games away from the qualifiers and put them in the tournament, making it far easier for the 'middle ranking' European sides to get to them consistently and play against the big sides.
There are too many teams in Europe for a 16 place tournament and perhaps a 24 team tournament as well - even in a 24 team tournament the likes of Scotland would be pressured to qualify consistently whilst the likes of Belgium or Norway will be in the position that Scotland are in now.
These are fair points but what is the aim of having the middle ranking teams in an international tournament?
No 4 groups with 5 teams and the first two in each group are going through.
It gives the teams a little break during the tournament.
I don't say it's the best idea but 20 teams are better than 24 teams.
They're middle ranking on the world stage, at the same level and beyond typical world cup entrants from outside Europe Brazil and Argentina apart - the likes of Turkey or Russia are far more capable than some of the absolutely useless sides in South Africa.
Their problem is by not being in a position to qualify for the European Championships except on rare occasions they are unable to progress despite being capable of it if they had the chance which has knock on effects for the quality of their national sides and overall football development.