Was Euro 2020 the best Euros ever?

[General_Elegancia]

I think it's one of the best ever.They had amazing games,comeback,never give up spirit,underdogs and fairytales.
If I can choose,I would choose this to be one of the best but not the best.It's definietly behind 00 and 88 but probably better than the rest (even84).

I have started at Euro 84.

 

[Xaviesta]

It’s not really traditional tournament football if you can qualify 3rd from a group of 4. Sure it made teams play a bit more expressively and made it nice and fun but that’s because there was no fear of failure. In fact you are rewarded for it. I don’t like the idea of being reward for failure when a trophy is on the line.

Also calling it 2020 in 2021 will never stop grinding my gears.

Sadly, the concept of a 'group of death' is a thing of the past.That group containing Germany, Portugal and France would have been more exciting if you knew at least one of them wouldn't make it to the knockout stage.

 

[giorno]

Yes, obviously. Especially the way it ended was the best since 1968

 

[Spoony]

2000.

 

[Eternitiy]

2008 was wonderful. Russia were really exciting, Arshavin was phenomenal. Spain were full of talent about to reach their potential. I remember hoping so much for us to sign David Silva after that tournament. I think we were heavily linked with him as well, what a shame.

 

[Number32]

2000 is still the best. Norway beat Spain, then late drama Spain vs Jugoslavia with 2 goals in 5 minutes added time, England beat Germany in the group stage, unlucky with Portugal and Romania had ruined prime class of 92 in International stage. Phil Neville's stupid foul in the last minute had sent England home.
The rise of Turkey, got a win against Belgium who were favourite at their home. France was beaten by Netherland to get draw against Spain. Literally there was no bad team with negative football at that tournament, Denmark was the worst team but still playing attacking football.

Knock out stages were more entertaining, with late drama and a lot of goals. 2.7 goals per game with only 31 matches.

 

[mshnsh]

Very surprised people liked euro 2004. Was a borefest. The big teams fell by the way side. An ultra defensive team won it. Rooney was the only good thing about it until he got injured.

The only memorable match was England vs France in the group stage.

 

[Withnail]

It was shaping up to be but then it all fizzled out in the latter stages.

 

[Offside]

It was shaping up to be but then it all fizzled out in the latter stages.

Did it? No. The thing that made it stand out compared to others was how good the quarters were and the Italy - Spain semi.

 

[Noot]

Thought it had some really bad patches early on then hit a stride around the third round of group games. If the first few weeks had been a bit more exciting then I'd be calling it my favourite ever tournament.

 

[Withnail]

Did it? No. The thing that made it stand out compared to others was how good the quarters were and the Italy - Spain semi.

Yeah after the first round or so until the quarters was great. I didn't really enjoy the semis or the final as much.

 

[GifLord]

Euro 2000 easily. So many epic matches.

 

[Frank Sinatra Fan]

Yeah after the first round or so until the quarters was great. I didn't really enjoy the semis or the final as much.

The final was choppy as finals usually are. But I really enjoyed both semis, specially the second half of Italy vs. Spain and the first 80 minutes of England vs. Denmark. Really good semis.

Overall, not best Euro ever (hard to take the throne from 2000), but still a good Euro that completely washes away the sour taste that 2016 left.

 

[Morty_]

It was pretty good, wish they stopped having knock-out games so bloody late though, considering almost all of them went to extra time.

Some people do have to wake up early.

 

[mshnsh]

From the ones I watched:
1.Euro 2000
2.Euro 2008
3.Euro 1996/2021
5.Euro 2012
6.Euro 2004
7.Euro 2016

 

[Frank Sinatra Fan]

Too many people here are letting their problems with the format and lack of fans cloud their vision about this Euro. On the pitch, the games themselves, it was a really good Euro, or at least often entertaining. The lack of fans and being hosted in multiple countries doesn't change that.

It was pretty average bar England losing. Nothing too special or memorable imo. I really enjoyed 2008, but more so because of my private situation I think.

Have you forgotten about the crazy monday? Croatia vs. Spain and France vs. Switzerland?

3. No wonder goals, no emerging talent

That just isn't true. Go see a highlight of the best goals in this Euro. Like Schick's awesome midfield goal. Or Pogba's third goal for France against Switzerland. List continues.

 

[Offside]

Euro 2008 was unbelievable.

 

[André Dominguez]

Euro 1992 due to that elite feeling the Euro had back in the days. Has football grown economically as a business, it has become logistically possible to organize events with much more teams.

 

[Ecstatic]

Euro 2000 - so many GOATS and super stars, including offensive ones.

 

[Solskjær's Red Army]

No way. Euro 2000, 2004 and 2008 were great and far better than this one. The individual quality in especially the first two was immense. Just take a look at the squads of Euro 2004. Even the likes of Czech Republic, Sweden, Denmark had great players.

Also loved the Portuguese stadiums' ambiance. I really think that tournament gets bad reputation just because of the defensive winners in Greece.

 

[Winzaghi]

2008 was my favourite. Lot of great underdog teams like Turkey, Croatia, Russia. Some cracking matches too.

 

[Charlie Foley]

Worst Euros.
Too many countries, not enough fans.

I thought euro 2016 was terrible too, the third place qualifies thing is stupid, there was some really negative football, a dull team won. But at least it had fans and was in one country: I was actually living in France at the time which was fun, but I ended up in hospital during the tournament which wasn’t

 

[Zehner]

I think it was better than 2016 but far worse than 2008 and 2012. We had some entertaining matches but I think if you take 2008 and 2012 as the benchmark, the standard of play was pretty low. In general I felt that many nations which were great in the past tournaments were approaching the end of a great generation or caught in transition.

IMO, we had only two teams with great individual quality in every position: France and England. Both managers chose to play a rather cynical style however that made the teams somewhat disappointing, even if England made it to the final. You just had the feeling that they could've been much better under a different manager.

Then there were a few teams with generally great squads but a few weak spots: Germany, Belgium and Portugal spring to mind. Germany and Portugal had maybe 1-2 position in which they weren't class but the managers fecked up. Belgium had many aging but generally great players but also disappointed from a collective perspective.

The teams that worked best as a unit IMO were Italy and Spain. Especially Spain's squad wasn't on the level of the other top teams, IMO, with many rather average players having important roles like Morata or Gerard Moreno. But they still worked well as a team. Still, in previous tournaments we had teams that worked similarly well as units but had world class in almost every position. Italy was a similar case with players such as Chiellini, Bonucci, Verratti and Jorginho but also quite average footballers like Di Lorenzo, Berardi or Barella. Anyway, I think Italy and Spain were overall the best teams in the tournament and their match had the highest standard we've seen.

And then there also were the typical "underdog" teams with a very good squad by their standards: Denmark, Swiss and maybe Austria. They provided many entertaining games and they were joined by a few surprise teams earning good results such as Hungary. But that's no different to previous tournaments, IMO.

So in general, entertaining tournament in a dumb format and no team came even somewhat close to the level Spain 2008 to 2012 had in my humble opinion. They had greater individual quality than the individually best team 2021 (France/England) and also worked better as a team than the best collective squads (Spain/Italy).

 

[Paul_Scholes18]

I think the group stage was a bit boring for some teams. England, Italy, Netherlands had an easy ride and never had any danger to miss knockout.

The drama in round 3 was pretty epic though in some groups. It got even more crazy due to third teams quality and I think we got many good games.

England vs Cech republic was probably the most boring and least important game of them all.

Playoff had it all really. I think it was too much drama that we got bored in the final with pens again. Switzerland massive win over France in the best Euro game I have ever seen in terms of drama.
Croatia vs Spain 8 goals and great drama even if Spain was too strong in extra time.

 

[lsd]

 

[Wolf1992]

No way

In terms of quality Euro 2000 it's superior, probably even superior than 98 WC (if we don't count Brazil).

Maybe english fans think this was the best Euro cause they reached the final, but as a south american i can be neutral, and Euro 2000 was superior in terms of quality of players and matches.

This Euro 2020 was only better than Euro 2016, Euro 2012 and 2008 were definitely better than Euro 2020.

With this '24 teams format' Euros are looking more and more like Copa America, which historically have been a borefest because Brazil didn't give a crap about it until the 2000s, and it was Argentina just playing the likes of Peru,Ecuador,Paraguay,Chile,Venezuela in the further stages etc.

 

[Bondi77]

Personally, I don’t think I’ve seen a Euros (or a World Cup for that matter) that was better. I thought the standard of football was really good for the majority of it. Some excellent matches, great drama, and some great comebacks. We also had a few shocks in the early rounds which always contribute to a good tournament.

I also thought the standard of refereeing was excellent in the main. For me, this greatly contributed to the matches being way more fluid and open. VAR was implemented better than it has been in the league (although there were a few exceptions) and overall, as someone who generally doesn’t like International football a great deal, I thoroughly enjoyed it.

The one big negative I will say is that the format was terrible. So many teams at a disadvantage with all the travel, while others got to play at home for most of it (England the obvious example). Just really not fair on the others. Don’t think it’s a coincidence that the two finalists were also the two teams who had a lot of home games.

How many have you seen?

 

[Bondi77]

euro 96 and euro 2000 are still unbeatable

I agree
2000 was the highest quality

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

I agree
2000 was the highest quality

1996 and 2000 were two straight tournaments of golden generations clashing. Of the big boys only Germany had started a decline by 2000

 

[SambaBoy]

The quality of football was at a very high standard I thought. In some tournaments, you have a lot of teams cancelling each other out but this one seemed to be more free-flowing. It was good to see key games not being decided by poor decision with the introduction of VAR, have to praise the standard of that too, decisions were made very quickly and wasn't all the nonsense with lines etc.

The whole 3rd place qualification needs to be scrapped though.

 

[BusbyMalone]

How many have you seen?

Six. 2000 was the first one I can remember fairly well.

 

[Siezard]

Euro 2021 was the best ever! So closely watched and keenly contested between all sides.

And best of all, England managed to beat most teams and qualified to the final while singing 'Football's coming home!'

 

[Josep Dowling]

Thought it was a good tournament football wise. Refereeing was on point.

I hope they never do a cross country Euros again as it never felt like an actual tournament. Also the 3rd place qualifiers is completely wrong and they need to sort that out. It’s a joke that a team can go through without winning a single group game.

 

[Jacob22]

Are people saying it just because England got to the finale?
It was one of the weakest tournament that I've watched, all the top nations were bad except for Italy.
But in general since Covid has started all football seems to be shit...

 

[Red Shorts]

As an Englishman and taking England's journey out of it, It's definitely near '00 and '08 for me. The games were outstanding on average, and very few that I switched off before full time.

Every knockout game had some drama in it, was just phenomenal. Qatar is going to be utter shite in comparison I feel, mainly down to poor crowd atmosphere and soaring temperatures

 

[matherto]

Most group games were tumescent.

Every knockout game had at least something interesting and then games like Spain-Italy were as good as it gets.

It was the complete opposite of the 2014 World Cup.

 

[GMok]

No, not for me. Euro 2000, 2008 and 2004 were much better in terms of quality. Don't remember Euro 96 that well. 2012 was bit of meh due to the same team winning it, although the quality was still better than this Euro.

This 3rd place qualifying nonsense has to stop.

Also, this bloody pandemic has taken a big chunk of joy out of Football in general.

 

[matherto]

Are people saying it just because England got to the finale?
It was one of the weakest tournament that I've watched, all the top nations were bad except for Italy.
But in general since Covid has started all football seems to be shit...

The quality of the games versus the quality of the teams.

Even if the top teams weren’t great quality wise, the games played were of excellent entertainment value.

I’d take great games over great teams any day of the week.

 

[RooneyLegend]

Nope Euro 2000, so many truly great players playing great football.

 

[Dirty Schwein]

This was a good tournament but the fact that the top 3 in a group went through made the entire group stage less fun. The group of death was only exciting in the final game. The other groups were generally quite boring as you knew all the big teams will make it out and they did.

The lack of host nation also took away from the tournament. I love seeing a host nation in play. Whether it's a big one like France who are under pressure every game or a smaller one like Greece who use the home turf to somehow punch way above their weight. Let's not even mention how some teams got shafted with the travel and others had the VIP pass...

Once it got the knockouts, it was much better. Shock results, penalties, controversy etc. Really good stuff.

The final had a good story also. A passionate nation that hasn't won jack shit since 1966 Vs a powerhouse footballing nation that was looking for redemption after failing to qualify for the last world cup.

In the end, many fell and the best team in the tournament won, which was nice.

I'd give this tournament a 7/10

P.S. the "let's laugh at England" thread here also made some great post-tournament reading