Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

EURO 2016

I did not realise until yesterday that the next tournament to be held in France will be expanded to 24 teams, comprising 6 groups of 4.

For me the Euros are much more enjoyable than the World Cup because of the fact that there are (usually) 16 stong teams competing. It is a perfect format. I also think it makes the qualifying groups more competitive in the knowledge that you have to win your group to be guaranteed a place in the tournament.

I can't remember a Euro tournament I have not enjoyed despite England's dismal record.

The new format will equate to 51/52 games over a period of 29-31 days.

UEFA are pillocks.
«1

Comments

  • i don't think they are definitely going to it yet, think they're just considering at the min
  • Agreed on every point. Euros are much more enjoyable than the World Cup for the reasons you state, the quality of the football in this year's tournament has been phenomenal, and that's because it's only the best teams involved.

    As you say, also makes the qualifying far less interesting.
  • Agreed - the worst thing for me is that in the actual tournament, the group stage only knocks out 8 teams from 24 - the 4 best 3rd place teams will go through out of 6 groups. One win should do it, or even two draws.

    For me thank means the tournament really won't pick up until about the quarter finals.
  • I don't mind opening it up to 24 teams. Yes the quality is diminished in the group stage but at the end of the day, it's more Football to watch during the Summer!

    I think the real problem is with the qualification. It pretty much makes the qualifiers even less interesting than they already are, as all of the top nations will not have to worry too much if they lose a few games!

  • still don't get why you can't have 4 groups of 6, just means more games in the group stage 5 instead of 3? Not sure what is wrong with that.

    they should make only consecutive yellows count as a ban, and do an amnesty on cards/bans from qualifying in my view
  • I don't mind opening it up to 24 teams. Yes the quality is diminished in the group stage but at the end of the day, it's more Football to watch during the Summer!

    I think the real problem is with the qualification. It pretty much makes the qualifiers even less interesting than they already are, as all of the top nations will not have to worry too much if they lose a few games!

    This. More teams = more games = more football to watch! The quality will be no different, I don't think many teams have really stood out so far. Germans, Spain, Portugal have all shown the odd glimpse but nothing spectacular. In fact the best games in the tournament have involved the lesser teams!
  • I would of had 4 groups of 6 round robin, top 2 go to QF, more emphasis on winning matches, but if you lose a couple you still have a chance. 5 games means more use of full 23 man squad, the reward for qualifying is greater (2 years worth, ended in 2 matches in current format) and it would filter the better teams into the knockout stages as well
  • I don't mind opening it up to 24 teams. Yes the quality is diminished in the group stage but at the end of the day, it's more Football to watch during the Summer!

    I think the real problem is with the qualification. It pretty much makes the qualifiers even less interesting than they already are, as all of the top nations will not have to worry too much if they lose a few games!

    This. More teams = more games = more football to watch! The quality will be no different, I don't think many teams have really stood out so far. Germans, Spain, Portugal have all shown the odd glimpse but nothing spectacular. In fact the best games in the tournament have involved the lesser teams!
    Agree with the above two posters - all the games so far have been cagey with the defences dominating - by opening up to lesser skilled team the top teams will go all out for goals and making it all more entertaining, hmmmm?
  • Already mentioned on another thread, but qualifying will be a joke.
    24 teams out of 53 UEFA members

    6 groups of 4 with top 2 going through AND the 4 best placed 3rd paced teams.

    Will be a joke tournament - both world cups that had 24 teams didnt work as well as those with 16 or 32 teams.
  • Sponsored links:


  • One of the problems with 4 groups of 6 is that there would be more dead games, where both teams are already out. It would be 36 more matches than the current format.
  • I reckon we might as well scrap qualification and have everyone in a year long tournament...
  • it'll become a watered down tournament, all UEFA cares about is the revenues. Would you really want to watch say Estonia V Hungary... All the big nations will still be there so really your just drawing the tournament out for more $$$
  • it'll become a watered down tournament, all UEFA cares about is the revenues. Would you really want to watch say Estonia V Hungary... All the big nations will still be there so really your just drawing the tournament out for more $$$
    If I didn't want to watch it, then I wouldn't watch it - Nobody is being forced.
  • i'm with the "more games in the summer....sweet" camp.

    at least this way scotland might just have a chance of getting to a tournament.
  • it'll become a watered down tournament, all UEFA cares about is the revenues. Would you really want to watch say Estonia V Hungary... All the big nations will still be there so really your just drawing the tournament out for more $$$
    If I didn't want to watch it, then I wouldn't watch it - Nobody is being forced.
    You dont feel having a watered down tournament is taking away from how good the tournament currently is?

    No one is forcing anyone to watch anything, but its not like Uefa are doing it for the good of the game its about the revenues and doing it for all the wrong reasons.

    If you wanted to give the option of having a larger tournament with more slots without watering it down too much then you would just add another 4 slots and make it 4 groups of 5 with the top two going through as you currently do...

  • How about making it even more complicated :)

    6 groups of 4, top 2 from each group go through = 12 teams
    They form 4 groups of 3, the winner of each group getting to a semi final

    So currently there are 32 games including the 3rd place play off (do they still have this?)

    Under the proposal above there would be 48 games.

    The first group stage would take 15 days, as you play 2 games on each day for the final games in each group, so would take 15 days compared to 12 currently, not a massive increase. There would then we a 3 day break, and the next group stage would take 7 days (2 days of games, 3 day break, 2 days of games). Another 3 days break, then the semis, 4 day break then the final. Total of 24 days, so you could have a few extra rest days and still complete the whole tournament in under a month.

    Advantages:
    1)Groups would still be tight with the 3 games each structure
    2)The second mini-group stage would mean we see more games between the top sides
    3)Still fits the whole tournament into a reasonable time-scale

    Disadvantages:
    1)Possibly too many rest days for TV Execs/Sponsors liking (though it could be seen as an advantage, the danger of wall to wall football is viewer burnout)
    2)The mini-group structure could lead to fewer shocks. A smaller team could grab a one-nil win, and still go out by getting stuffed in their other mini-group game*

    *e.g. Germany, Greece and Croatia are in a mini-group. Greece beat Germany 1-0, Germany beat Croatia 3-1, Croatia beat Greece 2-0. Greece go out, despite the victory over the group favourites. In a straight knock-out you'll likely get more upsets, good for the viewers, but probably not what UEFA want or the sponsors want. They want the biggest teams in the semis and finals. Their worst nightmare is likely two minnows sneaking through to a low key final.
  • the reality is Europe is now a lot more teams than it used to be with the break up of the eastern bloc into more constituent countries, including USSR (Russia etc) Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, the expansion of the competition has lagged behind some might argue, sorry cdnt find a link to the facts on this


  • the reality is Europe is now a lot more teams than it used to be with the break up of the eastern bloc into more constituent countries, including USSR (Russia etc) Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, the expansion of the competition has lagged behind some might argue, sorry cdnt find a link to the facts on this


    True, and i think the tournament as become more competitive with that, but lets be fair, if your good enough to be in the tournament then you would have won your qualification group or the play-off group.

    And to incorporate another play-off group within the tournament... like seriously, no one else can see that its all about money and not about football. If they want more revenue go american style and have a series...

  • I'm not advocating that, I prefer the more teams per group option, you could have more qualifcation groups/play off places from qualifiers though
  • Sponsored links:


  • 2016 Group A Final table
    Portugal (seeded)
    Krygystan
    San Marino
    Lichtenstein

    San Marino qualify for the knockout stage as best 3rd placed team (goal diff of minus 22 puts them ahead of Malta minus 26).

    They now play Faroe Islands for a place in the quarter finals (against either Austria or Cyprus).

    It will kill the tournament.
  • How about making it even more complicated :)

    6 groups of 4, top 2 from each group go through = 12 teams
    They form 4 groups of 3, the winner of each group getting to a semi final

    which was exactly the format in the 1982 world cup finals.


  • The bottom line is, why play with something that isnt broken... :(
  • edited June 2012
    I've known this for a while, and have been hearing people complaining that it won't be as good with 'weaker' teams in the finals. But I don't understand how it's any different from the World Cup's number of 32 meaning inclusion for the likes of Saudi Arabia, Trinidad and Tobago and Qatar?
  • It isn't a lot different that's the whole point. You fill up the competition with crap nations as above & in The Euro's case Scotland, Faroe Islands, Norway, etc.
  • I've known this for a while, and have been hearing people complaining that it won't be as good with 'weaker' teams in the finals. But I don't understand how it's any different from the World Cup's number of 32 meaning inclusion for the likes of Saudi Arabia, Trinidad and Tobago and Qatar?
    Because at least in the World Cup you have a higher % of decent teams coming in as well as crap teams - I don't see any teams of the calibre of Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, USA etc queuing up to get in
  • All this talk of San Marino Vs Liechtenstein is absolute tosh - countries like that will probably never make the top 24 in Europe.

    There are some very decent players in European football who unfortunately never get a look in when it comes to tournaments. Gareth Bale for example. So I do think there is a bit of exagerration going on about how it will 'kill' the tournament.

    All it will do is make it feel a little more like the World Cup in terms of length, quality etc.

    Its Football for crying out loud and when it comes on, you'll all bloody watch it!
  • It isn't a lot different that's the whole point. You fill up the competition with crap nations as above & in The Euro's case Scotland, Faroe Islands, Norway, etc.
    Some of those WC crap nations did turn out to be better than expected.
    Cameroon back in the day, also the Japs had a bit of a go, I think.

    The weaker Euro nations mentioned will never spring a surprise like these teams.
  • As someone who loves World Cup/Euros, I can only see this as a good thing. It means more games. I was looking forward to this current one for ages and suddenly there's only 5 games left.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!