Have UEFA totally screwed the Euro 2016 qualifiers

Kermit.de.frog

Sounded like a good idea at the time expanding the tournament and thus the qualifiers - "sure none of those teams will qualify anyway"

But the fact is Iceland, Wales, Israel, Slovakia, Northern Ireland, Finland and Albania all top their groups now and none of them have ever qualified for the Euros before.

Does a 24 team championship = a potentially very bad one?

As an aside we are in a group where realistically 4 of the teams including us should be there in a 24 team tournament except one or even two won't make it. That sucks as well.

Has the tournament been debased and devalued?

It strikes me that the excitement of even getting there won't be what it was.

It sounds even better than those teams are on top. I don't understand how that's a bad thing.

LuckyLloyd

Qualifying has been great thus far and the new TV rules mean we see so much more of it.

It doesn't suit Ireland that Poland beat Germany. That's the great thing. Ultimately there's always going to be some seeding and fixing but I'm loving how the tables are looking so far, it's great craic.

Shanotheslayer

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Sounded like a good idea at the time expanding the tournament and thus the qualifiers - "sure none of those teams will qualify anyway"

But the fact is Iceland, Wales, Israel, Slovakia, Northern Ireland, Finland and Albania all top their groups now and none of them have ever qualified for the Euros before.

Does a 24 team championship = a potentially very bad one?

As an aside we are in a group where realistically 4 of the teams including us should be there in a 24 team tournament except one or even two won't make it. That sucks as well.

Has the tournament been debased and devalued?

It strikes me that the excitement of even getting there won't be what it was.

Why should we be there but not any of the above countries? ...

Kermit.de.frog

Because we have a better team than each and every one of them?

Our group is poxy compared to others, let's be honest. Any other group and we are already qualified. No offense to those teams but they should not be genuine contenders to qualify. It's a result of UEFA's urge to include as many as possible.

We face the prospect of us being knocked out and Northern Ireland and Albania getting through ffs.

SeantheMan

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Because we have a better team than each and every one of them?

Do we ? News to me and a lot of other people too I'd imagine.
Not that I give them much weight....but even check the Fifa World rankings

#29 WALES
#40 SLOVAKIA
#45 ALBANIA

#62 IRELAND
#64 ISRAEL
#65 FINLAND
#71 N.IRELAND

Recently what have we done ?
Lost to Serbia,
Lost to Turkey,
Drew with Costa Rica
Smashed by Portugal

We managed to beat Oman, Georgia and Gibraltar.....

Kermit.de.frog

Those rankings don't reflect reality. Man for man are you saying Ireland is not a better team than Wales or Albania!?

Bale and Ramsey, good as they are, don't make a team.

Ireland is down the rankings less due to ability and more due to stupid games organised by the FAI with scant regard for rankings.

Shanotheslayer

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Those rankings don't reflect reality. Man for man are you saying Ireland is not a better team than Wales or Albania!?

Bale and Ramsey, good as they are, don't make a team.

Ireland is down the rankings less due to ability and more due to stupid games organised by the FAI with scant regard for rankings.

Lol. Football doesn't work based on Man for Man. I could see Wales and Slovakia beating us. Bale would have a field day against our back 4

kippy

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Those rankings don't reflect reality. Man for man are you saying Ireland is not a better team than Wales or Albania!?

Bale and Ramsey, good as they are, don't make a team.

Ireland is down the rankings less due to ability and more due to stupid games organised by the FAI with scant regard for rankings.

The table doesn't lie though does it?

I think it's great that these so called "minnows" are getting their chance and I hope a few of them get in. It's a great thing for a small nation to mix it up with the big boys, as we well know.

Sometimes you don't get the luck of the draw when the groups are called, sometimes you do, thems the breaks.

dsmythy

Before despite those teams being on top they'd know ultimately they'd still have no chance of qualifying. Now they can be delighted to be where they are knowing they could actually make it.

bucketybuck

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Sounded like a good idea at the time

It was never a good idea at the time.

Might as well just give every country a "You're a winner" medal and be done with it.

Probably the best thing UEFA have done in a while tbh

CSF

I don't understand how surprising teams being top of their groups is any reflection of how UEFA formatted the system anyway.

Surely that is more to do with Germany, Spain, Holland etc underachieving.

8-10

CSF wrote: »

I don't understand how surprising teams being top of their groups is any reflection of how UEFA formatted the system anyway.

Surely that is more to do with Germany, Spain, Holland etc underachieving.

Precisely, the groups are still the same, strange argument really. The quality of the 2016 tournament will tell us if it was a good idea or not but I think it's jumping the gun to use the qualifiers as a guide.

greendom

no

death1234567

bucketybuck wrote: »

It was never a good idea at the time..

+1. It was just a shamless vote/money grab by UEFA. The group phase is a joke, the group phase in the actual championship will be a joke and the last 16 will be a joke. What was great about the Euro's was that once you got in it was the best 16 teams in Europe which meant you had to be on your game right from the start. Now you can take three draws in the group and probably go through.

Kermit.de.frog

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

But the fact is Iceland, Wales, Israel, Slovakia, Northern Ireland, Finland and Albania all top their groups now and none of them have ever qualified for the Euros before.

Somewhere in Albania there is a forum where the discussion is "have UEFA screwed the 2016 qualifiers...Ireland are joint top of their group!"

Soups123

Deleted User wrote: »

Somewhere in Albania there is a forum where the discussion is "have UEFA screwed the 2016 qualifiers...Ireland are joint top of their group!"

I was just about to say the same if looking at other groups and thinking look who's top? We are on that train too.

A long way to go there'll be huge changes in most groups. If Ireland can't achieve 3rd in this group then they dont deserve to qualify.

I think we'll take 3rd

inforfun

That there will be 24 countries qualifying, so be it.
More concerned about the tournament itself, most of all the group matches.

There has been a 24 team tournament in the past which went down as the worst WC ever. Italia '90
I know the Irish\Ireland thinks different about that tournament but those group matches were terrible.

inforfun

inforfun wrote: »

That there will be 24 countries qualifying, so be it.
More concerned about the tournament itself, most of all the group matches.

There has been a 24 team tournament in the past which went down as the worst WC ever. Italia '90
I know the Irish\Ireland thinks different about that tournament but those group matches were terrible.

It was an awful tournament, but not sure that was down to the number of teams or was it more because of the style of football played by many of them. Mexico 86 was a memorable tournament and that involved 24 teams too afair.

CSF

Deleted User wrote: »

Somewhere in Albania there is a forum where the discussion is "have UEFA screwed the 2016 qualifiers...Ireland are joint top of their group!"

Yeah I'd say they absolutely hate us after Liam Neeson killing so many of their people

Will I Amnt

inforfun wrote: »

That there will be 24 countries qualifying, so be it.
More concerned about the tournament itself, most of all the group matches.

There has been a 24 team tournament in the past which went down as the worst WC ever. Italia '90
I know the Irish\Ireland thinks different about that tournament but those group matches were terrible.

As far as results were concerned it was great for Ireland but I don't think you'd find too many that enjoyed the football. Sure Ireland didn't even win a game and got to the quarter finals.

KerranJast

inforfun wrote: »

That there will be 24 countries qualifying, so be it.
More concerned about the tournament itself, most of all the group matches.

There has been a 24 team tournament in the past which went down as the worst WC ever. Italia '90
I know the Irish\Ireland thinks different about that tournament but those group matches were terrible.

I blame a lot of that on backpassing. Thank you FIFA for the backpass rule that came in after. One of the few innovations they got right.

Green Giant

I do think that a 24-team European Championship is too bloated and 16 teams was a perfect fit.

However, if the likes of Wales, Israel and Finland are having a better time of it than expected, then good luck to them. If they finish in the top two after 10 games they will have earned it.

Also it's good to see 'outsider' teams qualifying, and not all of them disgrace themselves either. Slovenia got a couple of good results in 2000 and Latvia drew with Germany in 2004, those in 16-team tournaments.

ArmaniJeanss

inforfun wrote: »

That there will be 24 countries qualifying, so be it.
More concerned about the tournament itself, most of all the group matches.

There has been a 24 team tournament in the past which went down as the worst WC ever. Italia '90
I know the Irish\Ireland thinks different about that tournament but those group matches were terrible.

The 24 teams wasn't the major cause of the problems in 1990 though, there'd been a perfectly excellent 24 team competition 4 years earlier in Mexico.

****

No denying that 24 is cumbersome though, but I think we are gaining so much under this format that its a price worth paying.
The extra 8 places has brought around 20 more teams into the qualifying picture, teams which were normally dead by GW7/8 will now go to GW10 with at least a squeak.

It seems a bit churlish of the OP that just because unsexy teams like Iceland, Albania and Israel are seizing this chance and have gone hell for leather from the start of this campaign that it therefore must be a mistake.
Fundamentally its good for football in UEFA if nearly everyone feels that qualification is somewhat attainable, it encourages investment, interest, playing numbers at all ages, everything.
(Irelands group is a bit sick I'll give you that, but I suspect we never complained when it was other teams who got such horrid groups.)

HalloweenJack

Green Giant wrote: »

Also it's good to see 'outsider' teams qualifying, and not all of them disgrace themselves either. Slovenia got a couple of good results in 2000 and Latvia drew with Germany in 2004, those in 16-team tournaments.

I remember that Latvia-Germany game vividly because it was just so shocking. Latvia were very unlucky not to win it, think they might've had a goal ruled out too. They definitely didn't disgrace themselves in that one.

bennyineire

3 games in, I think you might be jumping the gun. Also the group stages are drawn the same as the last ones. I don't really understand your crib

Green Giant

HalloweenJack wrote: »

I remember that Latvia-Germany game vividly because it was just so shocking. Latvia were very unlucky not to win it, think they might've had a goal ruled out too. They definitely didn't disgrace themselves in that one.

They weren't far off beating a very good Czech Republic side either

GLaDOS

The more football the better as far as I'm concerned. It's often the plucky underdogs who provide some of the best matches anyway.

Muff_Daddy

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Sounded like a good idea at the time expanding the tournament and thus the qualifiers - "sure none of those teams will qualify anyway"

But the fact is Iceland, Wales, Israel, Slovakia, Northern Ireland, Finland and Albania all top their groups now and none of them have ever qualified for the Euros before.

Does a 24 team championship = a potentially very bad one?

As an aside we are in a group where realistically 4 of the teams including us should be there in a 24 team tournament except one or even two won't make it. That sucks as well.

Has the tournament been debased and devalued?

It strikes me that the excitement of even getting there won't be what it was.

Iceland deserve to be where they are anyway, they are a serious team. I watched them last night and they throughly deserved their win over Netherlands.

Some of their youth teams have been to the latter stages of youth tournaments over the last number of years, they even made it to the the playoffs for the World Cup in the last campagne, so to write them off the way you're doing is highly disrespectful.

Prehaps you should educate yourself on the merits on some of these so called minnows before you pass comment on them.

inforfun

Dont underestimate Iceland.
Could have been in Brazil last summer too if it wasnt for a red card at home in the play offs vs Croatia.

Core of that team was 3 years ago at the Euro U21, an 8 team tournament.

Bookies were so off with giving odds of 2,4 for an Iceland DC last night. Long may it continue though.

kryogen

I like it, the cream should rise to the top, but it should not be an almost guaranteed spot for the bigger nations.

fryup

death1234567 wrote: »

+1. It was just a shamless vote/money grab by UEFA. the group phase in the actual championship will be a joke and the last 16 will be a joke. What was great about the Euro's was that once you got in it was the best 16 teams in Europe which meant you had to be on your game right from the start. Now you can take three draws in the group and probably go through.

agree, 16 teams was perfect...the last few euros were excellent even better than the WC (which goes on too long)...so no need to change it:(

the group stages will have the top three in a group of four qualifying for the knock out round which will make it less competitive

Shanotheslayer

fryup wrote: »

the WC (which goes on too long)...

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

iDave

I think the biggest problem 24 teams posses is it reduces the amount of nations that can host it.

jonneymendoza

CSF wrote: »

Yeah I'd say they absolutely hate us after Liam Neeson killing so many of their people

LOL!!

8-10

When the euros first went to 16 teams there were less teams in UEFA. Makes sense to expand

thelad95

Jesus we're not even halfway through the qualifying. The likes of Germany, Spain, Holland etc. will still probably finish top anyway. As some people have said, this format change has actually led to more competitive football with more teams now having a realistic chance of qualification.

I do have a horrible feeling (knowing Uefa) that they will eventually expand to a 32 team tournament which would have disastrous effects on the quality of football.

thelad95

iDave wrote: »

I think the biggest problem 24 teams posses is it reduces the amount of nations that can host it.

In what way...?

Fr Tod Umptious

thelad95 wrote: »

In what way...?

More teams equals move venues simply.
Which is expensive

Billy86

inforfun wrote: »

That there will be 24 countries qualifying, so be it.
More concerned about the tournament itself, most of all the group matches.

There has been a 24 team tournament in the past which went down as the worst WC ever. Italia '90
I know the Irish\Ireland thinks different about that tournament but those group matches were terrible.

To be fair, the 1982, 1986 and 1994 WCs also had 24 teams. 1986 and 94 were both good tournaments, and some rank 1982 with the best ones ever.

roanoke

The Euros (imho) have been re-designed to benefit the top teams (your England, Italy, Germany, Spain, France, Portugal, Netherlands, Russia).

UEFA want these guys in the finals every single time. They don't want a repeat of 2008 where, despite having a 16 team finals, England STILL managed to blow it. That's why we now have a 24 team finals.

Uefa don't really care (too much) who make up the numbers (whether it be Iceland, Wales, Israel, Slovakia, Northern Ireland, Finland and Albania or anyone else) so long as ALL of their favorites are there. Their priority/preference is to get the major powers/markets to the finals each and every time.

Kidchameleon

thelad95 wrote: »

I do have a horrible feeling (knowing Uefa) that they will eventually expand to a 32 team tournament which would have disastrous effects on the quality of football.

Platini has said that if he were to take over FIFA he would consider making the World Cup 40 teams...

thelad95

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

More teams equals move venues simply.
Which is expensive

I feel the future of sports events hosting is going to change anyway to a model similar to Euro 2020 anyway. The current model where a country builds loads of white elephant infrastructure with little legacy being left is barbaric and many countries (as evidenced by the lack of interest in Euro 2020) are now recognizing this. I'm not saying sports events will be held across a continent but instead three or four countries like our failed Celtic bid for Euro 2020

death1234567

roanoke wrote: »

UEFA want these guys in the finals every single time. They don't want a repeat of 2008 where, despite having a 16 team finals, England STILL managed to blow it. That's why we now have a 24 team finals.

I'd say its more to do with having (a lot) more matches in the Euro's which means more games for broadcasters to show which means more money for UEFA. It's rare that one of the bigger nations miss out and even still they still pay and show the Euro's on TV anyway.

It also means that all the smaller nations were going to vote to keep platini in charge.

Dearg81

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Because we have a better team than each and every one of them?

Our group is poxy compared to others, let's be honest. Any other group and we are already qualified. No offense to those teams but they should not be genuine contenders to qualify. It's a result of UEFA's urge to include as many as possible.

We face the prospect of us being knocked out and Northern Ireland and Albania getting through ffs.

I think Wales have a stronger team tbh. They have a good spine now with 2 solid CB's in Williams and Chester, 2 decent premiership midfielders in Ledley and Allen and then they have Ramsey and Bale who are 2 players way above anything we have at the moment. I think Bale would be the difference if we had to play them at the moment.

inforfun

Billy86 wrote: »

To be fair, the 1982, 1986 and 1994 WCs also had 24 teams. 1986 and 94 were both good tournaments, and some rank 1982 with the best ones ever.

That is true. It is just the group stages that are a pain. With a 24 country set up they still need a last 16.
So you have 2/2,5 weeks of group stages and in the end 8 go home and the real tournament starts.
A group of 4 where 3 can go through will have lot of dull matches, teams knowing all too well that 3 draws will see them through.

I am pie

Northern Ireland (and I say this as a fan!) have not much of a chance of qualifying and if they do and Ireland don't it's hardly their fault no UEFAs.

We best the mighty whale murderers 2-0 at home, i think you are probably jumping the gun as regards to our chances! Let's see what happens tonight in Athens.

Broadly speaking the best 24 teams will qualify on merit, I would say that longer term this is a positive for Ireland rather than a negative, especially if you dont qualify for this tournament and slip down the rankings? Hopefully both North and South qualify.

Wales flatter to deceive, always have. Even when they had the likes of Rush, Hughes, Southall and Ratcliffe, Van den Hauwe and Mickey Thomas in the 80s, they seem to be masters at finding a way not to qualify! Giggs and Gary Speed couldnt inspire them to do much a decade later so i dont hold out much hope for Bale now.

Corholio

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Because we have a better team than each and every one of them?

Our group is poxy compared to others, let's be honest. Any other group and we are already qualified. No offense to those teams but they should not be genuine contenders to qualify. It's a result of UEFA's urge to include as many as possible.

We face the prospect of us being knocked out and Northern Ireland and Albania getting through ffs.

Why you would want to see tournaments with the same teams over and over again I've no idea. That's the whole point of a draw at the start, some countries get better groups than others.

EuropeanSon

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Those rankings don't reflect reality. Man for man are you saying Ireland is not a better team than Wales or Albania!?

Bale and Ramsey, good as they are, don't make a team.
.

Spurs from two years ago say hi.

We are a worse team than Wales by any reasonable measure.