• Participation within this 'World Football' is only available to members who have had 5+ posts approved elsewhere.

EURO 2021

Status
Not open for further replies.

Even though stadiums won't be full, there's something just magnificent about an International Tournament isn't there?

Add in to the mix Wales, Scotland and you've got great atmosphere all the way through. Will be great seeing North Macedonia and Finland in there (and not ultra negative Iceland) and I for one cannot wait. 25 days and counting.

I've been lucky enough to get tickets to Scotland Vs. Czech at Hampden which should be a right spectacle.
 
barneygumble said:
Even though stadiums won't be full, there's something just magnificent about an International Tournament isn't there?

Add in to the mix Wales, Scotland and you've got great atmosphere all the way through. Will be great seeing North Macedonia and Finland in there (and not ultra negative Iceland) and I for one cannot wait. 25 days and counting.

I've been lucky enough to get tickets to Scotland Vs. Czech at Hampden which should be a right spectacle.
Click to expand...
I preferred the old 16 team format for the quality but it's good to see some smaller nations in there now too. Looking forward to Scotland-England game. Will not be easy at all for England especially if they start badly against Croatia.
 

Billy Dean said:
I preferred the old 16 team format for the quality but it's good to see some smaller nations in there now too. Looking forward to Scotland-England game. Will not be easy at all for England especially if they start badly against Croatia.
Click to expand...

I also preferred the old format.

But I must admit, any reason to have 3 games a day is exciting.
The old format still had the odd random team in it, like Latvia in 2004.

That said, Finland won their group (I think), and have every right to be there.

I think, looking at the schedule, it will suit Scotland or England to be runners up. I think winners of the group will go on to face one of France/Portugal/Germany or Hungary, with runners up facing the second place from Spain, Poland, Sweden or Slovakia.

Think if you win the group, your run could literally go

Germany/France/Portugal > Spain > Italy/Netherlands > Final.
 
barneygumble said:
I also preferred the old format.

But I must admit, any reason to have 3 games a day is exciting.
The old format still had the odd random team in it, like Latvia in 2004.

That said, Finland won their group (I think), and have every right to be there.

I think, looking at the schedule, it will suit Scotland or England to be runners up. I think winners of the group will go on to face one of France/Portugal/Germany or Hungary, with runners up facing the second place from Spain, Poland, Sweden or Slovakia.

Think if you win the group, your run could literally go

Germany/France/Portugal > Spain > Italy/Netherlands > Final.
Click to expand...
Yeah but even as runners up it won't be that easy. Likely Poland in the last 16 and if you get past that it's Germany/France/Portugal in the QF.
 
The Euros was the peak of international football when it was 16 teams. Europe had enough quality sides to make that a superbly competitive format in an era of 32-team World Cup monstrosities. Now, the Euros is a Frankenstein's monster of a competition with 24 teams. The old 24-team World Cup format was justified on the basis of developing the game and giving access to regions that were underrepresented. The qualifying competition for 24-team World Cups was still ultra competitive. Now, with the Euros, though, the qualifying competition is effectively redundant with zero jeopardy for any vaguely competent side. And the finals tournament will be effectively unwatchable in the group stage. France, Germany, Portugal and Hungary looks a great group until you realise three of them are likely to progress.

Even with full crowds, this format doesn't provide much jeopardy and tension. France '16 was the poorest Euros in living memory. I expect this version will be even worse.

I love international football, but the Euros is now purely a money-making festival for casuals with very little quality or relevance until the latter knockout stages. Of course, they're diluting the World Cup, too. It'll soon be 48 teams.

I'll pick and choose my group games, restrict myself to the Germany/France/Portugal group and a handful of other games and start to take a keener interest by the last 8. I think I'll pass on Finland v Denmark.
 
Drico said:
The Euros was the peak of international football when it was 16 teams. Europe had enough quality sides to make that a superbly competitive format in an era of 32-team World Cup monstrosities. Now, the Euros is a Frankenstein's monster of a competition with 24 teams. The old 24-team World Cup format was justified on the basis of developing the game and giving access to regions that were underrepresented. The qualifying competition for 24-team World Cups was still ultra competitive. Now, with the Euros, though, the qualifying competition is effectively redundant with zero jeopardy for any vaguely competent side. And the finals tournament will be effectively unwatchable in the group stage. France, Germany, Portugal and Hungary looks a great group until you realise three of them are likely to progress.

Even with full crowds, this format doesn't provide much jeopardy and tension. France '16 was the poorest Euros in living memory. I expect this version will be even worse.

I love international football, but the Euros is now purely a money-making festival for casuals with very little quality or relevance until the latter knockout stages. Of course, they're diluting the World Cup, too. It'll soon be 48 teams.

I'll pick and choose my group games, restrict myself to the Germany/France/Portugal group and a handful of other games and start to take a keener interest by the last 8. I think I'll pass on Finland v Denmark.
Click to expand...

Can I ask what is wrong with Finland Vs. Denmark?

Both progressed through their groups, and that’s all they’re required to do, to be there, by right.

The tournament before was dire, but regardless it’s not Albania, Iceland Romania or Slovakia’s fault that they qualified, but the Netherlands never.

Is it all about money? Of course it is, why else would they be dragging fans all the way to Non- accessible Baku? But doesn’t mean it won’t be enjoyable.
 

barneygumble said:
Can I ask what is wrong with Finland Vs. Denmark?

Both progressed through their groups, and that’s all they’re required to do, to be there, by right.

The tournament before was dire, but regardless it’s not Albania, Iceland Romania or Slovakia’s fault that they qualified, but the Netherlands never.

Is it all about money? Of course it is, why else would they be dragging fans all the way to Non- accessible Baku? But doesn’t mean it won’t be enjoyable.
Click to expand...
What's wrong with it? I suppose, to me, it has zero relevance to my understanding of the overall state of European international football. In the past, when I sat down to watch Euro 84, I knew I was watching two of the best sides in Europe. Quality-wise, they were among the elite. Therefore, these matches mattered in terms of where the international game stood on the continent.

Today, 24 teams have qualified. Europe doesn't have 24 good teams. Sure, Finland and Denmark might have qualified if it were 8 or 16, but we don't know that because the qualifying tournament is essentially an open door for vaguely competent teams. And, let's be honest, you now need a degree in applied mathematics to understand the qualification format since they added in the Nations' League route.

I accept that a lot of people just like watching matches over a summer. UEFA know how to maximise that audience. But I've zero interest in putting myself through two hours of irrelevance. If Finland and Denmark progress to a quarter-final clash, I'll take an interest. But the new format is a cherry-picker's charter. And it really is an inferior one to what we have had before taken in the round. There's little jeopardy in the first phase. In truth, I suppose I should really just change my mindset and tell myself that a knockout tournament is actually the ideal format for excitement and hold back until the last 16 or last 8 before engaging. I just find the whole UEFA "football family festival" guff utterly bogus and think they've ruined what was a wonderful tournament. It'll probably make them more money, of course, but I think it comes at the cost of relevance and quality. Then again, perhaps these things are overrated now.
 
Drico said:
What's wrong with it? I suppose, to me, it has zero relevance to my understanding of the overall state of European international football. In the past, when I sat down to watch Euro 84, I knew I was watching two of the best sides in Europe. Quality-wise, they were among the elite. Therefore, these matches mattered in terms of where the international game stood on the continent.

Today, 24 teams have qualified. Europe doesn't have 24 good teams. Sure, Finland and Denmark might have qualified if it were 8 or 16, but we don't know that because the qualifying tournament is essentially an open door for vaguely competent teams. And, let's be honest, you now need a degree in applied mathematics to understand the qualification format since they added in the Nations' League route.

I accept that a lot of people just like watching matches over a summer. UEFA know how to maximise that audience. But I've zero interest in putting myself through two hours of irrelevance. If Finland and Denmark progress to a quarter-final clash, I'll take an interest. But the new format is a cherry-picker's charter. And it really is an inferior one to what we have had before taken in the round. There's little jeopardy in the first phase. In truth, I suppose I should really just change my mindset and tell myself that a knockout tournament is actually the ideal format for excitement and hold back until the last 16 or last 8 before engaging. I just find the whole UEFA "football family festival" guff utterly bogus and think they've ruined what was a wonderful tournament. It'll probably make them more money, of course, but I think it comes at the cost of relevance and quality. Then again, perhaps these things are overrated now.
Click to expand...

It was unquestionably, the best way, when it was 16.

Same as the World Cup, I love it as a 32, yes there are some dead games, but it’s just a brilliant spectacle and it’s my favourite 4 weeks of the year when it’s on.

You don’t need 24 teams, but since the expansion we’ve seen every home nation snd Ireland qualify, snd that’s still an enjoyable experience for me.

But then again, I actually quite like International football, it’s a nice break to not endure Everton.

Oh and yes, it’s the most ridiculous thing ever to have a “celebration of football”, and make it inaccessible for the majority of fans to attend all three group games. But it’s football, 3 times a day, to thoroughly enjoy.
 
I'm pretty anti-international footy until one of the big tournaments comes about. I even considered getting a sticker album for this the the day. I don't feel like I've had enough of a footy fill this season so I'm now looking forward to it. I think it's pretty wide open in terms of who can win it and even though I laughed when I first saw it, It's no surprise to see England one of the favourites along with France.
 
Fancy England, France, Italy, and Portugal. And can't ever back against Germany but they aren't in the right place.

Might actually be England's time, with home advantage, and the domination of the PL.

I don't think there will be a better time to win it for them.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top