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

The Expansion to 24 teams, what are people's opinions now?

Has the expansion been good for the Euros?

  • Yes

    Votes: 45 57.7%
  • No

    Votes: 33 42.3%

  • Total voters
    78
Status
Not open for further replies.

That's a terrible idea.

why? top 4 get byes, so no team can sleep walk through the final group stage match. There should be some reward for winning the group stage with 7 or 9 pts. With 32 teams why even bother with qualifying?
 
why? top 4 get byes, so no team can sleep walk through the final group stage match. There should be some reward for winning the group stage with 7 or 9 pts. With 32 teams why even bother with qualifying?
32 eliminates almost 50% of the qualifying teams, then a straight top two from each group eliminates 50% of the finalists.

Can't get on board with byes at all.
 
https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2016/jul/12/euro-2016-death-possession-football

Everybody has a chance to qualify for the Euros. The smaller sides who made an impact – Wales, Iceland, even Northern Ireland – would have qualified for a 16-team tournament because they were good enough. Take France plus the best 15 teams from qualifying (allowing for a couple of sides easing off having already secured their place in the finals) and the only differences to the last 16 that did emerge are swapping Hungary and Ireland for Austria and the Czech Republic: 36 games, most of them dull, over a two-week period for that.

This will be taken as complaining at teams defending. It is not. Weaker teams should defend, they must defend. Their obligation is to get the best result possible, or it is no longer a sport. That can be uplifting, but when attacks are poor it tends to be dull.
 
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.

Shop

Back
Top