Greece and the Netherlands would've qualified if it was 32 teams!
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Euro 2016 |OT| Take a bow sson
- Thread starter Ape Gone Insane
- Start date
- Status
Greece and the Netherlands would've qualified if it was 32 teams!
Yeah, this uncertainty of whether a team will go through or not based on results in different groups got rid of a lot of direct tension during the matches themselves. We really need to go back to 16 teams with only 2 from each group going through. 32 is unnecessary and would just make the first half of the tournament even more boring.
It would also mean that every group has fewer good teams so it wouldn't be interesting anyway.
Tainted
Member
Hopefully UEFA review things following the tournament and revert to the 16 team format. Having a scenario where some teams are playing for a 'bore draw' in the knowledge they will progress by finishing 3rd makes for a drab tournament (At least in group stage).
The tournament should get better as a whole once we enter the knockouts. There's nothing like sudden death football to bring out the best in teams.
dr3upmushroom
Banned
Round of 16 for this kind of tournament is already getting ridiculous. a QF system works better.
They will review things and find out that they managed to sell TV rights and advertisements for 51 match, instead of 31 in the previous tournaments.
A 65% increase.
It is never going back to 16.
Don Draper's Hat
Member
That's about the 50th time I've seen someone mention English fans being "salty" (what does that even mean?!).
I don't get it. No one on here has been "salty" about England not winning. No one. Making an observation about the tournament structure being a bit rubbish does not mean someone is "salty" (I don't think anyway, I'm still not entirely sure what it means).
No doubt I will now be labelled "salty".
Tainted
Member
If TV money and ad revenue is all they care about....may as well just make it a 32 team comp then.
I like to think they do care somewhat for the viewing experience and making the tournament as great as it can be....or maybe I'm just living in fantasy land.
I think you are living in a fantasy land.
Have you not been following football for the last 20 years or so?
Cash first, everything else is barely tolerated.
It will be a 32 country tournament no later than 2028.
Tainted
Member
While I agree money plays a large part in it, I dont think it plays the only part. I choose to be not as pessimistic as you.
Jimbob Smalls
Banned
It was clear that every other team in the group, including Wales had a strategy that England was the team to try to draw against and to try to win against the others.
France, Germany and Portugal are having the same issue. It's tough to break down even mediocre teams who run back to their box the second their opponents get the ball.
Wales mullered a Russia who needed to win and take risks and Slovakia absolutely could not lose against England if they wanted to progress.
Agent_Tiro
Member
Exactly this. This best 4 third place qualifying has meant that the lower profile teams are playing to not lose, and if they are going to lose then to concede as few as possible. Every team England has played against has packed the defence and tried to grab goals on the break. This isn't a slight against those teams, as it's a valid approach. It should be down to the higher profile teams to find ways to overcome this. Which has basically meant that the likes of France, Portugal, England have laid seige to their opponenets 18 yard box for large periods of time.
I've mentioned earlier in this thread that I've taken enjoyment out of watching Iceland and other minnows battle hard to get a point. But when you have 1-2 teams in EVERY group that are playing this way it is having a hugely negative impact upon the entertainment value of the tournament. Most casual fans want to see goals. As good as an amazing defensive performance is, it can be incredibly dull to watch. People tend to prefer free-flowing end to end attacking football. There has been very very little of this so far. Hopefully the knockout stages will see some more of it.
The World Cup in Brazil was fantastic for entertainment and personally it was one of the best one's I've been witness to. (I have vague memories from Italia 90, but my main WC memories start in USA 94)
Nope. Of course not and no one has said that here, as well you know.
You also know that we're very critical of our own team as you have read here.
I just find it frustrating that every team we have come across so far have made no real effort to win the game themselves. And as we've been saying, the nature of the tournament, that sees 2/3 of the third place teams go through, is to blame for this.
But of course you already knew this. Don't let that get in the way of trying to spark some kind of slagging match though.
To show just what a joke the French and UEFA security is, a Russian that was deported managed to go to the game last night:
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/jun/20/russia-supporters-alexander-shprygin-wales-toulouse
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/jun/20/russia-supporters-alexander-shprygin-wales-toulouse
There's quite a number of "Fuck Slovakia" (more or less) posts in this thread.
If you don't like the tournament structure you should boycott it. Once you accepted to play under these rules, play by the rules. The structure won't change no matter how many will cry in here because UEFA likes money and there hasn't been any time in history when a tournament has gone back to the previous structure, as far as I know.
And again, France and Spain found a way to overcome very defensive teams. A very defensive team is a legit strategy to reach the final of Champions League, so let's not pretend that this was invented now. So many times in the history Italy went far in tournaments with the same strategy.
And you don't know what would have happened if Slovakia was actually more offensive, they had some good chances in the second half, maybe you would have cried about something else now.
Last night, I saw someone propose a different setup with 24 teams.
You'd have 8 groups of 3 teams, the group is sorted by FIFA-ranking and the top 2 will face off against each other. The loser then has to play the third team. The third match is between the winner of the first match vs the third team.
The team that win last match are automatically qualified for the 1/8th finals. The teams that finish second and third play an extra match to determine who will advance.
This brings a couple of advantages; no more simultanious matches, a higher incentive to win the match, a higher incentive to win the group in order to skip the intermediary match.
Don Draper's Hat
Member
How on Earth have you seen "the tournament structure is a bit rubbish" and thought "BOYCOTT THEN!"
Yeah, I'll boycott all by myself. That'll learn 'em!
The English fans are not the only people in the world questioning the decision to put 24 teams in the tournament you know.
And again, no one is saying Slovakia played bad. It's just really boring to watch a game of football where only one team wants to win. And I'm well aware this is not a new thing. Jesus, I'm an Ipswich Town fan, I know what it's like SUPPORTING the side setting out to not lose, and it's just as mind numbingly boring.
But I'm still not sure how having an opinion makes you "salty". Are you "salty" because you've got annoyed by apparent "salty" England fans?
I explained already that I used "salty" for the people going "Fuck Slovakia" or similar, if that wasn't clear enough.
I didn't call you "salty" for your opinion, so maybe stop that?
All one of them.
I might be minority here, but I like the format (which is the same as WC 86 to 94 btw)
Yes Slovakia vs England was a bad sample, but this format means that almost every game really counts. At least for one of the sides. With the 32 to 16 or 16 to 8 format many of the last games are pointless
Yes Slovakia vs England was a bad sample, but this format means that almost every game really counts. At least for one of the sides. With the 32 to 16 or 16 to 8 format many of the last games are pointless
IdreamofHIME
Member
The next tournament is gonna be a full on nightmare with the games taking place all over Europe instead of one country. No way the different police forces are gonna be able to cope with migrating Nazis. But at least Platini got his dream come true.
Yeah but you need either 16 or 8 teams for the next round and eliminating 16 teams during the group stage is a bit much.
If they want to keep the current structure, sure. But there's always the possibility of introducing byes for the group winners. Have something like 4 groups of 6. 3 from each group go through. 2nd and 3rd (different groups) play each other in the knockout stage and the winner plays a group winner in the round of 8.
No, I think there were more than just you.
Anyhow, I apologise for generalising with the "salty" comment, because most of the reactions here were pretty fine. Reading 2-3 pages of comments at once after the game makes it for a "condensed" impression.
Also I met some really nice English fans in Lyon over the weekend, they were really enjoying the Euro no matter how many teams are in.
SplitYourInfinities
Member
.
Wind's Howling
Member
Pretty much.
They'll up the countries that can join instead of downgrading. It is never going to happen. This 24 setup is here to stay.
SplitYourInfinities
Member
Can't wait for a tournament with Andorra, San Marino or Luxembourg. At least there will be goals!
I would rather 32 countries than 24 to be honest even if 24 by itself is too much, with the current format of 4/6 3rd placed teams also qualifying its pretty much park the bus against the best team in the group (Engand, Germany, France, Spain) and then grab a win from your remaining 2 games and you get a 3rd placed spot
I miss when we could have Holland, France and Italy in the same group back when every match if you were a top side it wasn't 3 games trying to score against a side parking the bus
There is pretty much no incentive for the smaller teams to attack at all
I miss when we could have Holland, France and Italy in the same group back when every match if you were a top side it wasn't 3 games trying to score against a side parking the bus
There is pretty much no incentive for the smaller teams to attack at all
I think you'll find I wasn't one of them. I clearly blamed the tournament format for encouraging overly defensive play.
That's actually a really good idea
Wind's Howling
Member
There was this science guy in a program here in Holland yesterday talking about better ways to improve the group stage and not making the 3rd slot an inevitable safe place.
He decided that the 3rd placed countries have to compete against each other for one match. Each country works their own match the exact same day, and from there on out those results will be taken into the equation and only 4 of them will venture further.
I honestly believe this is the better thing. This just makes it more fair because now, if you finished your last match and are 3rd, you have to wait for all the other countries to see what they are doing and you don't have it in your own hand.
That approach makes it so that every shitty country will stop playing on full defense the entire time. Because, what the heck. Why not end 3rd and have a 99% chance to venture further into the stage?
Have to edit my post a little more: If you end 3rd. The match you have to do in between is also a sudden death match. You lose, it is game over. You win? You have less days to heal in comparison to the country that ended 1st and 2nd.
Who will?
It would be far better to scrap the 3rd placed teams... to make the numbers work out you could give 4 teams byes to the 1/4 Finals who have scored the most goals in the tournament to encourage attacking play
The remaining 8 teams would have a round of knockout games to qualify for the 1/4 finals
Expanding the tournament was fine. I mean if a team like Netherlands missed out its because Europe as a whole has improved significantly while other powerhouse countries have declined.
The problem with the tournament is the way third place was set up. I posted before the tournament a statistical analysis that teams that finished with 3 points. (a draw in each game) had over 80% chance to advance to the next round. It's pretty clear that alot of teams are playing the draw.
Those that want the tournament expanded further (lol) just no.
This expanded tournament is great. Perhaps other years teams like England Portugal etc would be going out in group stages now all the big teams have a chance to make knock out rounds. I'd rather see Portugal in knockout than go home in Groups. Sure group stages football has been incredibly boring but I guarantee in knockout stages we're going to have some great games
The problem with the tournament is the way third place was set up. I posted before the tournament a statistical analysis that teams that finished with 3 points. (a draw in each game) had over 80% chance to advance to the next round. It's pretty clear that alot of teams are playing the draw.
Those that want the tournament expanded further (lol) just no.
This expanded tournament is great. Perhaps other years teams like England Portugal etc would be going out in group stages now all the big teams have a chance to make knock out rounds. I'd rather see Portugal in knockout than go home in Groups. Sure group stages football has been incredibly boring but I guarantee in knockout stages we're going to have some great games
Mattlikewhoa
Member
I'm hopeful...
Slovakia, Wales and Russia would have probably qualified also for a 16 teams Euro looking at qualifying groups results. Also Northern Ireland, Czech Republic and Austria.
Turkey, Hungary, Ireland, Sweden and Ukraine would have been surely out, Romania and Albania most probably. Maybe also Croatia?
So maybe your complains are a bit misplaced?
England really got a lucky group draw and gets to complain about not banking on that now.
Turkey, Hungary, Ireland, Sweden and Ukraine would have been surely out, Romania and Albania most probably. Maybe also Croatia?
So maybe your complains are a bit misplaced?
England really got a lucky group draw and gets to complain about not banking on that now.
His Majesty
Banned
The third place system also introduces an unfair (dis)advantage to certain groups, especially Group E and F in particular seem to be fucked. Group A unsurprisingly seems to have the easiest path.
Simulation of the tournament with the relative amount of winners from each group, notice the difference between E and A.
Simulation of the tournament with the relative amount of winners from each group, notice the difference between E and A.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked