Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Euro 2008 - (Football) - Who will you support

Who will you support

  • Total voters
    135
Don't panic said:
The only complaint that is legit, if sterile now, is the idiocy of how the groups were sorted.

If you have to guarantee the host a spot in the final 16, you should make sure that:
1. you award hosting to a nation that would have likely qualified anyway.
2. you do NOT give TWO guaranteed slots for hosts, especially if they suck like austria and switzerland (easily the two weakest teams in the whole lot)
3. if you cannot do 1. and 2., as a minimum you should not rig the groups to try allow the two home teams an easy way through. seeding and grouping should be based on purely quality and balancing, not politics.
Click to expand...
1. I don't know how you would be able to know that. The tournament is awarded some 6 years in advance, we've no way for knowing how good/bad Poland and Ukraine will be 4 years from now.
2. The hosts have to get automatic slots. It would have been a real shame to have had a competition without the Swiss and the Austrians.
3. I agree, the seeding and grouping were both screwed up. I believe they've now changed the way in which the seedings are calculated. I hope that someone will take notice that the the quarter final structure needs to be modified.

Veldek said:
Seeing the reaction of players from both the Netherlands and Romania, I think it's quite clear that there was a sarcastic undertone in this quote.
Click to expand...
Well, we'll just have to disagree on this one. I can see how some have understood him to call in to question whether both teams will fight for the match, but to me it looked like he was being realistic. I read what the Romanian players said in response to Domenech, and I think they overreacted. To me, it's the typical reaction/overreaction that goes on in the press.

Veldek said:
And I wouldn't call it a matter of fact. Poland had to win, too, with Croatia only using a B-team, and they didn't succeed.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, things turn out differently to what would normally be expected but if I were to say that I think that it's unlikely that Holland will win tonight, it doesn't mean that I'm whinning.

Veldek said:
the fact remains, that it's their own fault after all and talking about how the other game could ruin their chances is just bad style IMHO. They should better concentrate on their own match.
Click to expand...
Yes, agreed. As a supporter of France, I just want us to do our job, beat Italy. Once that's done, then lets look at the result of the other match.
 
stomer said:
That's not whinning but a matter of fact. He's not the only one who thinks that România will beat The Netherlands, the majority of bookmakers do too.
Click to expand...

Meh, bookmakers... They didn't list the Netherlands as a favorite before their first match against Italy...

The players on the bench are very motivated to show their coach they are worthy to play more often. Trust me. Huntelaar, for example: He really wants to prove he's as good (or better) as Van Nistelrooy. And personally, I think he comes very, very close at that.

--Erwin
 
this is going to hurt your heads...

GROUP C PERMUTATIONS

The Netherlands have won Group C and will play the Group D runners-up in the quarter-finals.

Romania will qualify for the quarter-finals if they beat the Netherlands, eliminating France and Italy.

If Romania fail to beat the Netherlands, the winner of France v Italy will go through.

If France and Italy draw, a point against the Netherlands would be enough to send Romania through.
France must win to have any chance of qualifying.

If France and Italy share a score draw (1-1, 2-2, 3-3 etc), Italy will go through if Romania lose (by any score). In this scenario, Italy, Romania and France will be level on two points each but Italy would have scored more goals in games between the 3 teams.

Romania will finish bottom of the group if they lose and France and Italy draw 2-2, 3-3 or 4-4. France will finish bottom if they draw 1-1 unless Romania lose 3-0 or by a four-goal margin.

If France and Italy draw 0-0, Romania can lose by one goal, two goals or by a three-goal margin other than 3-0 but still qualify. In this scenario, Italy and Romania would have identical head-to-head records, but Romania would have better goal difference in ALL group matches or, in the case of the three-goal defeats, goals scored. France would finish bottom, having scored fewer goals head-to-head v Italy and Romania.

If Romania lose 3-0 to the Dutch, Italy would qualify with a 0-0 draw against France because of their superior coefficient points. France would finish bottom as they would have scored fewer goals head-to-head v Italy and Romania.

If Romania lose by four goals or more and the other game ends 0-0, Italy would proceed with a better overall goal difference than Romania. France would finish bottom as they would have scored fewer goals head-to-head v Italy and Romania.

If France and Italy draw AND Romania avoid defeat, then Romania go through.



Got that????
 
Erwin-Br said:
Meh, bookmakers... They didn't list the Netherlands as a favorite before their first match against Italy...
Click to expand...
I wasn't trying to suggest that the bookmakers are always correct. The point I was trying to make was that Domenech wasn't some crazy fool for thinking that România will beat Holland, but that there are plenty of people out there (myself included) who think that he's probably right.
 
stomer said:
1. I don't know how you would be able to know that. The tournament is awarded some 6 years in advance, we've no way for knowing how good/bad Poland and Ukraine will be 4 years from now.
2. The hosts have to get automatic slots. It would have been a real shame to have had a competition without the Swiss and the Austrians.
3. I agree, the seeding and grouping were both screwed up. I believe they've now changed the way in which the seedings are calculated. I hope that someone will take notice that the the quarter final structure needs to be modified.
Click to expand...

i realize that 1 and 2 are hard, but a good start would be to eliminate the co-host gimmick. Or allow them a single slot, to be decided in a game. the other has to qualify. This would also disincentivize smaller teams or grouping of 3-4 nations to bid
Honestly, i don't think that the competition would have been much impacted by not having one of the two.
In any case, if the WC holders, allegedly the best team in the world (very allegedly right now :)) have to qualify for the next edition, i don't see why that would apply to the host as well.
 
scotthayes said:
this is going to hurt your heads...

GROUP C PERMUTATIONS
...
If France and Italy draw, a point against the Netherlands would be enough to send Romania through.
...
If France and Italy draw AND Romania avoid defeat, then Romania go through.

Got that????
Click to expand...

Gotcha! you repeated yourself! :D

i guess the most interesting scenario 15 minutes from the end, is Holland-Rumania 3-0
and France-Italy 0-0
 
Don't panic said:
i realize that 1 and 2 are hard, but a good start would be to eliminate the co-host gimmick. Or allow them a single slot, to be decided in a game. the other has to qualify. This would also disincentive smaller teams or grouping of 3-4 nations to bid
Click to expand...
I think having more than 2 hosts should be out of the question. I think it would be a real shame for the home fans if their host country hasn't qualified.

Don't panic said:
Honestly, i don't think that the competition would have been much impacted by not having one of the two.
Click to expand...
In hindsight, yes, but what would WC 2002 have been like if South Korea hadn't made it?

Don't panic said:
In any case, if the WC holders, allegedly the best team in the world (very allegedly right now ) have to qualify for the next edition, i don't see why that would apply to the host as well.
Click to expand...
I actually don't agree with that, I think the winners should be qualified automatically, I don't know why they changed it.

I think a more sensible idea, as opposed to hosts not receiving automatic qualification, would be to increase the size of the tournament. 24 teams instead of 16.
 
stomer said:
In hindsight, yes, but what would WC 2002 have been like if South Korea hadn't made it?
Click to expand...
considering how they were pushed ahead exclusively by entirely ridiculous referee decisions against italy and spain, probably a LOT better.

edit: Korea-Japan 2002 illustrates EXACTLY why these tournaments should NOT go to two hosts, especially when they don't have competitive teams: because not only it takes away a spot (or two) from a more deserving team, but especially because there is then an enormous economic and political pressure to ensure that the host team(s) do well, thus completely falsifying the tournament. Luckily the latter didn't happen this year.

stomer said:
I actually don't agree with that, I think the winners should be qualified automatically, I don't know why they changed it.
Click to expand...
i agree with you that the holders should be granted the chance to defend their title. but if they don't get that, i don't see why the host (especially multiple hosts teams) should.
 
Don't panic said:
edit: Korea-Japan 2002 illustrates EXACTLY why these tournaments should NOT go to two hosts, especially when they don't have competitive teams: because not only it takes away a spot (or two) from a more deserving team, but especially because there is then an enormous economic and political pressure to ensure that the host team(s) do well, thus completely falsifying the tournament. Luckily the latter didn't happen this year.
Click to expand...

"more deserving team" ... and that while even more crap teams take part (poland, greece which aren't even hosts)

actually being host makes further qualifications in other tournaments more difficult since it seriously reduces the amount of non-friendly games which then reduce the fifa ranking which is used to determinate the drawing pots for qualifications thus austria was put in the same pot as Albania and Island ...
 
If France and Italy get knocked out today they have only themselves to blame having both failed to beat Romania.

Anyway, the Netherlands are fielding Arjen Robben, Robin Van Persie and Klass Jan Huntelaar in their attack. That's some 'B' team! :eek:
 
France 0 - 2 Italy last time I checked, and someone said Italy was a sad choice to support.
 
They are right now a poor choice. They have to thank their goalkeeper for saving that penalty and the fact that France are actually even worse.

Even though I like Holland allot this time I was hoping they would loose, but only this time.
 
with 3 italian players banned for the next game because of yellow cards (Pirlo _and_ gattuso) it will get a bumpy ride for italy ... especially since the opponent will be Spain
 
Well, The Netherlands beat Romania with 2-0. Not a spectacular match, but at least we managed to win from them. (And that with an almost different team)

--Erwin
 
Whoa... I'm late getting into this thread..!

Who would've believed it.... 9 points after the 3 games :eek:
Gave the Italians a hand too.. ;)

Spain vs. Italy will be a thriller.

I think it's strange that we can meat the Italians again, in the semi's. Must admit I expect the Spanish though.

HUP HOLLAND HUP!! :)
 
Woot Italy v Spain next ggoooooo Italy. I support Italy LoL ah it's going to be a thriller of a match.
 
takao said:
"more deserving team" ... and that while even more crap teams take part (poland, greece which aren't even hosts)

actually being host makes further qualifications in other tournaments more difficult since it seriously reduces the amount of non-friendly games which then reduce the fifa ranking which is used to determinate the drawing pots for qualifications thus austria was put in the same pot as Albania and Island ...
Click to expand...

???
greece are defending champions and they qualified first in their group, ahead of turkey, norway and hungary.
poland also won their group ahead of portugal and eliminated serbia finland and belgium.
i would submit that they 'deserved' their spot with impressive campaigns, regardless of how they eventually did in the final stage.

I understand you are austrian, but you shouldn't take it personally.
i am sure you would agree that austria was there only because they were co-host, and that quite unlikely they would have qualified on the field.
If i remember right, in the last 20 years austria qualified only twice for the WC (out on the first round both times) and never for the Euro championship.
Switzerland is only slightly better in term of performance at WC and euro.

and as far being a 'disadvantage' not have to qualify... come on takao, youknow better than that :)
 
anyways, good match by the italians who deservedly go through (although the french were unlucky losing ribery so early).
i think they'll have a very hard time stopping spain's offense, especially without gattuso and pirlo.
we'll se if they manage to make it to the semi for a rematch against the impressive dutch.
 
I'm going to predict that Russia will beat the Swedes tonight and join Spain in qualifying for the quarter finals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back