• Update: The issue surrounding 2FA logins using the Google Authenticator should be resolved now. Sorry for any inconvenience this has caused. /Tom
  • We've been getting a growing number of reports from users being unable to log into their accounts using Two-Factor Authentication (2FA) with the Google Authenticator, putting them into an error loop. Rest assured we're trying to fix this asap. Thanks for your patience! /Tom

Road to Euro 2012

Pot 1
Ukraine
Poland
Spain
Netherlands

Pot 2
Germany
Italy
England
Russia

Pot 3
Croatia
Greece
Portugal
Sweden

Pot 4
Denmark
France
Czech Republic
Republic of Ireland

This Summer is gonna be fun. :D
 
drekkard said:
The pitch can't be an excuse, of course, but at the same time there must be some minimum requirements for a competition like a Euro Cup.

I'm not talking about the pitch the other day because I didn't watch the match, I'm talking in general. So don't get personal with the next paragraph because I'm talking about things we all have seen now and then and it's not directly related to the Bosnia-Portugal match, because I don't have enough info to judge about that.

If a pitch is lacking big chunks of grass and has holes, to me it's unacceptable, because it can inflict injuries to players. I don't care much about how big is a federation. Federations have more money than it seems. Or at least they have enough money to choose a good pitch (I can't believe there aren't better pitches in a whole country).

Federations send a lot of people on vacations to the big tournaments, their representatives travel with their wives and friends when they go abroad, and they earn money, more than most of us will earn with our work. They earn money with sponsors, from revenue, they receive some money from UEFA and they can even have some kind of local government investment.
.
Click to expand...

You are wrong on the bit in bold, and seem to be saying it from a Spanish (i.e. big rich federation) viewpoint, but if you look at the whole picture its a lot more complex. In fact as an illustration, there is actually a team that had to withdraw from WC2014 qualification after the draw was made as they simply couldnt afford to travel to their oppenents. A month ago Mauritius had to withdraw as they couldnt afford the costs of going to Monrovia (Liberia) since there were no direct flights and the trip would have blown their budget for the whole year. They had no option but to withdraw from the competition.

The big federations have lots of money from sponsorship, sure Spain, England, Italy, Argentina, Brazil, get a lot of money from big companies, eg Vauxhall (Opel), Coca Cola, Nike, Adidas, but the smaller nations don't get anything like this amount of money. How much do you think Legea pay Bosnia or Montenegro for kit compared with how much adidas pay Spain or Argentina, you know it will be much smaller.

Small nations in Europe (like say Faeroe Islands, San Marino, Malta, even the Baltic nations and to a lesser extent Bosnia, Montenegro) get some money via UEFA/FIFA but a lot of that will be spent on travel and insurance (to cover player injuries) for team matches. Unlike big nations (e.g. Spain, Argentina) they cannot command a big match fee for playing friendlies - Argentina and Brazil have got millions per game for playing friendlies in Asia, but will teams like Latvia, Malta etc command big fees for playing there - no chance. Some of these nations also have small stadiums (e.g. Estonia 10,800) and because the inhabitants aren't wealthy they charge very little for tickets (e.g. some Estonia tickets for their playoff were as cheap as 16EUR, this was the biggest game in the history of Estonia) - these nations cannot turn a profit on their games as they dont have enough seats in the stadiums.

You talk about local government investment, are you not aware of massive goverment debt (and the resulting budget cuts) all over Europe? Aside from that some of these small countries have minimal populations, and are still recovering from years of chronic underinvestment or the effects of war. Do you really think that the Bosnian goverment, which is already federated and so has two divisions, has enough spare money to spend on building massive stadium improvements ? The war there only ended in 1995, NATO is still there and there are other more pressing things to spend money on (e.g. removing mines, improving hospitals). A lot of the former Soviet states had cronic underinvestment during the latter stages of the USSR, there are so many other things to spend money on (healthcare, transport infrastructre, education) they also have aging populations and have to pay out state pensions to their elderly inhabitants and many of their most talented, educated young workers, who could be generating taxes, end up working abroad for more money, so there isnt even a big tax base to draw money from. Its a bit simplistic to say that small federations can just expect to be thrown goverment money.
 
i hope that all bigger football nations will be in shape when it comes to the tournament next summer. i want to see good matches with strong germany, netherlands, spain, england, france and italy. hopefully all of them will make their way to the knockout stage, then it will be a highlight. at least i hope so. and in the end i hope that our national team will show up a similar good performance like in the last two years and maybe we will be able to beat spain and finally win the first title since 16 years :D
 
Like always i want to see giant killers, underdogs and blood amongst the favourites. If not, a final between Spain and Germany please...but i wouldn't mind Ireland-Croatia at all...
 
This could be good EC. My thoughts about some teams:
*France: We still do not know who will be their opponents in group stage, but I can see them again failing to go through group stage. They even wouldn't be there if it wasn't for referees.
*Spain, Germany, England, Netherlands - I can see at least one from those four in finals. They all were doing great in those qualifies.
*Ireland, Croatia, Italy - I am not sure for those nations. As being Croatian I would love for Croatia to win EC, but I think that is too much to ask now. But who know. I think that those 3 teams are not top favorites for winning the EC, but if some of above mentioned four teams fails to produce good result one of those 3 will use that opportunity.

As for others, I don't have any specific thoughts. But I feel that there will be few surprises, both positive and negative.
 
Great games I watched last night or just do not regret watching the match Portugal-Bosnia until 3 am, it was fantastic! 8 goals for every taste, wow! Really liked the game Bosnians, how they fought until the fourth Portuguese goal, in short all the emotions spent yesterday at the match, I think what his game Bosnians deserved participation in the Euro, but they are a little bit unlucky with his opponent. Well, I hope next time they are lucky because they have a damn good team that deserves to play in major tournaments, good luck to them, and the Portuguese with the victory of course, well done! :)

Croatia 3-0, 0-0 Turkey
Click to expand...

>>>
Pot 2

Russia
Click to expand...
Thank you again, Croatia, the last time you gave us a part in the Euro, now the second pot, Dobro da Hrvatska! :WORSHIP::D

Pot 3

Portugal
Click to expand...
Hm ... :THINK:

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Okay, here and ended up qualifying round, will now wait for the very event, I hope it will be no less colorful than this qualifying round, while they themselves matches glow and beauty will be similar to yesterday's match Portugal and Bosnia, we'll see, good luck! Welcome to Poland and Ukraine ... :D
 
Well here is my little review of this play-offs:

Croatia vs. Turkey - Croatia showed quality in Istanbul, and played well imo. They knew how to use their chances over there and Olić apparently still has it. :D
Fully deserved.

Ireland vs. Estonia - Estonia was interesting and refreshing in group stages of qualifying and took advantage of declining Slovenia and hopeless Serbia. But lets face it - they played stronger team and playing in play-offs is a huge success already for them. I like their players and team, mainly because they score awesome long range goals. I truly hope that they will have opportunity to qualify for larger tournament again in closer future.

Czech Rep. vs. Montenegro - Czechs are more experienced team with couple of players who constantly play at top level (Cech, Rosicky...). Montenegro showed little in these two games, lacking finishing ability even though they have ten times better strikers then us lol. I expect them to compete again for playing in EURO or WC.

Bosnia vs. Portugal - Bad luck again for Bosnia. A better team got through though. Portugal played really well at home, seemed confident. Bosnia, like us, has the same ''Balkan mentality'' which does them harm, just like for us. They have OK group for WC qualifying so who knows...

In my opinion best teams got through to the finals. Unfortunately I won't be able to watch couple of group matches due too my school schedule but still can't wait for EURO 2012! :D
 
England will probably go unbeaten upto the Euros and then everybody (The English) will be saying we will win it and then we will struggle and maybe make it to the quarter finals if we are lucky :PP
 
Watch out for Russia, seriously, football is skyrocketing to new heights in Russia. We are knocking on the CL play-off door with two teams :) Only 4 goals in qualifications allowed, Malafeev made new record not allowing goals for national squad since 2008! :D (oh yeah hello Portugal - Russia 7:1)
 
The_Special_One said:
C'mon Bobby, you already know England is going to make it to the quarter finals. Then you will face us and, well, you know the story! :P
Click to expand...

Yep, you or Germany then we are finished :))

But we may even not get out of the group, I have a feeling we will get a Group of death like,

Spain
England
Portugal
France

:DD
 
Last edited:
IMO, they should get rid of pots. Makes it way more exciting. Sure, you might end up with Spain, Netherlands, Germany and Italy in one group and Denmark, Poland, Ukraine and Ireland in one group, but I think it's fair to the smaller countries.
 
No, pots are a good idea and ensure some balance is there which is not a bad thing. There's still enough variety to make groups look interesting.

What is retarded and dumb is what Abou said! Putting teams like Poland in there who would probably not even have qualified for the tourney in the same pot as the main contenders.
 
I think it's because UEFA are afraid. This way Polkand Ukraine wont have the face Netherlands and Spain, so they can have an easier group. This way. the host nations can go through easier. If Ukraine and Poland are out during the groups, It'll be bad for UEFA because those two countries obviously have the most support in their home countries.
 
But so what? If they don't go through then it's because they wouldn't have deserved to.

It's already a big advantage playing at home so they should have an 'easier' time than other teams in pot 4 let's say. But we shouldn't give them also weakest teams so they can progress through, that's just not right. They will already have the fans and the pressure on ref to help them etc during the match, but in order to get points and go through, they're gonna have to earn them and that includes beating great teams.
 
putting the hosts in pot one is done to the reason that they are not playing any official qualification match for two years. so they hardly get points for fifa ranking.

imagine: 2006 germany was on 22nd place in ranking due to the fact that they were not able to get higher points out of the matches they have played. each qualification match has a higher value than any friendly.

this would have meant that our nt would have been placed in pot 3 or 4 or even lower. the same will be with brazil - they will step down in fifa ranking until the tournament starts.

the main problem in this case is that two countries are the hosts - so two countries are blocking places in pot 1 which is crucial especially for the euro as there is higher percentage of top teams than at the world cup >> nearly 50% of starting countries are top teams at this euro, in the world cup is 25 - 30 %...
 
The fact that organising countries are a litle bit protected is purely commercial of course. It's better for tournaments if the host do well. The buzz is bigger and that is better for commercial ends.

I can see why PLF likes the system of pots, it does makes sense, but i prefer a system without the pots. I wouldn't mind a group with Holland, Germany, Spain and Portugal...as i'm fond of underdogs and surprises.
IMO the beauty of football is the fact that football is the sport (it's more a game than a sport IMO) where the chance that the underdog wins is the biggest. In a marathon the favourite will nearly always win, the Tour de France is nearly always won by the best rider. This is perhaps "fair", but it's also boring...i don't want Lance Armstrong to win the Tour 7 times...i want suspense. That is the beauty of football...Liechentstein can win against Spain. I want as much upsets as possible. What you see now is that the bigger clubs, leagues and countries are advantaged...(cfr. the CL).
Personally i would love a final between Ireland and Poland.

But like i already said: i can understand PLF's reasoning.
 
we7god, good post. I didn't think of that.

Gerd, I love underdogs as much as you do. Especially a guy like me who doesn't support any particular team, I wanna see the best team win and often root for the underdogs. But I do want them to EARN it.

So I'm all for an Ireland vs. Ukraine final in Euros too, but IF they get there on their own merits and not with special help.

If Ireland and Ukraine get there beating some great teams on the way, great but if their group was Ireland, Poland, Ukraine and Czech let's say, then no not so much. I think some balance is a good thing and it's not like balance ensures underdogs will lose. They have easier and tougher teams in their group but at the end of the day, they're all playing with one ball and the match starts at 0-0 and so they have an equal chance to the opposite team of winning the match regardless of if they're up against Spain or Poland.
 
We will always disagree about that PLF. But that's no problem.
You know that i'm also against penalties in big tournaments. If there is no winner after prolongations, the lowest ranked team goes through (yes, the lowest, not the highest).
 
gerd said:
We will always disagree about that PLF. But that's no problem.
You know that i'm also against penalties in big tournaments. If there is no winner after prolongations, the lowest ranked team goes through (yes, the lowest, not the highest).
Click to expand...

That's a stupid idea IMO. You can't put somebody through if they don't win the game. Ok, you haven't actually beaten anybody outright on penalties but I suppose you could look at it as though they are one on ones in as game but you have a few chances to put things right.

Personally, after 90 full time I would take a man off each team. 5 mins later another and so on. The last 5 mins and you could be down to 5 a side. Somebody will definitely score then as there will be so much space available on the pitch. Oh yeah, it will be golden goal aswell.
 
gerd said:
We will always disagree about that PLF. But that's no problem.
You know that i'm also against penalties in big tournaments. If there is no winner after prolongations, the lowest ranked team goes through (yes, the lowest, not the highest).
Click to expand...

I'm not a big fan of penalties though I do think they add an interesting element to the beautiful game and give goalkeepers who are largely unused throughout the 90 mins to showcase their talent and get in a nice 1-on-1 battle against other GK but I wouldn't do that. That would lead to many teams just PARKING the bus with 11-men behind the ball hoping to get a 0-0 draw and then they go through. Not playing for the win but playing for the draw instead just because the other team are 'supposedly' bigger and better. Ruins the competitive aspect of the game.

This whole underdog winning thing is supposed to be good for football. But this wouldn't be at all. It'd make the game even more defensive and dull imo.
 
It's bloody easier than that in my oppinion, just let through the team with most possession. That way Spain or Barcelona would always get through!

Just joking! In my oppinion, any solution other than penalties can cause a team to easily sit back, so that's why we stick with penalties, it's the lesser bad option.

But there's one simple rule I think this sport needs a lot, and is something that works perfectly in ice hockey and handball:

A yellow card could imply the carded player to get out of the pitch at least for 5 minutes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom