QuoteI'm relieved to hear he doesn't call me clichéd. I was afraid of that one.Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
You should hear what he really calls us/you...
Cliched isn't even close.
You should hear what he really calls us/you...
Cliched isn't even close.
I'm relieved to hear he doesn't call me clichéd. I was afraid of that one.You should hear what he really calls us/you...
Cliched isn't even close.
But given that, would he call you Gaël?
DID YOU NOTICE A SIGN OUTSIDE MY HOUSE...?
In light of my revolutionary ideas on biology, I'm offended by any such accusation or implication
I meant the collective 'you'.
Doubt you currently figure on his, er, 'radar'?
I'm offended by that AB. I'm on everyone's radar.
Off topic but did you guys see the clip of Han Solo with the magic guy David Blaine? is Mr Ford a stoner as people say? But even if not, how did he do this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgtjDX6fZdQ
No Somos muchos pero estamos locos.
Of course I am serious. It does not ensure the best teams get to the finals, it ensures the 'big names' have an unfair advantage via
a rigged draw, and of course they are the big name because of previous rigged draws, so it's a self perpetuating thing.
Every team should have an equal chance as they do in the FA cup.
If they really were the best teams they would not need a rigged draw, so why have one?
I don't think the neutral would rather watch Spain V German and certainly a lot of people who don't watch a lot of football would
be interested in a David V Goliath final.
The second best FA cup final in a vote was Sunderland 1-0 Leeds, 1973 with Sunderland being a second division club, and of course
they won despite Leeds being massive favorites, which nullifies your second point.
Furthermore as they had actually got to the final on merit, just like Sunderland, that makes you second point even more less valid.
A lesser team making the final always generates more interest because most people do not care whether Spain or Germany
win, however if the Faroes Isles were playing a lot would be tuning in to see if they could pull off a 'Sunderland'.
Well isn't that because our games against Sweden Austria were mis-matches where as our game against the Faroes was between two team of similar skill levels?
God love ya, tricky, but a cursory glance at our own home attendance or television viewing figures would suffice in demonstrating just how far and away with the fairies you are. Compare the level of interest in, say, our games against Sweden and Austria with the level of interest in our games against the Faroes, for example.
Anyhow you are kind of arguing against yourself because the seeding format ensures most of the games are mis-matches where as my method would
ensure more clashes between top teams.
And I certainly think when a lesser side gets to the finals it generates a lot of interest. If it were the Faroes for example the media would be interviewing
all their players etc, asking what they did in their par time jobs etc...
Mis-matches can be fun at times. Though last night's Uruguay v Jordan was tripe.
But that doesn't mean it'd be a good final. You can watch Spain v Faroes/other bottom-ranked team every campaign anyway.
Tahiti qualifying for the Confed was fun, but that's only because no-one takes that tournament seriously.
Seeding is an obvious requirement so as not to ruin the entire finals tournament. And the qualifying (Ireland, Faroes, San Marino, Gibraltar, Liechtenstein, Malta? No thanks)
Yeah, too many potential banana skins...
I'd bite your hand off for a group like that. Wouldn't bother me at all.
I agree though seeding is to ensure that the Finals have nearly all the best players.
Forget about the performance or entertainment. It's only the result that matters.
Nothing wrong with a bit of quality control. There isn't enough of it as there is when it comes to the WC. The best thing about the Euros is there a generally very few dud matches, Ireland 2012 a notable exception!
So, we sit quiet and wait in blind hope and faith. Everything will be just fine and dandy. All will be grand with a dab of luck. Maybe just have the Rosary beads at hand, in case...
Who's been knocking the team? The response to the Latvia and Poland games has generally been a very positive one, especially in contrast to the gloomy post-mortems of the Trap era. However, we shouldn't have any hesitation in constructively assessing and critiquing the performances of our players and the association responsible for governing and developing the game in Ireland when its necessary and appropriate to do so. It is possible to be both critical and supportive simultaneously. Not that there is anything in particular that should have alarm-bells ringing right now, it being a new dawn and all that - well, besides the same old infrastructural problems that have been swept under the carpet for years and years - but if things aren't up to scratch, it would be negligent on our parts as interested supporters to dip our heads in the sand. There is a positive aura around the team at the minute though, and rightly so. Hopefully, it won't be a short-lived honeymoon period. It is quite a wait 'til our next outing, mind.
I can see where the username originated.
I could turn your apparent truism on its head and just as easily suggest that if the lower-seeded teams really were deserving of places in the finals, they'd overcome without significant difficulty the higher-seeded teams who, you allege, aren't actually better than them anyway. So, why not seed the draw?...
Your doubt in the quality of the higher-seeded sides suggests it wouldn't make a difference anyway. Can you truly rig a draw if the teams designated as better aren't actually better in the first place?
Anyway, that all misses the point. It's not about FIFA/UEFA dishing out favours to their mates just for the sake of it or because certain "big names" might need favouring lest they falter. It's simply a matter of quality control, as DeLorean so succinctly and aptly put it. It's about separating the stronger teams earlier so as to ensure greater and increasing levels of competition as the tournament in question reaches its pinnacle.
C'mon, be serious.
You're either being disingenuous or you've misunderstood my point. As already highlighted, group stages are seeded so as to help ensure there is a degree of quality control in terms of those sides who make the finals. Teams that consistently perform better are (deservedly) kept apart until the finals whilst inferior and lower-ranked teams are (justifiably) weeded out. There is a degree of justice in that. Those lower-seeded sides with enough ability and consistency will eventually rise to the top some day. Admittedly, it can be self-perpetuating, but a batch of teams who might otherwise be ranked as fifth or sixth seeds making a finals as a result of a favourable open draw would do nothing for competition, and that's not even considering the impact that the risk of "big names" missing out would have on television viewing figures and potential revenue. It's a matter of weighing up the pros and the cons. To me, and, it would appear, most others, including the governing body, it makes both competitive and financial sense.Anyhow you are kind of arguing against yourself because the seeding format ensures most of the games are mis-matches where as my method would
ensure more clashes between top teams.
They use seeding systems in tennis and plenty of other sports too, and for good reason. Who wants to see Novak Djokovic knock Rafael Nadal out in the first round of Wimbledon, for example, and then romp his way to the final (of a tournament devoid of one of the modern game's greats due to an unseeded, open draw) to win it 6-0 6-0 6-0 against a pretty mediocre player who enjoyed an easy ride to the final by the grace of an open draw? Nadal and Djovokic didn't start out as seeds.
Exactly. And who tuned in for Spain versus whoever the sixth seeds in their last group were? Besides tricky, of course...
Last edited by DannyInvincible; 21/11/2013 at 9:37 PM.
Aye, but he's more worried about being on other people's radar...
UEFA.com
The UEFA EURO 2016 regulations have been published, mapping out the road from the qualifying draw in February to the final in Paris on 10 July 2016.
The regulations of the UEFA European Football Championship, 2014–16 competition, have been published on UEFA.com after being approved by the UEFA Executive Committee at its December meeting in Bilbao, Spain.
As hosts, France qualify automatically for the first 24-team final tournament – to be played from 10 June–10 July 2016 – leaving a record field of 53 nations to be drawn into groups of five and six teams when the qualifying draw takes place in Nice on 23 February 2014.
Sides will be seeded for the qualifying draw according to the UEFA national team coefficient rankings, which will be announced along with the draw procedure and final tournament match schedule after the 23/24 January Executive Committee meeting in Nyon.
It is not only the number of places up for grabs that has changed for UEFA EURO 2016; the qualifying schedule has been amended to ensure that fans will have the chance to watch more matches live than ever before on the road to France.
The new 'Week of Football' concept will see games played from Thursday to Tuesday. Kick-off times will be set mainly at 18.00CET and 20.45CET on Saturdays and Sundays and 20.45CET for Thursdays, Fridays, Mondays and Tuesdays. On double-header matchweeks, teams will play on Thursday/Sunday, Friday/Monday or Saturday/Tuesday.
"The fact we spread the European Qualifiers over several days as opposed to all teams playing on the same day will ensure a better visibility for the competition," UEFA General Secretary Gianni Infantino said. "Each day of the 'Week of Football' will have eight to ten matches as opposed to 20–30 matches on the same day."
European Qualifiers match dates
MD1: 7/8/9 September 2014
MD2: 9/10/11 October 2014
MD3: 12/13/14 October 2014
MD4: 14/15/16 November 2014
MD5: 27/28/29 March 2015
MD6: 12/13/14 June 2015
MD7: 3/4/5 September 2015
MD8: 6/7/8 September 2015
MD9: 8/9/10 October 2015
MD10: 11/12/13 October 2015
The nine group winners, the nine group runners-up and the best third-placed side will qualify directly for the final tournament. The eight remaining third-placed teams will contest play-offs to determine the last four qualifiers for the finals.
Play-off match dates
First legs: 12/13/14 November 2015
Second legs: 15/16/17 November 2015
The draw for the final tournament will be held in Paris on 12 December 2015. The format for the finals, which will feature six groups of four teams, can be found in the regulations.
Just over a month to the qualifying draw. It seemed ages away not so long ago - Sunday, 23rd February.
Confirmed, Ireland second seeds in qualifying: http://www.uefa.org/aboutuefa/organi...d=2046452.html
Download the details on draw and seeding pots here: http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/...1_DOWNLOAD.pdf (it's a PDF)
Avoid Spain, Germany and Italy in Pot 1 and you would have to be reasonably happy.
There is not much between the third seeded teams. Serbia and Turkey are bigger than the others in name only. I guess a trip to Norway for example would be more convenient than a trip to Israel.
Further down the pot, I would rather avoid Scotland, Northern Ireland and Armenia but wouldn't/shouldn't be too worried if we get them.
Balls.ie's take on best and worst case scenario
Here’s the doomsday scenario, the Group of Death, the awful vista. Open for debate obviously
1. Spain
2. Ireland
3. Austria (The seeding arrangement will certainly annoy them)
4. Wales (They have the players surely)
5. Iceland
6. Kazakhstan (Given that we had such trouble with them last time)
Here’s the jackpot, the bonanza, the Estonia option…
1. Bosnia-Herzogovina
2. Ireland
3. Israel
4. Latvia (O’Neill and Keane sides have a 100% record against them)
5. Azerbaijan
6. Liechtenstein (we want another crack at them)
I think there are probably worse 'worst case scenarios'.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks