You should hear what he really calls us/you...Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
Cliched isn't even close.
:rolleyes:
Printable View
You should hear what he really calls us/you...Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
Cliched isn't even close.
:rolleyes:
I'm relieved to hear he doesn't call me clichéd. I was afraid of that one.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
But given that, would he call you Gaël?Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
In light of my revolutionary ideas on biology, I'm offended by any such accusation or implication :)Quote:
Originally Posted by BonnieShels
I meant the collective 'you'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
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
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 viaQuote:
Originally Posted by zero
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?Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I agree though seeding is to ensure that the Finals have nearly all the best players.
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... :rainbow:Quote:
Originally Posted by Im_not_stirring
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/a...id/dismiss.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Crosby87
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?...Quote:
Originally Posted by tricky_colour
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by tricky_colour
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.Quote:
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...Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Aye, but he's more worried about being on other people's radar...Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
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.
http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/...1838221_w2.jpg
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'.
The "week of football" is a good move. There'll be two kick-off times on Saturdays and Sundays. One kick-off time on Thursday, Friday, Monday and Tuesday. So besides watching one's own country twice, there'll be 6 other live games to watch.
Yeah it's brilliant! International weeks can be boring enough (other than the Ireland games obviously) and we rarely get to see other countries outside of tournaments.
That's it. The qualifiers will be like mini championships ahead of the main event. Watch Ireland one night. Italy, Spain and Germany or whoever on the other days.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
You're obviously not married with kids!
Don't do the crime, don't do the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
Shouldn't the "Estonia option" include Estonia?Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
I think we'll need some guidance from Owls Fan on how to keep the family life reasonably harmonious while continuing to refuse to grow up, away from sporting/football obsessions.
I don't think it matters that much who we get from the first pot. We only need to finish in the top 2, but England would be brilliant.
Probably not Italy as they are capable of dropping points in strange places and they might drop them in the wrong places.
Avoid Serbia and Slovenia from pot 3. Scotland and Montenegro from pot 4.
As an Icelander, I'd want Ireland from pot 2, a flippin' disgrace that 'we' are not in pot 4, but that would be compensated for if we just got Ireland from pot 2. Welcome to Hell .... on ice.
Pot 5 avoid Iceland and Albania, Albania for their unpredictability, Iceland for their class and unbeatability.
Pot 6 doesn't matter who, same pain for everybody,
I am not sure there is a worse case scenario. Looking at the teams in Pot 3 and Pot 4, they are really no teams that you want to avoid, the teams in each pot are very similar. As geyser mentioned, Iceland and Albania could/would be tricky, and I think Luxembourg in Pot 6 are capable of causing upsets. If you forced me to pick a best and worst possible group:
WORST
Spain
Ireland
Serbia/Turkey (Can't separate them)
Montenegro
Iceland
Luxembourg
BEST
Greece
Ireland
Norway
Estonia
Moldova
San Marino
I've a general rule for new countries. Avoid them like the plague for the first Euro and first world cup campaign.
I'd say we're in a lot of teams "best scenarios" :(
Dunno if it's been mentioned yet, but there's one five-team group, and France will act as the sixth team in that group - playing friendlies on the days when teams should be playing the sixth seed. Not a bad idea, and it'd probably be preferable to stuttering against San Marino again.
Yeah whatever way they were talking about it on Off The Ball the other night, it seemed like another daft Platini idea. I suppose I was immediately sceptical when it involved France. It actually makes a bit of sense though.
Surely you want the weakest team in each pool of seeds?
Bosnia, Poland, Cyprus, Belarus, San Marino?
That thinking is way too smart and straightforward for this board.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sleepingpartner
I suppose it's manageable this time. If Kosovo get international status, I doubt they'll repeat it when the 2020 qualifiers comes along.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
Platini was makings calls for the World Cup to expand to 40. Giving Africa more places without affecting Europe and even an extra place for Europe. It would sort out one group runner-up missing out on the play-offs, with the best runner-up going through and 8 into play-offs.
I still don't agree with the expansion of the Euro's to 24, 20 would have been enough but sure it's done now. Hopefully Ireland will guarantee at least top 3.
Expanding the Euros is good for Ireland but it's totally going to dilute the quality. They ruined the Champions League, they ruined this and next they're going to ruin the World Cup.
I sincerely doubt we would have even qualified for this tournament under Trapattoni because right away we would be playing for a maximum tally of 4 points from the other top 2 seeds but I am reasonably confident that we can finally get the monkey off our back that is beating a half-decent team in a competitive game under Martin.
POT 1
- Italy - they weren't convincing last year, and don't forget that their two key players Buffon and Pirlo are 35 years old.
- England - they also have two star players Lampard and Gerrard close to end of their careers and Ireland is unbeaten in the last six matches against them.
- Greece - they are not as strong as it looks.Their key players Karagounis, Katsouranis (midfielders), Salpingidis and Gekas (strikers) are all over 32 years old.
POT 3
- Norway - they look like the weakest team in my opinion, with unknown local coach and bad results in the past year. Their duo from Fulham Hangeland and J. A. Riise is not young anymore.
POT 4
- Latvia - they have a young, inexperienced coach M.Pahars and four or five key players who are close to the end of their careers. The Boys in Green beaten them all five times.
- Estonia - they also have a young, inexperienced coach (some Swedish guy) and don't have a star players.
POT 5
- Cyprus - they have a lot of players over 30 years old and a series of bad games in the past year. Also, there is a new unknown local coach.
- Georgia - they also had a very bad previous year and there is no player who scored five or more internacional goals.
POT 6
- All teams are certainly weaker, but I'd like it not be Luxembourg or Kazakhstan.
So my list of the most suitable opponents is quite similar to the one written by the Boss. I hope it will be at least three of these eight teams in the group with the ROI. ;)
Once you get over the fact that they have Cristiano Ronaldo, Portugal are not insurmountable. They lack strength in depth and stumble over the line in every qualification campaign. They have dropped points against some very weak teams, like Liechtenstein and Northern Ireland.
Yes please!: Greece, Bosnia/ Austria, Slovakia, Slovenia, Norway/ Estonia, Latvia, Finland/Moldova, Azerbaijan/ Liechtenstein, Andorra, San Marino
Meh? England, Italy/ Serbia/ Armenia/ Lithuania, Macedonia, Georgia, Cyprus / Luxembourg
Jeepers!: Spain, Germany, Russia/ Romania, Poland, Turkey/ Montenegro, Bulgaria, Scotland, Wales, Belarus/ Iceland, themnextdoor, Albania/ Malta, Kazakh's, Gibralter, Faroes'
Of the pot 1 teams Greece is the one I would want as, as other posters have pointed out, a few of their key players are getting fairly old now. I think we could get mirror results against them (saw win at home lose away or two draws), whereas I think against the other pot 1 teams we might manage a draw at home but would probably lose away. Given that, if we dont get Greece I would rather we got Germany, Holland or possibly Spain, as even if we lose both those games that pot 1 team would be likely to beat the other pot 3,4,5 teams in the group and so you could factor them out of the group. Whereas if we draw Russia or say Bosnia we might only pick up a point against them but they (Russia/Bosnia) would (IMO) be more likely to drop points against the pot 3,4,5 teams (say Russia could lose or draw away to Poland or drop points in Armenia).
Pot 3: I'd definately take Norway and then to a lesser extent Slovakia. I would rather avoid Romania or Turkey or Serbia as these teams have good young players coming through (the likes of Torje, Nicu, Stojan, Chicheres / Toprak, Ekici, Sahin, Frei, / Subotic, Mitrovic, Markovic) although Serbia it seems will have a new manager.
Pot 4: I wouldnt want Montenegro as they seem to be more of a pot2/pot3 team and look to be easily the strongest team in that pot. Armenia have a few talented players (not just Mkhitarian at Dortmund) and the distance and heat (if the game is played in summer/autumn) could be a factor so I'd rather avoid them. I'd rather avoid Scotland and Wales as well because I think the local aspect of these games could make them more competitive. If our last fixture is away to an already eliminated Wales or Scotland I think it could be more of a challenge than say away to an already eliminated Lativa or Finland. I also think Scotland are improving under WGS and the fact they took points off Croatia away and gave a decent Belgium team a good game suggests they could be a threat. Fortunately (if we were to draw them) Wales have stuck with Coleman who seems to make very strange selections. Still I'd rather we had Latvia from pot 4 and to a lesser extent Estonia.
Pot 5: I'd take Lithuania from this group as I think they are the weakest team in the pot. I wouldnt mind Cyprus, but would want to avoid Albania and Iceland (both were pretty close to qualifing for the World Cup, Iceland narrowly lost in the playoffs and Albania - who might have had a chance of wining their group - sort of fell apart in the last few games) both of these teams looked more dangerous than Norway in their group. I wouldnt want the North because, like with Wales and Scotland but even more so, the intensity of the rivalry could make the games more competitive.
Pot 6: I'd like to avoid Kazakhstan from the point of view of distance, I think it (Dublin to Astana/Alama Alta) would be one of the longest journeys in UEFA qualification and last time I think the team had to break the journey in Estonia or Latvia, which isnt ideal. Aside from that I wouldnt mind what team we drew from pot 6. I wouldnt want to draw France (I think Platini had said they will go in pot 6 as a friendly team) as I think an enforced friendly against them could just be a distraction during qualification. I'd rather play friendlies against teams that offer us a different system to test ourselves against or are a proxy for similar opposition that we'll face in a competitive match, rather than what Platini thinks is good for France.
Overall I think being in Pot 2 has given us a great chance - a lot of the other pot 2 teams (Ukraine, Croatia, Belgium) are some way above us and it's great to be able to avoid them. The only pot 2 teams I would fancy our chances against are Hungary and the Czechs.