Printable View
Whether you admit it or not, Wales have been terrible for most of the past 20 years. They were regularly 4th and 5th seeds for tournaments. Maybe being among the makeweights for the next campaign has given them a kick up the backside they need, but that is a poor side that have been well beaten by England, Ireland, Scotland and others in the past 12 months, and I don't see them coming anywhere near a playoff position at the end of the next series.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
If we do become Euro regulars, I'm sure our goals will change to getting out of the groups and getting by the round of 16 etc. That'll be a good boost to the game here while other countries get the boost of making the finals when otherwise they might not have.
51 team 24 qualiiers, why do they need groups, prelimanry round of 5 games then one round of 23 games top 23 seeds v bottom 23 seeds, winner qualifies..!!!!
The past is irrelevant in this context. You said -Quote:
Originally Posted by mypost
They've already gone a long way (from bottom of Europe to middle of Europe). SvD is right to include them in the list of countries who could make an expanded Euros, and with the players they have (in their full squad, not the stripped down 4-nations squad), they wouldn't necessarily detract from it.Quote:
Originally Posted by mypost
No it isn't. Their past got them the seeding they have. They need to do more in the next two years than win a few games while already eliminated from competition, to get a better seeding next time.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Wasn't Italia 90 based on the 24 team system? I think this would be a marvellous idea. It gives the smaller countries a bigger chance of getting to the finals.
But we're focusing on their future success, not the past...
Yeah, sure why not! I'm sure some clubs will push for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by mandrake
Wales haven't succeeded at anything since 1958. We won't be seeing too much "success" from them in the immediate future either.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
The more teams in a Finals, the more cr*p it tends to be.
Given the number of teams now entering the Euros, 16 is probably an optimum number for The Finals.
And 32 for a World Cup.
And more thought should be given to getting rid of some of the minnows in pre-qualifying.
There is far, far too much football now and some constructive strategy be devised given to reducing the number of meaningless games.
Be they Ireland or anyone else.
The diehards should know;we've sat through enough of them.
Let's start a petition to stop the finals from expanding to twenty-four teams. It totally demeans the qualifying competition.
Even if you're not being ironic, UEFA are hardly likely to take notice.
But having a 50% qualification rate, on reflection, seems rather pointless.
Greed will kill this game of ours.
Like I said, the Copa America has a 100% qualification rate. The African Cup of Nations will be the only regional championship with a lower rate of participation than the new European Championships and doesn't have anything close to the quality of European football (despite Kevin Myers' bizarre statement to the contrary).Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
More fool the South Americans, though I suppose less teams makes it more viable.
And every other continent with a > than 50% qualification rate.
thought 24 teams would be good but ye it looks like the quality will drop which is a huge shame because euro 08 was without doubt the best tournament I ever watched especially when u compare it to the 2010 wc
The bloody vuvuzela's ruined that. Plenty of "good" teams did awful in WC2010. France and Italy finished bottom of their groups. Denmark came third. South Korea came ahead of Greece. That's a quarter of the teams in Euro2012!Quote:
Originally Posted by outspoken
A 24 team tournament will be just as good but it's up to these traditionally big nations to actually go and play well.
Actually they won their qualifying group for Euro 76. Winning five of their six games, before going out to the Yugoslavs (who eventually finished fourth) in the quarters.Quote:
Originally Posted by mypost
Technically they didn't qualify for the Euros in 76, because it was only a four team tournament. They won their group alright but seem to have lost to Yugoslavia, in what is now known as a play-off.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euro_1976#Final_tournament
Technically, artistically or however else you prefer to analyse it, they variouslyQuote:
Originally Posted by French Toasht
a) won a qualifying group of six games, and
b) as a result advanced to the last eight of the tournament, so
c) comparing that with a play-off simply to make the last 16 is a bit odd. They were clearly two stages better than that.