Agree entirely. I think only Lahm and Neuer are truly great players from their WC win, the rest just very good. OK, maybe Klose too in a way I don't really fathom. An international great but not a club great. Did Klose play throughout?Originally Posted by DeLorean
The caps thing was no big deal, I took it out on reflection.
To be honest, I'd expect Germany to average three goals per match in most qualification campaigns. Knocking nine past both ourselves and Sweden was impressive but Sweden managed seven in return themselves and we were at a seriously low ebb. They're a very good side and I agree they were the best performing team at the World Cup, if not the final itself. I just wouldn't have them in the same bracket as some of the great sides. In that sense I'm glad they haven't added to their World Cup win as I think it might say more about the rest than anything else. Only really brilliant teams should be capable of winning multiple international tournaments, France were exceptional, Spain were exceptional, Germany just very good in my opinion. I think they've benefited from a general dip in standards, but that's not their fault.
His first start was in the quarter finals and he kept his place then, only bits ad pieces before that.
Forgot about Marco Reus actually, not exactly the number 9 they need but definitely could have made a difference.
I enjoyed this from Ken Early.
Final hasn't exactly caught fire yet. Flowing at times, but no real chances.
Awful shame for Ronaldo. He loves attention so much I half-wondered if he was manufacturing some 'played through the pain' story, but then he went off.
Just me or does Renato Sanches "look" dangerous every time he has the ball but never really does anything with it? Bit like Anderson at United.
Pity Sissoko didn't score. Would have been one of the great team goals; Pogba, Griezmann, Payet and Giroud all involved.
Can't see where a Portuguese goal is going to come from. Adrien Silva had ample chance to pop a shot off in plenty of space but he neglected to do it.
If you told me Quaresma would appear in a European Championships final in 2016 I would have laughed, but then Helder Postiga and Hugo Almeida have played up front for this Portuguese side in recent years; which goes some way to explaining their current dearth of strikers.
Pity about Ronaldo going off, purely for the fact that he is the best player on the pitch. Portugal look toothless without him.
Sissoko probably the best player on the pitch followed by Griezmann. Payet and Giroud have looked alright, Payet always looks like conjuring something. Much ado about nothing re: Renato. I like the look of Cedric Soares.
ok this game is crap.
Nah, I'm enjoying it, I'm putting myself (a) in the shoes of both sets of fans as if it was us playing and (b) in my own shoes having played a really tight Liam Hyland Cup Final in 1996
Eder doing well simply by virtue of being a presence in the air, winning frees and slowing things down. William Carvalho has been a silent destroyer. Joao Moutinho's introduction has also changed things, he has more about him than Adrien.
Has Martial been banging Deschamps wife or something? As good as Coman is, Martial is just what they need to take that extra step.
Gignac has been just as unrefined as Giroud. Griezmann fairly fading out.
Penalties looked like Portugal's best bet a long-time ago. France may regret not taking advantage in that 20 minute spell when they had Portugal rocked.
Credit to Fonte and Pepe in particular though, they have handled (almost) everything thrown at them.
Last edited by TheOneWhoKnocks; 10/07/2016 at 9:22 PM.
Suitable way to end the worst tournament in years.
Once again, the favourites in a match go down with a relative whimper. Croatia, England, Germany, Spain, now France - all knocked out relatively unexpectedly and tamely when predicted to win (maybe could take Spain out of that list)
Portugal win the tournament having only beaten Wales - just like the English. But fair dues; they were the last ones standing when everyone else had choked. In a tournament with no great teams - barely any memorable matches even - a mundane side that could only win one of six matches seems like suitable champions.
I would agree with that. It was a disappointing tournament probably because it was increased to 24 teams and with their being not many great teams as it is, it just increased the number of average teams just happy to be there. Also knowing that 3rd place in the group stage could have been enough to qualify, many teams were happy to sit back and a get a draw in at least 1 (if not 2) of their group games.
Just thinking about my team of the tournament. I really struggled to think about it, not many stand out performances.
4-3-3
GK: Rui Patricio [POR]
RB: Joshua Kimmich [GER]
CB: Ashley Williams [WAL]
CB: Leonardo Bonucci [ITA]
LB: Raphael Guerreiro [POR]
RM: Dmitri Payet [FRA]
CM: Toni Kroos[GER]
LM: Kamil Grosicki [POL]
RF: Cristiano Ronaldo [POR]
CF: Antoine Griezmann [FRA]
LF: Gareth Bale [WAL]
Last edited by TheBoss; 11/07/2016 at 2:58 AM.
I enjoy every tournament greatly and this was no different. as sure as night follows day commentators feel obliged to state that it wasn't a great tournament. Cant remember the last time there was a consensus that the tournament just past was anything other than ordinary. therefore not sure what these people are measuring the standard against
I'm not sure the enlargement issue explains the lack of quality and lack of rip-roaring attacking football. There was jeopardy aplenty in the last 16 with several good teams pitched against each other. Almost all of the k/o games were tight cagey affairs. I think it mainly reflects relative evenness across the continent, a game that has yet to fully adapt to the post tika taka era perhaps, a game where the tactical pendulum has swung back in favour of defensive systems, as well as a lack of standout forwards. The tactical pendulum never stops swinging. WC 2010 was cagey, Euro 2012 was open and attacking, probably WC 2014 too, now Euro 2016 was cagey.
Obviously I'm biased but I think overall the enlargement brought in some much needed colour and gaiety and I think it made the year-long qualification process more interesting. The 1st seeds qualify by way of procession these days (ok, Dutch exception) and the prospect of even 3rd place being good enough gave Iceland, NI and Wales a real target to aim at right at the start, and gave Scotland and ourselves something to scrap for throughout.
The "4 best 3rd place" route was inelegant but overall the last 16 was a fair reflection and from that point on it became a tough tournament. It's not Albania's or our fault that Poland, Spain, Croatia, England etc. didn't make progress.
And in an era when the big countries and the big clubs are getting even richer, UEFA is right to open the door somehow to the rest.
As far as I'm concerned these finals aren't just elite competitions, they're also festivals of football that allow people from all over the continent to socialise and engage in benign nationalism (with a couple of countries who sadly don't buy into the "benign" bit) and UEFA 2016 was a qualified success all round. The Icelandic thunderclap will probably quickly deteriorate into the modern era Mexican Wave, but it was great and made all of Europe happy for a while.
Last edited by Stuttgart88; 11/07/2016 at 7:58 AM.
Yeah, I agree on not blaming the 24-team Euros. I thought it was great to see the smaller teams on the big stage (even if most didn't actually need the extension to qualify of course)
Hungary qualified through the play-offs - they were one of the more entertaining teams, and I don't think it was their fault Portugal were so poor.
Look at the top scorers in qualifying - Lewandowski got 13, Zlatan got 11, Muller got 9. Combined goals in the finals - 1. Hardly the fault of the third placed teams. (Griezmann, strangely, had never scored a competitive goal for France before this tournament)
I think we've touched on the main issues here already - lack of any real strikers, lack of any flair players who can run with the ball, and what Stutts notes as a pendulum swing towards cagey football - and I hope that is all it is!
I wonder can you add excessive coaching of players to that list? It seems at times like we've been watching two teams of technically excellent midfielders ultimately lacking in that creative spark to split a defence or wallop home a ball in the box.
Last edited by pineapple stu; 11/07/2016 at 8:26 AM.
Yep, I think that might be true. I think part of the reason for even matches is that players are now technically good but maybe lacking a bit of street grit. Maybe we're now well into the "academy era". Who knows?
To be fair, I think they mostly agreed that the last World Cup was good?
I enjoyed this tournament although because I was in France I didn't see a large number of games. I did see the one where there wasn't a shot on target for 118 minutes but Wales and Iceland doing well gave the tournament a lift. The wife is glad it's over though but luckily we have two TVs, one strategically placed in the kitchen
Last night was really enjoyable. It's a poor French side when Sissoko is your best player on the night. His usual trade mark was a back pass but has obviously received instructions from the manager to go at the opposition which he did reasonably well. I hoped that the shot for the incorrect handball decision would go in but there was some consolation that they scored soon thereafter.
Interesting to see Ronaldo on the touchline barking out instructions. I thought only the manager was allowed in that zone but may be he was the manager !!
I always got the feeling that the French thought that with beating Germany, the job had been done. Big mistake there because the Portuguese had been though nuts throughout the tournament and the loss of Ronaldo made them even harder to break down if less potent up front. When my friends in the Panel tipped the French to go through in extra time, there could only be one winner
Nice to see an underdog win and the happy clappy French crowd with their free tricolours, and many of whom did not wear colours, go home devastated. Now they know how we felt courtesy of one Thierry Henry.
Last edited by OwlsFan; 11/07/2016 at 10:44 AM.
Forget about the performance or entertainment. It's only the result that matters.
We were saying watching it last night it would have been hilarious if Portugal had scored the winner from that free-kick given for the Portuguese handball.
You wouldn't mind, but there was a black player and a white player going for the ball - very easy to see which arm had handled.
Ronaldo as manager was great craic too.
I really enjoyed it as it was edge of the seat stuff even if defences were on top. It seemed clear enough from the midway point in the first half that one goal would probably settle it, so there was a real tension with any ball dropping around the box. I wouldn't be too hard on France, if that Gignac chance goes in off the post the 'experts' would be saying how they found a way to win despite not being at their best.
I think Jim Beglin got it right when he said that it's very hard to produce two big games in a row so close together, and the Germany match would have taken a lot out of them emotionally and physically. Griezmann's header was guilt edged as well, if they had got their noses in front they may have been able to pick Portugal off on the break and possibly won with a bit to spare.
It's all about Portugal though, what a gutsy bunch they have been defensively since conceding three to Hungary, and they even showed some balls in other ways in that game. The winning in ninety minutes stats that are being thrown at them are a bit silly I think, they only needed penalties in one of their four knock-out games, they won the rest by outscoring the opposition, so what if it took extra time? Hardly a stick to beat them with, more a tribute to their stubbornness, grit and even quality and composure when it counted most in tough, high pressure matches.
The lopsided draw didn't really pan out that uneven in the end either, beating Croatia, Poland and Wales was almost as big an ask as beating Ireland, Iceland and Germany as well, Germany obviously the stand-out side but home advantage should be factored in too.
The Boss - surely Pepe deserves a spot on that team of the tournament? I'd probably have him a close second to Griezmann for the player of the tournament award to be honest, and certainly the best defender.
Dunphy corrected Giles last night actually when talking about this. Giles was saying the expansion was great for the likes of Wales and Iceland but Dunphy said that they would have qualified anyway under the old format. Both finished second in their group though which would have only been enough to secure a playoff spot previously.
I'm definitely a fan of the extra teams given the fact that it's such a tall order for middle of road European teams to qualify for the World Cup. In fact, I think I'd be in favour of expanding it further to 32. It should provide the added bonus of evening out the unfair fixture scheduling and the uncertainty that surrounds the third place spots.
There are enough decent teams in Europe to make it work. For example, if the Netherlands, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Montenegro, Norway, Denmark, Slovenia, Scotland and Serbia were added to this years lot I don't think the tournament would suffer too greatly, and it would add to the festival of football vibe that Stutts mentioned, and that has probably been the real success story of this tournament, along with Portugal.
Last edited by DeLorean; 11/07/2016 at 10:44 AM.
I think 32 is too many to be honest. I think the Euros needs teams like Norway, Holland, Scotland, etc, to be at home watching. The qualifying tournament has to mean something.
Remember with the UEFA Nations League now, there's a way for the Div 4 winners to qualify - so you could well have someone like Luxembourg, the Faroes or Kazakhstan qualifying. I think that, and the incentive provided by the achievements of Albania, Iceland and the North, is enough of a door for the lower countries in Europe.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks