The tournament would, I presume, be run the same way as the World Cup from 1986 to 1994 - four best runners-up get through.
Interesting this. At the moment to qualify for a Euro's we need to be in the top 16 teams which is a little above where we would expect to be. But I would say if there were 24 teams we should 'expect' to qualify if we are at par. Looking back at all our play off defeats you have to say we'd have been in a lot of 24 team Euro's. Even in this campaign if the top 3 qualified in the group you would say we still had some hope. No surprise what countries support it. Of course the tournament itself would be a mess (6 groups of 4 I assume with some 3rd place teams in a last 16?)EURO proposal
Following a proposal from the Scottish Football Association (SFA), the Congress will also be asked to approve a feasibility study into expanding the UEFA European Championship final round to include 24 teams. Latvia, Republic of Ireland and Sweden have given the SFA their support in requesting this proposal, according to Olsson, who added: "The views of the executive committee are positive to the idea of making a feasibility study. I think also individual members of the executive committee have said that they are positive to the idea because there are now more members of UEFA."
The tournament would, I presume, be run the same way as the World Cup from 1986 to 1994 - four best runners-up get through.
I don't think the quality of opposition is there to expand the tournament to 24 teams.
Based on current world rankings the top 24 teams in Europe are
Italy
France
England
Germany
Netherlands
Portugal
Czech Republic
Spain
Ukraine
Sweden
Croatia
Greece
Switzerland
Romania
Denmark
Poland
Russia
Scotland
Turkey
Serbia
Slovakia
Bulgaria
Israel
Northern Ireland
We're 25th. I guess the question is how much would having the bottom 8 teams improve the championships? Some not bad teams there who are as good as the middle 8. Also would mean that the top teams have less chance of not qualifying, even Steve McClaren should get England into the top 3 in their group. I can see this being agreed. The only problem is that it will be even harder for small countries to host it, therefore either rotate it around England, Italy, Germany, Spain and France or have more shared tournaments.
Don't see any inherent problems with shared tournaments. Think it's good to give countries like Belgium/Holland, Poland/Croatia, Japan/Korea, etc a chance to host a tournament which they wouldn't be able to do on their own.
Would be good to see more countries who don't usually qualify for tournaments get a bigger chance of making the grade, although at almost half the continent, 24 may be a bit excessive. Wouldn't have a particular problem with it, I suppose. Though could see it being rejected.
I take it you're not a geography student! Poland and Croatia are no where near each other. IIRC Croatia has tried joint bids with Hungary and Bosnia, but I've never heard of them teaming up with Poland!
I'm not sure what to make of a 24-team tournament. Obviously we'd qualify for more tournaments, but I wouldn't wish to effectively confine the hosting EUROs to the big five countries; I'd say even Belgium & the Netherlands would have had a bit of difficulty hosting a 24-team tournament, and very few other potential joint bids would be able IMO, certainly not Scotland & Ireland !
Bit harsh on Serbia IMO - they've consistently qualified for the big tournaments. Granted they got spanked by the Argies in the WC but I still think they'd be far better than Scotland and Russia and probably better than some of the teams in the middle section. take your point on the rest of those lower teams though, most of them are sh!te....having said that we wouldn't be much better and I deffo wouldn't be complaining if we qualified because of this!!!
"Well I think they'll be a little disappointed with that" - Matt Holland on TV3 after 5-2 drubbing by Cyprus
It's not just that we'd qualify for more tournaments, we should expect to qualify for all European Championships.
Looking back since 1988
In '92 there were only 8 qualifiers, we came second in our group to England and failed to qualify, would have made it into a 16 team tournament never mind a 24 team tournament.
In '96 (firt 16 team tournament) we wer in effect the 17th team and lost to Dutch in a play off. Would have made a 24 team tournament.
In 2000 we came second in our group and lost the play off to Turkey, again woudl have made a 24 team tournament.
And in 2004 we came third and may have got into a playoff for a 24 team tournament.
I'd trade the current 10-20% chance of us making it into a 16 team tournament for the 70-80% chance of us making a 24 team tournament, even if they are all held in Germany!
By the way not sure how much of an impact it would have on who could host it. Euto 2004 had ten venues for 16 teams and WC 2006 had 12 for 32 teams. It seems it's the first round where you need a large number of stadia. Assuming a 2 week first stage a 24 team tournament would be 36 first round matches. Would have thought that was easy with 12 stadia and do-able with 10.
Everybody seems to assume it would be 6 groups of four. It quite possibly would be 8 groups of 3 with the 8 winners into a quarter final. Would it be a smaller tournament?
Here they come! It’s the charge of the “Thanks” Brigade!
bring it on , anything that gives us a better chance of qualifying
Was he crazy!! Yeah , in a very special way , an Irishman.
I slept, and dreamed that life was Beauty;
I woke, and found that life was Duty.
Nah couldnt have that. 24 teams in it would dilute the quality. It would be like the champions league with 2 group stages. Too much dilutes the quality.
I mean lok at the World Cup. 32 teams in there and teams like Togo getting hammered. I cant remember 1 match that sticks out in this Summers World Cup and it would be the same with the Euros if they expanded it.
It would make hosting the finals much more expensive and awkward.
The qualification for the finals would also be less compelling as 50% of UEFA teams would qualify for the finals.
Non-runner IMO.
Really???
How about France v Brazil, or France v Italy even. Or perhaps T&T v England, or Sweden v England?
Even the first half of Japan v Brazil was exciting.
Seriously, you can't remember one game..?!
==============
What about a 20 team with 4 groups of 5 (like the UEFA Cup, or the Heineken Cup)?
Altough 24 would help teams like NI and ROI qualify more I think the tournament would end up being held every time in the same few countries. I believe in potentially greater number of teams making play offs from the current groups, but thats just because i want my own country to have a greater chance. There would need to be alot of thought before any ideas like this go ahead.
Bookmarks