|
Post by manulike on Nov 18, 2019 22:02:48 GMT
So, win tomorrow and it's Baku/Rome or Copenhagen/St.Petersberg. Lose tomorrow and qualify from playoffs it's Dublin/ Bilbao or Bucharest/Amsterdam. Draw tomorrow and win playoffs likely adds Munich/ Budapest to the 'lose' options above. I think... can you do a degree in UEFA fixture scheduling? LOL I think ... draw tomorrow, we play ROI for sure and then take their place as hosts in DUB/BIL
|
|
|
Post by gwernybwch on Nov 18, 2019 22:19:55 GMT
So, win tomorrow and it's Baku/Rome or Copenhagen/St.Petersberg. Lose tomorrow and qualify from playoffs it's Dublin/ Bilbao or Bucharest/Amsterdam.
Draw tomorrow and win playoffs likely adds Munich/ Budapest to the 'lose' options above.I think... can you do a degree in UEFA fixture scheduling? Although it means a League A final versus the winner of Iceland vs. Bulgaria/Israel/Romania Or a League B final versus Bosnia and Herzegovina I think.....
|
|
|
Post by manulike on Nov 18, 2019 22:23:51 GMT
So, win tomorrow and it's Baku/Rome or Copenhagen/St.Petersberg. Lose tomorrow and qualify from playoffs it's Dublin/ Bilbao or Bucharest/Amsterdam.
Draw tomorrow and win playoffs likely adds Munich/ Budapest to the 'lose' options above.I think... can you do a degree in UEFA fixture scheduling? Although it means a League A final versus the winner of Iceland vs. Bulgaria/Israel/Romania Or a League B final versus Bosnia and Herzegovina
I think..... I missed the party back in 2015 ... so why not ;-))
If we do draw, and go on to win the final, its THREE HOME FIXTURES IN DUBLIN FOR GROUP GAMES.
Knowing Giggs, he will screw it all up for us and we'll win tomorrow 5-0 ...
|
|
|
Post by helipad138 on Nov 18, 2019 23:09:47 GMT
Argh you're right about Ger/Hun being unlikely if we're in the playoffs. It's so f***ing complicated
|
|
|
Post by manulike on Nov 18, 2019 23:25:47 GMT
Argh you're right about Ger/Hun being unlikely if we're in the playoffs. It's so f***ing complicated Yes ...
Just read on the ESPN twitter feed that it is a pure 50/50 between us and Finland between group A or B - assuming that we win tomorrow.
As much as I'd totally love spending a couple of weeks in St Pete, I still won't be downhearted if we drew tomorrow ... Think we can beat Bosnia home or away ;-)
|
|
|
Post by manulike on Nov 18, 2019 23:35:52 GMT
Not entirely sure about this, but there is some logic saying that KOSOVO are also in pot 4 and can only be in Group A - which leaves BOTH us and Finland in Groupe B? So Group B could possibly be Denmark, Russia, Finland and us?
|
|
|
Post by robin1864 on Nov 19, 2019 0:06:32 GMT
I'm not even going to bother trying to wrap my head around this upcoming championship, or how it works. At this moment, it just feels like a never-ending stream of prolonged qualifiers. It has the makings of a non-descript event with no defining characteristics.
2016 was truly one of a kind experience.
|
|
|
Post by allezlesrouges on Nov 19, 2019 0:23:47 GMT
I'm not even going to bother trying to wrap my head around this upcoming championship, or how it works. At this moment, it just feels like a never-ending stream of prolonged qualifiers. It has the makings of a non-descript event with no defining characteristics. 2016 was truly one of a kind experience. It would have been somewhat unique if they gave all of the games to countries who would never be able to host a whole tournament by themselves. At least then there would have been the novelty of seeing us play tournament football across smaller nations. But the decision to give games to England, Netherlands, Germany, Spain, Italy is just plain bizarre. Replace those five with Wales (75,000), Greece (75,000), Georgia (55,000), Armenia (54,000), Belarus (41,000) and then at least you have a collection of nations that wouldn't ever host a whole tournament, then you have a defining characteristic of some sort. To be honest even if they did that you still lose the sense of occasion hosting it in one country provides. I can't see many fans being keen on the idea, and here's hoping the negative feedback prevents this from happening again in the future.
|
|
|
Post by manulike on Nov 19, 2019 0:40:59 GMT
I'm not even going to bother trying to wrap my head around this upcoming championship, or how it works. At this moment, it just feels like a never-ending stream of prolonged qualifiers. It has the makings of a non-descript event with no defining characteristics. 2016 was truly one of a kind experience. It would have been somewhat unique if they gave all of the games to countries who would never be able to host a whole tournament by themselves. At least then there would have been the novelty of seeing us play tournament football across smaller nations. But the decision to give games to England, Netherlands, Germany, Spain, Italy is just plain bizarre. Replace those five with Wales (75,000), Greece (75,000), Georgia (55,000), Armenia (54,000), Belarus (41,000) and then at least you have a collection of nations that wouldn't ever host a whole tournament, then you have a defining characteristic of some sort. To be honest even if they did that you still lose the sense of occasion hosting it in one country provides. I can't see many fans being keen on the idea, and here's hoping the negative feedback prevents this from happening again in the future. The first post in the last three pages that actually makes sense ;-)
|
|
|
Post by robin1864 on Nov 19, 2019 1:08:40 GMT
I'm not even going to bother trying to wrap my head around this upcoming championship, or how it works. At this moment, it just feels like a never-ending stream of prolonged qualifiers. It has the makings of a non-descript event with no defining characteristics. 2016 was truly one of a kind experience. It would have been somewhat unique if they gave all of the games to countries who would never be able to host a whole tournament by themselves. At least then there would have been the novelty of seeing us play tournament football across smaller nations. But the decision to give games to England, Netherlands, Germany, Spain, Italy is just plain bizarre. Replace those five with Wales (75,000), Greece (75,000), Georgia (55,000), Armenia (54,000), Belarus (41,000) and then at least you have a collection of nations that wouldn't ever host a whole tournament, then you have a defining characteristic of some sort. To be honest even if they did that you still lose the sense of occasion hosting it in one country provides. I can't see many fans being keen on the idea, and here's hoping the negative feedback prevents this from happening again in the future. I just want to get it out of the way as soon as possible. The format is obviously inspired by Platini's love for that sweet sweet Azeri dollar, but executed in a way less obvious than Qatar. For me at least, a big part of any sporting event is the local culture becoming part of the tournament's identity, which only Euro 2000, 2004 & 2016 seemed to have in recent times. 2008 and 2012 lacked that, and this upcoming Euros promises to be as equally sterile and corporate. I wouldn't mind a "Celtic" Euros hosted with Scotland and Ireland, but realistically looking at UEFA's specifications for this upcoming tournament, a Celtic Euros would be fantasy unless massive investment happened outside of Cardiff, Dublin and Glasgow. The Millennium is the only Welsh stadium which comfortably meets the criteria.
|
|
|
Post by impeachabull on Nov 19, 2019 1:51:47 GMT
This is going to knock me off manulike's Christmas card list but does anyone else quite fancy the Baku group? Group B means you have to play Denmark and Russia away. It'll just turn into a normal away game with a slightly bigger allocation. The only way to get Group E is the rigmarole of the play-offs and no ability to book flights/ tickets until next March. Most people won't stay long in Dublin and we've all done Dublin (and all its expense) with Wales. Group A we'll get tonnes of tickets and everyone will stay a week in Baku, accommodation is cheap, and we can start booking flights etc. straight after the draw.
|
|
|
Post by quetzal on Nov 19, 2019 2:02:27 GMT
This is going to knock me off manulike's Christmas card list but does anyone else quite fancy the Baku group? Group B means you have to play Denmark and Russia away. It'll just turn into a normal away game with a slightly bigger allocation. The only way to get Group E is the rigmarole of the play-offs and no ability to book flights/ tickets until next March. Most people won't stay long in Dublin and we've all done Dublin (and all its expense) with Wales. Group A we'll get tonnes of tickets and everyone will stay a week in Baku, accommodation is cheap, and we can start booking flights etc. straight after the draw. Doesn’t bother me. I want Cymru in the Finals. I will be there
|
|
|
Post by conwy10 on Nov 19, 2019 7:52:26 GMT
I'm not even going to bother trying to wrap my head around this upcoming championship, or how it works. At this moment, it just feels like a never-ending stream of prolonged qualifiers. It has the makings of a non-descript event with no defining characteristics. 2016 was truly one of a kind experience. It would have been somewhat unique if they gave all of the games to countries who would never be able to host a whole tournament by themselves. At least then there would have been the novelty of seeing us play tournament football across smaller nations. But the decision to give games to England, Netherlands, Germany, Spain, Italy is just plain bizarre. Replace those five with Wales (75,000), Greece (75,000), Georgia (55,000), Armenia (54,000), Belarus (41,000) and then at least you have a collection of nations that wouldn't ever host a whole tournament, then you have a defining characteristic of some sort. To be honest even if they did that you still lose the sense of occasion hosting it in one country provides. I can't see many fans being keen on the idea, and here's hoping the negative feedback prevents this from happening again in the future. The only reason I’m interested in this tournament is because it’s titled Euro 2020. I’d love the concept in the countries you named, but it feels like more of a Nations League then an established tournament. With not many wanting to host the tournament though I think we’ll have to get used to this being the norm in a few years.
|
|
|
Post by cantonwelsh79 on Nov 19, 2019 8:50:12 GMT
I'm not even going to bother trying to wrap my head around this upcoming championship, or how it works. At this moment, it just feels like a never-ending stream of prolonged qualifiers. It has the makings of a non-descript event with no defining characteristics. 2016 was truly one of a kind experience. It would have been somewhat unique if they gave all of the games to countries who would never be able to host a whole tournament by themselves. At least then there would have been the novelty of seeing us play tournament football across smaller nations. But the decision to give games to England, Netherlands, Germany, Spain, Italy is just plain bizarre. Replace those five with Wales (75,000), Greece (75,000), Georgia (55,000), Armenia (54,000), Belarus (41,000) and then at least you have a collection of nations that wouldn't ever host a whole tournament, then you have a defining characteristic of some sort. To be honest even if they did that you still lose the sense of occasion hosting it in one country provides. I can't see many fans being keen on the idea, and here's hoping the negative feedback prevents this from happening again in the future. Agree with this. Play the games in countries that will never host a tournament and its not that bad an idea - still not great but understandable. To give it to some on the list is just plain crap. I don't really have an issue with Baku but Munich? Had a world cup fairly recently plus the next Euros. St. Petersburg? Last World Cup. Kiev? Euros recently etc etc. Defeats the idea of it in my opinion. Having said that I want nothing more than to do the business and qualify tonight!
|
|
|
Post by insertname on Nov 19, 2019 10:23:34 GMT
I'm not even going to bother trying to wrap my head around this upcoming championship, or how it works. At this moment, it just feels like a never-ending stream of prolonged qualifiers. It has the makings of a non-descript event with no defining characteristics. 2016 was truly one of a kind experience. It would have been somewhat unique if they gave all of the games to countries who would never be able to host a whole tournament by themselves. At least then there would have been the novelty of seeing us play tournament football across smaller nations. But the decision to give games to England, Netherlands, Germany, Spain, Italy is just plain bizarre. Replace those five with Wales (75,000), Greece (75,000), Georgia (55,000), Armenia (54,000), Belarus (41,000) and then at least you have a collection of nations that wouldn't ever host a whole tournament, then you have a defining characteristic of some sort. To be honest even if they did that you still lose the sense of occasion hosting it in one country provides. I can't see many fans being keen on the idea, and here's hoping the negative feedback prevents this from happening again in the future. Good idea, not to mention it’s a chance to play in some more rather unusual places. Germany are hosting the next one, so why there? I recall part of Platini’s reasoning was that air travel was so cheap it would be easy for fans to make ad-hoc flights all over Europe so for that to be feasible that is probably why the host cities are major ones along popular routes. Either way, whilst unique it really does nothing for the competition at all and watching it play out next summer I’m sure it’s going to feel like a concentrated set of qualifiers rather than an actual finals.
|
|
|
Post by insertname on Nov 19, 2019 10:32:31 GMT
It would have been somewhat unique if they gave all of the games to countries who would never be able to host a whole tournament by themselves. At least then there would have been the novelty of seeing us play tournament football across smaller nations. But the decision to give games to England, Netherlands, Germany, Spain, Italy is just plain bizarre. Replace those five with Wales (75,000), Greece (75,000), Georgia (55,000), Armenia (54,000), Belarus (41,000) and then at least you have a collection of nations that wouldn't ever host a whole tournament, then you have a defining characteristic of some sort. To be honest even if they did that you still lose the sense of occasion hosting it in one country provides. I can't see many fans being keen on the idea, and here's hoping the negative feedback prevents this from happening again in the future. The only reason I’m interested in this tournament is because it’s titled Euro 2020. I’d love the concept in the countries you named, but it feels like more of a Nations League then an established tournament. With not many wanting to host the tournament though I think we’ll have to get used to this being the norm in a few years. I’m not sure about that- the choice was a distributed Euros or Turkey and uefa don’t seem to have a lot of love for Turkey. Germany are already down to host the next one and I’m sure there will be some who will put their hand up in the future. I do worry though that the expanded format not only devalues the quality at the finals but that it now rules out smaller countries who could have hosted the 16 team version and within Europe there are now not a great deal of countries who can stage a whole one without some sort of joint hosting bid. So there is a risk of the same old suspects who have already hosted a tournament in the last 20 years constantly being used (France, Germany, Portugal etc) resulting in a lack of diversity. Given how the franchising of european competitions has gone (champions league final 2024 is rumoured to be in the Us) I can see a European championship finals taking place outside of Europe by 2045.
|
|
|
Post by robin1864 on Nov 19, 2019 10:49:01 GMT
It would have been somewhat unique if they gave all of the games to countries who would never be able to host a whole tournament by themselves. At least then there would have been the novelty of seeing us play tournament football across smaller nations. But the decision to give games to England, Netherlands, Germany, Spain, Italy is just plain bizarre. Replace those five with Wales (75,000), Greece (75,000), Georgia (55,000), Armenia (54,000), Belarus (41,000) and then at least you have a collection of nations that wouldn't ever host a whole tournament, then you have a defining characteristic of some sort. To be honest even if they did that you still lose the sense of occasion hosting it in one country provides. I can't see many fans being keen on the idea, and here's hoping the negative feedback prevents this from happening again in the future. The only reason I’m interested in this tournament is because it’s titled Euro 2020. I’d love the concept in the countries you named, but it feels like more of a Nations League then an established tournament. With not many wanting to host the tournament though I think we’ll have to get used to this being the norm in a few years. I'd rather future tournaments just rotate between England, France, Germany, Benelux and Russia in rotation until economic conditions improve enough for somewhere off the beaten track to host. Infrastructure and stadiums ready at the drop of a hat. The fact that strong countries like Portugal and Spain are having to put together a joint bid must surely worry UEFA about the future viability of the tournament?
|
|
|
Post by pendragon on Nov 19, 2019 11:08:08 GMT
The Euros will likely be a continent-wide tournament in the future.
Logistically, not too different to a North or South American held World Cup, though a pain in the ar$e for us fans.
|
|
|
Post by impeachabull on Nov 19, 2019 16:30:43 GMT
Trying to kill time before the game. Group B looks pretty much confirmed as:
Denmark Russia Belgium Finland/ Wales
That's a nightmare of a group. Denmark and Russia away and Belgium on neutral ground.
If we manage to win tonight, all my weight is behind Group A!
|
|
|
Post by insertname on Nov 19, 2019 16:39:06 GMT
Trying to kill time before the game. Group B looks pretty much confirmed as: Denmark Russia Belgium Finland/ Wales That's a nightmare of a group. Denmark and Russia away and Belgium on neutral ground. If we manage to win tonight, all my weight is behind Group A! We've beaten two of those teams in the last few years
|
|
|
Post by impeachabull on Nov 19, 2019 16:53:31 GMT
Belgium are the number one ranked team in the world, Denmark looked better than us in the Nations League, and Russia in Russia is tricky. Don't get me wrong, I'll be delighted to get there and would take any group on offer but I'm positioning myself as the ying to manulike's yang. #BakuTwoOrThreeMoreTimes
|
|
|
Post by insertname on Nov 19, 2019 17:02:26 GMT
Belgium are the number one ranked team in the world, Denmark looked better than us in the Nations League, and Russia in Russia is tricky. Don't get me wrong, I'll be delighted to get there and would take any group on offer but I'm positioning myself as the ying to manulike 's yang. #BakuTwoOrThreeMoreTimes Russia have got their act together but all the same, psychology is a big thing in football (you wouldn't have sports psychologists if it wasn't!) and our victories over both Russia and Belgium in the Euros means that both of those sides won't be throwing parties about being drawn in the same group as us.
|
|
|
Post by insertname on Nov 19, 2019 17:05:38 GMT
I will say though that one other reason why the format is bad is the limit on ticket allocations.
With one/two hosts most of the games have an equal allocation split, I'm not sure how you justify having so many hosts (especially when the likes of England and Italy will have 3 home games) who will no doubt get an unequal share of tickets meaning games effectively become away qualifiers for a lot of teams. And away qualifiers are not easy to win. Isn't this fact a direct challenge to the point of a finals in the first place?!
Time to start preparing an asterisk to go next to the winners name, methinks. It's a complete farce...
|
|
|
Post by conwy10 on Nov 19, 2019 18:25:58 GMT
I wonder how long it’ll be before we have the Euros in USA to celebrate European openness... or €uropean openne$$. I thought Turkey pulled out because they wanted the Olympics and the only option was Ireland, N. Ireland, Scotland and Wales?
I’d like to see areas get given it. Like Britain and Ireland, Baltic Countries, Balkans, Scandinavia, Central Europe. Let the big boys have it like France, England, Germany, Italy every once in a while and then say a joint bid from Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland and possibly Ukraine if Poland can’t do the heavy lifting themselves.
|
|
|
Post by iantov on Nov 19, 2019 18:51:01 GMT
This second paragraph probably sums it up quite nicely;
'The Republic of Ireland are well versed in the play-offs, having not qualified for a major tournament automatically since 1994 - needing play-offs for the 2002 World Cup and the 2012 and 2016 Euros.
This time, they have benefited from a change to the qualifying system which means that, remarkably, they could actually have lost their past 21 games and still been in these play-offs as a result of being in Nations League Division B'.
Who dreams up this garbage...it's like this new fad for rewarding kids for coming last on school sports day. I despair, really do.
|
|
|
Post by insertname on Nov 19, 2019 18:56:58 GMT
This second paragraph probably sums it up quite nicely; 'The Republic of Ireland are well versed in the play-offs, having not qualified for a major tournament automatically since 1994 - needing play-offs for the 2002 World Cup and the 2012 and 2016 Euros. This time, they have benefited from a change to the qualifying system which means that, remarkably, they could actually have lost their past 21 games and still been in these play-offs as a result of being in Nations League Division B'. Who dreams up this garbage...it's like this new fad for rewarding kids for coming last on school sports day. I despair, really do. The alternative is 3rd place qualifying or going into a play off- that’s just as much rewarding failure. The only cure for all the ills regarding location and play offs is to go back to a 16 team finals and have done with it. No money in that approach though so it will never happen.
|
|
|
Post by eppingblue1 on Nov 19, 2019 19:03:22 GMT
UEFA will be hoping for a Hungary win tonight. Saves them having to put 2 host cities in the same play off.
|
|
|
Post by pendragon on Nov 19, 2019 19:28:11 GMT
Well, I noticed that the Romanian ref got a bad reception from the away crowd when his name was announced tonight....
|
|
|
Post by robin1864 on Nov 19, 2019 22:21:33 GMT
I wonder how long it’ll be before we have the Euros in USA to celebrate European openness... or €uropean openne$$. I thought Turkey pulled out because they wanted the Olympics and the only option was Ireland, N. Ireland, Scotland and Wales? I’d like to see areas get given it. Like Britain and Ireland, Baltic Countries, Balkans, Scandinavia, Central Europe. Let the big boys have it like France, England, Germany, Italy every once in a while and then say a joint bid from Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland and possibly Ukraine if Poland can’t do the heavy lifting themselves. Can't see them taking it out of Europe tbh, UEFA have seen the fallout of Sepp's Qatargate and learned you need to be sly when implementing your bribes. A Celtic bid would only have 6 stadiums out of 10 able to host, with all 6 being in Cardiff (CCS & MS), Dublin (Aviva) & Glasgow (Old Firm & Hampden). Being on the safe side, Swansea & Wrexham would need to expand to 30k & Cardiff expand to 40k. Scotland would probably need to expand some stadiums in Aberdeen & Edinburgh maybe. Most Irish stadiums are completely unsuitable for a modern football tournament however. We'd definitely get the final though
|
|
|
Post by impeachabull on Nov 19, 2019 22:31:02 GMT
So it's now just a straight toss-up between Baku/Rome and Copenhagen/Saint Petersburg?
|
|