Football

24

Comments

  • Tukai wrote: »
    I daresay that Pope Francis, who comes from Argentina, will make a statement at some time to the effect that Maradona had skills that were a gift from God that he was able to use to lift the spirits of many - especially in Argentina.

    Although AIUI he did do enough training and practice to refine the gifts God gave him, he was also a frail - and some would say sinful - human being and so suffered as such.

    Maradona turned up at the Pearly Gates and Peter punched him in the face. " What's that for?" He complained. "Blaming God for that goal" Peter said

  • Manchester United have just smacked nine goals past Southampton 😯
  • Manchester United have just smacked nine goals past Southampton 😯

    Like all the better clubs, they have better players

  • Telford wrote: »
    Manchester United have just smacked nine goals past Southampton 😯

    Like all the better clubs, they have better players

    Sort of.

    Saints have a major injury crisis.
    Saints had an idiot sent off in the first 90 seconds of the game
    Saints suffered from some unbelievably bad refereeing decisions and ended the match with 9 players.

    The result is not really representative of the relative qualities of either club.
  • CaissaCaissa Shipmate
    And Liverpool completes the improbable. Five straight wins and a third place finish to secure their spot in the European Super League. (Oops! I meant Champions League.)
  • Yes, eight wins and two draws from the last ten games. Just goes to show how badly the season had fallen apart before that. Hopefully the injury woes will lessen and Man City will have a bit of competition next season. The loss of Van Dijk was an especially huge blow, but there were plenty of others.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Yes, eight wins and two draws from the last ten games. Just goes to show how badly the season had fallen apart before that. Hopefully the injury woes will lessen and Man City will have a bit of competition next season. The loss of Van Dijk was an especially huge blow, but there were plenty of others.

    My team would have given them real competition but they have been relegated
  • The Baggies?
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    The Baggies?

    Indeed.
  • I found the CL final surreal. Everything seemed inverted, Chelsea snapped into the tackle and devoured space, City looked tired. Sterling was marmalised on the wing, the famed City elegance was just a smear. I don't really know what happened, but it was enjoyable. Tuchel is some manager.
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    Chelsea played excellently, especially the defenders.

    It's hard to know how much of City's failings were their own, and how much was just Chelsea not letting them play. But the commentators here were certainly perturbed by the team that Guardiola picked before the game even started. Essentially, they felt a holding midfielder was missing.
  • I forgot Harvertz's snappy reply to TV journalist, about being Chelsea's most expensive player, I don't give a fuck, we won the CL 1-0.
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    So a long, long time ago, before the world went a little nuts, I had bid for Euro2020 tickets in Copenhagen.

    I didn't get them anyway. And I'd bid for the 2nd and 3rd games. But I decided that I would watch all the Copenhagen games in full rather than just highlights.

    I watched Denmark v Finland on replay, thankfully. The replay completely cut out everything that happened with Eriksen (apart from enough audio references to give you a hint). Oh my goodness.
  • PigletPiglet All Saints Host, Circus Host
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿
  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host
    Indeed! Now to beat Croatia.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Piglet wrote: »
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    England have every chance of failing to qualify for next round
  • We take on Italy tomorrow. In the Stadio Olimpico, in Rome. 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    Telford wrote: »
    Piglet wrote: »
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    England have every chance of failing to qualify for next round

    Not really. The odds of 4 points not being enough must be pretty darn small.
  • If Portugal beat Germany, France might be 2nd in that group, and could play England. Yeah, Mbappe v Kane, what a contest, (sarcasm).
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Piglet wrote: »
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    England have every chance of failing to qualify for next round

    Not really. The odds of 4 points not being enough must be pretty darn small.

    If the Czechs beat England and Croatia beats Scotland, England could be out on goal difference
  • CaissaCaissa Shipmate
    Poland's draw with Spain was quite the upset.
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    edited June 2021
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Piglet wrote: »
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    England have every chance of failing to qualify for next round

    Not really. The odds of 4 points not being enough must be pretty darn small.

    If the Czechs beat England and Croatia beats Scotland, England could be out on goal difference

    They don't use goal difference. They first use head to head records.

    Besides which, you're wrongly assuming you have to be in the top 2 of the group to progress. You don't. But the scenario you're describing means England is above Croatia on the table because England beat Croatia.

    Scotland beating Croatia brings goal difference into play. But you still have to construct a scenario where there are enough 3rd place teams in other groups that have a better record than 3rd place in Group D. And if 3rd place in Group D is England on 4 points, that's still pretty unlikely.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Piglet wrote: »
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    England have every chance of failing to qualify for next round

    Not really. The odds of 4 points not being enough must be pretty darn small.

    If the Czechs beat England and Croatia beats Scotland, England could be out on goal difference

    They don't use goal difference. They first use head to head records.

    Besides which, you're wrongly assuming you have to be in the top 2 of the group to progress. You don't. But the scenario you're describing means England is above Croatia on the table because England beat Croatia.

    Scotland beating Croatia brings goal difference into play. But you still have to construct a scenario where there are enough 3rd place teams in other groups that have a better record than 3rd place in Group D. And if 3rd place in Group D is England on 4 points, that's still pretty unlikely.

    I was not aware of all this.
  • Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Piglet wrote: »
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    England have every chance of failing to qualify for next round

    Not really. The odds of 4 points not being enough must be pretty darn small.

    If the Czechs beat England and Croatia beats Scotland, England could be out on goal difference

    They don't use goal difference. They first use head to head records.

    Besides which, you're wrongly assuming you have to be in the top 2 of the group to progress. You don't. But the scenario you're describing means England is above Croatia on the table because England beat Croatia.

    Scotland beating Croatia brings goal difference into play. But you still have to construct a scenario where there are enough 3rd place teams in other groups that have a better record than 3rd place in Group D. And if 3rd place in Group D is England on 4 points, that's still pretty unlikely.

    I was not aware of all this.

    We Welsh spent most of the past three days calculating the possible outcomes. Thankfully, we have gone through second in Group A so don't need to worry, and await our fate...
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Piglet wrote: »
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    England have every chance of failing to qualify for next round

    Not really. The odds of 4 points not being enough must be pretty darn small.

    If the Czechs beat England and Croatia beats Scotland, England could be out on goal difference

    They don't use goal difference. They first use head to head records.

    Besides which, you're wrongly assuming you have to be in the top 2 of the group to progress. You don't. But the scenario you're describing means England is above Croatia on the table because England beat Croatia.

    Scotland beating Croatia brings goal difference into play. But you still have to construct a scenario where there are enough 3rd place teams in other groups that have a better record than 3rd place in Group D. And if 3rd place in Group D is England on 4 points, that's still pretty unlikely.

    I was not aware of all this.

    We Welsh spent most of the past three days calculating the possible outcomes. Thankfully, we have gone through second in Group A so don't need to worry, and await our fate...

    I am well pleased for Wales
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Piglet wrote: »
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    England have every chance of failing to qualify for next round

    Not really. The odds of 4 points not being enough must be pretty darn small.

    If the Czechs beat England and Croatia beats Scotland, England could be out on goal difference

    They don't use goal difference. They first use head to head records.

    Besides which, you're wrongly assuming you have to be in the top 2 of the group to progress. You don't. But the scenario you're describing means England is above Croatia on the table because England beat Croatia.

    Scotland beating Croatia brings goal difference into play. But you still have to construct a scenario where there are enough 3rd place teams in other groups that have a better record than 3rd place in Group D. And if 3rd place in Group D is England on 4 points, that's still pretty unlikely.

    I was not aware of all this.

    We Welsh spent most of the past three days calculating the possible outcomes. Thankfully, we have gone through second in Group A so don't need to worry, and await our fate...

    And well deserved, in my opinion.
  • The England team needs to realise that you have to get the ball towards the opponent's goal, and not just pass it around the half way line. A few old-fashioned long balls into the area would at least give Harry Kane the opportunity to flop to the ground and win a penalty.
  • Saucer of milk for @Jonah the Whale - but how true!

    Now, a tournament song... how about this one? With the verse immediately after the instrumental break (about 1'30") being the clincher: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OA1BRhwo70M
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    edited June 2021
    England is guaranteed passage to the next round now. Even if the Czechs thump them.

    EDIT: In fact, looking at the draw going forward, winning Group D might not be the best strategy...
  • orfeo wrote: »
    England is guaranteed passage to the next round now. Even if the Czechs thump them.

    EDIT: In fact, looking at the draw going forward, winning Group D might not be the best strategy...

    Yes, we broke into hilarity, thinking of the ways England could meet Germany. But coming second might lead to France. Abandon hope.
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    You've forgotten 3rd. I mean hey, 3rd might lead to Belgium, but maybe not.
  • I don't think I fancy our chances against any of France, Germany or Belgium. But then I've always been a prophet of gloom.

    @Sandemaniac Yes, I've come across that HMHB song before. Nicely bizarre.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Piglet wrote: »
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    England have every chance of failing to qualify for next round

    Not really. The odds of 4 points not being enough must be pretty darn small.

    If the Czechs beat England and Croatia beats Scotland, England could be out on goal difference

    They don't use goal difference. They first use head to head records.

    Besides which, you're wrongly assuming you have to be in the top 2 of the group to progress. You don't. But the scenario you're describing means England is above Croatia on the table because England beat Croatia.

    Scotland beating Croatia brings goal difference into play. But you still have to construct a scenario where there are enough 3rd place teams in other groups that have a better record than 3rd place in Group D. And if 3rd place in Group D is England on 4 points, that's still pretty unlikely.

    I have not really been in touch with this tournament and didn't realise that there were 6 groups of 4 teams.

    When I first started to follow football even the World cup only had 16 countries in the finals
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Piglet wrote: »
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    England have every chance of failing to qualify for next round

    Not really. The odds of 4 points not being enough must be pretty darn small.

    If the Czechs beat England and Croatia beats Scotland, England could be out on goal difference

    They don't use goal difference. They first use head to head records.

    Besides which, you're wrongly assuming you have to be in the top 2 of the group to progress. You don't. But the scenario you're describing means England is above Croatia on the table because England beat Croatia.

    Scotland beating Croatia brings goal difference into play. But you still have to construct a scenario where there are enough 3rd place teams in other groups that have a better record than 3rd place in Group D. And if 3rd place in Group D is England on 4 points, that's still pretty unlikely.

    I have not really been in touch with this tournament and didn't realise that there were 6 groups of 4 teams.

    When I first started to follow football even the World cup only had 16 countries in the finals

    The more teams are in, the more valuable the television rights basically.
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    I hadn't realised until now that the tiebreakers ultimately meant that Croatia got second in the group, and the Czech Republic were pushed down to third.

    I'm slightly intrigued by today's games (or the small hours of the morning for me). I'm not convinced that Spain will actually manage to beat Slovakia...
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Piglet wrote: »
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    England have every chance of failing to qualify for next round

    Not really. The odds of 4 points not being enough must be pretty darn small.

    If the Czechs beat England and Croatia beats Scotland, England could be out on goal difference

    They don't use goal difference. They first use head to head records.

    Besides which, you're wrongly assuming you have to be in the top 2 of the group to progress. You don't. But the scenario you're describing means England is above Croatia on the table because England beat Croatia.

    Scotland beating Croatia brings goal difference into play. But you still have to construct a scenario where there are enough 3rd place teams in other groups that have a better record than 3rd place in Group D. And if 3rd place in Group D is England on 4 points, that's still pretty unlikely.

    I have not really been in touch with this tournament and didn't realise that there were 6 groups of 4 teams.

    When I first started to follow football even the World cup only had 16 countries in the finals

    The more teams are in, the more valuable the television rights basically.

    Why not have 8 gropps of 4 then ?
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    edited June 2021
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Piglet wrote: »
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    England have every chance of failing to qualify for next round

    Not really. The odds of 4 points not being enough must be pretty darn small.

    If the Czechs beat England and Croatia beats Scotland, England could be out on goal difference

    They don't use goal difference. They first use head to head records.

    Besides which, you're wrongly assuming you have to be in the top 2 of the group to progress. You don't. But the scenario you're describing means England is above Croatia on the table because England beat Croatia.

    Scotland beating Croatia brings goal difference into play. But you still have to construct a scenario where there are enough 3rd place teams in other groups that have a better record than 3rd place in Group D. And if 3rd place in Group D is England on 4 points, that's still pretty unlikely.

    I have not really been in touch with this tournament and didn't realise that there were 6 groups of 4 teams.

    When I first started to follow football even the World cup only had 16 countries in the finals

    The more teams are in, the more valuable the television rights basically.

    Why not have 8 gropps of 4 then ?

    Because if you let too many teams into the finals, you get a lot of boringly one-sided matches.

    Meanwhile... my comment about Spain v Slovakia turned out to be one of my more embarrassing statements in recent times...

    England is definitely on the easier side of the knock-out draw. If they can get past Germany of course.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Piglet wrote: »
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    England have every chance of failing to qualify for next round

    Not really. The odds of 4 points not being enough must be pretty darn small.

    If the Czechs beat England and Croatia beats Scotland, England could be out on goal difference

    They don't use goal difference. They first use head to head records.

    Besides which, you're wrongly assuming you have to be in the top 2 of the group to progress. You don't. But the scenario you're describing means England is above Croatia on the table because England beat Croatia.

    Scotland beating Croatia brings goal difference into play. But you still have to construct a scenario where there are enough 3rd place teams in other groups that have a better record than 3rd place in Group D. And if 3rd place in Group D is England on 4 points, that's still pretty unlikely.

    I have not really been in touch with this tournament and didn't realise that there were 6 groups of 4 teams.

    When I first started to follow football even the World cup only had 16 countries in the finals

    The more teams are in, the more valuable the television rights basically.

    Why not have 8 groups of 4 then ?

    Because if you let too many teams into the finals, you get a lot of boringly one-sided matches

    I can't see how an extra 8 teams would make much difference and you might get more goals in one sided matches





  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Piglet wrote: »
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    England have every chance of failing to qualify for next round

    Not really. The odds of 4 points not being enough must be pretty darn small.

    If the Czechs beat England and Croatia beats Scotland, England could be out on goal difference

    They don't use goal difference. They first use head to head records.

    Besides which, you're wrongly assuming you have to be in the top 2 of the group to progress. You don't. But the scenario you're describing means England is above Croatia on the table because England beat Croatia.

    Scotland beating Croatia brings goal difference into play. But you still have to construct a scenario where there are enough 3rd place teams in other groups that have a better record than 3rd place in Group D. And if 3rd place in Group D is England on 4 points, that's still pretty unlikely.

    I have not really been in touch with this tournament and didn't realise that there were 6 groups of 4 teams.

    When I first started to follow football even the World cup only had 16 countries in the finals

    The more teams are in, the more valuable the television rights basically.

    Why not have 8 groups of 4 then ?

    Because if you let too many teams into the finals, you get a lot of boringly one-sided matches

    I can't see how an extra 8 teams would make much difference and you might get more goals in one sided matches

    Oh well, if all you want is more goals, I'm sure we can arrange a few more thrashings for Liechtenstein and Andorra.

    An extra 8 teams when there's only 55 teams in European competition is a hell of a lot. It's saying you don't have to be in the top half of qualifying in order to qualify.

  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Piglet wrote: »
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    England have every chance of failing to qualify for next round

    Not really. The odds of 4 points not being enough must be pretty darn small.

    If the Czechs beat England and Croatia beats Scotland, England could be out on goal difference

    They don't use goal difference. They first use head to head records.

    Besides which, you're wrongly assuming you have to be in the top 2 of the group to progress. You don't. But the scenario you're describing means England is above Croatia on the table because England beat Croatia.

    Scotland beating Croatia brings goal difference into play. But you still have to construct a scenario where there are enough 3rd place teams in other groups that have a better record than 3rd place in Group D. And if 3rd place in Group D is England on 4 points, that's still pretty unlikely.

    I have not really been in touch with this tournament and didn't realise that there were 6 groups of 4 teams.

    When I first started to follow football even the World cup only had 16 countries in the finals

    The more teams are in, the more valuable the television rights basically.

    Why not have 8 groups of 4 then ?

    Because if you let too many teams into the finals, you get a lot of boringly one-sided matches

    I can't see how an extra 8 teams would make much difference and you might get more goals in one sided matches

    Oh well, if all you want is more goals, I'm sure we can arrange a few more thrashings for Liechtenstein and Andorra.

    An extra 8 teams when there's only 55 teams in European competition is a hell of a lot. It's saying you don't have to be in the top half of qualifying in order to qualify.

    Let's just have 16 teams then in 4 groups. Top two in each group to go through to last 8
  • RicardusRicardus Shipmate
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Piglet wrote: »
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    England have every chance of failing to qualify for next round

    Not really. The odds of 4 points not being enough must be pretty darn small.

    If the Czechs beat England and Croatia beats Scotland, England could be out on goal difference

    They don't use goal difference. They first use head to head records.

    Besides which, you're wrongly assuming you have to be in the top 2 of the group to progress. You don't. But the scenario you're describing means England is above Croatia on the table because England beat Croatia.

    Scotland beating Croatia brings goal difference into play. But you still have to construct a scenario where there are enough 3rd place teams in other groups that have a better record than 3rd place in Group D. And if 3rd place in Group D is England on 4 points, that's still pretty unlikely.

    I have not really been in touch with this tournament and didn't realise that there were 6 groups of 4 teams.

    When I first started to follow football even the World cup only had 16 countries in the finals

    The more teams are in, the more valuable the television rights basically.

    Plus, the number of independent countries in Europe has pretty much doubled since the end of the Cold War.
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Piglet wrote: »
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    England have every chance of failing to qualify for next round

    Not really. The odds of 4 points not being enough must be pretty darn small.

    If the Czechs beat England and Croatia beats Scotland, England could be out on goal difference

    They don't use goal difference. They first use head to head records.

    Besides which, you're wrongly assuming you have to be in the top 2 of the group to progress. You don't. But the scenario you're describing means England is above Croatia on the table because England beat Croatia.

    Scotland beating Croatia brings goal difference into play. But you still have to construct a scenario where there are enough 3rd place teams in other groups that have a better record than 3rd place in Group D. And if 3rd place in Group D is England on 4 points, that's still pretty unlikely.

    I have not really been in touch with this tournament and didn't realise that there were 6 groups of 4 teams.

    When I first started to follow football even the World cup only had 16 countries in the finals

    The more teams are in, the more valuable the television rights basically.

    Why not have 8 groups of 4 then ?

    Because if you let too many teams into the finals, you get a lot of boringly one-sided matches

    I can't see how an extra 8 teams would make much difference and you might get more goals in one sided matches

    Oh well, if all you want is more goals, I'm sure we can arrange a few more thrashings for Liechtenstein and Andorra.

    An extra 8 teams when there's only 55 teams in European competition is a hell of a lot. It's saying you don't have to be in the top half of qualifying in order to qualify.

    Let's just have 16 teams then in 4 groups. Top two in each group to go through to last 8

    For a guy who wasn't following the competition and had to have the system explained to him, you sure do have a lot of opinions about it.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Piglet wrote: »
    Well done Scotland holding the Sassenachs to a draw! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    England have every chance of failing to qualify for next round

    Not really. The odds of 4 points not being enough must be pretty darn small.

    If the Czechs beat England and Croatia beats Scotland, England could be out on goal difference

    They don't use goal difference. They first use head to head records.

    Besides which, you're wrongly assuming you have to be in the top 2 of the group to progress. You don't. But the scenario you're describing means England is above Croatia on the table because England beat Croatia.

    Scotland beating Croatia brings goal difference into play. But you still have to construct a scenario where there are enough 3rd place teams in other groups that have a better record than 3rd place in Group D. And if 3rd place in Group D is England on 4 points, that's still pretty unlikely.

    I have not really been in touch with this tournament and didn't realise that there were 6 groups of 4 teams.

    When I first started to follow football even the World cup only had 16 countries in the finals

    The more teams are in, the more valuable the television rights basically.

    Why not have 8 groups of 4 then ?

    Because if you let too many teams into the finals, you get a lot of boringly one-sided matches

    I can't see how an extra 8 teams would make much difference and you might get more goals in one sided matches

    Oh well, if all you want is more goals, I'm sure we can arrange a few more thrashings for Liechtenstein and Andorra.

    An extra 8 teams when there's only 55 teams in European competition is a hell of a lot. It's saying you don't have to be in the top half of qualifying in order to qualify.

    Let's just have 16 teams then in 4 groups. Top two in each group to go through to last 8

    For a guy who wasn't following the competition and had to have the system explained to him, you sure do have a lot of opinions about it.

    You are correct.
  • Strange game, Italy v Austria. For periods, Italy looked flat, and Austria were better, and scored a disallowed goal. Then in extra time, Italy found new energy. But this flatness or whatever it is, is widespread. Maybe tiredness, and tournamentitis. Even France look lethargic at times.
  • la vie en rougela vie en rouge Purgatory Host, Circus Host, 8th Day Host
    I think France's lethargy is something to do with having played two games in temperatures of 36°.
  • Well, we're out.
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    So far results are going the way I want them to, but as a Belgium supporter I really didn't enjoy that. Parts of it were very dull and parts of it were really tense.

    Still can't get over how lopsided the knockout draw is. 5 of the 6 top-ranked teams on the same side (Belgium, France, Portugal, Spain, Italy - the only one one the other side is England).
  • Wesley JWesley J Circus Host
    Crikey! Ingerland have won! What's the world coming to! :D
  • la vie en rougela vie en rouge Purgatory Host, Circus Host, 8th Day Host
    And the French are already out. Cue national mourning, but TBH they only really started playing about an hour in, and I can't help feeling they deserved to lose.
Sign In or Register to comment.