StefCurry Posted June 21, 2016 Share Posted June 21, 2016 Spain and England getting out from the second places, it's veeery interesting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Consigliere Posted June 21, 2016 Share Posted June 21, 2016 Depending on the results, Belgium could end up on that side of the draw too. If both Belgium and Portugal win their final games, they will face each other in the next round. ETA. scratch that. If both Belgium and Portugal win their final group game, they end up on the 'easier' side of the draw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Killer Snark Posted June 21, 2016 Share Posted June 21, 2016 4 minutes ago, The_Raven_Quaresma said: Shambles, eh? A 5-0, eh? This feels so fucking good. During the Keystone Kops display before they started to pull their socks up, you can't criticise me saying that. They were atrocious for the first eight minutes. It looked like they were settling for second place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterOJ Posted June 21, 2016 Share Posted June 21, 2016 I knew we could do it! Croatia all the way! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. X Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 7 hours ago, Emre Mor-mont said: Our goals will be more numerous than our hills! *slow clap* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teng Ai Hui Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 Did I misunderstand something? Why is media reporting Spain v. Italy? Belgium could still win Group E; then, they would play Spain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polishgenius Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 1 hour ago, Teng Ai Bellerin said: Belgium could still win Group E; They can't - they lost to them and head-to-head is the first decider if teams are equal on points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teng Ai Hui Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 Ok. Thanks. That's what I get for trusting Wikipedia; they list goal difference as the first tiebreaker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucailduca Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 That's why a 24 teams Euro is a mistake... Half of the table is hard AF, the other one is laughable. With 16 teams you would only have great games from the quarterfinals to the end. Anyway, this could be the Euro of Croatia or Belgium if they don't screw up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 Wales are totally reaching the final! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altherion Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 The fact that half the table looks a lot more impressive than the other half results from the fact that Spain and England finished second in their groups. I don't see how having 16 teams instead of 24 would have made a difference here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Criston of House Shapper Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 39 minutes ago, Lucailduca said: That's why a 24 teams Euro is a mistake... Half of the table is hard AF, the other one is laughable. With 16 teams you would only have great games from the quarterfinals to the end. Anyway, this could be the Euro of Croatia or Belgium if they don't screw up. The format is not at fault if Spain and England just suck and end up in second place. I think the way this Euro is playing out so far, raising it to 24 teams is a success, we've had lots of interesting matches with teams that played on the same level, just like with 16 teams. The fact of the matter is, the top teams are now much more even, so it doesn't always have to be the same five or six teams that are playing for the title. The top-half is hardly laughable, Wales has been playing very well so far and has the best scorer up to this point, Croatia has been solid and deservedly won a difficult group, Poland proved that they can keep up with the big teams and Switzerland has been doing okay as well. And Portugal and Belgium might still end up in that half. If one of those teams makes it through to the finals and wins it, it's because they deserve it and not because there's now more teams. If anything, the bigger field makes it more difficult for a wtf-team like Greece or Denmark to win, because they have to win more knockout-matches in a row. With this format, you can't just somehow make it through the group stages by luck and then win three games and the tournament. There will be plenty of excitement in all the games going forward, as the Euro has lost its worst teams and will finally begin on Saturday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biter Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 22 hours ago, baxusz said: Holding back is more unsportsmanlike than beating an opponent with a high margin. You're probably right, but if we argue over semantics we risk forgetting about what is important: Northern Ireland advancing to the Round of 16. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 Can I just say, by the way, the funniest thing for me about the Spain-Croatia game was Ian Wright burbling before the match about how Roy Hodgson could learn from the Spanish who didn't change their lineup because they've won a few trophies and know what they're doing. Result: Spain beaten by a Croatian team who made five changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Killer Snark Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 1 hour ago, Emre Mor-mont said: Can I just say, by the way, the funniest thing for me about the Spain-Croatia game was Ian Wright burbling before the match about how Roy Hodgson could learn from the Spanish who didn't change their lineup because they've won a few trophies and know what they're doing. Result: Spain beaten by a Croatian team who made five changes. And they weren't just beaten. They were beaten well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Horse Named Stranger Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 5 hours ago, Criston of House Shapper said: The format is not at fault if Spain and England just suck and end up in second place. I think the way this Euro is playing out so far, raising it to 24 teams is a success, we've had lots of interesting matches with teams that played on the same level, just like with 16 teams. The fact of the matter is, the top teams are now much more even, so it doesn't always have to be the same five or six teams that are playing for the title. The top-half is hardly laughable, Wales has been playing very well so far and has the best scorer up to this point, Croatia has been solid and deservedly won a difficult group, Poland proved that they can keep up with the big teams and Switzerland has been doing okay as well. And Portugal and Belgium might still end up in that half. If one of those teams makes it through to the finals and wins it, it's because they deserve it and not because there's now more teams. If anything, the bigger field makes it more difficult for a wtf-team like Greece or Denmark to win, because they have to win more knockout-matches in a row. With this format, you can't just somehow make it through the group stages by luck and then win three games and the tournament. There will be plenty of excitement in all the games going forward, as the Euro has lost its worst teams and will finally begin on Saturday. Have we watched entirely different tournaments? I found the overall level of play to be rather poor thus far. True we really didn't see any blow outs, but the reason was that most of the weaker teams know how to park the bus, and a quite a few teams were not really on point when it came down to converting chances. All the new format did was to increase the number of games, and the higher quantity of games has unfortunately not lead to higher quality of games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Killer Snark Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 2 hours ago, Notone said: Have we watched entirely different tournaments? I found the overall level of play to be rather poor thus far. True we really didn't see any blow outs, but the reason was that most of the weaker teams know how to park the bus, and a quite a few teams were not really on point when it came down to converting chances. All the new format did was to increase the number of games, and the higher quantity of games has unfortunately not lead to higher quality of games. I agree. Compared to the superlative quality of the WC a few years back, there's been a lack of magic this tournament. Too many closely decided games where neither side have been playing exceptionally. It's been mainly just adequate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Consigliere Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 At least the fears of a 24 team tournament watering down the competition has not come to fruition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Criston of House Shapper Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 2 hours ago, Notone said: Have we watched entirely different tournaments? I found the overall level of play to be rather poor thus far. True we really didn't see any blow outs, but the reason was that most of the weaker teams know how to park the bus, and a quite a few teams were not really on point when it came down to converting chances. All the new format did was to increase the number of games, and the higher quantity of games has unfortunately not lead to higher quality of games. The level of play may not have been top, but with national teams it's kind of lack-luster most of the time anyways. But that's not what I'm watching this stuff for, I'm watching it as a source of entertainment, and entertained it has. Don't blame the format, if Spain came in second place with 16 teams, they would've probably had to go up against a strong opponent as well. And if the top teams don't play at their best, that has little to do with how many teams participate. I guess I just don't get why it would be better if Austria sucked against three better teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Horse Named Stranger Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 Just now, Criston of House Shapper said: The level of play may not have been top, but with national teams it's kind of lack-luster most of the time anyways. But that's not what I'm watching this stuff for, I'm watching it as a source of entertainment, and entertained it has. Don't blame the format, if Spain came in second place with 16 teams, they would've probably had to go up against a strong opponent as well. And if the top teams don't play at their best, that has little to do with how many teams participate. I guess I just don't get why it would be better if Austria sucked against three better teams. I don't really mind. But really watching the Sweden games had just been painful; Sweden versus Ireland was particularly awful. And there were a great many awful games. The England games were not particularly high quality stuff. It was somewhat entertaining, but really not quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.