EURO 2008 qualifiers

[steviejay]

If that's the issue, then it's the same as the French one. I haven't seen any of English qualifying games fully so I can't judge by myself.

Good players. players that tend to strut their stuff with ease in their respective leagues week in week out, but bring them together and they just dance about like numpties.

He said he won't step down. I don't understand it. Surely the FA will be under immense pressure to sack him, and what reason has he given them to hold on to him?
That being said, though, the English team played awful tonight. You'd have thought it was Croatia which was battling for qualification.

He won't leave but you'll be CERTAIN he'll be pushed. If the FA don't sack him then no English fan will believe the FA ever again.

Which is kinda sad cause I think McClaren had the unfortunate task of being the most hated man in England every time there's a game.

 

[Lambert Simnel]

and not from some Zumba-Bumba whom they took off a tree, gave him two bananas and now he plays in the Ukrainian League.

By any chance, has Blokhin started posting here in the CfC Sports forum recently ?

 

[steviejay]

In regards to the seeding issue. I'd be quite happy not to have Seeding. The only point of it I can see is to ensure that the big teams get through and who cares about the rest, where as the World Cup and European Cups are about teams from all over coming together to battle it out.

 

[Lambert Simnel]

Marla, yes, I agree with your comment. Random would indeed be unfair.

I guess it's unfortunate though, that when smaller countries get a mini "golden age" of players, when they previously might have achieved the knock-out stages of the finals, now they end up settling for 3rd place and potentially better seeding for the next tournament. But, let's be honest here - I'm just highlighting an issue without having any alternative approach to offer.

 

[Hitro]

England's quality should by far have been enough to not only qualify but also play a good role at the actual tournament. Players like Terry, Lampard, Gerrard, both Coles, Rooney and so on are all not worse than anything the top teams have to offer. So McLaren, just like Eriksson before him, is to blame for not at all using their potential. Of course he will be sacked, and rightfully so.

That said

The tournament already isn't a total failure.

 

[Rhye]

unbelievable suicide!!!!

I wonder why Croatian players played such game...like if they had some special motivation

Now I think that italian players should feel guilty for not having conceded the Scots a tie...it would have been great France and England directly out, like in 94

 

[mitsho]

I agree with what you say, but meanwhile, I can't see a better system than the current one. Let's imagine groups would be totally random... you could have Spain, Italy and Germany in the same group and another group with only weak teams having Cyprus and Georgia qualifying.

During the World Cup qualifiers in Africa, many people blamed the fact that both Ivory Coast and Cameroon where in the same group, whereas Togo could qualify in another group (the one of Senegal if I recall correctly). Obviously the seeding wasn't that good, even if of course, the African qualifying process with only one qualified per group is probably not the best.

Do we really want to have the same teams in every single time? Generally speaking. In my opinion, the Champions League for example is getting incredibly boring with having seen ManU -Barça for the I-don't-know-many times. I can't recall having seen any of the big matches of the CL in the last few years (ok, I saw some, but by far not one per match-day). It just gets a bit the same.

I know, national competitions don't get as boring although they are the same teams over and over again. But my statement is just a gut feeling. I wouldn't mind a bit more variation, a bit more luck-dependend group definitons. If you look at the EC'08 drawing pots, can you honestly say, they are fairly balanced? I mean there can be heavy to ultra-weak groups in there... Am I wrong?

m

 

[kryszcztov]

I don't believe France could do anything in the Euro if it doesn't become more solid again.

OK, you say "if it doesn't become more solid again", but you're doing it again ! Weren't you already done with hoping France would do anything at the WC when we faced Togo last year ?? Come on, of course we need to play better, but you sound like there's no surprise to come... And football is one of these few sports where surprise is everywhere.

@ Rhye : Same for you, dude ! But in the end I want our revenge in the EC final.

 

[Marla_Singer]

England's league has nothing to do with it; any undergrad anthropology student will tell you exactly why this has recently become an issue. When in trouble, blame foreigners!

Well, that wasn't my point, quite frankly.

Anyway, I had the feeling that teams with many members playing in various leagues succeeded better overall than teams with players almost exclusively playing in the same league. I think about Brazil, Argentina, the Netherlands, Portugal, Croatia for the matter.

Spain, England or Mexico are made of players mostly from the national league, and they didn't achieved much recently. However, in thinking about this again, it's true that neither Italy nor Germany exports many players and still have good results. Same could be said in a way about Greece, the current European champion. Actually, my point was just silly now that I dig it up a bit more!

 

[Pangur Bán]

England's quality should by far have been enough to not only qualify but also play a good role at the actual tournament. Players like Terry, Lampard, Gerrard, both Coles, Rooney and so on are all not worse than anything the top teams have to offer. So McLaren, just like Eriksson before him, is to blame for not at all using their potential. Of course he will be sacked, and rightfully so.

That said

The tournament already isn't a total failure.

You hit the nail on the head there. They get these top managers who've proved themselves at every other level ... and they've been to blame for England's lack of results since 1966.

 

[Marla_Singer]

Now I think that italian players should feel guilty for not having conceded the Scots a tie...it would have been great France and England directly out, like in 94

As I recall, a draw against Ukraine was enough for France to qualify, and a draw has made France against Ukraine. You could have lost against Scotland on saturday night, France would have still been in, the only team out would have been Italy.

 

[raen]

Portugal was in one of the easiest groups and is qualified in second with some luck. Playing like this they will loose big time in Euro. And if we play with Greece...disgrace again lol

I hope its enjoyable. I am also a little tired of always the same teams...but for instance Finland could push a little more and Portugal would be down.

 

[Rhye]

and now that I think about it, my signature is appropriate for tonight too!

 

[Hitro]

You hit the nail on the head there. They get these top managers who've proved themselves at every other level ... and they've been to blame for England's lack of results since 1966.

Well, to be fair their teams up until 1998 or maybe 1996 were mostly classical British teams that could fight extremely well but not much besides that. If you think through their 1990 lineup for example they had an excellent striker in Lineker and a bunch of very decent fighters but not really anything top level in the creative department. Consquently they failed the following year.

With players like Scholes and later Lampard and Gerrard (also Joe Cole and others) that gradually changed. The style of play did not. In fact it even lost some of the fighting prowess compared with other teams as that - like the technical aspects - got alot closer worldwide since the early 90s. Overrated players like Beckham sure didn't help.
Still, if you think about the last ten years, defenders like Terry, Ferdinand and Campell, the aformentioned midfielders and strikers like Rooney and the young Owen, it's quite a disappointment.

Eriksson's ugly defensive style probably did the most harm as that wasted the offensive capabilites completely. McLaren sure was no improvement on that.
They were also in hindsight unlucky to have a series of lucky results over the years that always prevented a fundamental change. This might be different now.

 

[Sofista]

The seeding ssytem was created to prevent events from ending with a disappointing final match.

Let's assume that the next WC is organized without seeding, and let's assume the current FIFA rankings hold true, and that every single team performs "as expected" by it. An unfortunate luck puts in the final stage all the better teams on one side, all the worse ones on the other of the board. The WC final would then be, Argentina (n.1) - Botswana (n. 101).
As a lover of the game, my reaction to the thought is: nooooo, gimme back the good ole Brazil-Germany!!!!

 

[Hitro]

Portugal was in one of the easiest groups and is qualified in second with some luck. Playing like this they will loose big time in Euro.

Yes but like with France this is anything but said. Let's face it, a short tournament like that is always alot about luck. One or two good games can change alot, one bad one can tank a generally great team. This is of course part of what makes it funny, but it should not be overanalysed. Had Argentina won that penalty shootout against Germany during the last World Cup they could well be World Champions now and everyone would say they are the best team in the world. It comes down to stuff like that.

 

[Red Door]

Maybe England needs some more black players.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Well, to be fair their teams up until 1998 or maybe 1996 were mostly classical British teams that could fight extremely well but not much besides that. If you think through their 1990 lineup for example they had an excellent striker in Lineker and a bunch of very decent fighters but not really anything top level in the creative department. Consquently they failed the following year.

With players like Scholes and later Lampard and Gerrard (also Joe Cole and others) that gradually changed. The style of play did not. In fact it even lost some of the fighting prowess compared with other teams as that - like the technical aspects - got alot closer worldwide since the early 90s. Overrated players like Beckham sure didn't help.
Still, if you think about the last ten years, defenders like Terry, Ferdinand and Campell, the aformentioned midfielders and strikers like Rooney and the young Owen, it's quite a disappointment.

Eriksson's ugly defensive style probably did the most harm as that wasted the offensive capabilites completely. McLaren sure was no improvement on that.
They were also in hindsight unlucky to have a series of lucky results over the years that always prevented a fundamental change. This might be different now.

Wow ... Hitro being fair towards England. Wonders never cease.

If you think through their 1990 lineup for example they had an excellent striker in Lineker and a bunch of very decent fighters but not really anything top level in the creative department.

I kinda disagree; you may be forgetting about Mr Gascoigne and Mr Platt? Or maybe you have a different opinion about those guys than me.

With players like Scholes and later Lampard and Gerrard (also Joe Cole and others) that gradually changed. The style of play did not. In fact it even lost some of the fighting prowess compared with other teams as that - like the technical aspects - got alot closer worldwide since the early 90s. Overrated players like Beckham sure didn't help.
Still, if you think about the last ten years, defenders like Terry, Ferdinand and Campell, the aformentioned midfielders and strikers like Rooney and the young Owen, it's quite a disappointment.

Eriksson's ugly defensive style probably did the most harm as that wasted the offensive capabilites completely. McLaren sure was no improvement on that.
They were also in hindsight unlucky to have a series of lucky results over the years that always prevented a fundamental change. This might be different now.

I agreed with your original point more I'm afraid.

To elaborate, if England had went more attacking against Brazil in that quarter final in 2002, you really think they'd have scored more and conceded fewer? If anything, it would have been the opposite. Similar thing in the last one against Portugal. If they'd gone more attacking I'm pretty confident Portugal would have disposed of them in normal time.

 

[TheLastOne36]

Portugal was in one of the easiest groups and is qualified in second with some luck. Playing like this they will loose big time in Euro. And if we play with Greece...disgrace again lol

I hope its enjoyable. I am also a little tired of always the same teams...but for instance Finland could push a little more and Portugal would be down.

Easiest? Don't push your luck buddy...

 

[Lambert Simnel]

Maybe England needs some more black players.

.