or to join or start a new Discussion

Articles/all comments
These 36 comments are related to an article called:

Should Euros be extended to 32 teams?

Page 1 of 2

posted on 20/6/24

Less qualifiers, more games in the finals is better for everyone surely

posted on 20/6/24

Whatever has 2 teams making it out of the groups rather than sometimes 3 is good for me

posted on 20/6/24

comment by Robberto Garnacho (U22716)
posted 34 seconds ago
Whatever has 2 teams making it out of the groups rather than sometimes 3 is good for me
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Agreed, this is nonsense. Somehow Spain vs Italy in match day 2 is already a basically a dead rubber now.

posted on 20/6/24

In fact with Europe I’d have 16 teams who never need to qualify automatically be there and the other 16 places made up of teams who had to qualify out of the rest of Europe. Use those extra dates for the nations league and friendlies and the assumed extra days of the CL

comment by Pun (U21588)

posted on 20/6/24

24 teams, three team groups where only the winner progresses. Runners up drop down to the Asian league.

posted on 20/6/24

UEFA keep extending their tournaments, the CL, Europa, intro of Europa League and now possibly the Euro's. Then you've got FIFA making their tournaments bigger, the World Cup, extengind the World Club Cup, Nations League. All whilst trying to compete with the domestic leagues, domestic cup comps etc.

Klopp warned of this a while ago that something is going to give. Players with less time between games and more/longer international comps in between seasons. No wonder the amount of injuries has increased.

posted on 20/6/24

I'm not a fan of 3 teams going through, feel like the stakes are so low in the first 2 games now

posted on 20/6/24

I think 24 is enough. Taking it to 32 means over half of UEFA's teams would qualify!

I don't mind that some of the third placed teams can also go through as this means there should be no real dead rubber matches at all.

comment by Busby (U19985)

posted on 20/6/24

comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 27 minutes ago
UEFA keep extending their tournaments, the CL, Europa, intro of Europa League and now possibly the Euro's. Then you've got FIFA making their tournaments bigger, the World Cup, extengind the World Club Cup, Nations League. All whilst trying to compete with the domestic leagues, domestic cup comps etc.

Klopp warned of this a while ago that something is going to give. Players with less time between games and more/longer international comps in between seasons. No wonder the amount of injuries has increased.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking player fatigue out of the equation, it's just less exciting.

posted on 20/6/24

comment by Diafol Coch 77 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 (U2462)
posted 2 minutes ago
I think 24 is enough. Taking it to 32 means over half of UEFA's teams would qualify!

I don't mind that some of the third placed teams can also go through as this means there should be no real dead rubber matches at all.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is it bad that 60% of European national teams qualify for the European Championships? It may make qualification a bit more of a nonsense (someone has already addressed this above).

posted on 20/6/24

comment by Christopher (U20930)
posted 11 minutes ago
I'm not a fan of 3 teams going through, feel like the stakes are so low in the first 2 games now
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm in 2 minds about this.
I would argue the knockout stages are the real part of the tournament and the groups just precursors. As such I don't think it is a bad thing if they mean the "best" teams can bed into a tournament and find form while not having real jeopardy to put pressure on. The rugby world cup group stages were a bit of a nonsense with big teams smashing minnows, but the knockouts produced some of the best games ever.

Spain-Italy has been described as a dead-rubber, but that may produce a better game than if it was 2 through and both teams saw not losing as the priority over winning. Now they may both play with less restriction knowing even in defeat they will probably progress. Also, no matter what the result, there will still be at least one winner takes all game on the last matchday in that group.

posted on 20/6/24

comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 (U2462)
posted 2 minutes ago
I think 24 is enough. Taking it to 32 means over half of UEFA's teams would qualify!

I don't mind that some of the third placed teams can also go through as this means there should be no real dead rubber matches at all.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is it bad that 60% of European national teams qualify for the European Championships? It may make qualification a bit more of a nonsense (someone has already addressed this above).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would benefit my country (the way things are going need all the help we can get!) but I think it would cheapen qualification a bit.

posted on 20/6/24

I think it would cheapen qualification a bit.
=====
I agree with the poster above who says just streamline qualification - probably just base it all on Nations League.

posted on 20/6/24

comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 27 minutes ago
UEFA keep extending their tournaments, the CL, Europa, intro of Europa League and now possibly the Euro's. Then you've got FIFA making their tournaments bigger, the World Cup, extengind the World Club Cup, Nations League. All whilst trying to compete with the domestic leagues, domestic cup comps etc.

Klopp warned of this a while ago that something is going to give. Players with less time between games and more/longer international comps in between seasons. No wonder the amount of injuries has increased.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking player fatigue out of the equation, it's just less exciting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I do think it'll reach a saturation point in both interest and from a player welfare perspective. Each governing entitiy is trying to exploit its piece of the revenue stream as much as possible. UEFA with the Euro's has probably calculated the decline in interest in England, for example, with an increase in interest in places like Scotland, Georgia and other countries who wouldn't usually qualify.

posted on 20/6/24

UEFA with the Euro's has probably calculated the decline in interest in England,
========
Is there?????

posted on 20/6/24

11.6m watched Englands Euro 2020 opener, 15m watched on Sunday by all accounts.

posted on 20/6/24

I take the point about player fatigue but a group stage of 24 is an abomination in terms of creating an exciting competition. Moving to 32 teams would generate one extra match, but perhaps that could be offset by streamlining the qualification rounds (added to which national teams could rest more players because qualification would be easier). Personally, I don't mind having traditionally weaker teams in the competition: it's interesting to get to see some of these middle-ranked sides that don't have much chance to qualify for a 16-team tournament but have a fair number of talented players. I struggle to see why anyone would resent having more Georgias and Albanias in the competition.

On the other hand, the biennial World Cup proposal can fuсk right off.

comment by Busby (U19985)

posted on 20/6/24

"UEFA with the Euro's has probably calculated the decline in interest in England, for example, with an increase in interest in places like Scotland, Georgia and other countries who wouldn't usually qualify."

Fair point.

posted on 20/6/24

comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 2 minutes ago
UEFA with the Euro's has probably calculated the decline in interest in England,
========
Is there?????
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Busby suggested extending the tournament makes it less exciting. For a fan of England I agree, we'd be less interested or excited about a group game between two of the smaller nations. However for UEFA its bums on seats and exciting for nations who don't usually qualify so evens out.

posted on 20/6/24

Oh.

posted on 20/6/24

comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 10 seconds ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 2 minutes ago
UEFA with the Euro's has probably calculated the decline in interest in England,
========
Is there?????
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Busby suggested extending the tournament makes it less exciting. For a fan of England I agree, we'd be less interested or excited about a group game between two of the smaller nations. However for UEFA its bums on seats and exciting for nations who don't usually qualify so evens out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I suspect it's simpler than this and just about the total product and market. More matches + more countries involved = more revenue. I doubt that revenue from the English market is reduced by increasing the size of the tournament, even if our fans think they prefer fewer teams and don't tune into all the games.

posted on 20/6/24

It wouldn't surprise me at all if we ended up with a 64 nation world cup played over 2 or even 4 continents. 8 games a day from 6am to 4am

posted on 20/6/24

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 10 seconds ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 2 minutes ago
UEFA with the Euro's has probably calculated the decline in interest in England,
========
Is there?????
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Busby suggested extending the tournament makes it less exciting. For a fan of England I agree, we'd be less interested or excited about a group game between two of the smaller nations. However for UEFA its bums on seats and exciting for nations who don't usually qualify so evens out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I suspect it's simpler than this and just about the total product and market. More matches + more countries involved = more revenue. I doubt that revenue from the English market is reduced by increasing the size of the tournament, even if our fans think they prefer fewer teams and don't tune into all the games.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree. It's the same for all of them, FIFA and their comps and the domestic leagues. Exploit the market or revenue stream too much and something's got to give. I think it'll be the goodwill of clubs releasing players for increasingly long international comps in between seasons.

comment by Pun (U21588)

posted on 20/6/24

comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 6 minutes ago
It wouldn't surprise me at all if we ended up with a 64 nation world cup played over 2 or even 4 continents. 8 games a day from 6am to 4am
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This will happen 100%

posted on 20/6/24

comment by Pun (U21588)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 6 minutes ago
It wouldn't surprise me at all if we ended up with a 64 nation world cup played over 2 or even 4 continents. 8 games a day from 6am to 4am
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This will happen 100%
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The choice between watching Venezuela versus DR Congo in the 2am or going to bed to get up to watch Uzbekistan versus Panama at 6am will be a difficult one.

Page 1 of 2

Sign in if you want to comment