Andorra are up there with Liechtenstein in terms of their ability to overcome their underdog status and be such cynical scumbags that you're still glad when they lose late on against (relatively) big-time opponents.
Andorra are up there with Liechtenstein in terms of their ability to overcome their underdog status and be such cynical scumbags that you're still glad when they lose late on against (relatively) big-time opponents.
The way they've spread all these ganes across the week has been an excellent idea by whoever.
Yeah I don't get the complaints about it, a lot of people in the media are saying how managers won't be happy with it, as if the will of a handful of coaches desperate for an excuse to justify poor performances should take priority over hundreds of thousands of fans getting a wider variety of matches to watch. Not that it's a great example but under the previous setup I'd never have watched Andorra vs Wales last night, nor had the opportunity to watch Norway vs Italy, Czech Republic vs Holland etc.
The reason international breaks have been so boring is because all the matches have been on 2 nights and the rest of the week is sparse. This has created loads more buzz.
nah load of bollocks.
Having international games on Thursday and Monday nights is shit for fans who attend them.
I would value their opinion and feel over someone randomly getting to watch a game on the tv.
It's no worse than the previous Friday/Tuesday setup.Originally Posted by son_of_foley
Course it is. Going to a game on Friday night is massively different to Thursdays. NO WORK THE NEXT DAY.
9-5 Monday to Friday is dying. Anyway, there's just as much chance your game lands on a weekend or friday night anyway but this reignites interest in international football between tournaments.
In what way? Because Simon watched Norway vs Italy?
There's plenty of interest in international football across Europe and has been for a while. A lot of countries still value their international team over their league
The point is that under the old regime if you followed your national side, you couldn't watch any other games apart from early kick off Eastern European matches. Now you can watch games on three different nights if you choose to, with your pick of the best of Europe's action on the nights that your own country aren't playing. I try to keep up with Ireland's games but they have usually clashed with England games in the past, now I will often be able to watch both. I can't remember the last time I watched a Wales game prior to last night, and I quite enjoyed it.
The major complaint from fans about international weeks is that over the space of two weeks you get two (generally uninteresting) games where you would usually have a Premier League weekend and either European or cup football. The new setup doesn't solve the issue - the qualifiers are often tedious, now moreso than ever thanks to the expanded tournament - but there's now a wider variety of games and you can take your pick of the best ones.
Last edited by Simon; September 10th, 2014 at 7:25 AM.
I disagree, international qualifiers have been dull for a while and I think these measures are a good start to inject some verve into them.
Increased coverage and viewership for each match, greater chance of qualifying should peak interest and it allows viewers to have a broader interest of teams. I agree that match going supporters are the priority but I don't believe they're getting the short end here.
Having the games on Thursday has no impact on chance of qualifying though.
Anyone travelling to another country for a game is taking at least two days off work anyway with the old midweek games set-up.
Sometimes you need more time off after a suspicious package is found at Luton airport.
You've lost it. No one said that.
Is it?
It's a Victorian principle and people want flexibility which is afforded by technology and demanded by the public from retail, service industry, medical proffessionals etc.
And some people want evenings and weekends off. It's not dying at all.
So you agree that other measures could have the same impact in improving international Football? I consider the qualifying change and matchday change seperate it's you who lumped them together
Most jobs are shift work these days tbf.
Definitely they do. You worked weekends and probably hated it but you still did it? 1/3 of the workforce works outside the traditional Monday-Friday 9-5 framework and it's a trend that's only going to continue growing. Core business hours just aren't 9-5 anymore and most businesses get increased output if they remove themselves from it. It's dying.
I don't think these changes are the complete answer, no. I think they've been great in adding interest and extending the games to a wider audience in this gameweek though and I expect that to prove the case in the rest of them. The day they play on has no bearing on whether a team qualifies or not though unless you're getting onto something to do with increased injuries or something.
I'm not arguing it does. My point was international football was in great health in Europe even if the English fans were bored of their team. I don't think it needed a shot in the arm. Of the measures put in I don't think it actually benefits the supporters of individual countries but instead further monetizes international football for the benefit of UEFA to make a power move with FIFA. I don't think international football should really be that considered about global tv audiences and I don't think there's anything wrong with it being primarily focused on partisan support rather than people who may or may not fancy dipping in and out of a random game on a thursday night. I don't see a problem with Fri/Sat then Tues/Wed for an international weekend.
Wasn't it done for the Clubs so that they get their players back a few days earlier? I don't think it makes any difference to most supporters.
On no level was this done to benefit clubs. It's for money and tv audience.
I'm pretty sure you're completely wrong on that. I remember all the stories when the change was made and they all focussed on how it was a direct result of the pressure from the big clubs who used to get their players back knackered on a Thursday ahead of a Saturday afternoon Premier League match.
I'm sure it is a happy by-product that they get to take in more TV money but it was the Clubs who pushed for the change.
Last edited by Beefy; September 11th, 2014 at 5:19 AM.
Why is that a bad thing? Not the money bit obviously, but why is it bad that they are doing it to get more people watching games on TV...surely making it easier for football fans to watch more football is a good thing?
As I mentioned before, one of the major complaints about international week is that you have two weeks where the usual jam-packed schedule is replaced by two games that you probably watch mainly out of duty, and the rest of the time there's nothing on. Now you can watch your own country's games, plus the pick of the rest. I'm not convinced the argument about it putting out live supporters really stands up for the reasons already mentioned, and fans should take priority over the clubs whatever their complaints are.
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/f...d-9148718.html
You need to look at the sub-text, sof. UEFA do nothing that isn't in the direct interests of the six or seven biggest Clubs in Europe. FFP, four teams in the Champions League, 'The Week of Football'. It's all done for the benefit of the same people.
I dont think there's been a change in the fifa rules about the length of preparation time a national team can call someone up for. Is there? Still 4 days before if same continent so the clubs will see little difference in return date no matter what Roy Hodgson may be suggesting.
UEFA are as self-serving as they need to be. They support the Champions League not the member clubs. They are also looking to monetize their international football hence the host change for 2020 and the idea of inviting members of other confederations in to future tournaments.
They support the Champions League because they're petrified of the top clubs doing a break-away. The move to three/four clubs was a reaction to AC Milan missing out twice in a row.
In terms of watching the games on tv, it's great. International weeks tend to drag when all the games are on the same day. In terms of going to the matches, it's awful. A Scotland home game on a Saturday afternoon was a great day out. The atmosphere will be buzzing. Now I'll have to take time off work just to get to the match on time and the atmosphere won't nearly be as good.
This is the worst group of U21s we've had in forever. Croatia are miles better.
Gibraltar are the worst team I have ever seen.
Yeah they would get murdered by San Marino...the defending for the Hoolahan goal and McClean's second were hilarious. Not to mention the own goal.
The own goal was sensational. Danny Baker will be preparing a new Own Goals & Gaffs DVD on the back of that alone.
At least they try though. They got players forward and tried to play football. Could have scored from a couple of corners too. They're absolutely hopeless but fair play to them. They have a game of football and lose 7-0. San Marino keep ten men behind the ball for 90 minutes and lose 5-0 and are no doubt delighted by it.
Fuck San Marino. They annoy me.
I still think teams like San Marino and Gibraltar should pre qualify against each other, what is the point of them getting stuffed 5,6,7 every time they play?
Another good performance. Finishing was dire though absolutely dire.
Over time they improve. Possibly only marginally, but they do improve. It's only 20 years or so ago that Turkey got fucked 8-0 by England. I know it's slightly different in that Gibraltar and San Marino's populations make growth limited but they're as entitled to be there as anyone else. You're allowed a squad of 23 to cover a maximum of two games in any window, if the managers are so upset about these pointless games cramming the schedule why don't they play the reserves to keep the first teamers fresh?
I think they would improve more by playing competitive games. I know what you mean about Turkey but their non-competitiveness was probably more to do with inferior coaching than innate inability to compete. San Marino/Andorra etc are never going to get anywhere near qualifying.
UEFA could maybe loosen the seeding a bit to give these tiny countries a chance to play each other.
Money. The games against England, germany etc etc bring a lot of money into these nations so that they can fund their football in terms of league structures and youth football. A game against a bigger nation could fund travel costs etc for their youth teams for the next few years.
Its not important that they dont qualify or get close. They are nations and they have every right to play games as much as any other nation. Football is supposed to be for everybody.
San Marino haven't improved. The likes of the Faroe Islands definitely have but San Marino are as negative and terrible as they ever were.
They never will improve! They have a population of 30k and anyone who ever is good enough will probably end up playing for Italy.
They still have a right to play as much as any else though.
The Faroes have improved and they're no bigger.
Fuck San Marino.
Faroes won their first ever match. Only way was down from there...
Fucksake Germany. We're going to have to win the group now.
I don't agree that they should pre qualify. They have as much right to play as anyone,
Why would they have a right to go straight into the main group stages? They don't have a right to qualify for the tournament. Do you think that all English teams should go into FA Cup first round?
Anyway, the new UEFA Nations League will allow the minnows to play some teams of a similar size so that will probably help them.
No talk about tonight's game, England played ok but it was pretty dull. Why were Estonia so defensive when 1-0 down?
Pointless pair of fixtures, nothing to be learned.
Well why not? The way it is set up now is fine, each group gets a minnow, sometimes they will pull a shock off. Its not their fault their nation is tiny. Putting them into qualifiers would kill everything the nation does football wise as the money dries up. I think jibbing off the prospect of some youths from Lichtenstein getting some decent facilities so that England dont have to bother with a "meaningless" game to be a bit shit really.
Then again I have just read "Outcasts - The Lands that FIFA Forgot" so am feeling a bit touchy about it right now. Football should be for everyone regardless of status and everyone should get the same opportunity.
It clearly isn't fine.
The product is diluted and uncompetitive, it needs something to give it some oomph.
Why isnt it? What difference does it make to anybody?
Its qualifiers. They aint supposed to be a spectacle.
I love watching England against whoever but these past two fixtures have tested my patience. I've seen one or two people criticise England's performances which is just mental.
So Estonia would have to pre-qualify as well?
How exactly would you orgnaise it? When would the other teams play their games? What would England be doing during that period as you also think friendlies are pointless right?
Talking about the product being diluted etc thats the English FA product. A team ranked 70th in the World beat the #1 team in the world. To put that into perspective Estonia are 81st in the world.
I don't know the solution and I don't claim to. The idea that elite sport is merely an excuse to highlight how socially inclusive Europe is and shouldn't be a spectacle, as MMH puts it, doesn't sit right with me. There's got to be a better way than this.
EDIT: Friendlies? pointless. It staggers me that we make time for them in the middle of the season, it does no good to anyone.
Last edited by Alex; October 13th, 2014 at 4:26 AM.
The difference it makes is that if these utterly pointless games continue then the appetite will die and these countries won't get as big a slice of the pie. It's a loose connection but look at horse racing, they've been serving up an uncompetitive product where the best competitors avoid each other that nobody questioned for years and now the sport might as well be dead aside from 4 days a year. The prize money is dwindling and the attendances and viewing figures are way down.
I'm not claiming you know the solution I'm asking what the proposal is.
You said the last two games were pointless so are we saying anyone in pot 5 and 6 shouldn't be in the draw without coming though pre-qualifiers. Or is it 4, 5 and 6.
It's good to know which teams are pointless.
The idea of international football becoming a closed club doesn't sit right with a lot of other people either. Next we'll be offering wildcards for the big countries who miss out on qualifying to make sure we maximise tv audiences
So to save smaller countries from the risk of missing out on big money matches against top sides thanks to dwindling crowds, you'll just remove the possibility of getting big money at all. Alright then.
Something Milan's owner raised just last week, insisting 'top' clubs who aren't good enough to qualify for the CL should be included anyway. Pathetic.
Simon,
They'll of course get solidarity payments from the masters table. Maybe down the line if they have a really good player we can have a big money IPL style draft for them to play for the real countries. Allen Stanford could maybe even put a team in the next world cup rather than any of that bosnia bollocks.
I don't want it to be a closed club at all. Did you watch the last 2 games? I can't believe you sat and watched them and thought 'yeah this is a great product, I can't wait for more of this, it really did a good service to the footballing progress of Estonia and San Marino'.
I'm not saying exclude them at all, I can't offer a viable solution and I don't know if there even is one. I've just ordered MMH's book, I hope it presents a compelling argument but I'm not sure it'll justify such an uncompetitive product being considered acceptable.
Bosnia can stay, I like them. Keep Armenia and Iceland too.
I don't think about football in terms of a product too much. It's probably part of the reason why the new schedule doesn't do much for me. I have an emotional attachment to my countries team and am invested in their games. I'll watch other games if they are on but I'm never overly fussed. If England were playing more expansive football I think the 'product' would seem better. Are any of the games in the group going to do much? Yet if it was a harder group and they failed to qualify what would happen then?
These ideas of minnow leagues could quickly become the champions league of international football or worse become another oceania with the deck stacked further against those teams qualifying to provide more of a safety net for the strong teams to get in.
I thought you were happy for the fixture spread and increase in teams at the Euros though? Surely smaller groups but more teams qualifying means an even staler qualifying process.
The fixture spread I think is a great idea and will probably result in more money for everyone, I'm not sure I've ever commented on the increased Euros. It has nothing to do with the football England play, and they've been playing well for a while now. It really doesn't matter how they play against San Marino who put 11 men in their box from the getgo.
You're assuming I'm saying the countries are pointless, not at all, it's the fixtures that are doing nothing for anyone. Albania just beat Portugal, a great result but half of a good team has gone to play for Switzerland anyway to give themselves a chance to compete.
We obviously look at it from different angles. I think it's essential for football to be entertaining or audiences won't care. I'll keep track of Group I which is the best group by a long way and just sit shaking my head everytime I watch Andorra score a 5-0 loss that funds a rubbish all weather pitch no one wants to play on and hope someone has a good idea to add some entertainment.
Wales needed a last minute goal to beat Andorra, presumably Wales are close to the breadline when it comes to relegating smaller nations to a B league?
No they didn't.
Nine minutes from time, whatever. They scraped past Andorra. So where does that leave them? Where do you draw the arbitrary line? As far as I can tell only Gibraltar are completely out of their depth - San Marino are a joyless bunch of cynical cunts (as are Andorra) and are a crap team, but they're not so far out of their depth as to make it laughable that they're allowed to play.
They've scored 1 goal in their last 30 qualifying games. They're utterly pointless as a football team, and just set up to have 10 men behind the ball at all times. I know Gibraltar are a joke, but they were at least trying to get forward against Ireland.
Sof can't see the middle ground but at least he's making some points. You've made 2 posts taking a wild swing at a generalised comment and making a huge leap from what I'm saying. You've made another post to an incomparable competition where you've stated uncompetitive teams shouldn't be allowed to compete but in the Euro qualifying they can take their piece of the pie as long as they turn up, or am I making one of those leaps there?
Wales didn't scrape past Andorra. The exciting moment of the game was Andorra scoring, they sat back and got dominated for the entire game on a pitch which was spitting marbles into the face of players and the ball couldn't be passed along. Coleman made a number of different changes to try and react to that before basically deciding on 7 midfielders on the edge of Andorra's box because it was impossible to pass the ball on the way to Andorra's 45th consecutive defeat. Did anyone leave that game proud of our socially inclusive attitude and confident that the Andorra's share of the pot will see a big improvement in the next campaign?
The Champions League and the Euro Qualifiers are not the same thing. If you really want to make that comparison, then the correct parallel is that Milan ARE allowed automatically into the Champions League Qualifiers ie. the Italian league system - they didn't qualify, so they shouldn't be allowed in.
No one's arguing that these small nations should be allowed into the tournament proper automatically, just that they have the right to compete on an even footing with everyone else at the start of qualifying.
For what it's worth, I think that for the most part these games ARE a waste of time. Of course they are. I just don't think there's a better solution - splitting qualification into two tiers will only set these teams back further, and there are better ways around the problem of overplaying players, such as managers simply utilising their 23-man squad to better effect by playing squad players against weaker nations - and the justifications for changing it don't stack up.
Wales did scrape past Andorra. Regardless of how you view Andorra's tactics - and I said at the time that I HATE the way Andorra play, going so far as to say that it's incredible how such huge underdogs can still be so utterly unlikeable, and that I was glad they got beaten so heart-breakingly - they came within nine minutes of getting a point, defended well and Wales needed a screamer from Bale to get them the win. By any definition that is scraping a victory.
The issue of whether or not Andorra's opportunity to play bigger opposition can improve their setup is separate - and just because they are not currently showing any signs of being willing to expand their style or risk heavier defeats in order to become a more competitive team that offers some kind of threat beyond just limiting the other team to five goals, doesn't mean they shouldn't be encouraged to do so.
Last edited by Simon; October 13th, 2014 at 6:08 AM.
They came within 15 minutes because there was 6 minutes added on for Andorra time wasting. They went 1-0 from a crazy penalty decision and got dominated for the rest of the game. They were playing on a road where you couldn't dribble or pass the ball. Wales won in those circumstances, it's not really up for much more analysis than that because it was pretty farcical and Wales don't deserve credit or criticism for that in my opinion.
I don't see how we get middle ground mate. We either have the members in qualifying (ie all members of uefa being treated the same) or we make some of them jump through hoops before they can play.
I just dont know what the gating factor is that's all. Is it going to be having a stadium of size X available to them (similar to entrance to the football league before). I don't think those kind of restrictions improved the non league because their income was smaller now and couldn't afford to build a new stadium etc without a generous benefactor.
My worry is when you have the pre-qualifier is when? Do we do it during the world cup? Not allowed. Do we do it after? I also think losing 2 games (or 4 if thats the suggestion) in qualifying won't change much. Which of the games in Englands group are offering a great product? Genuinely I can't see many.
It feels more like people want boring teams kicked out? We can't mandate footballing style though can we without fundamental changes to the games rules. What's to say Latvia or Northern Ireland won't become the new Andorra and just lose 45 games in the Tier 1 qualifiers after getting through Tier 2. I fundamentally disagree that excluding smaller/less capable sides and making them play against each other will improve them. I think they will play within themselves at a lower level.
This is football elitism
Of course they shouldn't have pre qualifiers. What would qualify someone for a pre qualifier the stupid FIFA rankings or bozos at Uefa
The more shit teams the better.
Exactly. Let's cull San Marino for the good of the game and as an example to the rest. Fuck them.
Why don't we just do away with the qualifying and have a massive tournament every 4 years. Fuck off. Don't be stupid. They have as much right to play as bloody England who btw are also fucking bollocls.
No they don't. If they don't want to try to win football matches then they shouldn't be allowed in the tournament. They lost the right to be considered an equal with everyone else when they took the decision to put ten men behind the ball in every single match they play.
When they stop seeing a 5-0 defeat as a great result then they could be reconsidered.
The contrast between San Marino on Thursday and Gibraltar on Sunday was incredible.
So what would you do?
Nothing. Just leave it.
I've not read this whole conversation so not sure if this is serious or not. But if it is, who is the judge of who plays attacking enough football? When we had Gary Megson we would go 1-0 up and then bring on a defender for a striker, often in the first half. I'd like to outlaw that but it is obviously unworkable as it is completely subjective.
(If you were not being serious then ignore this post and pretend it didn't happen)
Ahagshaha O'Shea. Amazing.
Brilliant point. Great result for Northern Ireland too.
I'm the judge. San Marino are gone.
Great results for both Irish teams tonight. Enjoyed the Germany game a lot.
The Ireland-Scotland games will be huge now. Looking forward to them.
It's been a bloody entertaining group so far. Four horse race.
I honestly cant remember the last entertaining England game. get rid of them too.
Estonia were down to 10 men for half the game! Also Estonia whilst not great are not on the same level as San Marino etc. They are probably in the same bracket as Georgia (who had some brilliant players back in the day and could again one day), Cyprus, Azerbaijan and the likes.
All this pre qualifying stuff doesnt take into account that a lot of the smaller nations players are not professionals either nor will the federations be swimming in money. How can they afford to play these games if there are no games against bigger nations bringing money in?
But yeah may as well kill football in these nations because some bellends in England were not entertained by the two games they saw of them in qualifying.
The book is good by the way, tails off weirdly at the end though. Worth a go for a couple of pence on Amazon or whatever.
Poland, Scotland, Brazil, Ireland in the last 16 months or so. The Ecuador game was enjoyable despite or because of the GBH going on on the field too.
Perhaps you should see someone about that memory?
Last edited by Beefy; October 14th, 2014 at 6:28 PM.
Englan v Italy at the World Cup was a pretty good game.
I'm not really in favour of separating the small nations, on the other hand I don't see how the fuck Gibraltar qualifies as a nation. Or San Marino.
Average games if that. England are terrible to watch.
What constitutes a nation for FIFA is weird and very random. They wont allow Monaco in but Gibraltar is fine even though its an Overseas territory. Yet Greenland, which is also an Overseas territory of Denmark isnt allowed in.
Gibraltar aren't recognised by FIFA only uefa
Your face is terrible to watch.
San Marino is a UN member state at least, unlike Gibraltar. I know Monaco is too but that's a weird one. A Vatican City XI would be a blast.
Oh right shit you are being serious
Lafferty showing glimpses again. Shame he doesn't do it more often because thats the same thing he showed as a much younger man that looked like he could get shit done.
Think going to Sion and Palermo and getting away from Rangers has helped him wise up. Hope it works out well at Norwich for him
Scotland bossing this so far, Ireland getting edgy with the tackles. Great game.
I still think Ireland are capable of scoring every time they get the ball and they've got a proven match winner to come on in Keane. We need an early goal in this half or I'll end up shitting myself.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote