Jump to content

Euro 2024: Not worthy of a thread


Magpie

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

I don't know if I'm just more out of touch with European football now but these seem like the weakest Spain, Germany, etc groups of players since 2000ish. 

Is that 50 year old navas or a different one? Ha. Canny midfield but rest nowt special 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

We getting a sub forum for this?

 

Today I learned Sylvinho is Albania manager with Pablo Zabaleta as one of his assistants

Link to post
Share on other sites

roberto martinez? how, just how?

he's to international football management what jermaine jenas is football presenting.

 

firstly gets one of the greatest group of european players for a long time in belgium. does nowt with them and now gets a very decent portugal squad.

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, huss9 said:

roberto martinez? how, just how?

he's to international football management what jermaine jenas is football presenting.

 

firstly gets one of the greatest group of european players for a long time in belgium. does nowt with them and now gets a very decent portugal squad.

 

These international jobs almost seem to carry a separate reputational ranking that seems completely untethered to league football. Like, does anyone think Martinez could get a high profile jobs in any of the top 4 leagues in Europe? 

 

Wouldn't shock me to see Southgate end up with something daft like the Belgium job. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Dr.Spaceman said:

Should get the squads today / tomorrow, right?

Saturday. For England anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Anderson said:

How are we favourites ahead of France for this? :lol: 


English bookies will always have us a little shorter as that many people will bet on it. :milner:

Link to post
Share on other sites

So now that we have had a couple of 24 team editions, do you prefer 16 or 24?

 

There are a few less fancied sides like Georgia and Albania involved, but still enough relatively decent sides (or certainly big name players) that have missed out which doesn't make qualification totally redundant - Sweden, Norway, Greece and even Wales would all have added something to the event.

 

There are 51 matches rather than the usual 31, so great for those, like myself, who will watch anything, but maybe not so much for those preferring quality, and the worst thing about the change is the 4 third placed teams advancing as it does mean less jeopardy in most group matches, and when you see groups containing Spain, Italy and Croatia, you realise there's actually a decent chance they will all progress anyway.

 

It won't change, and probably more likely they would try and squeeze 32 than going back to 16, but overall are you in favour of the larger tournament?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Paullow said:

So now that we have had a couple of 24 team editions, do you prefer 16 or 24?

 

There are a few less fancied sides like Georgia and Albania involved, but still enough relatively decent sides (or certainly big name players) that have missed out which doesn't make qualification totally redundant - Sweden, Norway, Greece and even Wales would all have added something to the event.

 

There are 51 matches rather than the usual 31, so great for those, like myself, who will watch anything, but maybe not so much for those preferring quality, and the worst thing about the change is the 4 third placed teams advancing as it does mean less jeopardy in most group matches, and when you see groups containing Spain, Italy and Croatia, you realise there's actually a decent chance they will all progress anyway.

 

It won't change, and probably more likely they would try and squeeze 32 than going back to 16, but overall are you in favour of the larger tournament?

 

I'm 100% in the "I'll watch anything" camp, so the more matches the better IMO :lol: 

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Paullow said:

So now that we have had a couple of 24 team editions, do you prefer 16 or 24?

 

There are a few less fancied sides like Georgia and Albania involved, but still enough relatively decent sides (or certainly big name players) that have missed out which doesn't make qualification totally redundant - Sweden, Norway, Greece and even Wales would all have added something to the event.

 

There are 51 matches rather than the usual 31, so great for those, like myself, who will watch anything, but maybe not so much for those preferring quality, and the worst thing about the change is the 4 third placed teams advancing as it does mean less jeopardy in most group matches, and when you see groups containing Spain, Italy and Croatia, you realise there's actually a decent chance they will all progress anyway.

 

It won't change, and probably more likely they would try and squeeze 32 than going back to 16, but overall are you in favour of the larger tournament?

 

 

I like having more smaller sides, but I don't like how 3 can go through from groups. I'd rather they just make it 32 if it's going to be more than 16.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...