ShawfieldAggro Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 I'm not sure exactly what point you're trying to make here, but it's not correct to say that the very top level sides like Spain, Italy, Germany etc have an better "fall-back" opportunity if they fail to qualify. In fact, an elite side who fail to qualify automatically will have a reduced chance of qualifying via the "Nations Cup play-off" than they would if they finished 3rd in the group and took part in "normal" play-offs. Instead of having a tie against someone like Slovenia or Estonia, they would end up facing off against three other "elite" sides for just one qualifying spot. That would only be true if three other nations from an elite division of 16 failed to make it through the qualifyng series surely...based on the info provided so far. With 20 spots available, its hardly likely, is it??? Unless the info is incorrect, and Uefa opt for a larger top tier of 24, which needless to say offers at least 4 sides who won't automatically qualify. Less fannying about also, if they are set on integrating the playoffs into the final set-up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShawfieldAggro Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 Wrong in so many ways, both teams were humped by top sides Spain etc, id go for a 2-0 win for TahitiNew Zealand are also shite btw, very very shite Given they've never even come close to playing each other, so what exactly are you basing it on? San Marino haven't played Spain recently, or any of the sides who pumped Tahiti. Plus, you're arguing that Tahiti would easily beat San Marino, then say how shite New Zealand are. So if they're that shite, what does it make Tahiti, given that New Zealand regularly dominate their continent?That would be the New Zealand who.emerged as the only unbeaten country at the last World Cup, then...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarraJag Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 Given they've never even come close to playing each other, so what exactly are you basing it on? San Marino haven't played Spain recently, or any of the sides who pumped Tahiti. Plus, you're arguing that Tahiti would easily beat San Marino, then say how shite New Zealand are. So if they're that shite, what does it make Tahiti, given that New Zealand regularly dominate their continent? They are all shite, and if Tahiti beating San Marino 2-0 is easy then I dont know where youre going with this, i never suggested that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarraJag Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 That would be the New Zealand who.emerged as the only unbeaten country at the last World Cup, then...... And New who lost to the mighty New Caledonia, they are brilliant aye? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarraJag Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 All I suggested was that it would be shite having San marino at the Euros as Spain beat Tahiti 10-0, Tahiti are ahead of San Marino in the rankings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShawfieldAggro Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 The proposed format won't have a berth awaiting San Marino just for the sake of it. Still unsure of how the format will go, but of however many nations make up the bottom pile, the side who gets through would have to beat every other side they come up against. For a lower ranking nation, i'd say it'd more likely be as i said earlier...a Georgia or Belarus or Lithuania qualifying from it, the main aim of the process would seem to be giving teams a level akin to domestic league football whilst running alongside the two majors. Fwiw, i'd back San Marino to win by the odd goal v Tahiti. Given the most Sammarinese are at least semi-professional with exerience of a decent level of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarraJag Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 The proposed format won't have a berth awaiting San Marino just for the sake of it. Still unsure of how the format will go, but of however many nations make up the bottom pile, the side who gets through would have to beat every other side they come up against. For a lower ranking nation, i'd say it'd more likely be as i said earlier...a Georgia or Belarus or Lithuania qualifying from it, the main aim of the process would seem to be giving teams a level akin to domestic league football whilst running alongside the two majors. Fwiw, i'd back San Marino to win by the odd goal v Tahiti. Given the most Sammarinese are at least semi-professional with exerience of a decent level of the game. The tahitian are mostly semi-pro as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 San Marino would have pretty much the same chance of qualifying for the Euros as they do now - ie none. The final spot would be for a side from the "bottom 16 nations", which currently contains teams like Lithuania, Cyprus, Macedonia and Georgia. For San Marino to qualify they'd have to finish top of a group which might look something like Northern Ireland, Azerbaijan, Liechtenstein, San Marino. They would then have to win two knockout matches against sides like Lithuania and Moldova. They have never won a competitive match, and regularly lose heavily to even the Pot 5 sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 That would only be true if three other nations from an elite division of 16 failed to make it through the qualifyng series surely...based on the info provided so far. With 20 spots available, its hardly likely, is it??? Unless the info is incorrect, and Uefa opt for a larger top tier of 24, which needless to say offers at least 4 sides who won't automatically qualify. Less fannying about also, if they are set on integrating the playoffs into the final set-up. It's very rare that all of the sides from the top 2 pots finish in the qualifying positions in the table. Looking back over the last few campaigns, here are how many of the sides from Pots 1 and 2 have finished in the top 2 positions of their group. Euro 2000 - 13/18 WC 2002 - 14/18 Euro 2004 - 14/20 WC 2006 - 11/16 Euro 2008 - 13/14 WC 2010 - 9/18 Euro 2012 - 14/18 WC 2014 - 12/18 So the chances are you're going to end up with more than just one team from the "elite" group scrambling around in those play-offs trying to find a spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShawfieldAggro Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 These backdoor entries (giggitty) are the only downside, from what i can make of it. The formats about as close as you'll get to a 'domestic' level of football running in tandem with the qualifying tourneys, but would still seem.a little pointless having teams like San Marino in the same sub-division as Northern Ireland or Lithuania. If its three tiers of 16, going down the way, then having SMR playing the likes of Leichtenstein Andorra Gibraltar Malta and the Faroes in a bottom tier of 6 with a promotion spot would benefit them more, as i dont envisage the proposed layout having that big an impact on the teams usually selected for friendlies. For example, we've only ever played A list opposition in friendlies about four times in the last decade anyway.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shotts56 Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 I still don't get it. In the League of Nations, it sounds as though it would be in our best interests to deliberately lose all of our games in the competition to work our way into the bottom division, and then win the play-offs from that bottom division to qualify for the European Championships ? Or we could try really hard in the League of Nations, come mid-table in one of the higher divisions, and not qualify for the European Champships? Eh ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FraserHFC Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 I still don't get it. In the League of Nations, it sounds as though it would be in our best interests to deliberately lose all of our games in the competition to work our way into the bottom division, and then win the play-offs from that bottom division to qualify for the European Championships ? Or we could try really hard in the League of Nations, come mid-table in one of the higher divisions, and not qualify for the European Champships? Eh ? They way I understand it is that winning your League of Nations groups enters you into a play-off (similar top finishing second in qualifying) where you then play another group winner. No doubt these will be seeded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shotts56 Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 Yes, but if we were in the bottom division (and apparently each division will comprise of three/four groups of four teams, if the media are to be believed), you would play-off against the winners of the other groups in your bottom division. So you want to lose games to get relegated to the bottom division, then start winning against the minnows there, and then you would face a fairly easy set of play-offs against the winners of the other groups in the bottom division in order to qualify for the European Championships. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bully Wee Villa Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 My brain hurts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 Here's my take on how this will work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 Yes, but if we were in the bottom division (and apparently each division will comprise of three/four groups of four teams, if the media are to be believed), you would play-off against the winners of the other groups in your bottom division. So you want to lose games to get relegated to the bottom division, then start winning against the minnows there, and then you would face a fairly easy set of play-offs against the winners of the other groups in the bottom division in order to qualify for the European Championships. You could do that, but it would also f**k up your chances of making the World Cup play-offs via the Nations League, which is supposed to be part of the plan if FIFA agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted December 4, 2014 Author Share Posted December 4, 2014 UEFA today formally approved this new competition to be known as the UEFA Nations League and joining the Confederations Cup, World Cup and European Championship as the fourth major tournament in our 4-yearly football cycle. No alterations were made to the original proposals... Personally I would have made all groups contain 4 teams, with a single 6-team group in Division 'D', and I would not have given slots at the Euros to the divisions. Here's the new arrangements illustrated: http://www.uefa.org/about-uefa/executive-committee/news/newsid=2191264.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsforlife Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Is this just more shit to get in the way of the proper football? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted December 5, 2014 Author Share Posted December 5, 2014 Harsh. It's replacing friendlies, not extra matches. Should be exciting for nations like ours - battling for promotion/against relegation - and the Finals fills that 'blank' June every 4yrs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsforlife Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Harsh. It's replacing friendlies, not extra matches. Should be exciting for nations like ours - battling for promotion/against relegation - and the Finals fills that 'blank' June every 4yrs. But given we don't use a large % of our friendly slots does this mean more scotland games? Meaning more messing about with the domestic football?(genuine question) The best thing for international football would be to move the qualifiers to the end of the season in non-wc/ec years. That way there is no blank summers with no football, and the domestic game gets left alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.