in terms of best World Cup/European Championships you have seen.

For quality of football,drama,entertainment and surprises it has to be one of the top 3.

Very few dull games and the likes of Turkey,Russia have added lots to the tournament which was not expected and we had deserved winners in Spain;

The good feature of this tournament was that positivity counted for most:

(1) Positive tactics and expansiveness were more evident than usual. The best team didn't always win but, even when that happened, the winning team made its luck rather than waiting for mistakes.

Contrast with the teams that stuck the more defensive, negative, counter attack stuff (eg. Greece, italy).

(2) Not much seriously negative play. Maybe I'm wrong but the sending off count seemed low and I can't recall a single match degenerating into a niggly, fighting one (although there was the usual diving, fouling etc).

Only 2 red cards (both in the 90 min for pushing a player over) which the said players accepeted.

Got to disagree with vbland about the diving, I thought, compared to other tournaments, this one was excellent in terms of non-diving. There was some, granted, but a lot less than other tournaments.

I agree that there was a lot less negativity. It wasn't my personal favourite (that was Germany 2006, but only because I was out there and felt a part of it) but it was definitely the best for proper football.

It was, however, the wettest I can remember!

quote:

Originally posted by AndyCardiff:
.

It was, however, the wettest I can remember!

I'm going on holiday (hey I do have some sort of life!) next week on the French/Swiss border so hope its dry by then.

I heard it's their rainy season

In my humble opinion, Euro 2008 is perhaps the best I have ever seen. However, plans are afoot for UEFA to well and truly mess it up for the future. In last nights evening press, there was an article stating that all 53 members have voted to expand the finals to 24 countries by 2016. All this will achieve is dilute the quality of the finals. The article went on to suggest that this was payback time for all the minnows who supported Michel Platini's election as president of European football's governing body.
Of course, Platini couldn't resist taking yet another swipe at England by announcing it was a good idea because "countries like England have the quality ( meaning chance) to take part". OUCH!

Enjoyed it muchly.
Am still in The Fatherland at the mo.
Felt a bit let down by the one-sided final mind.

quote:

Originally posted by BIGI:
In my humble opinion, Euro 2008 is perhaps the best I have ever seen. However, plans are afoot for UEFA to well and truly mess it up for the future. In last nights evening press, there was an article stating that all 53 members have voted to expand the finals to 24 countries by 2016. All this will achieve is dilute the quality of the finals. The article went on to suggest that this was payback time for all the minnows who supported Michel Platini's election as president of European football's governing body.
Of course, Platini couldn't resist taking yet another swipe at England by announcing it was a good idea because "countries like England have the quality ( meaning chance) to take part". OUCH!

Or perhaps it could be about giving smaller nations a chance of qualifying for a competition that they previously had little or no chance of qualifying for previously when it was limited to only 2 countries from each group? Personally I am looking forward to us getting one of our best ever chances of qualifying for the Euro's. I think that, at the rate our current youngsters are maturing, we will be in with an excellent shout of giving a good account of ourselves

quote:

Originally posted by Garage Joe:
Enjoyed it muchly.
Am still in The Fatherland at the mo.
Felt a bit let down by the one-sided final mind.

I can imagine there's a lot of disappointment around in Germany at the moment. I felt that Germany gave the best account they could in this tournament and some of the criticism levelled at them over here, especially from Martin O'Neill, was a little unjustified. I know the defence (especially centre-backs) was a little weak, but there were a lot of good things about the team

I think, rather like the team, a lot of people had had enough .

Not much disappointment here really. Everyone knows Spain were the best team there and the result was fair. The team did well and the Germans put a positive spin on coming second ("Vice champions") rather than a negative one (beaten finalist or runner up).

The team got a good reception in Berlin and the press put a positive spin on it - a young team with a good future.

Bu things move on fast in football. There's already been a debrief conference (info on the DFB site) in which, for example) Löw made it clear yesterday that Lehmann won't be picked again. The new regime at Bayern is getting a lot of media coverage. The women (who are world champions) are getting ready for the Olympics etc......

It will be interesting to see how Klinsmann gets on as coach of Bayern. Rightly or wrongly, I have heard that Low was the tactical brains behind the German 2006 good performance in the World Cup (I may be wrong here, please corect me if I am). So it will be interesting to see how Klinsmann now adapts to his first club coaching role.

I wish him luck, but I hope HSV win the Bundesliga!!!

Löw picked the 2006 team and decided how it played. Klinsi had a leader and change enabler role. This was at least as important in German football at the time - in getting rid of some out of date systems, political factions etc. A famous "fly on the wall" film "Sommermärchen" revealed this (although Klinsi was always open about how far he relied on Löw).

Löw's subsequent success - and he's hugely popular here - has meant that history has been somewhat unkind to Klinsi, downgrading his role a bit. Most people weren't that bothered when he left.

Nonetheless, Klinsi has never managed a team in the sense that it's understood at club level in most countries - picking the team and setting tactics etc. That means that it was probably unrealistic to expect he'd walk into a "top" job anywhere other than Bayern.

It's also worth noting of course that Germany - like many European nations would notdream of having a single "manager" like the UK teams do.

As well as Löw, Klinsmann also had a general manager (Bierhoff), a goalkeeping coach (Kopke I think) and a technical /scout lead (Sammer).

They also have an involved, powerful President (Zwanziger) and any number of influential elder statesmen (notably Beckenbauer).

Just as Flick seamlessly took over when Löw got banned and Bierhoff (and probably Zwanzigfer too) had to work very hard to steady the ship.

The Euros are always a more enjoyable watch than the World Cup. They don't go on for as long, (even as a football fan I get a bit footballed out by the World Cup), there's more competition as the teams are generally pretty well matched and there are less dead rubbers or matches between total no-hopers. Ecuador Vs Trinidad and Tobago or Ukraine Vs Saudi Arabia isn't an enticing prospect for the neutral. That's not to say they shouldn't be in the competition, of course they should, it's just that I find it hard to get enthusiastic about them. The Euros tends to have fewer of these kind of fixtures. Plus for some reason the football always seems to be more attacking and exciting in the Euros - nnot sure why but that's the way it seems.

Indeed. It's been noticable here that many people were almost unable to get the word "football" out of their mouthes this week. Everyone had had enough .

The format made sure that there was a match of high interest right from the off. In the first two group games it was a "must win" or a clash of two big guns. In the last, each of the four groups had a "win or bust" match up.

This 16 team format is almost ideal in terms of excitement and interest, and suited to the depth of European football. But money talks I guess.

Now it's been suggested and the calculators plugged in by the accountants, it's only a matter of time before the amount of teams are increased.

It still won't stop the same teams being in the semis though

quote:

Originally posted by Husker:
The Euros are always a more enjoyable watch than the World Cup. They don't go on for as long, (even as a football fan I get a bit footballed out by the World Cup), there's more competition as the teams are generally pretty well matched and there are less dead rubbers or matches between total no-hopers. Ecuador Vs Trinidad and Tobago or Ukraine Vs Saudi Arabia
isn't an enticing prospect for the neutral. That's not to say they shouldn't be in the competition, of course they should, it's just that I find it hard to get enthusiastic about them. The Euros tends to have fewer of these kind of fixtures. Plus for some reason the football always seems to be more attacking and exciting in the Euros - nnot sure why but that's the way it seems.

________________________________________________

I agree entirely. But as I posted earlier,the decision to increase the number of teams in the finals to 24, in 2016, will only serve to dilute the quality of the finals.

With 24 teams we might actually have a chance at qualifying.

We could also try playing Lampard up front as he seems more capable of scoring than any of the strikers we've got.

quote:

Originally posted by BIGI:

quote:

Originally posted by Husker:
The Euros are always a more enjoyable watch than the World Cup. They don't go on for as long, (even as a football fan I get a bit footballed out by the World Cup), there's more competition as the teams are generally pretty well matched and there are less dead rubbers or matches between total no-hopers. Ecuador Vs Trinidad and Tobago or Ukraine Vs Saudi Arabia
isn't an enticing prospect for the neutral. That's not to say they shouldn't be in the competition, of course they should, it's just that I find it hard to get enthusiastic about them. The Euros tends to have fewer of these kind of fixtures. Plus for some reason the football always seems to be more attacking and exciting in the Euros - nnot sure why but that's the way it seems.

________________________________________________

I agree entirely. But as I posted earlier,the decision to increase the number of teams in the finals to 24, in 2016, will only serve to dilute the quality of the finals.

I'm not sure it will. There were some good sides tbhat finished just outside the qualifying positions. As long as it's left at 24 teams, I see no problem

________________________________________________

I agree entirely. But as I posted earlier,the decision to increase the number of teams in the finals to 24, in 2016, will only serve to dilute the quality of the finals.[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure it will. There were some good sides tbhat finished just outside the qualifying positions. As long as it's left at 24 teams, I see no problem[/QUOTE]
______________________________________________

I would always advocate quality over quantity.
If any of the smaller nations reach the finals in the present format, then the've earned the right to be there. I don't see how extending the finals to 24 teams changes or improves anything.

Definitely the best football on t.v. since Mexico '86.

quote:

Originally posted by BIGI:
________________________________________________

I agree entirely. But as I posted earlier,the decision to increase the number of teams in the finals to 24, in 2016, will only serve to dilute the quality of the finals.

I'm not sure it will. There were some good sides tbhat finished just outside the qualifying positions. As long as it's left at 24 teams, I see no problem[/QUOTE]
______________________________________________

I would always advocate quality over quantity.
If any of the smaller nations reach the finals in the present format, then the've earned the right to be there. I don't see how extending the finals to 24 teams changes or improves anything.[/QUOTE]
I think Euro 2008 vindicated this but, personally, I think 24 teams could make it more interesting and not dilute the quality. But then, that's just my opinion.

How about this then? Have an FA Cup style European Championships? With the possibility of some real giant killing. "See Italy quake as they take on their neighbours San Marino in a real derby game"; "Be amazed as England take on a potential banana skin as they travel to a packed and hostile Ninian Park"; "Watch the dutch players faces turn bright orange as they come off second best v Luxembourg in the Benelux derby."

Now that would throw the cat amongst the pigeons

quote:

Originally posted by AndyCardiff:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by BIGI:
________________________________________________


How about this then? Have an FA Cup style European Championships? With the possibility of some real giant killing. "See Italy quake as they take on their neighbours San Marino in a real derby game"; "Be amazed as England take on a potential banana skin as they travel to a packed and hostile Ninian Park"; "Watch the dutch players faces turn bright orange as they come off second best v Luxembourg in the Benelux derby."

Now that would throw the cat amongst the pigeons

________________________________________________

Possibly, but not for me. I'm very happy with the present format. But judging by your 'Ninian Park' reference, are we now debating fantasy football?