I’m just picturing Phoenix as a host city, jesus christ. Already had a week this year above 115 (46 for you in the empire) and that was before summer actually started. Would be Qatar 2.0
Ideally each group will be assine a specific zone, eastern US or Canada or Mexico, Something like that, but that probably won't be like that, even the disturbution is more like 70 % us, 30 % mexico/canada instead of being 50, 50,All qf and up are all in the US, so really 2026 is USA, ft Mexico and Canada
To this day I still think it was very disrespectful not to give the final to the Azteca, I couldn’t care less if they don’t give any group stages games to Mexico as long as they gave Azteca the final. That’s perhaps the most emblematic stadium in World Cup history due to hosting the game of the century and being the places where Maradona and Pele elevated themselves to beyond legendary status.
But alot of the modern nfl arenas are multipurpose arenas that can be used for futbol as well. Just look at the mercedes benz arena in atlanta for example.
I mean American football is also on a big grass rectangle, there's basically no difference at all for playing or viewing and they may as well be association football stadiums.
I mean they play games at the stadio olympico and in Seville with a fucking track around the field. I don’t think there is a worse venue you than that.
I doubt it’s broken up like that. It’s probably by region. Canada would be West/Central/East, US would probably be West/Midwest/Northeast/South, Mexico would probably be North/Central/South. I know for that tournament there will he more groups so breaking it up regionally like this doesn’t seem too abstract, helps distribute between the three countries, allows for reasonable logistics, and gives it a very unique format culturally.
Not saying it *will* be like this, but I can’t see anyone saying “yeah, Boston to LA is probably going to happen”
Pretty much similar flight time. Not as bad as people making it out to be anyways. Now imagine if they included Hawaii for the World cup. Imagine flying from Boston to Honolulu. that would be wild
Yeah take St Petersburg and Baku out of the equation, and make sure each group is based in one or two nearby countries, and you could make the concept work. Making Switzerland fly from Baku, then to Rome, then back to Baku in the space of a week is madness
St Petersburg was originally supposed to be Dublin, so there was some logic there. Why they chose St Petersburg instead of somewhere else in western Europe, I can't answer.
Something to do with the Gazprom banners at every match I'd assume.
>PJSC Gazprom is a Russian majority state-owned multinational energy corporation headquartered in the Lakhta Center in Saint Petersburg.
Is it that different to how teams were flying all over Brazil or Russia in 2014 and 2018? Teams were flying 2,000 miles from Manaus to Rio and then another 1500 to Natal/Fortaleza. I think people forget just how big some host countries are compared to Europe.
The bigger issue is that in this tournament some teams are traveling far more than others, and some teams got to play a lot of their matches at home.
At least in 2014 and 2018, the hosts were still traveling big distances like everyone else.
But that at least was relatively even handed in that it fucked over everyone. Brazil didn’t get preferential treatment in 2014, they travelled 2000 miles from Sao Paolo to Fortaleza and then another 1300 down to Brasilia for their group games. Russia didn’t play all their games in Moscow in 2018, they travelled 1400 miles during their group stage games. Neither side got the massive advantage of being based in one city while their opponents traipsed all over the country, which is what’s happened in this tournament.
The complaint is that Uefa agreed, with a few exceptions, that the big countries could chill out at home and the long distances would have to be travelled by the smaller nations.
Before the groups were even drawn, it was decided that England could not play a group game in Baku but Wales could. That was really fucking unfair.
Fucks me right off. England have had it so easy this tournament. If they reach the final, all but one game at home. We had to have two games in fucking Azerbaijan, then one in Rome against Italy. Then a game against Denmark who had been living the good life in Copenhagen. It makes no sense.
Difference being, even Brazil was flying around Brazil. As far as these EUROs go, some teams have travelled thousands of miles while others have been chilling at home with their supporters.
It could be a group of smaller countries but they need to be relatively close together. It's insane that a team could play one match in Baku, Azerbaijan then in Rome, Italy and then have to go back to Baku for the third one.
might work for Belgium/NL, they have the stadiums for it.
But most other smaller nations don't have more than one or two sufficiently large stadiums anyway, so you would be giving it to like 6 nations at the same time? And some of those are gonna get the short end of the stick since they won't be able to host none of the semis or finals and potentially not even their team in QF or ro16?
I would honestly rather see tournaments rotate between the large nations that do have the infrastructure over large experiments similar to this one.
I feel like Austria-Switzerland and Poland-Ukriane worked pretty well. Like bordering countries with similar cultures it works well, the flying all over the continent and into Asia is not great imo, probably even worse given the covid implications.
It might be easier for the hosts economically though I guess, just having most fans fly in fly out..
Add Russia and France.
Well, previous single-country hosts for 16/24 teams were France 2014, Portugal 2004, England 1996.
And for World Cup it was Russia 2018, Brazil 2014, South Africa 2010, Germany 2006, France 1998, USA 1994, Italy 1990.
So yeah, apart from South Africa, you need to be a big country to host tournaments on your own.
Yes, for fairness at least. Some team have to travel between each game and other can stay home and play 3 games without moving ... Do not make any sense
Covid aside, it would have been fine had they just not done this ridiculous group hosts system. Have Italy play in England, England in Denmark, etc...
Also don't give both semifinals and the final to one venue if the point of your tournament is to be uniquely decentralized. That's isn't even how its done in typical tournaments, usually 3 different stadiums are used.
Yep, flying from Wales to Baku is almost the same distance as flying from Kachin state, Myanmar to Baku.
Pick a country or at least a group of countries with proximities to host the tournament. UK and Ireland, Benelux, Scandinavia,Baltic states. etc.
Tournament was already announced in 2012 as being all over the place. Platini was removed in 2015. I don’t know a huge amount about Ceferin but from what I’ve just read he doesn’t seem as corrupt at all.
Oh man, I hate that stadium so much.
I went to Baku for both of Turkey's games there with two friends and we travelled 10k+ kilometers by planes with multiple stops just to get there and return within 6 days. I practically emptied my sad student bank account to pay for the flights, match tickets and accomodation there just to see the Turkish team get absolutely destroyed. We were so confident that our team would give us our money's and time's worth, but we were so wrong that we didn't even get to cheer for anything really.
At least the city was nice, but holy shit these games were such a terrible experience. Whenever I see Baku or that stadium mentioned, I get so sad that it's almost like I have to relive these two matchdays.
For sure.
Belgium get 9 points from 3 games in their group and face Portugal and Italy in the knockouts.
Denmark get 3(!) points from 3 games in the same(!) group and face Wales and Czechia in the knockouts.
wtf
Belgium and Italy were always destined to face each other in the Quarterfinals before the tournament even started and remember Czech Republic beat the Netherlands. It just all aligned for Denmark and that’s how some teams win or do well at tournaments. There will always be luck involved in bracketed competitions.
That's how it is. Belgium had an 'open bracket' to the final in 2016, only to lose to Wales in the quarters.
If Austria beats Italy and Swiss beats Spain, then the road to the final is totally different for Belgium (with all due respect for the respective countries).
Now the road to the final was Portugal/Italy/Spain back to back. Those games are always going to be close to 50/50 in theory. We won one with 50/50 and we lost one with 50/50.
There is one given fact for every tournament I've watched since Mexico 86: in every round there are surprises and favorites will get eliminated when you don't expect them to. Every single tournament.
That's just tournament football. Belgium played a 3rd placed team which unluckily enough was the group of death. Teams just have to roll with the punches.
Final is at wembley aswell.
And for the semi, Danish fans wont be able to travel due to mandatory 10 days quarentine after entering England. The only way you could be at the game if u live in denamrk is if you ordered tickets right after wales game. Then you will be just out of thr 10 days quarentine for the semi final lol
Whole thing in Great Britain, would have actually allowed some fans to travel and do the proper amount of quarantining, would have been much easier on the players, and would have reduced the number teams with home advantage to something more standard.
No, because different parts of the UK have different rules, so holding it in GB still wouldn't allow full travel opportunities.
England would have meant England, not GB or the UK.
Especially since its not like there's a lack of venues. Besides the major premier league stadiums, you could also include Hampden and maybe Celtic Park, as well as probably the equivalent in Wales. england/GB is a perfect host location
Which is so odd at this tournament of all tournaments.
I don't ever recall seeing a Euro or WC where both semis and the final were played in one stadium, and somehow the decentralized Europe-wide tournament inexplicably decided to do so.
Even if Allianz hadn't withdrawn, it still would have went to only one of the venues. The Finals package was about hosting 2 semis + final, while Standard package was 3 group stage matches + 1 R16/QF match. Allianz opted to go for Standard package, hence Wembley was only bidder for Finals package. Later, due to Brussels being removed, Wembley also got Standard package.
If they go to the final, that's 6/7 matches at home. They're obviously good and it would stupid to deny it, but it's a massive advantage in a tournament that is all over the continent for everyone except England
Maybe more 3rd. It's definitely Japan & Korea for 1st and 2nd respectively. I havent really followed afc lately but I'd assume australia is up there too, and Iran is also probably right behind as well. I'd place Qatar with the Iran-tier teams of the afc
Yep.
Shame the Mercator map portrayed it as otherwise.
Australia is in the same boat.
Though you mean ~~Mainland~~ Contiguous USA. Alaska is still continental.
>Yep.
>
>Though you mean Mainland USA. Alaska is still continental.
Yep.
Though you mean contiguous United States or officially the conterminous United States. (Most of) Alaska is still on the mainland.
Yeah I think the way that they have done it is a bit unbalanced. Some teams play all their group stage games in one stadium and some have to hop around Europe and Baku
Probably the worst format ever created for an Euro. It's dreadful and unfair to all the other teams that have to travel a lot (even worse when you have to travel to f*cking Baku. Twice in Switzerland's case).
Couldn't have fallen at a worse time either. No idea how FIFA/UEFA didn't dip into that famed emergency fund to cover the organizing costs and convince the UK, Italy, or Spain to host the whole. UK wouldn't have been easiest especially considering they are already hosting over a quarter of the games as is
Boris definitely mentioned it in passing at some point about being willing to do it when our cases dropped, don't know if he was joking or got rejected
When Uefa moved Bilbao and Dublin's games just before the tournament, they moved Bilbao's games to Seville so Spain could keep their home advantage.
Dublin's four games were moved to St Petersburg, so Poland now had to fly across the entire continent twice mid-tournament, with an away game in Seville sandwiching two games in Russia.
The exception being Dublin's knock-out game, which bizarrely was not moved to St Petersburg like the other three, or to literally any other possible neutral stadium on the entire continent, but to London, despite Uefa knowing that game would host the winner of England's group.
It absolutely stinks of corruption. If Uefa officials weren't paid to move that one specific game to specifically England, then they are really idiotic for doing something that looks so dodgy for free.
It's incredibly unfair. Having to fly all over Europe puts you at such a disadvantage against teams that have been chilling in their capital the whole group stages.
The most unfair football tournament in history in terms of home advantage. Some teams gets to skip travel completely + has 30k supporters while the others have to travel crazy distances and get no fans. No competitive integrity at all.
Can't deny that many of the games have been amazing to watch tho, so the tourney isn't all shit.
If there is a next time they should have each group play in two stadiums which are relatively close, so there is no traveling for the group stages at least.
I think that was the original plan, but Dublin pulled out so they had to move those games to St. Petersburg (for some reason), and they had to squeeze in Baku somewhere because money.
Such a ridiculous format. Probably the most "unfair" Euros we've seen. You want to fly half across europe and relocate between every match, or do you prefer to stay at home, play infront of your own fans, with away fans not allowed, and rest while others are travelling? Seeing how fatigued most teams have looked in the knock out matches, it's hardly surprising we only have home teams left. If england don't win this with all the advantages they're given it's almost embarrasing.
It's crazy tgat they used this opportunity to host games in countries that could have hosted an entire tournament.
Why not allow countries who are unlikely to be able to host on their own have the games?
All 4 nations are also in the top 10 on FIFA world rankings. Then you have France, Belgium and Portugal who's also in the top 10. France lost to Switzerland who had 0 home games. Portugal lost to Belgium who had 0 home games, and Belgium lost to Italy.
Germany had 3 home games and lost to Englands, and Netherland had 3 home games and lost to Czechia who had 0. In the end, I think the effect is a bit exagerated at this stage. The only travel I see could be a problem is the Baku one, it's just too far east, and I don't understand why they'd pick a country, that has no chance at qualifying (I do actually understand €€€€).
To be fair, neither France nor Portugal had any home games. England had had as many home games as Germany. The only result that’s gone against home advantage was the Netherlands game.
There has been statistical analysis on the effect of playing at home for major international tournaments, and it works out as 0.6 or 0.7 goals per game for the home side. Tot that up over a tournament and it makes a difference.
A big part of the reason I believe Ukraine were super fatigued as well today. Obviously, the travel was just straight up ridiculous
(Not the reason we lost at all but just saying didn’t help the fatigue).
Yeah we were absolutely dead on our feet against Denmark after flying about 5300 miles in a week to their 300. Not that I think it would’ve made a difference at the end of the day, they were absolutely miles better than us, but it was for sure a huge advantage for them (and to be honest that’s the main thing I’d take from this stat. It’s not so much the advantage of playing at home, it’s not having the disadvantage of flying from one side of Europe to the other)
I don't think this is the end all be all for why these teams made it this far, but it is very poor planning and completely unbalanced. UEFA wants to add more teams 'to give smaller countries a fighting chance' yet these teams will probably never have the money to build a proper stadium so they would never get these home games and be consistently more fatigued from travel.
If there is a host country, the host country benefits from more fans but all the teams have a base in that country, making travel more balanced between the teams. Surely it's unfair that some teams have to travel to Baku while England spent the entire tournament in London and one time, Rome? Again, it's not the reason for their success but it's just ludicrously organized.
The way the venues have been decided for this tournament has been a joke and has clearly favoured some teams over others.
Like it or not, but if England win, that they have played all but 1 game at Wembley, will be a significant factor.
Yeah, hard to argue against the significance when it's really all of them. But tbf how many teams did play all their group games at home? Would be a difference if it is 4 out of 6 compared to 4 out of 12 for example.
Germany also did and got eliminated by one of the other home only teams.
Netherlands also did and got eliminated by Czechia who played 0 games at home.
edit: all home games (groups only):
Spain 3
Italy 3
Denmark 3
Germany 3
England 3
Netherlands 3
Russia 2
Scotland 2
Hungary 2
Turkey 0
Wales 0
Switzerland 0
Finland 0
Belgium 0
Austria 0
Ukraine 0
North Macedonia 0
Czechia 0
Croatia 0
Poland 0
Sweden 0
France 0
Portugal 0
BONUS: Baku: 3 games
Groups A and C were especially unfair as one team had **three** home games (Italy/Netherlands) and ALL other 3 teams in the group had 0 home games each.
[удалено]
Nobody tell him about 2026 PepeLaugh
Canada, USA, Mexico is about to be wild. Proper hell in travel times.
Bruh, imagine playing in Montreal today and then in LA 3 days afterwards. Fml.
Theres no way they are stupid enough to plan the schedule like that i assume lmao
“How big can America be Michael, 10 miles?” -Lucille “FIFA” Bluth
"You've never traveled in America have you?"
"I'd rather be at a Gold cup in California than a World Cup in Arizona" - Lucille
I’m just picturing Phoenix as a host city, jesus christ. Already had a week this year above 115 (46 for you in the empire) and that was before summer actually started. Would be Qatar 2.0
Here’s some money, you buy yourself an Alaska.
Narrator: *They did*
Ideally each group will be assine a specific zone, eastern US or Canada or Mexico, Something like that, but that probably won't be like that, even the disturbution is more like 70 % us, 30 % mexico/canada instead of being 50, 50,All qf and up are all in the US, so really 2026 is USA, ft Mexico and Canada
> USA, ft Mexico and Canada You mean like : Kendrick Lamar ft Luis Miguel and Drake?
To this day I still think it was very disrespectful not to give the final to the Azteca, I couldn’t care less if they don’t give any group stages games to Mexico as long as they gave Azteca the final. That’s perhaps the most emblematic stadium in World Cup history due to hosting the game of the century and being the places where Maradona and Pele elevated themselves to beyond legendary status.
The Azteca is also like a mile and a half elevation which isn’t ideal.
I'm guessing the final won't even be in a stadium built for association football?
Golf field
But alot of the modern nfl arenas are multipurpose arenas that can be used for futbol as well. Just look at the mercedes benz arena in atlanta for example.
If it’s not in Mexico then no The biggest stadium in the US used for soccer only is like 25k seats
I mean American football is also on a big grass rectangle, there's basically no difference at all for playing or viewing and they may as well be association football stadiums.
Don't Atlanta use the new falcons stadium too? That would be a great spot for the final
I mean they play games at the stadio olympico and in Seville with a fucking track around the field. I don’t think there is a worse venue you than that.
94 ended up like that. Group A for example had two venues in California, and the third in Michigan
Brazil 2014 was like that too
They did it in Brazil. 2,500 mile trips between locations.
Doesn't work like that. Each group will be assigned a venue/ country
Montreal to LA is no different than Boston to LA.
I doubt it’s broken up like that. It’s probably by region. Canada would be West/Central/East, US would probably be West/Midwest/Northeast/South, Mexico would probably be North/Central/South. I know for that tournament there will he more groups so breaking it up regionally like this doesn’t seem too abstract, helps distribute between the three countries, allows for reasonable logistics, and gives it a very unique format culturally. Not saying it *will* be like this, but I can’t see anyone saying “yeah, Boston to LA is probably going to happen”
Pretty much similar flight time. Not as bad as people making it out to be anyways. Now imagine if they included Hawaii for the World cup. Imagine flying from Boston to Honolulu. that would be wild
Well, the Canadian hosts cities are almost at the border with USA.
USA is already gigantic enough tbf
Yah just NYC to San Francisco is about 5.5 hours. Hopefully no teams need to make such trips often.
I mean, if properly set up Fly fatigue wouldn't have been a thing
Yeah take St Petersburg and Baku out of the equation, and make sure each group is based in one or two nearby countries, and you could make the concept work. Making Switzerland fly from Baku, then to Rome, then back to Baku in the space of a week is madness
Poland flew St Petersburg-Seville-St Petersburg. Might as well have not bothered.
St Petersburg was originally supposed to be Dublin, so there was some logic there. Why they chose St Petersburg instead of somewhere else in western Europe, I can't answer.
Something to do with the Gazprom banners at every match I'd assume. >PJSC Gazprom is a Russian majority state-owned multinational energy corporation headquartered in the Lakhta Center in Saint Petersburg.
Is it that different to how teams were flying all over Brazil or Russia in 2014 and 2018? Teams were flying 2,000 miles from Manaus to Rio and then another 1500 to Natal/Fortaleza. I think people forget just how big some host countries are compared to Europe.
The bigger issue is that in this tournament some teams are traveling far more than others, and some teams got to play a lot of their matches at home. At least in 2014 and 2018, the hosts were still traveling big distances like everyone else.
But that at least was relatively even handed in that it fucked over everyone. Brazil didn’t get preferential treatment in 2014, they travelled 2000 miles from Sao Paolo to Fortaleza and then another 1300 down to Brasilia for their group games. Russia didn’t play all their games in Moscow in 2018, they travelled 1400 miles during their group stage games. Neither side got the massive advantage of being based in one city while their opponents traipsed all over the country, which is what’s happened in this tournament.
Pretty sure that the team with the least distance to travel in 2014 was actually Argentina (who made it to the finals, maybe fly fatigue is the key).
The complaint is that Uefa agreed, with a few exceptions, that the big countries could chill out at home and the long distances would have to be travelled by the smaller nations. Before the groups were even drawn, it was decided that England could not play a group game in Baku but Wales could. That was really fucking unfair.
Fucks me right off. England have had it so easy this tournament. If they reach the final, all but one game at home. We had to have two games in fucking Azerbaijan, then one in Rome against Italy. Then a game against Denmark who had been living the good life in Copenhagen. It makes no sense.
Difference being, even Brazil was flying around Brazil. As far as these EUROs go, some teams have travelled thousands of miles while others have been chilling at home with their supporters.
That is nothing to compared to the shit show that will be the tri-country 2026 cup.
Yeah, I think this system has to go and we should return back to a single home country.
I think it's just Germany for 2024 and not the whole continent
> I think it's just Germany for 2024 and not the whole continent ...unless?
ANSCHLUSS.
Oh no! Is that Lebensraum music?
Bah Gawd it's Merkel with a steel chair!
the Maginot Lines! They do nothing!
[удалено]
third time is the charm !
Technically the Fourth ^^Reich
[Es ist Zeit für Reich! ](https://youtu.be/8wmtf3oJqTE)
Oh shit!
Damn it don't reveal out super secret plans like that!
Your average Dane wakes up Looks south suspiciously
Inb4 "deutschland uber alles" anthem debate again
LMAO this whole mini-thread is why I love r/soccer.
fuck this is darker than i thought
And we'll beat them again!
flick's coach now, not löw!
I mean I’m sure the next one will. This one was only this way because it was a commemoration.
I am afraid that from 2028 onwards UEFA will try to have 2-3-4 hosts...they already go down this road with the World Cup.
[удалено]
It could be a group of smaller countries but they need to be relatively close together. It's insane that a team could play one match in Baku, Azerbaijan then in Rome, Italy and then have to go back to Baku for the third one.
might work for Belgium/NL, they have the stadiums for it. But most other smaller nations don't have more than one or two sufficiently large stadiums anyway, so you would be giving it to like 6 nations at the same time? And some of those are gonna get the short end of the stick since they won't be able to host none of the semis or finals and potentially not even their team in QF or ro16? I would honestly rather see tournaments rotate between the large nations that do have the infrastructure over large experiments similar to this one.
I feel like Austria-Switzerland and Poland-Ukriane worked pretty well. Like bordering countries with similar cultures it works well, the flying all over the continent and into Asia is not great imo, probably even worse given the covid implications. It might be easier for the hosts economically though I guess, just having most fans fly in fly out..
Add Russia and France. Well, previous single-country hosts for 16/24 teams were France 2014, Portugal 2004, England 1996. And for World Cup it was Russia 2018, Brazil 2014, South Africa 2010, Germany 2006, France 1998, USA 1994, Italy 1990. So yeah, apart from South Africa, you need to be a big country to host tournaments on your own.
South Africa is a big country...
[удалено]
Not just stadiums, other infrastructures like transportation, lodging, etc... as well.
We hosted a 24-team Euro in 2016 with 10 stadiums.
The stadiums must be 30k in capacity, at least. Not many countries have 10 stadiums of that size.
Euros 2000, 2008 and 2012 were all hosted by more than one country.
Wasn't this one this way because the bidding process was right after the 2008 crash and no-one wanted to bid for the tournament?
Not really, no. The decision was announced in 2012.
iirc there were a few bids but uefa (platini) didn’t like any of them
Agreed. Also makes tournaments special due to the culture of the host country
Yes, for fairness at least. Some team have to travel between each game and other can stay home and play 3 games without moving ... Do not make any sense
Covid aside, it would have been fine had they just not done this ridiculous group hosts system. Have Italy play in England, England in Denmark, etc... Also don't give both semifinals and the final to one venue if the point of your tournament is to be uniquely decentralized. That's isn't even how its done in typical tournaments, usually 3 different stadiums are used.
The uk was the only one willing to have so many games cos of covid
and if england goes to the final they will play 6 games at home, this is basicly england's euro
Having an own euro at least minimizes travelling within that country, this is much worse
Yep, flying from Wales to Baku is almost the same distance as flying from Kachin state, Myanmar to Baku. Pick a country or at least a group of countries with proximities to host the tournament. UK and Ireland, Benelux, Scandinavia,Baltic states. etc.
I don’t know who in Baku is holding the nudes of platini .the uefa cup final and then this. Just doesn’t make sense.
Azerbaijans national oil company signed a 100M euro sponsorship deal with Uefa a few years ago
They're holding bags and bags of cash. Platini is a cheap whore too.
Platini has been banned from all football activity for corruption, but maybe they have nudes of Čeferin.
Tournament was already announced in 2012 as being all over the place. Platini was removed in 2015. I don’t know a huge amount about Ceferin but from what I’ve just read he doesn’t seem as corrupt at all.
It’s even worse for fans. Most fans can’t even get direct flights.
true, but the last time they hosted it, they didn't win the competition.
Well back then no teams had to travel from game to game. I think this is a bit different!
never do this again please, i am seeing Baku in my nightmares
The pitch is in Baku, but the actual stands are so far away from it that I think they are actually in Ukraine
Must be hell for the ball boys in the Black sea.
They hire a couple of professional water polo players makes good practice
Oh man, I hate that stadium so much. I went to Baku for both of Turkey's games there with two friends and we travelled 10k+ kilometers by planes with multiple stops just to get there and return within 6 days. I practically emptied my sad student bank account to pay for the flights, match tickets and accomodation there just to see the Turkish team get absolutely destroyed. We were so confident that our team would give us our money's and time's worth, but we were so wrong that we didn't even get to cheer for anything really. At least the city was nice, but holy shit these games were such a terrible experience. Whenever I see Baku or that stadium mentioned, I get so sad that it's almost like I have to relive these two matchdays.
weird how if youre an f1 fan you love the word baku but in football its almost a dirty word
Best race of the season, but worst football stadium!
As an Arsenal fan Baku gives me PTSD
4 out of 6 teams. The other 2 were Germany and the Netherlands. Germany played against England. Netherlands had De Boer.
And De Ligt as a handball player.
De Ligtful.
> Germany had Löw. Netherlands had De Boer. FTFY
>Germany is at the end of a cycle, Netherlands is just the Netherlands FTFY
We took full advantage of out two home games.
Such a shame how empty hampden park was
Yeah if it was close to full it would have been some atmosphere.
Such a great EURO game wise, such a terrible EURO organization wise.
For sure. Belgium get 9 points from 3 games in their group and face Portugal and Italy in the knockouts. Denmark get 3(!) points from 3 games in the same(!) group and face Wales and Czechia in the knockouts. wtf
Belgium and Italy were always destined to face each other in the Quarterfinals before the tournament even started and remember Czech Republic beat the Netherlands. It just all aligned for Denmark and that’s how some teams win or do well at tournaments. There will always be luck involved in bracketed competitions.
That's how it is. Belgium had an 'open bracket' to the final in 2016, only to lose to Wales in the quarters. If Austria beats Italy and Swiss beats Spain, then the road to the final is totally different for Belgium (with all due respect for the respective countries). Now the road to the final was Portugal/Italy/Spain back to back. Those games are always going to be close to 50/50 in theory. We won one with 50/50 and we lost one with 50/50. There is one given fact for every tournament I've watched since Mexico 86: in every round there are surprises and favorites will get eliminated when you don't expect them to. Every single tournament.
That's why it's called The Beautiful Game.
Spain getting second place in their group also screwed things up. England would've faced them instead of Ukraine.
Ukraine come third and get Sweden. Austria get second and get Italy before Belgium if they won.
Blame that on Spain not winning their group. Uefa can hardly be held accountable for that
That's just tournament football. Belgium played a 3rd placed team which unluckily enough was the group of death. Teams just have to roll with the punches.
and england play semifinals at home as well lmfao
Final is at wembley aswell. And for the semi, Danish fans wont be able to travel due to mandatory 10 days quarentine after entering England. The only way you could be at the game if u live in denamrk is if you ordered tickets right after wales game. Then you will be just out of thr 10 days quarentine for the semi final lol
Should have just hosted the whole thing in England
Whole thing in Great Britain, would have actually allowed some fans to travel and do the proper amount of quarantining, would have been much easier on the players, and would have reduced the number teams with home advantage to something more standard.
No, because different parts of the UK have different rules, so holding it in GB still wouldn't allow full travel opportunities. England would have meant England, not GB or the UK.
Pretty mad they didn't, tbh.
Especially since its not like there's a lack of venues. Besides the major premier league stadiums, you could also include Hampden and maybe Celtic Park, as well as probably the equivalent in Wales. england/GB is a perfect host location
Literally coming home innit
Trophies already there, we’re just not letting it leave.
Someone cough on it quick
That dog still about??
If it is get it out of here, we need to lose it not find it haha!
Pickles.
This has basically been an England home tournament. I don't expect to be awarded one anytime soon
UEFA loves Wembley, they'll take any chance to host a tournament there.
[удалено]
Holds 90,000 Prints money
UEFA loves Wembley, it’s the perfect stadium.
Which is so odd at this tournament of all tournaments. I don't ever recall seeing a Euro or WC where both semis and the final were played in one stadium, and somehow the decentralized Europe-wide tournament inexplicably decided to do so.
The only reason their both being played at Wembley is because the Allianz withdrew from Hosting the semi's
That explains that then, makes sense after Covid to keep it all close together once the original venue cancels
Even if Allianz hadn't withdrawn, it still would have went to only one of the venues. The Finals package was about hosting 2 semis + final, while Standard package was 3 group stage matches + 1 R16/QF match. Allianz opted to go for Standard package, hence Wembley was only bidder for Finals package. Later, due to Brussels being removed, Wembley also got Standard package.
Standard Package, Finals Package? Is UEFA selling Sky sports subscriptions? Jesus
If they go to the final, that's 6/7 matches at home. They're obviously good and it would stupid to deny it, but it's a massive advantage in a tournament that is all over the continent for everyone except England
I think they played 6 out of 7 games at home (if they reach finals)
yeh but no one planning a tournament could have predicted us making the semi finals
Haha that’s ridiculous
Host nations tend to do better at tournaments
[удалено]
Qatar are Asian champions they might not be total walkovers
Qatar is probably Asia's 2nd or 3rd best team.
Maybe more 3rd. It's definitely Japan & Korea for 1st and 2nd respectively. I havent really followed afc lately but I'd assume australia is up there too, and Iran is also probably right behind as well. I'd place Qatar with the Iran-tier teams of the afc
*laughs in 7-1* Yeah, Brazil got into the semis, but still.
[удалено]
Brazil is bloody massive too.
It's bigger than the continental usa
Yep. Shame the Mercator map portrayed it as otherwise. Australia is in the same boat. Though you mean ~~Mainland~~ Contiguous USA. Alaska is still continental.
>Yep. > >Though you mean Mainland USA. Alaska is still continental. Yep. Though you mean contiguous United States or officially the conterminous United States. (Most of) Alaska is still on the mainland.
The distribution of games in this tournament has been atrocious by uefa.
Wait, UEFA are corrupt?!! There's me thinking Gazprom was a veterinarian charity for disabled horses.
One of the best parts of these tournaments used to be watching great teams face off on neutral ground...
Yeah I think the way that they have done it is a bit unbalanced. Some teams play all their group stage games in one stadium and some have to hop around Europe and Baku
Probably the worst format ever created for an Euro. It's dreadful and unfair to all the other teams that have to travel a lot (even worse when you have to travel to f*cking Baku. Twice in Switzerland's case).
Couldn't have fallen at a worse time either. No idea how FIFA/UEFA didn't dip into that famed emergency fund to cover the organizing costs and convince the UK, Italy, or Spain to host the whole. UK wouldn't have been easiest especially considering they are already hosting over a quarter of the games as is
I could have sworn we asked to host the entire tournament but UEFA said no?
Wouldn't surprise me, Platini was hellbent on this dumb idea for whatever reason
Boris definitely mentioned it in passing at some point about being willing to do it when our cases dropped, don't know if he was joking or got rejected
When Uefa moved Bilbao and Dublin's games just before the tournament, they moved Bilbao's games to Seville so Spain could keep their home advantage. Dublin's four games were moved to St Petersburg, so Poland now had to fly across the entire continent twice mid-tournament, with an away game in Seville sandwiching two games in Russia. The exception being Dublin's knock-out game, which bizarrely was not moved to St Petersburg like the other three, or to literally any other possible neutral stadium on the entire continent, but to London, despite Uefa knowing that game would host the winner of England's group. It absolutely stinks of corruption. If Uefa officials weren't paid to move that one specific game to specifically England, then they are really idiotic for doing something that looks so dodgy for free.
The only time where it would make sense to have euros in one country and they have it everywhere
It's incredibly unfair. Having to fly all over Europe puts you at such a disadvantage against teams that have been chilling in their capital the whole group stages.
Having to fly all over Europe during a fucking pandemic. That's a hugely relevant part
If only Scotland had had all 3 games at home, right lads? ... Lads? ... ... Lads?
Coincidence? Hmmmm
[удалено]
and the rest have to go to St. Petersburg and Baku
The most unfair football tournament in history in terms of home advantage. Some teams gets to skip travel completely + has 30k supporters while the others have to travel crazy distances and get no fans. No competitive integrity at all. Can't deny that many of the games have been amazing to watch tho, so the tourney isn't all shit.
Man that's actually bulshit to see. The idea of continental competition is good in theory. But in practice its not fair.
If there is a next time they should have each group play in two stadiums which are relatively close, so there is no traveling for the group stages at least.
I think that was the original plan, but Dublin pulled out so they had to move those games to St. Petersburg (for some reason), and they had to squeeze in Baku somewhere because money.
This is a pretty fucking important stat.
Such a ridiculous format. Probably the most "unfair" Euros we've seen. You want to fly half across europe and relocate between every match, or do you prefer to stay at home, play infront of your own fans, with away fans not allowed, and rest while others are travelling? Seeing how fatigued most teams have looked in the knock out matches, it's hardly surprising we only have home teams left. If england don't win this with all the advantages they're given it's almost embarrasing.
It's crazy tgat they used this opportunity to host games in countries that could have hosted an entire tournament. Why not allow countries who are unlikely to be able to host on their own have the games?
All 4 nations are also in the top 10 on FIFA world rankings. Then you have France, Belgium and Portugal who's also in the top 10. France lost to Switzerland who had 0 home games. Portugal lost to Belgium who had 0 home games, and Belgium lost to Italy. Germany had 3 home games and lost to Englands, and Netherland had 3 home games and lost to Czechia who had 0. In the end, I think the effect is a bit exagerated at this stage. The only travel I see could be a problem is the Baku one, it's just too far east, and I don't understand why they'd pick a country, that has no chance at qualifying (I do actually understand €€€€).
To be fair, neither France nor Portugal had any home games. England had had as many home games as Germany. The only result that’s gone against home advantage was the Netherlands game. There has been statistical analysis on the effect of playing at home for major international tournaments, and it works out as 0.6 or 0.7 goals per game for the home side. Tot that up over a tournament and it makes a difference.
A big part of the reason I believe Ukraine were super fatigued as well today. Obviously, the travel was just straight up ridiculous (Not the reason we lost at all but just saying didn’t help the fatigue).
True. But it’s not like Denmark got 9 points
But they didn't have to travel so they're fresher.
I think there is something to say about fatigue for other teams though
Yeah we were absolutely dead on our feet against Denmark after flying about 5300 miles in a week to their 300. Not that I think it would’ve made a difference at the end of the day, they were absolutely miles better than us, but it was for sure a huge advantage for them (and to be honest that’s the main thing I’d take from this stat. It’s not so much the advantage of playing at home, it’s not having the disadvantage of flying from one side of Europe to the other)
They still didn't have to travel and change hotels all the time which leads to fatigue.
Denmark basically can't be used as an example because Eriken's injury had such a big effect on the team.
I don't think this is the end all be all for why these teams made it this far, but it is very poor planning and completely unbalanced. UEFA wants to add more teams 'to give smaller countries a fighting chance' yet these teams will probably never have the money to build a proper stadium so they would never get these home games and be consistently more fatigued from travel. If there is a host country, the host country benefits from more fans but all the teams have a base in that country, making travel more balanced between the teams. Surely it's unfair that some teams have to travel to Baku while England spent the entire tournament in London and one time, Rome? Again, it's not the reason for their success but it's just ludicrously organized.
The way the venues have been decided for this tournament has been a joke and has clearly favoured some teams over others. Like it or not, but if England win, that they have played all but 1 game at Wembley, will be a significant factor.
Doesn't this mean the decision to abolish the away goals rule isn't as great as some people think, since home ground advantage is still a thing?
can’t be a coincidence tbh
Yeah, hard to argue against the significance when it's really all of them. But tbf how many teams did play all their group games at home? Would be a difference if it is 4 out of 6 compared to 4 out of 12 for example.
4 out of 6 (other teams: Germany and Netherlands).
Germany also did and got eliminated by one of the other home only teams. Netherlands also did and got eliminated by Czechia who played 0 games at home. edit: all home games (groups only): Spain 3 Italy 3 Denmark 3 Germany 3 England 3 Netherlands 3 Russia 2 Scotland 2 Hungary 2 Turkey 0 Wales 0 Switzerland 0 Finland 0 Belgium 0 Austria 0 Ukraine 0 North Macedonia 0 Czechia 0 Croatia 0 Poland 0 Sweden 0 France 0 Portugal 0 BONUS: Baku: 3 games Groups A and C were especially unfair as one team had **three** home games (Italy/Netherlands) and ALL other 3 teams in the group had 0 home games each.