Are the likes of San Marino wasting their time?

aidan24326

I know there was a thread on this subject not that long ago, but given San Marino's hopelessly inept performances thus far, is it time for uefa to take a look at the situation with these teams? (San Marino,Andorra,Liechtenstein etc)

San Marino were so hopelessly outclassed against an admittedly average Ireland team on wednesday night as to make the whole excercise almost a waste of time. From San Marino's point of view, they can be gaining nothing from being on the end of one pasting after another. For Ireland, it was about as useful as a decent training session, but that's all.

Before Wednesday I'd probably have said that every country deserves to have an equal crack at it, but after watching that mismatch I'm not so sure. I see no benefit to anyone in this type of game where one team are so far superior as to make the whole thing a non-event. Perhaps it is time to introduce a pre-qualifying group for the minnows.

Some will say that playing against good opposition is the only way these teams will improve, and there is some merit in that, but San Marino's record in Euro qualifying is now Played 38, lost 38. In the current group, they look likely to end up with a goal difference of something like For 1 Against 50. In short, they are useless. What ye think?

MrJoeSoap

aidan24326 wrote:

I see no benefit to anyone in this type of game where one team are so far superior as to make the whole thing a non-event. Perhaps it is time to introduce a pre-qualifying group for the minnows.

Two words... David Gualtieri

They may be minnows, but they want to be playing there, and it shouldn't be up to us to say who we should or shouldn't have to play. Remember Liechtenstein? Drew 0-0 with us around the same time as losing 11-1 to Macedonia.

Some will say that playing against good opposition is the only way these teams will improve, and there is some merit in that, but San Marino's record in Euro qualifying is now Played 38, lost 38. In the current group, they look likely to end up with a goal difference of something like For 1 Against 50. In short, they are useless. What ye think?

Where do you draw the line then? Who else goes?

BaZmO*

It wasn't that long ago that you would've included Cyprus in that group and look how well tey're doing at the moment. And the way things are going at the moment it won't be long before we're considered part of the "Minnows" gang again.

If they want to be there and don't mind getting thrashed all the time and getting the odd moral vicory I've no problem with it.

Benedict XVI

A total waste of time.
Who benefited from Wednesday game, no one other than Robbie Keane and his stats?
The smaller nations should have a pre-qualifying tournament to decide who gets to the current stage, anyway it was all discussed in a thread a few months back when they lost 13-0.
In this months When Saturday Come (great mag. by the way) there was a piece on how it now looks like Gibraltar will be admitted to UEFA next year, Gibraltar, for fcuks sake !!!

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Two words... David Gualtieri

Enjoyable as it was they still lost 1-7

revileandy

they can be gaining nothing

Except a few quid from gates, tv rights etc. which you would hope is re-invested at grass roots level to improve their standards in years to come. Who's to say they won't be able to qualify for tournaments in 10-15 years?

They'll never improve if they're all bundled in together in a pre-qualifying group.

When they're put in the group they're in now, they have money spinning tv rights from home games against Germany and ourselves. When they're away from home they getting money from gate receipts.

eirebhoy

MrJoeSoap wrote:

They may be minnows, but they want to be playing there, and it shouldn't be up to us to say who we should or shouldn't have to play.

Gibraltar, Isle of Man, Guernsey, Vatican City, Jersey and Montenegro are next so.

http://www.uefa.com/uefa/Keytopics/kind=64/newsId=464331.html

Surely there has to be a limit?

Senegal, South Africa, Cameroon, Nigeria, Tunisia, Morocco, Egypt, Ivory Coast and Congo all got a bye into the 2nd round of African WC qualifiers based the FIFA World rankings and qualifying for the previous world cup.

In Asia they put the 14 teams ranked lowest in the FIFA rankings into a 1st qualifying stage. 7 of those teams then join the rest in the next stage.

In North America they had a knockout stage with all the smaller countries in the 1st round. The winner of those matches would then play a team from the top half of seeds like USA and Mexico. All those winners are entered into the group stage.

In Oceania Australia and New Zealand got a bye into the 2nd round and didn't have to go through the first group stage.

They've only got 10 teams in South America so only one league for them.

We have the most participants and yet we only have 1 qualifying stage.

Benedict XVI

eirebhoy wrote:

Vatican City,

Ha, I'd guess the footballing population of the Vatican City is mainly made up of Swiss Guard and they could not play cos they are , well, Swiss.

Edit,
just relaized, I run the place, yea we want a piece of the action.

BaZmO*

Benedict XVI wrote:

Ha, I'd guess the footballing population of the Vatican City is mainly made up of Swiss Guard and they could not play cos they are , well, Swiss.

The same Swiss that we couldn't beat in 4 attempts?

Kojak

MAybe these small states could be put into a mini-competition of their own where they would be playing teams of their own standard and the winners could then be put into the qualifying draws proper.

Is it right to say that just because these countries are not succesful they should be done away with altogether - I ersonally don't think so. It is plainly obvious that they are not up to the level of Ireland (which by the way is still a long way away from the top nations) but I think they do deserve a legitimate competition of their own.

MrJoeSoap

Benedict XVI wrote:

Enjoyable as it was they still lost 1-7

Yes but England needed to win by 7 clear goals, and although Holland won (making it largely irrelevant) San Marino would have cost England their place in the World Cup anyway.

"Welcome to Bologna on Capital Gold for England versus San Marino with Tennent's Pilsner, brewed with Czechoslovakian yeast for that extra Pilsner taste...and England are one down."

Andrew 83

Personally I'd be in favour of them staying in the main competition but then having there own small tournament when the full European Championships are on (maybe with a population limit on who gets to enter).

Without the visits of the major powers I'm not sure soccer's popularity will soar in these places. And, as someone else said, I'm sure the revenue the big boys bring in (in away tickets and TV money if nothing else) must be valuable to the associations.

redspider

We discussed this before at length. My viewpoint is as it was, they should be in a 2nd tier, along with the other 'minnows' where they may just get a draw or a win.

But people say San Marino are hopeless, but I think for an area with a population the size of 28,117, I think they are very very good. I'm sure they could certainly defend very well against any amateur club team with a selection from that size of a population and may very well win.

If I was them I would go for the 2nd tier system that I proposed with relegation and promotions. Note that in that 8 groups of 4 (top tier), and the rest deivided someway, Ireland would have been relegated hypothetically, and perhaps NI would have been promoted. Now that I think about it, its a bit like the Eurovision song contest system, not that I looked at that for inspiration, a coincidence.

I say to Uefa to try it. Although San Marino wont vote for it. If you were with a club from a small town, wouldn't you like to play Germany, and who cares if you lose 13-0. If UEFA had a PR voting system, it would happen tomorrow.

BTW, their no.10 is relatively handy, their only pro I understand somewhere way down in Italy, and he's looking to score a goal. He wont vote for a second tier but if I was him I would. Its time, as UEFA has grow so large with the new countries affiliated, to structure it in tiers.

Redspider

redspider

eirebhoy wrote:

(Uefa) have the most participants and yet only have 1 qualifying stage.

I fully agree - its stupid. The fault probably lies with Lennart Johansson and cronies who probably promised many of the associations that he would keep the system as it was as long as they vote for him. With a one nation one vote sysem, its liable to be held to ransom by the 'wishes' of the smaller nations, if they club together, and they have.

Uefa's politics would be a factor in the lack of movement, imo. A change would be a change for the better, and its obvious to 'a blind man', no disrespect to blind people intended if listening!

Redspider

MrJoeSoap

redspider wrote:

BTW, their no.10 is relatively handy, their only pro I understand somewhere way down in Italy, and he's looking to score a goal.

Andy Selva, 6 goals in 29 caps, not a bad return at all.

Only slightly worse on average than Niall Quinns return of 21 goals in 91 games (Quinn scored every 4.33 games, Selva once every 4.83)

BaZmO*

redspider wrote:

BTW, their no.10 is relatively handy, their only pro I understand somewhere way down in Italy

Isn't the keeper that was on the bench the other night a professional too?

Xavi6

BaZmO* wrote:

Isn't the keeper that was on the bench the other night a professional too?

Yeah so they said. Got dropped cause of the Germany game. The other lad was making only his second start I think.

eirebhoy

BaZmO* wrote:

Isn't the keeper that was on the bench the other night a professional too?

As far as I'm aware Selva is their only pro but could be wrong.

aidan24326

You could argue it both ways I guess, but there is still some merit in putting the minnows into pre-qualifying. That way they could have meaningful competiton amongst teams of a similiar standard, a chance to improve by actually winning a few games for a change, rather than getting stuffed 5-0 every time.

The best of them could then move on to tackle the big boys, and would have something to play for other than merely fulfilling largely pointless fixtures where the opposition get to top up their goal-difference.

It's very true to say that teams like Malta and especially Cyprus have made significant progress over the years. From whipping boys to credible opponents who can take points off most teams especially at home. However we're not exactly comparing like with like. Cyprus has a population of 800K, so there was a bit more potential there for starters. That's the equivalent of a good-sized city. San Marino have the pop. of a small town, I've no doubt the likes of Cork City or Shelbourne would beat them.

MrJoeSoap

aidan24326 wrote:

I've no doubt the likes of Cork City or Shelbourne would beat them.

Shels or Cork City would have beaten the Irish side that "played" in Cyprus.

CiaranC

I've no doubt the likes of Cork City or Shelbourne would beat them.

!!!

Of course 'the likes of Cork City or Shelbourne' would beat them. Those are professional football teams, San Marino are an amatuer team from place with 1/3 the population of the bigger Dublin suburbs.

BaZmO*

aidan24326 wrote:

...other than merely fulfilling largely pointless fixtures where the opposition get to top up their goal-difference...

Actually, the goal difference that the bigger teams get against the likes of San Marino isn't taken into account if the top teams are level on points at the end of the group stages. It's the goal difference against the top teams that's counted, or something like that anyway.

mike65

Iceland
Faros Is
Andorra
Liechtenstien
Malta
San Marino
Luxembourg

Any other 'minnows'?

Mike.

Benedict XVI

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Yes but England needed to win by 7 clear goals, and although Holland won (making it largely irrelevant) San Marino would have cost England their place in the World Cup anyway.

"Welcome to Bologna on Capital Gold for England versus San Marino with Tennent's Pilsner, brewed with Czechoslovakian yeast for that extra Pilsner taste...and England are one down."

Yea but things like that are rare, that was 13 years ago and the only other time I recall the minnows having a impact on qualifying was then we drew 0-0 with them back in 1995. We missed automatic qualification for Euro ’96 by 1 point.

The opening lines of Capital Radio in the 1-7 game is classic though.

eirebhoy

mike65 wrote:

Iceland
Faros Is
Andorra
Liechtenstien
Malta
San Marino
Luxembourg

Any other 'minnows'?

Mike.

Armenia, Moldova, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan. I have to agree though, there are very few teams that are easy to beat in their home stadium. Away from home the above teams just sit back for the 90 minutes.

Bodhidharma

First off, Football is about inclusion.

Secondly,We need these smaller teams the way Fighters need easy opposition now and then. You cant always play at world class.

If we were playing only good teams then WE would become the San Marino. Lets face it, we're not good enough to dismiss other teams. We're only 4 points ahead of them, and we played a game more.

eirebhoy

Bodhidharma wrote:

First off, Football is about inclusion.

Secondly,We need these smaller teams the way Fighters need easy opposition now and then. You cant always play at world class.

If we were playing only good teams then WE would become the San Marino. Lets face it, we're not good enough to dismiss other teams. We're only 4 points ahead of them, and we played a game more.

I don't think that's the point. If we slip in with these minnows so be it.

LuckyLloyd

mike65 wrote:

Iceland
Faros Is
Andorra
Liechtenstien
Malta
San Marino
Luxembourg

Any other 'minnows'?

Mike.

Is it not correct to say that Iceland recently beat Northern Ireland 3 - 0 away? They are a relatively competative team.

The Faroes have had some good performances over the last five years and taken a couple of points for their trouble. Malta and Luxembourg are never completely outclassed on the scale of San Marino.

This for me is thew problem with the entire argument. We are really only talking about five teams max that cannot compete and get beaten badly every single time. Andorra, San Marino, Azjerbaijan, Liechtenstein.

The teams in the next bracket can pull off a few results now and again, and are not pushovers at home. If there were more teams out of their depth you could consider splitting the qualifying competition. As it is, having these five teams playing a short qualifying competition once every two years and gauranteeing football to the lucky one would not be fair IMO. Let them play. Who knows? Cyprus must be considered a case in point for keeping the current system as it is.

aidan24326

LuckyLloyd wrote:

Is it not correct to say that Iceland recently beat Northern Ireland 3 - 0 away? They are a relatively competative team.

Yeah. I think Mike65 was being a wee bit harsh on Iceland! They would be a good deal better than the likes of San Marino and Andorra.

Bodhidharma

eirebhoy wrote:

I don't think that's the point. If we slip in with these minnows so be it.

What is the point of this thread? From what i gather it is saying that if your not good enough to compete with the big boys then your out in the cold. Countries can progress you know. The Dutch team in the 60's was amateur, so what does that say.

If the ability to win is a prerequisite for entry into a competition then maybe Ireland shouldn't bother with the olympics.

Dont forget that we are only qualifying for the Euros. Every state has as much right to have a go, no matter what size or ability.

eirebhoy

Bodhidharma wrote:

Dont forget that we are only qualifying for the Euros. Every state has as much right to have a go, no matter what size or ability.

Why isn't there a problem with it in Asia, Africa and North America?

As for Iceland, they're below Liechtenstien in the seedings for the next world cup.

Savman

Who'd watch San Marino V Leichtenstein? Their only hope is the big teams and as someone said, gate receipts that can be invested in youth academies and such.

I don't agree with the idea of kicking them out altogether and forcing smaller nations to qualify for a qualifying group. Nonsense tbh. I've no doubt in years to come, teams like San Marino will be less and less desirable places to go.

Pigman II

Are the likes of San Marino wasting their time?

No. I'm sure the rag-tag bunch of butchers, bakers and candlestick-makers are having a wonderful time travelling around Europe and playing in the finest Stadia in the world (and Lansdowne Road).

Now, if the question was 'Are the likes of San Marino wasting OUR time' (and money) then the answer would most definetly be yes.

Guy:Incognito

This has been touched on but I like the way everyone is conveniently leaving out Cyprus in a "dont mention the war" type scenario. A few weeks ago they would have been firmly lumped in with the minnows. The fact is, they are improving and others can do the same. If they had been spending their time playing the other minnows they may well not be at the level they are now.

Pigman II wrote:

Now, if the question was 'Are the likes of San Marino wasting OUR time' (and money) then the answer would most definetly be yes.

Thats exactly the attitude most would have had towards cyprus before we played them. If anything we wasted their time.

As well as that , we could very well end up spending the foreseeable future bouncing between the minnows and the proper leagues.

eirebhoy

The thing about Cyprus is they'd no doubt qualify from the stage 1 of qualifiers. They're a decent team with a league that is improving. Someone mentioned a point about the money they make from playing the big teams. That's a fair point I suppose.

BaZmO*

Stekelly wrote:

...I like the way everyone is conveniently leaving out Cyprus in a "dont mention the war" type scenario...

You sure about that?