Euro 2012 Playoff matches to be Seeded

BaZmO*

This is seriously unfair to the smaller nations, but at least they are saying it up front this time.

But as an extra blow, the seeded team also gets to play their away match first. This is blatant favouritism.

So in essence, if you're one of the smaller nations you almost have to win you're qualifying group by finishing ahead of one of the Seeded teams and if can't manage that you'll have to beat a seeded team in the playoff. Tough ask.

Why don't FIFA just tell the smaller nations that they don't want them and just have a separate tournament with all the big nations?

Link

everdead.ie

BaZmO* wrote: »

This is seriously unfair to the smaller nations, but at least they are saying it up front this time.

But as an extra blow, the seeded team also gets to play their away match first. This is blatant favouritism.

So in essence, if you're one of the smaller nations you almost have to win you're qualifying group by finishing ahead of one of the Seeded teams and if can't manage that you'll have to beat a seeded team in the playoff. Tough ask.

Why don't FIFA just tell the smaller nations that they don't want them and just have a separate tournament with all the big nations?

Link

Less money if the small nations don't get to try and qualify

KerranJast

Meh. In 2016 there'll 24 teams so we *should* be qualifying everytime from then on. Selfish I know but what can you do.

BaZmO*

everdead.ie wrote: »

Less money if the small nations don't get to try and qualify

But that's the unfortunate thing, it's all about money and not really a fair contest.

everdead.ie

BaZmO* wrote: »

But that's the unfortunate thing, it's all about money and not really a fair contest.

Of course it is we are talking about UEFA and FIFA fifa who are led by a man who was responsible for the collapse of FIFA's marketing partner ISL had led to losses of up to $100m under Blatter's management.

FlawedGenius

Is the top 2 in the group not automatic no?

ArmaniJeanss

GerCPM wrote: »

Is the top 2 in the group not automatic no?

No.

9 groups of 5/6 teams.
9 winners + 1 best runner up, + 4 playoff winners qualify to join the co-hosts.

Mitch Connor

It is a digrace imo. Regardless of when they announce it.

The groups are seeded to begin with, so each group should be even. If a smaller team finishes second ahead of a bigger nation, then they have done so by being better over the 8/10 games, and theoretically proven themselves equal of all the other sides that have finished second.. They should not be further punished for previous performances. It is a disgrace.

ArmaniJeanss

Mitch Connor wrote: »

It is a digrace imo. Regardless of when they announce it.

The groups are seeded to begin with, so each group should be even. If a smaller team finishes second ahead of a bigger nation, then they have done so by being better over the 8/10 games, and theoretically proven themselves equal of all the other sides that have finished second.. They should not be further punished for previous performances. It is a disgrace.

I agree.. If they were seeding by performance within the group it would be acceptable, i.e the 4 runners up with the most points are the seeded teams then it would as least be consistent with how they normally do their seedings for club competitions. And it would give a perhaps deserved advantage to the teams who came closest to qualifying automatially.

Mitch Connor

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I agree.. If they were seeding by performance within the group it would be acceptable, i.e the 4 runners up with the most points are the seeded teams then it would as least be consistent with how they normally do their seedings for club competitions. And it would give a perhaps deserved advantage to the teams who came closest to qualifying automatially.

Yeah - THIS i agree with. the best 4 based on performances in the groups would be acceptable, but based on anything else is a joke. Its simply giving way too much of an advantage to the bigger nations.

That_Guy

Talk about giving "smaller" countries the two fingers.
Fair play my fcuking hole.

GLaDOS

I'm waiting for the first person to come in saying, well if we were seeded you wouldn't be complaining :rolleyes:

That_Guy

ScienceNerd wrote: »

I'm waiting for the first person to come in saying, well if we were seeded you wouldn't be complaining :rolleyes:

Not in this lifetime buddy.

GLaDOS

That_Guy wrote: »

Not in this lifetime buddy.

Happened last time

Guy:Incognito

BaZmO* wrote: »

But as an extra blow, the seeded team also gets to play their away match first. This is blatant favouritism.

Playing away 2nd gives you an extra 30 mins to score an away goal if it's a draw, which I think is unfair.

nullzero

Football isn't a fair contest full stop.
Just look at the so called Champions League, how many sides have been constantly competing in that competition without even challenging for their domestic title for years?
Football seems to be all about creating big sporting brand names to compete with the big U.S sports brands, as a result we've ended up with a sort of footballing class system.

Bandit12

Is anyone surprised? Only a matter of time before the bigger nations get a bye into the European Championship and World Cup anyway's. To much money to be made and football is a major business these day's.