Euro 2008 qualifiers - No playoff's, More matches.

eirebhoy

Great news considering our record in playoffs. Although, since the groups are bigger we will be playing more matches so it could backlash as more players will retire and club managers won't be happy.

Uefa has altered the qualifying format for the 2008 European Championship.

The winners and runners-up from seven groups will automatically qualify for the tournament, which is being co-hosted by Austria and Switzerland.

The move means there will no longer be play-offs between teams finishing in second place in the groups.

Six of the qualifying groups will contain seven teams, and the other eight, with the hosts filling the other two spots in the 16-team tournament.

The qualifying-round format was decided by Uefa's executive committee at its meeting in Tallinn, Estonia, on Tuesday.

The qualifying competition will begin in the autumn of 2006, after the World Cup in Germany in the summer.

The format for Uefa Euro 2004 in Portugal involved 10 group winners qualifying, along with the host country and the winners of five qualifying play-offs staged over two legs on a home-and-away basis.

I have a spreadsheet keeping track of the seedings so here is the latest:

[U][B]European Champs[/B][/U]|[U][B]World Cup 2006[/B][/U]		
		[B]Team	Played	Points	Played	Points	Avg Points[/B]
[B]1[/B]	A	Czech   8	22	6	15	2.642857143
[B]2[/B]	A	Englan	8	20	6	16	2.571428571
[B]3[/B]	A	Hollan	8	19	6	16	2.5
[B]4[/B]	A	France	8	24	6	10	2.428571429
[B]5[/B]	A	Portug.			6	14	2.333333333
[B]6[/B]	A	Germany	8	18			2.25
[B]7[/B]	A	Italy	8	17	5	12	2.230769231
[B]8[/B]	B	Sweden	8	17	5	12	2.230769231
[B]9[/B]	B	Croatia	8	16	5	13	2.230769231
[B]10[/B]	B	Greece	8	18	7	14	2.133333333
[B]11[/B]	B	Turkey	8	19	7	12	2.066666667
[B]12[/B]	B	Spain	8	17	5	9	2
[B]13[/B]	B	Poland	8	13	6	15	2
[B]14[/B]	B	Bulgar.	8	17	5	8	1.923076923
[B]15[/B]	C	Latvia	8	16	6	10	1.857142857
[I][B]16[/B]	        Swizz	8	15	5	9	1.846153846[/I]
[B]17[/B]	C	Romania	8	14	7	13	1.8
[B]18[/B]	C	Ukraine	8	10	7	17	1.8
[B]19[/B]	C	Russia	8	14	6	11	1.785714286
[B]20[/B]	C	Serbia.	8	12	5	11	1.769230769
[B]21[/B]	C	Belgium	8	16	5	7	1.769230769
[B]22[/B]	C	Slovaki	8	10	6	14	1.714285714
[B]23[/B]	D	Norway	8	14	5	8	1.692307692
[B]24[/B]	D	Sloveni	8	14	5	8	1.692307692
[B]25[/B]	D	Denmark	8	15	7	9	1.6
[B]26[/B]	D	[B]Ireland[/B]	8	11	5	9	1.538461538
[B]27[/B]	D	Lithuan	8	10	5	9	1.461538462
[I][B]28[/B]	        Austria 8	9	6	11	1.428571429[/I]
[B]29[/B]	D	Hungary	8	11	5	7	1.384615385
[B]30[/B]	D	Israel	8	9	6	10	1.357142857
[B]31[/B]	E	Finland	8	10	6	9	1.357142857
[B]32[/B]	E	Bosnia	8	13	4	3	1.333333333
[B]33[/B]	E	Scotlan	8	14	4	2	1.333333333
[B]34[/B]	E	Iceland	8	13	5	1	1.076923077
[B]35[/B]	E	Wales	8	13	6	2	1.071428571
[B]36[/B]	E	Estonia	8	8	7	8	1.066666667
[B]37[/B]	E	Albania	8	8	7	6	0.933333333
[B]38[/B]	F	Georgia	8	7	6	5	0.857142857
[B]39[/B]	F	Macedo.	8	6	7	5	0.733333333
[B]40[/B]	F	Armenia	8	7	7	4	0.733333333
[B]41[/B]	F	Belarus	8	3	4	5	0.666666667
[B]42[/B]	F	Cyprus	8	8	6	1	0.642857143
[B]43[/B]	F	Moldova	8	6	5	2	0.615384615
[B]44[/B]	F	Azerbai	8	4	6	2	0.428571429
[B]45[/B]		N.Irela	8	3	6	3	0.428571429
[B]46[/B]		Liechte	8	1	6	4	0.357142857
[B]47[/B]		Andorra	8	0	7	4	0.266666667
[B]49[/B]		Faroes	8	1	4	1	0.166666667
[B]48[/B]		Malta	8	1	5	1	0.153846154
[B]50[/B]		Kazahk			5	0	0
[B]51[/B]		Luxemb	8	0	7	0	0
[B]52[/B]		San M.	8	0	6	0	0

We'll most likely finish in Pot C after this set of qualifiers. If we win our remaining 5 matches we should make Pot B.

MrJoeSoap

Pot C it is so.

BaZmO*

eirebhoy wrote:

Great news considering our record in playoffs. Although, since the groups are bigger we will be playing more matches so it could backlash as more players will retire and club managers won't be happy

It might just mean that there will be less friendlies.

B.

Keano_sli

I'd rather see us trying to qualify straight from a group than via a play-off, so I think, and hope, it will be to our advantage.

por

Us in Pot C and England in Pot A !!!!!
That's b**ix, we are much better than them.
They had a easy group both times,
Etc. Etc. Etc...

Opps, wrong thread

Kone

Hooray! No play offs!

I think we'll make Pot B!

Guy:Incognito

I've been thinking for a while that they should go a bit further than this and do a south america style big league. They could use 5 groups (3 with 10 teams and 2 with 11 teams). This could then eliminate friendlies, bat maybe 1 a year io you fancy a bit of practice Vs a team from outside Europe.

eirebhoy

I wouldn't be too keen on us not playing friendlies under Kerr. We'd have the same team until Kerr goes ffs.

Cianan2

I think no playoffs sounds interesting enough, but what are the chances of it failing?? I wouldn't like it to be sh*t and have to sit through it every tournament.

But with more matches in the group stages,i guess it could leave more to look forward to, more matches to attend/see the country in action.

Are they definately going ahead with it??

Pigman II

That's a bloddy disgraceful system. There should have been 7 groups of 5team with the bottom 20 or so teams in UEFA forced to prequalify for 7 5th seed spots in the main qualifying stage.

It'll be nonsence in itself if Ireland (or any of top sides in Europe) have to play 14 qualifiers, let alone that 6-8 of them will be against teams who don't even register a blip on the footballing radar.

eirebhoy

Pigman II wrote:

..let alone that 6-8 of them will be against teams who don't even register a blip on the footballing radar.

4 max. The bottom two seeds are the only teams that wouldn't really be a match for us. Even then, I wouldn't take a win up the north or over in the likes of Georgia and Azerbaijan for granted. We had 3 woeful teams in our 6 team group for WC 2002. I doubt we'll ever get that again with the teams improving by the year.

Big Ears

definetly to Irelands benefit and if we make pot B we would be odds on to qualify no matter who else makes up the group .

Guy:Incognito

Pigman II wrote:

That's a bloddy disgraceful system. There should have been 7 groups of 5team with the bottom 20 or so teams in UEFA forced to prequalify for 7 5th seed spots in the main qualifying stage.

It'll be nonsence in itself if Ireland (or any of top sides in Europe) have to play 14 qualifiers, let alone that 6-8 of them will be against teams who don't even register a blip on the footballing radar.

The south americans play 18 and it doesnt seem to do them any harm.

Pigman II

Stekelly wrote:

The south americans play 18 and it doesnt seem to do them any harm.

I'm not a fan of the 18game S.American system as it is, but would be a wild claim by anyone to say the worst team in that particular 10 team league is as bad as some of the weaker sides in Europe. That's my main issue here.

Yes it concerns me that there will potentially 14 games to navigate (only advantagous if you have a huge panel with strength in depth), but my primary concern is that they will be played against whipping boys with increased regularity.

It's reducing the qualification process to an almost pointless exercise.

//

BTW wrg the SA system, I think it was only put in place to ensure Brazil and Argentina qualify every single time. Before when teams there only played 4 games in qualification there was always slight chance of a medium quality team breaking up the status quo but over 18 games they haven't a chance! That's probably what UEFA are trying to set up now and since Ireland will (at best) only be 3rd tier in this new system it can't be good for us in the long term.

por

Big Ears wrote:

definetly to Irelands benefit and if we make pot B we would be odds on to qualify no matter who else makes up the group .

How quickly we forget, If I recall we ere in the equivelent of Pot A for the Euro 2004 draw, and where did that get us ?.....Pot D by the looks of it.

Big Ears

por wrote:

How quickly we forget, If I recall we ere in the equivelent of Pot A for the Euro 2004 draw, and where did that get us ?.....Pot D by the looks of it.

McCarthy's poor start left Kerr in a bad position and he to adapt to the Ireland team when qualifying had already started , also we will most likely finish in pot C , the same seeding we had the last time we qualified .

So the blame goes towards the man who will probably lead Sunderland to the Championship title .

Guy:Incognito

Big Ears wrote:

McCarthy's poor start left Kerr in a bad position and he to adapt to the Ireland team when qualifying had already started , also we will most likely finish in pot C , the same seeding we had the last time we qualified .

So the blame goes towards the man who will probably lead Sunderland to the Championship title .

Yeah he was too pig headed to walk away before qualification started. He seemed determind that his parting shot was that we would.nt qualify.

thejollyrodger

18 games is a lot. it suits the bigger nations who have more players to choose from. i cant see this suiting ireland. i think UEFA have brought it in to stop smaller nations from coming through.
Im a little worried about this development tbh

Guy:Incognito

without checking I'd sat that from the end of Euro 2004 till the start of WC2006, including friendlies we must play at least 18 games, so it wouldnt be a big change, just that there won't be any crappy , irrelevent friendlies.

eirebhoy

Where's this 18 games coming from? 7 teams in a group means 12 games each.

Guy:Incognito

eirebhoy wrote:

Where's this 18 games coming from? 7 teams in a group means 12 games each.

It started frommy post further up where I was saying they should have larger groups of 10 or so, like in South America.

Pigman II

eirebhoy wrote:

4 max. The bottom two seeds are the only teams that wouldn't really be a match for us. Even then, I wouldn't take a win up the north or over in the likes of Georgia and Azerbaijan for granted. We had 3 woeful teams in our 6 team group for WC 2002. I doubt we'll ever get that again with the teams improving by the year.

I missed this post up to now.

Just for the sake of argument (and as an extreme case) .... if Ireland land in the 8 team group and draw the following 4 lower teams Estonia (E), Cyprus (F), Malta (-), Luxembourg (-) (which is entirely possible if the seeding go along the lines of your stats table) then it would mean we would have managed to draw 4 particular teams whom our combined record against reads : " played = 16; won = 16; scored = 48; conceded = 5; "

Now if that isn't 8 bankers then I don't know what is! Point being, 8 non-contests IS possible and 6 is extremely likely. 4 would be a dead cert, not a max.

Guy:Incognito

Leictenstein was a banker until we drew with them.

Pigman II

Stekelly wrote:

Leictenstein was a banker until we drew with them.

That's not the point.

I am contesting that it is possible to get drawn in a group with up to 4 bottom quality teams and that IMHO is unacceptable.

Guy:Incognito

It's just a bigger version of the same system. Instead of 2 bottom teams and 2 top teams you'll have 4 and 3. (4 and 4 incl Ireland)

Either way, whatever the system, Cyprus, Malta and Luxembourg are not going to qualify.

eirebhoy

Pigman II wrote:

Just for the sake of argument (and as an extreme case) .... if Ireland land in the 8 team group and draw the following 4 lower teams Estonia (E), Cyprus (F), Malta (-), Luxembourg (-) (which is entirely possible if the seeding go along the lines of your stats table)

Thats if we are in the 8 team group, I didn't take account for that. Although, Estonia wouldn't be an easy match anymore which is why they're in Pot E atm.

KevIRL

I think the point is that the lower teams should have go through some sort of pre qualifying tournament. They do this in some of the other federations anyway. These teams are just there as banana skins. Plus a pre qualifying tournie allows the smaller nations a chance to play others at their own level and would be good preparation for a step up.

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

Pigman II

eirebhoy wrote:

Thats if we are in the 8 team group, I didn't take account for that. Although, Estonia wouldn't be an easy match anymore which is why they're in Pot E atm.

Why wouldn't they be? They were actually in pot D (ie teams 28-36) back when drew them for WC2002 and that factor didn't stop us dispatching them h&a with minimum effort back then either

KevIRL wrote:

I think the point is that the lower teams should have go through some sort of pre qualifying tournament. They do this in some of the other federations anyway. These teams are just there as banana skins. Plus a pre qualifying tournie allows the smaller nations a chance to play others at their own level and would be good preparation for a step up.

Exactly! UEFA seem to think they're doing the smaller countries a favour by giving them 10-12 opportunities to get creamed every 2 years. IMHO it'd help them a lot more if the could get a short summer season of maybe 4 competitive football matches at their level, rather than having to play 'shut up shop' for every game and learn absolutely nothing other than how to keep the scoreline down.

Plus I'd rather be in a five team group where you couldn't take any game lightly, compared an 8 team group where a majority of the fixtures are more or less meaningless.

eirebhoy

Pigman II wrote:

Why wouldn't they be? They were actually in pot D (ie teams 28-36) back when drew them for WC2002 and that factor didn't stop us dispatching them h&a with minimum effort back then either

Estonia 0-1 Belgium
Estonia 0-0 Bulgaria
Estonia 0-1 Croatia
Estonia 2-0 Andorra
Estonia 4-0 Luxembourg
Estonia 1-2 Slovakia
Estonia 1-1 Russia

No team won by more than 1 goal in Estonia in the last 2 qualifying groups. I wouldn't call them a walkover.

Pigman II

eirebhoy wrote:

Estonia 0-1 Belgium
Estonia 0-0 Bulgaria
Estonia 0-1 Croatia
Estonia 2-0 Andorra
Estonia 4-0 Luxembourg
Estonia 1-2 Slovakia
Estonia 1-1 Russia

No team won by more than 1 goal in Estonia in the last 2 qualifying groups. I wouldn't call them a walkover.

Yet 3 out of 7 teams DID win (irrespective of the scoreline) and Estonias only wins were against those powerhouse's from Andorra and Luxembourg so I wouldn't exactly call them a progressive nation.

Perhaps if they had beaten either Bulgaria or Russia there then I might see where you're coming from, but as it is I'd still take them in a heartbeat as a fifth seed.

eirebhoy

I think the draws against Bulgaria, Croatia (away) and Russia show that they are no walkover.

Pigman II

Bulgaria of late have a fairly decent away record (if you choose to forget their 6-0 defeat to Czech in '01 of course) so I'll give them that much, but getting a draw at home to Russia is nothing to crow about considering Russia couldn't win a single away game in the '04 qualifiers and recently lost 7-1 to Portugal.

WhiteWashMan

how about ireland drawing against the mighty football nation of isreal?

cor, didnt the world champions france draw against them as well?

i think every team deserves the chance to play anyone else.

after all, we all know the magic of the cup applies when minnows face powerhouses (unless youre aston villa, in which case you are definately not going to win)

[Jackass]

I dont see why we can't make pot B with all Israel, France and Switzerland at home...i'd have us favourite for all those games.

I like the sounds of 2nd place being automatic qualifier, because i think we can compete with any team we're drawn against, but at least now, second place will be enough.

I would worry about the fact that there's more room for yellow cards, suspensions, injurys etc. So strength in depth will be more of an issues in that qualifying campaign, obviously a disadvantage for us, but overall, i think it's a good thing.

And yes, Mick McCarthy is to blame for our last qualifying campaign.
He should have left after the world cup (after screwing up our chances by accusing roy keane etc. etc. etc. matter of opinion, for a different thread), but after a terrible tactical and team performance in Russia, he then leaves 3 at the back for the last bit against switzerland at home..again, tactical error.

It took all 45,000 people in Landsdowne road screaming "KEANO, KEANO, KEANO" to get the stubbern **** to step down. (And remember storys of FAI wanting to fire him but couldn't afford it...and he still wouldnt leave.)

Then it was left to Kerr to not only adapt to his first high profile job, but in international football, (actually first real management job since underage and eircom leauge can't really be compared to full international football) and in a group we've already lost.

And guided a team to the championship title? Whoop-de-F'n-Do. Clinton Morrison. David Connolly. What have they both got in common? They were the top strikers in the first Division, but never even came close to making it in the premier leauge (at least not yet Morrison, Connolly can't even score in the championship anymore). Gary Breen. He is in the Championship team of the year. He wouldn't even get into most premiership squads, never mind first teams. So there's clearly a big difference.

Judge him on how he does next season, not what he's done this season. If Sunderland stay up, then ya, he's a quality manager...if they go down, he's just another shmuck.