I understand that, but even on the basis of positive and attacking play the Russians deserve it. They BEAT the league winners by 3 goals in the opening game, 4-1. Puh....
UEFA Euro 2012 - Group A - ** spoilers ** (Czech Republic, Greece, Poland, Russia)
- Thread starter Robbo
- Start date
I understand that, but even on the basis of positive and attacking play the Russians deserve it. They BEAT the league winners by 3 goals in the opening game, 4-1. Puh....
Ultimately though, the teams who were level were Russia and Greece and Greece demonstrated tonight that they are better than Russia by beating them.
Russia should have put this group to bed before tonights games even kicked off really.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
ah well it keeps my work sweepstake alive as i got the Czechs.
I was arguing about this before with my Dad. I think it isn't fair to be honest and this is why.
Say Russia smashed the Czechs 10-0, drew the next game with Poland 2-2 and then lost to Greece 1-0 because of a bad decision by the ref (Say a dive giving the Greeks a pen) and the Greeks would still go though.
Doesn't seem right. Like saying if City were 5 points behind United at the end of the season but won the title because they beat them in their game together.
Say Russia smashed the Czechs 10-0, drew the next game with Poland 2-2 and then lost to Greece 1-0 because of a bad decision by the ref (Say a dive giving the Greeks a pen) and the Greeks would still go though.
Doesn't seem right. Like saying if City were 5 points behind United at the end of the season but won the title because they beat them in their game together.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 7,004
- Location
- Thessaloniki
It's not like saying that at all
It's like saying that if they finished the season on equal points and Utd had a better goal difference but City had beaten Utd in both games, then City would win the title.
IMO it's fairer than United winning the league on the back of a 10-0 win at Wolves because they didn't turn up or had loads of injuries, for all we know Czech Republic had a bad day at the office in their first game...
I think most people just carried away with the Russia hype, I wrote Greece off at the start but they displayed an admirable never say die attitude.
I think most people just carried away with the Russia hype, I wrote Greece off at the start but they displayed an admirable never say die attitude.
Last edited:
This isn't a league, it's a knockout cup competition!
It is fair - all teams know the rule and what's at stake in each match. Arguably the rule is working well if teams like Russia are punished for sitting back and settling for draws and 1-0s. In the past other boring teams like Italy and Spain have been punished for settling.
There isn't anything like enough games to see any normalisation in results, indeed there aren't enough games in a Premier League season for normalisation to occur - good and bad decisions, good and bad luck does not absolutely even itself out over the course of a season
Good to see a lot of bets going down the pan.
You see when you make assumptions, you look like an ****
....i didnt bet for your info, i just didnt want to see the Greeks get through to the next round as i quite liked the Russian team.Greece are going to get absolutely hammered by the Germans, thats the funniest thing about their win.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 25,821
- Location
- Glasgow
It's strange looking at a table where the winners have got the same (negative) goal difference as the last placed team, the second placed team have no goal difference and the third placed team is the only one with a positive goal difference. I understand how it happened but it still looks a bit odd to me.
Ah well, there goes my team in the sweepstake for the Euros, a reasonable substitute for Scotland overall but they did it the wrong way round - it should have been a loss, a draw and then a futile win if they wanted to emulate it properly.
Bit of a pity that it looks like both host nations will be going out though, I tend to think the atmosphere is better if at least one of the host nations can make it beyond the group stages of major tournaments.
Ah well, there goes my team in the sweepstake for the Euros, a reasonable substitute for Scotland overall but they did it the wrong way round - it should have been a loss, a draw and then a futile win if they wanted to emulate it properly.
Bit of a pity that it looks like both host nations will be going out though, I tend to think the atmosphere is better if at least one of the host nations can make it beyond the group stages of major tournaments.
Probably. On the other hand, that's what people thought and expected would happen last night to Greece by the russians. However, as we know it was not so SIMPLES for the russians.
Associate
- Joined
- 29 Jul 2008
- Posts
- 1,416
The Russians had a couple of good opportunities and should have scored one goal at least. On the other hand Greeks were not given a penalty (not to mention the yellow card) and also had a chance for a second goal. Overall I think that a 2-2 would have been a fair score.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Yes, to a degree but then Real and Barca(assuming its those two) both have a ridiculously larger number of games to make sure they don't end up drawn, and there are two games, which gives both teams a chance to pull one back in the head to head stakes. Its a much fairer way to do it than head to head in a 3 game league, which is unbelievably stupid of them to do.
Either way, Russia were good for most of the game, horrendously lazy defending in the dying seconds of a half catches out so many players. Though the commentators wanted to put it on the left back it was a CB who randomly ran across missed the header badly and left a gaping hole for the guy to run into.
Manager has to take most of the blame though, 7 shots, 7 misses, very very poor misses in the first game, Pav comes on and in 15 minutes makes the other guy look a joke so who starts and plays most of the second and third games, the same awful striker. If RVP played and missed 11 shots in 11 in the first two games, you would drop him for the third, let alone someone no where near RVP's level. He was out of form and playing badly, ended up with 14 shots and 14 misses, of which half should have been goals from the type of chances missed.
Greece, don't think they were very good but ultimately the team who doesn't turn off for 30 seconds because they think the whistle is going to go for half/full time will have a huge advantage over a team that can't wait to get off the pitch. Russia absolutely threw it away. Poland did to a degree as well, Greece were so horrifically awful in the first half of the first game, they should never have let them back in it at all.
I think I'll start a new thread on the subject (if that is what transpires) but in my eyes having two host nations in a 16 team tournament is a bit of a joke. Why?
1) In general, if nations have to club together to host a tournament then that implies that at least one of the nations aren't 'big enough' in footballing terms, in terms of infrastructure to host the tournament and therefore probably in ability.
2) In this specific case, the two host nations are officially the two weakest nations in the tournament by FIFA ranking (and probably fail to qualify from their groups), which bears out the above. Yes, I dare say not playing any qualifiers probably hurts their rankings but even so...
So basically the host nations get a free pass rather than being there on merit. Yes that always happens BUT it is worse than normal when there is two nations hosting it (because it takes twice as many spots and is more likely to involve rubbish teams on account of the fact they aren't big enough to host it individually). The same thing happened with Belgium in 2000, they failed to get out of their group as well, although at least the co-hosts were a 'top' side.
Maybe in future years we'd see something similar in Britain, with Scotland and Wales clubbing together to give more a credible bid and sneak themselves into the tournament. Not quite such a big deal though since they are expanding to 24 teams.
Last edited:
I dunno, it at least eliminates teams perhaps getting through because their third game was against an already eliminated team who just don't bother turning up and get a 6-0 drubbing or something, which would completely distort the stats.
If two or three teams are tied doing a direct comparison of the results concerning just those two or three teams is fairer than first deciding based on goals scored and conceded possibly against an unrelated team whose performances may have varied hugely.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 25,821
- Location
- Glasgow
I can see where you're coming from and to an extent I'd agree but I still think the atmosphere tends to be better when the host or hosts are still in the competition. I wouldn't imagine it is going to ruin the competition or anything drastic like that but it does just keep that little bit more interest.