Forum

xml	No replies possible in the archive

England Spain Italy France
Author: kerrbhoy Date: 05-12-2003, 18:36	Can someone tell me the reason that these countries have been GUARANTEED a 6 team group?

Author: porto-1978
Date: 05-12-2003, 19:56

Because those are the countries that have more teams in Uefa Clubs competitions!
Stupid reason, i guess. It was a good reason before Bosman rule, but ourdays?!?
Hey, uefa masters, try to get better excuses to protect the stronger sides because those are... just excuses!
The players from the portuguese national team make no less european games than the players from spanish or french national team! The majority of the international players from clubs such as Real Sociedad, Villarreal, Mallorca, Auxerre, Lens, Sochaux, Manchester City, Newcastle, Southampton, Perugia, Udinese or Parma play not in the spanish, french, english or italian national teams but in other countries national teams!!! Nihat, Figo, Schevchenko, Rui Costa, Nistelroy and so many other players... also the south american players...
I guess how many french international players play this year in Uefa competitions by french teams... I guess very few! But in those teams play a lot of internationals from other countries, for sure more than french internationals! (i?m only remembering Barthez that (don?t play) but make his trainings in Marseille and some under-21 internationals).
So the real reason is to protect the stronger teams, as many other Uefa rules....

Re: England Spain Italy France
Author: Sokin Date: 05-12-2003, 20:03	No games against Andorra Luxembourg or Kazahstan is not a big protection.

Re: England Spain Italy France
Author: kerrbhoy Date: 05-12-2003, 20:31	You're right, its not. So I wonder why UEFA even bothered. They've made the draw look unfair/fixed just so The Big Four can avoid a couple of games against Andorra. Strange behaviour. I imagine that on England's week off, all the Premiership games will be cancelled anyway as most of the players in England are internationals for other countries.

Author: porto-1978
Date: 06-12-2003, 20:37

But the majority of the international players in England are not internationals for England, Spain, Italy or France...

You?re loosing the most important about it... The question is not to avoid the 3 last countries in uefa ranking; the question is to play in a group of 6 and not 7 teams. Two more games, no matter with who. And the weight of that 2 games results is very relative (the results with the last classified of the 7 team?s groups are not considered to get the 2 best 2nd placed, those have direct entry in WC06).
I would not be surprised if one or more of those national teams will take advantage of those 2 "hollydays" to play each other or with a better opponent than Andorra or Liechenstein.

It?s not only aparently unfair, in fact it?s really unfair. Uefa club competitions are a continent wide competition so if it?s reason to protect some countries it?s not that way but the inverse way. There?s about 32 (or a bit more) countries that provides almost the total of european players involved in Uefa competitions. Uefa could save those 30-something countries from playing a pre-qualification round for WC06. That pre-qualification round would add to the best ranked countries enough to fill 40 places in the qualification (if we save 32 countries from pre-qual, then that pre-qual would have 8 winners, added to the other 32,= 40).
This way all the groups have the same number of teams and so each team plays the SAME Nr of GAMES: 8 groups of 5 teams each, or 10 groups of 4 teams each.

Only the winners from the pre-qualification would have more games than the others. But are countries with real no expression in Uefa clubs competitions. Countries such as Belarus, Cyprus, N. irl, Estonia or Albania, that nearly almost have no clubs playing in Europe after christmas... (nr.33 this year, Hungary, still have one team in Uefa cup but is an exeption; it?s a rarity that a country whose national team is ranked 33-52 to have clubs in Uefa after preliminary rounds or 1st or 2nd round in uefa cup... So it?s just to avoid august-november in the schedule of that Pre-qualification games...

Re: England Spain Italy France
Author: porto-1978 Date: 06-12-2003, 20:53	Or 42 teams in 7 groups of 6 teams each... but that would mean more games for each team. Litlle arrangement in pre-qualification would be required as Europe have or don?t have any direct entry in WC (as Germany this time).

Author: kerrbhoy
Date: 07-12-2003, 06:17

So why weren't Portugal included?

I agree with a pre-qualifying competition but only for use in eliminating countries with tiny populations that provide NO competition. In other federations they have many such countries, in UEFA we don't...

There were 51 teams in Euro qualifying this year, and by your system to gain 40 teams in the end 11 of those would have to be eliminated. And 22 therefore would have to play in the preliminaries. This means not only would Andorra, Litchenstein have to play preliminaries, but every country from 30th [i.e. seedings for WC2006> place would also. This for WC2006 would have included Bosnia, Wales, Israel, Hungary, Belarus, Georgia, etc. What if one of these countries lost in the preliminaries? It would kill football there for 2 years.. and these are countries which have produced great players and clubs in the past..they all have potential.

i.e. Wales may have no clubs in Europe, but their best players play in the CL for Celtic, Man United, Newcastle etc. It's not fair to look at club coefficients and then transfer those onto the national team?

There only are say 6-8 countries which provide no real competition - Andorra, Litch, San Marino, Malta, Luxembourg, Faroes, Azerbaijan & Moldova. Kazakhstan has a large population & a well supported league and will be a better addition to UEFA. http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/2003/avekaz.htm. UEFA should introduce a preliminary tournament which just eliminated the very, very worst i.e. eliminate 3/4 for 48 teams and 8 groups of 6. This could even be turned into a tournament i.e. San Marino, Andorra, Litch, Malta & Faroes play in the summer, and the winner qualifies for the WC qualifying.

I don't see how European football benefits from killing off the national team of smaller countries for 2 years.

We had it lucky all through the 70s & 80s when UEFA had exactly 33 countries, normally with a host or a holder making it exactly 32 in qualifying!

Author: porto-1978
Date: 07-12-2003, 17:09

Portugal is in 2nd place in the ranking used in frankfurt(?) last friday! How can the 2nd placed enter in a pre qualification?!? In the day Portugal will be 36th or something like that... (Portugal played a lot of pre qualifications in the past, as was never a "protected" country, still watch national and clubs marks and just keep being jelous, scot)
I?m not mixing national selections ranking with clubs ranking in a way or another. Who?ve done that was Uefa with this rule that you?ve mentioned in this topic. And i say it again, if you relate clubs and national teams competitions, then you shouldn?t protect a minority of 4 contries but the majority of countries that gives players to Uefa competitions.
We?re talking about football! Just it. Kazaqstan have to prove they deserve to play the qualification: getting higher position in ranking and/or winning the pre-qualifications until that day. Hungary have to do better or else is considered worse than Wales, no matter if magiar football was wonderfull in the past.
Ok, 32 teams more 8 from qualification it?s just an example... Maybe not the very best... The important thing it?s just one: that all groups have the same number of teams, why not 48 in 8 groups of 6...ok that?s far better that the system used last week. BUT: in pre qualification enters the last ranked countries, not the less populate or any other economical or social diference. In that system, i would expect Portugal to play the pre qualification and Malta to go directly to the qualifications if it was the case that Malta over passed Portugal in the ranking. As you scotish should be ready to see your national team in the same situation if it was the case...
As example, if Hungary have to play a pre-Qual it?s because they are not doing very well. So they have to prove they deserve better! That can even motivate them.... If then they lose with Albania... well, we can?t say hungarian football will be death for 2 years. That would be a signal that the hungarian football is death already (fact that i don?t believe to be truth, but i would like to watch them in a situation like that to be sure that they are still better than Albania; and i think it would be healthy for Hungaria this time, to Wales or Austria next time to be included among the worst to test their pride).

Author: kerrbhoy
Date: 07-12-2003, 18:06

When I said "So why weren't Portugal included? " it was in response to your comment "Because those are the countries that have more teams in Uefa Clubs competitions! ". My point was that France will have the same number of clubs in Europe next year as Portugal, so Portugal deserve a 6-team group as much as them.

Why start with the Scottish shit again? I was trying to have a sensible conversation with you for once. I won't make that mistake again.

Re: England Spain Italy France
Author: Sokin Date: 08-12-2003, 02:05	France has 20 clubs in the domestic league and Portugal 18.

Re: England Spain Italy France
Author: kerrbhoy Date: 08-12-2003, 05:01	Yeah, I am sure that's an excuse UEFA would use; it's not one they gave at the time though!

Author: porto-1978
Date: 08-12-2003, 18:09

uh! oh what a mistake i?ve made... i?ve misunderstood that comment of yours, sorry... and now i feel bad about it, well just as if i?ve gave the idea of being paranoic. In fact i?m not (too much

and i think that "So why weren't Portugal included? " was a bit open question. Anyway was my fault to think you had bad intentions saying that.
In fact i almost forget that next year portugal have as much uefa representants as france... And as there was another 6 teams group, portugal would deserve it, following the path uefa created with this rule. But i don?t agree with the rule, so i don?t think portugal deserve more than czech republic or sweeden at this level (as france or spain deserve no shorter group than portugal).
Portuguese domestic league will have only 16 teams next year or the year after, not sure. And one more thing: except Porto, Sporting and Benfica only Boavista (sometimes) have some portuguese or other nationality internationals... Teams such as Braga, Beira-Mar, Mar�timo (the best classified right now to take the Uefa cup places next year) have no internationals, except maybe some africans and Braga?s goal keeper Quim (Scolari prefers him to Baia).
It would be extremly unfair to include Portugal; big part of portuguese internationals don?t play in Portugal; but the same for french, or am i wrong?
Thinking better, Ricardo, Baia, Quim, Paulo Ferreira, Miguel, Nuno Valente, Rui Jorge, Ricardo Carvalho, Ricardo Rocha, Beto, Costinha, Maniche, Deco, Petit, Tiago, Sim�o Sabrosa, Nuno Gomes and many others play in Portugal. It?s about 50% playing in Portugal and 50% outside. We?ll see Scolari?s list.

Re: England Spain Italy France
Author: Gosti Date: 08-12-2003, 20:00	It?s like - why has spain just 8 places in uefa cups when the spanish second league has better quality than the first of for example bulgarian league?

Author: kerrbhoy
Date: 08-12-2003, 20:03

Every club in the English Premiership has at least 10 non-English players. Most have over 15, some have more than 20. Scotland's squad for the game v Netherlands included 16 players based in England.

England national team having a "day off" will make zero contribution to reducing fixture congestion in England because most/all of the Premiership games will have to be postponed anyway due to players being away with other countries.

In fact giving Wales or Ireland a 6 team group would have made more sense as 2 of England's players play outside England's league, only 1 of Ireland's or Wales players does..

Author: Lyonnais
Date: 10-12-2003, 17:02

I really don't understand the issue you are raising there.

UEFA needed 4 countries to play in 6-team groups. They could have had a draw. Instead, they chose like the so-called 'Big 4'.

What's the issue then ? Is it really unfair for say Portugal that France or Spain do not have to play those stupid games in Liechstenstein or San Marino ? Is it such a big advantage not to meet like a team that would not deserve to play in any professional league in Europe ?

Portuguese paranioa ....