[Archived] Euro 2008

[American Rover12]

And both coaches sent to the stands in the Germany Austria game. Ridiculous.

[mode_m]

quick question.

did both austria and switzerland get auto 'ins' to the euro since both are hosting?

[American Rover12]

I believe so.

[mode_m]

Seems unfair, unless of course they were both good enough to win their divisions, or at least one was. No big deal for me just curious really.

[USRoverME]

they were in as hosts, same way Japan and S. Korea got into that World Cup....

[leftfooter]

quick question.

did both austria and switzerland get auto 'ins' to the euro since both are hosting?

Of course.

That's why there at least two Championship standard sides in the 'second most important football tournament in the world'

[Rovermatt]

Switzerland got the quarter finals of the World Cup. And they just beat Portugal.

[Eddie]

Only beat Portugal as a result of Portugal not needing to get anything from the game. I don't think either Switzerland or Austria would have qualified had they had to.

[leftfooter]

Switzerland got the quarter finals of the World Cup. And they just beat Portugal.

No mention of Austria?

"...Switzerland got the quarter finals of the World Cup...."

Switzerland in my opinion are a poor team. The evidence was there for all to see. Home advantage, crowd behind them and knocked out after their second game.

"...And they just beat Portugal..."

So inane, not even worth a reply.

[rover6]

In anticipation of today's "big clash" I have two observations/questions:

1) Why do Italy go in for that counter-productive and absolutely stupid tactic of trying to find the striker as early as possible in an attack? If you remember the last World Cup (where Italy did alright! but in pretty shambolic style imo) the genius that is Totti gave the ball away 90% of the time doing this. It seems that the Italians have this idea that the second forward should receive the ball with one touch and then spin and play a killer long pass to the isolated main striker.

This tactic allows for ZERO midfield build-up, demands superhuman abilities of the target striker, is easy to defend and is only reasonably effective in the 1/100 times the ball is inch perfect and the lone forward muscles some space.

I was watching Italy play Romania and in the first half, I was relieved to see that they were playing sane football, engaging their considerable technical and passing ability. But then in the second half, they lapsed into this premature pass tactic and their attacking game moreorless fell apart. Why on earth do they do it when they have so much talent to build patiently?!!!!! (Yes, it is annoying me).

2) Anyone notice Cassano's facial twitches - surely further evidence of an absence of marbles? We've heard all crazy stories and it's bad enough that he came on versus Romania and did a remarkable impression of Totti (one touch, turn, ambitious forward pass, give ball away *repeat*) but he also seems to have a facial twitch that makes him look like a wolf.

There you have it, just a few thoughts of mine. You won't get that from Alan Shearer - or Hansen for that matter.

[Rovermatt]

Only beat Portugal as a result of Portugal not needing to get anything from the game. I don't think either Switzerland or Austria would have qualified had they had to.

So? Hardly 'Championship standard'.

[Eddie]

Coming into this tournament I had a good feeling about the French side, but now I don't really see how they win this game. They totally lack creativity and it is difficult to see how they will score. I do expect Toni to get a goal to get the fans off of his back.

[Rovermatt]

No mention of Austria?

Austria are clearly rubbish. They aren't the first poor team to host a major tournament and they won't be the last.

"...Switzerland got the quarter finals of the World Cup...."

Switzerland in my opinion are a poor team. The evidence was there for all to see. Home advantage, crowd behind them and knocked out after their second game.

"...And they just beat Portugal..."

So inane, not even worth a reply.

Almost inane as your observations. Beating Portugal can be a pretty stiff task. Just ask Engerland.

[Eddie]

So? Hardly 'Championship standard'.

How many of their players would you want at Rovers? How many of their players would stand out in the championship? I think it is pretty fair to say that they would both be good(ish) championship teams. You have to remember that club sides tend to be better than national sides anyway.

[Rovermatt]

That may be so but to dismiss a major international tournament so readily is ridiculous.

[Eddie]

I didn't dismiss it. There are some great sides in this tournament and a few are playing some really entertaining football. I've really enjoyed the group stages, although I have a feeling that the knock-outs won't be as good.

[adopted scouser]

Viva Espanya

[Rovermatt]

I didn't dismiss it.

I know you didn't.

[leftfooter]

Austria are clearly rubbish. They aren't the first poor team to host a major tournament and they won't be the last.

Almost inane as your observations. Beating Portugal can be a pretty stiff task. Just ask Engerland.

Don't know what England have to do with it. They didn't qualify because they are not good enough.

My point was originally about Austria and Switzerland.

Are you honestly asserting that the Swiss are a better side than Portugal?

[Eddie]

No. He's just saying that they are good enough to beat them.

99/100 if that game has meaning for Portugal they win by a couple goals.

[Rovermatt]

Eddie you're seriously underestimating Switzerland's quality. Sure they're not a great team but to claim that they would lose that regularly (and heavily) to Portugal when it matters is naive to say the least. There are very few teams at international level as bad as that. The Swiss certainly aren't one of them.

Don't know what England have to do with it. They didn't qualify because they are not good enough.

My point was originally about Austria and Switzerland.

Are you honestly asserting that the Swiss are a better side than Portugal?

I was citing England's failure to win against Portugal, a very good team that the Swiss (a 'Championship standard' side apparently) just beat. Obviously Switzerland are not superior to Portugal but they are clearly worthy of their victory and their place at the tournament as hosts.

[leftfooter]

Switzerland got the quarter finals of the World Cup. And they just beat Portugal.

Not relevant to this tournament...Besides not recently they haven't

Actually England did reach the quarter final of the last World Cup; but as Croatia proved however, that doesn't mean they're good enough to be at Euro 2008.

[Rovermatt]

Not relevant to this tournament...Besides not recently they haven't

What?

Actually England did reach the quarter final of the last World Cup; but as Croatia proved however, that doesn't mean they're good enough to be at Euro 2008.

The Swiss are hosts and thus deserve their place. England weren't good enough to qualify but they'd hardly look out of place if they did manage it.

[Eddie]

So Matt, what would be your prediction for a crunch Portugal v Swiss game? I'd probably go for 2-0 Portugal, which perfectly fits into my earlier statement.

My biggest problem with your position is that for someone who is so hard on the England team you are then so forgiving for the Swiss (which only further confirms my view that you dislike the England team rather than simply thinking they aren't good). Had England been hosting the tournament and then been knocked out after two games before winning a dead-rubber tie against one of the better sides would you have said that they were deserving of their place in the tournament? I'll stand by my point that had Switzerland not been hosts they would not have qualified. They have one quality player and four or five good ones, that really isn't impressive. Had it not been for the heavens opening up they would have been beaten more heavily by Turkey.

[Rovermatt]

So Matt, what would be your prediction for a crunch Portugal v Swiss game? I'd probably go for 2-0 Portugal, which perfectly fits into my earlier statement.

My biggest problem with your position is that for someone who is so hard on the England team you are then so forgiving for the Swiss (which only further confirms my view that you dislike the England team rather than simply thinking they aren't good). Had England been hosting the tournament and then been knocked out after two games before winning a dead-rubber tie against one of the better sides would you have said that they were deserving of their place in the tournament? I'll stand by my point that had Switzerland not been hosts they would not have qualified. They have one quality player and four or five good ones, that really isn't impressive. Had it not been for the heavens opening up they would have been beaten more heavily by Turkey.

A crunch game may very well end up that way. But 99 times out of 100? Come now.

Any 'dislike' I may have for England is irrelevant. I don't foresee any circumstance in which I would claim that England (an entirely respectable footballing nation) wouldn't deserve a place at something they were hosting.

I'm not being particularly forgiving to the Swiss rather I'm defending their right to be there. They are hosts and have regularly played in other international tournaments. Granted they aren't that good but that will happen with any such tournament, some sides are quality others are rubbish.