[Archived] Euro 2008

[RoyRover]

I can't wait for the Euros. Summers of international football is something that I really look forward to. The idea that England will be sorely missed is a bit extreme. Yeah, I'm sure people would have looked forward to seeing England's big names and the chance to play against them. But I'm sure they got over that. No doubt that English fans won't care as much, but the idea that Europe as a whole will miss them is a bit off. I look forward to not hearing the endless hype about England and how this will be their year, only for them to bore everyone to a standstill. No doubt people like Shearer and Lineker will still find the opportunity to say things like 'how are Romania here and not England? We would beat them easy.'

I'm really looking forward to seeing players like Christian Chivu and Adrian Mutu having the chance to demonstrate their talents on an international stage. I think teams like France, Spain, Croatia and Holland have a good chance of doing well. I also think Romania could cause a few upsets.

[Rovermatt]

It's a very difficult thing to watch a tournament when you feel that your team should be there (not based on quality of performances, but simply because they are England).

No team is entitled to be there. Not even the vaunted English with their one World Cup victory. They've stunk out the last couple of tournaments. In the long run they won't be missed.

[Eddie]

In the long run we are all dead.

You won't miss England because you have a strong dislike for them. I obviously will miss them, like all England fans, but I would also miss France, Germany, Italy, etc...if they were not to make it. I'd like to see a tournament with the best teams, no one has a divine right to be there, but it's always nice to see the big clashes. I'm sure you will argue that the best teams qualify, which is of course true for the qualification period, and you will no doubt argue with what I'm about to say, but England are, or at least could be, one of the best sides in the tournament and would have a chance of winning it had they been there, a better chance than a team like Romania.

I'll also add that England provided some of the best entertainment at Euro 2004.

[Blueboy Downunder]

i couldn't care less about euro 2008. england are not in it, so i am totally not interested.

hope our boys do well though

[LeftWinger]

i couldn't care less about euro 2008. england are not in it, so i am totally not interested.

hope our boys do well though

There is a contradiction if I've ever heard one

[MarkBRFC]

At first when England didnt qualify i was pretty gutted and didnt think i would be interested in this tournament at all, now we're getting closer to it though im really looking forward to a good month of top quality (hopefully) international footy without the English media circus there to ruin it.

[Tris]

I can only really comment on what I hear here in France, but they would certainly much rather have England in the tournament. I think the general feeling is that everyone wants all of the best teams in and, regardless of how poor England were in qualification, most still view them as one of the best sides in Europe.

I would want to see a European tournament that involved all of the best teams, England still fall into that category for me and they would have the potential to win it if they were involved.

Eddie - you come out with this rubbish every 2 years (and in between to be fair) - about "the best" sides (in your eyes) being involved in the final phases of international competition. And you still haven't ever admitted that Greece were deserving European Champions 4 years ago simply because they don't fit your own criteria.

The fact is that you have seen a European tournament with England involved in it - they lasted as far as they could but weren't good enough to progress to the final stages. END OF STORY!!! You can't say they would have the potential to win it if they were involved - that's ridiculous. They WERE involved but plainly didn't have the potential to win it, otherwise they'd still be in it!

I'd like to see a tournament with the best teams [...] I'm sure you will argue that the best teams qualify, which is of course true for the qualification period

How do you suggest the 16 teams are chosen to make up this summers tournament finals Eddie? Alphabetical selection? Eddie picks his favourites? Based on qualification for Euro 2004, or Euro 2000, or the Beijing Olympics?

It's a competition which starts in September 2007, if the teams you want to see weren't good enough to qualify then go and watch rounders or something.

[Rovermatt]

In the long run we are all dead.

You won't miss England because you have a strong dislike for them. I obviously will miss them, like all England fans, but I would also miss France, Germany, Italy, etc...if they were not to make it. I'd like to see a tournament with the best teams, no one has a divine right to be there, but it's always nice to see the big clashes. I'm sure you will argue that the best teams qualify, which is of course true for the qualification period, and you will no doubt argue with what I'm about to say, but England are, or at least could be, one of the best sides in the tournament and would have a chance of winning it had they been there, a better chance than a team like Romania.

Any dislike I may have is irrelevant. This is a tournament with the best teams. England are patently not one of them. Nor are any of the other home nations for that matter. It's depressing but it's the truth.

[tchocky]

It's a competition which starts in September 2007,

2006

[AggyBlue]

This is a tournament with the best teams. England are patently not one of them.

No No No Matt.

England are obviously the best team in Europe at present, we just had a pathetic manager during the qualifying stages.

[RoyRover]

In the long run we are all dead.

You won't miss England because you have a strong dislike for them. I obviously will miss them, like all England fans, but I would also miss France, Germany, Italy, etc...if they were not to make it. I'd like to see a tournament with the best teams, no one has a divine right to be there, but it's always nice to see the big clashes. I'm sure you will argue that the best teams qualify, which is of course true for the qualification period, and you will no doubt argue with what I'm about to say, but England are, or at least could be, one of the best sides in the tournament and would have a chance of winning it had they been there, a better chance than a team like Romania.

I'll also add that England provided some of the best entertainment at Euro 2004.

No one cares about what happened four years ago. People aren't thinking "God, England played a great game against France four years back, they should really be here." I too would miss France, Germany and Italy if they all weren't there, but if one of them were to miss out I'm sure you and I could get over it pretty quickly. I have no doubt that you would like to see England at the Euros, so would the other millions of English fans. I find it a shame that people can't look forward to seeing some of the best football teams in Europe and think that the tournament will be lessened because a poor England side aren't there. I thought that people would enjoy watching good football and not pinning their hopes to a team that constantly fails to deliver. I don't think that people are necessarily anti-English, just anti-England are a great team, who deserve to be at tournaments just because...

[American Rover12]

No No No Matt.

England are obviously the best team in Europe at present, we just had a pathetic manager during the qualifying stages.

Obviously

[Sydney Rovers]

I can only really comment on what I hear here in France, but they would certainly much rather have :rolleyes:England in the tournament.

I wish England were there too, who will Portugal beat in a penalty shoot out this time?

[Eddie]

Eddie - you come out with this rubbish every 2 years (and in between to be fair) - about "the best" sides (in your eyes) being involved in the final phases of international competition. And you still haven't ever admitted that Greece were deserving European Champions 4 years ago simply because they don't fit your own criteria.

The fact is that you have seen a European tournament with England involved in it - they lasted as far as they could but weren't good enough to progress to the final stages. END OF STORY!!! You can't say they would have the potential to win it if they were involved - that's ridiculous. They WERE involved but plainly didn't have the potential to win it, otherwise they'd still be in it!

How do you suggest the 16 teams are chosen to make up this summers tournament finals Eddie? Alphabetical selection? Eddie picks his favourites? Based on qualification for Euro 2004, or Euro 2000, or the Beijing Olympics?

It's a competition which starts in September 2007, if the teams you want to see weren't good enough to qualify then go and watch rounders or something.

That's not actually true. I have never denied that Greece were deserving of their vicotry, I simply said that they were not the best side in Europe. I will never budge from that point of view.

I don't have a problem with the qualification phase, I don't think England deserve to be there, but I think the vast majority of football fans would put them in the best 16 in Europe if they had to compile a list, just as they would do the other "big" teams, my personal taste is to see major tournaments where those teams go head to head as I am generally bored by friendlies and qualification phases. This is my personal taste, I understand that many don't agree with me.

Any dislike I may have is irrelevant. This is a tournament with the best teams. England are patently not one of them. Nor are any of the other home nations for that matter. It's depressing but it's the truth.

This is a tournament of the best teams during the qualification period. Each of them deserves to be there, any team that isn't there doesn't deserve it (except in fluke circumstances like Wales for Euro 2004), but that doesn't make this the tourmanent of the best teams.

No one cares about what happened four years ago. People aren't thinking "God, England played a great game against France four years back, they should really be here." I too would miss France, Germany and Italy if they all weren't there, but if one of them were to miss out I'm sure you and I could get over it pretty quickly. I have no doubt that you would like to see England at the Euros, so would the other millions of English fans. I find it a shame that people can't look forward to seeing some of the best football teams in Europe and think that the tournament will be lessened because a poor England side aren't there. I thought that people would enjoy watching good football and not pinning their hopes to a team that constantly fails to deliver. I don't think that people are necessarily anti-English, just anti-England are a great team, who deserve to be at tournaments just because...

I don't think that all of Europe will be crying about this for months, I had simply pointed out that I have spoken to probably around 50 French people about this and every single one of them has expressed the same opinion: that being that they wish England were in it and that it is a shame that they are not. They are not depressed, they will enjoy the tourmanent still, but they would like them there. Now it is quite possible that I have spoken to the only 50 people in Europe who care about this, or it is possible that they reflect a good percentage of European football fans, who knows. All I can say is that, from my experience, the football fans here would like to see England in the tournament and they don't feel it will be quite as good without them.

What you must remember is that everyone here watches two leagues, Ligue 1 and the Premiership. As a result of this they build up a huge level of respect for the English game. Most view the English league as the best in the world and they see what English players do and, as shocking as this may sound to those of you who think the England team is already over-hyped, they probably think more of the English team and English players than the average England fan. I posted on this back in 2006, but they are amazed by the quality of the team when they run through a list of players. The simple reason for this is that they see their exploits at club level, but they never see their failings at international level. If you had only ever seen Lampard and Gerrard at club level you would probably think England had one of the best, if not the best, central midfield pairings in world football, sadly that is far from the truth.

Now if you won't miss England that is fine, I am only saying what I have encountered. If you really want to speculate and disagree with the feeling within the country that I live in, well then that is your choice. As for me saying England are one of the best teams, well I'll understand why many will disagree and rely purely on results, which is entirely logical, but personally I like to look a bit beyond that when judging sports teams. Maybe that's why I was more critical of Rovers when many were pleased with the 7th place finish. That is why I put England amongst Europe's best sides (certainly in the top 16). I don't want to see a tournament where the top 16 are simply handed their place, that isn't what I'm saying, but I would like them to do their jobs and all make it through the qualification phase. If they don't, as England failed to do, then I don't think they deserve to be there, but in an ideal world, for me at least, they would be.

Now get yourselves worked up and call me a moron or whatever.

[Rovermatt]

My my Eddie, chill out homes.

This tournament does have the best teams in it since they all qualified, gaining more points than their opponents. I'm pretty sure that's the most accurate way to gauge the quality rather than some long, drawn out hypothesis.

There is not a single side in Euro 2008 whose presence is surprising. The likes of Greece (the reigning champions) and Romania may lack glamour but there is no doubting their records in qualifying. In Romania's case, they have some very talented footballers and a good team spirit. They are not exactly lacking in pedigree unlike Latvia for instance.

Yes the like of Denmark, Serbia, Norway and England (all respectable footballing nations) are absent but the majority of people will still enjoy the tournament.

[Blueboy Downunder]

eddie, how can you possibly say that greece where not the best side in europe in 2004?? they won the piggin tournament and thoroughly deserved so!!

[Eddie]

Yes the like of Denmark, Serbia, Norway and England (all respectable footballing nations) are absent but the majority of people will still enjoy the tournament.

I never said that they wouldn't and I never said that any of the sides who are there did not deserve to be there or that any of the sides that weren't deserved to be. I simply said that many fans in Europe, people who do not support England, would rather have England there. I also said that I rank England amongst Europe's best sides and that I feel most football supporters would as well. They did not deserve to qualify for the tournament.

[Eddie]

eddie, how can you possibly say that greece where not the best side in europe in 2004?? they won the piggin tournament and thoroughly deserved so!!

It's not the best side in Europe that wins it, it's the best side for the 4 weeks over which the tournament is played. That may sometimes be the best team, sometimes it won't be, sometimes a team will prove that they are by winning it. Greece were most certainly not the best side in Europe, but they were the best team during the toournament. There are far too many factors to consider in a knock-out tournament that prevent it from simply proving who is the best around.

One could argue that Portsmouth are the best side in England, afterall they won the only tournament in which every league side competes in, but they most certainly aren't. I will never begrudge a team or individual their victory, but winning doesn't always mean that you are the best. For those few weeks, with the rub of the green, home advantage and good play Greece were the best side, a few months later when they failed to qualify for the World Cup they most certainly weren't. Good team, but not the best. Afterall, who here is putting Italy down as their favourites? They are the best team in the world...aren't they?

[philipl]

England going down

[T4E]

It's not the best side in Europe that wins it, it's the best side for the 4 weeks over which the tournament is played. That may sometimes be the best team, sometimes it won't be, sometimes a team will prove that they are by winning it. Greece were most certainly not the best side in Europe, but they were the best team during the toournament. There are far too many factors to consider in a knock-out tournament that prevent it from simply proving who is the best around.

One could argue that Portsmouth are the best side in England, afterall they won the only tournament in which every league side competes in, but they most certainly aren't. I will never begrudge a team or individual their victory, but winning doesn't always mean that you are the best. For those few weeks, with the rub of the green, home advantage and good play Greece were the best side, a few months later when they failed to qualify for the World Cup they most certainly weren't. Good team, but not the best. Afterall, who here is putting Italy down as their favourites? They are the best team in the world...aren't they?

GSM Buddy. I totally agree with your point. I'm not going to miss England though - I'd miss any of the other big sides.

[FourLaneBlue]

To be fair to Eddie regarding Greece I know what he is saying. Greece winning was like winning a cup rather than the league. If they had played over a season home and away then they wouldn´t have won the title. So they were the best team in the tournament but it doesn´t necessarily equate to best team in Europe. In 2006 Italy won the World Cup but if you ask people who the best team in the world are then I would guess most would still say Brazil.

As for the Euros...nobody really gives too much of a toss that England won´t be there. Sure they will miss them as they are usually there but, like The Netherlands in 2002, they will get over it pretty damn quickly. Heck...I´m English and I even I don´t give a toss anymore. That said there are currently ten English players knocking the ball around in the Champions League final so England obviously have the players to win it if not the team (the old conundrum) and, in a tournament, would be expected to get out of their groups. Well...now MacLaren has buggered off anyway.

I´m looking forward to to a tournament with the best teams from September 2006 to October 2007. I´m surprised people cannot enjoy the best teams in Europe competing against each other just because England aren´t there. We weren´t good enough...forget about it and enjoy the football. After all the next tournament won´t be along until 2010...

[Rover4ever]

For those few weeks, with the rub of the green, home advantage and good play Greece were the best side, a few months later when they failed to qualify for the World Cup they most certainly weren't. Good team, but not the best.

Agree that Greece were not, and are not the best side in Europe, but in all fairness, they hardly enjoyed home advantage in Euro 2004, did they?

Also if you make a subjective statement of best teams in Europe as a neutral, England wouldnt be in the top 3, maybe top 6, but definitely not top 3....

[Eddie]

Sorry about that, brain freeze.

I certainly wouldn't put England in the top 3 in Europe, I'm not sure if they'd be in my top 6 at the moment. They'd certainly be in my top 10 and I'd like to see anyone to seriously argue that they aren't in the top 16.

[philipl]

Sorry about that, brain freeze.

I certainly wouldn't put England in the top 3 in Europe, I'm not sure if they'd be in my top 6 at the moment. They'd certainly be in my top 10 and I'd like to see anyone to seriously argue that they aren't in the top 16.

Steve McLaren put up a far more convincing argument that England are not in the top 16. And unlike you eddie, he has concrete evidence to prove it,

[Eddie]

So are you saying they aren't then?