1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Thanks, scara
    Dismiss Notice

Euro 2020

Discussion in 'General Football' started by Jordinho, 6 Dec 2012.

  1. Notmegov

    Notmegov Mido

    Joined:
    14 Jan 2012
    Messages:
    3,015
    Likes Received:
    937
    Location:
    Nappy Land
    Yes i do believe it, i do believe UEFA and all there crony's are after as much money as possible!!

    Do i want it to happen?? No
    Do i like it??? No
     
  2. Notmegov

    Notmegov Mido

    Joined:
    14 Jan 2012
    Messages:
    3,015
    Likes Received:
    937
    Location:
    Nappy Land
    Can just see it being spread over 6 months or some thing stupid like that.
     
  3. billyiddo

    billyiddo Paul Stewart Staff Member

    Joined:
    14 Jan 2012
    Messages:
    19,080
    Likes Received:
    8,027
    Location:
    SE4
    what do people want - competitions to stay in exactly the same format for eternity? Now THAT would get boring.

    Good to see Uefa and Fifa mixing things up a little recently, if it doesn't work out im sure it'll revert back or get tweaked here and there or whatever.

    Jts' idea on the first page about close by cities in different countries hosting together is fantastic imv and probably not a million miles from what we will end up with.

    As for the costs - just get yourself a 2week or 30 day inter rail ticket and Europe is your oyster for a reasonable price.
     
  4. jts1882

    jts1882 Chris Armstrong

    Joined:
    15 Jul 2012
    Messages:
    5,269
    Likes Received:
    1,804
    True, it could be expensive to host for countries without the infrastructure.

    However, there are a number of countries that already have the infrastructure. England or Germany or France could host it immediately. Russia would also be able to host it by 2020 after their world cup. Italy and Spain wouldn't need much extra. So that gives France (2016), England (2020), Germany (2024) and Russia (2028 ). The economic crisis should be over by the late 2020s allowing Italy and Spain to host 2032 and 2036.

    So there is only a problem for 2040 if repeating the hosts every 24 years is a problem. I don't see this as an urgent need to change the format of a competition that is successful.
     
  5. ArcspacE

    ArcspacE Banned

    Joined:
    14 Jan 2012
    Messages:
    11,786
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    I Have 90 Infraction Points
    More sign of the financial times (to come!), imv
     
  6. Rorschach

    Rorschach Erik Thorstvedt

    Joined:
    14 Jan 2012
    Messages:
    22,764
    Likes Received:
    11,381
    Location:
    ...here
    They do some good work too, it must be said. They banned snoods.

    Seriously though what the fudge is happening to football? We need a revolution.
     
  7. Spursalot

    Spursalot Jimmy McCormick

    Joined:
    19 Jan 2012
    Messages:
    11,158
    Likes Received:
    9
    Euro 2020

    This is such a dumb plan. For so many reasons, yet the geniuses at Uefa were never going to listen to fans. Granted it's not yet set in stone.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21203253
     
    Last edited: 25 Jan 2013
  8. Jurgen the German

    Jurgen the German Andy Thompson

    Joined:
    21 Jan 2012
    Messages:
    16,931
    Likes Received:
    2,987
    Location:
    Mexico..All's I'm saying
    I echo PLJ's sentiments. Way to ruin a tournament that was perfect that way it was:

    16 teams
    You get the good games early e.g. Germany v Holland
    None of crap teams from Africa, South America or Asia

    And Sepp Blatter's response when asked about the potential cost for fans?: "The tournament could either be in one country with 12 stadiums, or one stadium in 12 or 13 cities, with each venue getting four games. We have talked about 12 or 13 host cities because it could be a tournament of 24 or 32 nations. In these days of cheap air travel, anything is possible. It is easier to go from London to Paris or Berlin than Cardiff to Gdansk. We will discuss it very seriously – it's an idea I feel really passionate about, and it would be a lot easier from a financial perspective. It is not easy to build airports and 10 stadiums in a country. This would be an easier arrangement, especially when we are in the middle of an economic crisis. But it is just an idea."

    Yeah because the airlines wouldn't do anything cynical, like say raising the prices of flights to those destinations about 400% when the tournament is on would they?
     
  9. chicken_badge

    chicken_badge Gudni Bergsson

    Joined:
    6 Feb 2012
    Messages:
    2,650
    Likes Received:
    89
    These venues will be assumed to be neutral, perhaps with some teams playing at home through luck of the draw. So we could see Germany v Holland at Wembley in the first round while England play Romania in the Allianz. Where would be the sense in that?

    Would you also expect to shift 90000 tickets for Croatia v Switerland at Wembley?

    Should at least cluster the cities so rotate between Central Europe, the med and Northern Europe
     
  10. Spursalot

    Spursalot Jimmy McCormick

    Joined:
    19 Jan 2012
    Messages:
    11,158
    Likes Received:
    9
    However host nations who do qualify for the tournament will play at least two of their three group matches at home.



    Nope, the aim is to not make them neutral.
     
  11. Jordinho

    Jordinho John White Staff Member

    Joined:
    14 Jan 2012
    Messages:
    41,848
    Likes Received:
    9,879
    Location:
    Next season
    With 4 host nations in the same group I see a potential problem.
     
  12. Jurgen the German

    Jurgen the German Andy Thompson

    Joined:
    21 Jan 2012
    Messages:
    16,931
    Likes Received:
    2,987
    Location:
    Mexico..All's I'm saying
    Exactly. The officials won't know who to cheat for.
     
  13. braineclipse

    braineclipse Andy Thompson

    Joined:
    15 Jan 2012
    Messages:
    16,974
    Likes Received:
    4,062
    I don't get why exactly people are so negative about this.

    What's the big deal exactly?
     
  14. Spursalot

    Spursalot Jimmy McCormick

    Joined:
    19 Jan 2012
    Messages:
    11,158
    Likes Received:
    9


    It's brick for fans having to pay even more money to follow their teams, brick for the environment with all the air travel that will be required and brick for the atmosphere that will be missing due to the countries only hosting a handful of games.


    To name the first three that come to mind.
     
  15. braineclipse

    braineclipse Andy Thompson

    Joined:
    15 Jan 2012
    Messages:
    16,974
    Likes Received:
    4,062
    Realistically, how many fans follow their teams throughout a normal EC tournament? Not trying to be sarcastic, genuinely interested. Seems like it would be very difficult, especially post the group stages.

    Would it be that much more expensive as long as UEFA do what they're saying they will do and make sure group stage games for team aren't across the continent, but relatively close?

    I suppose the environment issue is a somewhat valid one,, but not one I would expect UEFA to care mush about. If true that host nations will have two "home games" then surely that goes some way to compensate for that, giving a lot of fans shorter travel distances for quite a few of the games.

    I could see the atmosphere being a bit worse off, perhaps. But that's difficult to tell before actually trying. I would imagine that the atmosphere in quite a few of the cities would be quite good. Again, creating more "home games" could easily create a very good atmosphere.

    Of course there will be some negatives by changing the structure like this, as there will be with any change. But there also seems to be some positives and a decent thing for UEFA to test out once to see how it turns out. Just seems to me that a lot of people are reacting with some gut change=bad reaction to this.
     
  16. Jurgen the German

    Jurgen the German Andy Thompson

    Joined:
    21 Jan 2012
    Messages:
    16,931
    Likes Received:
    2,987
    Location:
    Mexico..All's I'm saying
    But why change it in the first place? What is wrong with the format as it currently exists?

    I'm all for change if it's for a good reason, but not just for the sake of it.

    Ok not too many people can afford to follow a team throughout an entire tournament, but some may take the decision to book 10 days off work to follow the their team (assuming they get there of course) for the knockout stages. Instead of having a base in one country, they have to travel across Europe to follow their country. What's the point?

    We all know the airlines will bump up the prices. I wonder if UEFA have some lucrative deal with one of the airlines in the pipeline maybe? Wouldn't surprise me.
     
  17. chicken_badge

    chicken_badge Gudni Bergsson

    Joined:
    6 Feb 2012
    Messages:
    2,650
    Likes Received:
    89
    It depends who you think the audience are. I mean, let's say it was the uk netball finals. The vast majority of people serious about watching this would actually go to the tournament, maybe a significant number would then be satisfied by you tube clips. But that's it.

    For the Euros you have maybe ten million people in England alone who want to watch this. Lets say England progress and get 10,000 unique fans to each game the that's maybe 60,000 who are actually there. Comparing the number of people put out by going to the actual games and the overall audience , and it's a relatively small percentage. So I guess fan convenience isn't a big deal for UEFA.

    Also maybe the agenda isn't to get big numbers of fans from each team at the games maybe they prefer to have a significan number of locals too?

    Not saying its my preference either way, just that UEFA may not actually be prioritising the fans who want to follow their team.
     
  18. jts1882

    jts1882 Chris Armstrong

    Joined:
    15 Jul 2012
    Messages:
    5,269
    Likes Received:
    1,804
    So that is potentially 12 "host countries" for six groups (assuming they stick to 4 team groups). Two hosts per group, each with at least two home games means two thirds of the games will involve home advantage.

    Assuming that the big countries all get a city (which I'd expect), this will help get all the big nations to the knockout phase, which will help boost global audiences. Coincidence?
     
  19. Gordinho

    Gordinho Banned

    Joined:
    14 Jan 2012
    Messages:
    1,823
    Likes Received:
    7
    Location:
    Never argue with idiots. They'll take you down to
    The FA will be taking an interest how it pans out, I reckon it will put Game39 back on the agenda.
     
  20. braineclipse

    braineclipse Andy Thompson

    Joined:
    15 Jan 2012
    Messages:
    16,974
    Likes Received:
    4,062
    Nothing in particular wrong with the format as it is, but football has grown immensely (particularly financially) over the last 20 years by not just standing still and being happy with the status quo. You might not be happy with that development, but that's more a question of motivation than application.

    If the biggest teams do get 2 home games a lot of fans will be able to take 10 days off work and follow their team in their own capital. And again, if the flights are relatively short then trains will be an alternative to flights as well. The trips won't be that much longer than the travels internally in single countries hosting events.

    I'm assuming UEFA are doing this to increase the interest and thus the audience and income from these tournaments. I don't think giving several teams home advantage to thus get more big teams through the group stages is part of it though. Coincidences happen. Quite frequently.

    If this was some part of an overall money making scheme for UEFA why then allow Polan and Ukraine to co-host, or Switzerland and Austria?

    I'm generally less than convinced by conspiracy theories though.
     

Share This Page