Jump to content

Euro 2016


Batman

Recommended Posts

He wasn't. Just Koeman didn't fancy him and he had a lot of mostly head injuries. Hsd one bad game.

 

One poor game :lol: He showed some promise at times. But generally had a disappointing season.

 

Hopefully he can bring his euros performances into the new season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What A story for our last remains league one player

 

Take a bow Jose Fonte European Champion

 

He has outdone Lambert Lallana and Morgan and he didn't need to move to achieve it

 

Saw Schneiderlin and Fonte at the end. Ironic one left for 'ambition' and ended up being dropped. Had he stayed maybe he would have played and maybe even won.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw Schneiderlin and Fonte at the end. Ironic one left for 'ambition' and ended up being dropped. Had he stayed maybe he would have played and maybe even won.

 

The Germans have a word.....Scheudengloat, or something.....Which is what I'm doing right now. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another fine example of how a TEAM will trump a group of talented individuals. This year for football has been incredibly refreshing in that regard, but it really has been a **** tournament.

 

I'm just proud of Jose though, absolute lad. Born to lead. Our captain is a European Championship winner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a great result for the Portuguese, the nicest citizens of Europe! But what a poor EC it was, only the Germans played some attractive football. The others played too often with the intention not to lose so it was mostly boring to watch. Hopefully this won't be the future of football...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a great result for the Portuguese, the nicest citizens of Europe! But what a poor EC it was, only the Germans played some attractive football. The others played too often with the intention not to lose so it was mostly boring to watch. Hopefully this won't be the future of football...

Most boring matches occur when both teams are afraid of losing. As long as one team is desperate for the win, it's usually exciting.

 

With that in mind, here are my suggestions:

 

1) No more 3rd placed teams in a group advancing. Ever.

 

2) No more penalties in knockout matches. After extra time, the "highest seeded" (defined below) team advances. That way, at least one team will be going all out for the win. Probably both (see below).

 

Seeding: First round of knockout, easy: Each match is 1st vs. 2nd from group play, so 1st is the higher seed. Bonus here: big incentive to finish first in group stage: more excitement there already.

 

Subsequent rounds: team with highest points from previous matches is the higher seed. The points are the ones got from the group stage (again incentive to win as many as possible there), plus 6 points for each win in 90 minutes in a knockout, or 3 points for each win in extra time. ZERO points for a previously drawn match and going through as higher seed. In the event of two teams having the same number of points, goal difference followed by goals scored in all previous matches is used as a tie-breaker. If still tied, penalties (with zero points for that win). Again, incentive to win as many matches as possible, and to score as many goals as possible.

 

For the final itself maybe use penalties instead of seeding; it wouldn't be satisfying crowning a champion after a draw.

 

Argument against: the seeding is an artificial way of separating teams. Rebuttal: it's done in the group stage anyway, when teams are tied on points.

 

Argument against: the higher seeded team may park the bus. Rebuttal: better to have one team park the bus, and the other go all out in attack, than both parking the bus. Besides, there's a strong incentive to maintain a high seed to win, so unlikely a team will park the bus.

 

Anyway, call me mad, but I think it might work. As a bonus, England won't lose on bloody penalties again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Morgan,

 

Was hoping to run into you tonight but couldn't find you anywhere.

 

I know you must be feeling a bit down at the moment but hey, what a great season you've had .... big games, highest level, two cup finals, silverware (unused subs do still get a medal, don't they ?) Just goes to show what can be achieved with a bit of ambition.

 

Anyway, I'll catch up with you in the Europa's if you're Everton move doesn't come off.

 

Jose xx

 

ps. Cedric says hi !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most boring matches occur when both teams are afraid of losing. As long as one team is desperate for the win, it's usually exciting.

 

With that in mind, here are my suggestions:

 

1) No more 3rd placed teams in a group advancing. Ever.

 

2) No more penalties in knockout matches. After extra time, the "highest seeded" (defined below) team advances. That way, at least one team will be going all out for the win. Probably both (see below).

 

Seeding: First round of knockout, easy: Each match is 1st vs. 2nd from group play, so 1st is the higher seed. Bonus here: big incentive to finish first in group stage: more excitement there already.

 

Subsequent rounds: team with highest points from previous matches is the higher seed. The points are the ones got from the group stage (again incentive to win as many as possible there), plus 6 points for each win in 90 minutes in a knockout, or 3 points for each win in extra time. ZERO points for a previously drawn match and going through as higher seed. In the event of two teams having the same number of points, goal difference followed by goals scored in all previous matches is used as a tie-breaker. If still tied, penalties (with zero points for that win). Again, incentive to win as many matches as possible, and to score as many goals as possible.

 

For the final itself maybe use penalties instead of seeding; it wouldn't be satisfying crowning a champion after a draw.

 

Argument against: the seeding is an artificial way of separating teams. Rebuttal: it's done in the group stage anyway, when teams are tied on points.

 

Argument against: the higher seeded team may park the bus. Rebuttal: better to have one team park the bus, and the other go all out in attack, than both parking the bus. Besides, there's a strong incentive to maintain a high seed to win, so unlikely a team will park the bus.

 

Anyway, call me mad, but I think it might work. As a bonus, England won't lose on bloody penalties again.

 

Sounds fine with me, this should help to make the game less dull for the non biased spectator. You could also choose for penalties before the match instead of seeding, the team who wins the penalties gets a 1-0 lead or something like that. I'm not sure but I believe this was used in the MLS back in the '80s to make the game more attractive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 for Cedric seems a bit harsh. He played really well.

 

I thought he was brilliant. It even says in the Telegraph link that he bested Payet, arguably Frances most dangerous player. Not quite sure how that means he gets a rating of 6...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds fine with me, this should help to make the game less dull for the non biased spectator. You could also choose for penalties before the match instead of seeding, the team who wins the penalties gets a 1-0 lead or something like that. I'm not sure but I believe this was used in the MLS back in the '80s to make the game more attractive.

Yes, that should work too. But still go to extra time if tied (ignoring penalties) after 90, and pre-match penalty winner wins if tied after 120.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...