Quarterfinal matchup [R]

[Pakalolo]

You think, I criticize this rule because Germany is involved? That's totally wrong. If Germany had won vs croatia, croatia would be in a mess.
Do you really like a rule which benefits 3 sure groupwinners after only two matchdays? And that's only one of many drawbacks.
I mean there have to be runner-ups, and especially those of group B and D are at a disadvantage.

but it seems like you're already making excuses for a possible (very possible) loss against Portugal while having a 'burnt chicken avatar', and thus making all Germans look like sore lossers in advance. can't say I like it ...

[_R2N_]

You think, I criticize this rule because Germany is involved? That's totally wrong. If Germany had won vs croatia, croatia would be in a mess.
Do you really like a rule which benefits 3 sure groupwinners after only two matchdays? And that's only one of many drawbacks.
I mean there have to be runner-ups, and especially those of group B and D are at a disadvantage.

So, what would you suggest for such a tight schedule?
There has to be some beneficts of getting the first place of the group, one of them is getting more time to rest.

[Lusankya]

At first I would change H2H to goal difference.

[_R2N_]

At first I would change H2H to goal difference.

Should "team A" ,who scored much goals against "team C", be considered better than "team B" who have beaten them (team A) ?

[benztown]

Should "team A" ,who scored much goals against "team C", be considered better than "team B" who have beaten them (team A) ?

No it shouldn't. H2H is the best way of dealing with this. The Euro is not a league, but a tournament. You have to win your games, simple as that.

[Lusankya]

No it shouldn't. H2H is the best way of dealing with this. The Euro is not a league, but a tournament. You have to win your games, simple as that.
LOL. H2H is the worst piece of hsit you can imagine, especially for small groups like in the EURO.

one small example

World Cup 1982 Group 2, you know how Ger and Aut cheatet Algeria out of this tournament? Well it was because of the nonsimultaneous last group games. With simultaneous last group games and GD they couldn't do this, but with simultaneous last group games AND H2H they could STILL do this!

Alg - Ger 2:1
Aut - Alg 2:0
Ger - Aut 1:0

1.Aut 2:1 3
2.Ger 2:2 3
3.Alg 2:3 3

With three teams tied on points H2H is the worst thing you can consider and btw, it's not really a HEAD to HEAD comparison anymore.

With two teams tied on points it's not that much worse than GD, but still worse. Or should you be rewarded, that you lose your 3 points lead, because you played with your B-team or just lost? Usually two teams who are tied on points had a draw anyway. I looked up the last three ECs and WCs and in 10 out of 14 cases they did.

[benztown]

With three teams tied on points H2H is the worst thing you can consider and btw, it's not really a HEAD to HEAD comparison anymore.

That's exactly why your example is wrong. With three teams tied and each team winning over the next one, H2H cannot and is not being used! Where's the problem?

With two teams tied on points it's not that much worse than GD, but still worse. Or should you be rewarded, that you lose your 3 points lead, because you played with your B-team or just lost?

If team A beats team B fair and square and both end up with the same amount of points, then why should team B go through ahead of team A? They had their chance and lost. Simple.

It's about fairness, not about making the fight for the top spots in a group more exiting. If that was the case, why not scrap the points system all together and let the viewers vote who they'd like to see in the next round?

Usually two teams who are tied on points had a draw anyway. I looked up the last three ECs and WCs and in 10 out of 14 cases they did.

Well, then where's the beef? In that case, GD is still used.

[Lusankya]

That's exactly why your example is wrong. With three teams tied and each team winning over the next one, H2H cannot and is not being used! Where's the problem?
Of course it is used, just like in my example. Read the rules. Maybe you don't understand the rule, so you don't know how ugly it is.


If team A beats team B fair and square and both end up with the same amount of points, then why should team B go through ahead of team A? They had their chance and lost. Simple.
Well, often a victory is not just fair and square, most of the time it's luck.
But do you really think it's fair a team can rest all their players, cause they know nothing can happen anymore? In theory Poland hat the much easier task than Austria, cause Croatia fielded the B-team, why Germany fielded their motivated A Team. Both messed it up anyway, but that's not the point. The point ist that Austria was discriminated because of H2H in theory. Such things shouldn't happen.
Simple.
Yeah H2H is very simple, so there are ten pages per thread to clarify the rule. :p Especially when there are three teams tied on points.

It's about fairness Yeah and H2H is the exact opposite of fairness.

Well, then where's the beef? In that case, GD is still used.
Yeah, so why not just use GD all the time and get rid of all the disadvantages H2H brings?

[benztown]

Of course it is used, just like in my example. Read the rules. Maybe you don't understand the rule, so you don't know how ugly it is.

Team A beats Team B, Team B beats Team C, Team C beats Team A => H2H impossible, hence not used! I don't know what you're getting at.

Well, often a victory is not just fair and square, most of the time it's luck.

You have to draw the line somewhere. If a victory often is not fair and square, then what point is there in having a final match? Just get rid of the sport all together, since winners are often only lucky. Come on.

And when victories are lucky, then goals scored are down to luck as well.

But do you really think it's fair a team can rest all their players, cause they know nothing can happen anymore?

Well, that's the nature of a first round. And of course it's fair because that team was good enough to be able to afford that.

In theory Poland hat the much easier task than Austria, cause Croatia fielded the B-team, why Germany fielded their motivated A Team. Both messed it up anyway, but that's not the point. The point ist that Austria was discriminated because of H2H in theory. Such things shouldn't happen.

All Austria had to do was to win the game. If they can't do it, then too bad for them.
And what about a team that's out anyway and doesn't give it all in their last game, so that the opponent can net 5 goals and hence advance on GD ahead of a team that beat them before? Would that be fair?

Yeah H2H is very simple, so there are ten pages per thread to clarify the rule. :p Especially when there are three teams tied on points.

It's simple as long as you win. And I still don't get your complaint about three teams being tied because in that case, GD is being used. So that's really a non sequitur.

Yeah and H2H is the exact opposite of fairness.

When two teams are tied on points within a small, single-leg table, then what fairer way is there to determine the better team than to look at the result of the game those two teams played against each other? How could GD be any fairer?

Yeah, so why not just use GD all the time and get rid of all the disadvantages H2H brings?

Because it's the best way to determine who deserves to advance.

[Lusankya]

Team A beats Team B, Team B beats Team C, Team C beats Team A => H2H impossible, hence not used! I don't know what you're getting at.

You didn't understand my example? It's crucial, that you get it.
If three teams are tied on points and you use H2H as the tiebreaker, then you look first on the games played by the three teams.
So I get it now, you don't understand the rule!

All Austria had to do was to win the game. If they can't do it, then too bad for them.
Of course Austria just had to win, but how could they advance if Poland wins by more goals? They couldn't. And Poland had the easier task, because the croatian b-team is not as strong as the a-team. Can't you understand this?


And what about a team that's out anyway and doesn't give it all in their last game, so that the opponent can net 5 goals and hence advance on GD ahead of a team that beat them before? Would that be fair? You always want to win. Show me an example, maybe from the world cup, where the last team just gave up the last game and lost with many goals. I couldn't find one.



It's simple as long as you win. And I still don't get your complaint about three teams being tied because in that case, GD is being used. So that's really a non sequitur.
Please read the rules. You're wrong.


When two teams are tied on points within a small, single-leg table, then what fairer way is there to determine the better team than to look at the result of the game those two teams played against each other? How could GD be any fairer?
That's not the point! It's about the many bad side effects H2H has.



Because it's the best way to determine who deserves to advance.
Not if it comes with such many disadvantages and gives many possibilities to cheat. What's wrong with GD? Show me some disadvantages exclusive to GD.

[benztown]

You didn't understand my example? It's crucial, that you get it.
If three teams are tied on points and you use H2H as the tiebreaker, then you look first on the games played by the three teams.
So I get it now, you don't understand the rule!

Of course I know the rule. What happens is that you look at the GD of those three teams from the games involving only those teams. So what's your problem with that?

Of course Austria just had to win, but how could they advance if Poland wins by more goals? They couldn't. And Poland had the easier task, because the croatian b-team is not as strong as the a-team. Can't you understand this?

Yes, I understand it and I see your point. I could evade an answer the way you did and say "you always want to win", but I won't. I agree, it's not completely fair. But if you're not able to beat your opponent in the first place, then this is a very lame excuse. So maybe, with a different schedule, things might have turned out differently.
But there are so many things that are not really fair and that could produce a different outcome with a different schedule: The weather, injuries, the ref, etc.
Bottom line: You have to beat you opponents to win the championship.

Lets say Team A is the best team in the tournament and ultimately wins the cup. Team B is the second best team and would beat everyone except Team A. However, those two teams are pitted against each other in the semi final. So team C reaches the final which had a much easier schedule.
This is unfair in the same way it was unfair for Austria to play against a better opponent than Poland.

On the other hand, by the time Poland played Croatia, the Croatians might have peaked physically, so maybe Austria had the advantage? See, all this talk is bull****. Just win your games and don't whine.

You always want to win. Show me an example, maybe from the world cup, where the last team just gave up the last game and lost with many goals. I couldn't find one.

In 1996, Turkey lost 1-0 to strong sides from Croatia and Portugal. So in the final match when they already were out, they lost 3-0 against a weaker Danish side.

Or do I have to remind you of the lackluster German game against a Portuguese B-side in 2000, losing 3-0?

And in 2004, Latvia barely lost against the Czechs (2-1), then tied the World Cup finalist Germany (0-0), only to totally blow it against Holland in the last game (3-0).

And that's just looking at the last three Euros.

When two teams are tied on points within a small, single-leg table, then what fairer way is there to determine the better team than to look at the result of the game those two teams played against each other? How could GD be any fairer?

That's not the point! It's about the many bad side effects H2H has.

Lol, so fairness is not the point? Well, in that case I guess you're right.

Not if it comes with such many disadvantages and gives many possibilities to cheat. What's wrong with GD? Show me some disadvantages exclusive to GD.

What's wrong is that you can get beaten by a team and still advance over it by scoring more against a third team. That's ridiculous.

H2H is the fairest system. But obviously that's not what concerns you - see above...

[Johannes]

Back on subject:

QF's :
Croatia - Turkey = looking forward to that one
Portugal -Germany = gonna be GOOD
Italy - Spain = OMG !! EXCELLENT
Holland - Sweden/Russia = mmmm, don't know what to expect

so far this tournament has very few lows and a lot of good football !!! Great stuff !

[drahnier]

You can expect a Sweden trying to close it down to a 0-0 draw, and most likely a Dutch offense that is way too much on the roll this year for the Swedish tactic to work, even though Sweden is always a hard team to beat in these big-team matchups.

So Dutch win, maybe by 2-0.

[fh 1]

If Sweden plays in 1/4, Holland, won't have it easy, but I can't see a Swedish upset: One half time Ibrahimović isn't enough and Sweden has no other scorer, while Holland has ten.
If Russia makes it to the quarters, this may be a very funny game with a lot of goals, especially in the Russian net, as their defense seems somewhat shaky.

Spain - Italy, well, Italy without carded Pirlo and Gattuso, Cannavaro out on injury and Spain having a marvelous team. But Italy is World champion, isn't it?

Portugal - Germany, the first match so far Germany isn't favorite, maybe then will be easier for them to play with less pressure. Will injured Frings be fielded? Podolsky? How will act the criticized defense, the goalie? Will the strikers finally score? Can the well known German will, discipline and fighting spirit defeat again Portuguese talent, creativity and improvisation?

Croatia - Turkey, can the brave Turks again play so enthusiastically as the last games before? Or will the Croatians cool them down? We'll see.

[Joep]

Looking forward to ALL these games, so subscribing here:

[xyzfutboll]

cant wait for Croatia vs Turkey

i just hope that the 2 suspensions and 3 injuries that turkey has wont hurt the team too much

[Excape Goat]

Portugal - Germany, the first match so far Germany isn't favorite, maybe then will be easier for them to play with less pressure. Will injured Frings be fielded? Podolsky? How will act the criticized defense, the goalie? Will the strikers finally score? Can the well known German will, discipline and fighting spirit defeat again Portuguese talent, creativity and improvisation?

.

Actually, in 3 games, Germany played liked the three German teams we know for the past 15 years.

Against Poland, they played the German team under Klinsmann at WC 2006. They attacked at will.

Against Croatia, they played liked Germany between 2000 and 2005. They lacked confidence. They suffered very "un-German" mental lapse. They reminded me of the German team that lost to England.

Against Austria, they went back to the old school Germany. They did not look inpressive. Austria thought that they had chances, but Germany actually controlled the game and won.

So which Germany will show up?

[squidward123]

Against Austria, they went back to the old school Germany. They did not look inpressive. Austria thought that they had chances, but Germany actually controlled the game and won.

From 93-96 Germany played nothing like against austria!:eek:


So which Germany will show up?

Germany 1970's :cool: hopefully lol!

[frankwhite]

Great tournament so far, especially because both teams i cheer for, turkey and germany, made it to the quarters, and may meet at the semi final :eek:

[blanc]

Germany > Portugal
Croatia > Turkey
Spain > Italy
Netherlands > Sweden/Russia*

*whoever they play

IMO. :)

(but they will all be VERY close)