Greece 2004 EURO win a FLUKE??!!!

[Outwide]

Greece out with no points! Does this mean 2004 was just a fluke!???

thoughts?

[Lusankya]

England doesn't participate in EURO 2008, does that mean 1966 was just a fluke!???

[vancity eagle]

solid defending and a lot of luck, one day the ball bounces this way, the next day it bounces the other way.

[crfamazonense]

Yes it was a fluke. they didn't even qualify for the 2006 WC. On that night in Lisboa all the stars aligned right and they beat portugal in the "portuguese"" Maracanazo.

[seadondo]

England doesn't participate in EURO 2008, does that mean 1966 was just a fluke!???

I didn't realize that Bobby Charlton still plays for England.


Regarding Greece: they executed great strategy and tactics in their Euro 2004 campaign, but I still feel that it was a fluke. Considering that with pretty much the same team they failed to qualify for WC'06, failed to get any points in Euro '08, and they probably won't qualify for WC 2010 (even though they are in the weakest qualifying group).

[Outwide]

I have to agree. It seemed that everyting fell into place in one dramatic summer in 2004. FLUKE.

[Jwaksman]

I think people just need to define the term "fluke". If you play that Tournament ten times, does Greece win more than once? Probably not. But it's not like they were the beneficiaries of biased refereeing, or that a slew of upsets caused them to not have to play good teams. They earned that title fair and square.


Upsets happen in sports. Greece overperformed in '04, but they also underperformed in '08. They sure looked pretty good for a team that didn't get a single point. Austria even managed to collect a point, but nobody would argue that Austria is a superior team to Greece.

Funny stuff happens when you have small sample sizes. But rough luck this time around for a very solid team doesn't take away from what they achieved four years ago.

[SportBoy333]

When you have a team that's not as talented, everything has to go right and everything has to go perfectly and there's no way that was gonna happen twice.

[glennaldo_sf]

Hmm... not to be nitpicky but... is this a FIFA tournament? ... no so why is it in the FIFA thread and not the UEFA one?

Anyhoo... I'm going to go against the tide and reaffirm my stance that no, Euro 2004 was not a fluke! Greece beat the hosts - not once but twice! Plus, they beat and outplayed the defending champions + the most impressive team in the semifinal. They also beat Spain (that may be like shooting fish in a barrell when it comes to the QFs but in qualifying, Spain are usually quite impressive) in qualifying. So no 2004 was not a fluke.

Also, Czech Republic, Denmark & Sweden had impressive tournaments in 2004 but did not impress here. It's four years later, things change in that time. Greece are playing with largely the same team here but they are older and teams are ready for them so it is not working. 2004 was not a fluke but lightening simply doesn't strike twice.

[Fan123]

I would like to think that they were a fluke. But upon reflecting on the results in 2004, I noticed that they at least always win their matches, never needing to go on to penalties. Yes, they got extremely lucky that no one was able to break down their 10-men defense, but you have to agree that they won it in the fairest way possible. All their goals were legitimate, and none were scored from penalties. None of their later matches needed penalties to decide the winner.

The defense-minded tactics were frustrating to viewers and lovers of the game, but Greece does not have enough talent to play attacking football. It's the only way they can compete with superior oppositions, by having a strong back line. Spain, France, Czech and Portugal were all more talented and powerful than Greece. You have to give some credit to them for overcoming these 4 superior teams.

If any team is to blame for Greece winning the Euro, it is Portugal. I don't understand how Spain, France and Czech Republic lose to them, but at least they all have good reasons: they all underestimate Greece or lost someone influential (Nedved).

Portugal, however, have no excuses. They were the host. They lost to Greece once already in the opening match. And then they go and lose to Greece AGAIN, as the host! For me, it's not that Greece won, it's that Portugal lost it. I don't know why, maybe Portugal underestimate Greece too, but if you already lost to them once, how can you continue to underestimate them after they got to the final?

[vancity eagle]

fan 123 I completely agree with you. I really love the way Portugal plays, but the bottom line is they got no character. Any team that loses twice to Greece at home in the same tournament really has to have serious questions asked of them. I just knew they were gonna lose to Germany as well.

[Todorov]

fan 123 I completely agree with you. I really love the way Portugal plays, but the bottom line is they got no character. Any team that loses twice to Greece at home in the same tournament really has to have serious questions asked of them. I just knew they were gonna lose to Germany as well.

It is our sad fate...:(

[FNU]

This is ridiculous. Greece beat Portugal TWICE that tournament. WHAT FLUKE? :rolleyes:

[billgrant88]

England doesn't participate in EURO 2008, does that mean 1966 was just a fluke!???That's a quite phenomenally bad analogy mate. Fair play, I don't think many people would have been able to pull that one off with a straight face.

[eliostar1]

You can say that about quite a few tournaments, France in 98 and Italy in 82 come to mind. It's better to be lucky than good.