With pre tournament odds up on most online bookmaking site who does everyone tip to lift the Euro 2008 title. Current odd have Group B Germany as the tournament favourites at 9/2 with bet365 sportingbet and Coral, and 5/1 with totesport and PaddyPower. Although I see croatia in the same group a potential group winners there. The pre tournament odds give Spain as second favourites at 7/1 closely followed by Italy at 8/1 of which both should comfortably reach the quarters. Also any thoughts on top Euro scorers? In the Euro finals one of my tournament bets will surely be tournament top scorer, for which Miroslav Klose is narrow favourite at 10/1 followed by Fernando Torres and Chritiano Ronaldo at 11/1 and 13/1 respectively. Not sure about ronaldo's international scoring record but 10/1 for closer in a strong Germnay side seems good value to me.
Got to disagree with you there. Italy are notoriously slow starters to int'l tournaments. When they reach the quarters, they usually win it all (or at least make the final). But there's a good chance they won't even make the quarters IMO. Yeah, I think I would go with Klose too. Just because Germany play against weaker defences compared to what Torres will face.
I think most Germans would agree that it is pretty likely that Gomez will be Germany's top scorer at the EC and not Klose, given that he doesn't get injured (he is pretty injury prone). Gomez has an even better goal ratio this season than Luca Toni, that says it all I think: Mario Gomez, season 2007/2008: ........................games:.........goals: Bundesliga...............23..............18 German cup ............. 3 .............6 Championsleague .......4 .............3 National team.............6 ........... .3
I would definately take a shot on whoever looks to be Germany's #1 striker. This tourney is going to have a ton of low scoring games in Group's A, B & D. Group B will be where the goals are and should produce the top goal scorer. As for who's to win it, I took Italy at +500 before the groups came out, I'll take them for more at their current odds of +700. I actually like the group they are in. IF they get out of it, they won't have any chance of facing any other favorites except Spain until the final (No chance of facing France/Holland, Portugal or Germany). I also took Romania at +3500. I know its a massive long shot, but if my Italy wager implodes in the group stage, then the Romania long shot looks like a better shot as they get the same path to the Finals. Plus, they have a good recent history vs Holland to boot.
That's not true. You should've looked at the brackets more carefully before wagering on these teams. If Italy get to the semis, they will play either a group C or group D team. They have the most difficult route (along with the other teams in Group "C"), hence the fairly high odds for them to win.
Yes, I mis-stated. They would face a group D team in the Qtrs - and then possibley re-match with a C team in the Semi's and can't face a group A or B team until the finals. Regardless, I have them beating Sweden in the Qtrs, France in the Semi's and then Portugal (I picked Portugal over Germany in the other semi) in the final based on plugging in my expected results for each team. I still say its a team from group C that will win it as I think both teams to come out of that group will meet in the semis. Ideally I'd see Romania vs Italy in the Semi's, but thats pretty damn unlikely.
BocaFan, Italy doesn't seem to have a "system" of going to the quaters and winning it all then. I think they reached the final twice in the Euros and apart from that they had everything from semis to 4th place. Germany either doesn't make the group stages or reaches the quater finals and goes into the final. There are so many strong teams this time I really can't make up my mind about who I should see as a clear favourite to win it. If history means anything then Italy, Germany, France and the usual underdog will play a role (if the first two make it out of the group stages), Spain and the Netherlands will have a great squad and bottle it as usual and Portugal might go far but not make it in the end. And if Germany meets Italy in the finals.. Please everyone, just not Italy. But yeah, I have no idea. Could be anyone.
This was my thinking so on reflection maybe Gomez is somebody worth looking into. Have to say not really followed him much, but Klose has that big comp experience.
Dutch Euro performance: 1988: win 1992: semis 1996: quarters 2000: semis 2004: semis If that's what you call bottling it, I'd like to know who in your view did better than the Dutch over the past five European tournaments.
That only means they were good but not good enough. Thats what I call bottling. There is a certain room for bad luck but if it happens that often.. If you don't get far you probably didn't have to quality to win it anyway that time but if you go that far so often you obviously had. You just didn't have that last bit of bite and strength to go all the way. It's the contrast between potential and winning. Look at Germany. Five finals, three wins. It's about going all the way. No one will call a team that does not have the potential to win the Euros and then doesn't make it to the final bottlers. Our Euro-squad the last two times was shite and no one really expected them to win it. It would have been a miracle. The problem is that Spain and the Netherlands usually have excellent teams and but not the endresult that would match their potential. Spain did worse than you guys though. I'd say that on paper you are favourites along with a couple of other teams and maybe you can prove history wrong, who knows.
Well the tournament has only been around since 1960 with a total of 12 rounds; not exactly a large space of time to gauge who has the most consistency. Conventionally Germany is always dangerous on European grounds but other than them its all pretty much up in the air. Suppose a non favorite plays in the final? Can we unanimously agree that a final that has the likes of a Croatia/Swiss/Greece/Turkey featuring would come as a surprise? Probably not. This has a lot to do with facing extremely tough team very early on; so national sides who don't bring their "A" game right away, regardless of their quality, are going to suffer an early exit. Pound for pound I think Germany, Italy and France have the most balanced sides in the tournament. My guess is at least one of those three countries with play the final.
If that's bottling then you must think very highly of the Dutch national team - so only what, three wins out of five is good enough? Also the last time Germany won a game at the Euros was in 1996. And you're calling the Dutch bottlers compared to them? The problem is there's all these people with opinions about the Dutch NT while they barely know the squad. It's opinions based on the past, on prejudice and on urban myths, not on actual analysis of the actual squad. If you had actually watched Holland play in the past two Dutch qualifying campaigns, for example, you'd come to the conclusion that this generation is the opposite of bottlers as well as, ironically, the opposite of an excellent team. I.e. they've played crap football yet still managed to continue to win. So by all means criticise Dutch football, god knows we do plenty of that on the Dutch board, but try to stick to actual facts and analysis.
By the way, I didn't say that to slag off German football. Germany is a favourite at Euro 2008, I will gladly agree with that - but not because they always do well at the Euros. That's just not true.
C'mon they have three titles. The last ten years we've seen the weakest generation of German footballers to date but they're always a team to be feared.
So what you're saying is that when the Germans don't do well at the Euros, a weaker generation is to blame, but when the Dutch don't do well, it's because they're a nation of bottlers? Where's the sense in that?
Actually forget about don't do well, it's when the Dutch don't reach the final every Euro champs that they're considered bottlers. What a load of crapola. Don't make me list who played for us in 1996 for example. If that was a strong generation of 'Dutch players, I'm Napoleon. Yet they still reached the quarters.
I guess winning something 10 years ago is better than winning something 20 years ago. But don't get me wrong, even though I am German I don't have anything against the Dutch team whatsoever. I would hate to lose against England and nowadays I would love to see us beat Italy but I don't harbour any special dislike/thoughts of rivalry against the Dutch team. I also didn't say anything about the current squad, I made and overall comment on the performances of the last 20 years, not on the new team. Like I said, maybe you will prove history wrong. And can you blame me for having very high expectations of the final/win ratio for a good team? For us not winning a tournament for more than ten years now is getting close to unaccaptable.
I hate to follow the odds, but I'd have to take the Germans here. I think Klinnsman did a tremendous job during '06 & I think they were one of the more attractive teams of the World Cup. Even with his departure, I think they have continued to build upon that. I also think neither Austria or Switzerland advance to the round of 16 and you will see both countries flooded with German supporters. I haven't followed the Dutch really much in the past 2 years. Will they field a strong team? They are placed in a tough group (someone stated it was the toughest 4 team group ever assembled, in any competition), but I do not see the French doing well, although I see Ribery making me eat those words. The Czechs would have been my other leading contender, but the loss of Rosicky destroys their chances. Spain looks incredible on paper, but haven't they always??
I can't see a team beating Germany this summer. I know I sound arrogant and I'm sorry for that, but that's how I feel. I know there's plenty of talent in other teams but considering the last couple of years, germans have been superior. Just my opinion.
I just don't get how the Germans are excused for not winning a single game in eight years at the two most recent Euros because 'they had a weak generation of footballers' whereas by contrast the Dutch who reached the semi-finals of the two most recent Euros and never failed to get out of the group stage of the past five Euros are still considered by some as bottlers - I mean, who is more likely to be a consistent football nation, considering the number of active footballers in each country and considering the strength of the domestic league in each country? Where does this ridiculous set of standards re: the Dutch come from? I've wondered about this on these boards for years and I've yet to receive an answer. Anyway all I ask for is for an honest assessment of THIS Holland squad. Just like the Germans who I'm sure don't want this Germany squad to be analysed on the basis of the two most recent European championships.
I really hopeOranje to make it out of the group fase, but I honestly don't know what to expect concerning Italy and France. That said, Germany seemed to be on a stroll recently, and seeing that we as usual have a quite easy path it is likely that we'll make it to Vienna. The Netherlands may be equally strong, but they just have a tougher road ahead, we'll see. Germany vs Holland would be a nice final for sure though.