• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times 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. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

The Official EURO 2012 thread

Who will win Euro 2012?

  • Spain

    Votes: 17 17.3%

  • Germany

    Votes: 54 55.1%

  • Holland

    Votes: 17 17.3%

  • France

    Votes: 3 3.1%

  • Italy

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • England

    Votes: 2 2.0%

  • Croatia

    Votes: 1 1.0%

  • Poland

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Ukraine

    Votes: 2 2.0%

  • Other

    Votes: 2 2.0%
  • Total voters
    98
Modric THFC said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Euro_2012#Group_stage

Tie-breaking criteria

If two or more teams are equal on points on completion of the group matches, the following criteria are applied to determine the rankings:

1. Higher number of points obtained in the matches played between the teams in question;
2. Superior goal difference resulting from the matches played between the teams in question (if more than two teams finish equal on points);
3. Higher number of goals scored in the matches played between the teams in question (if more than two teams finish equal on points);
4. If, after having applied criteria 1) to 3), two teams still have an equal ranking, criteria 1) to 3) are reapplied exclusively to the matches between the two teams in question to determine the final rankings of the two teams. If this procedure does not lead to a decision, criteria 5) to 9) apply in the order given;[32]
5. superior goal difference in all group matches;
6. higher number of goals scored in all group matches;
7. position in the UEFA national team coefficient ranking system
8. fair play conduct of the teams (final tournament);
9. drawing of lots

If two teams play last match in group stage, and they tie the match with same points, goals scored and goals received instead above tiebreakers, they play penalty shootout, provided no other team in the group finishes with same number of points.

Note: As all teams have a different UEFA national team coefficient, the last two tie-breakers (i.e. fair play conduct and drawing of lots) will never be applied in this tournament.
Click to expand...


I would have thought 7 and 8 should be the other way around, since it's about performance at the tournament, on the pitch.

That minor quibble apart, I think it's a fair system. Very unlikely indeed to get down to No. 7.
 
Ballack and Roberto Martinez on England's Performance.

Please ignore Alexi Lalas, he blows. Ballack is not impressed. Also, I love Martinez.

[video=youtube;lsR4J87L80U]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsR4J87L80U&list=UU6SWjj-LQD26epNFKfpZRxg&index=3&feature=plcp[/video]
 
Last edited:
sofoot.com gave Parker their top rating (a sizzling 6.5)

Scott Parker (6,5) : Sa m?¿che et son style sans folie n’ont pas r?®ussi ?á cacher l’essentiel : Scott n’est pas fait pour le football du XXI?¿me si?¿cle. Trop rapide, trop physique, trop sexy pour lui. Pourtant, dans son style tr?¿s atypique, le joueur de Tottenham a ?®t?® tr?¿s pr?®cieux. Son jeu tr?¿s simple - contr??le/passe - a fluidifi?® la circulation anglaise au milieu. Il lui manque une pointe de vitesse pour vraiment peser sur le jeu mais quelle ?®l?®gance sur le pr?®.

Scott Parker (6.5): The wick and style without insanity have not managed to hide most: Scott is not made ​​for football of the XXI century. Too fast, too physical, too sexy for him. Yet in his very unusual style, the Tottenham player has been invaluable. Its very simple game - control / password - had eased traffic in the middle English. It lacks a burst of speed to really influence the game but what elegance on the meadow.
 
Enter the Pitbull said:
sofoot.com gave Parker their top rating (a sizzling 6.5)

Scott Parker (6,5) : Sa m?¿che et son style sans folie nÔÇÖont pas r?®ussi ?á cacher lÔÇÖessentiel : Scott nÔÇÖest pas fait pour le football du XXI?¿me si?¿cle. Trop rapide, trop physique, trop sexy pour lui. Pourtant, dans son style tr?¿s atypique, le joueur de Tottenham a ?®t?® tr?¿s pr?®cieux. Son jeu tr?¿s simple - contr??le/passe - a fluidifi?® la circulation anglaise au milieu. Il lui manque une pointe de vitesse pour vraiment peser sur le jeu mais quelle ?®l?®gance sur le pr?®.

Scott Parker (6.5): The wick and style without insanity have not managed to hide most: Scott is not made ​​for football of the XXI century. Too fast, too physical, too sexy for him. Yet in his very unusual style, the Tottenham player has been invaluable. Its very simple game - control / password - had eased traffic in the middle English. It lacks a burst of speed to really influence the game but what elegance on the meadow.
Click to expand...

Sounds like they were seduced by his good looks.
 
The difficulty in viewing that video is immediate empathy that Lalas has for the English. For the low quality of football that is.
 
metalgear said:
The difficulty in viewing that video is immediate empathy that Lalas has for the English. For the low quality of football that is.
Click to expand...

Lalas unsuprisingly (as it's a trait most American footballers share) has an appreciation for the workrate and discipline shown.

Ballack in my opion was just being a C**t, and having watched ESPN's coverage of the games, brings absolutely nothing of interest from a commentary perspective, even though I agree that Roy is creating a dreadful side to watch.
 
Were England that bad? Solid at the back, actually retained the ball well for the most part and we created some decent chances. I don't know what more we should have hoped for to be honest.....
 
Ballack is kind of right, but what was he expecting? James Milner, Ashley Young and Danny Welbeck to be equal to Ribery, Nasri and Benzema?
 
I love the way that Lalas and Ballack are lined-up to be diametrically opposed, and passionately so, while Martinez goes about his business in a very level-headed manner.

They're all right to a greater or lesser extent, and frankly, I haven't enjoyed watching England play since the 0-0 in Rome, with the exception of the 5-1 humbling of Ballack's Germany in Munich.
 
southstand1882 said:
Did Ballack have an opinion on Chelsea's style versus Barcelona and Bayern?
Click to expand...

Shame Lalas got interrupted when he wanted to bring up Chelsea. I also remember Chelsea playing like that against good teams when Ballack was there, actually a lot more defensive than England were against France.

Lalas and Martinez both make good points, England look to play the Hodgson way and it's probably the right choice.
 
My impression is that the media - and perhaps England fans - are way, way over-estimating yesterday's England performance.

Straight after the game, Gabrial Clarke asked Gerrard "Can this team just get better and better?" This is exactly the kind of question that was asked of the "Golden Generation" time and time again after sluggish starts to championships. It seems Clarke was falling back into the same old clich?®s, and many commentators seem to be going down the same road today. It's once again the triumph of hope over reality (and as noble and natural as that attitude is in sport, it can also be negative if there's nothing to back it up).

One really cannot ignore that for most the second half it was like an away game for England. Why was this? It's a Euro's game packed full of England fans in the stands. And yet England got pushed back and back as though they were playing in Paris and really were in self-preservation mode for the last half hour. The stats:

France England
Goal attempts 21 - 5
Shots on target 7 - 1
Corners 11 - 4
Possession 65% - 35%
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/match/2012/jun/11/france-v-england

I thought England were ok yesterday, and with Rooney back they'll improve. But if I were an England fan I'd think long and hard about yesterday's game before getting too hyped up. England were second best by quite a distance as the stats show.
 
Hope we see two great games tonight. Nothing is making me get excited for Greece/Czech republic but considering how surprised I was about the two games these two were involved in on the opening day, we might be shocked a little bit tonight.

I think Poland/Russia could be very good. Poland need to win and Russia have in my eyes played the best football of the tournament so far.
 
The media have always framed their questions so that players will have to agree with them, then they things completely out of context to make their headlines.
 
chancer said:
My impression is that the media - and perhaps England fans - are way, way over-estimating yesterday's England performance.

Straight after the game, Gabrial Clarke asked Gerrard "Can this team just get better and better?" This is exactly the kind of question that was asked of the "Golden Generation" time and time again after sluggish starts to championships. It seems Clarke was falling back into the same old clich?®s, and many commentators seem to be going down the same road today. It's once again the triumph of hope over reality (and as noble and natural as that attitude is in sport, it can also be negative if there's nothing to back it up).

One really cannot ignore that for most the second half it was like an away game for England. Why was this? It's a Euro's game packed full of England fans in the stands. And yet England got pushed back and back as though they were playing in Paris and really were in self-preservation mode for the last half hour. The stats:

France England
Goal attempts 21 - 5
Shots on target 7 - 1
Corners 11 - 4
Possession 65% - 35%
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/match/2012/jun/11/france-v-england

I thought England were ok yesterday, and with Rooney back they'll improve. But if I were an England fan I'd think long and hard about yesterday's game before getting too hyped up. England were second best by quite a distance as the stats show.
Click to expand...

I don't know anyone whose getting carried away with England. England played like the away side and tried to hit on the break because France are about the 3rd / 4th best side in the tournament and are many times better than England.

Commentator's / interviewer's are paid to make hype, non English seem to take that as though it's the common mood amongst "the people" but it really really isn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back