• 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

UEFA Nations League

the worst criticism I have seen is regarding this part (however well intentioned)

"For middle-ranking and smaller nations, the UEFA Nations League will offer an extra way to qualify for UEFA EURO final tournaments. Lower-tier countries – the bottom 16 in the rankings – are now guaranteed one of the 24 qualifying slots for UEFA EURO"

If you are at 18th bottom of the rankings you have an incentive to lose to get into the bottom 16. I don't follow US sports but do the worst teams in NFL lose games in order to get first pick in the draft the following year?
 
braineclipse said:
I think doing away with most of the friendlies is exactly the plan.
Click to expand...
But they haven’t, they’ve just renamed them “UEFA nations cup”. There’s still the same amount of international games and breaks. Completely pointless for me.
 
Last edited:
Is this a case of be careful what you wish for?

We all bemoan "meaningless" friendlies and (generally) have little issue if our players drop out. So instead they will now become very meaningful games, in so far as rankings in this new league will have a direct impact on the pots for the Euro Qualifiers.
Friendlies, however pointless/inconvenient they may seem, do have a use in allowing managers to test out new players, new formations etc. Is this less likely to happen when rankings might be at stake?
 
agree with the above its purpose is to remove "meaningless" friendlies - FA's were never going to vote for less games.
 
r-u-s-x said:
agree with the above its purpose is to remove "meaningless" friendlies - FA's were never going to vote for less games.
Click to expand...
And there’s the problem. You see it in every sport, rugby union having these same issues as well, the powers that be are just trying to bleed every last bit out of the players to the detriment of the game. They all want to dip their filthy little beaks in.
 
r-u-s-x said:
the worst criticism I have seen is regarding this part (however well intentioned)

"For middle-ranking and smaller nations, the UEFA Nations League will offer an extra way to qualify for UEFA EURO final tournaments. Lower-tier countries – the bottom 16 in the rankings – are now guaranteed one of the 24 qualifying slots for UEFA EURO"

If you are at 18th bottom of the rankings you have an incentive to lose to get into the bottom 16. I don't follow US sports but do the worst teams in NFL lose games in order to get first pick in the draft the following year?
Click to expand...
Agreed, this is a strange one. I suppose they need motivation beyond promotion and relegation, but we might see some weird and really unsportsmanlike results from this.
Gazza Dazzla said:
But they haven’t, they’ve just renamed them “UEFA nations cup”. There’s still the same amount of international games and breaks. Completely pointless for me.
Click to expand...
Yeah, replaced, like I said.

Same amount of games, but no friendlies. These are competitive games. There's an actual competition. You might not like it, but it's not just a renaming.
 
Gazza Dazzla said:
And there’s the problem. You see it in every sport, rugby union having these same issues as well, the powers that be are just trying to bleed every last bit out of the players to the detriment of the game. They all want to dip their filthy little beaks in.
Click to expand...
That's with the starting point that club football takes precedence - I know we are bias but the clubs do not exactly cover themselves in glory with looking after the players (got a week off then have a tour in Hong Kong). Players largely want to play for their country for many this is the pinnacle of their career, outside the CL the WC is still the number 1 competition to win.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
Is this a case of be careful what you wish for?

We all bemoan "meaningless" friendlies and (generally) have little issue if our players drop out. So instead they will now become very meaningful games, in so far as rankings in this new league will have a direct impact on the pots for the Euro Qualifiers.
Friendlies, however pointless/inconvenient they may seem, do have a use in allowing managers to test out new players, new formations etc. Is this less likely to happen when rankings might be at stake?
Click to expand...
Possibly. But the problem with the friendlies has been that they're so low intensity and quality that the actual value of trying new things or players is negligible. There's very little to be learned as it can't be generalized to competitive games in and real way.

I'm primarily a club supporter. I enjoy the big tournaments, otherwise the internationals are more of a distraction and a source of frustration. What I think can be unfortunate is that players that are in desperate need for a breather might be forced to play where they might have sat out a friendly.
 
braineclipse said:
Possibly. But the problem with the friendlies has been that they're so low intensity and quality that the actual value of trying new things or players is negligible. There's very little to be learned as it can't be generalized to competitive games in and real way.

I'm primarily a club supporter. I enjoy the big tournaments, otherwise the internationals are more of a distraction and a source of frustration. What I think can be unfortunate is that players that are in desperate need for a breather might be forced to play where they might have sat out a friendly.
Click to expand...

Yes, I can understand question marks around the overall value of friendlies. But it's the scenario in your second para that concerns me more. As there will potentially be more at stake than in the friendlies, players may be expected to play and 'arrangements' that clubs might sometimes have with the national team manager about resting certain players, only playing 45 mins etc., may become harder to have in place.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
Yes, I can understand question marks around the overall value of friendlies. But it's the scenario in your second para that concerns me more. As there will potentially be more at stake than in the friendlies, players may be expected to play and 'arrangements' that clubs might sometimes have with the national team manager about resting certain players, only playing 45 mins etc., may become harder to have in place.
Click to expand...
I don't think this will be a big issue, certainly not for the big nations, as they are pretty certain of qualification through the normal route. I think this will be a little bit like CL vs EL, where the normal quali games are the CL, and the smaller nations see the nations cup as an extra opportunity to qualify for the European Championship. The bigger nations won't put more into it than needed. It will get serious only once they get to the semi finals.
 
They should just do away with all qualifiers; all the top league qualify (top half get seeded) apart from the bottom two who get relegated; The second league winner/runner up gets promoted/qualifies and the bottom team gets relegated; subsequent leagues the winner gets promoted/qualifies and the bottom team gets relegated if there is a lower league.

Would mean much better level competition, and hopefully avoid ever having to play San Marino/Faroe Islands etc. ever again.
 
r-u-s-x said:
the worst criticism I have seen is regarding this part (however well intentioned)

"For middle-ranking and smaller nations, the UEFA Nations League will offer an extra way to qualify for UEFA EURO final tournaments. Lower-tier countries – the bottom 16 in the rankings – are now guaranteed one of the 24 qualifying slots for UEFA EURO"

If you are at 18th bottom of the rankings you have an incentive to lose to get into the bottom 16. I don't follow US sports but do the worst teams in NFL lose games in order to get first pick in the draft the following year?
Click to expand...
An NFL team that's already had a horror of a season might "tank" for the last 2 or 3 games, but it's not easy.

It's not as valuable as it is in the NBA (where, I understand, it does happen) because single draft picks are rarely enough to turn a team around. It's worth ranking once the season's dead but I don't believe anyone starts the season with that in mind.

Teams can structurally tank - someone did it last season but I can't remember who. It essentially means allowing your veterans to run out their contracts and playing the kids. It's not a great strategy though, because NFL scouting isn't as clear as in other sports. A team also can't turn its fortunes around on the back of one player like in the NBA.
 
Last edited:
Hopefully the fact that every game will count towards the teams' FIFA ranking coefficient and thus affect seedings for future qualifying campaigns.

It is also worth noting that the Euro Nations League is based on a Norwegian initiative, so I would not be surprised if this is not sent to a footballing scrapheap after just a short while where it can rest peacefully alongside the Handshake for Peace and the Royal League (the other Norwegian "successes" of more or less international football).
 
scaramanga said:
An NFL team that's already had a horror of a season might "tank" for the last 2 or 3 games, but it's not easy.

It's not as valuable as it is in the NBA (where, I understand, it does happen) because single draft picks are rarely enough to turn a team around. It's worth ranking once the season's dead but I don't believe anyone starts the season with that in mind.

Teams can structurally tank - someone did it last season but I can't remember who. It essentially means allowing your veterans to run out their contracts and playing the kids. It's not a great strategy though, because NFL scouting isn't as clear as in other sports. A team also can't turn its fortunes around on the back of one player like in the NBA.
Click to expand...

just to clarify, in the NBA, the draft is a lottery system so the worst team doesn't automatically get the best college player, balls are drawn and the worst 5 teams have a better chance than other middle ranking teams to get the best draft choices.

In the NFL, the team with the worst record gets the no.1 prospect but unless its a QB with so many draft busts and a 53 team roster compared to a 15 player roster in the NBA, tanking isn't so much of an issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back