World

Competitions

Euro 2008

Vote: Should the Euros be Expanded?

June 20th, 2008 | By: Ian Rose | 15 Comments »

Reuters has reported that UEFA will decide sometime this year whether to expand the European Championships to either 20 or 24 teams. Since this is UEFA and not FIFA, there is a tiny little chance that the will of the fans won’t be completely ignored, so tell us what you think about expanding the Euros? Is it only fair, with all the new countries splitting off in Europe, or does it dilute a tournament that is so great for the fact that it is so exclusive?

Tell us what you think.

As for me, I have to say I’m dead set against it. As much as it would bring me great personal joy to see Scotland qualify for the Euros more regularly, which would be more likely in a 24-team system, it would mean less. Even though teams like Greece and Poland didn’t perform at a high level in the tournament, there were no bad teams at Euro 2008, and I think this year’s tournament is a great example of why 16 is a perfect number. It makes qualification a meaningful process, where perennial Euro teams like England are not assured of successful entry, and where teams like Italy and France can be pushed to the edge of elimination.

I’m a big fan of this tournament’s format, and happen to think it’s the most competitive international football tournament in the world. I’m looking forward to hearing your thoughts on the matter.

Tags: Euro 2008 News, Euro 2012, Euro 2016, European championships, Rules and regulations, Tournament format, UEFA

Euro 2008 World Cup RSS Feed

del.icio.us:Vote: Should the Euros be Expanded?

digg:Vote: Should the Euros be Expanded?

newsvine:Vote: Should the Euros be Expanded?

reddit:Vote: Should the Euros be Expanded?

fark:Vote: Should the Euros be Expanded?

stumbleupon:Vote: Should the Euros be Expanded?

Comments

By jonkon | June 20th, 2008 at 5:42 pm

Problems I can immediately see
1. More games would make more tired legs for the next season.
2. More boring group stage games.
3. Longer tournament, less interest.
4. Will there be enough venues for all these games?
5. Five man groups gives a day off for certain teams making an unfair advantage in the following match.
6. Would put too much pressure on the home country to be able to have the capacity to entertain so many fans from so many countries.
7. England might qualify

Posted from United States

By Thierry | June 20th, 2008 at 5:43 pm

NO WAY!!! What’s the point of qualifiers then?

By jonkon | June 20th, 2008 at 5:44 pm

If anything should be changed, its the seeding. Who think Scotland might have had a chance to advance from group C? I certainly do. The qualifiers need changing, not the finals.

Posted from United States

By Daryl | June 20th, 2008 at 5:44 pm

If there are going to be two co-hosts then I’d like to see the total number of teams increase. To have one eighth of teams automatically qualify feels wrong.

Only question is whether the European football schedule can accommodate a longer tournament.

Wonder if I’d feel the same had England qualified…

Posted from United Kingdom

By Lugo | June 20th, 2008 at 6:14 pm

Make it 20. Nobody watches qualifiers outside of Europe.

By Elisa | June 20th, 2008 at 6:16 pm

There are two schools of thought:

1) Europe has the best teams and with the burgeoning quality of the ex Eastern bloc countries, we should open it up to more countries.

2) Money talks and we miss all the English monies. Also we do not want hear the flack about 2 hosts any longer.

I love it just the way it is, but I am not totally against expanding it.

By bunchapooha | June 20th, 2008 at 6:16 pm

Ridiculous.

Posted from Netherlands

By Ryan | June 20th, 2008 at 6:17 pm

I don’t know Lugo, they certainly had my interest.

Posted from United States

By Ryan | June 20th, 2008 at 6:18 pm

Also an idea, what if when there are two co-hosts ( Austria/ Switzerland, Ukraine-Poland in 2012) they play a two leg aggregate series for the spot, how entertaining would that be?

Posted from United States

By Johannes | June 20th, 2008 at 6:40 pm

Ryan: that is a great idea !!

but expanding the finals would eventually deminish the overall quality of the tournament (and put extra strain on the players). Not that UEFA (and FIFA) necessarily care about that, they’re only interested in the mulah !

By mele149 | June 20th, 2008 at 7:12 pm

I think it’d be pretty good just to have 20. The tournament just seems so short, and this year there were a lot of surprises, having a few more “dark horses” could make it even more interesting.

Posted from United States

By Ian Rose | June 20th, 2008 at 7:22 pm

So far, 68% for keeping it as it is. Couldn’t agree more.

Posted from United States

By AJ | June 20th, 2008 at 8:26 pm

Make it 20. Having the likes of England, Scotland, Denmark and Ukraine only brings more competition to the table, it wont hurt it. More teams = more fans = more money spent = economy happy. Also, if this trend of co-hosting continues, then I’d hate the fact that technically only 14 teams battled for a spot.

So yes, please change it to 20 teams.

Posted from Canada