Forget World Cup, Euro is football's top competition

I've no problem at all with teams like North Korea getting to the World Cup, they got there on merit, just didn't set the competition alight when it mattered. I'm just making the point that there are usually no equivalent teams, preparing for some drubbings, in the Euros at the moment. This probably won't be the case once the comp is expanded in 2016. For what it's worth though, I disagree that the World Cup begins with the knock-out stages, there's more flair and flamboyance during the groups, and we get to see some more of the more obscure nations play, rather than the same old faces that usually turn up at the business end of each tournament. I've also always felt that part of the appeal of the World Cup (and to a lesser degree, the Euros too) is in adopting a few other teams from groups other than your own nation's to support as the comp progresses.

If only! I've just found the article on the Age's website, & I think they've ballsed up massively with both dates and times. From what I've seen on the UEFA website each game kicks off either at 6pm or 8:45pm local time, making them all either 2am or 4:45am AEST. It's going to be hard work staying up for these fixtures! I think Italy v Spain could be the match of the opening rounds, there's no love lost between those 2 nations' teams and fans, and it's usually a case of an unstoppable force meeting an unmovable object when they do play each other.

I'll bow to your greater wisdom - I took the dates and times straight out of this morning's Age. If 4:45 is correct, that ain't very inviting - I was rather attracted to the 7:45 starts. I thought to myself - how civil is that?

Sorry Cattery, I think that you may be getting your time zones confused, the correct times for these games are: Germany v Portugal, Sun June 10 Netherlands v Germany, Thurs June 14 England v Ukraine, Wed June 20 ... and all at the ungodly hour of 4:45am AEST.

These days, the Euros probably are better than the WC. There are so many quality teams pitted against each other, it's ultra tight the whole way through. In case people aren't aware, there are a few quality games at very watchable times: Germany v Portugal, Sat June 9, 7:45am Netherlands v Germany, Wed June 13, 7:45am England v Ukraine, June 19, Tues 7:45am I would encourage everyone to try and at least catch some of those games.

24 team Euro, still equals better quality teams than a 32 team world cup. You think there aren't 24 good football nations in Europe?

Lekter a young Drogba and Wayne Rooney would not make the starting team of Barcelona or Real Madrid please. These are 2 of the greatest clubs in the world if not the 2 greatest with Man United. Drogba only plays for Chelsea which is not Barcelona or Real Madrid. -Cough cough cough men like Zidane, the 2 ronaldos, Ronaldhino Becks, Xavi , Ineasta, and Messi, Luis Figo, sone of the all time greats. To compare Figo to Drogba is laughable i mean really please., And please do not insult Zizu the French Master of Jogo bonito the beautiful game. -and please do not even get me started on Kaka.

A young Drogba would definitely make Real Madrid or Barcelona. You just say that because he is 34. Plus club teams play 40 to 50 matches every season unlike national teams whose players don't get to see each other every Sunday and Wednesday. They play what, once a month?

What bothers you about North Korea like teams being in a football tournament? All those "bad" teams get eliminated in the group stage anyway and only the top teams in the world make it to the round of 16 where the real tournament begins.

Hi...from a personal point of view....the Euro tournaments have always caught my fancy since the competition is intense right from day 01 unlike the world cups wherein, it takes a while for the spectacle to warm up. Of course, it's because the number of teams competing at the Euros are far lesser. Cannot wait for the action to begin! Thanks.

i was opposed to 24 teams for Euro 2016, but now support the move to 24 teams . Why: -I argue one increases the quality as more nations will get better at soccer in europe with the exposure -Higher tv ratings around europe and globally as more nations included so more people around the world will watch and in more nations in Europe. -It is a continent like eurovision, not the whole world, and the more teams with in the 1 continent that can participate in the tournament the big party, like euro vision the better. -It brings more energy like eurovision as more of Europe will be part of the big tournament. 16 feels a bit stale 24 sounds better I would even go to 32 , just include all of Europe or 75% of Europe. -the energy and colour of having more teams, nations, and cultures in Europe will be great. -And more teams means more surprises like Denmark winner euro 92, Czech republic runner up euro 96, Greece winner euro 2004, great publicity and stories for the sport of soccer. -And also the more teams well the more nations of europe the better to workout the euro crisis and how to save the Euro lol.

I used to be more excited for the Euros but now its like a World Cup with so many missing charms. TO contra your arguments 1. Yes the FIFA Rankings are flawed weighted towards countries that play other coutnries e.g. an European team like Czech R will rank higher than say Japan or Ghana because they are playing other European countries - does not mean they are better 2. Definately lots of corporates at the generally smaller European stadiums. That's not too mention the problems around racists fans in Ukraine 3. The BIGGEST problem with the Euros for me is the lack of alternative styles, I know England are speedy whilst Spain hold the ball but many games at the Euros lack the different stlyes that makes the WC so great. There's no Paraguay v Nigeria where every player on one team is smaller yet very skillfull or the speed of the Asian countries. 4. As for supposed quality well the Euros are going to 24 teams from 2016 so that's then end of that argument But as you can tell your preaching to the converted. So yes I will be watching

I think you'll find that there is still likely to be a large percentage of corporates and suits utilising their freebies & filling the seats at stadia during Euro 2012, there always is. There is also the issue that a lot of fans are avoiding this tournament thanks to both Poland & Ukraine's reputations for (how to put this delicately?) not so tolerant treatment of outsiders. The English FA have already returned thousands of unsold tickets to UEFA. Hopefully any nastiness won't rear its ugly head during the forthcoming weeks but concerns have already been voiced at the prospect, the BBC have already broadcast some quite unsavoury stuff on their Panorama program. There has also been suggestions that any trouble may have a knock-on effect on Russia's World Cup in 2018, as this article states: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2012/may/30/euro-2012-russia-poland-ukraine However, I'm really looking forward to this tournament kicking off: this is the last European Championship to have only 16 teams (Euro 2016 will have 24), so the quality of all the qualified teams is high: there are no Euro equivalents of North Korea here; the 2 hosts are arguably the weakest teams, but with home support behind them could provide some surprises; and I don't think any of the 4 groups are easy to call at this stage. Here's to some sleepless nights coming up!

I'm pretty sure that people from Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay would disagree with you. Plus when you consider that the world cup adds these teams plus the likes of Chile, Mexico, Paraguay, Cameroon, USA, Japan and South Korea to the tournament you will have even more class added to the likes of the players mentioned from Europe. Furthermore outside of the top ten leagues in Europe the football is overated. Sure there are a lot of players playing in Spain, England, Italy, Germany, France and Russia. But there are also a lot of players playing in leagues like Ukraine, Poland, Czech Republic, Croatia, Greece, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, Scotland and the English championship. Are these competitions better than the Argentine league, the Brazillian campeonato, the J league and the MLS? Perhaps if your playing for the likes of Dynamo Kiev, Celtic, Club Bruuge or FC Copenhagen and your team has a run in one of the European competitions. Otherwise if you don't your stuck playing the likes of St Mirren, Scunthorpe United, or any number of teams whose name I don't know. And these players are better than Neymar, Elano or Riquelme?

Amen

10 years go plus id agre with you bot not anymore. Euro 2000, and euro 96 definatly wasn't euro 96 a great soccer torunament, best one ever even better than egrmany 2006 standard wise and excitement. Gazza and England and the old wembley and the loss to the germans at wembley 30 years of hope and glory ringing through wembley 1966 win and Booby moore's ghost though wembley and bobby charlton. Great times. But now world cup has advanced , as per usual the south americans of course have always been a force. But it is the rise of Asia. For example the land of the rising sun Japan, a new dan in Asia has given rise to world soccer getting stronger, and the USA 94 opened up north american markets, and of course Africa too the hopes and dreams of millions of Africans eg 2010 world cup south africa "it's time for Africa shakira". But now maybe World cup is higher standard. But ultimately UEFA champions league is the no 1 tournament. Barcelona and Real Madrid are a better chide than Brazil or Spain or Dutch national team or Uruguay, or gemrany or argentina and of course better than England despite all there bulldog spirit and legends past like gazza and Becks. Rooney would not even make the Barca or Real 1st team he'd come off the bench as would Drogba not make Barca or Real madrid starting team.