Are the Euros a better tournament than the FIFA World Cup?

Good points Brian, you can 'fluke' a Euro to an extent. I'm not saying Denmark or Greece were bad teams but they were hardly world beaters either time. I still can't see us Scots winning one though. Qualifying would be a start I suppose. There have been some cracking Euros for sure though, '88 was a classic because of Van Basten and I enjoyed '96 greatly for my own reasons, London that Summer was a great place to be, the atmosphere was brilliant. The last tournament wasn't actually too bad either I don't think in terms of the football played. But like you say, you can't beat a good World Cup........... We could actually do with a good one and by that I mean a real vintage one, last two have felt a little flat for me but it's all personal feeling really and what stage you are at in life. We all remember things from our youth as being far better than they actually were and World Cups are no different. I still reckon '82 was very special regardless!

WC much better, and harder to win. I mean Czech's, Russia, Denmark & Greece have all won Euros. The last Euro was pretty good but generally the problem is the lack of different styles. The English long ball v the Greek defensive counter attack is about as differnet as ytou get. The World Cup has has the romance, agility, unpreditctability of the Africans, the speed of the Asian The holding the ball of the latin americans etc. Just ask any Italian or German to name the WC wins and then the Euros wins. I am yet to meet one who only knows the Euros.

That is a really scary article. Totally different topic but the matter of FFP playing directly into the hands of the established rich clubs is so glaringly obvious I just don't see how it can be passed. I understand what Platini is trying to remedy but this is not the way. He's basically also saying that clubs can't accept handouts from benefactors but they can take vast leveraged loans (such as at ManU) to service themselves as long as the interest payments stay within FFP. Anyhow, it's a minefield and for another time that has probably already passed. I read an article the other day that the lawyer that took on UEFA over Bosman is planning a challenge on FFP also. Should be interesting.

Platini specifically referenced Scotland getting in as a result in his long conversation with Martin Samuel. Have you ever read that? It's....fascinating. And not in a good way. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2329745/Martin-Samuel-meets-Michel-Platini--read-FULL-transcript-interview-UEFA-president.html

I think the two tournaments are very different. The Euros tended to have a higher concentration of quality but as Chris says, expanding it to 24 teams is just bats and the product will be diluted like the World Cup. The problem is UEFA can't afford to have the likes of England miss out again, they just lose too much money I suppose. Who knows, even Scotland might qualify for something again now though..... I can at least dream. For me, the World Cup is as much about the first week as it is the last. Seeing teams and fans from all around the world dreaming of winning the thing and having a great time is what it's all about. I had one of the best days of my life in Paris in '98 for Scotland against Brazil. We knew we'd get beat but we didn't care, it was an amazing day. The World Cup is almost unique in its' ability to bring people together like that. Much of the romance (I'm going to sound like a right old git now) has gone out of both competitions now. I remember as a kid waiting to see Brazil and Argentina, you'd heard there was some guy called Maradona or Zico that you'd never seen before, these fantastic names and you couldn't wait to see them play. You can watch Messi three times a week now. No matter how much I despise Sepp Blatter, the World Cup will always be special (I hope) and the Euros is a nice interlude in the alternating 2 years. I really can't see that idea about some of the Americas teams coming into the Euros having any legs at all, sounds nonsense.

OK, there are a few distinct strands to this: Firstly, there is no comparison at all between the Europeans and the World Cup in terms of what you want to win (though being English, either would be nice. Sometime in my life. Or my childrens), the World Cup is the one - it's not remotely close. So the point about the Euros being better has nothing at all to do with the relative desirability of the two at all. The 16 team competition tends to be viewed as a better *tournament* by many, because the teams are much more even, so the group stages are far more critical. The better teams in the World Cup ought to put away the weaker ones in the group stage and get through, so there's often a feeling that the World Cup doesn't really get going till the knock out stage. In the Euros, the group matches are fraught and difficult. Fail to win your first one and you're in trouble, because the two remaining games will be against teams quite capable of beating you. That's all that's meant - it's the concentration of good teams that gives the Euros it's particular appeal. Of course, Platini is about to ruin this completely by expanding it to 24 teams the fool. Now, on the matter of inviting teams from outside, this is just flying a kite to express dissatisfaction with the corrupt FIFA. It won't happen.

Increasing it to 24 is one of the most ridiculous decisions that even the ridiculous UEFA have ever come up with.

Exactly nos inviting other teams, that's what the confederation's cup is for lol.

Perso, I still think the WC is the pinnacle of world football, well ahead of the euro. Growing up we were always saying it was probably harder to qualify for the Euro than for the WC but the prestige of the latter is unmatched, even by the Olympics football title. As for inviting Argentine, Brazil and a couple of other non euro countries I find the suggestion completely ludicrous and I hope this doesnt happen. The charm of a euro comp is that you play amongst your old rivals, your neighbours, people, countries and teams you know by heart. Like an old family reunion. I love both comps for different reasons and i think its the case for most european fans but i think they should keep their specificity.

Euro's you could say are harder to win. Take Argentina,Brazil.Uruguay, out of it, then you could say yes. But that's a hypothetical, as 9 World cups combined have been won by these guys. There been around 19 world cups so South America have won almost 50%, so you could say if only. But the fact is these teams are not at Euros, so it makes winning euro easier then in some ways. Uruguay got to semis in 2010, but have not won since 1950. Argentina have not won since 1986. And as for Euros haveing better teams alot of the time it's only had 8 teams, then went up to 16. So many good teams in the 8 who missed out were good teams, and had poor qualifying campaigns, or were in tough groups to qualify. Winning the copa america can be a really tough tournament to win. And not all of europe are strong teams,anyway. Plenty of also rans, and mid tier teams eg Swedens,Belguims,Russia's of this world, then the next rung down the Austrias, and Norways. Spain has not always been this good either don't forget. Only consistent euro powerhouses have been Germany and Italy. Euro gonna expand to 24 teams. I'd say world cup is harder, as if you look at the history Euro's were only 8 teams for along time so many teams missed out. And by Euro 96 in England, Mexico, some of the African teams, a few had got good, and many of the mid tier south american teams had improved,and by the late 90's Asian teams and socceroos had all raised the bar.

That's just crazy. All confederations have their own championships and all the nations within that confederation have to qualify for their championships and all that. The idea of then "inviting" some nations from outside of that confederation is just stupid. FIFA should simply ban them from doing it, and if they try to defy FIFA then the simple response is to say that if they do that they'll lose some spots in the World Cup, I think that would probably be enough of a deterrent.

Agree. People have often talked up the Euro's as tougher than the World Cup, but that's with the 16 teams. The 8 extra teams that are added aren't stronger than the best nations in the other confederations around the world.

Am i missing something here? Isnt the Euro the European championship? Wouldnt introducing non-european teams essentially be ending the Europoean championships and having world cups every 2 years?

Your money is always going to go into someones pocket (even when I buy a WSW jersey money is going into the pocket of some FFA executive), but at least if FIFA is powerful I get to see Australia play on the world stage and have someone to support. I don't see too much difference between FIFA and UEFA in terms of integrity to be honest. But at the end of the day FIFA has the sports interest from a global perspective. UEFA is simply all about Europe. If UEFA had their way the World Cup would no longer exist.

which is preferred to pouring billions into the corrupt FIFA coffers?

Sounds like UEFA just want a piece of the World Cup pie to me. It's always been the case since the birth of humanity that we treasure what we don't have. If a 'World Cup' happened every two years, as opposed to every four years, it wouldn't be nearly as exciting. I imagine if UEFA start handing out a few invitations, nations will be lining up and begging to be made a part of it. An exclusive little Euro-centric 'World Cup', I'll pass on that thanks. I much prefer the more world-wide appeal of the World Cup. I want to travel to places like Brazil where I've never been before. Furthermore, I love the unpredictability of the World Cup. I mean look at how the All Whites did at the 2010 World Cup. Respect! At the same time, you can get perceived 'weak' teams in the European Championship as well but it's not the same when they're not your little brothers across the Tasman Sea.

"If football was merely an excerise in watching technique we would never bother with anything but the UEFA Champions League." Or take it even further. Just watch Barcelona play Real Madrid every week. We can buy our $150 jersey and be the fake, plastic, bandwagoner supporters that society wants us to be, whilst pouring billions of dollars into the elitist Euro clubs coffers.

The World Cup is a festival of football. If football was merely an excerise in watching technique we would never bother with anything but the UEFA Champions League. But it's not. It's about passion, and the World Cup is where this energy and excitement reaches a crescendo. The World Cup is where the world comes to celebrate football and each other, and that is something that no regional competition is ever going to be able to compete with.

With the current performance of the mexican national side I'm not sure they're ideal for an invite at any rate

I'm very much in the "couldn't give a toss camp". I love the World Cup and will always support my team, but the farcical bidding process has really ruined the idea of the 18/22 tournaments for me. Until FIFA receive their much needed enema I won't be supporting their tournaments.