The 2016 UEFA European Championships will be the first edition to have 24 teams in it. This is an upgrade from the absolutely perfectly working 16-team knockout.
What this means is that roughly half of UEFA’s 53 member nations will qualify for the Euros, and that 24 competitors will now mean an off-balance tournament, and a very off-balance qualifying segment. It is quite possible to get through the group stages in both without winning a game.
The new format is the brainchild of former great footballer Michel Platini, who has also introduced an overhaul of one competition (the UEFA Cup into the Europa League), tweaks to another (Champions League qualifying) and brought in Financial Fair Play (FFP).
Many have derided the Europa League, pointing out that its paltry reward, combined with its fixture largesse, exacerbates its already bloated nature and asks too much of the mid-tier and low-tier clubs’ already strained finances.
FFP, too, has had its fair share of criticism for its lack of gumption, being a half-hearted regulation that is all show and little go, allowing clubs still too much financial leeway. Conversely, some have also argued it is merely a measure to ensure the elite clubs’ position among the top.
Although, to be fair, the intended sanctions of FFP are only starting to be implemented as the regulation works on a medium-term basis, punishing clubs if they breach the limitations over the course of three seasons or so.
On the other hand, not much that I’ve seen or read has gone against Platini’s Champions League tweaks, although it wouldn’t be too hard to see if Platini’s aim – to have more clubs from outside the traditional nations take part – has been bearing fruit. These tweaks have been in place for a number of years, so there’s the beginnings of a solid base of evidence.
From the get-go, however, Platini’s changes to these Euros are yet another example of modern sport administrators’ undying crusade to dilute the quality of competitions. First of all, for a sport that’s by far and away the most popular sport across Europe there is no need to expand the competition to encourage new markets, unlike the Rugby Championship, for example.
Secondly, although mid-tier nations may reach their first ever finals, their presence will inevitably downgrade the overall quality of the tournament, lessening the essential tournament ingredient of tension. Yes, one may argue that the World Cup is filled with crap too, but at least there’s still that mystery and awe that comes when Japan play Senegal, Greece play Costa Rica or Chile play Switzerland. Scotland versus Spain is a less intriguing and a far more predictable meeting.
Platini has expanded anyway, from the very workable 16-team finals format to the askew 24-team tournament, where there’ll be six four-team groups. That means 12 teams will go into the round of 16, with four teams to be found from teams that finish third in their group. A 16-team, or a 32-team tournament like the World Cup, is perfectly fine as the group stage splits the teams equally.
By expanding it to 24 teams, it means that qualifying has to be changed to allow eight more teams to progress. The planners firstly have to negate the tricky problem of funnelling 53 nations into 24 spots. First of all, the member nations are placed across nine groups of six teams each, with one group having only five (remember that there’s actually 54 UEFA member nations, but the hosts France don’t have to qualify).
In previous editions, the nine group winners went through, along with the best second-placed team, and the eight remaining second-placed teams playing-off to reach the finals. Now, there’s many possibilities in which a team can get through to France without having to win any of their qualifying games.
It goes without saying that is far from ideal. Safe to say, with such easy qualifying, there will be no repeat of last time around, when Romania, Turkey and Hungary finished within three points of each other on an exciting last matchday of qualification for the 2014 World Cup.
The important thing to conclude is that Platini’s new plan is so fresh that it hasn’t even finished its first week. Criticism of the clunky amount of teams will hang around, but it is quite possible that including eight more European teams will be a masterstroke, with maybe a few big names falling to less-pointier sticks of the lesser footballing nations.
The general high standard of European football also means that the football is often quite entertaining, and the games are generally quite tight affairs, so again Platini might be right in trying to dig a grave only to find more treasure. Taking a look at the European teams, there’s slightly more than 16 quality teams.
First of all, there’s the usual western European quality – England, France, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Italy and Switzerland (that’s nine teams). Below that tier, we can add the milieu of good-but-not-great footballing nations of Europe: old powerhouse Russia, successful sleep-inducers Greece and their eternal rivals, Turkey, the most-summery Scandinavian nation Denmark, and a handful of former Yugoslavian and Warsaw Pact countries (Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia, Czech Republic and Ukraine).
Together with the first nine nations, that gives us 18 nations, and to that we can add surprise packets Iceland, as well as four other mediocre teams featuring one or two fantastic players (Armenia, Montenegro, Sweden and Wales) – making 23 nations in total.
Furthermore in Platini’s favour, the European Championships have shown us before their capacity to shock, with Greece and Denmark being outside lights to have won in recent editions. Also, changes introduced to the Champions League qualifying has led to more minnows reaching the group stage, and the tale of the underdog is a timeless story everyone loves seeing repeated, especially journalists. An example would be Cypriot team APOEL reaching the quarter-finals a couple of years ago.
One important caveat, though, to that hope, is that the 16-team format worked splendidly, with big names failing at times and small names succeeding in the finals. Although the last one was a bit of a stinker, the 16-team Euros were generally belter tournaments with tense games, due to a consistent quality of the teams across the tournament. Michel Platini has gone and changed that.
Anthony Ferguson
Guest
Quite agree that Platini has stuffed up the European Champioships and the EUFA Cup, turning them into a bloated travesty. I've already lost interest in the European Championship. 16 teams in the finals was pushing it. As for the Europa League, its a farce, the reality tv show of football. All the losers get voted back in again and again til it totally destroys the notion of cup competition. Celtic for example, were knocked out of the Champions League quals by nobodies twice this season AND still got a group spot in the Europa League. The World Cup conversely is perfect with its true global representation, and 32 teams is about right given the number of countries who enter the qualification stages. Any more will spoil it though.
Johnno
Guest
nos if you don't know what to think we could back to the old 8-team Euro's last used in Euro 92 lol. Denmark loved 8-team Euro 92 lol.
nickoldschool
Roar Guru
That's a valid point Paul and Lion. But I think FIFA and especially UEFA wants to have as many meaningful games as possible between big events, i.e euros and WC. We are sort of used to have those lengthy qualifying processes I guess and even if our team doesn't qualify for one event, say a WC, we know they will start the other qualifying for the euro just after the WC. I remember thinking that when my team didn't qualify for a WC or euro. Re 24 or 16 I still dunno what to think. Considering the density of European football I think 24 can work plus it would ensure big teams do not miss out and that smaller nations which are rarely given the opportunity to take part in a major comp this time around really stand a chance at the start of the qualifying process. A couple of British nations other than England, same with Scandinavians or Slavic nations, would def bring something to any major comp.
Johnno
Guest
Fuss UEFA would never want to do that merge the qualifying. UEFA, and all the confederations make a packet out of qualifying games, $$. As do the stadiums like Wembley and San Siro, won't be happening in Europe Fuss. More qualifiers equals more money.
Fadida
Guest
It's called a World Cup. Too hard for you to understand?
Lion Down Under
Guest
I've thought that for a long time. WC hosts and holders qualify automatically, everyone else qualifies through their Regional federation's championship. Where there are 0.5 qualifying spots up for grabs play home-and-away play-offs. It would further internationalise the sport as you could have more cross-federation friendlies and even competitions if you're not playing two sets of qualification games against your continental neighbours every four years.
Batou
Guest
Gold!
Paul
Guest
So other continents cannot dare to dream? Great neoconservative argument there, but it will do nothing to grow the game.
Fussball ist unser leben
Roar Guru
Algeria was one of the most exciting teams at WC2014. Apart from Ghana, I can't recall another team pushing the eventual World Champions to the extent Algeria did. Honduras vs Costa Rica was a beauty at WC2014. Some of the most enjoyable moments, for me, as I watched all 64 WC matches was seeing so many unfashionable underdogs triumphant.
Paul
Guest
Better still, just use these tournaments as a qualifying pathway to the World Cup. Already happens in youth and women's football.
Fussball ist unser leben
Roar Guru
Don't see what's wrong with a 24 team tournament? The competition is to identify the best football nation in Europe. So, why not invite as many teams as is physically possible for a Group & Knock-out competition that's played over 30 days? One change I'd like to see - it's already happening in the Asian Confederation - is to merge the qualifying for the Euros & the World Cup. The World Cup gets the 13 best Uefa nations. The Euros get the 24 best Uefa nations.
c
Guest
it is simple 24 teams = more product = more money
Que?
Guest
Great union reference. The NRC doesn't have a lot to do with international football.
whiskeymac
Guest
is the growth of the tournament a sly grab for power by the federation over those pesky clubs?
Domitian
Guest
Better yet Johnno, why don't we just stop playing football all together and just do a comparisons of FIFA rankings, which could be calculated on quality of culture and position respective nations finish in Eurovision, and then we could hold riveting and enlightening discussions based on said rankings?
Johnno
Guest
Stevo, what the mystery of crap teams who are lower ranked playing in a so called FIFA vote grabbing "World Cup" lol, too funny. Sorry other than a laugh I get no joy watching Algeria V Honduras,when I know Sweden V Denmark would be a better game.
Stevo
Roar Rookie
"Yes, one may argue that the World Cup is filled with CRAP too, but at least there’s still that mystery and awe that comes when Japan play Senegal, Greece play Costa Rica or Chile play Switzerland. Scotland versus Spain is a less intriguing and a far more predictable meeting." But you forgot to mention the highly ranked Socceroos playing the minnow nations like Spain and Netherlands LOL!!!!!
Johnno
Guest
Ah yah old Geezer, enjoy Europe in all it's splendour, and have a real Eurovision party. To be honest I wouldn't object if all of Europe competed, or at least make it 32-teams. Europe is the best part of the World for culture and history, we love Europe and Euro vision, so get them all in for a party. So many good teams, why should some miss out. World Cup soccer always annoys me as it doesn't feel like a true "World Championship" as so many good European teams miss out. But no FIFA want voted so they get all the crap football confederations underserving spots. Tell me this, at the soccer world cup are you saying,Czech Republic and Sweden,Denmark,Ukraine, Romania, and Turkey,Serbia,Norway,Ireland,Scotland,Austria,were not better than some of the dross teams at the World Cup. eg Honduras,Algeria, oh and I forget the 79th Ranked Socceroos LOL. Oh let me remind you Ukraine is ranked 22, Hungary is ranked 34, and Scotland is ranked 28, and Finland is ranked 55 lol. Finland are ranked higher than us. See how many good teams were missing from this so called World cup to give spots to other confederations who are lower ranked eg Iran 43, and Australia 79 lol. So a strong and expanded Euro championship is a good thing. The World Cup being called a true World championship is farcical,the world cup needs to change it's qualifying, and have the top 32-teams, not just a confederation share to get a cynical grab of votes by FIFA officials to keep getting re-elected. So a bit if justice for an expanded Euro championship, it will be like a de-facto world championship. It's not about European arrogance, it's just fact and it is what it is, Europe produces more quality teams than any other confederation, so an expansion of Euro Championships I see as a good thing, as more teams will get the chance to prove themselves on the big stage. Or maybe we could say Europe/South America.
Johnno
Guest
Ah yah old Geezer, enjoy Europe in all it's splendour, and have a real Eurovision party. To be honest I wouldn't object if all of Europe competed, or at least make it 32-teams. Europe is the best part of the World for culture and history, we love Europe and Euro vision, so get them all in for a party.