It sounds like you want some sort of European Super League that serves to benefit the biggest teams.
Tuchel's First Squad (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter alexccfc99
- Start date
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
In the international game? Yes and the structure already exists via the Nations League. I would structure qualifying around this somehow so the level of international fixtures reflects this. We want to see big games like:
Spain v Portugal
France v Italy
Germany v Netherlands
We’re one of the federations that has open qualifying. Asia, Oceania, CONCAF and AFCON all have preliminary qualification rounds.
oscillatewildly
Well-Known Member
It is what it is. Otherwise you're asking the world governing body to create an 'underling' tournament - A bit like an international checkatrade.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
It’s no different, in principle, to how the FA Cup has staged entrance. When we played Maidstone, they earned the right to play us despite it being a complete mismatch. In international football, we’re forced to play against teams that aren’t fit to play against us or the other elite of European football.
oscillatewildly
Well-Known Member
Although they were never going to win, that Albanian side last night were the most organised I've ever seen.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
They were and there’s no denying that. However, there’s no ‘magic of the cup’ in these fixtures and the Nations League has played a role in developing the smaller nations than the traditional qualification format. What do teams like San Marino get from their annual 5+ goal drubbings?
I don’t know how it would work but leveraging the league structure to have automatic qualification for the Euros and World Cup for, say, the top 8-10 teams in top 6 makes sense.
Qualification for CONMEBOL is one big league structure for World Cup qualification over 2-3 years.
Otis
Well-Known Member
They're the same with their drug gangs.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Some of those teams that you deem not worthy of playing England have won a trophy since 1966.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Like who?
My point isn’t just about England. Malta should not be playing Spain/Netherlands or the Faroe Islands playing France/Croatia.
Why not have 2-3 stages of qualification where highest ranked teams enter qualification at a later stage?
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Greece and Denmark for starters.
Spot the odd one out here. Why should England be automatically entitled to play them, despite not winning anything for going on 60 years?
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Why are you fixated on England? I said highest ranked teams and/or Nations League Group A teams. Which includes Denmark, Scotland and Hungary. If England were 20, 30 and 40th (and so on) in the world rankings, we’d have to play more qualification games.
It’s inherently meritocratic and the best teams play one another.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
You were talking about certain teams not being worthy to play against England, which is why I'm talking about them.
Fair play for just openly admitting you don’t give a shit about the competitive element of international football and you just want the whole thing to be governed by TV ratings.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Firstly, not what I said. Second, the point was the ‘lesser teams’ should earn the right to play the mid and top tier nations.
So this applies to the semi-pro teams like San Marino and Andorra… not Denmark who are a top tier nation in Europe!
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
It’s not competitive, is it? This is why the Nations League exists in the first place.
The current system tiers teams according to world ranking and puts them into pots. So taking 2 or 3 of the lowest pots out and having a preliminary round makes sense and is the norm for the other federations.
If we’re following your logic, is it anti-competitive that the Prem and Championship enter the 3rd round of the FA Cup? If not, why?
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Firstly, not what I said. Second, the point was the ‘lesser teams’ should earn the right to play the mid and top tier nations.
So this applies to the semi-pro teams like San Marino and Andorra… not Denmark who are a top tier nation in Europe!
I’m not sure I’d describe a team that hasn’t won anything in nearly 60 years as part of the elite, or having an automatic right to anything.
Last edited:
No, it isn’t, but English football is set up as a pyramid, whereas international football isn’t. Some kind of seeding makes sense but your suggestion essentially creates a closed shop based on nothing more than self-professed ‘big’ teams playing each other on an endless loop simply because that’s what “we want to see”. That’s not competition, that’s marketing.
To go back to one of your earlier points:
Who gives a shit? Why should the entire international system be overhauled to make things more convenient for Thomas Tuchel?
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
I’m not sure I’d describe a team that hasn’t won anything in nearly 60 years as part of the elite, or having an automatic right to anything.
This is a dumb argument.
Should Germany, France, Spain and Italy have to play the likes of Andorra, Gibraltar, Lichtenstein and San Marino?
My answer is no because these fixtures are as mismatched as anything you’d see. If they made it through 2-3 rounds of prelims, fair enough but otherwise they have no right to play the elite.
UEFA is in the minority of confederations that has open qualification.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Yes of course they should do.
“No right to play the elite”
It wasn’t along that one of the elite you’ve described above lost to North Macedonia - and it was only a year after they’d won the Euros.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
It’s got nothing to do with convenience. The international game is no longer the pinnacle of football and a large part of this is because there’s too many dead rubber games.
There’s also the wider issue of player welfare over the amount of games they play. So it makes sense for a shorter international calendar but with more competitive games.
Yes of course they should do.
“No right to play the elite”
It wasn’t along that one of the elite you’ve described above lost to North Macedonia - and it was only a year after they’d won the Euros.
Terrible example to use because North Macedonia earned that playoff-spot via the Nations League because they won their Group in the C league rather than the traditional qualification process. Unwittingly, you’ve supported my point that the qualification process isn’t really fit for purpose as it creates dead rubbers. Therefore, expanding the nations league makes sense because it gives teams opportunities they would be locked out of via the status quo.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Not really, you’ve been going on about certain sides not being fit to play the elite, which is just nonsense. Presumably you’d also support Man City and Liverpool if they decided they deserved to enter the FA Cup at the last 16 or quarter final stage.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Yes for the same reason we don’t play Liverpool, Man City, Crawley or Maidenhead FC.
The Nations League is organised into leagues based on promotion and relegation and has been leveraged to allow lower ranked teams to have playoff spots with the top teams.
The Nations League could genuinely revitalise international football if it was the foundation for World Cup/Euros qualification. All that I’m suggesting is removing the pot 4 and 5 teams because they stand next to no chance of qualification. To date, I don’t think a team ranked so low has ever qualified.
Which, bear in mind the qualification places for the World Cup and Euros has been expanded, strengthens the idea of using the Nations League. In a similar way to how COMNEBOL has their league style qualification process.
Especially if the Euros is expanded to 32 teams, you may as well as well have 20 places allocated to Group A and winners of Group B and a qualification process for the remaining 12 spots with remaining 30-odd teams.