There are teams in Europe that will almost never make it to any tournament…all they do is make the numbers and thus increase the number of games competitive countries have to play.
In Asia and Africa, they already have different stages of qualification, although it’s a different setup to what I think Europe needs.
My take is the countries with the lowest FIFA ratings should play a two-legged knockout fixture (or a one-off could be a better idea) and then proceed to the main qualifying round.
What’s your take on that?
We dont need to see France beat Gibraltar 14 nil without leaving 2nd gear. And can you just imagine if Russia eventually collapses. Who wants to see new countries like Zorbokh etc lose to Italy by 20 goals.
I mean concacaf also does it with preliminary rounds in the gold cup, but I don’t think it’s necessary with Euros. There are more large and middle teams it’s too hard to get a good cutoff line of who should and shouldn’t have to go to preliminary.
But more games means more money to make! In 5 years we have a super nations league, club v country friendly matches, super duper champions league etc. There is always room for more games, players are only pretending to be fatigue /s
There are teams in Europe that will almost never make it to any tournament…
They still have a shot to do so no matter how unrealistic it is. Making it harder for them to do anything is not a good thing because some redditors are bored of international football. I bet you the same ones crying for “competitive qualifiers” would go mental if they made it so pot 1 teams can get matched against each other, which realistically makes the qualifiers more competitive.
That’s not what I mean. Take the FA cup preliminaries for instance where the teams at the lower leagues go through playoffs, but the difference is any of the weak teams that get through the playoffs will book a spot in the qualifying table of four teams
thus increase the number of games competitive countries have to play
If they’re so weak can’t competitive countries send an alternative team?
If the bottom two teams are such a walkover then the bigger nations can just send reserve sides to play. I’d expect training is more competitive than the matches against Malta and Gibraltar anyway so the players aren’t exerting themselves massively.
There were 8 competitive games for England in 2023, it’s nothing compared to club schedules.
no, but the players are the same
number of games need to be reduced
Absolutely not. This smells of entitlement
Why though? Just so that international teams can play a couple of extra friendlies instead of playing weak teams? They’d probably just end up playing those weak teams in the friendlies instead, since teams from other continents would be busy with their own qualifiers anyway.
They wouldn’t. England, for example, only tend to play high calibre friendlies because they want to sell out the stadium and keep the competitiveness high. It’s rare that they play a small nation in a friendly
Tbh there are also teams in the actual tournament that exist to make up the numbers. Like idk what teams like Switzerland, Sweden, or Austria do besides existing as filler teams for some guy on YouTube to make a highlight video of the best player from the opposing team. I specifically highlighted these teams because they’re usually okay in Group Stages but always lose in the Ro16 by any semi-decent team.
It’s kind of necessary to have the bad teams in the tournament because that means more games which means more money even if you don’t like it.
Where are you from? What teams like Switzerland, Sweden and Austria “do” is playing for their fans in the biggest stage representing their nation, and doing well at that.
As you highlighted this teams, Switzerland in the last euros didn’t lose to any semi-decent team in the round of 16. They eliminated the world champions France and then proceeded to take Spain to penalties.
Probably made a lot of people happy.