Jump to content

Thread for saying 'Thank You' to the UEFA Nations League


Stephen Malkmus
 Share

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, Utdtillidie2 said:

Promotion and a play off guarantee. What else you looking for?

Don't get me wrong... I've watched every match in this small table of miniscule world consternation and it's had me up to here 👉-

I'm well chuffed that we've "Won The League"......but fcuk me, it just seems like we've landed in a worst pile of shyit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Autistisches Nilpferd said:

Don't know if there are any teams with a better record than us but we've done rather well out of it. Tremendous stuff

Hungary have a good record too. I think they also started off in Group C at the start of it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, qos_75 said:

Hungary have a good record too. I think they also started off in Group C at the start of it. 

They have gone from A to C but the first promotion was a tad phony. They finished second in their league C group but went up due to format changes. Israel also in that same boat. 

 

The only 7 teams who’ve actually won a group twice (no one has won a group all three times) are:

 

Netherlands: Made the first and third UNL Finals

Italy: Made the last two UNL Finals

Spain: Made the last two UNL Finals

Bosnia: Twice promoted from B to A with a relegation in between. The Dundee/Inverness/St Mirren of international football.

Scotland: Promoted from C to A

Serbia: Promoted from C to A

Georgia: Promoted from D to B

 

Edited by Donathan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are opponents in the NL play-off semis drawn at random, or based on NL  results? UEFA currently rank the 4 Group B winners (in this order)…ISRAEL/BOSNIA/SERBIA/US. If it’s the latter then Israel here we come. A decent draw. It would also throw up a powder keg Bosnia v Serbia tie, which I was quite surprised to see isn’t one of UEFA’s “prohibited” matches. This may have to be played at a neutral venue. Maybe Iceland. Or Outer Mongolia. Maybe UEFA will deliberately keep these two apart, hoping one or both fail to make the final.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard to think of a single change in modern football that has been as unanimously positive as the Nations League.  UEFA don't deserve credit for much, but absolutely do for this one.  It's also hard to think of a nation it doesn't suit, regardless of murmurs of "glorified friendlies" from (lol) the likes of England fans.  Top tier nations get regular matches against other top tier nations that "matter", smaller nations get a tangible shot at qualification, whilst also getting games around their own level, diddies can go proper backyard wrestling on each other and actually stand a chance of improving.  If there's a downside to the competition, you're either Bitter Barry from Bootle or you're just being contrarian.

EDIT: If you're really pushed for a negative, you could perhaps point to the "Final Four" thing that always seems a bit pointless.  A trophy is nice for 1 of the 4, but the rest probably end up feeling like it's a waste of time, particularly the two that have to play the third place playoff.  But still, you can then argue that instead of playing a 6th seed side in qualifying, you're getting two matches against top tier nations.  Is that not better?

Edited by forameus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, forameus said:

It's hard to think of a single change in modern football that has been as unanimously positive as the Nations League.  UEFA don't deserve credit for much, but absolutely do for this one.  It's also hard to think of a nation it doesn't suit, regardless of murmurs of "glorified friendlies" from (lol) the likes of England fans.  Top tier nations get regular matches against other top tier nations that "matter", smaller nations get a tangible shot at qualification, whilst also getting games around their own level, diddies can go proper backyard wrestling on each other and actually stand a chance of improving.  If there's a downside to the competition, you're either Bitter Barry from Bootle or you're just being contrarian.

EDIT: If you're really pushed for a negative, you could perhaps point to the "Final Four" thing that always seems a bit pointless.  A trophy is nice for 1 of the 4, but the rest probably end up feeling like it's a waste of time, particularly the two that have to play the third place playoff.  But still, you can then argue that instead of playing a 6th seed side in qualifying, you're getting two matches against top tier nations.  Is that not better?

I mean, even if they are “glorified friendlies” for the top nations, that’s at worst a net wash for the top nations who would otherwise be playing actual friendlies against the exact same group of opponents.

 

The nations league is absolutely fantastic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...