Jump to content

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


Stephen Malkmus

Recommended Posts

2 hours 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?

"bUt Ah DoN't UnDeRsTaNd It"
     -Every Sportsound pundit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to play devil's advocate for those looking for a negative, it hasn't been great for non UEFA nations. I know UEFA don't care about that by the way. 

Argentina have only played Italy in the Finalissima, Brazil haven't played anyone from Europe, etc. It makes it tough to prepare for World Cups when you can't really play nations from other federations. And if the COMBEBOL nations join in next time it just passes that problem down to Asian and African nations etc. 

But that's not for us to worry about, so aye - Thank You, UEFA Nations League(TM)!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Salvo Montalbano said:

Just to play devil's advocate for those looking for a negative, it hasn't been great for non UEFA nations. I know UEFA don't care about that by the way. 

Argentina have only played Italy in the Finalissima, Brazil haven't played anyone from Europe, etc. It makes it tough to prepare for World Cups when you can't really play nations from other federations. And if the COMBEBOL nations join in next time it just passes that problem down to Asian and African nations etc. 

But that's not for us to worry about, so aye - Thank You, UEFA Nations League(TM)!

Opportunities to play friendlies:

 

- Immediately before major tournaments

 

- March window 3 months before tournaments (All UEFA nations are idle except the 12 involved in the playoffs and the 4 involved in the league C relegation playoffs)

 

- March, September, October and November windows the year before a major tournament (You can play a friendly against the idle team from a 5 team group)

 

The world’s tiniest violin is playing for Brazil. If they truly wanted more friendlies against non-CONMEBOL opposition they should be lobbying to change the qualifying format to two groups of five with the top three from each group going to the finals and the best third placed team going to the intercontinental playoff event. That would cut them from 18 qualifying matches down to 8.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah credit to UEFA. When this was announced as a third level international competition there was a fair bit of eye rolling, but it's certainly been a success. I don't feel the bigger nations are that bothered about it right enough. You get a lot of weird results in Group A and the finals don't really attract much interest - incase anyone had forgotten, Italy hosted them in 2021 and France won the title, beating Spain in the final. There was a whopping crowd of 31,000 inslde the San Siro for that showpiece match.

The success of the tournament has been with the smaller nations. THere is a lot more competitive international football, and of course a moon shot at qualifying for a major tournament, which is the real prize on offer.  Another big benefit is the reduction in those tedious international friendlies we were subjected to on a regular basis. The idea of going back to them is terrifying, so the nations league is here to stay. Good. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather see the concept used to revamp World Cup and Euro qualifiers, instead of existing as a third tournament. That would probably involve a first stage that exempted the top 16 sides to act as promotion and sides eliminated in the second stage could be relegated to the first round of the next competition. 

Both group stages could be completed within ten/eleven international dates according to the back of my envelope, top 16 sides only facing six matches to qualify before any necessary final play-off round.

Throw in a drop-down competition for the sides eliminated in the first stage and the "minnows" would still have competitive matches, and it would free up dates in the international calender for the all-important money-spinning meaningless friendlies, to boot.......
 
Although I expect they'd then use those free dates for a rich nations Super League tournament.........
    
 Edit: I should state that I am one of the rare fans of the concept of the Nations' League from south of the border, Southgate's non-scoring non-achievers notwithstanding - I just think it could have sat better within the existing qualifying framework.  
 
 

Edited by IncomingExile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, TheScarf said:

Norwegian man who came up with the idea, thank you.

Did this just arrive fully formed?

It's probably just me, but I don't remember much speculation, or anything about such a tournament before it suddenly appeared.  Was it really one man's brainchild, or did it get wrung and morphed through all sorts of committees first?

At first, it seemed complicated, but its genius is really in its simplicity.  As an idea it makes sense. The masterstroke lies in tying it to the major tournaments via the play-off places.  

Like all the best ideas, it feels obvious, now that it exists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Did this just arrive fully formed?

It's probably just me, but I don't remember much speculation, or anything about such a tournament before it suddenly appeared.  Was it really one man's brainchild, or did it get wrung and morphed through all sorts of committees first?

At first, it seemed complicated, but its genius is really in its simplicity.  As an idea it makes sense. The masterstroke lies in tying it to the major tournaments via the play-off places.  

Like all the best ideas, it feels obvious, now that it exists.

I think he was just the mouthpiece for the idea to be honest. It’s been a great addition to international football. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did this just arrive fully formed?
It's probably just me, but I don't remember much speculation, or anything about such a tournament before it suddenly appeared.  Was it really one man's brainchild, or did it get wrung and morphed through all sorts of committees first?
At first, it seemed complicated, but its genius is really in its simplicity.  As an idea it makes sense. The masterstroke lies in tying it to the major tournaments via the play-off places.  
Like all the best ideas, it feels obvious, now that it exists.
And in contrast the old system of pointless friendlies* that we persisted with for over 100 years just seems bonkers.

*I absolutely detested it when Scotland so often "chose not to take a game" in those bad old days. A few times it was to have a morale building camp or the like, but the majority of the time it was just lack of being arsed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Gordopolis said:

And in contrast the old system of pointless friendlies* that we persisted with for over 100 years just seems bonkers.

*I absolutely detested it when Scotland so often "chose not to take a game" in those bad old days. A few times it was to have a morale building camp or the like, but the majority of the time it was just lack of being arsed.

I think the attitude to friendlies was a direct factor that contributed to us failing to qualify for tournaments for 20 years. Partly because playing friendlies was a good way to raise your world ranking and get up the pots, but also because it robbed managers of the chance to experiment and we ended up getting tactically overcome by minnows who knew exactly what to expect from us, over and over again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t follow this sort of thing closely but it’s I imagine it’s also been a prescient move by UEFA to make these fixtures more meaningful. The number of pullouts and resistance by clubs may have become a significant issue eventually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Echo the sentiments above. It's a tournament that has benefitted countries at all levels. For the major nations, it gives them a near guarantee of the Euros. For nations our side, it gives us the chance to make things easier for ourselves and to test ourselves against nations at our own level. For those diddies, they get to play competitive games and in the case of Gibraltar, gain a promotion to play against reasonable outfits.

 

Much more engaging than friendlies and I hope they don't bring in Conmebol teams, it would make it a bit more gimmicky in my view. I like the link to qualifying.

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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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