Euro 2008 seeding format - total farce

[Craig_H]

Haha...4 seeding pots, i stand corrected. And it's still a farce

France seeded 4th??? Croatia and Sweden 2nd?? Germany 3rd?? Ridiculous

[Rich]

So we could have a group of:

Holland, Italy, Germany, France

Likewise a group of:

Austria, Sweden, Romania, Poland

Muppets!

[Ritchi3]

Haha...4 seeding pots, i stand corrected. And it's still a farce

France seeded 4th??? Croatia and Sweden 2nd?? Germany 3rd?? Ridiculous

I can see why Croatia are seeded so high, they got 29 points, which is pretty high for any group. I think only Greece had a better campaign than them.
You see, I think you're ranking teams on past reputation, and whether they're a "big name" or not and not on their current form. If you run away with your group, you should get a higher ranking.

[Rich]

I can see why Croatia are seeded so high, they got 29 points, which is pretty high for any group. I think only Greece had a better campaign than them.
You see, I think you're ranking teams on past reputation, and whether they're a "big name" or not and not on their current form. If you run away with your group, you should get a higher ranking.

But what happens if you're drawn in an easy Qualifying group? (Not that Croatia were...)

I'd have thought the FIFA world ranking would be a "fairer" way of deciding seeding.

[Ritchi3]

But what happens if you're drawn in an easy Qualifying group? (Not that Croatia were...)

I'd have thought the FIFA world ranking would be a "fairer" way of deciding seeding.

But the groups are decided on your previous results anyway. Most people think the FIFA rankings are a farce anyway. Lets face it, whatever way the pots were made, somebody would be giving out. I think they're right to only include most recent results, it gives the lesser nations a bigger chance of progressing, which is good for football in the long run.

[Rich]

But the groups are decided on your previous results anyway. Most people think the FIFA rankings are a farce anyway. Lets face it, whatever way the pots were made, somebody would be giving out. I think they're right to only include most recent results, it gives the lesser nations a bigger chance of progressing, which is good for football in the long run.

Not necessarily - do you think it would make a good spectacle for all the BIG historic teams to get knocked out? Or perhaps having one team cake-walk to the title.

Seedings should be based on previous performances and form; which (allegedly the FIFA system is based upon) so why not use that?

Having all the best teams in one group will more than likely be to the detriment to the tournament later on.

[Ritchi3]

Not necessarily - do you think it would make a good spectacle for all the BIG historic teams to get knocked out? Or perhaps having one team cake-walk to the title.

Well, I really enjoyed watching Greece win it, if that's what you're asking?

Seedings should be based on previous performances and form; which (allegedly the FIFA system is based upon) so why not use that?

The seedings ARE based on previous performances and form. It's just that they use a system that's more current, the FIFA won takes into account results over the past 10 years, which makes it harder to move up and down.

Having all the best teams in one group will more than likely be to the detriment to the tournament later on.

By best, I assume you mean biggest? And if so, are you saying there's only four big teams? IF there are, then it'll be a poor tournament anyway.

I'm sure there's a better way this could have been done, but given that Greece, Austria and Switzerland had to be seeded, I'm sure people would have complained no matter what way the pots were drawn up.