Euro 2008 seeding format - total farce

[Craig_H]

Austria and Switzerland are going to be seeded as hosts. Greece are going to be seeded as holders. And the fourth seed will be the side who has the best combined qualifying record from the World Cup 2006 qualification campaign, and the Euro 2008 qualifiers.

Off the top of my head, i'd guess at Czech Republic - they always have brilliant qualification campaigns.

So the four 'seeds' will probably be Austria, Switzerland, Greece and the Czech Republic.

So you could conceivably end up with a group like this: Austria, Germany, Italy, France.

While another group could be: Greece, Poland, Croatia, Romania.

So with 2 qualifying for the quarter finals from each group, you could end up with 2 inferior nations getting through, while genuine contenders go out in the group stage.

What's the point of having a 'seeding' system if you seed the weaker sides?

[-V-]

Greece are the European Champions so they are the strongest side. Its only right they get seeded

[CharlieMansonsSquint]

What?

So we shouldn't judge teams on their results now?

[Craig_H]

Greece are the European Champions so they are the strongest side. Its only right they get seeded

They're also rubbish.

You honestly think Greece are the 'strongest side' in europe?

[Craig_H]

What?

So we shouldn't judge teams on their results now?

Not sure if you were replying to me or V, but teams shouldnt be seeded solely on the basis of being hosts, or the winners FOUR YEARS ago.

[Bob]

They're also rubbish.

You honestly think Greece are the 'strongest side' in europe?

They weren't the strongest side when they WON it either.

Would you prefer it if the richer nations were seeded or those whose reputation preceded them. I don't know, like England perhaps?

[El Diego]

That seems a very fair system Greece are seeded as they won it, and the hosts are seeded as they are the hosts. I would have thought that they would have put France(Being World cup finalists), Italy(World cup winners) or Portugal(Losing finalists) as the fourth seed instead of Czech Republic.

[El Diego]

Not sure if you were replying to me or V, but teams shouldnt be seeded solely on the basis of being hosts, or the winners FOUR YEARS ago.

Didn't Greece finish top of there group in qualification?

[Craig_H]

They weren't the strongest side when they WON it either.

Would you prefer it if the richer nations were seeded or those whose reputation preceded them. I don't know, like England perhaps?

Funny how i never even mentioned england, but you did. Paranoia perhaps.

England have yet to qualify, so dont be silly.

The point of seeding is to keep the top sides apart. So if they do it, they should seed accordingly. For example, Italy are the current world champions, but wont be seeded unless their qualification campaigns are the best - that's a nonsense. France were runners up in the WC.

So in a tournement of 16 european nations, either the world champions or the runners up (or both) will NOT be seeded.

That's ridiculous.

[Craig_H]

That seems a very fair system Greece are seeded as they won it, and the hosts are seeded as they are the hosts. I would have thought that they would have put France(Being World cup finalists), Italy(World cup winners) or Portugal(Losing finalists) as the fourth seed instead of Czech Republic.

Well it's not definitely going to be the Czechs, it depends if they have the best qualification campaigns.

But why should the hosts be seeded? I dont get that.

[Craig_H]

Didn't Greece finish top of there group in qualification?

I think they did, but qualification groups arent equally testing, are they?

Where would they have finished if they'd been in your group?

[El Diego]

Well it's not definitely going to be the Czechs, it depends if they have the best qualification campaigns.

But why should the hosts be seeded? I dont get that.

The FIFA want the hosts in any major Tournamount to get at least to the quaters to keep public intrest in that country or countries. I think that's fair enough.

[-V-]

DJS, your being a little silly

Your assuming that just because you associate teams like Germany, Italy and France as being world beaters that gives them the god given right to be at the top.

This is the European Championships, and those teams dont deserve to seeded ahead of the champions just because you think they are better footballers.

Greece beat the best of the best

[El Diego]

I think they did, but qualification groups arent equally testing, are they?

Where would they have finished if they'd been in your group?

I know that if Scotland won the previous European championship I would expect them to be seeded for the one now.

[Craig_H]

The FIFA want the hosts in any major Tournamount to get at least to the quaters to keep public intrest in that country or countries. I think that's fair enough.

Makes a mockery of it though, IMO.

I dont mind 'inferior' sides earning their passage to the latter stages, but if you're losing a side like Italy, Germany or France (for example) in order to get an Austria, Switzerland or Greece through, i think that's to the detriment of the tournement.

You want the best sides going through. If 3 of them are in one group, that's impossible.