Holland are seriously good. You have to love a side that responds to pressure by throwing on more strikers in a ‘you might score, but we’ll score two’ style.

The other three top seeds – Austria, Switzerland and Greece, were abysmal. It is often said that the European Championships have a greater quality of football than the World Cup. Not on this showing.

Spain might look good, but they will bottle it. Would it honestly surprise you if Italy knocked them out on Sunday?

France were dreadful, truly dreadful. From the sulkiness to the laziness, you had Domenech’s ineptness, Makalele’s flailing elbows, no creativity, weaknesses in defence, everything was just all wrong.

Russia are a completely different team with Arshavin available.

Petr Cech really needs to drop the ball more with Chelsea, just for amusement sake.

Sweden are not what they once were. Old, tired, and lacking in ideas against Russia, they were duly dispatched.

There is not a more colourful or more likable manager in international football than Slaven Bilic. Croatia could beat anyone on their day.

Germany always do what is required to qualify. Why they are underdogs against Portugal tonight is beyond me given their history of doing exactly what they are doing now.

Expect some tight quarter finals – there is not a walkover in sight.

England would’ve been dumped out in the group stages had they qualified.

 

You may have heard about the new scenario UEFA have created when teams who are level on points cannot be split them on goal difference or goals scored. In Group A, this is taking shape with Czech Rep and Turkey both sitting with three points, two goals and three against. If they draw their last match, qualification will be decided on a penalty shoot out.

The full rules can be found here, and explain that under normal circumstances, positions are sorted by points, then goal difference, goals scored, and then a coefficient that will always separate them. However, there is a new clause which creates the penalty shoot out possibility:

“If two teams meeting in one of the last group matches have the same number of points, the same goal difference and the same number of goals, and if this match stands at a draw at the end of normal time, then the ranking of these two teams will be determined by kicks from the penalty spot, provided no other teams within the group have the same number of points on completion of all group matches.”

This situation is also appearing in Group C, thanks to Holland’s fourth goal against France, which left the French with one point, one goal, and four against, just like Italy, who drew with Romania earlier in the day. With them meeting on the final day, a draw would again invoke this clause and produce a shoot out (unless Romania lose and have the same number of points as them).

So, if Romania avoid defeat, and Italy and France draw, Romania will qualify, with Italy and France dead level in third. How do third and fourth get decided? Technically, they will have to play out a shoot out despite the knowledge that they are both already out. That would certainly be a first.

And they would have to do it, for betting purposes alone. For example, I genuinely have a bet on France finishing third in their group. If both games end in a draw, do France come third? Or fourth? Do I win my bet? And who, out of Italy and France, currently sits third? Who sits bottom?

Answers on a postcard…

 

Holland are awesome when they play as a team

Spain are potentially even more frightening

Both teams, however, are just as capable of being hopeless, and in a cup format, probably neither will win

Especially Spain, who for all their great attacking talent, were poor defensively

Austria, Switzerland and Greece are the worst top seeds in tournament history

Germany are an efficient, well oiled machine, and are deservedly favourites

England were hopeless under McLaren – Croatia look average, Russia awful

Slaven Bilic is a talented and entertaining coach, though

Zlatan Ibrahimovic is world class, so why is he rubbish so often?

Raymond Domenech is a hopeless tactician – two defensive midfielders against a ‘park the bus’ side?

Italy’s defence is pretty woeful without Cannavaro

Freddie Ljungberg is fit again. West Ham fans must be confused to see him run so much

No-one understands the offside rule anymore

If you’ve got an attacking set piece against Holland, be very afraid

Outside Group C, this tournament won’t get going until the knockout stages

 

Winner: Germany

Twelve years since their last tournament victory, the Germans consider themselves overdue, and their status as favourites is well earned. They’ve got a powerful midfield, a decent defence, and a dangerous strike partnership in Klose and Podolski. They’ve got the simplest of groups, and should cruise through as winners, and play the Czechs or the Swiss in the quarter finals.

Dark Horse: Switzerland

Many are suggesting that Austria and Switzerland are the worst host nations ever to hold a major tournament, but then they said the same about the South Korean side that reached the semis of the World Cup six years ago. For me, Austria are dreadful, but Switzerland are underrated. With a decent defence, Barnetta running the midfield and Frei leading the line, they can surprise a few in front of their own support. I’d be surprised to see them go out early.

Top Scorer: Podolski, Germany

Germany have a habit of scoring plenty in group stages and bullying the smaller teams – witness their 8-0 demolition of Saudi Arabia six years ago. They’re in a weak group, and Podolski showed throughout the qualifying campaign that he knows where the back of the net is.

Early Leavers: France

In a group of death with Holland and Italy, one of the three has to go, and despite widespread predictions of that team being Holland, I could see France having another short lived campaign, much like the two they had prior to the 2006 World Cup. A loss to the Dutch, and a draw against Italy unable to save them perhaps.

What are your predictions?

 

Euro 2008 is coming up, and predictably, with England not in it, the spotlight has once again come down on the perceived lack of English players in the Premiership. In an article which shows just how statistics can be warped, the BBC claims a ‘dramatic slide’ in those available to Capello.

They begin the article with a graph, showing how the number of English starters has changed over the last eight years. Here it is:

Looks pretty dramatic, doesn’t it? Except when you look closely, you’ll notice that there only appears to be a big drop because of the scale used, with the number of players only ranging from 160 to 208 on the axis. I distinctly remember being taught at school that graphs should not be exaggerated in this way.

But let’s look at the numbers. Five years ago, the number of English starters was 179. This season, 170. Hardly a dramatic drop, nine players in five years. In fact, this year’s drop comes off the back of four years of climbing, despite what the Daily Mail would tell you about ‘forriners taking ah jobs’.

All this completely misses the point. 170 English players is plenty, Capello needs a small fraction of those. It doesn’t matter if there used to be 500 (there never were, incidentally), it isn’t the best players that are missing out, it is those that were never good enough to get near the national side anyway. Those that remain should benefit from playing with quality rather than substandard leftovers.

For England to be successful, the top twenty or so need to be of a high quality, and performing as a team. The former is aptly demonstrated by the fact that there were ten English players in the Champions League final, and the latter is Capello’s job.

There are no excuses. If England fail, it is not the fault of the clubs, it is the fault of the players (who are good enough), and the management team. No-one else.

© 2010 The Beautiful Groan Advertise on this site Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha