President of UEFA admits tournament format is unfair and benefits England - UEFA Euro 2020 (2021) Discussion

[–] Zinger (2334) 3 years ago

LOL

Where did he say it benefits England?

Let it go, you sad vagina repelling fuckwit.

reply

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) 3 years ago

The level of these arguments is off the charts. I think you got me, you convinced me that England reached the final with merit.

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 3 years ago

[–] Towelie_Towel (779) a month ago
England will lose in the first playoff round.
They have a very easy group, but they will face the 2nd of Group F (France/Portugal/Germany). They easily lose against any of these 3.

reply share ignore report

This was your thoughts before the beginning of the tournament. Since the first playoff round you have done nothing but make excuses and slate England.
Poor form. Poor form indeed.

reply

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) 3 years ago

England would have lost that game, as predicted, had Kalvin Philips seen the red card he deserved.

But he didn't and Germany, who almost got eliminated by Hungary, also disappointed, so that explains why England got through - in addition to the clear home advantage, of course.

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 3 years ago

England would have lost that game, as predicted, had Kalvin Philips seen the red card he deserved.
Oh, I didn't realise that your opinion superseded that of the referee and VAR!

Supposedly better teams (France, Belgium and Spain) have lost in this tournament, so just stop with the excuses. Both Italy and England are in the final on merit.

reply

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) 3 years ago

Every team needs some merit, of course.

But in England's case it's merit, accessible group adversaries, home advantage, rest advantage due to less travel and referee advantage (Kalvin Phillips red allowed the victory against Germany, Sterling's fake penalty allowed the victory against Denmark).

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 3 years ago

Again the referee and VAR disagree with you. It appears you are wrong despite your protestations.

reply

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) 3 years ago

I'm not wrong, the referee and VAR just did a mistake - unless they did it in purpose.

Unless in your opinion referees and VAR never get anything wrong. In which case I'd like the key to that utopia you live in.

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 3 years ago

But you are wrong.
Unless you live in a world where only your opinion is right. In which case you can shove that key up your arse.

reply

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) 3 years ago

Classy reply, but I understand you're upset and yesterday was a tough night.

I'm not right, it is agreed all over Europe and even in some unbiased English reporters that that penalty was a disgrace and the most notable referee mistake in the entire euro.

Fortunately the trophy didn't go to England, so good for England that this penalty will probably be forgotten.

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 3 years ago

Fortunately?
Italy won, were the better team and deserved it Fortune had nothing to do with it

reply

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) 3 years ago

Depends on what you interpret from fortune. Anything that happens around us can be interpreted as fortune, either positive or negative, so a random game that happened in London without any of our interference can be considered simple fortune.

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 3 years ago

I believe you make your own

reply

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) 3 years ago

You cannot control the entire universe, so things that you don't control can be called as fortune. It's random to you. The game was random to me, I had no control in it.

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 3 years ago

Not talking about the Universe. Talking about a football match

reply

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) 3 years ago

Then why did you feel the need to reply to my post just to refute to such a pointless note like "fortunately"?

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 3 years ago

What?
Stop talking nonsense

reply

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) 3 years ago

I'm not the one talking nonsense, go read the sequence of posts if you want to try to understand the conversation.

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 3 years ago

Don't need to. Your posts have been biased and nonsense from the beginning. Just another anglophobe with an axe to grind.

reply

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) 3 years ago

Why are you fighting against the windmills?
It seems you don't want to face the facts.

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 3 years ago

Opinions aren't facts

reply

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) 3 years ago

Yes, your opinion is that I'm just an anglophobe.
But I'm just stating facts (referee benefits on Sterling and Kalvin Phillips in addition to home advantage).
Why do you fight the truth?

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 3 years ago

I don't fight the truth
Why do you present your theories as facts?

reply

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) 3 years ago

What fact are you saying it's not a fact?

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 3 years ago

Calvin Phillips yellow was not a red (Jorghinos tackle on Grealish was more a red) and Sterlings penalty was a penalty. If you think he dived what do you make of Immobiles play acting against Belgium? Now that was a disgrace. Or Chiellinis pull back on Sako?

As for travel, the President of UEFA does not say anywhere in that article that the tournament benefits England, so that is an out and out lie. His main concern is fans having to travel from (his words) Rome one day then be in Baku a couple of days later. To be honest he's right, but then that was a mess of UEFA's making. The teams themselves didn't have to drive long hours or cross big time zone differences. In fact teams in the Europa league suffer worse.
Just stop lying, you are looking foolish as well as bitter.

reply

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) 3 years ago

Why are you bringing other plays into discussion? We are talking about England.

What is the issue with Chiellini's pull back on Saka? That was a very interesting play. Chiellini got beaten due to his old age, but his experience allowed him to understand immediately what to do: he had to make a foul, because he knew a yellow card is better than a goal at that point. It was greatly played by Chiellini, everyone was impressed with it.

How can you say that "he didn't mention England explicitely so it is a lie"? Of course he wouldn't mention a team by the name, he doesn't want to be unpolite.
But what team do you think he is referring to, then, when he says: "it's in a way not correct that some teams have to travel more than 10,000 kilometres and the others 1,000 for example"
Who do you think he's refering to, when he says "others 1,000 for example"? There is no team that traveled less than England.
As is obvious, he is implying here that in this specific tournament, it was England the benefited team. It's basic text interpretation.

Why would I look bitter as well?
In your words I'm just being biased against England, "anglophobe". But England lost, so shouldn't I be happy?

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6730) 3 years ago

You SHOULD be happy. I am happy as fuck!

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 3 years ago

Why are you bringing other plays into discussion? We are talking about England.

Because you can't mention one team in a tournament without comparing them to another

What is the issue with Chiellini's pull back on Saka? That was a very interesting play. Chiellini got beaten due to his old age, but his experience allowed him to understand immediately what to do: he had to make a foul, because he knew a yellow card is better than a goal at that point. It was greatly played by Chiellini, everyone was impressed with it.

What is the issue? Right there you show your bias.

How can you say that "he didn't mention England explicitely so it is a lie"? Of course he wouldn't mention a team by the name, he doesn't want to be unpolite.
But what team do you think he is referring to, then, when he says: "it's in a way not correct that some teams have to travel more than 10,000 kilometres and the others 1,000 for example"
Who do you think he's refering to, when he says "others 1,000 for example"? There is no team that traveled less than England.
As is obvious, he is implying here that in this specific tournament, it was England the benefited team. It's basic text interpretation.

No it isn't basic text interpretation. It's trying to fit your 'ahem' facts to someone elses by adding he said the tournament benefitted England when he didn't say that at all.

Why would I look bitter as well?
In your words I'm just being biased against England, "anglophobe". But England lost, so shouldn't I be happy?

Happy or not you are still bitter. Maybe because your team didn't go as far as you would have hoped.

reply

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) 3 years ago

That's how you counter-argue, just saying "maybe your team didn't go far", "you just show bias", "it's not, you just try to say it is"?

Not even going to bother to reply to such a non-existent argument.

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 3 years ago

You just did though didn't you

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (38076) 3 years ago

Err…no he didn’t.

reply

[–] Sparky123 (1679) 3 years ago

I didn't even read the link because I don't care what anyone says.
England are in the final, tough shit.

reply

[–] sokar (2098) 3 years ago

"I would not support it anymore. It's not correct that some teams have to travel more than 10,000 kilometres and the others 1,000."

So blame England for UEFA for organising the tournament. Sound logic.

Every other country knew and agreed to the format and are know crying because of it. Get over it. They would have know how far they would have been travelling. It was done to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the tournament. Again they all knew and agreed to it before it began and not once were their any concerns tabled until England started winning. Oh no we can't have those pesky English winning can we, alright for everyone else but not England.

The amount of online hate and vitriol which has been targetted at the England team and it's fans has been nothing short of disgusting and would not happen to any other country which is actual provable due to other countries doing the same things as England and no one complaining.

And as already stated, at no point on that article does he mention that it benefits England.

Finally and this is where everyone who is complaining about this literally knows nothing. England were given more games at home due to us trying to get the 2024 European Championship. Germany were the favourites and so we backed out on agreement that we were the main hosts of this tournament. So get over yourself, it is pathetic.

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (38076) 3 years ago

"It's not fair to the fans. Some fans had to be in Rome and in a couple of days they had to be in Baku -- a 4-1/2 hour flight.”

No mention of England as stated by the OP.

reply

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) 3 years ago

He clearly said it benefits teams that traveled less in favor of those that traveled more.

No team has traveled less than England.

It's not difficult to put 2 and 2 together, there was no team with more benefits than England.

It seems obvious, it's basic logic. If the article is not in your main language you may have some difficulties interpreting this, but you can find a translation if that helps you and makes it easier for your comprehension.

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (38076) 3 years ago

Rude.

reply

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) 3 years ago

Just trying to help, I apologize if I was off base.

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (38076) 3 years ago

Which I shall accept with equanimity.

reply

[–] spurtle467 (1546) 3 years ago

It's basically like a home tournament for England sure, but oh well. There's been a home nation in every other international tournament and I guess we were due one compared to other countries.

reply

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) 3 years ago

It's not basically a home tournament for England, because in the traditional home tournaments all teams play in the same country.

In this one, several teams had to travel 10 thousand kilometers, crossing entire continents while other teams barely moved. That's the difference.

reply

[–] TheArgentinian (7062) 3 years ago

It's obvious the only one who benefited from this format are the colonizers.

reply

[–] Zinger (2334) 3 years ago

LOL didn't take long for you to shown up.

Inferiors countries always moan.

reply

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) 3 years ago

You're very proud of your country, for someone who doesn't even know his own language.

reply

[–] BillySlater (4241) 3 years ago

That´s rich considering Conmebol held 4 Copa Americas in the last 6 years just so Messi could finally win with Argentina.

reply