The unfair farce of a 24-team Euro must change

Here in Cologne, the city’s new approach to serving beer has frustrated some England fans. Cologne’s bars and brasseries serve “Kolsch” — a traditional blond beer that can only be produced in the city — in a thin 200 ml glass called “odd“. The bartender counts the quota of each table Strange on a coaster.

Monday evening, while a few colleagues and I watched Croatia take on Italy at Cologne’s Bei D’r Tant pub (plentiful food, no air conditioning) and the strange tallied on the tables of the English supporters around us, we were engaged in a different kind of reckoning. At the time, Italy’s 97th-minute equaliser was a blow to Croatia, but not a fatal one, leaving them on the brink of elimination but with an outside chance of qualifying for the knockout stages if other results went their way.

If England had beaten Slovenia by three goals or more last night (if only!) and Denmark had won against Serbia, Croatia could still have reached the last 16 as one of the best third-placed teams, even if they only took two points from their three group games.

The Croatians spent Tuesday at base camp, likely gloomily watching England and Denmark work to 0-0 draws, before returning home today. This strange and unsatisfactory setup is necessary because UEFA expanded the European Championship from 16 to 24 teams in 2016, so the top four third-placed teams must now join the top two from each of the six groups to form a group of 16 teams. knockout phase.

We have reached the point in the tournament where the course of events becomes both farcical and unfair.

The inclusion of four third-placed teams leads to a lack of danger – with too many low-stakes group matches and too much margin for error – as well as unsporting results and a confusing and unbalanced draw system for the round of 16.

Austria, for example, went into their final group game against the Netherlands yesterday knowing that a 1-0 defeat would be enough to qualify for the knockout stages, as they already had a better goal difference than Hungary, who finished third in Group A.

The system is unfair to teams from previous groups, including the Hungarians, who had no idea what to do to reach the round of 16 in their third and final match.

The point of playing the last set of matches in each group simultaneously is to create danger.

This format creates a situation where the significance of most of the later rounds of group matches is unclear until the entire phase is completed.

The first 24-team Euro, in 2016, was won by Portugal, who qualified for the round of 16 as one of the best third-placed teams after three draws. This should have been the wake-up call that the system was flawed and likely to reward negativity. What is the solution ?

It is highly unlikely that UEFA will reduce the competition to 16 teams, so the obvious solution is to expand it to 32 teams.

There would be downsides, but it would be worth it to ensure a cleaner qualification process for the round of 16. In the meantime, we’re left to figure out exactly who needs to lose and by how many points to keep Croatia and their teammates in the competition, which gets harder and harder as your beer count increases.