17 September 2003
To some surprise, UEFA have decided not to seed the sides that will make the play-offs for Euro 2004. I say some surprise, because it was thought (and hoped) in Spain and England that they would try to make it as easy as possible for those countries, considering their collective financial clout.
This does, however, disregard UEFA’s threat to expel England from the tournament if the FA can’t keep the hooligans/fans in order. I don’t know of anyone who regards that as an empty threat, so why should we expect for life to be made easy for us? (Well, apart from the corruption in football.)
While England certainly have a chance of going through, a point ahead of Turkey going into the final match in Istanbul, qualification is by no means guaranteed. Had there been seeding by results against the top four teams in the group, then we would have been well-placed. Had there been seeding by world rankings, ditto. Had there been seeding by performances, then we’d have been last.
But there isn’t any seeding, so it doesn’t matter. If things go wrong against Turkey, we could find ourselves against any number of teams, including three from these Isles. Although not all at once.
In what is by far the weakest group, France have coasted through with Slovenia content to wrap up a play-off place. Based on last year’s shambles at the World Cup, where the star player and manager fell out (think Roy Keane but during the tournament), they would appear to be prime opposition. That’s also what Romania thought in the World Cup play-offs, and they were sent packing thanks to the expected disciplined defending and fast counter-attacking.
Not to be trifled with, but a ‘should-win.’
Bosnia, despite what the BBC say, can’t make the play-offs. It’s all or nothing for them.
The Danes are in the driving seat in this topsy-turvy group: if they lose, they go into the play-offs. Otherwise they go through outright.
The last time England met Denmark was in the second round of the World Cup. The Danes had been a highly impressive and efficient side in group stages, with pacy wingers and a hard-tackling midfield. Then when we played them they fell apart, and even let Emile Heskey score.
If Norway somehow fail to win at home to Luxembourg, then Romania will be in with a chance. So realistically, Romania are out of it.
Norway aren’t better than Denmark or Slovenia. Probably one of the weakest sides we could face.
Holland failed to make the last World Cup, thanks to the Irish, and came out second-best to the Czechs in qualification here. No other team in Europe can boast the same number of top strikers as the Dutch, but there are questions about their ability to pull together.
Not a team I’d fancy. ‘Could win.’
Thanks to a home win over Hungary last week, a draw in the other match would see Latvia through. This is a remarkable achievement, because not only does the country have limited resources, but their star, Marian Pahars, has been injured for over a year now.
To truly realise what this meant to their goalscoring options, consider this: at the start of this year, they were top of the group while scoring less than a goal a game. They have only put four in two matches past the lowest of the low in European football, San Marino.
Possibly the best side to get.
Poland have suffered something of a slump since qualifying early for the last World Cup. Olisadebe’s a confidence player, and the rest of the side’s unremarkable. They do have a history of playing against England and tripping us up, so it’s just as well they only have an outside chance of the play-offs.
Hungary were one of the greats of European football back in the 1950s, the best side apart from the 1970s Dutch side to never win the World Cup. Right now I don’t have a lot to say about them.
Iceland are in a sticky situation. Unless they beat Germany in Germany, they’re in real danger of being overtaken by Scotland, who have beaten them twice already in the group and just need a home win over Lithuania. Admittedly Lithuania beat Scotland at home, but they’re unlikely to repeat.
Scotland vs England would be the dream tie for the Scots, although the English are so good at making sporting enemies — Simon Barnes of The Times has said before that this is our purpose in sport — that it would be just another grudge match for us.
I was at the last match between these two. Wembley, 1999, play-off for Euro 2000. We lost on the night but went through on aggregate, and even that minor loss isn’t likely to recur if we do face them.
Unless Northern Ireland get another ‘great’ goalless draw, Spain will be in the play-offs. Spain, who always qualify at a canter. I’d be wary.
England’s group, silly.
Choice between Croatia, who England beat just a month ago, and Belgium. Belgium have a very shaky defence — they lost 4-0 in Croatia — but I would still prefer to play Croatia, because I feel that they lack a bite, or edge, to their team.
Oh, Wales. If you hadn’t tried to beat Italy in the San Siro you could have played a full-strength side against Finland and topped the group. It’s churlish to complain, though, after you’ve done so well, and with your pacy counter-attacking play you could pose a real threat to England.
The prospect of playing Italy won’t arise, thankfully, unless they fail to beat Azerbaijan at home.
Still all up for grabs between Ireland, Switzerland, and Russia. To be honest, it’s a mystery how Ireland have got themselves into this mess. Russia and Switzerland are no more than you’d expect, although a play-off in the Russian winter would be one to avoid. Ireland are the big team for England to avoid, for the simple reason that they hold us in similar regard as the Scots do, but have some talented footballers as well.