Euro: R16: Wales v Denmark, 6/26/2021

[Savi]

Venue: Johan Cruyff Arena, Amsterdam
Kickoff: 12:00 EST, 18:00 CET

Wales
- Group A runners-up (1-1-1)
- Tied

Switzerland 1-1
- Beat

Turkey 2-0
- Lost

Italy 0-1
- Top goalscorers: Kieffer Moore, Aaron Ramsey, Connor Roberts - 1
- Ethan Ampadu was the youngest player in EURO history to receive a straight red
- Gareth Bale's last goal for Wales came on 10/13/2019 against Croatia
- Wales are 3-for-3 at reaching the knockout stages at major tournaments (1958, 2016, 2020)

Denmark
- Group B runners-up (1-0-2)
- Lost

Finland 0-1
- Lost

Belgium 1-2
- Beat

Russia 4-1
- Top goalscorer: Yussuf Poulsen - 2
- Last time they reached the knockout stage was that famous 2-2 tie against Sweden in 2004 in which both teams advanced and knocked out Italy

Click to read more...

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

Open tie could go either way

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

These 2 vs 2 matches in the Rd of 16 are probably the biggest argument against the 24 team format.

 

[cgf]

I'm higher on Denmark than Wales. Though I wouldn't be shocked if the welsh pulled it off, I don't expect it.

 

[Live in the Now]

These 2 vs 2 matches in the Rd of 16 are probably the biggest argument against the 24 team format.

The 24 team format sucks because in some aspects it invalidates the first two games of a group. Is the last day worth it? I don't really think it is given how dull Group A and Group C finished up.

 

[Wee Baby Seamus]

I like that one of these teams will make the QF. Favour Denmark here.

 

[Savi]

Denmark going through with 3 points and getting rewarded with a game against Wales, meanwhile we go 3-0 and could be facing 3rd placed FRA/POR/GER, then Italy in the QF, then group winner FRA/POR/GER in the semi lol

 

[Vinther]

no doubt that 2nd place in group B would seem to be much easier for the next 2 games than 1st. at least before the games are played

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

The 24 team format sucks because in some aspects it invalidates the first two games of a group. Is the last day worth it? I don't really think it is given how dull Group A and Group C finished up.

I like 24 teams in principle, but I don't know if a round of 16 is needed. I think 8 groups of 3 were tried at some point in some tournament, but I'm not opposed.

 

[cgf]

I like 24 teams in principle, but I don't know if a round of 16 is needed. I think 8 groups of 3 were tried at some point in some tournament, but I'm not opposed.

3 team groups are a big turn-off for a lot of folks.

 

[Live in the Now]

I like 24 teams in principle, but I don't know if a round of 16 is needed. I think 8 groups of 3 were tried at some point in some tournament, but I'm not opposed.

They would never do this, but I think they should rank the first and second placed teams the way they do with the third place teams. They should then assign them to the knockout stages based on their performance in the tournament. Ex: 9 point teams get to play the worst third place teams that qualified. In this scenario Denmark would almost certainly play the best second place team. But I mean what do I know anyway.

 

[Bures Elbow]

I think a big issue was how they ranked teams for the original draw, instead of using the FIFA ranking they used "qualification" ranking for the first time, resulting in Group F.

Still, the 24 team format will always have completely unbalanced RO16 draws, unless the scenario the above poster outlined is implemented ( decent idea, better than 8 groups of 3 where collusion and match fixing is more possible)

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

I think a big issue was how they ranked team for the original draw, instead of using the FIFA ranking they used "qualification" ranking for the first team, resulting in Group F.

Still, the 24 team format will always have completely unbalanced RO16 draws, unless the scenario the above poster outlined is implemented ( decent idea, better than 8 groups of 3 where collusion and match fixing is more possible)

No tournament format could fix the cardinal error of placing the reigning World champions, European champions and previous World champions and last Euro semifinalists in the same group. I mean every seed ranking format will have its flaws but Portugal should just never be in pot 3 unless they declare football illegal and ban playing football.

 

[member 305909]

They really should ditch this predetermined winner of group x meeting runner up of group y.

The best should always meet the worst in the playoffs.

 

[misterchainsaw]

They would never do this, but I think they should rank the first and second placed teams the way they do with the third place teams. They should then assign them to the knockout stages based on their performance in the tournament. Ex: 9 point teams get to play the worst third place teams that qualified. In this scenario Denmark would almost certainly play the best second place team. But I mean what do I know anyway.

The only difficulty in implementing that is I think they want to avoid having teams from the same group play each other in the knockout rounds for as long as possible. Under the current format there's a slim chance of a 3rd place team facing their group winner in groups A and D in the quarterfinals, but the possibility is minimized as much as possible (the only way left for it to happen now is if two 3rd place teams from groups D-F finish below Finland). With ranking the group winners 1-6, the 2nd place finishers 7-12, and the 3rd place finishers 13-16 that would be harder to avoid without significant shuffling most years.

And while it will be interesting seeing how the bracket would shape up using your idea, you're still likely to have the group of death teams underseeded (France can't be better than the 3rd best group winner already even with a win over Portugal, for example). I think it's still be possible to end up with an overloaded half of the bracket.

EDIT: The timing of the QF games comes into play too. You'd have to lengthen the tournament (specifically the amount of time between the group stage and the KO round) to ensure all teams got some baseline of rest, in case a group winner from the last group had to play early in the QF round.

 

[bossram]

They would never do this, but I think they should rank the first and second placed teams the way they do with the third place teams. They should then assign them to the knockout stages based on their performance in the tournament. Ex: 9 point teams get to play the worst third place teams that qualified. In this scenario Denmark would almost certainly play the best second place team. But I mean what do I know anyway.

100%.

I think all the knockout matches (R16, QF, SF) should be re-seeded based on the group results. Best 1st place team plays worst 3rd place team, etc. etc. Even in the QF or SF, best group record remaining plays worst group record remaining.

It makes the group games more meaningful (don't just play for draws). And reduces the likelihood a 1st seed team gets "rewarded" with a behemoth in the R16.

 

[Bagge]

Denmark going through with 3 points and getting rewarded with a game against Wales, meanwhile we go 3-0 and could be facing 3rd placed FRA/POR/GER, then Italy in the QF, then group winner FRA/POR/GER in the semi lol

I think you are counting out Hungary a little too soon here. The still have a shot if they win against Germany and Portugal loses. They can even finish second with a 2 goal win against Germany.

 

[Bures Elbow]

I think you are counting out Hungary a little too soon here. The still have a shot if they win against Germany and Portugal loses. They can even finish second with a 2 goal win against Germany.

Maybe if they were playing in Budapest, they're playing in Munich.

 

[misterchainsaw]

100%.

I think all the knockout matches (R16, QF, SF) should be re-seeded based on the group results. Best 1st place team plays worst 3rd place team, etc. etc. Even in the QF or SF, best group record remaining plays worst group record remaining.

It makes the group games more meaningful (don't just play for draws). And reduces the likelihood a 1st seed team gets "rewarded" with a behemoth in the R16.

Just for the hell of it I reseeded the Euro 2016 tournament based on Live in the Now's idea. The eventual winner of the actual tournament (Portugal) would have ended up being the 15th overall seed and #2 seeded Germany would have been stuck playing them in the round of 16. There also would have been one R16 game that was a rematch of a group stage game, and several possibilities for QF rematches. I just think the differing qualities of individual groups as well as the volatility of the 3 match group stage makes it hard to have a "perfect" system. You're always going to have "underseeded" and "overseeded" teams.

For those who are interested this would have been the knockout round round of 16 under LitN's plan in 2016:
#1 France (1A) v #16 Northern Ireland (3C)
#8 Spain (2D) v #9 Belgium (2E)
#4 Wales (1B) v #13 Slovakia (3B) *group stage rematch*
#5 Italy (1E) v #12 Switzerland (2A)

#2 Germany (1C) v #15 Portugal (3F)
#7 Poland (2C) v #10 Iceland (2F)
#3 Croatia (1D) v #14 Ireland (3E)
#6 Hungary (1F) v #11 England (2B)

 

[QuietContrarian]

Denmark going through with 3 points and getting rewarded with a game against Wales, meanwhile we go 3-0 and could be facing 3rd placed FRA/POR/GER, then Italy in the QF, then group winner FRA/POR/GER in the semi lol

Wales are not a bad team, as your team clearly saw in 2016.

Think with all the shit Denmark have been thru this tourney, a little “reward” is just fine.
————————————————————————————————————————-
On another note.

Denmark beat them twice in 18/19 NL, 2-0 at home and 2-1 away.
Without Damsgaard, AC, Hoejbjerg, Maehle, Wind, and Skov Olsen among others.

Still they have Bale, so it is still a 50/50 game in my book.

 

[Antiillafire]

Wales are not a bad team, as your team clearly saw in 2016.

Think with all the shit Denmark have been thru this tourney, a little “reward” is just fine.
————————————————————————————————————————-
On another note.

Denmark beat them twice in 18/19 NL, 2-0 at home and 2-1 away.
Without Damsgaard, AC, Hoejbjerg, Maehle, Wind, and Skov Olsen among others.

Still they have Bale, so it is still a 50/50 game in my book.

Wales have not been impressive at all this tournament considering their results in 2016. They looked rather weak against the weakest team in the tournament (Turkey) and were not decisive against Switzerland who despite the draw were the much better team.

 

[QuietContrarian]

Wales have not been impressive at all this tournament considering their results in 2016. They looked rather weak against the weakest team in the tournament (Turkey) and were not decisive against Switzerland who despite the draw were the much better team.

I am still going to say 50/50 - Everyone kicks it up during the knockout rounds.

Belive me I hope we win.

Besides, might be my memory failing, but other than that Belgium game in 2016, they werent really on fire.

 

[East Coast Bias]

Denmark is a heavy favorite on the markets. I expect them to win. They're the better team and have been unlucky this tournament. (That's not an Eriksen reference - its a reference to play/results)

 

[Say Hey Kid]

Will Bale score a goal?

 

[Eye of Ra]

wales is decent but denmark is the better team and wins this.