Nations League Good or Bad ?

[Academica]

They still train, they still have to learn a game plan, then they have to go out and perform at the highest level.
They are top level sportsmen, being asked to be in tip top condition all the time, no rest, no long weekends to chill out, finish one game and it’s right into preparation for the next.

It is good but you have to realise that it’s not going to go to plan every game, every week over a full season.
That’s a lot of competitive games.

International break = everybody gets what nobody wants.

 

[chedinho]

International break = everybody gets what nobody wants.

From a city point of view, we don’t want it.
We pay good money to watch our players turn out for us. We want to see them perform at their peak, in our domestic games.
But there are also, a lot of people, who support other clubs,who want to see our players turning out for their country.
Kdb
Sane
Bernardo etc
UEFA have been clever, rebranding international football like they have the chumps league.
It’s going to be popular, but probably not with the top teams in Europe, that are asked to provide their best talent.

 

[sir baconface]

I’ve not worked out whether this means more, fewer, or the same number of games. Isn’t that the deciding factor?

 

[domalino]

Best thing UEFA have done in ages. Off the back of the world cup, it's made internationals interesting again.

England v Spain, Germany v Netherlands and France v Germany were all really good games to watch.

That Spain game gave the England team more tournament-useful experience than 20 friendlies and a qualifying campaign against 9 bad sides.

 

[domalino]

I’ve not worked out whether this means more, fewer, or the same number of games. Isn’t that the deciding factor?

The same.

 

[mat]

Best thing UEFA have done in ages. Off the back of the world cup, it's made international's interesting again.

It's certainly brought back the unpredictability of group football.

 

[sir baconface]

The same.

Ah right. Thanks. In that case, I’d prefer semi-competitive to friendly games.

 

[markbmcfc]

Was critical of it but there's no denying it makes the games more interesting. Especially given the three sub rule.

It feels as if there's more International breaks, I can't be arsed to check if that's true but it feels that way. As long as the international fixture calendar hasn't increased then I think it's a good move.

 

[urban genie]

But you can't keep playing weaker nations in friendlies just to keep your job. O'Neill is finished at Eire - a dead man walking.

That's true, but then as I said if southgate had got beat or any other manager the preasure to win could mean the will to experiment or blood young player that friendlies gave you is now gone

 

[cyan]

I was doubtful at first - but it looks like it might be useful. Certainly good for the minnows - I see that Gibraltar have now won 2 matches - that has to be better for them than always being the whipping boys. England will be boosted by beating Spain in a competitive match - Germany are being found out more than they would have been in a loaded Euro 2020 qualifying group. Sadly, from a personal point of view, Scotland continue to be shit - I did hope that a couple of winnable games might be encouraging - but no.

Quite how it now feeds into the Euro 2020 qualifying groups I've not quite got my head around - but once its in operation will no doubt become clearer.

having said all that - I don't like the way International football breaks up the beginning of the league season - as others have said - I'd much prefer a format where the League seasons (national and UEFA) finish early May - and then all Internationals are played in one block - but of course that works for a northern hemisphere season - others would not be so keen.