Euros 2020 (really 2021)

It didn't. Germany '88 had 15k higher average attendance.

Euro '96 broke records for cumulative attendance by virtue of having more than double the number of games of any previous tournament.

France and Poland/Ukraine both had higher AAs since.
Ah you're right , the figures I was looking at were for a 16 team tournament. My apologies.
 
Ah you're right , the figures I was looking at were for a 16 team tournament. My apologies.

No worries,
as regarding enjoying the tournament, I did too, but that was because England did well, 3 Lions, where I was in my life etc.
I think how your team does massively colours the perception of a tournament. I've had arguments with people who insist Italia 90 was thrilling and USA 94 was boring and dour; USA was a far higher scoring tournament with many more high scoring games. The difference was England did well in Italy and didn't reach the USA.
Euro '96 is the same: it's many flaws are papered over by England's performance etc.
 
No worries,
as regarding enjoying the tournament, I did too, but that was because England did well, 3 Lions, where I was in my life etc.
I think how your team does massively colours the perception of a tournament. I've had arguments with people who insist Italia 90 was thrilling and USA 94 was boring and dour; USA was a far higher scoring tournament with many more high scoring games. The difference was England did well in Italy and didn't reach the USA.
Euro '96 is the same: it's many flaws are papered over by England's performance etc.
This is so true, I can barely remember USA 94 or pretty much any tournament after 2006, until the last world cup and yet I have this perception of Euro 96 being fantastic. I agree about Italia 90 by the way I have always insisted it was a rubbish tournament and England were fairly pants in it with the exception of the semi final.
 
I would sincerely hope it is not hosted here. Where will otehr countries be with vaccinations. I think it is an insane idea and I am surprised anyone is for it, to be honest.
 
I would sincerely hope it is not hosted here. Where will otehr countries be with vaccinations. I think it is an insane idea and I am surprised anyone is for it, to be honest.
I can only assume there would be no foreign fans allowed.
 
I would sincerely hope it is not hosted here. Where will otehr countries be with vaccinations. I think it is an insane idea and I am surprised anyone is for it, to be honest.

There are already 11 matches being hosted in the UK as it stands, including two of the round of 16, both semi-finals and the final itself.

Those issues are going to arise even if we don't host any additional matches.
 
I can only assume there would be no foreign fans allowed.
I could go for that, but to be honest I would want to see the players quarantined as well before the tournament.

I just think it is really risky.

Teacider, the more peopl eyou have visiting the UK the more risk.

If it's not done with extreme care we could be set back a year.
 
This is so true, I can barely remember USA 94 or pretty much any tournament after 2006, until the last world cup and yet I have this perception of Euro 96 being fantastic. I agree about Italia 90 by the way I have always insisted it was a rubbish tournament and England were fairly pants in it with the exception of the semi final.

Euro 96' is the lowest WC or Euro since the Euros went to 16+ teams. (2.06 goals/game). There were a few lower scoring before that, but with 4 or 8 teams in some tournaments, the probability of a statistical freak is higher.

Italia 90, I think, was the lowest scoring WC ever (2.21 goals/game); only South Arica 2010 came close for negativity.
 
No worries,
as regarding enjoying the tournament, I did too, but that was because England did well, 3 Lions, where I was in my life etc.
I think how your team does massively colours the perception of a tournament. I've had arguments with people who insist Italia 90 was thrilling and USA 94 was boring and dour; USA was a far higher scoring tournament with many more high scoring games. The difference was England did well in Italy and didn't reach the USA.
Euro '96 is the same: it's many flaws are papered over by England's performance etc.
Since when was football rated by being high scoring it’s not basketball?

Italia 90 was a great tournament.

usa 94 was soulless
 
Since when was football rated by being high scoring it’s not basketball?

Italia 90 was a great tournament.

usa 94 was soulless

I didn't say it was a sign of quality, but I will argue it's a measure of positivity and negativity.

Italia 90 was the most negative WC I've seen, the apotheosis of Catenaccio football. I doubt it's remembered as anything but a bore outside Germany, England and Cameroon. I enjoyed it du to England's performance.

I don't know what you mean by soulless. I know some will fundementally object to it being held in the USA, but beyond that, the only reason to call it that was that England wasn't there.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top