The BIG Question: Was Euro 2016 Really That Good?

Chris Wright

11th, July 2016

11 Comments

portugal-euro-2016-champions

It’s done. Euro 2016 is finished, over and done with, done and finished with, finished and over with. Done. Now we can talk about it.

Did you actually enjoy it? Pies can’t quite convince ourselves either way. Wales and Iceland aside, the group stages were generally passable with odd moments of genuine drama. The knockout stages – by and large cagey, tense and micro-managed – not so much.

The problem with a frantic last 10 minutes of extra time or a memorable shoot-out (Germany versus Italy, par example) is that it tends to eclipse the 110/120 minutes of soul-sucking, mind-numbing tedium it took to get there.

And there was just too much of that at Euro 2016.

Elongated periods of dull, unimaginative possession retention. Too many teams attempting to out-stifle each other with identical game plans. Too many teams playing conservatively as if painfully aware of the high stakes. Not enough efforts on goal. Not enough flair, spontaneity, end product, tempo, urgency or will to win inside 90 minutes.

In all honesty, looking back, a lot of it was incredibly dull.

That being so, it perhaps surprising then that the goal-scoring stats actually rank quite highly in all-time terms.

Euro 2016 saw more goals scored than any other previous European Championship tournament: 108 in total. That’s an average of 2.12 goals per game, with one goal going in every 44 minutes.

While the expansion to 24 teams must be factored in, Euro 2016 compares favourably with most of the other modern-era tournaments in terms of goalmouth action…

euro-2016-goal-chart

Image via Wiki

Still, comparatively complimentary statistics hardly make for enthralling sporting spectacle.

The whole tournament was perhaps most eloquently summed up by its final match, with Portugal and France contesting a stupefying shocker of a borefest until it finally clicked into life in the 109th minute. The only real theatre before that point came as the result of a tweaked knee ligament.

Incidentally, the 2016 entry was the longest a European Championship final has ever remained goalless, and by some distance – the previous record being set in 1996 when it took Patrik Berger’s 59 minutes to break the deadlock with a penalty against Germany.

What’s the verdict, Pies fans? Was Euro 2016 actually any good? Were you able to appreciate it on the whole? Let us know…

You have already read 4 premium articles for free today
Access immediately the premium content with Multipass

Or come back tomorrow

Posted in Euro 2016, Opinion

Share this article: Email

11 Comments

  1. up44 says:

    “the goal-scoring stats actually rank quite highly in all-time terms.” not when you look at the average per match, though. especially considering the fact that not all of the previous tournaments included full 30-minute extra time.

    apart from a few exceptions (Wales, Iceland and Italy): very disappointing tournament. seemed many teams were playing not to lose rather than to win.

    on the bright side: as a Dutchman, knowing that we didn’t contribute to such a boring tournament makes me slightly less sad that we didn’t qualify. yeah… not really, though

  2. derek says:

    Very poor tournament overall. I’d say the idea of a 24 team tournament proved to be a failure – allowing 4 third place finishers who really shouldn’t have been there (including Portugal!). Teams who have achieved only draws should not proceed to the next round.

    Snore-fest of a tournament – the final game being just another example. Although I agree with the above comment that Wales and Iceland were the exceptions.

  3. C says:

    The BIG Answer: NO. It wasn’t. Portugal had an easy tournament and I don’t give a fuck about Ronaldo!

  4. Timon says:

    An article title I read summed up the tournament for me.
    “It was a fitting final, a match that went on for too long in a tournament that went on for too long”.

    I didn’t think the 24 team format worked. It dragged it out, and got rid of the intensity and the high quality of the football.

  5. Alex says:

    Not a terrible tournament. Hungary, Wales and Iceland and some other teams were interesting to see.

    Having said that, the format needs to change back. You cannot have a team winning the trophy if they can’t win any of their first three group games. It sort of undermines what a tournament is.

  6. jones says:

    I can’t remember more boring Euro tournament than this.

  7. up44 says:

    at least we’ll always have that germany v italy penalty shootout to remember. simply hilarious…

  8. PetrovskyKSC says:

    It’s a shame new zealand was not able to procede to the knockout stages with its three draws in 2010. That would have been very well deserved. I don’t really feel like talking about the tournament in question because it was a complete waste of time.

  9. Deano says:

    Never mind all of that! I am sensing a Fry and Laurie reference at the start of that article. Correct?

Leave a Reply