Euro 2012 - Is it right that Poland and Ukraine are Hosting?

When browsing the Guardian website, one often stumbles on the most interesting titbits of information, such as the precise age of 'Vastu Shasta' (As old as your house, apparently) or why the Tories are all scum. Today, however, I discovered something much more interesting, and at least a little bit more useful. Our Euro 2012 hosts have, between them, qualified for the tournament once. That was Poland in 2008.

So is it right that these countries should be hosting the tournament, and, perhaps more importantly, be placed in the first group of seeds with Spain and Holland?

I'm not arguing that hosts should not get automatic qualification, but rather, perhaps the success of a nation should be taken in to consideration. Of course, it great to see UEFA spreading the profit around a bit, but there needs to be a clear set of guidelines for choosing a country; an unsuccessful nation such as, say, Finland or even some tiny places like San Marino or Andorra are just as qualified as our hosts next summer.

Further, placing Poland and Ukraine in Pot 1 is, frankly, nonsensical. Pot 2 I could have understood, but in pot 1? There is a possibility that next year we could see a super-group containing Spain, Germany, Portugal and France (who have been placed in the bottom pot) while another group is made up of Poland, Russia, Greece and Ireland. With respect to all those teams in the second group, this distorts the competition somewhat. The point of seeding is to prevent the best teams meeting very early. There is a very real possibility that the best 4 teams in Europe right now are Spain, Germany and Portugal from that group, plus Holland. Clearly this makes a mockery of the idea of seeding.

So how would I change it? I'm not advocating anything like making the last winner stage the competition; this would only concentrate the profits into the hands of wealthy nations further. What I am suggesting, however, is that a nation that has never qualified for the Euros is not a suitable host. Even if Ukraine has only been a country for 20 years, it doesn't seem right to me. The same applies to South Africa and even more so to Qatar.

I'm quite aware plenty of people will argue that this competition will improve infrastructure in Ukraine and Poland, as well as the quality of the footballing facilities, but these nations are not poor, and often such benefits are overplayed. Take, for example, the World Cup in South Africa. This has not helped the vast majority of South Africans, or even South African footballers. FIFA's profits have been well-documented. The nations that should be getting competitions to host are those on the periphery - they qualify, but perhaps are still not that strong. This would be countries such as Sweden, Denmark or Russia. I believe that these kind of hosts would give the tournament more meaning, and prevent disparities such as within the 'group of death' and the 'group of boredom'.

PS. Sorry about the length, it was this or doing University Coursework...

 

Yeh they are

 

Not as bad as Qutar and Russia hosting the world cup, the two countries who's government would pass a bill that says it's ok to kill people for being homosexual...

 

Ban him!

 

Hosts since inception:

France - 1960
Spain - 1964
Italy - 1968
Belgium - 1972
Yugoslavia - 1976
Italy - 1980
France - 1984
West Germany - 1988
Sweden - 1992
England - 1996
Netherlands/Belgium - 2000
Portugal - 2004
Austria/Switzerland - 2008
Poland/Ukraine - 2012

 

And the award for just reading the thread title goes to...

I've not got a big issue with the location to be fair, both countries have a bit of a football background (unlike Qatar) but I'm not a fan of seeding them top, and I'm not a fan of dual country hosting in general. It dilutes the quality of what's only a 16 team tournament (for now...) too much, and they should be seeded accordingly.

 

You little tinker you.

 

On the plus side we could get Poland or Ukraine as top seeds in our group

 

In regards to the OP I think it's fair although the whole pot 1 thing is too much. What would be weirder was if they hosted the African Cup of Nations. That wouldn't be right...

 

Russia do not have the death penalty for homosexuals. Took me a full minute on Google to find that out

 

I don't see the problem. I'd love San Marino to host a Euro championship. Think of the happiness it will bring to the Poland and Ukraine to host such an event. The best team always wins it. And i include Greece in that.

 

I like this

 

The only thing that really worries me greatly, is that Poland have a bad hooligan culture and racism is still prevalent there.

 

Understatement.

 

You do realise you could fit the population of San Marino into the Riverside and there'd still be empty seats? I know Qatars small but I don't even think there's room for ten pitches to be painted in a field, let alone stadia.

 

Racist

 

The awarding of tournaments isn't just about the quality of the teams - it's about investing in the infrastructure of the game.
Poland and Ukraine have both had to upgrade their stadiums and transport networks in order to host the tournament.
One of the reasons we suffer in hosting bids is that all this stuff is already in place.

The Pot 1 thing is to ensure that the host countries play their games at home and also give them a theoretically better chance of getting to the next round which is supposed to improve the tournament atmosphere.

 

You're only saying this because you can't go incase you get killed

 

I just hope Scotland host it soon, at least that way we'll qualify

 

Obvs they would joint-host. Who do you think I am? Simon Stupid?