Euro 2012: May the best team win. Or not

June 21, 2012

sports-lead-euro


Paris, June 21: Euro 2012 has been nothing if not entertaining, with plenty of goals, thrills and spills and assorted controversies from racism to goals not being given that should have been -- with Greece adding the surprise factor.


With the quarter-final line-up now known, the football fan might feel entitled to ask a nagging question: "Will the best team win?"

If this season in general has been anything to go by the answer is likely to be: "Probably not."


International football can be a crabbier affair than its domestic equivalent -- witness the difference in pace between the frenetic English Premier League, even with its foreign stars, and an England team which can verge on the pedestrian.

Yet a parallel is emerging between the international games as witnessed by the European championships and the Champions League, widely seen as the pinnacle of what the game has to offer at any level.

For many observers, Barcelona rank in terms of pure talent as the outstanding club team in Europe, with Bayern Munich not too far behind. But it was Chelsea who denied both to land last season's Champions League against all the odds.

Barca may have had 80 percent possession and 42 attempts on goal to 11 for their rivals over two games, yet it was the Londoners who advanced to the final.


There, Bayern cruised home in statistical terms -- but lost on penalties.

At Euro 2012, there are several indications the "best" team doesn't always win.

England topped Group D after beating Ukraine, yet the hosts enjoyed 62.5 percent of second-half possession, as well as a "goal" that wasn't given, despite crossing the line.

France, on the other hand, boasted a 23-game unbeaten run before losing to a Sweden side who showed flashes of brilliance with a lethal Zlatan Ibrahimovic.

But it was England who cruised into the final eight to face Italy instead of Spain.


Britain's Daily Telegraph newspaper was confused on Wednesday, asking: "England top of the pile, Spain dodged and Rooney scoring the winner. Who makes this stuff up?"


Group A was another case in point.

On the evidence of the first matches, Russia looked streets ahead of their rivals after swatting the Czech Republic 4-1, only to crash out to a Greek side who, as in their 2004 glory year, most pundits had discounted after they lost to... the Czechs.

The Netherlands came in as one of the sides with the most impressive qualifying records and the pedigree of former champions.

It came as a surprise, then, that the 1988 winners lost all three of their matches, lumping their non-achievement this time round with that of the Republic of Ireland.

Football is not an exact science but quantitative analysis should act as some kind of guide.


After all, have Germany and Brazil, as the "best" teams in history, not tended to re-establish the natural order of things by winning more often than anybody else?

British scientist John Maddox chose a landmark year to carry out a study for Nature magazine.


In 1966, the year England beat West Germany to win their only World Cup, Maddox wrote an article "We wuz robbed" (We were robbed) and established the chances of a draw at just 0.27 -- or statistically 27 in 100 matches.

He then mused on what that meant for the remaining matches.


"In other words, if two teams are equally matched, the chance that the result will be an active injustice to one of them will be 0.73."

One might object that the term "equally matched" is subjective and only relative -- but few fans would stop to reason as much if their team has just lost a close game.

Maddox went further in establishing that "a team which is slightly less skilled than its opponent can nevertheless expect a one in three chance of winning the deciding match" -- what one might today perhaps call the Chelsea factor.

He suggested redesigning certain parameters of the game to flatten the effect of such a perceived "injustice", including a series of matches for finals, as happens in the Major League Baseball World Series.

Failing that, Maddox suggested altering the game itself, "possibly by widening the goalposts or by abolishing goalkeepers".

And UEFA think goal-line technology is controversial.



Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 20,2020

Melbourne, Jun 20: If 15 teams can be allowed to enter Australia for the T20 World Cup then fans will not be stopped from watching live action from the stadiums, Cricket Australia's interim CEO Nick Hockley said on Saturday.

Hockley replaced under-fire Kevin Roberts, who recently got the boot from Cricket Australia, which is grappling with financial woes.

Different possibilities are being worked out for the T20 World to go ahead as scheduled later this year and one of them is to host the tournament before empty stands in the wake of COVID-19 pandemic.

However, Hockley said crowds will be allowed, though, hosting 15 teams with players, officials and support staff is "complex" as of now, hinting that probably the ICC flagship event could be pushed back.

"The reality is, and we've got much more understanding about this in recent weeks, is crowds are most likely to come back before international travel. Our biggest challenge is getting 15 teams into the country," Hockley told cricket.com.au when asked if he would like to see the World Cup proceed without fans.

"If I compare it with the prospect of a bilateral tour, you're talking about bringing one team in and then playing individual matches. But the prospect of bringing 15 teams in and having six or seven teams in one city at the same time, it's a much more complex exercise."

When specifically asked whether crowds would be permitted by the time borders have opened to the point that 15 teams will be allowed to travel to Australia, Hockley replied in an affirmative.

"That's the current thinking, yes."

Hockley said it came as a shock when he was asked by Cricket Australia to replace Roberts.

"I've had very mixed emotions. I was very shocked to be asked. I didn't see it coming at all, so I probably haven't had time yet to process it. I feel very sad for Kev (Roberts). On the other hand, I feel this is a massive privilege to be asked, it's a massive responsibility and a massive opportunity even if it's only for the next few months," he said.

Hockey did not commit when asked if he would like to assume the role full time, but he did say that he would quit as CEO of the T20 World Cup Organising Committee.

"My approach throughout my entire career has been to focus on doing the best job I can with what I've been tasked with, and the future will look after itself. And I'll continue the same approach.

"That's (T20 World Cup) been a real priority over the last 48 hours. We're reasonably well progressed and we will be appointing an interim because you just can't do both," he said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
April 2,2020

Lausanne, Apr 2: The postponement of the Tokyo Olympics and the shutdown of the sporting calendar because of the coronavirus pandemic are going to hit international sports federations hard financially.

Many sports that are part of the Games depend heavily on the payouts every four years from the International Olympic Committee (IOC).

"The situation is tense and very gloomy. An assessment will be made, but clearly some posts are under threat," said an official of a major international federation.

The 28 international federations (IF) of the sports that were due to be present at the Tokyo Olympics, would have received substantial sums from the IOC.

However, the postponement of the Games until 2021 could lead to a freeze of their payment.

"We have a lot of IF with substantial reserves, but others work on a different business model, they have income from major events which are suspended, which can be a problem for the cashflow if they don't have enough reserves," said Andrew Ryan, director general of the Association of International Olympic Summer Sports Federations (ASOIF), which is responsible for distributing this money.

The five additions to the Tokyo Games programme - karate, surfing, skateboarding, climbing and baseball/softball - are not eligible.

The Olympic payout totalled 520 million after the Rio Games, four years ago.

"The Olympic money could be less than for Rio 2016," Ryan warned before adding: "My advice is to budget the same as in Rio".

The federations receive money on a sliding scale determined by their audience and size.

The three largest (athletics, swimming and gymnastics) can expect approximately 40 million.

For the second tier, made up of cycling, basketball, volleyball, football and tennis, the sum is 25 million.

For group three, which contains eight sports, including boxing, rowing, judo and table tennis, it is 17 million.

The nine sports in the next level (including sailing, canoing and fencing) receive 12 million.

For the three in the last category (rugby, golf, modern pentathlon) the payout is 7 million.

For the largest associations, such as football's FIFA which has a 1.5 billion nest egg, or basketball body FIBA which has CHF 44.4 million (42 million euros) in reserves, IOC aid represents a small proportion of their income.

For others, it is vital.

"Some IF probably don't have the cashflow to survive one year," said Ryan.

For most federations, the postponement of the Olympic Games has a domino effect, forcing them to reschedule their own money-earning competitions.

"The revenues from these events will eventually come in," said Ryan. "But this impacts the cashflow." World Athletics has already postponed the 2021 World Championships in Eugene, Oregon to 2022.

The International Swimming Federation (FINA) will have to do the same for its World Championships scheduled for next summer in Fukuoka, Japan, when they would probably clash with the Tokyo Games.

"One edition of the World Championships means for us 10 million in revenues," said one sports federation official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"If this income is postponed, totally or partially, for a year, we will face major problems, especially if the IOC money, originally expected in September, is not paid out."

The Singapore-based International Table Tennis Federation has already taken steps, with "the Executive Committee agreeing to reduce their expenses and senior staff offering to take a salary reduction," said marketing director Matt Pound, but, he added,"further cuts will take place if needed."

- 'Significant loss of revenue' -

The ITTF has suspended all its competitions until June and that is costly.

Kim Andersen, the Danish president of London-based World Sailing, said commercial revenues are not immune.

"The IOC will eventually pay out its aid, but what weighs most heavily is the uncertainty about whether our competitions will be held and whether our sponsors will be maintained," he said.

The IOC is not prepared to go into details of what it plans.

"It is not possible at this stage to assess the overall impact" of the postponement of the Tokyo Olympics, an official told AFP.

"It depends on a number of variables that are currently being studied." According to an official of one federation: "the IOC will discuss on a case-by-case basis, sport by sport".

Another option is for the federations to ask for a share of the public aid set up to deal with the coronavirus crisis, in Switzerland, where 22 ASOIF members are based and also in the United Kingdom, home of World Sailing.

"Can sports federations benefit from federal aid? The answer is yes, in principle," Philippe Leuba, State Councillor of the canton of Vaud, in charge of the economy and sport, told.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 10,2020

Potchefstroom, Feb 9: Bangladesh clinched their maiden ICC U-19 World Cup title after beating favourites India by three wickets in the summit clash here on Sunday.

Set a revised target of 170 after a brief rain interruption, Bangladesh won the match with 23 balls to spare.

Sent in to bat, India's batting wilted under pressure as a superb Bangladesh bowling attack shot the defending champions out for a paltry 177 in 47.2 overs.

Yasashvi Jaiswal (88 off 121 balls) was once again a standout performer but not for once did he look like dominating the Bangladesh bowling unit whose new ball bowlers Shoriful Islam (2/31 in 10 overs) and Tanzim Hasan Shakib (2/28 in 8.2 overs) literally stifled the Indians for runs.

The third seamer Avishek Das (3/40 in 9 overs) was the most successful bowler in terms of figures but it was Shoriful's first spell with channelised aggression that put the Indians on the back-foot from the onset.

After a short rain break towards the end, the target was revised to 170 from 46 runs but Bangladesh reached 170 for 7 in 42.1 overs to win the match.

Opener Parvez Hossain Emon top-scored for Bangladesh with a 79-ball 47 while captain and wicketkeeper Akbar Ali was not out on 43 from 77 deliveries.

For the India U-19 side, Ravi Bishnoi was the most successful bowler with figures of 4/30 while Sushant Mishra had 2/25.

India thus missed out on a record fifth title in their seventh final appearance.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.