Is UEFA Nations League a major competition?

>winning it would make up for complete footballing failure for 50 years.
Find me one person with this view

unironically yes.

there was no tangible difference in effort from players or enthusiasm of fans for the games leading up to these semi finals, than for a Euro Championship or World Cup. that may be because players and fans aren't intelligent enough to tell the difference between a Euro qualifier and a Nations League qualifier, but regardless everyone has treated the Nations League as equal to the Euros (until their country has gotten knocked out, at which point they've gone into cope mode).

>England treating this as an actual competition is not a cope for 50 years of hurt

>inb4 league b

Its between the euro and the wc

Anyone with a Portuguese flag

>everyone has treated the Nations League as equal to the Euros
Imagine thinking this is true.

Imagine losing to Ronaldo-less Portugal though in a final at your national stadium HAHAHAHAHAHAH

about as major as Copa America

I remember when brit posters in here were posting about how shit and useless this competiton was when England was last of their group

See

It was the sacrifice we needed to win the bigger one

>brit
>England

Attached: 1540416979805.jpg (457x322, 21K)

Come on lad 95% of brit flags on Yea Forums are from Engmand

>we
Ah yes, the famous French African All-Stars

In order to win a world cup a country has to successfully complete 7 games. For the Nations League that's 6 games. For the WC that's 4 knockout games, NL it's 2. However the NL puts you in a more difficult group and has you play both high ranked teams twice in order to advance. So in terms of difficulty to win it it's close I say. Not quite as hard but very close. In terms of value, it's being held every 2 years. So I'd say it's bellow in value of a WC and slightly lower than a EC. But it's rather valuable if you think about it.

What makes it appear less grandiose is that the games are peppered throughout autumn and the finals are being held at the beginning of the summer. Imagine a world cup that's spread around like that. Condense all the NL group games to the summer and the knockout games the week later and you have a proper tournament no?

I-it's a stupid summer trophy that nobody cares about, okay??

Attached: tumblr_mu3wdlGZdo1sgh4k9o1_500.png (497x480, 218K)

League b

11 months later, still butthurt

Attached: world cup winner 2018.png (1114x835, 470K)

>and slightly lower than a EC
FFS. It's no where near the level of an EC. You don't even have to qualify for the NL. It's gifted based on ranking.

>But it's rather valuable if you think about it.
And yet nothing you've posted supports the value you think it has.

More major than any continental competition except the Euros. Copa America and the joke tournaments they have in Asia, Africa, etc. are less major than the Nations League.

Yes, yes it is spainbro

>inb4 league b

I didn't even know it was this week desu
And it was on some 3rd tier TV channel

>An user said it so it must be true!!!

are you a paki?

> Only people defending this shit are the finalists
> And even the Anglos know its worthless

Why are we even discussing this

>You don't even have to qualify for the NL
But you do have to make it to Group A. Time will tell how difficult teams find this, the initial results suggest it is difficult indeed.
>It's gifted
Literally more merit in the format than any other international tournament. No seeding, little randomness, no long knockout stage to give teams an "easy route"...

Haha. This damage control. You asked a question, got and answer and now realise your argument is done.

It's Le Tournoi important. Only London coons think it's valuable

Okay in terms of qualifying it's definitely inferior. But it's still valuable bong, you should learn to use your head a wee bit better.

1. more competitive group stage
2. home and away games group stage
3. semi and final vs highest ranked teams (by NL rankings)
4. 6 games played vs regular 7 tournament games

It's a prize that comes close to the EC and somewhat to the WC. However it's not the same. But to state that it holds little value is retarded and only shows you judge things by perception. Seems you're already coping for the inevitable massacre tonight

We will see where it will go. The formate is promising and turned out better than expected. It's at least a good indicator where teams stand between the big cups.

>But you do have to make it to Group A.
What is it you think you've refuted with this comment? There is no qualification campaign for the NL.

>Literally more merit in the format than any other international tournament.
This is the most desperate cope I have ever seen on here. There's no merit in it at all. It's glorified friendlies designed to line UEFA's pockets. You simply cannot attach prestige, value and merit to something like that.

>But it's still valuable bong
It's not. It's not even Confed Cup valuable.

>It's a prize that comes close to the EC and somewhat to the WC.
It's no where near the EC, let alone the WC. Fuck me.

>There is no qualification campaign for the NL.
Germany have to try and qualify for Group A next time

>Seems you're already coping for the inevitable massacre tonight
I want England to win the EC or WC, preferably both in my lifetime. I do not care for this fucking meme money spinner.

The coping bong vs the delusional bong. Which is worse Yea Forums?

Attached: 534543534534.png (1377x693, 888K)

The fact that the main prize on offer here is 2nd chance of qualifying for the European Championship tells you everything you need to about the Nations League and its value.

Remember when UEFA tried this but for clubs?
The Intertoto tournament that was nothing but summer friendlies that could get you a ticket for the UEFA cup?

On Yea Forums it would have been rated as high as a CL win it seems.

He’s obviously being ironic.

What's worse is that you're such a tragic failure of a football nation, like we are, that you deluded and cope yourself into attaching unwarranted value and worth to a cynical competition of glorified friendlies so you can feel you've got a chance of actually achieving something worthwhile to make up for the fact you're a loser.

And then you play to the crowd desperately hoping someone agrees with you, you insecure fragile cunt.

We're not quite like you tho, bong

Attached: 12312312312.png (901x436, 744K)

You know what makes me think this cup is worthless.

People who aren’t involved in it constantly making threads saying is worthless and has no value.

The teams involved are treating it like it matters, not just like a glorified friendly. To me, that gives the tournament value.

can't be a major competition if it happens during a domestic league and the CL, also being able to change your squad between match ups is meh. players know it I mean you saw the reaction of the players at the end of the game last night, measured happiness and measured sadness.
I'm still happy it exists.

t-that's because we're not playing user

Maybe not if we're looking at population size, investment/money, etc. You're still a massive failure though. No doubt about it at all.

>Crashing in the semis vs not qualifying at all
>1 WC over 50 years ago vs 3 finals but no WCs at all
Really makes you think, huh?

>inb4 league b
>inb4 south korea

It's not even that. The team who wins the final Sunday won't win direct qualification for Euro 2020. The NL matches this week are pointless, as you can only win a trophy and a sum of money.

It's one of the toughest competitions for sure and when it inevitably replaces the Euro Cup it'll be given the respect it deserves, but until then it's just a comfy competition that makes Germans seethe.

Which is why I said a 2nd chance of qualification. It only happens if they fail in the group qualis.

/thread

I know this is extremely rare, but when we get knocked out pretty early in a relevant tournament, it's still featured on the biggest TV channels and highly followed

...

Yes and no

>You don't even have to qualify for the NL
that makes it even harder though
if you're in league D, you have to be successful for 6 years to even have a chance at competing for the trophy

>that makes it even harder though
No it doesn't at all.

Best competition? Yes.
Major competition? Not yet.

Needs a few tweaks here and there, the 'finals' are utterly pointless but the League stage offers some great games with every nation getting proper competitive fixtures. League D was unironically kino, with smaller countries actually getting to play attacking football.

I apologise for the retarded bong shitting up this thread with his non arguments. He's probably white.

youtube.com/watch?v=4IGCkzKy1rQ&t=2s

My bad. I thought you meant this week's matches would put the winner into the play-offs if they fail in the qualifying groups when these four teams were already guaranteed play-offs, but I read it wrong.

Thanks for offering us the WC Eder

It was made to replace friendly games and serves as an alternative path to the EC. There are not many competitions for NTs: The World Cup, the Continental cups (of which only the EC and the Copa America can be called important), the Confed Cup and the Olympic Tournament. The Confed Cup is pretty much dead and the Olympic Tournament is for U23 players.
The Nations League has been quite successful up to now, I think. It was quite entertaining. However, it is not even close to the likes of the WC and EC, it simply isn't intended to. To determine its status, we'll have to wait a few more years, but I wouldn't call it a major competition. Nations that unironically wank themselves because of NL achievements are automatically disqualified from the club of football chad countries. However, it is a cup and it's fun. Unless you get relegated to League B.

The euros is shit tier now. They allowed top 3 to advance groups. They allowed teams like Portugal to draw all their group games and still qualify for knockouts. No tournament with any self respect would allow shitters like this to advance. Euro 2016 biggest disgrace ever.

Stop taking sense user your going to trigger the autistic user like this guy

We're better and they know it. It's why they've already written tonight game off. Bong mentality keeps them weak.

So like any other tournament final lol?

You might be better, you're still massive failures though. That was the point. And you're making shit arguments about the NL as a coping mechanism.

I never said we weren't chokers or generally unsuccessful on an international level. Just that we're better than England by a margin. And this weeks NL prize is a fun treat in-between the wait for the EC and WC after being out of it for 4 fucking years. My arguments aren't shit. The Nations League is a decent prize, it's not great, it's not shit either. You people need to learn to be more balanced man, you come across like some borderline nutcase calling everything shit and golden and nothing else.

They should allow B teams to play in League D (and a new E). Games like Germany B v Slovenia would be pretty interesting.

It's probably Europa League level if we're being generous?

>CL = WC
>EL = Euro
>NL = Intertoto

If Tsu or England win it then it automatically becomes BIG because fans of those 2 things have too much hype presence in footy.

>Just that we're better than England by a margin.
Which is utterly irrelevant to the point being made as it was never argued otherwise, you thick cunt.

>My arguments aren't shit.
You're claiming the NL "is a prize that comes close to the EC and somewhat to the WC". Of course your arguments are shit.

it made a lot of great competitive matches , and has a great potential to make small teams grow by facing similar strenght teams instead of just playing against giant teams that crush them 9-0

But you have to be a consistently good as a team otherwise you'll get relegated
With Euro or the world cup you only need to get lucky for 2 years, you get new chance everytime and your past record doesn't matter

no and no

>But you have to be a consistently good
England and The Netherlands weren't consistently good and they're through to a semi.

It doesn't make sense to compare with Europa League
If you're in the europa league it means you aren't in the champions league and that's already a failure
It's more like a league cup
But it's also different from that because it's the only international competition in odd-numbered years so you really have no excuse but to focus on it

because it's the first edition lmao

>more bollocks excuses
Give up, Lucasz

only reason he scores is because it is deflected on umtiti's calf

JUST

Seething cos you couldn’t beat a team that couldn’t even qualify AS the reigning world champions, some reign at the top

how exactly do you expect promotion and relegation to come into effect within the first season? are you daft?

Me, it’d at least make up for last year

I think it's value is high for lesser teams (league b-d) because they get a chance at winning something namely their league and a qualification spot for the World Cup or Euro.
For them it might be a really interesting competition.

The a teams will qualify through the normal way easily so some of them might not take the Nations League that serious. Additionally they have a lot of players from top clubs that have to play the CL/EL too so the added Nations League games are exhausting. In the past it was normal for them to not give a fuck about friendlies.

Me

What?? You claimed you have to be consistently good and I shown you that you don't at all.

Attached: 67388408-5B65-4400-993E-55DECA89BFF2.jpg (620x1054, 231K)

are you retarded or just baiting
they had to set up the initial leagues somehow, so they based it on uefa ranking
consistency comes into play over time, that's what consistency means

It's a major trophy and it's coming hope. Threads like this are pre-emptive copes.

Attached: 1553549818664.jpg (415x445, 38K)

So then you now realise your argument is bollocks. It's fair enough you calling other people retarded when you don't understand words.

>"the FIFA National Teams world ranking is bought to you by Coca-Cola"
i blame burgers for this

not getting relegated is not a sign of consistency?

it isn't a major competition and it will end in 2 years max

It isn't when you can avoid it by simply winning one game out of four like Italy did.

whoa, an actual logical argument

it won't end, everybody is happy with it

On paper it's harder to win than the Euro is

Yes it is. Unlike yours.

It will never be since the main purpose is qualification for euro/WC. Still kino though

>2-3
>3-2
ohnononononon wait till you get a look at OHOHOHOHOHHO OHNONONONNONONONO

unlike everything else you said before*

It's slightly better/more interesting than ordinary friendlies but nowhere near "major" status

Winning it is stil more prolific then how the 2016 EC went down, they should really change back the EC format.

It's not got the best of views here because its only on Sky Sports unlike normal qualifiers or tournaments that are on mainstream tv

wait until the big boys (fra, ger, ita, spa) saying they're tired of this model
same thing with the champions league: either the big clubs have a guaranteed win and major prizes every year or else they'll create the super league.

The Nations League format should just straight up replace the regular World Cup and Euro qualification process and I predict that's where FIFA is going with this desu.

>you're now aware world cup qualifying for 2022 started this morning

No. Your entire argument has been shown to be absolute arse gravy, fella.

And how would that work then when you have 13/14/15 UEFA teams qualifying for the WC and 24 for the EC?

My argument is that being in the top tier of the nations league is a test of consistency over several editions
You countered by saying it's not, based on literally one unfinished season

Just have the that many ranked teams qualify

there is no "model" they replace some meaningless friendlies here and there, you can be sure it generates more money than friendlies and the federations are happy with it

third biggest international tournament behind WC and Euros

ah yes the last of a league A group can't go to the EURO/WC

'no', qualification will remain the same, if there is no qualification then you will replace them with that? friendlies? come on nigel, the point of the Nations league was to prevent all those boring friendlies that generate not enough money

>being this obsessed over england that you're in every thread to post this
do you even have a fucking job lmao

WC
Euro
Copa
CL
Nations league
Europa league
Confederations cup
Club world cup(current format)

t. ranking pro

How can they possibly beat us if we just rank them below us?

Attached: dr-evil.jpg (600x300, 40K)

Nation's league is a success. I watched every Sweden friendly for a couple of years. They were ALWAYS boring, often 0-0, no one tried, whole team was substituted etc. NL is fun

>But you have to be a consistently good as a team otherwise you'll get relegated
This is your argument. It's bollocks. Stop making excuses and accept you have no fucking idea what you're on about.

>generates more money than friendlies and the federations are happy with it
of course they are. and i bet the sheeple is just happy to give them their money will they cry 'this modern football is all about money waaa waaa'

you're better than germany now

if you're not consistently good then you can't win the trophy despite one decent season
that's a fact

But it's not a fact at all. Fuck me, it's like you don't even understand how football works, particularly in formats like the NL.

you've provided literally no counter arguments aside from one

So I have provided a counter argument then, you dumb fuck lmao
And what do you think is needed other that actual facts that clearly show your point is bollocks even if it is just one?

what is the argument all about lads, I'll be the judge

lol seething

congratulations sherlock, you figured it out, yes I'm seething. a reply consisting of "lol seething" to my post will again be on point because yes I'm still seething.
bravo. let's all congratulate you.

England has the better track record. You ain't no Germany or Italy.

lmao

Jews

Why are French posters so obsessed with displaying their inferiority complex?

mickey mouse joke competition that nobody takes serious lol

I'm proper seething right now, lads.
Gonna have a Rowntrees Fruit Pastille ice lolly to cool down

Attached: e508a08d994f5b786d5c6506ce3c001a.png (610x343, 249K)

>here's why you have to be consistently good to win the NL, thus making it a merit-based tournament that you can't win just by getting lucky.
>no, you're wrong, but I won't explain why or give any reasoning because I'm a seething Scot.
Retard.

Hah! Fuck you Netherlands

>i-i can't argue your point so you must be le jock
What a predictable and ignorant response.

Scotland is even more embarrassing than England. They do worse than Wales ffs!

>still not making any arguments
The Nations League is literally impossible to do well in unless you get results against top teams. No other international tournament is so strict. Address this point or stop posting.

>13
>Behind Croatia, Uruguay, Switzerland, Denmark and Colombia
>Barely ahead of Sweden and Chile

Kill me. When will this nightmare end already?

>caring about how a beverage ranks football nations

>league b
enjoy finland away

I don't care at all whether >we are 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th. But being ranked 13th reminds me of the atrocity that was 2018.

Right, so you've not even understand his point, you fucking Sunshine Bus-riding spastic.
The arguments have already been made, but you don't like them so you will ignore them
Italy have demonstrated you do not need to be "consistently good" to avoid being relegated. Once it has been demonstrated once it therefore applies in every subsequent edition. You can literally stay in League A by winning just one of your four games and five points of a possible 12

>The Nations League is literally impossible to do well in unless you get results against top teams
And to address this utter shite - Portugal are the final having won three of the five games they've played and those wins being against Switzerland, Poland and unquestionably the shittest Italy in living memory.

>winning just one of your games
Against a top 12 team. Not easy, as Germany proved.
>5 points
Out of four games, to win 1, draw 2, and lose 1 sounds like a pretty standard performance to me. Not relegation form in almost any league. "Only" five points you say, when two of the teams in the semi-finals got seven. Points don't come easily in this tournament where there are no minnows (with the exception of Iceland who are gone, likely to never return).
>you do not need to be "consistently good" to avoid being relegated
Yes you do. Out of the relegated sides, three of them lost two games out of four. Two losses is seemingly the standard for relegation in this format, especially if you lose against two different teams. That's a pretty strict requirement when you are, I repeat, playing against top 12 teams.
>muh Portugal
Just because you don't rate their opponents, doesn't make for a good argument. What would be a strong run to the final in such a short competition for you? In fact, they are unbeaten in five against teams from Europe's top 12, with three wins to boot. I'd say that's great work. Would you consider it more legitimate if they also knocked out Nigeria and Japan en route to the final, as may happen in a World Cup?

You can literally avoid relegation in the NL with FOUR points. You can W1 D1 L2 and remain in League A. The argument from the boxhead that you have to be "consistently good" in the NL to avoid relegation is utter fucking bollocks, as is your ridiculous argument that it is impossible to do well unless you get results against top teams as Portugal have shown.

Utterly clueless.

England will never win a trophy in your lifetime. Kill yourself :^)

>You can literally avoid relegation with four points
And you can progress in the World Cup with two, if the rankings in your group go 9-2-2-2. This is not a good argument.
>"consistently good"
Listen, with the exception of Iceland, as I've said, there were no minnows in this tournament. You have to be good just to get draws against top 12 teams. I don't care if you don't rate Switzerland and Italy, the facts disagree with you because they got decent results against teams that, by any objective standards, are among the best in this confederation.
If you like calling every team except title winners in a normal season a "meme" or "chokers" or "shit-tier" or whatever else, then it's simply your standards that are fucked. You are expecting teams, all teams, to be much better than they reasonably can if you think five points in four games against literally top 12 teams isn't a decent performance.
>Portugal
Unbeaten in five with three wins against top 12 teams, this is good shit no matter how you slice it.
To me your standards for performance seem completely off. This isn't the Premier League where "good teams" win the majority of their matches every season. A single win here is a major result, and a draw shouldn't be seen as a negative result either.

Finland is comfy

The ranking is rigged by (((them))) and we're gonna dab on everybody again soon enough

No one over here takes it serious, it's just seen as a major sellout to milk money out of friendlies

>This is not a good argument.
It's the only argument needed to refute the bollocks the Pole is posting. You do not need to be "consistently good" to avoid relegation in the NL. Your attempt at deflection and memeing about the WC is essentially an admission you now understand this, but are just compelled to keep arguing the toss because you're an obnoxious twat.

>to be much better than they reasonably can if you think five points in four games against literally top 12 teams isn't a decent performance.
It isn't a decent performance at all though and it certainly isn't consistently good. FFS. Five points from a possible 12 is not decent by any measure.

>this is good shit no matter how you slice it.
Ahaha, and now we have more goalpost-shifting now you realise your argument is fucking pony too. Portugal are in a final having beaten Poland, Switzerland and Italy and you're trying to argue that these are top teams right now. lmao.

In the next edition we're going to have Ukraine, Sweden, Bosnia and Denmark in League A. Are these "top teams" too? What about in the third edition when it is entirely possible we may have the likes of Scotland or Finland in League A?

Your argument and the Pole's are diabolical.

that's some fucking cope

i know because i'll say the same thing once we lose

He's not wrong though. UEFA weren't making money from friendlies organised by national associations. By taking control and packaging friendlies as a competition they can sell it to broadcasters and sponsors.

>UEFA make money
>We get competitive matches between sides of relative equal strength
Everyone wins

Literally this and nothing else also checked my friend

Proper ranking

What is the 5th best NT in Europe, after Portugal, England, the Netherlands and Switzerland?

Belgium

All of these points basically boil down to the same issue: you don't rate the teams in the NL. You don't think it's a good result if you get a draw against Portugal, against France, against Italy. You don't think it's a great result if you get a win against Belgium, against Croatia, against Germany.
By your ridiculous standards, the only teams that did "well" were probably Belgium and Switzerland, who got 9 points, and one of them didn't even qualify for the finals (this is due to the aforementioned Icelandic exception).
I haven't moved any goalposts. I've said all along that these are good results. Nobody even got 10 points, let alone 12, so a draw is clearly a decent results here. I would actually call 5 points - a win, two draws, and a loss - exactly average. When your opposition is other top 12 teams, yes, I think it's clear you have to be "consistently good" to not slip below that average every year.
>Portugal are in a final having beaten Poland, Switzerland and Italy and you're trying to argue that these are top teams right now.
So who are the top teams in Europe? More importantly, how many of them are there? What's the limit of "top" for you? Is every European competition a meme if the eventual champions don't beat France or Spain along the way for some reason, even if those teams drop out early? Even if they beat teams who beat those teams?
If, when asked to name the "top teams" of Europe, you only name 4, 5, 6 teams... your standards are far too high for any competition to match them. We saw a 12-team group stage where 11 teams were competitive. One of the worst performers was fucking Germany, with a measly two points. So yes, I think five points from Italy IS a good result, and I think eight from Portugal IS a great result.
In a tournament without minnows there are no "free" points. You can't look at the groups and say "Oh, we'll get a win there" - there are favourites, sure, but zero near-certainties. That is what makes the NL competitive.

England B.

the euro's are also just friendlies that happen to be to made more competitive by making it tournament format

shit, same deal the world cup

How do the teams from pot 3 and 4 get into the euro?
t.desperate scot

Actually win in qualifying.
Good luck, Angus.

Attached: EngPepe.png (4496x4328, 456K)

If England win it will get the marketing and global recognition to become a major competition. Exactly the same as the WC in that regard.

We dabbed on Albania and Israel let us in

Attached: 1477843228602.png (456x498, 24K)

It boils down to the fact that you do not have to be consistently good to avoid relegation in the NL. This is a proven fact and so attempting to argue otherwise is nothing but a deluded coping mechanism.

There is also the fact that your argument is complete shit too, as it is possible to do well in the NL and not get results against top teams. You can bitch and cry all you want.

>I haven't moved any goalposts.
Well except you did. When your argument is this and when it's proven wrong you then argue that Portugal's form on paper is good, you're shifting the goalposts. You do this because you know you haven't a leg to stand on here.

Is there a reason why the Nations League should be regarded as less prestigious than the Euros, when League A of the NL is literally just the Euros with all the shitters cut out?

Attached: 1421694152805.jpg (442x933, 71K)

Bigger than the euros for sure

>against Switzerland,
sounds like they had to beat an /elite/ nation then. jog on Angus

Italy

Bunch of big teams got failed to qualify for the play offs so now they're pretending this tournament is arbitrarily less valuable despite pitting the top teams in Europe against each other just like the Euro.

>switzerland
>elite
lmao

it's every 2 years and the euro is every 4 years
there's your objective reason

>proven fact
>proven wrong
Both of these statements of yours are opinions based on the fact that you personally don't rate the teams in question, like I said, you don't think Portugal beating those teams is praiseworthy, you don't think Italy getting five points is praiseworthy.
The lack of true shit teams - the likes of League C - in the top tier means that any point you can get is a good point, and any three is a real achievement.
Like I've been saying, your definition of "top team" seems to be too harsh.

because it's a competition of glorified friendlies. there's no real qualification process. after a few editions you're looking at the possibility of tier 2 and tier 3 nations in league a and possibly winning it. the main prize is essentially a back door into the euros.

because it is only a side competition DURING more important competitions such as the champions league and league games, players can't be entirely focused on the nations league

>there's no real qualification process
???????

>after a few editions you're looking at the possibility of tier 2 and tier 3 nations in league a and possibly winning it
And in every EC/WC you're looking at the possibility of tier 50 teams winning.

>the main prize is essentially a back door into the euros
The main prize is a trophy, money and prestige, same as every other tournament.

You don't have to start seething this hard just yet mate, you might still get lucky and make it to the finals.

>there's no real qualification process
well yes, everybody is automatically qualified to the nations league

Are you that Pole on a proxy? I notice he struggled with words then ran off when he started shifting the goalposts.

The proven fact is you do not have to be consistently good to avoid relegation in the NL. The fact you can lose two games in the group, win one and draw one and not be relegated simply does not support the argument. That sort of form is not "consistently good" by any stretch of the imagination so the argument made is objectively wrong.

What is also wrong is your claim that "The Nations League is literally impossible to do well in unless you get results against top team" as Portugal have shown this time around and will shown in future editions even more so as shitter teams that Poland are promoted to League A.

How come you cannot argue the point without resorting to "b-but wot about the WC/EC". It's like you know the Nl is wank, but are desperately trying to convince yourself otherwise by pointing out flaws in competitons that no one is arguing about.

>and prestige,
There is no prestige in the NL. You simply cannot manufacture prestige. And a trophy is not the prize it's nothing but a fucking trinket offered to the winner.

And everybody is automatically qualified to the World Cup qualifiers.

so to win the euro or the world cup you have to play 17 games, to win the nations elague you have to play 6 games.

well????? guess the debate is over

>to win the nations elague you have to play 6 games
How many games did France win?

Attached: lot's of laughs.gif (400x400, 675K)

...

.de

I'm not surprised

i guess bong will consider this competition as friendly now.

Uefa ranking makes much more sense

>seething
>2018 world champs and soon to be euro 2020 champs
yeah we mad lol

Attached: téléchargement (1).jpg (270x187, 13K)

We fucked in you in your home turf. Sure you got the world cup, but you just couldn't succeed at home. Speaking from experience btw

Well?

I now agree with all the Spanish, Germans and Frenchies. This tournament is a meme fest and not something a nation as presitigious as England should be winning.

>it's actually a good strategy to lose on purpose all the games and get relegated in 2020/21 to get inferior opponents in 2023 and get a better chance at playoffs to qualify to Euro 2024

Scotland, you know what to do next

COCK HEAD

The weird thing was our commentators were insisting it was not a major competition while we were winning (While also constantly going "Remember what happened in the World Cup hmmm?"), then said it was a major tournament when we were losing.

Nobody hates the England team more than our own media and pundits.

Thank you m8

Take the 200 IQ route and realise that only the group stages are good and the """finals""" are tinpot

CL above Copa