Is It Harder To Win The Euros Than The World Cup?!
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 06. 2021
- Euro 2020 is finally underway, albeit in 2021, and one of a number of talking points surrounding this tournament appears to be the debate over whether the Euros might actually be a tougher competition to win than the FIFA World Cup.
More minnows qualify for the World Cup than the Euros, the argument goes, providing an easier path to success than you get in the UEFA European Football Championship.
So in this short opinion piece, HITC Sevens examines those claims, the various merits of both arguments, and provides his own views on the question. - Sport
Brazil = 5 WC wins
also Brazil = 0 Euro wins
Checkmate
How brazil can win euro bro🤣
@@Ayush-jt5kw BRUH YOU DON'T GET THE JOKE
as a brazilian, true
@@Ayush-jt5kw if they just move the country to Spain and play in it
Winning the world cup is at least easier for South American teams than winning the euros
It's had to argue against that
No shit
I knew that there would be people who didn't get that this was a joke. I didn't think they'd be 2 of the first 3 comments.
Well you're not wrong
True a South American side hasn’t won a game in the euros
No team has ever lost by 5 goals at the Euros
Brazil: sweating
Brazilian here... This is a quality comment 😂
@@bethlance-sharpe7120 kkkkk Dificil esses tempos.
Italy almost did in the final 2012. 4:0 which is the highest final loss ever in the Euros and even would be the highest in the WC because even there no team has ever lost by four goals in the final.
Ya Slovakia just did it yayyy
Slovakia answered your call
I think the first stages of the Euro’s are tougher comparatively, but when both competitions get deeper and into the later stages, the World Cup is harder
I just remember our German side going up against the likes of South Korea in the 2002 WC semifinals. I think the group of 16 and 8 before that also had easy games for Germany. So sometimes even later WC stages can be rather easy. Of course we got very lucky there.
@@LuLeBe yeah but you got south korea because of their disgusting match fixing... italy should have gone through to the quarter finals against spain, instead both of them got corrupted refereeing that ultimately let sk to the semis
Much much harder
@@LuLeBe Germany in 2002 was a pretty rare situation, and then they ran into Brazil and it was over. They'd have had tougher competition, too, if South Korea hadn't cheated to get to the semifinal.
@@LuLeBe Indeed, no disrespect to South Korea but you just know Germany is going to win that game.
Portugal literally drew every group game and won the Euros lol
Italy did the same in the World Cup but they won all of their games in the second group
Don't forget the came 3rd in the group so only just got threw
@@simongreenwood445 and it was just about the easiest group in the entire competition
And only won ONE knockout stage game within the normal time, they had to go overtime OR to pens in all the others
And became third in their group, not to mention almost losing on pens to poland in the quarters
All of that also makes me think portugal really didn't deserve to win the euroes, they simply didn't play that well
And they deserved the win.
Both are extremely hard to win for England!!
Lol
And so many other teams you plank
@@Mind-your-own-beeswax shush England lost to Iceland
@@euphoriaggaminghd that was 5 years you spanner
Yeah but we already won it. That little star above the England badge proves you wrong kiddo.
Xavi in 2012: "Euro is harder than WC"
Xavi in WC 2014: "Chile please stop🥺"
Man literally won the world cup.....go get yourself a world cup and we will pay attention to whatever you say....
@@HarpreetSingh-yr6tl You have a pathetic mindset with that comment.
@@mattmart1345 wtf does this has to do with mindset?.....oh i am sorry i guess u are just another troll looking for some attention
@@HarpreetSingh-yr6tl dude u just paid the attention by replying him 🤣🤣🤣
@@Rohityadav_17 yeah i realised the same after typing the comment 😆
Portugal's route to the Euro 2016 Final : Iceland, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Poland, Wales. Imagine getting such an easy route to a World cup final.
@UncreativeUsername England didn't reach final.
@@shafiqsha9875 i think he wanted to say England's route to the semifinal in
Russia 2018 .
@@shafiqsha9875 or Croatia's route to the final in Russia 2018 .
All those teams except Croatia would be humiliated by any south American team. Even Bolivia
That happens. This year Italy had a pretty tough route with Belgium, Spain and England (also Austria was not that bad).
I think that the world cup has more good teams while the euro's have less bad teams
Lol wtf
@@zackieofficial4726 It makes sense. For example you get strong south american teams, but also weaker north/central american and african teams in the world cup.
@@miketsable a lot of CONCACAF and African teams are better than many UEFA teams
@@Minjarez96 you're right, but i still think there are "more bad teams" in world cups than in euros. But it's also a larger competition, so it could be because of that.
@@Minjarez96 Africa of course, but especially Nortz America has little to offer. Mexico is a constant stronghold, but apart from that their arent much strong teams. USA, Cuba and Costa Rica are good but rarely can go further than the group stage.
Euros are harder to win... for Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay.
LOL
True
When a crap team like Greece and Portugal can win it by not even winning a single group stage match. You think it would be hard for South America?
@@blabla-rg7ky
Really 😂?
You think Greece is a powerhouse?
@@bitik9847 greece are not a footballing powerhouse, but in 2004 they have not been crap, and not because they've won the EUROs but because they have been very well organized (cohesion and team spirit brings you trophies, not individual talent or else messi and gaymar would have won everything by now). Greece's tactics, cohesion and a bit of luck is what had - deservedly - brought them the trophy. Which means they are not crap, so like I said, your opinion doesn't matter because you are clueless about football
It's harder to get out of a group at the Euros, it's harder to run the table of the knock out rounds at the World Cup. The fact that Denmark and Greece have won the Euros proves this, and ultimately proves that the World Cup is harder. No middling team has ever won the World Cup, because the knock out round is brutal.
Well the Danes are now currently a very good team, ranked 10 in the world by FIFA.
what? you could lose your first two games in the euro's and qualify with 3 points
It is so much easier the groups in the world cup. Just ask the 2021 euro finalists how easily they got in to the knockout stage in wc 2014
@@gunter6377 Haha
Bad example
@@notjosephstalin6391yeah getting out in the group stage
Germany entering WC2018 as current champions : "Meh, World Cups are easier, too many weak teams in the group stages"
Mexico and South Korea : LOL
Yes but this is a trend for some reason. World cup title defenders drop out of the group stage in next world cup. Germany in 2018, Spain in 2014, Italy in 2010. Plus France, current world cup winner, was kicked out of final 16 by Switzerland this Euros.
@@jonb3150 France also got kicked out of 2002 in the group stages ... The only country not to succumb to this curse in the 21 century was Brazil 2006
@@fpsqt Brazil built different
Lol in 2022 the same repeated 😂
god bless christian eriksen.He seems like such a nice guy as well as a talented young man
@@wojtek24msz So your not young in your twenties? Got it
@@JB-dv4ds Well not really hes at his prime, hes not young anymore in football
@@wojtek24msz he means young by life standards. To have this happen to you in a age of 29 is not good. When you are in your 20s you still have a lot ahead of you in life.
@@Uhatttt but he's too young to die of a heart attack. You see, it's funny, football isn't life.
@@JB-dv4ds in football he’s a grandpa
You missed one big factor - the climate. Every other World Cup is held outside Europe and European teams have to cope with climates they are not used to. It shows in the fact Spain in 2010 were the first European team to win a World Cup outside of Europe
Italy Spain Portal and even southern France have Mediterranean climate. So it shouldn't be about that.
@@anisagovic4902 there is a difference between a Mediterranean climate and the humidity of summer in Japan or a Brazilian rainforest or the heat and altitude of Mexico and Chile.
I mean in the last 5 world cups 3 of them were in Europe..
The 2010 World Cup in South Africa was held during Winter in the southern hemisphere with temperatures in some games close to 0c (32f)
I think that the reason some think that European football is superior is misguided by the qualifying system for the World Cup finals. In South America we only get 4 secured spots. Plus regarding climate. I’m from Chile, and the weather here is really tamed, not to hot and not too cold. But in Brazil and Venezuela and the northern countries? Horrible weather to play in. When national teams play in Bolivia, players and staff need to use a oxygen mask every once in a while. So yeah the climate is a big factor but it affects everyone, not only Europeans
If the World Cup didn't have spots for every confederation it would most likely just end up being all EUFA and CONMEBOL nations. Arguably higher quality but maybe not as fun for the world to watch.
In 2026 we're gonna see plenty of New Zealand vs Egypt like matches
@@angeleduardoruizvillar4411 still better than the euros. Just the feeling of the World Cup itself. Having the whole world unite for one tournament. It makes it more enjoyable.
@@TeamVadegg That's true. However, that is not the debate
Kind of the point of the world cup
CONCACAF should be well progressed by the next World Cup
Euro never saw players like Messi, Pele, Maradona, Neymar, etc. And people say Euro is harder than World Cup 💀
Its not about players its about teams. Germany sene brazil 7-1 where are all the players you are talking about. And plus Europe has lot excellent players than any other continent
If the World Cup is so easy, why haven’t any lesser teams like Greece or Denmark won it yet??
How have England not won the euros
Because they don't even qualify BECAUSE other stronger european teams qualify instead of them... I don't get your doubt here
@@RQuiaios Um, I think he means why haven't a underdog team won the World Cup since 1950.
@@augustusfreeman4032 The only underdogs that won the Euros was Greece, Denmark was a peculiar case (and they had a good team back then). And Greece I have no good explanation for it, it is an event that happens once in a lifetime, could happen in a world cup as well I guess. That is a true exception
@@RQuiaios the world cup never had a true under dog winning since 1930! that is because there are more top level teams and more low level teams at the same time. Basically if you are a medium level European team is far harder the World Cup because you have at least three more top level teams that you may face, plus these teams would be less tired because they got easier games. The situation is different for a top level European team, where the World cup is slightly easier because of the reason explained in the video.
I'm 10000x more excited for the World Cup than the Euros.
That wasn't the question, though, was it? 😐😐
Totally agree! No-one really knows that the Euros are happening in my country. But when the world cup comes around...bars, streets, everything changes. And my country hasn't played in the WC ever.
@@supernovasupernova4289 Ireland?
@@WakaWaka2468 Ethiopia actually. Football mad people with zero football skills.
@@supernovasupernova4289 is the Africa cup of nations as big there as the euros/copa America is in their respective continents
The World Cup is way harder to win for normal countries, euro is way harder to win for England
@B No, because they won a World Cup already😅
@B I’m French.
@B I was for Italy... you completely miss understood what I said...
@B The match in 1966 WC final ended in 4-2 for England over West Germany. The goal you're referring to was England's third goal. The Fourth goal was blasted into the roof of the net by Sir Geoff Hurst at the final whistle. There was a two goal margin at the final whistle. Know the facts before you post!
@B Just stfu mate, after aggressing like you did yesterday you aren’t allowed to talk
Silly question if we're being honest. Greece, Denmark and the 2016 iteration of Portugal have all had their moment in the sun. Croatia on the other hand, are the first traditional outsiders to be World Cup Finalists since... Czechslovakia in 1962? Yeah, so that's that.
What do you mean by traditional outsiders? We had a powerhouse team in the 90s getting bronze in 98' and were one of the favourites going into the 2016 euros. Then in 2018 we were considered the 9th best team in the tournament and had the best midfield trio on the world at that time. What do you mean by "traditional outsider"?
@@crobeastness Outsiders to win it. Granted Croatia had a fantastic run in '98, they didn't play a knockout stage match again until 2018. Just because they're usually known as outsiders doesn't mean they're not good. Only a handful of teams are realistically expected to win the wcup.
@@hiranom20 that's because they usually under perform. 2016 we were one of the favourites to win. I still don't know how Portugal won. Then again I don't know how Portugal beat anyone in the knockout rounds. They played worse then everyone they face and still win. And the quarter finals in 2008 still haunts us to this day. Modrić has even said that his worst lose ever. It really was a miracle lose.
Spain and netherlands were both outsiders in 2010, both teams never won it
@@riccardomallardo7779 not winning it before does not make them outsiders in the world cup world. Both have been powerhouses forever. What about in 98'? France never won before and beat Brazil who had 4 at the time? Does that make France outsiders in that case? No, they were a prominent soccer nation for some time as well.
I'd also like to remind people the Hungary team that defeated El Salvador 10-1 didn't even get past the group stage.
El Salvador has no history on football...
This was like 40 years ago. Its different now
The standards have gotten bigger. Even Haiti was in a World Cup but from them to qualify in a current World Cup would be much harder for them. They have to go through more than teams like Mexico and USA.
@@ChristianDoretti look up magico Gonzalez and maradonas comments about him. He's from el Salvador and was a great player.
@@shannonballspen1s482 but, as we all seen in 2014 with Brazil's campaign, you simply cannot make a team around one really good player (in Brazil's case, Neymar), because if something happens to him, the team is ruined, and not everyone has the same physique as Cristiano Ronaldo to allow the manager to do such thing.
This is actually a thing in handball.
Europe is the continent with by far the most love for the sport while still not coming close to football but while the latter has a long list of countries that play the game with as much if not more passion, handball isn't really that big of a deal even in countries where they are very close to the European level of quality. Because there are more European nations at the European championships than the World Championship, there are fewer easy wins in the first one.
I also think that euro is more competitive, but i dont agree with you when you say europe is the continent that loves football the most. Football bornt in Brazil , and Argentina had the biggest rivalry between clubs in the world ( Boca vs River)....
@@rafaelpinheiro2468 football wasn't born in brasil
@@rafaelpinheiro2468 First, you ve never seen Benfica and porto rivalry in Portugal, second football was born on England no Brazil.
@@miguel.b8832 Isn’t Sporting Benfica’s main rivals?
Also in Water Polo
Pendu fans searching for this video
After Messi win World Cup
Learn how to spell out your insults first
Not sure how there's anybody arguing that the Euros are harder to win, unless they're completely ignoring the part about qualifying for the tournaments as part of the difficulty in winning the tournament.
Most saying such stupidity are european, from the top countries. Uefa literally hands these teams free qualification to the world cup, they'll pick 1 top team and group with 5 terrible teams. It's pathetic.
It’s actually what the video talks about. There some european teams that are visibly stronger than others like the north american ones that can’t even partecipate at the cup.
@@jbanol 1 powerhouse, 2 decent, 3 pathetic, is usually how it goes.
great point that everybody ignored. WC is harder also because it's harder to qualify.
@@jbanol for the last 20 years, only European teams have been winning the World Cup... European teams are more well-organised and compact..
This video should be titled: have the sport’s governing bodies ruined major international football tournaments?
I grant you it’s not very catchy though.
How did they ruin it
I get the hosting shambles but more nations is better imo
@@jakesullivan8339 Too Long Too Boring.
@@jakesullivan8339less motivation to win matches in the group stages
@@jakesullivan8339 I disagree mate
@@jakesullivan8339 Have you seen this Euro? Never seen this many boring matches before. There's literally nothing to play for till the last round of the group stage, untill that you're just playing not to lose.
If they want 24 teams it should be 4 groups of 6 with top two advancing to quarter finals imo.
I’m brazilian and gonna tell you: never seen such a humble guy talking about his own culture like you. I really respect you for The respect you had with us in the video, which is something kinda rare these days. Here in Brasil we have an alike question for this same theme: Is it harder to win the Euros or is it harder to get in a World Cup Final? That came up with Croatia in 2018. Nice video, mate. Im supporting you english guys this year, big fan of all your singing and union. Keep it up! 🇧🇷🏴
welp loool it didnt come home it went to rome
World Cup > Euro
And it was like that even before Argentina won the World Cup. With that it is confirmed either Europeans like it or not.
Ohio skibbidy rizz
🤓🤓🤓🤓
@@Cheeselover34 Where's the lie?
@@omessiasdogolhe’s a pendu fan
my biggest counter argument would be, you still have to qualify for the world cup. there less spots for european teams in the wc than the euros, so on top of playing the best in your qualifying group to qualify, you play the best of other FAs
There is no argument here. Literally zero.
My biggest counter argument is 9:18
The 24-team tournament + alternative qualifying methods (through the Nations League) seems to put the 2020 Euro at a lower level than those with 16 teams.
little strange as the same big nations are still in the same tournament , level of the tournament hasnt gone down. just more teams .
I think the champions league is a down grade with all those 2nd 3rd 4th placed loser teams participating in there from one nation.
No one wants to see gloryfied boring league games in the champions league.
Maybe in the short term, but it will give smaller countries more hope, and make them be better
@@TheDMG187 i agree the nations league is a good example the quality of the smaller nations has improved a lot .countrys like luxemburg are not getting hammerd every game and even draw or win from the big nations,
@@marcusfranconium3392 level of group stage has gone down.
@@gigsawsoljier1408 so did the champions league with all those 2nd 3rd 4th place losers .
Yeah, because Greece could some day win the World Cup......
Do you think England could some day win the Euro?
@@gontrandjojo9747 Who knows. They always seem to flop.
@@diegohrestre except when they win the World Cup
@@BizzyIzzy87 euro cup started in 1960. World Cup started in 1930s. Maybe in that time England would have won a euro cup🤷♂️
Greece fully deserved that win because they played like a team. They didn't need a penalty shoot out or dodgy referee decision like the so "big teams" often need.
Probably for the achievement of “World Cup” the World Cup makes a more competitive scenario than Euro.
The south American teams skill level is usually a cut above plus the African teams now also are extremely talented, so no the euros are certainly not more difficult to win.
the same Hungary who beat El Salvador lost by 4-1 to Argentina in the next game and was eliminated....
In 2026 we will have a World Cup with 48 teams and a groupstage with 16 groups of 3. That new format will decrease the level of play at the World Cup again.
It basically makes it almost a straight knockout tournament, for some countries it could mean 2/3 years of prepping and in some cases playing nearly 20 qualification games could rest on 1 game. Makes the World Cup seem such a non-event.
Why not 12 groups of 4 with top 2 going through with 8 best third place finishers leading too a last 32 last 16 1/4's semis and a final
@@zumizm1 Now this makes more sense
@@zumizm1 they didnt want to increase the number of matches for a team to play
@@adventus6125 it would of only been 1 match a team extra , with 16 groups of 3 I'll call it now with each team only playing 2 games alot of groups will be decided on ridiculous things like yellow cards conceded etc etc
More depth of talent in the Euros... More quality at the top in the World Cup. Doubt you'll ever see a real underdog winning the World Cup. The World Cup also has a history of "elite" European teams not even advancing out of the group stage to "lesser" teams around the globe. Love both competitions though.
Cheers Alfie, really needed to be reminded of how bad Ireland were at Euro 2012 👍
Morocco, Japan, Korea, Mexico, etc are better than Tier 2 European Teams and can even beat the Tier 1 European Teams on their day. Argentina and Brazil are among the Tier 1 European Team. Then How is Euro Better than World Cup? Teams like Germany, Spain, Portugal, Denmark are getting eliminated in WC. Euro Champion Italy cannot even qualify for WC. How is Euro better than WC? Is this a Joke? O wait! Can Greece and Portugal win a WC?
Greece, Denmark, Czechoslovakia would disagree. It's harder to qualify to WC then pass group stage in Euro
Czechoslovakia would have won the world cup in 1934 if it wasn't for the corrupt referees. Czechoslovakia, Denmark and Greece deserved their Euro wins because they played like a team. Greece won theirs without a penalty shoot out or needing some dodgy referee decision like so many of the "big teams" often get.
@Anis Agovic You got it wrong ; because it's harder to qualify for the world cup through the european qualifiers, many european teams miss out, despite being in the 32 best teams in the world. Therefore, it's less competitive, and teams like Greece, Denmark and Czechoslovakia could go far if they got a chance again. (That's what is explained in the video, without me saying that I totally agree with this logic.)
And England disagrees with you. Now what?
Greece has qualified for WC three times and passed the group stage in Euro 2 times
The 'anyhow'with Eddie Howe guaranteed the comment and a like, great humour and a anouther well educated and factual video 👍👍👍
I've noticed that the extra round in the world cup makes an interesting difference... in the Euros we get surprising champions like Denmark, Greece and Portugal, in the world cup we get surprising semi-finalists like Turkey ('02), Bulgaria ('94) and Croatia ('98) but almost never a surprising champion...
When Portugal won the euro 2016, there was already an extra round. Greece 2004 was an exceptional situation as it was before the Olympics to be held in the winning country.
Its funny Xavi said that i respect the guy but can he really say that knowing They confortably won it with 4 0 against italy while he had to see hes " tiki taka " ass being saved by the all mighty sante Iker
2010 Spain almost got knocked out by Paraguay.
@@lapalu exactly
Previous Euros have 16 teams, 13 Europe teams (if Europe host, 14) enters the world cup. So it's already similar in the level of competition coming from Europe, added to that some strong teams from other parts of the world. World Cup does include weaker teams, but in order to win, you need to beat the BEST teams. The presence of those weakerteams doesn't make that easier.
The two competitions are pretty much the same in terms of competitiveness. It's harder to see surprise winners at World Cup simply because 1 more game is played.
I agree. The groupstage are more competitive in the Euros, but then in the knockout the World Cup is better.
One solution (though I don't think the only thing): Unify the qualis of Conmebol and Concacaf; you are not going to see countries like Panama, El Salvador, or Jamaica (with all due respect), and Uruguay, Chile, Colombia, or Peru consistently doing it more into the World Cup (and improving the level of the US and Mexico, as they'll have to go head-on national teams as Argentina or Brazil way more frequently)
I'd say early group stage, Euro is definitely harder. But when the competition proceeds to top 8 and beyond, then World cup matches seems to have higher quality.
Yeah group stage in the euros is way harder 9:18 🤣🤣🤣
so hard that 3 teams could pass. No way big teams choke on group stage of euro.
What a joke!
Euros is harder to win
POV: European guy telling you why European competition is better
Pog?
while providing good arguments
@@jsn8928 pov I think
@@jsn8928 Pog is a twitch emote
Salty because you’re not from Europe
2:16 I swear Saudi Arabia reached the round of 16 in 1994 in a group with Belgium, the Netherlands and Morocco?
@Anthony Mcken Were belgium good then? I'm not very familiar with that era
This Eurocentric view point that most teams from other continents is making the world cup easier to win than Euros is baseless and flawed. In world cup tournaments, if I am not mistaken, Europe has the most representative followed by South America and the best from the rest of the world. Is it adding the likes of Saudi Arabia, Japan, Nigeria or USA that is making the the world cup easier to win? I don't think so. It is your mindset that makes you feel that the European tournament is harder.
The year the Saudi player scored imo the greatest world cup goal
(belgian here) we weren't really good from 90s to 2010 our golden era kinda started in 2013-2014
@@gokhulmanikandan7689 Belgium were good in the 30s and now, that's pretty much it.
It's so hard to win the Euro that even Greece already won lol
but not England.
Isso é inveja da Grécia lmao
@@BQD_Central England never wins anything.
@@Mclovinulongtime literally never
@@Mclovinulongtime they won world cup
No World Cup is much harder to win
Thabks for this video! I always feel like people forget that the 2018 World Cup is not wholly representative of European football, and that comparing the two tournaments is a bit unfair.
In world cup 2018 the usual examples are Panama and Saudi Arabia.
Panama disqualified the United States and Honduras. It grabbed a nice position.
Saudi Arabia went to the world cup above Australia and then won against Egypt.
Would anyone say anything if it was Australia or U.S.A in the world cup? I highly doubt it.
This just give smaller teams a nice shot in playing against European teams.
How Australia qualified afterwards is the weirdest part of the situation, basically being the 5th team representing Asia...
Panama also got torn a new one by England and Belgium and lost to Tunisia. Saudi Arabia left a bad account of themselves because they got demolished by Russia. I don't think they were that bad in the other two matches though
And thats the truth. People just don't care for anyone outside of a rich and big country.
Hell even Brazil and Argentina don't count aparently
The world cup basically becomes the euros with maybe 1-2 south american teams by the round of 8
In the last 3 World Cups all but 1 South American teams have made it to the next round leaving behind European teams that regularly finish 1st or 2nd in UEFA WC qualifications, like Switzerland, Poland, Italy and England.
Yes..South American teams are good. But only 3 win it. The point is nobody outside South America or Europe does win it so the rest is useless filler who can have the odd upset. European giants have floped lately
Merging EURO and Copa Am. would be the undisputed hardest tournament. Best of both worlds.
@@papaburgandy3918 winning the whole thing is not the only achievement possible, italy and england lost to to costa rica and uruguay in 2014 group stage, portugual losto to uruguay in the 2018 wc, colombia destroyed poland and almost got through england, peru(3rd tier in south american football) played a very balanced game against denmark, mexico is always in the round of 16. I know the wc has more irrelevant teams (africa, asia and north america), but even those teams can be a pain in the ass, iran and morroco really gave spain and portugal a hard time in 2018 group stage, ghana reached quarter finals in 2010, and germany had a really tough game against algeria in the last 16 of 2014, I know im only picking thr games where europeans lost, but thats quite a lot dont you think? The point for me is that in the world cup there are different styles of play coming from each continent, so an african team in good form can be more challenging than a second tier european, the same goes for mexico and second tier south americans like colombia and chile
It is very unlikely that any team outside of europe and south america will ever win it, so only looking at the winner is not a good enough perspective. The euros have had more unlikely winners like greece and denmark who rarely perform well in the wc and most of the times dont even qualify (greece went to the round of 16 only in 2014 and lost to costa rica, which isnt even south american
World Cup trophy is much harder to win than the European Championship trophy
I would think the Euros are easier because we have had 2 upsets in the Euros in relatively recent memory (Greece and Portugal) but I honestly can't think of when there has been a major upset winner at the world cup
Portugal 2016 a upset ? U mad bro
@@hassymiia6267 absolutely, Portugal didn't win a game within the 90 minutes for the whole tournament. Ronaldo was injured during the final. Just look at that 2016 Portugal team man for man against that France team who obviously went onto becoming world champions
@@voropret well they got lucky cause all the strong teams were dodged bybthem except France Who was tired at the Final due to their match against Germany
@@erinblue4043And Argentina beat which big team in World Cup?!
@@farm9052france ,netherland ,mexico and Croatia
England won the World Cup, so I go with the Euros
LMAOOOOOOOO
It's more like they won by cheating they just cheated against Argentina and made the Portugal team tired by changing the Destination from Hampden park to Wembley at the last moment
@@skullygaming2664 hahahahahha oh be quiet and run along there’s a good chap
it was in 60s lmao none of your players were even born yet
Facts. Whats even funnier is that their goal was illegal and the ball never crossed the Line... England is so fckn bad.
People complaining against Portugal winning the Euro 2016 without beating anyone, but you still have to see it in the opposite perspecte. NO ONE also beat them right? I mean, yeah they didn't win any game in the group, and barely passed the knock-out stages, but common, they were tough to beat, even with boring football their defense was so solid. Winning the Euros even with unattractive football is STILL winning the Euros, so I guess what goes down in history is the title not the performance
And lets be real. they played well both semi finals and finals. they werent just unattractive football
I agree with you. Portugal and Cristiano deserved it. But the point is that is impossible to win a WC with 3 draws in the first 3 games. It is possible in the euros tho
Disagree there. THIS Euro won by Italy Will go down in History for the good soccer played by the team, more than for the title itself.
I'm Spanish and in my opinion Portugal have played some of the best football in the 21st century, I like their style, reminds me of the pre-tiki-taka Spain where the style was more vertical and aggressive it was called 'furia roja' (red fury)
I would rather watch Portugal running on the attack than Spain with 80% possession in 82 minutes and without shooting for goal just passing the ball sideways
@@erinblue4043 Italy were by no means the best team in the tournament and there style wasn't particularly good, they struggled against Austria, Spain which has a very weak squad managed to outplay them in semis and England also outplayed them in the first half of the final
Also in 2018 Germany was thought to have the easiest group ever and lost 1-0 to Mexico, beat Sweden 2-1, and lost to South Korea 2-0 finishing last in their group. might have been bad luck but losing to Mexico and South Korea was a shock
Mexico (always at least the second round)
Sweden (never the favorites , but never easy to defeat)
South korea (tough contenders)
You cant say this was the easiest groep ever.
There are so much weaker groups in the past. For example
2002
Belgium
Russia
Tunesia
Japan
2006
Portugal
Mexico
Angola
Iran
Etc..
The last 4 world cup has won by european teams. Last team that won it outside of europe was brazil.
But The more tougher competition than euros is the champion's league. Every top player of the world plays there so no doubt about it.
You can't compare the Euros to the Champs League though as one is international and the other is domestic. It's apples and oranges, like comparing Barcelona with Brazil.
European football is boring to watch, but it's effective. The rest of the world seems to think that attackers win you football games, while more or less only Europe seems to understand that these are the DEFENDERS, instead - you'll need to have proper discipline in defence in order to progress through the tournaments.
Thus, European superiority is primarily based on their discipline in defence, while they players' technique and beauty of the game can be seriously lacking compared to an average South American team, but also compared to the several top teams from other confederations (e.g. Japan, Mexico, Drogba's era Ivory Coast).
@@martinusv7433 exactly
@@martinusv7433 Nd South American footballs are drama queen's actors.
Of course, there's way more European teams than American teams, Europe has more chances to win.
That pic with Sol Campbell, Fowler and the other guy.. looks fire 🔥..they looked like they were running a gang
They about to drop the sickest EP/Singles..
@@ritchierich2793 🔥🔥🔥
Dennis Wise
5:40
Fun fact about that group. Greece has been in 4 Euroes. They have had Russia in their group three of those, Spain twice and the Chech Republic twice as well. (The only time thatthey didn't meet Russia was when Russia was U.S.S.R. and they were disqualified by Greece in the qualifiers)
The funny part is that 2012 was their only Euro that they eventual winners were not in their group.
Even pre 2016, I would still argue the WC is more challenging then the Euros, let alone since the Euros expanded.
1) Yes, you do get some dross in the WC who only show up for butt kicking but you also get the best of South America and Africa, who have shown an ability to take on Europe.
2) All of the European teams are familiar with each other. Very Familiar. Not so with teams outside of their confederation, who only really play competitive matches against each other AT the WC and in one or two other tournaments no one cares about.
The fact that 4 of the best 3rd place teams gets through make it much easier
Despite defeating Romania 2-1, Albania were one of the unlucky two 3rd-placed teams NOT to progress five years ago.
Like Latvia in 2004, they'd never qualified for anything previously - or subsequently - from their debut appearance...
That's how it used to be in the world cup for a while too when they had 24 teams.
Yes, this time around. But before that...
And isn't future World Cups adding more teams and more teams to its knockout rounds too?
@@Kickingit06 starting in 2026 the final will consist of 48 countries
@@crobeastness There's talk of it going to 72 or 96 after that. There's even been some talk of expanding it for 2026 too.
The quality at the Euro's has been lessened by the inclusion of the teams from the nations League C and D.
Can you make a video ranking all 21 world cup winning sides in history ?
There aren't 21 world cup winning teams
@@jonpool9030 There are, I think you are getting confused. For instance the argument would be who is better; the Italian side of 34 or the Italian side of 38?
@@Bcleah ok so if the teams have two different players from the previous world cup then you say they are different teams?
@@jonpool9030 Yes, hence 21 teams.
And although there are players who won two or more World cups, they will be at least four years older for each subsequent win, and thus at different stages of their career.
@@Bcleah different stages of their career does not make it a different team if they were the same players. I get your idea tho
2016 euro winner:;- Portugal.
2018WC:; Portugal can't even qualify to semis..
2020euro winner:;- Italy
2022Wc:;-Italy can't even qualify, infact destroyed by Copa winner Argentina.....
2022 Portugal wins World Cup
Yeah, but you forget that they were defeated by european countries
@@Sup7569 😂😂. Uno Reverse, Messi Wins World Cup have 300million less squad value than portugal.
@@JaroK1997 uruguay knocked them out in previous world cup
@@Sup7569 no
I agree so much on one of the final statements about being humble.
It's also amazing how spectacularly England failed to do so, less than few weeks after this video was uploaded 😂😂
No. Beating Argentina and Brazil is tougher than beating Lithuania and Finland
Right. And beating France, Italy, Portugal, Germany,Spain, England, Belgium is even harder
Overall, the Euro has better teams. And Lithuania don't play the Euro.
The only team at the World Cup that is a challenge for top European teams is Brazil (and to a lesser extent Argentina). Teams like Uruguay and Colombia are decent, but not better than second rank teams like Denmark or Croatia.
At the Euros, the second rank teams qualified (so don't try to bring Lithuania or San Marino in the discussion...) have a better level than the teams from Concacaf (Panama...), Africa or Asia.
So the World Cup only bring Brazil as an additional top team, the second rank teams like Mexico or Colombia are not better than the European second rank teams like Sweden or Croatia , and all the "little teams" are weaker in the World Cup than in the Euro.
Euro is close from the group stage (just look at group F of this current Euro) while the knockout of the World Cup is basically European and South American teams trashing the rest of the World...
@@gontrandjojo9747 check better in the last three WC editions how many South American in the quarter finals. Argentina not a treat?! They only reached the final in 2014 after beating teams like Netherlands and Belgium! Even Uruguay defeated Portugal, the current European champion, last WC! Europe has more top level teams that is why they win tournaments more often; on the other hand, South America has less teams so they have stronger teams in average and perform better in average...
But 2016 Iceland could beat any other South American team and even give Brazil and Argentina a run for their money. European football is simple better.
@@supersueca1 in football even Costa Rica can beat any European and South American team at least once!! You have to check the average performance over multiple games and the number of good players each country produce.
When the World Cup expands this argument will be right again
Objectively, Europe should probably send about 18-20 teams in a given year to a 32 team World Cup if it were solely about sending the best 32. The top 40 or so teams in Europe are all pretty competitive.
Can you make a list of Kane's seven biggest contributions in the first game of the Euros?
I can only think of 3 right now.
1. Being offside
2. Tackling the post.
3. Getting pushed in the back.
I always considered them almost as hard to win and the Euros much harder to win than Copa America but World Cup has to have the edge for the added value of teams.
I agree. The Euros are harder to win. Exept for Brazil and Argentina, all the greatest nations are in Europe.
then how is euro tougher when you have more competitors
Uruguay has the same number of WC titles than France.
@No Name What about England?
Would love to see a vid on the worst teams to compete at the Euros mentioned around 4:00! Ireland would probably be included but would still be fun lol.
But now after fifa made the world cup becoming 48 Teams tournament, I think it's gonna be "euro is harder than the world cup" again
Actually, expansion actually increases difficulty slightly.
It used to be until they made it 24 teams. Look at Portugal's route to victory in 2016, up to the final they avoided any top side.
Didnt they defeated the powerhouse France?? Soo...
Not to mention 2018 runners up
@@bladehea 'up to the final'
We would have played against belgium but they lost to wales
@@antonioeliseu7727 And you lost to Uruguay in the round of 16 at the world cup, so...
Until the mid-90s, it way harder to qualify for the EURO (8 teams, with one given to the host) than the WORLD CUP (12 spots, not counting the host place when it was an european)
Didn’t germany even fail to qualfy once same with italy
Germany has never failed to qualfied they only have withdrew that tournament
So Panama just caught a stray bullet for what 😔 at least we had a great time
even greece and denmark have already won the euro and this would hardly happen in a world cup where only the big teams win
Doesn't matter which one is harder. Winning the World Cup just has a higher status.
Definitely. Nobody thinks Ronaldo is better than Messi because he won a Euro. You judge players on the World Cup
@@WakaWaka2468 Well, on an international level, Ronaldo is definitely better than Messi. Winning the Euros is a huge achievement nonetheless. It's still the second biggest international trophy.
@xansar what? I am talking about actual trophies
@xansar Lmao no, 2016 Portugal was certainly not better than whatever Argentina had that year
@xansar Ronaldo performs waaaaay better on an international stage than Messi, is what I'm saying
the world cup is clearly harder to win than the euros lmao.
Think a bit more. In euros basically every team is competitive, one slip and you’re out.
Meanwhile in world cup you could find a north american squad or a south africa squad who really aren’t that competitive. In the other side there could be 2 giants like Germany and France fighting each other, and the team who played against the bad squad gets a free pass. In the Euro you can’t find something like this, everyone is relatively close to each other, so it takes a player who’s not in top form and you’re out.
@@ignls8809 Bro, fucking greece and denmark won the euros. You'll never see those teams win the world cup. Case closed.
@@ignls8809 that means it is easier to win the euros.
@@Obi-WanKannabis yeah
@@Obi-WanKannabis Denmark could win the euros. They are a true soccer nation. They would dominate all other continents except south America and just be under the big 3 there.
Greece is a different case. They had a very tactful coach and squad that was willing to listen. They have the strongest defence in the world.
How is this even a question? Simple logic would tell you World Cup is if not harder at least as hard to win as Euros. You have to beat the toughest opponents to win a cup and having some weak ones or not in the early stage of match pool is irrelevant.
Thank you Irish guy for your fabulous opinion
Eurocentrism is def part of this issue, people in the future will point towards Netherlands beating Denmark in the future too, without context at all.
Finland beating Denmark?? Assuming you talking about Eriksen.
Eurocentrism is a poisened term, so you shouldn't use it in polite company.
The reason why people like to refer to Europe in regards to football is... welll because it's the place with the most professional football in the world.
It's cute that Oceania has it's own federation, but in the great scheme of things, they are not that important.
@@BQD_Central yeah, the place with the most professional football in the world but with hundreds of non european players. Messi, Ronaldinho, R9, Batistuta, Etoo, Drogba, Salah, Firmino and it goes. on.
@@BQD_Central the European leagues are the best cause they have money, simply put. They also have less corruption and are much better organized than other leagues...
It's not only about consistent tougher competition at Euro but also about the nature of it. European teams tend to be more physically challenging and technically disciplined. The endurance part is even more important. In Romania we strongly felt that way in the 90s. At Euro 1996 Romania lost all 3 matches at one goal margin with France, Spain and Bulgaria, after a campaign the team was minutes of semifinals in World Cup 1994. Romania lost penalty shootout with Sweden in the quarters and also had been beaten by Switzerland in group stage. On the other hand, they won all thre matches with noneuropean teams, respectively Colombia, home country USA and Argentina. the story repeteated in 1998 with victories in group stage with Colombia and England but losing 0-1 in Roundbof 16 with Croatia. European teams are tough strongholds.
Load of bullshit u wrote there
I personally preferred the previous 16-team format. The expansion I suppose does give a chance to smaller teams but the last thing players probably want at seasons end is more games. I genuinely fear for player welfare if the World Cup/Champions League expand.
College basketball in the US used to have a similar question with the Big East tournament (before conference realignment a decade ago) being harder to win than the NCAA Tournament. The arguments are basically the same: Big East tournament had a better median quality of team, compared to the NCAA tournament which had more teams but also more teams from weaker conferences. In this example, Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay would be like Duke, UNC, and Kentucky. Meaning, the overall top end talent in the NCAA tournament was higher, therefore might be a little bit harder to win, even with having more games that the top teams would be able to win easily. But, it’s a fun question to play around with nonetheless.
i think that the start of the world cup is easier then the start of the euros but when you get out of the group stages it gets harder then the euros because some nations like argentina and brazil will pretty likely get in the knockouts which wouldnt happen in the euros.
Saudi Arabia beat eventual World champion Argentina. Morocco's results at this World Cup. Nah! Say what you like. The World Cup reigns supreme!
I agree the World Cup despite the occasional group stage mismatch is more difficult and prestigious overall. The real question is: Copa America or The Euros?
Italy won 4 FIFA WC, 2 Euros (1968,2021)
Hold my beer
Entire world nation route's for fifa world cup. Thats what bring entire world together 🙏❤️
The danger of the 16 teams Euro was that you're guaranteed to be paired with atleast one other top team and two good or very good teams. One mistake, one bad Game or a bad start could end your campaign right then and there.
The World Cup group stage in comparison is mostly a much easier starting ground to get rolling.
Euros are more difficult at the start and world cups are more difficult at the end
In the current format about 3/4 of European squads make it into the knockout rounds at world cups that are hosted in Europe, but when the tournament is held elsewhere only about 1/2 of them make it out of the group.
All you have to do is look at the teams that have won the EUROS and see how it's easier to win than a world cup. Portugal, Denmark and Greece have won the last 24 years
Honestly, there were also underdogs who won the world cup (like in 1954 and 1950) but in the past decades only the favorite have won it and it includes more quality teams and quality players than the euros. World cup >>> euros.
Day 9: make a starting XI of the physically strongest players in each position in europe
I think Portugal killed this theory by winning Euro 2016 despite not winning a single group game - I assume the only team to ever do this at an international tournament. It still baffles me now!
Pre-2016, they wouldn't have got out of the groups. The move to 24 was a real shame for the Euros as a tournament IMO.
What matters is that they won, so i dont care. Its easy to say Portugal ONLY won 1 game in the 90 minutes, but Portugal didnt Lose a single game as well, dont forget that.
@@miguel.b8832 you're misreading my point. Had England won in that manner, I'd have taken it 100 times out of 100.
However, the fact is that Portugal would have been eliminated in the group stages of any tournament prior to 2016. They then avoided a big country until the final.
The whole point of this video is how easy it is to win. Prior to 2016, you would never have made a final having only played the likes of Austria, Iceland, Hungary, Croatia, Poland and Wales.
@@miguel.b8832 they played the long game well but they wouldn't have got out of the group at the world cup.
Italy 1982 Group A. 0-0 vs Poland, 1-1 vs Peru, 1-1 vs Cameroon.
They won the World Cup.
Copa America and Euro can be harder than the World Cup sometimes, especially for footballers like Maradona, Pele, Matheus.
World Cup is way harder than euro
Well, unless you're English, then everything is hard. You only got one chance every 55 years!
Short answer: No
As an Italy fan, the European Championships are the hardest, as we have won it 2 times now and lost it twice, and we have won the World Cup 4 times and lost it twice to Brazil, who I would love Italy to beat in the next World cup Final after we qualified for it in Qatar in 2022.
I agree 100% BTW, my country just pulled off a miracle and drew 1-1 with Spain, what a game!