Man don’t you just hate this? Being forced to ask the “what if” question repeatedly and make calculations, in order to find out your team’s chances of qualifying? And to think that all could be avoided simply by winning the first two group games.
Alas for the Azzurri, we already know that ship has sailed. Let’s see if they can catch up with Netherlands with a late flight or something…
.
Matchday 2: Group C Standings |
 |
First let’s start with the group standings after matchday 2. Here’s the situation:
| Team | |||||||||
| Netherlands | |||||||||
| Romania | |||||||||
| France | |||||||||
| Italy |
As you can tell from the table, Netherlands have already clinched their qualification and are mathematically guaranteed of ranking 1st. Romania, France, and Italy are therefore left to contend 2nd spot.
.
Straight from the rulebook… |
 |
First, let’s make the rules & regulations clear for everyone. The following is straight from the “Regulations of the UEFA European Football Championship” document, article 7.07:
Equality of points after the group matches
Article 7.07
If two or more teams are equal on points on completion of all the matches in their group, the following criteria will be used to determine the rankings in the order given:
a) number of points obtained in the matches among the teams in question;
b) goal difference in the matches among the teams in question;
c) numbers of goals scored in the matches among the teams in question (if more than two teams finish equal on points);
d) goal difference in all the group matches;
e) number of goals scored in all the group matches;
f) coefficient from the qualifying competitions for the 2006 FIFA World Cup and 2006/08 UEFA European Football Championship (points obtained divided by the number of matches played);
g) fair play conduct of the teams (final tournament);
h) drawing of lots;
.
Group C Qualification Scenarios |
 |
Ok, so now that we’ve established tie-breaking criteria, let’s look at win/draw/loss scenarios for the last two group games:
.
vs. Romania |
vs. Italy |
. |
||
|
|
. |
|||
. |
||||
by 2 or less |
. |
|||
by 3-0 or more |
. |
|||
by 4-1, 5-2, etc. |
. |
|||
. |
||||
. |
||||
. |
||||
. |
||||
. |
||||
. |
||||
. |
||||
. |
||||
.
Scenarios 2, 3, 4, and 5 deserve some further explanation.
Netherlands beat Romania by 2 goals or less, Italy vs. France ends 0-0
In this scenario, Romania, Italy, and France end up with 2 points each and with identical goal differences and goals scored (when considering only the France vs. Romania, Italy vs. Romania, and France vs. Italy matches). Thus, the 4th tie-breaking criterion (d) applies and ROMANIA qualifies based on their better global goal differential.
| Team | |||||||||
| Netherlands | |||||||||
| Romania | |||||||||
| Italy | |||||||||
| France |
.
| Team | |||||||||
| Italy | |||||||||
| Romania | |||||||||
| France |
.
Netherlands beat Romania 3-0, Italy vs. France ends 0-0
Once again Romania, Italy, and France end up with 2 points each and with identical goal differences and goals scored (when considering only the France vs. Romania, Italy vs. Romania, and France vs. Italy matches) and also identical goal differences and goals scored globally in group C. Thus, the 5th tie-breaking criterion (f) applies (FIFA/UEFA coefficient from World Cup 2006 and Euro 2008 qualifying campaigns: points obtained divided by the number of matches played), which sees ITALY ranked higher than Romania and France.
| Team | |||||||||
| Netherlands | |||||||||
| Italy | |||||||||
| Romania | |||||||||
| France |
.
| Team | |||||||||
| Italy | |||||||||
| Romania | |||||||||
| France |
.
Netherlands beat Romania by 4-1, 5-2, etc. (i.e. Romania lose by 3 goals but score at least one), Italy vs. France ends 0-0
In this scenario, Romania, Italy, and France end up with 2 points each and with identical goal differences and goals scored (when considering only the France vs. Romania, Italy vs. Romania, and France vs. Italy matches). Thus, the 5th tie-breaking criterion (e) applies and ROMANIA qualifies based on their higher global number of goals scored.
| Team | |||||||||
| Netherlands | |||||||||
| Romania | |||||||||
| Italy | |||||||||
| France |
.
| Team | |||||||||
| Italy | |||||||||
| Romania | |||||||||
| France |
.
Netherlands beat Romania, Italy vs. France ends in a draw with goals
In this case, Romania, Italy, and France end up with 2 points each and with identical goal differences (when considering only the France vs. Romania, Italy vs. Romania, and France vs. Italy matches). However since Romania vs. France ended 0-0, and because of the goal they already scored vs. Romania (on matchday 2), any goal scored in the match vs. France (matchday 3) puts ITALY above the lot for the 3rd tie-breaking criterion (c).
| Team | |||||||||
| Netherlands | |||||||||
| Italy | |||||||||
| Romania | |||||||||
| France |
.
| Team | |||||||||
| Italy | |||||||||
| Romania | |||||||||
| France |
.
Phew! That burnt a few brain cells…
I’d just like to say I spent a fair amount of time researching this, so technically I should have gotten everything right. However feel free to point out any mistakes and/or ask questions if you need further explanations.
Tags: Euro 2008, France, Group C, Italy, Netherlands, Romania
Related Posts:
.jpg)
Great job. Let’s hope that the 11 reserves of the Netherlands will show off their skills
[...] To find out what results would favor Italy on matchday 3, read: Euro 2008: Group C Qualification Scenarios [...]
Great post. It’s simple to understand when you lay it out like you did.
brilliant breakdown mate – the work on that is exhaustive and well researched. I would love to see an Italy v Spain quarterfinal. And a Dutch v Russia quarterfinal coming out of these groups.
You’ve hit the scenario’s almost completely right I think. Except for one minor almost unsignificant detail: the uefa-coefficient will only count if the NED/ROM game ends exactly 3-0. If it might end in 4-1; 5-2; 6-3 etc. Romania will go through on goals scored. If the goal difference is greater of course, Italy goes through.
You are absolutely correct Johan, thanks for pointing it out.
I’ve corrected the table.