Too many carve-ups and a lack of jeopardy... could it be time to increase the Euros to 32 teams?

Let's suspend reality for a few moments and pretend that the hideous denouement to Scotland’s game in Stuttgart on Sunday didn’t actually happen.

Instead of the Hungarians counter-attacking in the 100th minute, let’s assume that someone in dark blue makes a tactical foul and the ball never gets as far as Kevin Csoboth.

The game ends goalless. Hungary are out. But where would that have left Steve Clarke’s side?

Not through but not quite out. With two points and a poor goal difference, the game would have been as good as up, yet it wouldn’t have been time to pack the bags just yet.

Scotland would have been left in limbo. A time to dig out the calculators and the prayer mats in the hope that results elsewhere would go our way.

It would have made for an awful few days, filled with angst, false hope and huge uncertainty. Truthfully, it is probably better for all concerned that it didn’t come to pass.

Kevin Csoboth's late, late goal for Hungary deprived Scotland of a draw - and a nervous wait

The Netherlands lost out to Austria earlier this week but still progressed to the knockouts

Slovenia celebrate their draw with England, which saw them progress in third place

But the very fact it could have happened illustrates how dysfunctional a 24-team Euros actually is.

While it would have taken a truly freakish set of results for any side with two points to qualify as one of the four best third-placed teams, even the hypothesis is just nonsense.

A hammering and two draws? Where’s the glory in that? Would that honestly be a feat worth celebrating?

It makes no more sense from a practical perspective. In their wisdom, UEFA devised a matrix which has a different last-16 draw for each scenario.

In other words, there is a version of the first knock-out round if the third-placed sides from Groups A, B, C and D progress. This differs from B, C, D and E going through and so on and so forth. Ten different scenarios, in fact.

So, if you finish third, not only do you have to wait until all the groups are completed to see if you have made the cut line, you also have little idea of who and where you will be playing. So, you can’t book hotels or trains. You don’t even know if you’ll be needing them at all.

This is the muddle Europe’s governing body created when it expanded the competition from 16 teams to 24 in 2016.

There was always something that felt just right about the model which we saw between 1996 and 2012. Four groups of four teams. A premium quality event. No grey areas. Alas, as always happens, greed ruled the roost.

In extending their tournament by eight teams for France 2016, UEFA waved through 20 more games (51 rather than 31) with the quality of matches hugely diluted.

The third-placed scenario ensured two-thirds of the teams progressed to the last 16.

Northern Ireland progressed with three points and a zero goal difference that summer. Portugal also scraped by with the same numbers. They’d go on to lift the trophy despite not winning a single group game.

At the Covid-delayed Euro 2020, the bar for progressing was set even lower. Ukraine made it through with just one win and a negative goal difference.

No side has ever made it through with two points, but it’s arithmetically possible and will doubtless happen one day. It’s a ludicrous situation.

A sense of jeopardy is the very essence of elite sport. When there’s so little of it, the sense of achievement is diminished. There have been too many group stage matches this summer with not enough riding on them. No game sums up the sham that this initial phase has become more than the Netherlands’ clash with Austria in Berlin on Tuesday.

Having lost a thrilling match 3-2, the Dutch should have been distraught and on their knees at the end. Instead, they shrugged their shoulders and moved on. They already had four points and had already qualified. Finishing third in Group D was inconvenient but no disaster.

England’s goalless draw with Slovenia further illustrated how lame these final group matches can be.

Gareth Southgate’s men would have liked to win the game yet didn’t really have to. Slovenia knew a point would probably be enough to take them through for the first time with three draws. It had a dull share of the spoils written all over it and so it proved. The 24-team format has also opened the door to teams who both need a draw to progress.

One of the abiding memories of the 1982 World Cup in Spain was West Germany and Austria’s shameful encounter in Gijon. With the West Germans leading 1-0 after 11 minutes, both teams stopped playing, knowing that they’d both progress at the expense of Algeria.

The fact Romania and Slovakia could have gone down that road on Wednesday night in Frankfurt - and they did draw 1-1 - illustrates the inherent danger with this set-up.

It’s also fundamentally unfair. Certain group winners play a runner-up while others face a third-placed team. The sections which finish last are also at a distinct advantage because those teams with one eye on third place know exactly what they have to do. Scotland and Hungary had grounds for complaint on this point.

So, what’s the solution? Given that the expansion of the tournament after 2012 has spoiled it, it might seem counter-intuitive to suggest that adding more teams will repair the damage. Yet, that’s precisely what should happen.

While permitting eight more nations to take part might feel the tournament just becomes too unruly, it would only mean another 12 matches.

Eight groups of four with only the top two progressing to the last 16? No need to pack the aspirins. Clear, fair and affording those who do make it to the knock-out rounds a justifiable sense of achievement.

As for the counter argument that the quality would become too diluted. That horse has already bolted.

The Nations League — one idea UEFA does deserve credit for — has allowed three teams to sneak in via the back door.

By definition, though, that already means that the 24 nations are not the best in Europe. Georgia, for example, made it via the play-offs despite being ranked 46th in UEFA’s coefficient list. Meanwhile, Norway (14th) and Greece (15th) stayed at home.

The quality dropped off sharply when eight teams were added after 2012. Were the likes of the aforementioned two plus, for example, Sweden and Ireland to qualify, it would really make no appreciable difference now.

The fact is that with 44 per cent of Europe’s 55 competing nations already present, qualification is not the achievement it used to be. And sadly, due to the flawed nature of its current format, the main event has also lost some of its sparkle.

Too many group stage matches with not enough riding on them

Read more