Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football

Not to be confused with Wikipedia talk:WikiProject American football, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian rules football, or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Canadian football.

Career statistics - qualifying tournaments for cups

Today I have added some notes for Ernst Wilimowski in his career statistics regarding the goals and number of games in the German Cup, as these high numbers in the National Cup column give a wrong impression.

The high numbers are due to the fact that the statistics include regional preliminary qualifying tournaments, not recognized as official games by the German Football Association (DFB) for the German Cup, to select the regional Reichsgau representatives in that time. Even though I have included the explanations in the notes, actually, in my opinion, such qualifying tournaments have no good evidence for goals of players, such as match reports to back it up, and the numbers used in the career statistics for these qualifying tournaments are closer to WP:OR calculated from other sources like this: https://docs.ufpr.br/~mmsabino/sstatistics/willimowski.html or https://www.rsssf.org/players/pwillimowskidata.html.

My question is whether there is any further consensus beyond this information here WP:WPFCONSENSUS#Statistics and WP:FOOTY/Players#Career statistics, if such matches/goals in qualifying tournaments for club competitions, besides UEFA Qualifying rounds, should be or should be not included in the player career statistics. Miria~01 (talk) 17:58, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

I mean fa cup (English) qualifying rounds are official matches. Muur (talk) 12:24, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, this is indeed the case in the FA Cup, I didn't know that because almost all sources (worldfootball.net, sky, BBC etc.) leave out the qualifying rounds for the FA top scorers without mentioning it. But the the FA is clear in that:
Jonathan ‘JJ’ Lacey was officially crowned as the top scorer of the 2023/24, The FA, 28 May 2024

However, it is a different case for the in the German Cup and even now in the modern time, since 1952, when the German Football Association (DFB) revived the national cup for West Germany, the remaining slots for amateur teams or from clubs from lower tier leagues are given to the cup winners of the regional football associations, the Verbandspokale. And these matches and goals, in that different competitions, of course do not count towards the German Cup.

But I realize from the different approach by the FA for the FA Cup, that a note, as it is now, is probably better in the career statistics table to explain, if added games and goals in qualification formats are not official recognized by the governing body to belong to the actual competition. Miria~01 (talk) 13:54, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

seems more like how world cup qualifiers dont count as world cup matches. theyre qualifiers, so are a a different type of match. uefa dont count champions league qualifying matches as champions league matches cuz theyre qualifiers. they count as german cup qualifying matches, not german cup matches. still official matches, just as qualifiers not german fa cup matches. a guy from san marino could score 500 goals in a champions league qualifing win in round 1, but he wouldnt win the champions league golden boot cuz they were scored in the qualifiers (still count as official goals tho). so your german guy could have scored 5 in qualifying and 10 in the actual cup for 15 goals but 5 count as qualifying goals (differnet stats). they should still count as official matches and goals.Muur (talk) 00:58, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Agreed - matches in qualifying rounds are still official matches and should appear somewhere in a player's stats. They don't "not count" just because they were qualifying matches -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:39, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

I have always counted FA Cup qualifying matches with FA Cup 'proper'. GiantSnowman 18:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

They are official games, that is beyond question, but whether they belong to the respective competition is a question. @Muur has already given examples such as the World Cup qualifiers, which are not counted towards the World Cup tournament itself.

What bothers me most is that they are in the National Cup column as it is for Ernst Wilimowski. My recommendation to leave them out completely was a bad one, I see that now. However they could be under "Other" and a note explaining what this "other" includes. Miria~01 (talk) 18:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

prob better to under the national cup section and if it needs a note put "5 apperences and 2 goals in qualifiers, 2 apperences 0 goals in the cup itself". techinically misleading, i guess, but i dont think anyone splits off champions league qualification games into a different section from the regular champions league? eg that season in 2006 where liverpool had to start in the qualifying first round so had like 15 qualifiers before the group stage.Muur (talk) 01:02, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Of course I will follow the consensus and I don't want to drag out the discussion unnecessary. In the end, there is only some things I want to draw attention, which definitely affects other players too and ultimately motivated me to write the notes for this player. An additional problem, such as the 1940-41 season, is that qualification for the next tournament (APR-JUN 1941) is accumulated with the actual tournament in the season (AUG-DEC 1940). Or 17 goals in 1943-44 in the National Cup column, which didn't even take place due the war. Without notes and an explanation this all has given the reader a wrong impression about the players records and success in a competition. That's why I appeal to include more notes when it comes to something like this.

Part of the table for illustration with the notes attached:

Appearances and goals by club, season, and competition. Only official games are included in this table.

Club	Season	League			National cup		Other		Total
		Division	Apps	Goals	Apps	Goals	Apps	Goals	Apps	Goals
PSV Chemnitz	1940–41	Gauliga Sachsen	21	36	6	17	13	41	40	94
	1941–42		14+	32	1+	1	–		15+	33
	1943–44		2+	9	–		–		2+	9
	1944–45		1+	5	–		–		1+	5
	Total		38	82	7	18	13	41	59	141
1860 Munich	1942–43	Gauliga Bayern	5	8	6	17	–		11	25
Karlsruher SC	1943–44	Gauliga Baden	4	6	5+	17	–		9	23
Career total			296+	413+	19+	53	14	43	329+	509+

Miria~01 (talk) 18:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

I think what you've done is good Miria. My two cents, I think we should treat them as different tournaments. A modern example is when a team is knocked out of the Champions League and drops down to the Europa League. We add a note like you've added here to say "Includes x games in UCL and y games in UEL". I think that's a more relevant example to follow in this case as the DFB Pokal (and its qualifying tournaments) is different from the FA Cup. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 08:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

References

Moses Swaibu

Moses Swaibu could use more eyes. In the past week two IPs, likely the same person, have removed reliably sourced content and added poorly sourced content. Per WP:DUE, I think it would be fair to update the article to mention Swaibu's activity since going to prison, using articles from The Athletic [1] and The Guardian [2]. Robby.is.on (talk) 10:08, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected to stop disruption. GiantSnowman 18:18, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, GS. :-) Robby.is.on (talk) 00:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Timo Werner loan spells?

Should we be adding two loan spells for Timo in the infobox and stats? [3] Govvy (talk) 11:57, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I personally would just leave it as one since it got extended before his current deal expired. Ortizesp (talk) 21:26, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

The BBC describes it as an "extension", rather than a separate spell, so I'm content for there to be one loan spell. GiantSnowman 18:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Consensus about North American rights listing is needed

I need help me in reach consensus about the way North American Soccer/Football rights are listed in broadcast lists, since this issue is happening a lot, i feel we need seek for a definite consensus about it so dont it happens again and again.

It is happening now in Talk:UEFA Euro 2024 broadcasting rights#Why Language Spit for USA/Canada is needed , but also happened in Talk:2023 FIFA Women's World Cup broadcasting rights as well in past but had reached consensus about this theme.

The most debate it has, the better, I think that this is too much overlooked and should be resoved as far as possible, also to be clear: THIS IS FOR NORTH AMERICA LISTING ONLY, some people assumed it was for all regions, but from what I looked, is only a North American thing and won´t be a precedent for other regions, as the only region that does it, europe, has pretty much rights concentred into the European Broadcasting Union (EBU).

Since the euro is coming closer, i feel it is a thing that should have some urgency to have debate and get some sort of conesnsus, I also posted in WikiProject Sports Talk Page - Meganinja202 (talk) 02:40, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Footballers moving clubs during tournaments

For players who move clubs during a tournament year eg Mbappe this summer. How do we approach this? As it doesn't seem right to say "he won the Euros while playing for Madrid" when he's never played a game for them. This is just a hypothetical re Mbappe but their are many players who this senario would apply to and was wondering if there are any rule as to how to approach this when editing. Mn1548 (talk) 17:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Who will he be contracted to if/when he wins the tournament...? GiantSnowman 18:02, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

That's a seemingly logical answer but causes inconsistencies with players who transfer mid tournament. Eg Ona Batlle being listed as a United player in the list of 2023 World Cup Squads but not being listed as a player who won the World Cup while at the club on their statistics page. Personally, I think the club where the player played their last competitive game should be used in all contexts as its more consistent and provides more useful information. Mn1548 (talk) 19:19, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

No, it doesn't. The club contracted at the date of the final will not change. GiantSnowman 20:11, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

The majority of contract end on 30 June and start of 1 July, the majority of competitions rune mid June to mid July. Mn1548 (talk) 14:04, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

You are clearly not understanding what I am saying. What club will they be contracted with when the tournament finishes? GiantSnowman 16:18, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Why do you have to mention his club? Seasider53 (talk) 18:09, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

You don't, in prose, but there are a number of instances where that is needed. Mn1548 (talk) 19:11, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

If you look at the squads page lede, you'll see it says quite clearly The club listed is the club for which the player last played a competitive match prior to the tournament. :) --SuperJew (talk) 18:34, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

I can see it sats that there but is that true for all squad tables for all tournaments ie is there a standard on Wikipedia for it? And if so, is that standard true for outside of squad table eg "List of [Team] records and statistics". Mn1548 (talk) 19:10, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

hes a psg player for the first half and then madrid for the second half (as per his contrat starting on july 1). in regards to "last team tehy played for", what if he breaks his leg and then get called up a year later - do you still list as psg cuz he didnt play for madrid yet?Muur (talk) 20:35, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

I remember this issue coming up before when someone kept changing Dommarumma's club to Milan on the Italy roster after he moved to PSG because he hadn't played since then. But it was like October and I feel like the consensus was to change it to his new club on the roster page. RedPatch (talk) 23:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

I would say the tournament squads page, use the team at the beginning of the tournament, so PSG. The actual France squad can change to Madrid on 1 July as that is a continuously evolving page which is kept up to date. RedPatch (talk) 01:02, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Plus we can always add a note indicating if a player has joined a new club during the course of the tournament, don't really see an issue with that. Jay eyem (talk) 04:05, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Also agreed Mn1548 (talk) 14:07, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Agreed Mn1548 (talk) 14:06, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Think there is a difference between not playing because of injury, and no playing because every game possible to play is in the future. Mn1548 (talk) 14:06, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

A similar question

Hi all, I have a similar question to the topic above. I'm updating list of Burnley F.C. internationals and Burnley's season is over (luckily). Jóhann Berg Guðmundsson left the club as a free agent, although his contract only runs out on 30 June. He has been called up by Iceland who play two matches before his contract runs out. The club has not included him in the overview of players who received call-ups. If Guðmundsson plays, would you include these caps in the list or not? Eem dik doun in toene (talk) 11:58, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes. He's still under contract till 30 June, so if the appearances come on or before that date, they're the appearances of a Burnley player. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:14, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, plus this instance eludes to the point I was making that he's been called up to international duty based of his performances at Burnley NOT as a player who is currently a free agent. Mn1548 (talk) 14:10, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

2023–24 UEFA Champions League

Hello. Can someone explain (better than me) to user AutisticAndrew that the prose practice below the image in the infobox should be "Wembley Stadium in London hosted the final"? See talk page and history page, moreover, see problem ongoing here Island92 (talk) 15:55, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

User:Khoa41860 (talk)

I would like to draw attention to the user Khoa41860 and his contributions , who is making false claims in the edit summaries (with "update formatting") to make significant changes to sport and football articles. This behavior is repetitive and even ignores, after some time hast passed, closed discussions, if no consensus has been reached in his favor.(example)

I have revised his last edits, which wanted to add the Czechoslovakian records at the FIFA World Cup to Slovakia, here also with false claims in the edit summaries,.Diff example. I also warned him on his talk page about this behaviour, but he deleted it so that no one else would notice that he does repetitive disruptive edits under false pretenses in the edit summary. (Diff: deletion of the warning) Miria~01 (talk) 18:52, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

I see a lot of past warnings on their talk page. I would hope that it is merely incompetence rather than insolence, but regardless of the explanation it may be time to report this user to the Administrator's noticeboard. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 02:40, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Is an Elo ratings, 11v11, and rsssf source more important than a FIFA´s source???

Hello everybody! I am quite new in the english wikipedia. The topic I´m adding is related to the count of matches in the Argentina-Brazil football rivalry article and all the related articles derived: Argentina national football team results (1920–1939), Argentina national football team results (1940–1959), Argentina national football team results (1960–1979), also in Argentina national football team results (unofficial matches), in Brazil national football team results (unofficial matches) and in Brazil national football team records and statistics.

I want you to tell me, please, the "consideration" of the sources here. If in the Wikiprojet Football is more valuable or "important" a source of Elo Ratings [4] [5] or 11v11 [6] [7] or Rsssf.com [8] that show a list of matches, or a source of FIFA that also shows the list of matches FIFA official´s page (archive). Argentina vs. Brazil head to head. February 2013. FIFA´s source is from Feb. 2013. After that date, they played 10 times, with 4 wins for Argentina, 4 wins for Brazil, and 2 ties. To see the complete list of matches according to this FIFA´s source, please click in "Advanced search", and then in "Show all matches".

I only put FIFA´s source to be neutral, but there are many others sources with the complete list of matches of serious organisations or sites that differ with Elo Ratings, 11v11 and Rsssf. For example, AFA (Argentine Football Association) [9], El Gráfico [10] and many others that agree with FIFA´s source...

My opinion is that the most important and official source in football that we can have is FIFA... No other site or association can be above FIFA. I think that any source by any web or page or organisation CAN´T be above a FIFA´s official source, because FIFA means official in the world of football, and FIFA is the major world football official organization. For me, I repeat, a single FIFA source "kills" any other source in football.

So, for you and the members of the WP Football: is an Elo ratings, 11v11, and rsssf source more important than a FIFA´s source???

Can you participate in the talk page of the article Argentina-Brazil football rivalry? [11] Thanks! Regards, Raúl Quintana Tarufetti (talk) 22:55, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

wouldnt fifa be considered a primary source meaning secondary sources are preferred?Muur (talk) 04:26, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

For questions of most notability, statistics compiled by an authoritative agency, should be more preferred than secondary sources, if no analysis or interpretation of the statistics is involved in a Wikipedia article. However, it is only my opinion and not a Wikipedia guideline. Miria~01 (talk) 10:26, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Realistically, we care a lot more (in general) about what secondary sources say about a subject. When this is about statistics, there's a bit of confusion.

I see this a lot, because there's two ways to look at it. If the "official" primary source says something, arguably it is always correct, even if it's wrong, because they get to choose what the "official" statistics are. However, on the flip side, if multiple other sources agree that it isn't the same, then arguably we should state that as the correct information, as it comes from reliable secondary sources.

The fix? Simply state both. If it all possible, leave a result in prose, but then have a note stating which sources back up that result. There's obviously some issues there, but in general we can't just take one organisations opinion on the matter.

A good example of this being done in practice is pro wrestling, where organisations can state dates of when championships are won/lost, but because they happen on tape delay, their numbers and the real-world examples are wildly different. In articles, we publish both pieces of information, and use notes to explain why. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:33, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

To clarify the above: a subject is a primary source when it is closely or immediately involved, and all sources are primary sources for something. So for instance a primary source for a single football game is likely going to be generated by Players, Managers, Referees, Clubs, Pundits, Commentators, Fans and their immediate output (interviews, opinions) a lot of which will fall into SelfPub, or otherwise be considered unreliable for wikipedia (i.e. youtube, or lacking due weight etc), or in the case of things like Team Sheets, Match Reports, Referee Reports, ticket stubs etc are official documents and de facto always primary sources. Secondary sources will be Match Reports, News Reports, and so on which may include or re-contextualise Players, Managers, Referees, Clubs, Pundits, Commentators, Fans and their immediate output. They may differ in things like the time a goal was scored, how many shots were made, successful passes, etc or have other criteria that they use others don't which is what is what segregates them from being a pure primary source.

Who contextualises, and in what context, can also change the source from secondary to primary however. So FIFA talking about the results of a football game are not a Primary source, they are secondary. They are reporting, like any other news site, the outcomes, or in this case a list of games. However, if FIFA in discussing the football game were to talk about themselves, their policies and so on, then they would cross that line back into being a Primary Source. There are also wrinkles such as FIFA not recognising games that they did not sanction etc which is reliance on them alone can sometimes be fraught with issues. Similarly if a football club, say Liverpool, publishes post match review and such - there's nothing inherently unreliable for basic observable facts - but any discussion of the club, opinions on referees, controversy etc are obviously way more contextually primary than secondary. However in most cases there is usually a secondary sources available to corroborate or explain any issues (as LV says above) or be more suitable sources for any other number of reasons.

This is why, typically, for statistics - FIFA and club sites are generally reliable sources, but the context needs to be understood of what they may be describing or presenting to decide if it is Primary or Secondary. Koncorde (talk) 13:26, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

New module for two-legged ties

For anyone interested, I have recently created Module:Sports series for use in football articles as a replacement for the two-legged tie templates (Template:TwoLegStart and Template:TwoLegResult). The module allows for quite customizable tables, as well as automatic bolding for the winners on aggregate. In addition, it uses {{fbaicon}} instead of the generic {{flagicon}}. It is also more efficient than using the two-legged tie templates, with a lower node count, post-expand include size and template argument size. I'm planning on implementing it for the next club season, having tested it quite thoroughly to ensure there are no major issues. I've added detailed documentation, which should hopefully make the features and intended usage clear enough. Let me know if you have any questions/comments/feedback. Cheers, S.A. Julio (talk) 06:50, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Mario Božiković

I was curious if we have an article on Mario Božiković at all, [12], maybe his career isn't notable enough for wiki standards these days. :/ Govvy (talk) 08:38, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

We don't. There isn't even an article in the Croatian Wikipedia: [13]. Robby.is.on (talk) 08:43, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

K, I was looking for an article to see if it was up to date, etc, Cheers, anyway. Govvy (talk) 09:21, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Bare uses of Template:Infobox

A number of articles in the series that includes 1880–81 in Scottish football use {{Infobox football country season}}, followed by a separate instance of {{Infobox}}. this is sub-optimal, and it would be better to either modify the former to include the necessary fields, or to crate a "module" sub-template to hold them. I'm not clear if this issue is limited to Scottish articles or whether others are similarly affected.

Separately, articles in the sequences that include 1971 All-Ireland Under-21 Football Championship, 1971 All-Ireland Minor Football Championship use {{Infobox}} rather than a more specific template. Is there one that would be better? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:23, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

The last 2 are Gaelic football, which is may have a separate WikiProjevct / set of standards. Spike 'em (talk) 18:44, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Gaelic games would be the correct WikiProject for those. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:53, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Tosin Adarabioyo

Could Tosin Adarabioyo please be watched as it's heavily edited; might need semi-protecting? JMHamo (talk) 18:30, 7 June 2024 (UTC)