Talk:Anti-football

This article was nominated for deletion on 8 November 2007. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

2007-11-8 Automated pywikipediabot message[edit]

--CopyToWiktionaryBot 09:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No neutral[edit]

Hi, I think that tis article in no neutal. ¿who says who is "anti-football"? ¿With which perspective? It´s subjetive and no neutral. Many teams could be considerated anti-football by the not objetive point of view of many jornalists... For those reasons, i think that we have to say that it term is used by a singular way bay a part of the press (in Argentina, los menottistas -Menotti´s "fans"-)

Thanks, --Ultracanalla 23:28, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-football in Spain[edit]

The word "Anti-Fútbol" or "Antifútbol" in english Anti-football is used in Spain at least since the mid 20th century. There are hundreds references beteween 1947 and today, and it appear in each decade. The term precede the concept of Catennacio, sometimes refer to a football without tactic or skill, but usually refer to extremly defensive football

February 4, 1947. Right colum, 6th paragraph, 7th line http://hemeroteca.abc.es/nav/Navigate.exe/hemeroteca/madrid/abc/1947/02/04/026.html

Octobre 21, 1954 http://hemeroteca.abc.es/nav/Navigate.exe/hemeroteca/sevilla/abc.sevilla/1954/10/21/024.html

May 3, 1955 http://hemeroteca.abc.es/nav/Navigate.exe/hemeroteca/madrid/abc/1955/05/03/033.html

November 29, 1966 http://hemeroteca.abc.es/nav/Navigate.exe/hemeroteca/madrid/abc/1966/11/29/102.html

October 7, 1975 http://hemeroteca.abc.es/nav/Navigate.exe/hemeroteca/sevilla/abc.sevilla/1975/10/07/051.html

March 3 1981 http://hemeroteca.abc.es/nav/Navigate.exe/hemeroteca/sevilla/abc.sevilla/1981/03/10/069.html

December 3, 1985 http://hemeroteca.abc.es/nav/Navigate.exe/hemeroteca/sevilla/abc.sevilla/1985/12/03/097.html

October 5, 1992 http://hemeroteca.abc.es/nav/Navigate.exe/hemeroteca/sevilla/abc.sevilla/1992/10/05/075.html

--Bentaguayre (talk) 23:23, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Listing FC Barcelona and Spain as Anti-Football[edit]

Why? Even if we are going to use the odd definition in the first paragraph, Spain/Barca still do not fit the bill. So many shots (on and off target) every game. They don't put 10 players behind the ball. They press extremely hard because they want the ball back and so they can create more chances. Most of their play isn't even in their own half. The reason that they are stuck with the anti-football is because most teams do not want to attack them, not the other way around. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.26.123.51 (talk) 00:45, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Catenaccio[edit]

I think it should be made clear that 'anti-football' is not catenaccio. In catenaccio you are looking keep the opposition from scoring but at the same time you want to score yourself. Anti-football is used for the sole purpose of disrupting any type of football from being played in the hope that your team doesn't give up any goals and settle for the draw. La Fuzion (talk) 20:29, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep personal opinions outside this page[edit]

I noticed that there is one offending line here in this edit that reads, "Often a tactic deployed by the infamous coach Graeme Tulloch to make football a boring spectacle and drive away the spectators."

Without too much preaching, I am very sure that personal opinions such as this should either be backed up with solid evidence/anecdotes, or never be mentioned at all. Pasonia (talk) 04:58, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Anti-football. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101207052857/http://www.affsuzukicup.com/_webapp_735740/Historic_victory_leaves_McMenemy_bewildered to http://www.affsuzukicup.com/_webapp_735740/Historic_victory_leaves_McMenemy_bewildered

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:59, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Anti-fooball" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Anti-fooball. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Regards, SONIC678 19:23, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]