Talk:2014 FFA Cup preliminary rounds

Some Points
This should save work creating additional articles that replicate each state cup competition (which is probably overkill). This would also conform with the way the NPL yearly articles are structured. They still show each state finals series even though the top of the table qualifies for national NPL finals series. Any ideas? --TinTin (talk) 23:41, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Each section needs an introductory sentence something like "Tasmanian Clubs qualify for the FFA Cup through entering the 2014 Lako Cup. One club (the grand final winners) from this competition qualifies for the FFA Cup propper" or "NSW Clubs qualify for the FFA cup through entering the 2014 Waratah Cup.  Eight clubs (the quarter finalists) from this competition qualify for the FFA Cup propper."
 * Those state cup competitions who also have more than one spot in the FFA Cup propper should still be shown in full (ie. all rounds up to and including the grand final), with it some how noted that all eight Semi-Finalists of the Waratah Cup qualify for the FFA Cup propper.


 * Agree, we should focus the content on one article as with the NPL. Also, I redirected some individual state cup articles here. Let's just grown this article and see how it shapes up at the end of the season before we go making individual state cup articles.--2nyte (talk) 02:31, 14 February 2014 (UTC)


 * As someone who has experience editting pages with a high volume of fixtures listed I have to ask: are you certain that you want to list every fixture for every tournament (omitting the ones which only yield one FFA Cup place is going to make very, very little difference) all in this one article? The size of this article by the end is going to completely dwarf the FA Cup quali articles, which I'm fairly sure are the biggest fixture-dump articles on Wikipedia. I'd go so far as to say that the length of this article will reach insanity levels. Are you certain that you don't want to break it down?


 * If anything I'd suggest going the opposite way - publish all of the fixtures for those tournaments with only a handful of teams and round, and split the bigger tournaments off into their own articles - it's not as if there isn't precedent for this anyway. Only show the last round for the bigger tournaments (meaning, the ones which dictate which teams qualify, not the actual Finals as in many cases the absolute winner is irrelevant.


 * It's your article at the end of the day, but I really suggest you consider how long this article could get if you try to show every fixture. Falastur2  Talk 03:25, 14 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I think we could break the article down in the future if need be. But for now I would prefer to centralise everything to this one article. Australia has never had a competition like this before and we don't really know how it will turn out, specifically in future seasons (next season, as the current is just a "trial"). The whole football structure in Australia (especially that of state competitions) is experiencing a great deal of change, so for the next few seasons we'll be going through trial and error, as with the NPL articles (which I have based on The Football League season articles).--2nyte (talk) 03:39, 14 February 2014 (UTC)


 * That's fair enough, but there are two things I'd like to counter here: first, the Football League season articles contain a generalised article with only the most basic info - a league table and results grid each - and then have subsequent breakdown articles showing the full range of details usual to a season article, one page per division of the league, which I think is closer to my suggestion. I'm not suggesting you remove all information for the various leagues - as I say, I still think it would be a good idea to show the last round, perhaps two rounds, of each competition leading up to the teams qualifying for the FFA Cup (I still don't quite see the virtue in showing the Finals when the top X teams are already guaranteed to go through, but that's by the by) as well as some blurb explaining the background of the competition. I'm just not sure that you need to show every result from every subordinate cup, all in this one article.


 * Secondly, I don't see why you should feel like you can only experiment once per league season. I'd be happy to produce a couple of alternative ideas on my user subspace, imagining some results so the page looks as it would at the end of the season, and so that you can pick and choose between them. There's no reason why you can't innovate in the middle of the season, you don't have to wait for the 2015 FFA Cup to try a different format. Falastur2  Talk 11:14, 14 February 2014 (UTC)


 * If they are better suggestions mid season then I will happily go along, but for now I think we should just wait and see how it shapes up. Also, this season of the competition is just a trial, next season (2015–16 FFA Cup) will be a much more definitive structural format like the FA Cup, at least that is what FFA has said.--2nyte (talk) 11:45, 14 February 2014 (UTC)


 * It should be added that, before I saw you were expanding this article to include all fixtures, I created the page 2014 Dockerty Cup, which is the Victorian qualification tournament. Feel free to nick the Victorian fixtures from there, I guess, or to link the article to save space. Falastur2  Talk 14:29, 15 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I suggest splitting up the Queensland section into the three "Pools" that exist, in much the same way that the Northern NSW is set-up. The current way suggests there is one pool from which teams can be drawn, but this is not the case. There is effectively a Northern Queensland pool, a Southern Queensland (ex-Brisbane) pool, and the Brisbane Canale Cup as a third pool. Matilda Maniac (talk) 15:27, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Some More points
Everyone is doing a lot of work on this article. It's good to see how much information and detail is being added in a timely way. But I have two more suggestions. --TinTin (talk) 23:25, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Article Name
Personally I would prefer the use of the term Qualifying Competitions as opposed to Qualifying Rounds. My reasons are that most of these competitions pre-date the FFA Cup and so are really fully fledged competitions in their own right, not just qualifying for the FFA Cup. Relatedly quite a few of these competitions have rounds that exist after teams have already qualified for the FFA Cup eg. after the Quarter Finals in Victoria and the four Victorian Clubs have qualified they still play the semi and finals of the competition. --TinTin (talk) 23:25, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Attendance Column
I think the use of an attendance column is kind of silly when most of these games particularly the early rounds are played in small suburban grounds with a handful of supporters and no one counting attendance. Therefore the chance of getting accurate attendances for most of these games is unlikely. Therefore can we remove this column? --TinTin (talk) 23:25, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree. Matilda Maniac (talk) 05:46, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

No-one's said any different, so I suggest TinTin that you keep deleting from the other State tables too. However, there is a different format for the Round of 32 onwards with attendances, that should stay. Matilda Maniac (talk) 08:56, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah I'm slowly removing the column from the tables state by state. I totally agree attendance shouldn't be shown for qualification tournaments but attendances in the FFA Cup proper definitely could be important. In general the qualification details should be more brief and succinct than the FFA Cup proper. --TinTin (talk) 23:05, 27 February 2014 (UTC) :✅

Tackling ACT
It looks like Tuggeranong United are now back in based on their 2013 Federation Cup Win. How should this be shown in this article? a. Should the full 2013 ACT Federation Cup Details be included (ie. all rounds) b. Should a quick sentence be included about ACT qualifying being by 2013 ACT Federation Cup c. Nothing included about ACT qualification Currently option C is indicated in the article. My preference would be for option b, as clubs didn't know at the time it was a qualification for the FFA Cup, also the confusion about the temporary attempt to use the pre-season cup in ACT to qualify FFA Cup entrants also makes it reasonable to omit full details of the 2013 ACT Federation Cup. --TinTin (talk) 05:45, 24 February 2014 (UTC)


 * There were certainly indications last year that state knockout cups would result in qualification. In Western Australia, it was advertised from at least the quarter-final stage that the Cool Ridge Cup winner for 2013 would be part of an inaugural FFA Cup. So clubs knew this and it provided incentive. Can we assume it was also the case in the ACT ? I would say yes, as it resulted in TUFC lodging a formal (and successful) protest, against Capital Football's proposed pre-season tournament model. Therefore should put all 2013 Federation Cup Details in. Matilda Maniac (talk) 23:27, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Northern NSW format
How does this knockout system work, when there are more teams involved than is normal for a particular round?

Official document for the Southern Pool (NPL) has seven matches and 2 byes :. This produces nine entrants in the next round, when there should be 8. However, this section was edited 26/2 to show the two Bye teams - Edgeworth FC and Valentine FC playing each other. Sportingpulse confirms two byes :

Northern Pool has 5 matches in Round 2 and a bye, which will result in 6 teams in Round 3, but there's only supposed to be 2 winners in Round 3, who go to the June Finals Series...

Southern Pool (interdistrict)  has 3 additional matches (i.e. 19 rather than 16), and a bye, resulting in 20 teams in Round 2. The extra matches are : Kurri Kurri SC	v Raymond Terrace SC, Toronto Awaba JSC	v Newcastle Suns FC, Beresfield Utd SSC (ZL1)v Warners Bay FC, and a BYE to Kahibah FC  Matilda Maniac (talk) 08:58, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Rounds with new teams - Tabulation
I had the intention of having these tables only as a temporary table until such time as the draw is made and the Home and Away fixtures can get populated. At which point it is duplicated information. Would still leave in the text which mentions the new teams : e.g. "12 Clubs from the National Premier Leagues NSW entered into the competition at this stage." Thoughts as to whether it should stay or go ? Matilda Maniac (talk) 09:10, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
 * As long as the content is explained I have no problem with its inclusion.--2nyte (talk) 01:23, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Some ACT Questions
Based on results I take it that multiple teams from the same club can all enter that competition? I like the Quarter Final between both Canberra FC teams. I guess players become Cup-tied some how? I think the inclusion of the oldies Masters teams is pretty random too. Do we need some sentences to explain this in the ACT introduction? I presume no other state based cups work this way? Will this change in 2015 or remain the same? --TinTin (talk) 22:15, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Each federation has its quirks. Northern NSW for example their competition rules specifies 35 minute halves !! Western Australia has published that many more teams will be eligible in 2015 than the current 3-4 tiers. I adjusted earlier the tiers for the Masters teams to (-) rather than the tier their firsts team plays at (especially since their first team is often in the competition anyway!). Matilda Maniac (talk) 23:19, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah fair enough. I am presuming at some stage the FFA will step-in and coordinate a more standardised approach in the future to the State Cups.  Also the ACT and SA Cups both being called the Federation Cup isn't useful.  What do you think? --TinTin (talk) 23:16, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

New source
Just found this website. Looks like a good creditable source for match info on the cup.--2nyte (talk) 11:38, 6 March 2014 (UTC)--2nyte (talk) 11:38, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Well it looks well constructed, but that alone doesn't imply credibility.
 * The first difference I've seen is from NNSW, with a win by forfeit by Edgeworth Eagles FC over West Wallsend SFC. Rather than a Bye to the next round for Edgeworth Eagles. This is different to what was posted on foxsportpulse.  It follows on to an additional team for NNSW (78 rather than 77), which is what pursuitofthecupau is showing. see also the related comment above under Northern NSW Format.  Matilda Maniac (talk) 09:16, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Have seen the draw which was posted on Youtube, and indeed Edgeworth Eagles were drawn with West Wallsend; so its a forfeit, which meant that Edgeworth Eagles were eligible for the bye they received the following round. Matilda Maniac (talk) 23:06, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Second difference is for WA draw, which show 11 NPL teams entering in Round 1, whereas documents on Football West website show all 12 teams competing, with additional constraints for the Perth Glory Youth side (competing and eligible for the cool Ridge Cup, but not eleigible for the qualification to FFA Cup round of 32). Perhaps the official websites have not yet caught up. Matilda Maniac (talk) 01:52, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Tiers for Western Australian teams
Text currently has assumed tiers (5),(6) and (7) for entrants from the Sunday League competition. Fixtures have yet to be finalized and posted, and some of these teams may be in a different division and will need to have the tier number adjusted. Matilda Maniac (talk) 15:29, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅--A couple of minor adjustments. Matilda Maniac (talk) 00:29, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

NNSW and Qld Formats
Basically both Qld and NNSW use regionalised rounds but are presented in totally different ways currently. NNSW are separated into different sub-sections where Qld uses an additional column(s) in the tables to separate different Zones and Sub-Zones. I think they need to be standardised. I prefer the Qld model because it saves space in an already over-crowded article. Thoughts? --TinTin (talk) 01:50, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I also prefer the Qld model, although I note there are different rounds at different dates for each of the three zones/subzones in NNSW which would have to be explained in the text; the format that is being used on www.pursuitofthecup.com is not right (it has the northern pool's round 1 showing as Round 3), but is rather neater. A Qld-style format for NNSW needs to show the northern pool's round 3 winner qualifying for the final series (which are effectively Rounds 6&7), so they would just not appear in the round 4 and round 5 sections. Standardisation of approach and saving a little space is a good thing. Matilda Maniac (talk) 23:18, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅-- Its not ideal, but saves heaps of space in this massive article. Matilda Maniac (talk) 00:32, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

WA teams
When were teams reduced from 52 to 49? It seems that 2 teams were taken out of the Preliminary Round, and 1 from the First Round. If so then changes need to be made on the other FFA Cup articles in regards to total teams participating. Also changes need to be made in the First Round section of WA.--2nyte (talk) 01:29, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * the maximum number of Sunday league teams did not enter, and also it is rumoured that the Perth Glory Youth team will no longer take part, so there will only be 11 NPL-WA teams in the First Round. I imagine it will become clear after the preliminary round is played, and heading towards the first round draw. Matilda Maniac (talk) 05:29, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The competition regulations were amended with respect to the Perth Glory Youth team, who will no longer take part, so there will only be 11 NPL-WA teams in the First Round.  Matilda Maniac (talk) 14:17, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
 * entrants back up to 50 with inclusion of Whitfords City SC. Matilda Maniac (talk) 12:00, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

References for match results
Where is everyone getting the match results from? We need to get references for these results and add them to the article.--2nyte (talk) 13:30, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I've been sourcing from the member federations' websites who generally have a link through foxsportspulse; various matches seem to appear earlier on pursuitofthecupau.com, which receives some of their results from retweets from the same member federations. Do most "Second-tier" soccer competitions reference each match, where there may not be an official PDF match report made available ? Matilda Maniac (talk) 16:06, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Penalty Kicks and Forfeit Format
I do not think that we need additional lines throughout the results tables for each time a result is decided by Penalty Kicks, or their is a Forfeit. It is adding extra lines to tables that are already large - e.g. the early rounds from Victoria. I do not see anything wrong or inconsistent with the format that existed prior to this recent change. I also consider that even if such an additional expansion was warranted, it should not be in bold black as it makes it look like this information is the most important item of the table, and dilutes the normal emphasis on putting bold type to show the winner of ties. Can we please change it back ? Matilda Maniac (talk) 21:48, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Similarly, the use of the '†' symbol, to denote extra-time - where the reference for the symbol is not shown anywhere near where it appears - in my opinion detracts from what was already there in the characters 'aet'. Can we please change it back ? Matilda Maniac (talk) 21:53, 3 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I was using the format used on 2013–14 FA Cup Qualifying Rounds.--2nyte (talk) 00:01, 4 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Any other opinions ? I notice there have been attempts to revert to the previous format.Matilda Maniac (talk) 02:22, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Victorian Dockerty Cup Results
2O14 Dockerty Cup redirects to this page, however the results do not go beyond the Quarter Finals, (understandably as that is the end of qualification for the Round of 32), therefore a page needs to created showing the Semi Finals and Finals results for the 2014 Dockerty Cup. I am very new to this and am not sure how to do it. — Preceding [[User:Footballzs|Footballzs (talk) 03:45, 18 August 2014 (UTC)]] comment added by Footballzs (talk • contribs) 03:37, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅--Matilda Maniac (talk) 18:25, 17 September 2014 (UTC)