Talk:2014 FIBA Basketball World Cup

Canary Islands map
Should that be to scale vs. the mainland Spain map? – H T  D  19:15, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Qualified teams
There are many ways to present information, but since there are 24 teams this will become too large. There are several options. Each has its pros and cons:
 * Option A takes up a lot of space but presents more information, not as much as B, but those info can be seen elsewhere.
 * Option B takes up a lot of space but presents the most information, but the list is duplicated elsewhere.
 * Option C takes up less space but presents less information, but those info can be seen elsewhere.

Option A
Current one:

Option B
The one found at 2014 FIBA Basketball World Cup qualification

Option C
The one found at 2010 FIBA World Championship


 * FIBA Africa
 * FIBA Asia
 * FIBA Americas
 * (Olympic Champions)
 * 1
 * 2
 * 3
 * 4
 * Potential wild card
 * FIBA Oceania
 * FIBA Europe
 * (Hosts)
 * 1
 * 2
 * 3
 * 4
 * 5
 * 6
 * Potential wild card
 * Potential wild card
 * Potential wild card
 * 2
 * 3
 * 4
 * 5
 * 6
 * Potential wild card
 * Potential wild card
 * Potential wild card

Discussion

 * Option A Just gives the best and easiest overview. Additional info can be found on the team pages or the main article. Kante4 (talk) 18:00, 1 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Option A A simplified and good summarization of teams, and with an orderly lead, the readers will have a clear understanding to it. FairyTailRocks (talk) 13:14, 2 September 2013 (UTC)


 * The only problem I have with either Option A or B is that both are too long. Once the tournament starts the reader has to navigate for quite a long time before getting to the more important bits, unless s/he uses the TOC. Option C is used in FIFA World Cup tournament pages. However at this point when qualifiers are still being held, Option A is more appropriate. – H T  D  12:31, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

wild cards selection & dates
There reads: To complete the 24-team tournament, FIBA will announce the four wild cards after a meeting in Barcelona on February 2014; they may announce an initial list of qualified wild cards after a Buenos Aires meeting on November 2013.

The table in this article has the date of February 2014, while the table 2014 FIBA Basketball World Cup qualification has the date of November 2013. Though, strangely, there are already four teams listed. What does that mean? Is it a guess, or have they been selected already? 82.141.117.117 (talk) 01:45, 27 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Apparently vandalism, which I had reverted by the time this was posted. - David Biddulph (talk) 07:55, 27 September 2013 (UTC)


 * There still reads they may announce an initial list of qualified wild cards after a Buenos Aires meeting on November 2013. Is this "initial list of qualified wild cards" some larger list from which the 4 are selected or what does that mean? If not, then the sentence says FIBA will announce the teams in February, but may still have already announced them in November 2013? There is no source to that chapter to check the info. 82.141.117.117 (talk) 19:00, 27 September 2013 (UTC)


 * My interpretation of that wording was that they might announce some of the 4 in Nov 2013, and the remainder in Feb 2014, but (as you imply) a source would hopefully help to clarify. - David Biddulph (talk) 19:12, 27 September 2013 (UTC)


 * There is now a source, and apparently I was right. Willing countries/federations must first send a application, then in November the list of countries might be shortened, then in February the selections are made. 82.141.117.117 (talk) 16:52, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Draw hosts
Can anyone look for a reference on the hosts of the draw were? – H T  D  16:00, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Bizkaia Arena
"Venues" section has the city of the arena as Bilbao. However, the arena's article and the "Group C" section, has the city as Barakaldo. It is near Bilbao and part of its metropolitan area, but not the same city. 82.141.94.123 (talk) 19:30, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Done. – H T  D  19:37, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Though, strangely, everyone on the tv broadcast spoke only about Bilbao. Maybe it is easier to use the more familiar name, even if it is wrong. 82.141.94.123 (talk) 18:11, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * If it means something, it's still at "Greater Bilbao"... – H T  D  20:01, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Tiebreakers
I suggest not putting the tiebreaker columns in place until the final standings are determined. Ties aren't really being broken until the standings are final anyway. MrArticleOne (talk) 20:41, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * It also seems crazy to me to say that teams with different numbers of games played are tied, even if they have the same number of points. If 3 teams have 3 points, the teams that have only played 2 games should be listed ahead of the teams that have played 3 games. MrArticleOne (talk) 20:49, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd agree on equal points/unequal games, but it sorts out once all of the day's games are done. It's also quite neat if there's a H2H match-up already that can be used. – H  T  D  20:53, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree that it sorts out once all of the day's games are done, but (a) I think we should strive for accuracy even in our intra-day presentation and (b) not all tournaments happen to use a schedule like this one, where everybody in the same group plays in a given day. Certainly you are right that the problem is significantly mitigated under this format, though. I stand by the observation that there's no need for a tiebreaker column until the tie is "final." MrArticleOne (talk) 23:29, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I dunno but most tournaments do schedule all of the group games to end in the same day (see UEFA Champions League), or at least the next day (FIFA World Cup, because there are 3 matches/day). What's screwing up the tables is the fact that FIBA awards 1 point for a "normal" loss. That necessitates the useless tiebreaking of 2-1 and 1-3 teams, for example... – H T  D  15:38, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Undoubtedly it is true that part of the problem is FIBA's goofy points system, whose only purpose is apparently to adjudicate the exceedingly rare circumstance of one team refusing to play another. MrArticleOne (talk) 16:36, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * For some reason, they're quite frequent in international tournaments probably because of "national pride"; some teams take the easy way out an default instead of forfeiting. Well, triple doubles in 40 minutes are more frequent than forfeits but they do happen. And if there's anything to it, the rankings are actually accurate, goofiness and all. – H T  D  16:51, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Seems to me people are using GOAL DIFFERENCE rules for tie-break. These are part of the 2014 rules that do not come into effect until Oct 1, 2014. Goal Difference is currently irrelevant for FIBA rules (see 2012 rules). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.134.78.217 (talk) 01:28, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Since "goal average" is one of the most senseless tiebreakers I can imagine, personally, I would argue that we should use it in lieu of "goal average" except for "official" tiebreakers. That is to say, "goal average" should only be used when the standings are final and our table's standings need to reflect how FIBA officially breaks ties. Prior to that, I think it is well within our editorial discretion to say that it's our almanac and we'll do what we consider sensible. MrArticleOne (talk) 01:55, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
 * PD and GA gives out the same results anyway, except when two teams have the same PD but have different PF and/or PA. Also, overall GA is irrelevant 99% of the time; it'll only be used once all of the tiebreakers have been exhausted. While PD isn't an official tiebreaker, FIBA does use them, and is easier to understand/compute than GA. – H T  D  13:59, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Why has Ukraine been listed as eliminated and New Zealand as qualifying for the next round? Ukraine has a better GA than New Zealand and thus will advance. Only Finland have been eliminated. New Zealand, Turkey, and the Dominican Republic are all undetermined. I have never commented on wikipedia before so I don't know how to change it. Perhaps this is why it is a bad idea to ignore GA (and include GD) in the tables until the end of the round - it makes people think GD is correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeremy1986 (talk • contribs) 19:10, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The games that are considered in computing the GA are those involving NZL, UKR and loser of DOM vs. TUR. Either way, all have 1-1 head-to-head records against each other, but the GA for UKR will always wind up last, hence they're eliminated.
 * Again, overall GA isn't used until all tiebreakers have been exhausted. – H T  D  19:16, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Because no matter who wins DR vs. Turkey, the loser will be in a 3-way tie with UK and New Zealand. In both cases of the 3-way tie, the head to head is 1-1 and Ukraine will lose the GA tiebreaker. Remember the GA tiebreaker only counts points between the tied teams.

DR loses: NZ/Ukraine   : 73-61 NZ/DR	     : 63-76 Ukraine/DR   : 72-62 NZ 		PF=136, PA=137 Ukraine       PF=133, PA=135 Dominican R	PF=138, PA=135

Turkey loses: NZ/Ukraine   : 73-61 NZ/Turkey    : 73-76 Ukraine/Turkey: 64-58 NZ		PF=146, PA=137 Ukraine       PF=125, PA=131 Turkey		PF=134, PA=137 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.127.104.11 (talk) 19:14, 4 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Apologies, I didn't realize GA is initially only amongst the tied teams.-Jeremy1986 (talk) 19:25, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
 * This why I'm hesitant on displaying overall GA because 99% of the time, that's not the tiebreaker that will be used. At least with PD you're supposed to be sure that it's not the one being used. – H T  D  19:41, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

"Final round" wording
I found it misleading that "Final round" refers not to the single final game, but to all the rounds for the final 16 teams i.e. the knockout stage. http://www.fiba.com/basketballworldcup/2014/competition-format calls it "Final phase". I'm proposing to use "final phase" or "knockout round" or "knockout stage" instead. Note the name of the 2010 article, 2010 FIBA World Championship knockout stage.—Bagumba (talk) 04:15, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Preliminary round --> (Second round if applicable) ---> Final round has been the standard in FIBA-sanctioned articles. 2010 FIBA World Championship's section is called "Final round"; indeed all have "Final round" in the section titles save for 2006. There's a difference between a "Final round" (which implies many games) and a "Final", which is a single game.
 * It does look like they're sticking with "Group phase" --> "Knockout phase" at the moment, which would then revert to "Preliminary round" and "Final round" at the archives website. – H T  D  12:14, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Data about attendance
Hi,

From where do the data of attendance come please ? (in these articles : group A, group B, ...)

I haven't found them on the fiba website...

Thanks :)

InfraRouge77 (talk) 13:50, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi InfraRouge77. I am getting the info under the Boxscore tab from Fiba Livestats. For example this SENvsPHI just go to Boxscore then look at the bottom part of the page. For us to get attendance of other games just navigate through the games listed in the ribbon (navigator). Nickrds09  (Talk to me) 14:20, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Woaw why is it so tiny?? Thank you Nickrds09. InfraRouge77 (talk) 16:23, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Believe it or not, it's an improvement from 2010, and quite a bit higher than 2013 World Men's Handball Championship's early stages. – H T  D  16:54, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Australia "tanking" investigation
Shouldn't there be something in this article about FIBA's investigation into the Australia-Angola group stage game? http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/sep/09/australias-boomers-under-investigation-for-tanking Tad Lincoln (talk) 02:44, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

New FIBA World Ranking
About the New FIBA World Ranking after the 2014 FIBA World Cup, it's quite simple to obtain it. It takes just some additions and subtractions. Here a simple tutorial. Just go to the official page of the FIBA World Ranking (click here), select the table, copy and paste it to your spreadsheet application of choice (Excel, for example). Do the cosmetic things (cells width, height, etc). In the FIBA World Ranking page there is a section called "how it works" explaining the scoring system, weights for competitions and the cycle to witch it applies. By reading that we understand that a cycle includes the last two World Cups/World Championships, and that the inclusion of points awarded in a new competition drops the points of the older one. In this case the 2014 edition points are included and the 2006 edition droped. Then, using the scoring system and weights, just include in the next column of your streadsheet with the old rankings you just copied and pasted the points awarded in the 2006 edition. The final standings of 2006 edition can be seen in the official FIBA Archive (click here) or right here in the wikipedia article: 2006 FIBA World Championship. After that just include in the next column the points awarded in 2014 edition. Then in the next column use a simple formula that takes the points of the old ranking, subtracts the points of 2006 edition and adds the points of the 2014 edition. Voilà! We have the new ranking points after the 2014 edition for every national team. Since the final was not played yet, I "awarded" 200 points to both USA and Serbia, since that ammount is granted. The second placed receives 200 points. The first receives 250 points. So after the final, just adding 50 points to the winner completes the new ranking. Edit: Just added those 250 points to the USA instead of 200 since they've won the final game. Doing all this you will obtain something like this:

After that you just need to take the columns with the country names and the new ranking points and copy then in another spreadsheet. Order then by the ranking points, include a column for the new rakings and fix the cases of draws in number of points. The new World Ranking is complete. You will obtain something like this:

As we can see, all but 5th, 6th and 7th are determined. If Serbia loses against USA then France will be ranked 5th, Russia 6th and Serbia 7th. If Serbia wins they will have 50 points added, reaching 394 points. In this case Serbia will be ranked 5th, France 6th and Russia 7th. Edit: Serbia lost, so the final ranking for those three teams are France in 5th, Russia in 6th and Serbia in 7th. It takes less than ten minutes. So I'll restore the new rankings and the changes.177.94.146.106 (talk) 12:45, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 2014 FIBA Basketball World Cup. 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/20140129213927/http://www.fiba.com/pages/eng/fc/news/presRele/p/newsid/70551/presReleArti.html to http://fiba.com/pages/eng/fc/news/presRele/p/newsid/70551/presReleArti.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141206060033/https://au.sports.yahoo.com/basketball/news/article/-/25626101/australia-cleared-of-tanking-angola-match/ to https://au.sports.yahoo.com/basketball/news/article/-/25626101/australia-cleared-of-tanking-angola-match/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141204170144/http://www.sportal.com.au/basketball/news/australia-cleared-of-tanking-at-fiba-basketball-world-cup/1qnp1qz5qztoz15ofkg4mm518i to http://www.sportal.com.au/basketball/news/australia-cleared-of-tanking-at-fiba-basketball-world-cup/1qnp1qz5qztoz15ofkg4mm518i

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:11, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:37, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Islas Canarias (real location) in Spain.svg