Talk:2018 FFA Cup preliminary rounds

Stub
Just a stub currently.

Links:
 * Brisbane Round 2 Draw: https://www.footballbrisbane.com.au/single-post/2018/01/23/The-FFA-Cup-Round-2-Draw
 * Tas preliminary Draw is on their fb: https://www.facebook.com/footballfedtas

--TinTin (talk) 05:31, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

So we're still doing the ridiculous MASSIVE TEXT INDICATION FOR WITHDRAWALS
Fair enough, that stuff is so much more important that things like "team qualified for FFA Cup" etc. I'm sure this is based on some real logic ... actually, I'm sure it isn't - merely people defending their stupid earlier decisions rather than admit they could ever have been wrong. 58.107.65.107 (talk) 22:11, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * opinion noted. Sore index fingers from scrolling down this article with the mouse wheel coming up !!! Round 7 information will clearly show which teams qualified for the Round of 32.  Matilda Maniac (talk) 00:14, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * We don't really need to show who qualified as it's said in the lede of the article that the winners of Round 7 qualify. How about rather than complaining being a little more proactive in suggesting a solution for a problem that nobody else seems to see as an issue? - J man708 (talk) 02:59, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Cessnock City Hornets
Cessnock City Hornets given a Bye to the fourth round as per draw - see comical video at NNSW Southern Conference Round 3 Draw. Mayfield United Junior were not in the draw, as they had previously been withdrawn by FFA (links to Mayfield United Senior too strong?). So it is incorrect to say that Cessnock City Hornets drew with Mayfield United Junior and then get a Walkover. Third round ties re-adjusted. Matilda Maniac (talk) 00:45, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The issue I see is that the original fixture listing showed 26 teams from the Southern NNSW, even though Mayfield United were not in the draw, they were designated to have a match. This issue hasn't happened before (a club withdrawing before the draw and not being included in it). The thing is, by not being included in the draw, the position they had was still open, with Cessnock City having their fixture nullified.
 * Another issue I have is that the table would show 188 matches with 189 eliminations. This would be nullified with the inclusion of a walkover and not a bye. If Mayfield had withdrawn before their first match, then the way your suggesting makes more sense, but seeing as they were in Round 2 (even with their bye), then I think showing a forfeit significantly better.
 * TL;DR - The only reason why Cessnock had a bye is because Mayfield forfeited. - J man708 (talk) 03:05, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I suggest that you watch the video. 25 teams and 25 balls in the draw, and the first team drawn [which happened to be Cessnock] were given a Bye to the next round. There was no forfeit and no mention of a forfeit. You seem to be speculating that they were withdrawn just before the draw - they may have been withdrawn before the Round 2 games were played. Perhaps you can research that. The table with entrants and eliminations was altered to mention that withdrawal - so that the numbers balanced - and you removed that text. Matilda Maniac (talk) 03:17, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I know the draw contained 25 teams, but there were originally 13 fixtures announced for that stage on the NNSW's website. Because of that Cessnock progressed by virtue of Mayfield's withdrawal, even though they were announced as having a bye in the draw.
 * Let me put it to you this way. Had the draw announced Cessnock progressing due to the withdrawal of Mayfield, what would you suggest we'd do. Surely if the word "bye" weren't used in the draw, you wouldn't see grounds to adding this in. That's my point. Yes, they announced Cessnock has a bye, but that's only because Mayfield withdrew. It's not like they always had it planned that 26 teams would somehow turn into 12 fixtures and a bye. It was always planned to be 13 fixtures and I think this is more important to show than the announcer using the word "bye" in the draw. You know as well as I do that they frequently stuff up these small details. - J man708 (talk) 14:57, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I do not see a problem with a withdrawal at one point in time causing a bye at another point in time, and I dont believe NNSW have stuffed up small details here (apart from failing to get all the balls into the pot at first attempt). Matilda Maniac (talk) 23:25, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I see a problem with it, as Mayfield also passed the 2nd Round and were set to be in the 3rd round before pulling out. Therefore it seems only logical to show it in the 3rd round, not the second. Also, I see my previous edit as being the easiest to understand for your garden variety reader of this article. - J man708 (talk) 02:18, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Your edit today was factually incorrect, whatever a garden variety reader is. Matilda Maniac (talk) 12:09, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I was thinking you'd stopped responding halfway through the discussion which is what most people seem to do on here to win a disagreement. My apologies if this wasn't the case. Perhaps we should call upon other users to find a solution, as I think we're both sticking to our guns? - J man708 (talk) 12:22, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Not trying to "win". Your edits stand and no need for an edit war. All good, dont get hit by Tiangong-1. Matilda Maniac (talk) 13:38, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
 * See, now I feel bad over that! I wish I were as virtuous as you, Tildawg. Also, that's the first I've heard about that. Still though, hopefully it won't be as close as Skylab was for you. - J man708 (talk) 15:24, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Skylab, haha; i was in Sydney at the time, so i was only closer as you were not alive then ! Matilda Maniac (talk) 13:42, 4 March 2019 (UTC)