Talk:2023 AFC U-17 Asian Cup qualification

Welcome!
Thank you for checking in. Help the page expand with your contributions.Footy2000 (talk) 21:02, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Draw result
Shouldn't we remove the Draw results section? I am not able to understand how this section is providing any useful information which is not already provided by the 'Draw seedings' and the 'groups' section. The same has been done on the 2022 AFC U-23 Asian Cup qualification page as well.--Anbans 585 (talk) 09:46, 25 May 2022 (UTC)


 * The group standings change once the qualifiers are over. The Draw Result section is used in European Championship as well. Footy2000 (talk) 12:47, 25 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Is this a standard or something? I am asking this because nothing like this has been done on 2022 FIFA World Cup page. It's true that the order changes after the draw, but as already stated in the draw procedures, in AFC competitions the draw position is the pot from which the draw has been made. Even if we consider that the draw position is changed after draw, what important information regarding the tournament are these tables signifying (there has to be some significance right?).--Anbans 585 (talk) 14:56, 25 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Nothing much as far as I can think, perhaps just a cleaner way of displaying the groups and they are used in youth competitions of UEFA. However, I'm not sure if it is a standard. Footy2000 (talk) 15:44, 25 May 2022 (UTC)


 * So as far as I understand, it is just something which is used on UEFA pages, without any additional added advantage. If we have to see groups then they can directly navigate the groups using the navigation menu provided on the top-left of the page (people usually are only concerned with their own national team). I think that we should remove it on both the U-17 page and the U-23 page. What do you think?--Anbans 585 (talk) 08:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Fate of the sixth best runners-up
As thing stands, by now the AFC has been unable to select a host nation despite Bahrain had withdrawn from hosting duty three months ago. And on October 1st, the first games will be played. That means we have to:


 * Wait for the updates.
 * Deciding whenever the sixth best runners-up shall qualify.

If the AFC still cannot select a new host nation before October 1st, then the sixth best runners-up will qualify for the tournament. I don't like the fact that some people were fixing to eliminate the sixth best runners-up' opportunity to qualify, given the AFC has not chosen a new host and the qualifiers is only about a week before it kickstarted. In this case, we must prepare to decide whenever the sixth best runners-up can be given the chance to qualify or not. HiddenFace101 (talk) 04:37, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
 * None of this is up to Wikipedia's editors to decide. Or to have speculative permutations. Wait for something to be announced. Matilda Maniac (talk) 04:51, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't expect anything. It's only for Wikipedians to prepare for any circumstance. But by now, we have to all agree that the [temporary] sixth best runners-up may qualify, until October 1st. HiddenFace101 (talk) 05:20, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Here is what the AFC has to say in its regulations which are available here.
 * Sixteen (16) Member Associations shall participate in the Finals of the Competition by virtue of:
 * qualifying through the Qualifiers;
 * being the Organising Association;
 * being invited by the AFC to participate in the Finals.
 * Thus this clearly states that the sixth place team in the runners-up do not have a guarantee of being qualified to the final tournament in case the host is not decided before the tournament. Instead of writing what we think will happen to the sixth placed team, It is better to write that the process of how the last team will qualify is currently undecided, and is yet to be announced by the AFC. Anbans 586 (talk) 07:32, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
 * AFC has said so once, and they did the other opposite. What does "AFC regulation" even mean when they can't practise it themselves? The AFC used to issue a ban against UAE fans attending their first two home games in 2022 WCQ after the brawl in 2019 AFC Asian Cup loss to Qatar, and in the end the UAE fans still attended the match against Indonesia, and no reason was given why the ban was overturned.
 * Give any evidence you want, but "trust" in the AFC is another thing. It doesn't matter if the AFC said this or said that. Do you think the AFC want a tournament with just 15 teams to take part? HiddenFace101 (talk) 08:29, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It's not about trust or anything. What are you even playing about here. I simply said that instead of saying "the sixth placed team will qualify" it is better to write "the qualification for the last team is not confirmed of how it will be done". See you are saying "it will happen this way if no host is selected before the qualifiers are conducted", but how are you so sure that this is the way it will happen, because according to you "AFC can not be trusted", which basically means "that they can not be trusted on what will happen next". You are basically saying "trust me", and no one else. Now why would someone would to trust "you" when the only thing you have is assumptions and no reference nothing. This is a straight red flag under WP:ORIGINAL. I am not commenting on what the AFC will do, I am just saying that we do not know what they will do and thus we do not get a license to say something about the same. Anbans 586 (talk) 09:17, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
 * To be clear, the sixteenth team will qualify, but the methodology of the same has not been defined, and thus we do not get to warrant anything about the same on the page which the readers would read. Anbans 586 (talk) 09:19, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Different qualification status as of matches played on 7 October
Hello @HiddenFace101, @Matilda Maniac, @Marco Setiawan, @Fauzannaufan, @Kenta Minazu, @Sakiv, @Vinkenstein, @Jimjonqwe, @Fahrurozi.86. Here are some qualification status as of 7 October which I believe are required to be added as of 7 October, instead of having so many reverts about everything.

1. Turkmenistan's elimination - The best TKM can do is to come second in the group if JPN defeat JOR by 7-0. Now even if that was to happen, then TKM can only have a maximum of 1 points in the second placed teams ranking, which is clearly less than the 6 current groups (G, H, D, F, B and E) which are guarenteed to atleast finish with three points. Thus I believe that TKM should be marked as eliminated. 2. Syria's elimination - The best SYR can do is to have five points, in which case it will be tied on five points with JOR and TKM. In this scenario, the head-to-head will be counted between these three teams in which TKM will be marked as the best team with a GF of 4 goals, Jordan would be placed next with GF of 3 and Syria would be placed next with a GF of 1. Thus the best Syria can finish is fourth and thus they are knocked out of the tournament. 3. Qatar's qualification - The worst Qatar can do now is to finish second, which can happen if they get defeated by Lebanon. Even after this they will have 7 points. Iraq on the other hand can win against Oman, and can get 7 points, after which Qatar would be marked as the top team due to a better head to head against Iraq. Thus Qatar would qualify in this scenario. If Iraq draws or loses against Oman, then Qatar will finish the group in second place. Even after this the top three teams will be Oman, Qatar, Iraq. Here for the second placed rankings, Qatar will have 6 points since they won against Oman and Iraq. Now 6 points is already enough to qualify in the second placed rankings as the other groups can not get more than 4 points in any scenario in atleast six groups. Thus, Qatar is already qualified for the finals.

What do you think? Do you believe that there is some problem with the maths proposed here? If yes, then what is the said problem? Anbans 586 (talk) 09:00, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Still too soon to say Qatar has qualifed. Even the AFC asian Cup IG has said 3 teams that has booked their place in the tournament. Marco Setiawan (talk) 09:53, 8 October 2022 (UTC)


 * @Marco Setiawan They have not confirmed it since they have not taken the second placed team in the account. The entire reason why they have been deemed to be qualified is because the second placed teams are being taken into account. Do tell, if there is some problem with the maths, if there is not then I don't believe that there should be an issue regarding the same. Anbans 586 (talk) 13:26, 8 October 2022 (UTC)


 * @Anbans 586 Agree with all the points you said since it matches my calculation. Syria and Turkmenistan are eliminated and Qatar is qualified. Fauzannaufan (talk) 13:35, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Anbans 586 This level of detail smacks of WP:ORIGINAL, which was a subject you were warning others about on this Talk Page. The answer will all sort themselves out within the next 20 hours. Matilda Maniac (talk) 00:13, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I am sorry that this is being considered as original research, and I do agree that it actually is. The only difference I would want to label out is that in this case it is just mathematical combinations with a fixed logic, but in the case I previously objected to it was more about assumptions regarding the rules of how the qualification system works. Feel free to revert (in case not already done), but I feel that this and mere assumptions on the basis of a past activity should not be considered the same. Anbans 586 (talk) 08:35, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, WP:ORIGINAL states "Routine calculations do not count as original research, provided there is consensus among editors that the result of the calculation is correct, and a meaningful reflection of the sources. Comparisons of statistics present particular difficulties. Editors should not compare statistics from sources that use different methodologies." Thus calculation on the basis of the given methodology should not probably be treated as such. Anbans 586 (talk) 08:37, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Anbans 586 thanks for the clarification. Matilda Maniac (talk) 10:22, 9 October 2022 (UTC)