Talk:Association football/Archive 3

Famous incidents
This section needs to be expanded or deleted. At the moment it is very england-centric. Deus Ex 14:38, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Chinese history of the game
''The latest finding confirms that the earliest form of football was originated in China more than 2300 years ago. The research, which involved more than 30 archeologists, scholars and historians, concluded with scientific evidence that the game has its origin from an ancient Chinese sport called &#36468;&#38816; -- pronounced Cu Ju ,in the province of Shan Dong, north of China.'' -- can we have a citation for this? I've not heard of this research, and as it has been added by an anon user I'd like a little confirmation if it's to be left in. -- Arwel 20:32, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * There is, perhaps, a reference to this on the Football page, and that is where it belongs. Association Football history begins with the FA drawing up the Laws of the Game.
 * FIFA is said to have officially declared China to have invented early football. Official Chinese source A-giau 19:13, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Brainstorm?
I missed a lot of things about football in this article. As it is, there's a huge chunk on what are the rules of the game (which I seriously think should be cut down), then little else. The naming conventions part is very interesting, but other than that I think there's much room for improvement. Any suggestions? Mandel 10:42, Aug 4, 2004 (UTC)


 * Others may be more likely to suggest something if you were less vague... what else are you missing, exactly? Note that we have separate pages for skills and tactics and for formations. --Shallot 12:07, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * I've been planning to a separate page on football culture, but never actually got round to it. I would take the violence and accidents bit, and add bits on fans, and their culture (links to football chants), as well as derby games.  There would be other things in there but I would need to think them up.  There's still a lot to write up.  Just to point out as well that the accidents bit is very UK orientated so we'd probably need to convince people to contribute some more to it.  It would also help cut out the links at the end of the article as there are well too many of them.  Anybody up for helping out with it? Master Of Ninja 13:22, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * I've now added a page on Football culture. Feel free to add or correct. -- Master Of Ninja 12:11, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Yes, I've had the same idea. Fans/football culture is a big subject. I've been thinking about starting an article on Tifo (see http://www.tifonet.it, for instance). &mdash; Pladask 15:04, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

PS I am very tempted to reword large parts of the article for flow and feel of the text. Would I have support? But then maybe I should wait.Mandel 10:48, Aug 4, 2004 (UTC)

Major international competitions - olympics
I saw in this section that the summer olympic tournament comes right after the world cup. As a matter of precedence shouldn't it even be after the continental competitions, as the European and South American championships are actually more watched, and more prestigious than the olympic one? -- Master Of Ninja 08:36, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Football culture - request for help
Hi

I've basically started and written a lot of the Football culture article. It's linked from the main football page. However I'm not sure how many people have seen it yet.

What I'm asking for is help in adding things to it and proof-reading it as well. The article is very UK-centric, and slightly less Euro-centric. A bit of additional perspective would help.

Any volunteers to help me would be greatly appreciated.

With Thanks -- Master Of Ninja 11:03, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Fanaticism
I advise fanatics,ignorants,vandals,idiots about impossibility a sport is certainly the most played and watched in this planet because is not a valid statistic scientifically available!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Approximately very much we know soccer and basketball are team sports probably most played and watched but cricket,U.S.A.football,Rugby football,baseball are widely spreading in the world specially in Asia where live 3.640.693.000 persons!!


 * Whiteholespewingtimeenginesdeadoxygenlowadviseplease. Hig Hertenfleurst 15:21, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Well that last edit makes it soooo much clearer!? Please get someone who speaks English to help you rather than Gogle or whatever. Mintguy (T)

Metric approximations
The metric approximations for the size of the field of play can be found here:

Laws of the game

As is clearly described: The ten yard required distance to a "dead" ball is approximated to 9.15 meters. The size of the goal is in fact defined to be 7.32 x 2.44 meters.

Furthermore the laws of the game now officially defines the dimesions of the field of play and other distances in meters, keeping yards in parenthesis for historic reference. This article should probably do the same.

And I will keep correcting this as long as I have to. :)


 * There is no need to take an aggressive attitude. The 9.5/9.15 equivalant for 10 yards was incorrectly transcribed some time ago, and it appears on the Wikipedia's image here (Image:Football_pitch_metric.png). This image also has the dimensions of the goal transcribed incorrectly. When someone changed 9.5 to 9.144m with this edit I used this image as a basis for "correcting" the metric equivalants. Of course your first edit of 9.14 for the 10 yards was itself wrong, but thank you for taking the trouble to check it before recorrecting it. The image with the metric equivalents needs to be modified. Mintguy (T) 23:45, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hi!

No aggression intended on my part; just stating the facts. Yup, I missed by a cm when first correcting - didn't check the laws before doing it. I notice also that the image actually contradicts itself in prescribing a 9.5 m center circle and a 9.2 m penalty circle. I not too good with images though, so I'll leave it to someone else to correct it.

chrmb

Opinions wanted
Could football/soccer contributors please help to adjudicate the ongoing controvery at Talk:Rutgers_University. Thanks.Grant65 (Talk) 08:25, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

Football stubs
I have created a new stub template for football related items, I figured that there are a large number of fans in the Wiki population who might be interested in filling out articles but are not willing or able to wade through the mountain of general/bio/sports stubs. The category is Category:Football (soccer) stubs. There are already almost 250 articles there, what has surprised me during this effort is how many major players still don't have articles at all.

Bob Palin 14:40, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Football / Soccer
Seeing "football (soccer)" everywhere is doing my head in. Can't we move this page and associated pages to use the unambiguous term association football? IVoteTurkey 16:02, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * It's been discussed before, believe it or not - the general reason for using "football (soccer)" is that "association football" isn't a very commonly used term, at least outside of Britain. Also, linking to football (soccer), with the extra "pipe" at the end, conveniently displays as just football. sjorford 16:18, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Yup. Unfortunately, on Current sports events someone went around deleting all the pipes. I suspect it was a fan of American football who objected to the beautiful game appearing as plain football! -- Arwel 22:15, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Someone pointed this out at the top of the page, but I thought I'd put a valid link here are the bottom - "soccer to officially become football in Australia" - http://www.australiansoccer.com.au/public/article/show.asp?articleid=8183&menuItemID=


 * I've just been told off for altering the first paragraph of this page to say that its official name is Association Football and soccer is slang. Apparently this is no longer true. No longer true where? Even the Australians admit soccer is not what the rest of the world calls it:


 * "The Australian Soccer Association (ASA) will change its name to Football Federation Australia on January 1 to help lift the game's profile.

"We feel that it is important to make this symbolic change, and to bring the 'world game' in Australia into line with the rest of the football world," ASA chairman Frank Lowy said in a statement on Thursday." from the FIFA website.


 * I don't care how much debate there has been or how strongly certain people feel about this - there is wrong name and a right name. I'm sure these arguments have been put before but I'm not about to wade through pages of debate to find them. The fact is that in much of the world you could watch football, play football, organise football and NEVER come across the word soccer. The official bodies are called Football organisations, it's played by football players for football clubs on football pitches and watched by football fans. It's a no-brainer. That there are other sports which are called football doesn't change this fact.


 * I will not be bullied or pursuaded otherwise. I will make this change anywhere I see it. If the first paragraph of this page remains as it is now I will put a 'Neutrality Disputed' notice up as it is misleading and WRONG. user:Btljs

---

In Australia yesterday, the Australian Soccer Association changed its name to Football Federation Australia - and expects all soccer organisations to do the same. At least one of the major newspapers, The Sydney Morning Herald, has officially started using the name football instead of soccer in their sports section. I wasn't sure exactly how or where to put this in the article, so I didn't touch it... --AlbinoMonkey 08:21, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * As an Australian involved in the sport in many ways, I will be interested to see how this change works out. The major "football codes" in NSW and Qld have official names quite different to football (ie Rugby League and Rugby Union), however in the other states the major code (Australian football) is simply called "football" and this no doubt will cause some confusion (presumably where they may be possible confusion a qualifier will be used, eg "Australian football"). I wonder whether the News Ltd press will change to using "football" for "soccer", considering the investment News has in rugby league.
 * It is interesting, seems highly unlikely the AR community will acknowledge it though, many of them have trouble coming to terms with actual existence of other codes in the first place. But there is a another phenomenon - the sponsor-related naming of grounds - people appear prepared to dispense with names that in some cases have been in use for many, many years at the drop of a hat.


 * The "soccer"/"football" debate will no doubt continue to go on, but debaters should accept the fact that the game goes by different names in different places (and sometimes by more than one name in the one place). The article currently deals with this reality well - at least the opening and important sections - and there is no point in changing this.


 * Cheers,
 * --Daveb 07:42, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * the term football fits no sport better than the game between two teams of 11 play two periods of 45 minute each and no hands/arms are allowed to touch the ball on the field.
 * however, due to the american influence on the world, soccer is the next best known word to describe this sport.
 * right now the title and the opening section does indeed explain this very well and i think it should stay this way. association football is ridiculous, the biggest sport in the world should not have to suffer to a practically unknown name. Keep it the way it is.  LG-&#29356;&#22812;&#21449; 08:36, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, 'association football' *is* the official name of the sport and, if you ask me, an encyclopaedia should be using official terminology: for example, the article on 'penalty shoot-outs' resides under the procedure's official name of kicks from the penalty mark, despite the fact that nobody except a few referees and the LOAF calls it that, it is the official name and should be used. The same principle should apply for the name of the game.  Hig Hertenfleurst 19:03, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Management
I've been looking for a page that describes the role of the football manager, or head coach. I've only found articles about economics and baseball so far. I was surprised that such an important role hasn't been commented on so far. Vanky 01:03, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Football culture subsection
Hi everyone,

Almost all the information in the football culture subsection was already covered (often word-for-word) in the dedicated article football culture. Therefore I think it is worthwhile moving the remaining information to that article, in much the same way that the large football around the world subsection was successfully moved to its own article last year.

There is a wealth of information to be presented about the sport, but football (soccer) is already a long article. We should probably try to keep the focus on it as the "core" article regarding football, and as such primarily focus on the core details; further worthwhile information can be covered in dedicated articles. Obviously this will require a bit of a balancing act!

Please throw around any ideas!

Cheers, --Daveb 16:09, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Expanded laws info / gameplay
Hi everyone,

I have begun expanding the information on the Laws to make the game more understandable to those who don't know much about the game (this is an encyclopaedia after all): prior to this there was very little about how the game is actually played. I have tried to cover things broadly rather than a technical regurgitation of the Laws.

I think we should add brief info on fouls and misconduct. Tehre is already an article on offside that we can easily link to.

This will all add to the article length so we may have to spin off some of the more detailed info to other articles, eg the nitty-gritty of the FOP could go to a devoted article.

A section on general gameplay would probably be beneficial too.

Cheers, --Daveb 18:59, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Is football number one?
Has it ever been conclusively proven that football/soccer is the most played and most watched sport in the World? It says so in the beginning of the article, but has it really been proven? There are indeed figures about volleyball and basketball that point to a possibility that these two sports challenge football/soccer in this area. (Number of national associations (both) is one, number of players (volleyball) is another). Personally, I think football/soccer is the most played/watched, but I am serious enough about it to acknowledge that I have never seen conclusive evidence about it. //AT 2005-04-12


 * See for a page that shows just how ludicrous most published figures are. According to FIVB, 1 in 6 of the world's population play volleyball. Even taking into account that there is a difference between "plays" and "has played, once, in the back yard", that figure still seems stupidly high. I'm not aware of any reliable figures on these things, but then I've never heard anybody seriously refute the claim of football to be #1. (Except by anglers, but then that's a pastime, not a sport :) sjorford &rarr;&bull;&larr; 12:54, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sure, but is it--strictly speaking--appropriate that a serious initiative like wikipedia puts it up as fact in the article? I think not. I think that that part should be rephrased to better reflect the situation. I think it should be mentioned that, although there is no conclusive evidence, most indicators point to that football/soccer is the most played and watched sport in the world. //AT 2005-04-12

Well, I've been bold, and removed the 'most popular' claim from the first paragraph (it's been transplanted and NPOVised to the end of the FIFA survey para), as well as taking the opportunity to relegate the first mention of alternate naming a short way (IMO it's not so utterly important as to need mentioning straight off the bat). Hig Hertenfleurst 13:33, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Nice bold fix there Hig!! The whole naming issue simply takes up too much space for what is not a major matter, e.g. the Names of the game section has somehow grown into an ugly mess of English and non-English names and derivatives. People simply need to accept that the sport does go by different names in different places, whether it suits our preference or not (e.g. I for one am happy that Soccer Australia has eventually morphed into Football Federation Australia, but can cope with the fact that the media refers to the sport by both names!). I think we need to continue to focus on improving information on the game itself (refer to above topics).  Cheers, --Daveb 05:21, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

From 24.22.66.105: The most popular sport in the world is football/soccer. All you need is a ball.


 * And a foot --Clawed 04:14, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Further streamlining of article
I have moved the bulk of the names of the game section to its own article (Football (soccer) names).

This section was bulky and unwieldy, with bits and pieced tacked-on clumsily over time; much of the section referred to non-English terminology, while other parts agonised over the preferred term in English-speaking countries. It was not in keeping with an overview article, which this is.

As such, I have streamlined the section to a brief overview of the development of the main terms for the game, with a brief note on why different terms are used. By design there are no lists of what terms are used where: these are dealt with in the new article, and placing them in the football (soccer) article will simply lead to more pedantic debate.

While I know lots of people like to debate what is the "best" or "correct" term, these debates will go on forever and we simply need to accept that different terms are used in different parts of the world. Let's get football (soccer) up to featured status quality!

Cheers, --Daveb 10:03, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * The memorable moments section simply lists some names and events; it doesn't give any useful information about what happened, why the events are memorable or why they were important to the sport... all-in-all hardly encyclopaedic information. I suggest it be removed. If the information is somehow deemed important it could be placed in football culture or in its own article, eg "List of football memorable moments". --Daveb 05:56, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, Dave, maybe you SHOULD have done either BEFORE you deleted the section. I would say it should be a section in Football Culture. --Marianocecowski 07:14, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * This is wikipedia; anyone can revert the change so my suggestion is still that- a suggestion that the section not be in football (soccer). It doesn't really matter whether I publish my ideas seven minutes before or seven minutes after I made a change. I agree football culture could be a good article in which to put the list, however the usefulness of the "information" in its current form is debatable. Cheers, --Daveb 08:57, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * I would suggest not to put it into the football culture article as the article is way too big at the moment, and will probably get streamlined shortly. Maybe put the memorable moments in its own page, listed by decade or by year, with explanations why it was memorable? -- Master Of Ninja 14:49, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * True. Also, we don't want Football culture to just become a dumping ground for all miscellaneous football-related issues. Expansion of the information to something more meaningful is certainly required. --Daveb 07:46, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Nomination for POV
To everyone on this talk page, I am sorry for my behavior. Look at my user page user:taylorr. please respond to this message! sorry, taylorr

I have nominated this article for check of it's POV due to the word being used more than football, offending some, and offenses on the talk page. Taylorr 21:32, 19 May 2005 (UTC)TaylorrTaylorr 21:32, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
 * This is an invalid dispute, the author has failed to declare the nature of his dispute in the above entry. Bob Palin 21:45, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I have removed the NPOV templates. In any case, three templates was wildly excessive and damned ugly - one would be sufficient if the nominator had deigned to properly state his grounds for a dispute. -- Arwel 23:35, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Arwel, you are a loser for ruining a VALID DISPUTE. Here is one: when there is a raging debate over what should be the name on the talk page, and things have happened, DONT YOU THINK THE THING SHOULD BE PUT IN PLACE? Are you blind? Look below, there is a fight going on. So, there is a dispute, a word that is used in the NPOV template. So Arwel, get a life other than critizizing something that is right! 68.196.86.165Taylorr68.196.86.165
 * I would hardly call it a raging dispute. The issue has been discussed ad nauseum previously, and the compromise of using the "soccer" in the title Football (soccer), explaining where the terms come from, but using the formal name in the text, decided upon. --Daveb 10:11, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
 * One person disputing something that was settled years ago on Wikipedia after very long debate does not indicate a valid POV dispute - it indicates the presence of a kook. --83.104.44.241 13:06, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Taylorr said "Look below, there is a fight going on". This is an encyclopedia, there should be no "fights" over the content, just reasoned, rational discussion and agreement. The contents of an encyclopedia are not determined by who is offended or by common usage in any particular country, they are determined by the facts. There has been a lot of reasoned, rational discussion of this matter in the past, it is available for anyone to read. It was determined that the fact is, that the game is called Football. However, to acknowledge that other games are also called by this name, the (soccer) was added and the main article on Football summarises the various games that are called that. It's very hard to see how a more reasonable agreement could be reached. Bob Palin 13:41, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

its not my fault loser its the talk page!!

Soccer should be the name
I definatly think the game should be known as soccer. Although only few know it as soccer, the bigger nations know it by that name. Just because the British know it by the name 'Football' dosen't mean it should actually be named that! I mostly think of old people calling the sport football, and by now, with bigger and more populous nations calling it soccer, that means it should be known by that. So at my perspective: old people call the sport football, and the correct and more popular name is soccer. I also think the only reason it is called football because radical people like the person who wrote this article who want to change the name of something to their liking changed football into the more popular word. Anyone who lookes at this article should look at all the other posts. They all say that the word soccer origanated in England and Ireland. So obviously it became popular and people just hated the name who probably couldn't speak English! And the word soccer origanated probably at the same time the word football did.

So I think when bigger countries call something by one name, and just one island and some liberal countries in Europe call it by another name, who should get the name? My choice: the larger countries. Also, just because this Hig Hertenfleurst thinks he's such a big hot shot and he can't get any substatial evidence (a name let alone for that matter) doesn't mean that football is the 'supreme name'! That is extremly upseting! One more thing: the word soccer became popular around the 1880s. The word football became popular at about 1860. So the ridiculous comment by Daveb can't be proven: the article about soccer vs football names just stated when they became POPULAR! Plus, you were wrong about just the U.S. saying 'soccer', it clearly states in the article that Daveb refers to that Australians, New Zealanders, and some white South African communities call it soccer, maybe more as far as we know. So the comment about 'soccer' being only spoken in the U.S. is wrong beyond belief. And the only reason the Australians changed their soccer association to the word football is because of the terrible pressure made by other countries. And Daveb can't check his facts either: he is TOTALLY twisting what he said and is making offensive comments regarding population of the UK vs the population of other countries. Just because you make a play on words you think that I didn't refute your comments, which I did. And I didn't say ANYTHING about soccer predating football, I said they came at the same time. These are some ways that I refuted your comments- 1. I gave dates- you didn't. 2. I gave examples- you didn't. 3. And I didn't use twisted facts and mess up what someone else says- you did. Taylorr


 * Just because you think something's right don't make it so. The current usage has been arrived at after much debate, and we've now got something that might possibly be called consensus, the practical upshot of which is that this article refers to itself as football.  It's considered bad form to come thumping in and make changes to something that's been debated at length already without first attempting to restart the debate.  With that in mind, I've just reverted your edits.  Incidentally, you might also like to sign your comments using three or four tildes (~), which produces the following rather pretty effect: Hig Hertenfleurst 16:29, 14 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Tell you what, when the governing body changes its name to FISA we can justify changing the wiki entry. Bob Palin 20:50, 14 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I can't believe this petty debate keeps rearing its ugly head! Then again, with ridiculous statements like the anonymous entry above I can see why it does.
 * "...with bigger and more populous nations calling it soccer...". Could you please explain this statement? I can only think of one English-speaking nation more populous that the UK that uses "soccer" more commonly.
 * "word soccer origanated probably at the same time the word football did". Read the football (soccer) names: it shows how the two names developed.
 * The reality is that the sport is known by different names in different places, and for different reasons; the article title reflects this. Furthermore, there is a separate section acknowledging the different names used, and a link to a more comprehensive article covering the issue. The sport's "formal" name, at least as used by its governing body, is football, and this is why it this term is used throughout the article. Enough said!
 * --Daveb 13:30, 15 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Dear Taylor/anonymous:
 * Your latest additions to your original post above aren't doing you any favours.
 * I never said that just the US calls the sport "soccer"; rather I refuted your comment that "bigger and more populous nations" call the sport soccer by pointing out that there is only one more populous English-speaking nation that the UK that does so. You have failed to refute this: you have only listed a few English-speaking nations with far lower populations that the UK.
 * Please provide evidence to support your assertation that "soccer" predated "football". The article I refered you to clearly explains how "soccer" was developed from the term "association football".
 * Please provide evidence that the Australian Soccer Association changed its name to Football Federation due to "terrible pressure made by other countries". The FFA has clearly stated that it changed its name by its own volition in order to better utilise the connection to the "world game".
 * Clearly you have your knickers in a knot over something, but before you carry on like that again I suggest you check your facts. --Daveb 12:22, 19 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Dear Taylor - I'm afraid you don't really make a lot of sense and it is perhaps pointless trying to debate with you, but perhaps I should make one thing perfectly clear to you. The word "soccer" is an abbreviation of "association" from Association football. Much like "rugger" for Rugby football it was used as a slang way to refer to the game. In Britain and most of the rest of the English speaking world (see below where the national associations are listed) the word soccer has no meaning outside of its slang usage. We would never consider placing Rugby football at "Rugger" and we wouldn't consider placing American football at "gridiron" or "old pigskin". Bye Jooler 07:45, 20 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Taylorr: Do not edit what other people have written on this talk page in order to misrepresent them. Such behaviour is pathetic, to say the least. I have reverted your vandalism of my comments.
 * Furthermore, your "counter-refutations" are useless:
 * You provide no evidence to support your "dates". In comparison, I was able to direct you to an article that clearly explained to origin of the name soccer as a derivation of association football.
 * I stated a fact: there is only one English-speaking country with a larger population than the UK that uses the term soccer; this was done to clearly refute your garbage statement that the "bigger and more populous nations" use the term soccer. Can you name any other countries that fit your description? Your last attempt highlighted your ignorance in the matter.
 * Could you elaborate on exactly what "twisted facts" I used?
 * So, Taylorr, I think it is time to grow up, use basic netiquette and stop vandalising others' comments. You will also need to accept that the sport is known by different names in different places, but that the formal title used by both the IOC and FIFA is "football", and that "football" predated "soccer" as clearly described in the article I directed you to.
 * --Daveb 10:09, 20 May 2005 (UTC)