Talk:UEFA Euro 2020 qualifying play-offs

Section showing provisional play-off teams
I think there is a lot of value to be had in showing which teams are provisionally in the 4 play-off spots for all 4 play-offs. The page currently lists the priority lists for each of the 4 leagues but this on it's own is not that helpful as there is no connection between this and the current state of the qualification groups. For example working out which teams are currently playing in the League A play-offs cannot easily be worked out from looking at the priority list.

An example of what I have in mind is given below which is how it would have looked after the third round of games were complete. I added this to the page but another user has removed it. We have discussed it on their talk page and we disagree on the need for this information. I therefore would be interested in hearing other opinions on the matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sperick (talk • contribs) 16:17, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * With the qualifying group stage now well underway, I've added a letter to note this without needing a separate table. S.A. Julio (talk) 15:33, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Provisional Play-off positions
 Notes



Recent change
The format was very recently overhauled. I feel it's not am improvement at all. The table now no longer complies to MOS:ACCESS, in particular with MOS:COLOR. Currently the blue and green background are used as sole means to convey their information. And they are unfortunately not accessible to a number of readers.Tvx1 16:50, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I would support this comment. The bolding and italics are good as are the (E), (Z), (Y), but it was better before with the yellow where we have (X) in the last column.  The colours would be better added when things are definite and final rather than solely due to current standings (this I believe is more consistent with wikipedia standards). The yellow would then move down once higher teams will no longer need these spots, and will turn blue once teams are confirmed as being in the play-offs (so 16 yellow bands would change to 16 blue bands over time). These colours would mean we don't neccessarily need the (Q) and (A) designations that might otherwise be added to the table (alternatively, we could no have the green colouring at all and use the (Q) designator instead.  That would actually be more consistent with this table being able play-off qualifications, and colours only designating teams that are in play-offs (I would understand the deviation from standard in this case however).165.225.114.217 (talk) 01:31, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * The previous version violated MOS:ACCESS, only the yellow denoted teams guaranteed a play-off spot. Now, the table combines the blue colour with strong text. While the table is meant to focus mainly on the play-off teams (the group standings can be found elsewhere), if necessary the top two teams of each group could also be denoted using emphasis. Visually, this version seems to be more intuitive to readers, and makes the play-off possibilities easier to follow. In response to the IP, this is no different to the group standings tables, which colour teams even if they have not yet qualified. Then the status letters (A, Q) can be used to note when positions are finalised for teams, just as done in group tables. The qualifying article should have internal consistency, hence why I adjusted the format. S.A. Julio (talk) 15:23, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

League C
As of Matchday 6 (September 8-10), there's a disagreement between editors of possible playoff combinations. I'll state my points briefly that don't agree with the recent edit.


 * The only reason any league gets more than four playoff spots is if there is a league somewhere that has less than four teams that didn't qualify directly.
 * In the case of League C, it's only getting more than four spots if every team is either already qualified or going to playoffs from Leagues A and B.
 * That's 24 direct qualification and playoff spots combined, which leaves 8 spots for League C (as it's currently seen).
 * The teams at the bottom of the overall Nations League rankings of League C therefore only go to playoffs if it's the other case: namely, if so many teams are directly qualified above them that they can get to the 4 playoff spots that way.
 * So Estonia can go to playoffs but Slovenia can't! Here's the best possible case for them:
 * Group A: Bulgaria and Montenegro can't both qualify directly (that would involve both of them getting past England), so at least one of them gets a playoff spot. (1)
 * Group B: Serbia and Lithuania can't both qualify directly, so the one that does should be Serbia, as they're above Slovenia and Estonia. (Sorry, Lithuania! We're trying to get Slovenia to playoffs!)
 * Group C: Estonia can't qualify directly, so they are getting a playoff spot. (2)
 * Group D: There are no teams from League C there.
 * Group E: Hungary can still qualify, that doesn't take up a playoff spot.
 * Group F: Norway and Romania can still take top two, if they win all their remaining games (NOR-ROU can be won by Norway), and Spain loses everything.
 * Group G: Israel and Slovenia may both qualify, but right now, we're trying to decide if Slovenia can go to playoffs if they don't qualify directly. So let Israel get at least second place.
 * Group H: Albania may still qualify directly.
 * Group I: Cyprus and Scotland can't both qualify directly (Belgium is out of reach), so at least one of them gets a playoff spot. (3)
 * Group J: Finland and Greece can't both qualify directly (Italy can't be pursued by Greece), so at least one of them gets a playoff spot. (4)

As it can be seen, even if everything goes well, Slovenia cannot get a playoff spot, because Estonia, and at least one team from Groups A, I and J are going to get to playoffs before them from League C. (Same goes for Lithuania by the way.) Piriprimey (talk) 09:20, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * There is a possibility for Slovenia to advance to the playoffs. It relies on almost everyone from League B except one group winner qualifying from the main path. If at least nine League B teams qualify directly but one group winner does not, the extra teams for the playoffs have to come from League C (group winners can't be in the same playoff path with higher league teams). Slovenia therefore advances to the playoffs with the following main path qualifiers.
 * Group A: Czech Republic (and England)
 * Group B: Ukraine and Serbia
 * Group C: Northern Ireland (and Germany)
 * Group D: Republic of Ireland and Denmark
 * Group E: Slovakia and Wales
 * Group F: Romania and Norway
 * Group G: Austria and Israel
 * Group H: Turkey and Albania
 * Group I: Russia and Cyprus
 * Group J: Finland and BiH
 * In this scenario, there is one League B team not qualifying directly which is group winner Sweden. There are eight teams in League C not qualifying directly: Scotland, Bulgaria, Greece, Albania, Montenegro, Estonia, Slovenia, Lithuania. The first seven advance to the playoffs. Only Lithuania is out. 109.204.166.89 (talk) 11:41, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Bulgaria and Montenegro can not qualify toghether but Czech Republic and Montenegro could so Lithuania is still in the race. Stigni (talk) 21:14, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually, Montenegro cannot outrank England, so it cannot qualify together with the Czech Republic. (Bulgaria can't either.) No more than 10 teams from League C can qualify directly. --Theurgist (talk) 21:27, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

And what happens if, in the above scenario, Sweden qualifies directly instead of either Norway or Romania? This way everyone of League B would qualify, and Leagues A and C would each have enough non-qualifying teams for two full play-off paths. Would the League B path be formed with League A teams or with League C teams? (In the latter case Slovenia still would be in the play-offs while Lithuania still wouldn't.) --Theurgist (talk) 00:08, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * League A teams, as no group winner would be present (therefore allocated via the overall ranking). S.A. Julio (talk) 20:41, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Playoff Rules
I think it is ambiguous, how the rules are defined. In the situation where teams selected for playoffs are:

League A (1) - 1 non group winner

League B (4) - 1 group winner and 3 non group winner

League C (7) - 3 group winners and 4 non group winner

League D (4) - 4 group winner

1. Form a path with four teams from the same league.

2. If there are more than four teams qualified in a given league, draw which teams will participate in the play-off path of that league.

3. Remaining teams are drawn into a path of a higher league.

Path D is formed with the 4 League D teams.

Path C is formed with 4 of the 7 League C teams, 3 of the non group winners are drawn into a path of a higher league.

Path B - are the 3 overflow League C teams drawn into this Path (as per point 3) ie draw 3 teams from 6 (3 B non GW + 3 C overflow) to join B GW in Path B? Or is this Path formed of all the League 4 teams because there are 4 (as per point 1)?

I'd like to change some of the wording, but don't actually now or think that this would be the process.

1. If there are four teams form a path with four teams from the same league.

2. If there are more than four teams qualified in a given league, draw which teams (non group winners) will participate in the play-off path of that league.

3. Remaining teams are drawn into a path of a higher league which is not already full.

DavidDublin (talk) 09:10, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Original table
Given how intricate the play-off rules are and how much discussion there is about them, I made this table to represent all possible combinations of direct qualifiers per group and league as of right now. Feel free to update it, improve its readability, and fix any errors. --Theurgist (talk) 10:38, 15 September 2019 (UTC)


 * If these are all the possible table-topping combinations, you can see the issue in determining the status of a team, as there would currently be 96,768,000 unique "selection" outcomes which are possible. S.A. Julio (talk) 16:17, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Indeed, and my aim was to ease that process and to facilitate calculations such as those above on this page and in other talk pages. Can Slovenia be in the play-offs? Yes, because the table shows that a sufficient number of teams from Leagues B and C can still qualify directly. Of course, the table will have to be updated as the events unfold. --Theurgist (talk) 19:03, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * We are now down to 82,944 41,472 possible combinations of top two teams in the standings, assuming the below table is correct. Thanks to UEFA's helpful simulator, I was able to run a script to generate the possible scenarios, allowing for a quick check to see if a team still can qualify for the play-offs. If interested, the output is here in a ZIP file (the contents can be searched using a regex in grep, every team has a status, 1=eliminated, 2=qualified, 4=playoffs). S.A. Julio (talk) 16:58, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I downloaded it, although I'm not computer-savvy enough to be sure how to use it. By the way, UEFA's simulator is slightly incorrect in that it allows you to select teams that in reality can no longer qualify directly together, such as both Slovakia and Wales, and both Romania and Norway. --Theurgist (talk) 00:51, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I made sure to only request possible combinations based on the below table. If you are on Windows, grepWin is a useful tool for searching files. If you navigate to the unzipped folder under "search in", you can do a regex search of the files, here are some examples. Then all the files matching the search will be returned, each filename has the respective 20-team combination of qualified teams (which can be copied into a text editor for review). S.A. Julio (talk) 02:54, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Just uploaded a spreadsheet with the data here. If you go to Data → Filter views → Create new temporary filter view, you can click the green sort icon on a column to filter by a team's possibilities. S.A. Julio (talk) 08:31, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Suggestion about key
I think (Q) and (E) stands for 'qualified' and 'eliminated' well, but (A), (X), (Y), (Z) aren't understandable without explanation. How about substitute (A) with (P)(for 'Play-off') or (R)(underneath Q)? If (X), (Y), (Z) are replaced with (R+), (!Q), (!R), they can represent their meanings. HostileClaimant (talk) 22:26, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
 * (A) is meant to represent 'advance to a further round', while X/Y/Z are the typical first-choice status letters for group standings, based on Module:Sports table. S.A. Julio (talk) 22:48, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Teams selected
Hey, I noticed you made an adjustment to the table format. However, I wasn't exactly sure about this format, it seemed quite complicated to upon initial viewing. Isn't it simpler to use 'Y' instead of x/S? I'm unsure if that format would be something readers could understand quickly. I'm unsure of the best format of the table, when adjusting the format last month I didn't see the necessity to duplicate all the status letters from the group tables. S.A. Julio (talk) 07:52, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Basically, my version is different from the current version in two aspects:
 * It is more play-offs-centric, and the primary highlighting (the colouring) is based on advancement to the play-offs. That section is about the play-offs; there are plenty of sections and tables about everything else already.
 * There are two separate columns indicating whether or not it is possible for teams to qualify directly and to be in the play-offs. Indeed, this can be achieved with a single column and a few extra letters, but I find that more confusing and less straightforward than my version. Of course, after the completion of the group stage the two columns will be combined into one, as it will be completely unnecessary to have both. But for the time being, I think this aids comprehension.
 * --Theurgist (talk) 17:02, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

So...
...there's no scenario where Northern Ireland doesn't at least make the play-offs, but there are scenarios where Iceland does? 58.111.211.23 (talk) 22:53, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, it seems a bit counterintuitive but that's how it works out given the current teams which have/can still qualify. There are 8 different ways Iceland can still be eliminated, such as this combination of qualified teams: Eng+Cze, Ukr+Srb, Ger+Nir, Den+Irl, Svk+Hun, Esp+Swe, Pol+Aut, Fra+Tur, Bel+Rus, Ita+Fin. Here's a spreadsheet of the 288 remaining possibilities, which allows you to filter possible outcomes by team. S.A. Julio (talk) 23:12, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Awesome work. I was confused about how Greece still had any chance, being ranked 33.  I think I know the rules but I can't keep them all in my head at once.  Using your info I was able to see that it mainly depended on Iceland being eliminated, which of course makes sense.  And out of the 8 ways that can happen, I see they also need Austria or Israel to qualify directly.  Obvious!  OK, I'm still working on that bit... Timanfaya (talk) 09:09, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Right, I've got it now. The unique significance of Group G is that Austria and Israel are above Greece in the NL rankings, while the other possible qualifiers are Slovenia and North Macedonia, who are below them. Timanfaya (talk) 09:54, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Iceland will be eliminated if the League A play-off path can be formed with teams ranked above it. Such a path can still be formed with Portugal, Switzerland, Croatia, and one of Netherlands/Germany.
 * In order for Northern Ireland to be eliminated, the League A and League B paths must both be formed with teams ranked above it. Out of those 23 teams, 11 have already qualified. If Northern Ireland fails, both Netherlands and Germany must qualify. At least 3 others must qualify too: two of Switzerland/Denmark/Ireland, and one of Croatia/Wales/Slovakia. That's a maximum of 7 non-qualifying teams, which is not enough for two paths so Northern Ireland must be there too. --Theurgist (talk) 01:59, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Attendance
Some are wrong. Shall I add UEFA API source?--Island92 (talk) 17:01, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I think here it is better to keep the existing sources, they are all reliable. S.A. Julio (talk) 17:09, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The only differences are Northen Ireland vs. Slovakia (12 November 2020) 1,057 UEFA source in comparison with 1,060 being reported, and Iceland vs. Romania (8 October 2020) behind closed doors UEFA source in comparison with 60 being showed.--Island92 (talk) 17:17, 19 November 2020 (UTC)