Talk:2012–13 Manchester United F.C. season

Football: England / Manchester United / Season Low‑importance

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	English football portal This article is supported by the English football task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Manchester United task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the season article task force.

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Greater Manchester Low‑importance

	Greater Manchester portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greater Manchester, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greater Manchester on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Greater ManchesterWikipedia:WikiProject Greater ManchesterTemplate:WikiProject Greater ManchesterGreater Manchester articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Peterborough friendly[edit]

I wonder if the Peterborough friendly is actually worth listing? The article on ManUtd.com says that the game will be played by a "United XI", which is basically code for "the reserves", plus the first-team is playing in another friendly in Hanover the next day. I think the Peterborough game should be removed from the list. – Pee Jay 12:09, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, they don't even mention it in thier upcoming fixture before the Premier League game.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 13:43, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The same situation has happened a number of times in previous seasons, where a "United XI" has played in a friendly and the team has included a couple of recognised first-team players, but these are still effectively reserve team matches. Shall we try to go back through previous season articles to try to identify those? – Pee Jay 15:23, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And what should we do if the opponent was also been XI? or in Cosmos situation last season where half of the players were United former players.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 16:35, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think in terms of the opposition that's fine, it's more about what United team was playing. The Paul Scholes testimonial was definitely a United first-team friendly. – Pee Jay 20:30, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Than lets remove the United XI from previous articles aswell. But we should keep United testimonial games even if was partly XI. such as Neville one.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 04:15, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like United have just organised another friendly for "a Manchester United XI" against Forest Green Rovers. In case any editors try to add that one, they should be warned that it comes under the same category as the Peterborough friendly. – Pee Jay 12:15, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

'Other' matches column[edit]

Not much point of it, is there? Gonna remove it. VEO^onefive 12:30, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List all the upcoming Premier League games?[edit]

Would people want a list of the scheduled Premier League games, as well as the games already played? Some of the Spanish teams have this, e.g. 2012–13_Real_Madrid_C.F._season#Matches

I think this would be a nice addition, it makes for an easy way to look up future matches. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Motsjo (talk • contribs) 07:37, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It won't be allowed as the Premier League holds the rights on the game schedules and using it will result in copyright infringement. Only UEFA games are permited to be used, so you will see the fixture of United from the Champions League after this week draw but not Premier League games.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 08:00, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fabio and Amos[edit]

I think Fabio and Amos can be removed from squad table. Yes it does show on manutd.com first team squad because there is no page showing 'Players on Loan'. And it shows on the website that Ben Amos will be playing 12-13 season for Hull City. The table will show 0 for all the columns for these players for this season. Whats your view guys?? Shreyas.shridhar (talk) 09:30, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How do we know they won't return from loan and play in games for United this season? We don't. They are still technically United first-team players and deserve to be listed in the stats table, just like we have done for loan players every season before. – Pee Jay 09:55, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Its stated on manutd.com that Ben Amos will be playing for Hull City whole season. Shreyas.shridhar (talk) 10:04, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Their names are there in 'Loan Out' table. We can add their names in the squad table when they come back Shreyas.shridhar (talk) 10:07, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and Fabio is on a season-long loan to QPR, but have you never heard of players being recalled from loans? – Pee Jay 10:08, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, If they are recalled then we can add them to the table. Till then we can remove from the table right? Shreyas.shridhar (talk) 10:16, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, why would we? They are still United players. – Pee Jay 10:20, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Atleast can we put a * in front of their names in the table and showing it below as 'On Loan'??Shreyas.shridhar (talk) 10:25, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Surely that would be pretty obvious, given that they have no squad numbers this season. – Pee Jay 10:51, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. GGMU!! Shreyas.shridhar (talk) 10:54, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Today in United conference we discovered Ben Amos (player in question) will be number 40. with new player Buttner 28 and Ángelo Henríquez once signed will be 32. Fabio number may still vary. But I also belive they should both be in the table as they can still return.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 14:56, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Berbatov in the squad statistics section[edit]

As per Ole Solskjaer's inclusion in the 2007-08 squad stats section, Berbatov should be included in this season's squad stats section. Although he did not make any competitive appearances this season, he was part of the squad when the season started and should be mentioned. – Pee Jay 10:16, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The page should evolve...[edit]

Have a look at Chelsea's page!

The squad section's better. THey have the detail of the Champions League squad. The overall transfer activity. The way the matches are presented is much better (especially the "show" functionality). They've an overview of the competitions. The results by round's interesting, too. And, last but not least, their statistics sections is outstanding! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.13.209.25 (talk) 01:22, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Chelsea's page is unnecessarily convoluted and full of nothing but stats. This page at least has the chance for people to write prose about the season. – Pee Jay 17:05, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Giving more details (like on Chelsea's page) does not prevent you from writing prose! On the contrary, it allows you to do it better! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.218.14.78 (talk) 01:49, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It may not prevent the writing of prose, but it doesn't necessarily help with that process, as you claim. Repeating stats unnecessarily is something we should strive to avoid. – Pee Jay 23:05, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it does. It allows you to refer to a statistics table for example. And it's the best way to give comprehensive information, the prose being the best way of describing how things happened during a match, for example or any other event. And it's not a question of repeating stats, but to mention them. Do we have any mention of the champions league squad? No. So to add it wouldn't be a repetition in any way. The same holds for the majority of the points I mentioned, if not for all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.218.14.78 (talk) 23:34, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about Chelsea's page, but could someone reconfigure the Player's stats table to look more like The Arsenal 2012-13 table? I feel like it makes the difference between substitution appearances and starts, along with total appearances (which is what I think this page needs the most). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adnan7631 (talk • contribs) 01:52, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wilfried Zaha[edit]

First of all, this page and Zaha's page contradicted each other, as he is listed as a United played on loan on his page.

Secondly, Rockybiggs explains it well:

"He is a man u player. Please STOP AMENDING. Please see this league, the transfer Could NOT be left until the summer due to football league rules, see here [1]. Therefore the transfer had to occur in january with a loan back. Please see comments from palace chairman here [2]. Please accept the simeple fact its a transfer, NOT an delayed transfer --Rockybiggs (talk) 10:44, 4 February 2013 (UTC)"[reply]

And finally, yet more proof that Zaha is indeed a Manchester United player here on the official Man Utd website where Zaha is listed as an on-loan player. Can't argue that.

So please, stop trying to change reality because for some reason you'd rather have it another way, and accept he is a United player.90.61.239.252 (talk) 14:11, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2012–13 Manchester United F.C. season. 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/20120518112245/http://www.lcfc.com/page/LatestNews/0%2C%2C10274~2773743%2C00.html to http://www.lcfc.com/page/LatestNews/0%2C%2C10274~2773743%2C00.html

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:11, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]