Talk:Association football/Archive 22

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 15

←

Archive 20

Defenders corner

I heard once there are sometimes corner kicks for the defending side in its own half. Does this happen, if so in what circumstances? BillMasen (talk) 04:57, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

There is nothing under standard football rules that would allow for this: if a player from the attacking team puts the ball out over the dead ball line in the defending team's half, a goal kick is awarded. --Pretty Green (talk) 08:11, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

"Soccer" in lead

The only place the word appears in the lead is in the hat. As an American I find it odd that an article on this sport doesn't have the word "soccer" anywhere in the intro section. Granted, we Americans aren't known for our wordly view, and perhaps "football" exceeds use of "soccer" by leaps and bounds in the overall globe. Still though, America is a pretty big place, makes up a large percentage of the English-speaking world that reads the English Wikipedia, and we all call it soccer here. Since soccer redirects here, and it's a prominent enough term to warrant the hat statement, there should be some mention in the lead, however brief. That's my 2 pence. Equazcion ^(talk) 06:59, 20 Mar 2010 (UTC)

Yes but that's America, how many of the Pro American players/those playing in the American League call it Football most of them! The majority of the world calls it Football, it was the first Football and the only Football which uses the feet for most of the game so shouldn't it have the right to be called Football. Additionally the countries that call it Soccer (most of them anyway) try to enforce the word Football as the correct term, all of the governing bodies of those countries refer to it as Football, take Australia for example. They have AFL and both of the Rugbys, The AFL and Rugby fans usually call it Soccer but those who play the sport call it Football and the correct/official term for the sport in Australia is Football! The sport is not commonly known as Soccer, Soccer is in the nicknames as it should be but most people call it Football! Simba1409 (talk) 08:54, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Simba1409, you are clearly a very dense individual. We do not care what the "official" name for a sport is in a particular country; we simply care what Joe Public on the street calls it. There are people in the United States, Canada, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand who call the sport "soccer", and there are even British people who use that name. It is just as valid a nickname as "football". – Pee Jay 09:36, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes but it is way more refereed to as Football than Soccer, Football is not a nickname of the sport noting the knowledge of FIFA= International Federation of Association Football!

Um, as far as I know, FIFA is not an English abbreviation. The French word can be translated into English as football or soccer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.245.144.229 (talk) 10:10, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

The sport is called Footie or the World Game more than what it is called Soccer so why don't we just leave the most common name (Football) at the top and leave the nicknames on the side! Simba1409 (talk) 09:51, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

That's just in your experience. There are millions of people worldwide who call it "soccer", even more than those who regularly call it "the world game" or "the beautiful game". This encyclopaedia is intended to serve the entire planet, not just your tiny corner of it. – Pee Jay 09:54, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

What is the most common name for the sport? Football, I'm not saying people don't call the sport Soccer hence the reason it is in the nicknames on the side! We keep the most common name at the top, the other names at the side!

More people call it Football than Soccer —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simba1409 (talk • contribs) 10:00, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

But how do you know that "football" and "soccer" are not used in equal measure? Usage of those terms varies depending on where you are; even within countries, usage of a particular term can change. As far as most people are concerned, "football" and "soccer" are equally valid nicknames for association football. – Pee Jay 10:04, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Count the countries, which would be more people? [1] Football would! They aren't the population of countries that call it Soccer is overpowered by the larger list of countires which call it Football [2] They are not used equally, Players, Fans, Governing bodies, Commentators, Coaches etc call it Football since it is the world most popular sport that leaves a small amount of people who call it Soccer Fact and math over rules opinion! Simba1409 (talk) 10:10, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

You're obviously not listening to what I'm saying. "Football" may be more popular as a primary nickname, but how many of those people do you think use "soccer" as well? Probably most of them. Anyway, this discussion is clearly still in progress, so stop removing "soccer" from the article until the conversation is over. – Pee Jay 10:18, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

No most of them wouldn't call it Football and Soccer, and seeing that there is more countries (with bigger populations) that refer to the sport as Football the discussion is other due to the reason that Wikipedia follows facts!

Again read here [3]

Simba1409 (talk) 10:20, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Now you're the one making assumptions. Just because someone uses one name primarily does not mean they are incapable of using another name. For example, my dad is Welsh and he uses "football" and "soccer" interchangeably. Your argument is a non-starter. – Pee Jay 10:30, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

No, the most common name for the Sport is Football EVERYONE KNOWS that the way the page is worded makes it sound like the terms are equaly used which they are not!

How about we reword it to something like this 'more commonly as Football in most countries and Soccer in countries with other codes of Football?'

Simba1409 (talk) 10:34, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm not going to argue with you any more over the prevalence of either term. However, I do agree that a rewording is probably necessary. Whether the wording you suggest is appropriate or not is not for me to decide. – Pee Jay 10:39, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

EVERYONE else seems to be happy with it as it is, which is why you keep being reverted - while Wikipedia uses consensus not majority, this should be a pretty strong hint. Your arguments are valid reasons why the article titles should be (association) football rather than soccer (and believe me, that argument has been done to death), but not valid reasons to remove the word soccer as an alternative name for the sport, which it is. BEVE (talk) 10:41, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't usually matter how prominent an "also known as" term is. How often one word is used over another is a hard thing to source, so claiming something like you're suggesting is usually not done in leads, and would be original research anyway. How often on Wikipedia does some editor make the argument that, "Well everyone knows this", and actually end up winning? That's really not a respected argument here. Equazcion ^(talk) 15:00, 20 Mar 2010 (UTC)

PS. I also oppose this "other codes" wording, not only because it sounds totally awkward, but because it doesn't make much sense. "Codes" other than what? Are you saying the rules of the game in countries that call it "football" are more "official" than the one calling it "soccer"? It's a very odd statement that seems again like original research, and even if not, is too cryptic for the lead. Equazcion ^(talk) 15:04, 20 Mar 2010 (UTC)

This argument, if you want to call it that, has been done to death. I'm surprised you guys are being so patient here. The fact is not only is soccer just a "nickname", it's also a name used exclusively (and officially) for the sport in the U.S. and Canada, which is over 300 million English speaking people right there. Not to mention many other countries also commonly call it soccer. It's also irrelevant which name is used more for the sport in this case, so let's not even argue about that. Backing up your argument by linking to another Wikipedia article is also not the way to go. LonelyMarble (talk) 15:16, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Other codes of Football means AFL, Rugby League, Rugby Union, American Football etc. And how is it irrelevant, the article claims that Football and Soccer are equally terms which they clearly are not! Football is the offical word for the majorty of the world, so it should be re worded.

If you think Soccer is a more common term then your an idiot! It should be noted that only general public call it Soccer (excluding America who have MLS) all the other leagues call it Football. It should be noted that the sport is officially called Football excluding America and a few other countries!

Count the countries which have Football for the official name of Association Football and which have Soccer, then count the people, which has more! Football!

THE ARTICLE NEEDS REWORDING! If they want the sport called football they would have called it FISA!Simba1409 (talk) 22:12, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

No one said soccer is the more common term. It doesn't matter if they're equally used or not, even if you had a source for that, which you don't. And don't call people idiots -- WP:NPA. Equazcion ^(talk) 22:26, 20 Mar 2010 (UTC)

Exactly my point, the article suggests that Soccer is a equal or more common term which is why it must be re worded, and I can get sources to prove which word is more common! I could even do the math!

124.179.243.193 (talk) 23:04, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

The lead makes no claim which name is more popular, and football is even listed first. More information about the differing names for the sport is covered in length in the etymology section of this article. The etymology section even makes clear that most official organizations use football. There is absolutely no need to get into an argument about whether football or soccer is the more common name. If you want to force the argument, the United Kingdom has ~60 million people; the United States and Canada have ~340 million people. And why force the issue, the article is already titled association football, let it go. LonelyMarble (talk) 03:10, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Exactly it leaves the user blank, another reason why we should reword it! Well all know which term is official and more common!

Simba1409 (talk) 05:27, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Of course, the easy way out of this is to change the wording to 'also known as football or soccer'. --Pretty Green (talk) 10:15, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that change of wording would help with this user's complaint of alleged ambiguity. And I don't think a change of wording is necessary. No one else seems to have a problem with the current wording. LonelyMarble (talk) 22:40, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Soccer is by far the most popular name of this sport throughout the English speaking world. Football is a confusing name which can refer to a variety of sports. Plus, no one ever calls it Association Football. So, soccer is the only logical name. Just because some Poms don't like the name soccer should not really matter. Jonas.maj (talk) 12:02, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

This is clearly a subjective issue. Your perception of the popularity of either word will obviously depend on where you are from. If you are from a place where American football, Australian rules football or rugby league football is more popular, then it is almost certain that you will refer to association football as "soccer". However, this does vary across countries, regions and even cities, so it is not fair to say whether "football" is more popular a term than "soccer" or vice versa. – Pee Jay 16:42, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

I think interpreting the above comments as an assertion about the popularity of the word soccer vis-à-vis football is beside the point. Instead, it points out what I think should be obvious, and the reasons I would strongly support a move to soccer (though the article should still use the majority wording football): that very few people are familiar with the term association football, while technically correct and incorporating the commonly used word football; and that soccer is unambiguous, and is understood and used throughout the English-speaking word, even when not the preferred term.

FWIW, though (not much), football (soccer) makes my eyes bleed.—Wiki Wikardo 00:37, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Certainly words derived from the English word "football" are the most common terms for this sport; however, the Spanish word for the sport is "fútbol" and the German word for the sport is "fußball". These words, though similar to "football", are spelled and pronounced differently and are therefore different words. How many non-English speaking countries actually use the word "football" for the sport? Rreagan007 (talk) 21:34, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Check the interwiki links on the article to get an idea. Arguably, "fútbol" is the same word, just with an unavoidable accent by non-English speakers, and then naturalized to Spanish orthography. French, for example, also spells it football. —Wiki Wikardo 00:37, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Yawn! The article is fine at 'association football' - that is the sport's name. Admittedly it is the more formal version but, as you note Wiki Wikardo, football (soccer) is ugly and both football/soccer are unacceptable for a variety of reasons. 'Association Football' is perhaps more common than many think - FIFA, for example, includes it in its name.

As for the whole soccer in lead stuff; the phrase Association football, more commonly known as football or soccer is completely accurate, it doesn't state which is most common, ie, it is fair and neutral. As I have pointed out many times too, the American/Rest of World soccer/football binary simply isn't true; 'soccer' is less common in Europe/Africa than America/Australia but isn't absent (I was at a match yesterday at Wembley where the fans were chanting "We're the famous Barrow soccer and we're going to Wembley"); whilst 'Toronto FC' proves that some in NAmerica are at least familiar with football for this sport.

What I'm trying to say is - the lead is fine, the title is fine, leave it be! --Pretty Green (talk) 10:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Just to clarify (fuck it, I am not wading through the reams of circular debate to try and make sense of all this), what, exactly, is the problem with soccer, again? It’s certainly more common than association football; is it because some Brits erroneously perceive it as North American? —Wiki Wikardo 07:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

The commonality of the terms soccer/football is difficult (impossible?) to prove and depends on your definition of common. 'Soccer' is probably the most common term for a wider number of people, in that the majority of the English-speaking world is American English speaking, and the majority of American English speakers use 'soccer'. But, American English writers will also write a hell of a lot less about soccer than those using British English; so the majority of documentation about the sport probably calls it football. So from an archival/literary POV - and this is, after all, a source-based encyclopaedia - football is probably the most common. Add to that that many non-English languages have terms similar to football - futbol, Fussball etc. - and the waters become muddier. And yes, there are also the language bigots on both sides of the pond (oh sod it - in every country), who are the sort that can make Wikipedia a hell hole if they want. Pretty Green (talk) 08:43, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

It's always a laugh to come on here and read the arguments about what it should be called. The game is officially called Association Football, always has been and probably always will be. It's been discussed (to death) on here dozens of times and frankly if anyone on here taking part in this discussion hasn't heard of the term Association Football they shouldn't be discussing the issue. No-one is ever going to stop it being discussed but some of the stuff being written about it is pure nonsense, lol. Cls14 (talk) 23:55, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. There are no more arguments regarding what we call the sport here than there have already been for several years in the talk archive pages. I wish people would read all the archives before posting their messages here - then they might actually see that it's been discussed to death years ago. Can we now please talk about something more interesting? EuroSong ^talk 16:45, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Consider the names of the national associations which are FIFA members. Because the English list doesn't show the association' full names, please have a look at this List from the German wiki. You can see: out of 208 national organisations only three (= 1.4%!) call their subject "soccer": USA, US Virgin Islands and Canada. In contrast, 129 (= 62.0%) of them call it literally "football" (only Samoa adds "soccer" in brackets). Except from 13 countries, all others (63) use names, that obviously derive from "football" - like Futbol, Fútbol, Futebol, Futbollit, Fußball, Fussball, Voetbal, Futbola, Voetbal, Fudbalski, Futbolen, Fudbalska, Fótbóltss, Fodbold, etc. If you add these countries, 92.2% of all national association play "football", whereas a miniscule minority of 1.4% play "soccer". Those are the facts, but I guess this minority will nevertheless keep on lobbying for their POV. --Eberhard Cornelius (talk) 17:45, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

The sport is referred to as football throughout the article. It is standard for articles to list common names of the subject in the lead and that is all that is being done here. This is the English Wikipedia, and the populations of the US and Canada make up a large part of the English speaking world. Plus other English speaking countries like Australia and New Zealand still commonly use soccer despite the recent name change of their official organizations. LonelyMarble (talk) 18:25, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

The percentage composition of the wikipedia audience is not relevant: "Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia" WP:AUDIENCE. --Eberhard Cornelius (talk) 21:07, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

"People who read Wikipedia have different backgrounds, education and worldviews. Make your article accessible and understandable for as many readers as possible."

How, in your interpretation, does this mean that we should omit a term by which the sport is known to hundreds of millions of people around the world? —David Levy 21:25, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

And that's why the article is titled "soccer." Oh, wait...it isn't. So what's the objection?

Also note that a percentage of persons (and more specifically, English-speaking persons) would be of far greater relevance than a percentage of countries is (with the latter measure assigning equal weight to the USA's ~309,000,000 residents and Aruba's ~105,000 residents).

And as noted above, a national association's terminology does not necessarily reflect that of its country's citizens; the Australian Soccer Association and New Zealand Soccer were renamed Football Federation Australia and New Zealand Football in 2005 and 2007, but "soccer" remains the usual term among Australians and New Zealanders.

But again, we aren't assigning prevalence to "soccer" within the article, so what's the issue? —David Levy 18:44, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Hey, I just came to this page to read about soccer, and I'm really surprised to see that it's not even called that! It should say "soccer" in the first sentence. "Soccer" is the most common name for the sport in every English speaking country except those in the U.K. (USA, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa and Belize all use "soccer"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.240.61.2 (talk) 07:49, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Ivorian War Citation, 2005?

Where does the citation say 2005? --Mistakefinder (talk) 07:43, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

"Popularity of football" map is unclear

It is unclear what the colors mean on the map. I guess darker colors mean countries where football is more popular - but then America is the darkest shade of red? Really? Also, what's the difference between green, red, and blue? Why is China striped? There should be a key explaining these things. Westknife (talk) 00:38, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Westknife. The map's color code is totally confusing, at best. Son of Somebody (talk) 05:25, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Part of the problem is that it does not really show the popularity of football but just the number or people per 1000 inhabitants playing the game. To fully figure out what that map was saying I had to look at File:Football world popularity.png page and then scroll down and then at the full size image. then look at England, France and Spain as they compare with the US. All four countries had <50 players per 1000 inhabitants with the first three countries being listed as having football as the number 1 sport, which it is not in the US. Look at Canada and Brazil who both have 25-50 players per 1000 inhabitants. I really don't think that it's possible to say that football enjoys the same popularity in Canada as Brazil or in the US as in England, France or Spain. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 07:55, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I need to chime in on this discussion, too. The map isn't at all useful. I would like to recommend that someone clarify the legend or remove the map altogether. Toropop (talk) 03:07, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

I have created a version without the varying colour - simply a map showing the number of players per thousand in green. Is this worth being used on the page? What do people think? Woodgreener (talk) 19:17, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Much better. Please use it. I found the old map incredibly confusing as well. Though I'm guessing the red indicates that it's not watched very much in those countries. 24.69.107.128 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:37, 9 July 2010 (UTC).

I think the old map, with three colours should be used. It just needs a better legend. (A) to clarify that it's not popularity but participation and (B) to show that countries in red are those where soccer is not the de facto national sport (aka No 1 sport). It's an important piece of info; to see, for example, that soccer is so popular as a participation sport in N.America but not the national sport. The countries in Blue are of unknown status Redred514 (talk) 15:21, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, actually, forget what i said. It just needs a better legend. I agree. 24.69.107.128 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:24, 16 July 2010 (UTC).

soccer not No 1 sport area:

CIS states (including Russia and central Asia), Baltic States, Finland, Mongolia
Indian subcontinent (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka)
North America (Alaska, Canada, continental United States)

220.210.143.190 (talk) 07:37, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Misconduct rules should be amended

If a goalkeeper is being sent off with red card, the penalised team can bring in a substitute goalkeeper and bring a field player off instead. If there are no more subsitute goalkeepers, a field player can play as goalkeeper, wearing a distintive jersey. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.35.52.2 (talk) 16:08, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

If you can find a reference for these specific rules, then it can be amended. Simples. Woodgreener (talk) 19:49, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Football was not the cause of the war between Honduras and El Salvador

It is now widely known (at least in Spanish-speaking academic environments) that the cause of the war between El Salvador and Honduras in 1969 had nothing to do with football. Certain Europeans and North Americans have ever since 1969 continued to repeat this lie. It probably seems amusing, interesting and it falls within stereotypes of Central Americans. Ryszard Kapuscinski was the first one, with his book "The football war". This book is considered a joke amongst Central American historians and serves more as a record of European and North American simplistic views of Central American histories, rather than a serious account of what really led to the 100- hours war between El Salvador and Honduras. Just imagine if a Nicaraguan reporter had been in Poland, to witness a football match between England and Germany, just before Germany invaded Poland in the September Campaign of 1939. This Nicaraguan journalist could easily have written at home that the following war between England and Germany was caused by the football match. But this is obvioulsy ridiculous. The same goes for the mistakenly called "football war" between Honduras and El Salavador. It is a ridiculous proposition. It was as much a football war as the II WW was a football war. There was casually a tense series of matches between Honduras and El Salvador, when there were already political tensions between the countries. These tensions had to do with disagreements within the Central American common market, Salvadoran immigrants in Honduras and pressures in both countries to undertake an agrarian reform. Both countries were led by military dictatorships. These factors combined to render a war that lasted 100 hours. Football had nothing to do with the war, just as people going to the toilet during those days was not a cause of the war. The war would have happened, with or without football. How many times do Central Americans have to clarify this? Probably just as long as there are prejudiced and irresponsible "historians" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.109.116.26 (talk) 23:22, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

I think the comment is sufficiently guarded - "widely considered to be the final proximate cause" ie it didn't cause it, but was a tipping point, the way that shooting Archduke Franz Ferdinand caused World War One. The article doesn't say that it was a war over football. --Pretty Green (talk) 08:41, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

"Call back" - reference needed

hi,

Can a reference be given for the sentence: " The referee may "call back" play and penalise the original offence if the anticipated advantage does not ensue within a short period, typically taken to be four to five seconds". I believe it is a relatively new rule, so a direct quote which explains is important.

213.131.238.28 (talk) 03:46, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it is a new rule; this has always been an aspect of the advantage rule. --Pretty Green (talk) 08:46, 16 July 2010 (UTC)