Talk:Two-legged tie

Merges

My reasoning for the merges: A Two-legged playoff is an event, that makes use of the aggregate score rule and the away goals rule to decide a winner. Thus the second two articles are subsets of the first one.

This assumes that the terms aggregate score and away goals rule are not used outside of the definition of two-legged in any way.

By the way, should this article be called Two-legged playoff or Two-legged (sports), with Two-legged be a disambig page between this and biped? -- Chuq 03:27, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only part I strongly disagree with is merging the away goals rule into this article. True, it only occurs in the context of two-legged playoffs, but on results pages (for example here and here) the article is linked to on results where the aggregate score is equal so as to inform the reader why one team moved on. Redirecting this to two-legged finals wouldn't make sense to the reader (since they would have to read the entire two-legged article to find out about the away goals rule).

I've posted a link to this discussion on the Project Football talk page as there are probably editors there who would like to weigh in. - Pal 13:53, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I object to merging in away goals rule as not every two-legged match is necessarily subject to the away goals rule, especially when looking back historically (e.g. in the Copa Libertadores, until very recently, European competitions until the mid-1960s) and it would be misleading to suggest otherwise. The concepts should be kept separate.

This article also needs to be renamed - the Manual of Style recommends using nouns, not adjectives, as article titles. I would suggest two-legged match. Qwghlm 19:15, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support aggregate score merger, per above and against away goals rule per above. I created this article thinking that it may well get merged anyway, but was surprised that there was nothing about this on Wikipedia!

I don' think that there's a need to create a 'two-legged' disambiguation page with biped, but it appears that this page ought to be moved; two-legged match probably fits best. --Robdurbar 21:22, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that both should be merged into a Two-legged article, although I'm not certain that's the best choice of titles. I disagree with Qwghlm and Robdurbar — the away goals article does not need to be separate. away goals rule should be made into a redirect to two legged match#away goals rule (or whatever). Everything would then work, and the articles would make more sense in this context. aLii 20:39, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot redirect to a subsection of a page, only a page itself. Qwghlm 23:15, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and merged the Aggregate score article into this one since there were no objections, but I've left the Away goals rule article separate since there was no concensus. - Pal 20:19, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please separate "Aggregate score" and "Two-legged match". Section 2 of Primary School Leaving Examination refers and links to aggregate score which does not seem to follow "Two-legged match". -Sherman 16:51, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History

When was the first two-legged tie? In the Stanley Cup? –H T D 15:56, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Second leg home advantage section

It looks like the paragraph in this section on second-leg advantage was a mish-mash of stuff. I read it several times without it making sense, so it needs a rewrite. I've removed it and will re-source it from scratch. For example, the away team absolutely does not need to score twice in the second leg, because they have the 2-1 GF advantage in that leg as far as the aggregate goes. It's the second leg home team that has to maintain the GD. MSJapan (talk) 22:25, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]