Talk:2006 FIBA World Championship

competition rules

shuoldnt be competition rules amd tie breakers posted in this article? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.238.64.254 (talk • contribs) .

I looked on FIBA's site before, but couldn't find anything. I finally found rules in Japanese, if that helps anyone else. Yahoo Japan

Basically, 2 points for a win; 1 point for a loss; 0 point for a abandoned or DQ game. Top four teams advance, ties are broken by head-to-head (bad news for Japan). Goal average is second (but, I don't see how that can ever be applied in a 2-way tie). Goal average is calculated by Scored÷Allowed. In a three-or-more-way tie, W/L versus the others is the first tie breaker, followed by goal average in games involving only those teams. Third tiebreak is goal average in all group games. If the three-or-more tied teams are whittled down, then either the 3-way tiebreaker (if three or more teams are still left) is reapplied to the remaining teams, or the two-way tiebreaker is applied, depending on how many are left. Neier 13:14, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused why China is in the knockout bracket instead of Puerto Rico. There was a 3-way tie for 3rd place. Within the 3-way group, all 3 teams were 1-1 against each other. The team with the best goal average is Slovenia, so they finish 3rd. Then it reverts back to the two-way tiebreaker, and Puerto Rico defeated China. Shouldn't Puerto Rico be in 4th position? Edit: authority for my position comes from Appendix D.1.6 of the FIBA Rulebook: "If, at any stage, using the above criteria, a multiple team tie is reduced to a tie involving only two teams, the procedure in D.1.1 . . . will be applied." D.1.1 reads: "If there are two teams in the classification with equal points, the result(s) of the game(s) between the two teams involved will be used to determine the placings." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.42.16.135 (talk • contribs).

No. Article D.1.6 applies only if there is still a tie — which there is not. (Put another way, the tie is not "reduced" because it is no longer existent.) Because China's goal average was higher than Puerto Rico's, the tie is already broken by the second classification — the same one as the one which put Slovenia first in the tiebreaker — so there is no need to invoke D.1.6.

If China's and Puerto Rico's goal averages were the same in the three-team tiebreaker, then D.1.6 would be invoked. Neonumbers 10:25, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

team squads

Should all of the partipating national team squads really be in this article? Instead why don't we work on getting these squads in the individual countries national team pages, and/or create stubs for national teams that do not have a page created?--Lowg 22:31, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they should, its a world championship and in the future somebody would know what players participated. By the way, do you want to put the Serbian flag instead the SCG in this one too? :D

In this case, the basketball association and FIBA have come to mutal agreement that team should represent both countries in this tournament, however right after the tournament, both federations will most likely split, similar to the precident set by the national football federations in the 2006 FIFA World Cup. But do you have any input on my question please? It does seem you have an interest in improving the quality of this page, and perhaps we can colaborate on this. We can focus on improving quality of this article, and at the same time, begin to create/standardize the national basketball team pages of the particpating countries, similar to the excellent work done during the 2006 World Cup for the national football teams and Wikiproject:Football.--Lowg 05:35, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't sound smart to have the squads at the national team pages, since these teams will change in years to come, and you will eventually want to know who played in 2006. If you think the page is too long, we could move the squads to Basketball World Championship 2006 squads, as 2006 FIFA World Cup has 2006 FIFA World Cup squads. Mariano(t/c) 10:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm ok with that also, I just feel it is a little too much to list 288 players in this article.--Lowg 23:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. See Basketball World Championship 2006 squads. Hope you like it. Mariano(t/c) 10:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Title

Wouldn't 2006 Basketball World Championship be more appropriate for the title? Just as 2006 FIFA World Cup and 2006 Winter Olympics. Or is there a different naming convention? --Ton e 08:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I think it should be moved to 2006 FIBA World Championships. That's what it's called on the official FIBA webiste. An dr iu s 14:20, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The official name which arguably is the most common formal name is probably the best in this instance. While the Winter Olympics is different, I'm not sure how the 2006 FIFA World Cup fits in to you're suggestion. It is the official name. More informally it is far more often referred to as just the World Cup. If we want to refer to the sport, it would be the Football World Cup. So really, the FIFA World Cup example is similar in some ways to the FIBA World Championship name. Nil Einne 11:31, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tiebreaker Format

In my opinion the group tables would look better without the tiebreaker give within the table itself. Add the tiebreaker summary underneath it? Theasfl 21:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the criteria should be covered before, and a simple * linking to a comment at the end of the table would be better. Don't you think? And this not only for the group A. Mariano(t/c) 07:30, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

anything probably works better than the added cells in the group tables Theasfl 03:30, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Something as important as deciding who advances or not as a footnote? I think it should be very clear why some teams didnt advanced even though they had the same record as some that did... shown clearly in the table Efrainbet 12:17, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, but the current format with 5 lines at the headers is horrible. Perhaps we could widen the 2 extra columns for the header to fit less lines. I'll try that. Mariano(t/c) 16:17, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The tiebreaker rules themselves were explained in the opening paragraph, giving the numbers underneath the table and referring back to that would be more effective than the current method. 132.170.41.154 12:36, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OFFICAL RANKINGS

acording to the offical website all teams that lost in the round of 16 are ranked tied for 9th place and the teams that finish 5 th in group in the 1st round are ranked 17th and 6th place are ranked 21st place Ranul 07:49, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with 2006 FIBA World Championship Final

no point for having a page devoted to the finals, can be easier to have it on the main page as a subheading Luis Santos24 (talk) 11:44, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We have separate articles for the 2010 and 2014 finals, so it makes sense we have one for 2006 (and all finals up to 1978). With that said, the 2006 final article was just created hours(!!!) ago, so let it have some time to grow and develop. This article used to have a separate final section but it's gone now and it had a nice account of the game vs. the one found in the new article. We could've used that. –H T D 15:21, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]