Talk:2010 Caribbean Cup

Football 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Caribbean: Martinique Low‑importance

	Caribbean portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caribbean, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the countries of the Caribbean on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.CaribbeanWikipedia:WikiProject CaribbeanTemplate:WikiProject CaribbeanCaribbean
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Martinique work group.

Goalscorers

So I'm told that goalscorers are only for the tournament proper. If this is the case then why do we have all the goalscorers for the Caribbean Championship 2008? Shouldn't we have some consistency here? Aron1024 (talk) 20:43, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense to separate qualifying from the finals stage. Whatever it is should definitely be consistent among articles. LarryJeff (talk) 21:36, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ranking 2nd place teams

Unlike what seems to be the norm in other confederations, it looks like the ranking of the 2nd place teams counts all games when there are not the same number of teams in the groups. At least that's what's been done in the past -- see Cayman Islands advancing over St Vincent in 2008. I've yet to find documentation from either CONCACAF or CFU of the procedure to rank the group runners-up. Anyone else know for sure? LarryJeff (talk) 21:33, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I am aware (which does not equate to certainty), it's done on points per game {hence Cayman Islands over Saint Vincent & the Grenadines in 2008 - 5/3 (1.67) vs 3/2 (1.5)} 92.2.97.98 (talk) 00:12, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://dcc.digicelfutbol.com/en/news/22-dcc-game-12-st-vincent-0-barbados-0 This report seems to suggest that the runners-up from Group D will not be considered for qualification - "Knowing Cayman finished second in Group A on 4 points, it is guaranteed that St Vincent qualify as one of the top two sides from Groups A, B or C." - implies that St.Vincent have already qualified for the next round. 92.2.97.98 (talk) 02:06, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

St. Kitts and Nevis advancing to the next round

Can someone put a note, explaining which was the criteria for this. Gonzalochileno (talk) 16:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Appears the user who made that edit used head to head results among the 3 tied teams as the first tiebreak. CONCACAF typically uses overall GD/GF before head to head, thus St Vincent would be group winner and Barbados runner-up. I reverted the edits to reflect this. LarryJeff (talk) 17:04, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gonzalochileno, I just noticed the sig on your question and realized you were the same person who made the edit moving St Kitts to the group winner position. Anyway, it looks like we have it right now. LarryJeff (talk) 17:11, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here you can read that it was decided by head to head, it clearly says St. Kitts and Nevis wins group B http://dcc.digicelfootball.com/en/news/22-dcc-game-12-st-vincent-0-barbados-0 , i just wanted you to write a note clarifying the tie breaker situation Gonzalochileno (talk) 19:11, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reference. I added a note, with the reference, below the standings table. LarryJeff (talk) 19:37, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Martin name

Is there any reason why the French version of the name - i.e. with the hyphen 'Saint-Martin' - is used rather than the English 'Saint Martin'? NOTE - http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Collectivity_of_Saint_Martin - no hyphen here for the territory's main article. Since this is the English language article, the hyphen should not be used. 92.2.97.98 (talk) 13:52, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2010 Caribbean Cup. 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/20101003044551/http://www.concacaf.com/page/GoldCup/NewsDetail/0,,12813~2134820,00.html to http://www.concacaf.com/page/GoldCup/NewsDetail/0,,12813~2134820,00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 05:23, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on 2010 Caribbean Cup. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 19:56, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]