Jump to content

Talk:2013–14 Premier League

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Decisions that apply to this page from previous seasons pages

[edit]

To make it clear for the passing tourist what decisions that have been made by the community about the layout/style of previous seasons articles I thought adding a list here would help. Correct me if I'm wrong or have missed anything.

  1. There will be no positions by rounds table (See Talk:2011–12 Premier League#Positions by round revisited (yes, again!))
  2. There will be no assists table (See Talk:2012–13 Premier League#Goals and assists)
  3. The map should only contain England and not Wales (See Talk:2011–12 Premier League#Swansea City and its "nationality")

Spudgfsh (talk) 19:06, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Qualified Teams.

[edit]

As of today (7/4/13) Everton have qualified for next season due to their points total.

Liverpool have also qualified due to the fact that Sunderland (max points 49) still have to play Aston Villa (Max points 51). There is no way both teams can get more than 49 points.

  • If Sunderland win, Villa can only get 48 points
  • If Villa Win, Sunderland can only get 46 points
  • A draw and Sunderland can only get 47 points

Spudgfsh (talk) 15:55, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone explain the reasoning for WBA being safe? As far as I can work out they will be safe on monday in the event that Aston Villa lose to Man U as Villa still have to play Wigan. If there you can't provide a reference or a reasoning it is WP:speculation or WP:OR Spudgfsh (talk) 19:04, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't think they were either at first but they are. Jeff said it on soccer saturday, it's because of the fixtures remaining for the teams below them. Teams below them will have to lose/draw some of their games because they play each other. For example, Stoke vs Norwich or Wigan vs Aston Villa. You can try it here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/predictor/default.stm ThisIsDanny (talk) 19:19, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know, but unless you can find a reference it is still Speculation. It will be possible to clearly explain it on monday if Villa lose to Man U but until then we cannot definitively explain the maths. Spudgfsh (talk) 19:23, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
West Brom cant be relegated, tried in on predictor, also no point deductions(administration at least anyway) can be done at this point of the season, they will carry over to next season.OJDriscoll (talk) 18:53, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
West Brom are definitely confirmed for next season now, as Aston Villa have to play Wigan. Thaumimicus {talk} 11:35, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is now obvious mathematically that West Brom are safe on 45 points, as the maximum points it's possible to be relegated on for 2012-13 is now 44 (Wigan and Villa draw against each other and win all their other remaining games). Concentrate2 (talk) 12:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes we know, I've explained it so many times. I know they're safe because of the fixtures for the teams below them. But forgetting about fixtures and who still needs to play who, if you look at the table it's not clear that they're safe unless you look at the fixtures. Wait until Wigan drop points or West Brom win etc. ThisIsDanny (talk) 13:50, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So why not put them in the list? It doesn't make sense to me to say we shouldn't. They are in the Premier League for 2013-14. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Concentrate2 (talk • contribs) 14:35, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I've added them in... ThisIsDanny (talk) 16:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If both teams have the same points which of the two teams qualify and who enters the Premier League Alf5435334777 (talk) 20:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It will go down to goal difference. For example if Hull have a goal difference of +10 and Watford have +5 then Hull would go through and Watford would be in the play-offs. If they're both the same though, it would go down to goals scored. The team who have scored the most goals will go through and the other will go into the play-offs. ThisIsDanny (talk) 21:05, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Swansea are not safe on 43 points if they lose by big margins. Wigan can reach 44 points by winning their 3 games. Aston Villa can reach 43 by winning 2 games and losing Wigan. If Sunderland win against Tottenham and Stoke, they will also reach 43 points. Stoke ends on 43 as well by beating Tottenham and losing to Southampton and Sunderland. Norwich and Newcastle can reach 44 points by winning their remaining games against sides not involved in relegation. Southampton can reach 45 points by beating Sunderland and Stoke. Swansea gets relegated only if they end up on 43 points with Stoke, Sunderland, and Aston Villa with inferior goal difference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nayefjuve (talk • contribs) 21:05, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We know. The cut-off is 43 points. This is why Swansea on down are not on the page: they're not yet in the Premier League next season... Concentrate2 (talk) 21:07, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Earlier they were listed but I removed them. After today's result, and since Sunderland and Southampton play each other, the cut-off is now 42 points. Swansea and West Ham United are now safe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nayefjuve (talk • contribs) 22:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I'm adding them now. Falastur2 Talk 22:25, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The cut-off is now 41 points, following Wigan's loss to Swansea. Stoke are not quite safe, and remain one of 8 teams still fighting to avoid that last spot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Concentrate2 (talk • contribs) 22:22, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Why is Newcastle and all the other teams on 41 points safe? If wigan win both their remaining games, they will be on 41 points. They have a goal difference of -23, and two wins would improve this to a -21 minimum. Newcastle are on -22, and a loss would do nothing but worsen this. It is still possible for Wigan to stay up and Newcastle to go down. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.195.118.117 (talk) 14:59, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Seriously? Wigan have Aston Villa on the last day of the season. Let's just say Wigan beat Arsenal midweek. And if Wigan beat Villa they'll be safe. However, Villa will have dropped points and would be worse off than Newcastle. This would be the case if Villa win the game, Wigan would have dropped points and be in a worse position than Newcastle. ThisIsDanny (talk) 15:03, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

None of the Europa League positions are known yet. If Hull City win the FA Cup, they would move to group stage, and 5th and 6th, would be relegated to lower start points respectively. Hull and Everton should both be (TQ), but that is all that is known. Specifically, what I mean is that to state that fifth place has the group position now might cause inference that fifth place is entitled to that; they are only entitled to the play off round. They shall only be promoted to the group stage if it is incidentally handed to them as a result of the FA cup winner not taking their rightful place there. Should the page not represent the natural position prior to an event happening to change it?

Table movements

[edit]

Please make a table movements 91.134.65.79 (talk) 19:56, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What? ThisIsDanny (talk) 19:59, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I do believe (s)he is requesting that we put in a table, or a list of changes from last season. Spudgfsh (talk) 20:19, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hull/Watford

[edit]

If Hull and Watford have the same points which ranks Alf5435334777 (talk) 20:23, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The table is hidden until more teams qualify, and do you mean if they end the season with the same points? It would go down to goal difference, then goals scored. ThisIsDanny (talk) 20:41, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

==Play-offs

When he will play playoffs for entry into the English Premier League 91.134.65.79 (talk) 21:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

when he will play playoffs for entry into the English Premier League 91.134.65.79 (talk) 19:27, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Managerial Changes

[edit]

There will be a table of managerial changes placed on the page once there are changes that Have actually Happened. Until the changes actually Happen it is just speculation. This is an encyclopaedia not a blow-by-blow description of what will/might happen. If you are unsure please read Wikipedia:SPECULATION#Wikipedia_is_not_a_crystal_ball Spudgfsh (talk) 16:43, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. It should be left out until the date of appointment/resignation etc, even if it's been confirmed or not. ThisIsDanny (talk) 17:01, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is not speculation if it has already been confirmed. 81.21.141.81 (talk) 18:43, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, but it shouldn't be on the page until it's actually happened. ThisIsDanny (talk) 19:24, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
it is not necessary to hide it until the date as long as reliable sources has confirmed events taking place in the future. It does not infringe any Wikipedia rules as it is not speculation or crystal-balling. 81.21.141.81 (talk) 22:28, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. There is nothing that could feasibly derail Moyes' move to Manchester United now. This is not like the transfer of a player where a previously undiscovered medical condition could scupper the deal; Moyes has signed on to be Man Utd's next manager and his contract will commence on 1 July 2013. Done and dusted. – PeeJay 00:46, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
But the Chelsea situation is still too unclear to detail yet (IMO). Spudgfsh (talk) 11:17, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thinking about it, I don't agree that Moyes should be listed, not without a footnote at least: it's not speculation, but it's not a fact that he has become the Man U manager. Suppose some scandal comes out and Man U tear up the contract, or he dies before taking up the post - he would in that case never have been the Man U manager.Concentrate2 (talk) 13:19, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It may not be metaphysically certain, but it is certain beyond all reasonable doubt. It is not reasonable to assume that Moyes will die in the next two months or that a scandal will come to light. – PeeJay 19:11, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Map

[edit]

Do we copy last season and swap to the two maps given that there are currently 5 London teams with either Palace or Watford going to be promoted. Both of which will complicate the map in that area (especially Palace). Spudgfsh (talk) 20:48, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to copy the London map over tonight but wasn't sure whether or not to wait until Palace or Watford were promoted. But I think there should definitely be a London map on the page. ThisIsDanny (talk) 20:50, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
as someone had almost done it already I just fixed what was there. Spudgfsh (talk) 21:19, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2 teams from wales

[edit]

Is this the first time in The Premier League that there are two Welsh teams in the league? Anttipng (talk) 20:13, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that is the case. Spudgfsh (talk) 20:18, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

pellegrini

[edit]

Is there a reason why he's listed in last season's page? Brian Kidd took over for the remainder of the season, Pellegrini signed after the season was done. --Dekabreak101 (talk) 05:01, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it is part of an attempt to pretend Kidd was never manager?--Egghead06 (talk) 05:19, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is because caretaker managers don't normally get included on the list of managerial changes and Kidd was a caretaker manager. If you look Pellegrini is on the previous season page as the replacement for Mancini. => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 07:44, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Season officially starts on 1st July. Technically Pellegrini was in place for the start of 13-14 and so is a managerial change from the previous season. Falastur2 Talk 08:20, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Table of transfers

[edit]

What is with this? I don't really have a view either way but is gets added and deleted every few days. Any chance of a consensus on "in or out"?--Egghead06 (talk) 05:53, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A user has repeatedly tried to add this without discussion and it has been repeatedly removed. they have similarly added it to 2013–14 in English football page. I could be persuaded about the merits of a short passage describing the transfer window within both articles I'm not convinced by the table.
I have started a discussion on the Talk:2013–14 in English football#Transfers Section which details my concerns => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 07:37, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New article to display fixtures and results?

[edit]

Who thinks this would be a good idea? If so I will be happy to create a page displaying so. Drinkdrinker (talk) 17:30, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Norwich City Captaincy

[edit]

The article has flipped a couple of times recently between Seb Bassong and Russell Martin as Norwich city captain. Can someone use this to determine a definitive decision as to who will be in the table? => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 20:19, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To me when reading that link you provided I would say Russel Martin is the captain. This is also supported by the source that column in the table is based on, which clearly states Russel Martin. Any change in that table that goes against that source I feel is unsourced. QED237 (talk) 21:41, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Top Goalscorers

[edit]

Shouldn't Aaron Ramsey be number 4 in goal scorers, not 3? --94.9.100.52 (talk) 17:54, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Good spot. Falastur2 Talk 18:08, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, Cheers. --94.9.100.52 (talk) 18:13, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Live updates

[edit]

Hi. Based on Wikipedia policies and guidlines we should not provide livescores and live updates. This based on WP:LIVESCORES and WT:FOOTY consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 81#Live scoring and it has also been discussed many more times. This also applies to tables and list such as top goalscorers and other match info, which you can also read about at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 81#Live updates (again). Please wait until matches are finished before adding the statistics. QED237 (talk) 21:28, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, you're wasting your breath. The editors who provide live updates - pretty much all of them anonymous users - don't read this page and wouldn't care even if they did. The only way you can combat this stuff is to get this page semi-protected so that anonymous users can't edit it full stop. Falastur2 Talk 22:48, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It will be hard but not impossible, we were several people doing this at the end of 2014 FIFA World Cup qualification, and also now on the Champions League, and I will continue (have already been succesfull on club season articles). Discuss, warn, report to AIV works even if it is a tough battle. I will not give up as I want people to follow wikipedia policies and guidelines. Feel free to help. QED237 (talk) 00:44, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In an ideal world this would not happen but then neither would people updating infobox stats without changing the 'as at' date, editing without an edit summary or editing without supporting references. I support what you are doing. Good luck.--Egghead06 (talk) 05:28, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stats reference for total goals and for number of games

[edit]

I tried to add this as a reference for the total number of goals and the number of games played (as it's not covered by the current refs). but it keeps resulting in an error in the calculation for goals per game. can anyone find a way to add it in (or fix the template)? => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 22:24, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assist

[edit]

There is a consensus not to include assist on WT:FOOTY that you can read at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 81#Assists.

This has also gone to WP:ANI in this discussion where the user inserting assist got warned for editing against consensus. QED237 (talk) 10:40, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

League table template

[edit]

Hi.We had/have a recent discussion at The Village Pump where the editors modified the sandbox of {{2013–14 Premier League table/sandbox}} to have a truncated transclusion of the table for use on the pages for the current season of all the teams. This has also been informed at WT:FOOTY to get people to join the discussion at village pump. This template is now supposed to be used on all of the season articles and this the main article, to have one template to be updated instead of making updates on every individual article. QED237 (talk) 00:02, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 14 February 2014

[edit]

117.233.80.213 (talk) 09:09, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assists table

[edit]
Rank Player Club Assists
1 England Steven Gerrad Liverpool 9
England Wayne Rooney Manchester United 9
3 Germany Mesut Özil Arsenal 8
First off, I've removed the other two requests here as they were just exact duplicates.
Secondly, people have consistently raised the idea of an assists table, and it's been rejected every time. You can read the previous discussion here (click). It's already been decided by a consensus of editors that it is not encyclopaedic material. I don't think that is going to be changed any time. I'm sure there are plenty of other websites where you can keep track of this, such as this one (click). Falastur2 Talk 11:04, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, it comes up numerous times a season and is rejected by consensus every time. => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 13:57, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

League Table

[edit]

Someone needs to update the League table to include 6th place as Europa League qualifiers (with Man City in their current League position)

European Qualification

[edit]

Since Man City have won the League Cup, as long as they stay in the top 5 the league cup spot for the meanwhile until the FA cup final will go to the 6th placed team. Please edit table as 6th now will be going to Europa League 3rd Qualifying Round as it stands. Add a note below table. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.26.149.177 (talk) 16:23, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will defiantely take a look at it. Do you have a source confirming it will go to the sixth placed team? QED237 (talk) 16:40, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
He's right, QED. The rule has always been that the League Cup winner qualifies for the third EL spot, and if they have a better qualifying spot then the League Cup EL place goes to the highest-placed team in the league with no better European spot. In this case, since the FA Cup spot has not been allocated yet, the LC spot goes to 6th place.
It's already been done in the league table (which is not updated here, but on a template elsewhere) however, so no need to do anything about it. Falastur2 Talk 22:51, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Falastur2: I were the one updating the league table template with this info, I was just asking for a good source to use in the note below table. QED237 (talk) 23:07, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
NOt sure what you mean it has not been updated "here" to me the PL article is updated. QED237 (talk) 23:10, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Miscommunication. What I meant was that it does not need to be editted on this article space because the table is controlled from the template. Falastur2 Talk 23:25, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ohh Okay, I see. QED237 (talk) 23:37, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

League table change error

[edit]

I looked at the league table here and a few teams points have been updated such as Liverpool and Chelsea but a few teams have not been updated such as Manchester City and Everton. They also is a few more that needs updating. (Z2a (talk) 19:50, 22 March 2014 (UTC)).[reply]

done. => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 20:07, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Flags?

[edit]

Why suddenly remove all the flags?

iamjohnchan (talk) 09:02, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Has something to do with WP:MOSFLAG, please join the discussion at WT:FOOTY#Manchester United–Arsenal brawl (1990) where this is discussed. As far as I can see policy-followers say they shall be removed everywhere but many want the flags anyway. QED237 (talk) 10:01, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

oic... ok, thx for reminding!

iamjohnchan (talk) 01:38, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Have hull qualified for the europa league?

[edit]

Someone put Hull as qualifying for European football by being (at least) runners up in the FA cup. This being on the basis that Arsenal are guaranteed to finish at least 6th and therefore will get a European place by league position. All based on this source. Now that I've read it again I'm confused if that is actually the case. any opinions? => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 21:20, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think all the rules regarding the European berths are explained on the 2014-15 UEFA Europa League article. The cup winner of any country, if that team is not already qualified to the European competitions through the national league, qualifies to the Europa League. If the cup winner qualifies to the UEFA Champions League, through the league of course, the cup runner-up takes the cup berth, again if the runner-up is not already qualified to the European competitions. If it is the case, the berth goes to the league. BUT, if the cup winner qualifies to UEFA Europa League through both cup and league, the cup runner-up does NOT qualify, the berth goes automatically to the league. So, in this case: The FA Cup Final is Arsenal vs Hull City. Arsenal will be in the UEFA competitions but don't know if it will be Champions or Europa. Hull City cannot qualify through the league anymore. So, if Arsenal gets 4th place or higher, Hull City will go to Europa League even if they lose the final. If Arsenal fail the Champions and get 5th or 6th place, Hull City must win the FA Cup to get Europa League, if they lose, no UEFA.--2.82.105.184 (talk) 23:36, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above comment is spot on. Just wanted to reinforce that. Falastur2 Talk 07:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not certain whether the rules in the quoted reference (the primary source) are particularly clear on this situation. In fact if I was a Hull supporter I'd complain if Man United got the place over Hull (I'm not so I won't but). If that is the consensus I'll not push it but someone needs to remove the europa league spot from Hull (in the league table template) until it is certain that they have qualified. => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 18:17, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Try this instead - section 2.04. Although, it actually raises a question on which round Hull/Arsenal would qualify for if they (well, if Arsenal) don't finish 5th, but still, it makes it pretty clear that the only way that the runners-up get a Europa League berth is if Arsenal qualifies for the Champions League independently. Falastur2 Talk 18:34, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers for that I tried to find something on the UEFA website but couldn't. There is still a bus sized hole in the rules where it only talks about champions league and not case where the winners qualify for the Europa League. It's still undefined as to what happens and there hasn't been a precedent in the English league. Remember Liverpool caused problems by winning the CL and finishing fifth in the league forcing UEFA into giving them an extra place. As I say at best it's undefined at worst they won't qualify so Hull shouldn't have the EL place in the template. => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 18:45, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have looked around and it is clear. Arsenal to CL and then Hull to EL, Arsenal to EL then ManU to EL (if Arsenal wins FA Cup). What is the difference with the table with Arsenal/Hull and ManC/Everton in the table? If we show one we should show the other. It is current league table and in current situation Hull is in EL. QED237 (talk) 21:06, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
About berths, a cup winner always takes the best UEFA Europa League berth (given that that team is not qualified to UEFA Champions League), and a cup runner-up always takes the worst berth (given that that team is not qualified to Champions or Europa). So, with the current situation in mind, Hull City will go to Europa League even if they lose the FA Cup Final. If they win they will go to the group stage, Everton to the play-off and Tottenham Hotspur to the 3rd qualifying round (given that the League Cup winner is Manchester City). If they lose, it will be Everton to the group stage, Tottenham to the play-off and Hull to the 3rd QR. If for example Arsenal and Everton switch positions and Arsenal win the FA Cup, it will be Arsenal to the group stage, Tottenham to the play-off and Manchester United to the 3rd QR.--2.82.105.184 (talk) 22:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Having read both sets of rules, I would say you could run a bus through both. Neither is explicit as to what would be the outcome would be when the cup winners already qualify for the europa league (rather than the champions league) outside of the cup competition. Lawyers would pick both to pieces (both on behalf of ManU and Hull) and I would not want to have to make a ruling given their poor wording. => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 22:31, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps this is the reason why UEFA are changing the rules (I think start 2016-17) so that in the future no runners-up are allowed in Champions League or Europa League (if they not qualify by league position of course). QED237 (talk) 22:37, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So how are we doing with the league table? We show that 6th-placed team Everton is in Europa League when ManC is the winner, Is there a chance they wont be in EL?. Should we display Hull or not since it is not certain? Wait for league to end (Arsenal in CL) or Cup to be played (We know how it will be)? QED237 (talk) 22:39, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would leave 5th and 6th as certain EL spots (given the current rules) and not do anything for the other spot until it can be confirmed without uncertainty. => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 22:43, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Premier League 6th-placed team will always be in UEFA Europa League as League Cup winners Manchester City guaranteed already the UEFA competitions through the league. The 7th-placed will go to Europa League ONLY IF Arsenal fail Champions AND win the FA Cup. So I agree with Spudgfsh, let's leave Hull City alone until we're sure if Arsenal will go to Champions or Europa. If Arsenal confirm Champions, Hull will be in Europa; if not we'll have to wait until the FA Cup Final the weekend after the end of the Premier League.--2.82.105.184 (talk) 22:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This was my first comment in the League Table template: "Since FA Cup finalists Arsenal would at this point qualify for 2014–15 UEFA Champions League, FA Cup finalists Hull City would, at least, qualify for third qualifying round of UEFA Europa League." At this point, as Arsenal is in 4th place, Hull will play in Europa League (they are not assured that participation, though) See https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Template:2013%E2%80%9314_Premier_League_table&oldid=605047180 . Afterwards, Spudgfsh modified my edition, stating "Since FA Cup finalists Arsenal would at this point qualify for either 2014–15 UEFA Champions League or UEFA Europa League through league position, FA Cup finalists Hull City will qualify for third qualifying round of UEFA Europa League", which I think is not right. Tykyheg (talk) 09:02, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that Arsenal are not guaranteed to be in the CL. therefore it's not certain that hull will be in the EL. It's simpler to not include them until it is certain (at the end of the season). => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 09:08, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
When a team have guaranteed the qualification, they have a (Q) added next to the name of the team: Liverpool (Q). The color of the background is the competition that the team would play at this point. Arsenal are not guaranteed to be in the CL, but they have a green background because, at this point, they would play in the CL. Hull are not guaranteed to be in the EL, but they should have a blue background because, at this point, they would play in the EL. Tykyheg (talk) 09:32, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
See a similar example in 2013–14 Serie A#League_table: "Since the 2013–14 Coppa Italia finalists (Fiorentina and Napoli) would at this point qualify for the 2014–15 European football season thus 4th, 5th and 6th in Serie A would qualify for group stage, play-off round and third qualifying round respectively."Tykyheg (talk) 13:49, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I get what you are saying and I am able to agree with you to some degree but there is a minor difference. In that serieA case we know what rounds the different teams would go to. Should we put Hull in group stage or in qualifying round? And if adding Hull to qual, then there will be an error in the table with two teams entering the same round, but at the same time we cant add them to group stage not won FA cup yet. QED237 (talk) 14:08, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'll put my hands up and admit that I changed the table (changed the qualifying rounds bit) before I realised that was I was doing wasn't necessarily helpful. I would've changed it back but I got stuck in the situation that QED describes above - namely that technically, we can't specify which round any of Everton, Spurs or Hull will enter the EL in, so neither way is technically correct. I am unsure how to proceed in this situation. Falastur2 Talk 21:02, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2014

[edit]

Kwennington (talk) 11:36, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done This is not an edit request, please say what you want to be done and provide a source. For example: I want lalallaa to be changed to hahaha because.... and provide source for that change (unless it is minor change not in need of source. QED237 (talk) 13:24, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 29 April 2014

[edit]

2013/14 Premier league — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwennington (talk • contribs)

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to any article. - Arjayay (talk) 07:50, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Position by Round

[edit]

I'd appreciate the availability of a 'Position by Round' summary on this article. Example: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/2013%E2%80%9314_La_Liga#Positions_by_round. Is it feasible? If not, why so?

I personally find them highly informational. (A715478063 (talk) 21:43, 3 May 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Never mind. Saw the notice... — Preceding unsigned comment added by A715478063 (talk • contribs) 21:46, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Is it correct that we should add the Promoted Teams? They are: Leicester City, Burnley, and Derby County/Queens Park Rangers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lolliwiki (talk • contribs) 08:22, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No we should not add them to this season, they should be in the next one. QED237 (talk) 09:47, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 2013–14 Premier League. 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, 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) 21:23, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on 2013–14 Premier League. 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) 16:45, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:2013–14_Premier_League&oldid=1196654749"