Talk:2014 FIFA World Cup knockout stage

	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.
	This article is supported by the Brazilian football task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Brazil: Sports Low‑importance

	Brazil portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics 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.BrazilWikipedia:WikiProject BrazilTemplate:WikiProject BrazilBrazil
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Sports in Brazil task force (assessed as Low-importance).

2010s Low‑importance

	2010s portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject 2010s, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2010s 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.2010sWikipedia:WikiProject 2010sTemplate:WikiProject 2010s2010s
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Using FIFA Line-ups and Tactical Information

This is ridiculous, every FIFA competition the wrong info is given because what is only a brief guide by the governing body is used. In the Nederlands vs Mexico game Dirk Kuyt (and for the 2nd game running) started in the left wing back position.

This is the real formation for those wishing for accurate information.

            Cillessen

     Vlaar - De Vrij - Blind

Verhaegh - Wijnaldum - De Jong - Kuyt

             Sneijder
    Robben             Van Persie

--The Mercenary 73 (talk) 18:00, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@The Mercenary 73: You can't claim FIFA's giving the wrong info. Teams often shift their formations during the course of the game, and in some cases teams give line-ups that they end up changing from the start to confuse their opponents. For example, Juwon Oshaniwa (Nigeria) was listed as a CB in all of Nigeria's line-ups yet he's played left back in all of their matches. Davykamanzi → talk • contribs • alter ego 18:24, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't honestly know what FIFA are doing, i only noticed the mistake with Nigeria's Oshaniwa during their 3rd game but this misinformation has been going on for the past 3 World Cup Finals. Dirk Kuyt definately started the game as above and Holland have been playing 3-4-3 formation, they did change around during the game but that was the way they started. The UK broadcaster ITV backs this up too. --The Mercenary 73 (talk) 18:47, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@The Mercenary 73: First, it's spelled "definitely". Second, like I said, teams often give line-ups they end up not implementing at the start of the game to confuse their opponents. Over here we go with the official starting line-ups, and FIFA are the ones with the official starting line-ups. Davykamanzi → talk • contribs • alter ego 19:15, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is there such a thing as an "official" starting line-up? As far as I know only the keeper has special privileges and there is nothing in the rules about what a lineup should look like.

In any case the pictured line up has Kuyt as right centre, while he did indeed started playing left back in the first half (you only need to replay the match to see this. So the picture is indeed wrong as it neither fits the coaches announced line up, nor the line up that was played. Even worse, the file is sourced as own work by Davykamanzi and it is unclear where the information comes from. So not only is it factually wrong, it is also not reliably sourced. This picture is problematic indeed. Arnoutf (talk) 21:07, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Arnoutf: I could agree with you on the own work point, because it makes sense that we should cite the documents that we get these line-ups from. Otherwise the picture fits the line-up announced by FIFA here, and we've been going with the line-ups announced by FIFA all tournament because they're the ones who organise the World Cup. If you want to make a point about the line-up used during the game, feel free to do so in the section, but in terms of starting line-ups we go with what FIFA puts out. Davykamanzi → talk • contribs • alter ego 01:11, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you check File:NED-MEX 2014-06-29.svg or any other of the line-up files for this World Cup for that matter you will find that they are now "reliably sourced" to lay to rest that element of this little debate. Same will go for all the future line-up files. Davykamanzi → talk • contribs • alter ego 02:20, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding the sources. For me this makes it ok per WP:TRUTH; in part because otherwise we would need to recreate the images with equally reliable sources; which will be a nightmare and something to discuss on image by image basis (and to be implement by editors objecting your work). Arnoutf (talk) 17:20, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FIFA gets the official line-up when the referee is handed it by the participating teams no later than 60 minutes before kick off. This is simply a sheet of paper with the eleven names of the players who will be starting the game. No tactical formation is included and FIFA uses previous games and/or a guess as to where which position players will occupy. As seen there have been cases of incorrect tactical and positional formation's appearing on Wikipedia, notable examples being Nigeria and the Nederlands. Now all i'm asking is this the policy of Wikipedia that false, inaccurate or incorrect information is used because it complies with Wikipedia's rules on 'reliable sources'? If this is the case that the formation and player's positions are going to come from information prior to the actual game then IT HAS TO BE STATED CLEARLY with the diagram. A reply without sarcasm would be appreciated. --The Mercenary 73 (talk) 18:06, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a reliable source providing the alternative formation, feel free to discuss on the image page and propose an alternative. As long as the provided diagrams are backed by a reliable source, and no-one is taking the effort to create alternative diagrams based on (at least equally) reliable sources this is simply a no go.

The idea of Wikipedia is that improvement are always possible, but that the editor desiring the improvement has make the case and put in the effort to change status quo for something better (ie creating a well sourced more accurate image). Arnoutf (talk) 21:33, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the FIFA report on player average positions, Kuyt did in fact play the entire first half almost entirely as the left winger. See http://resources.fifa.com/mm/document/tournament/competition/02/38/97/73/51_0629_ned-mex_actualformation.pdf. From the average position markers, it seems that NED made a tactical adjustment in the second half to move him more toward the right. So, I agree with Mercenary73. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.147.236.205 (talk) 22:51, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Original Research?

Although, I've not seen it in any media, I checked the results from each tournament since the current 32 team format began in 1998. This is the first time that all the group winners beat the group runners-up. Would it be original research to put this in the article? Opinions & reasoning please! Tapered (talk) 07:21, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a Dutch newspaper reporting it: "Unicum: acht groepswinnaars in kwartfinales op WK" (in Dutch). de Volkskrant. 2 July 2014. Retrieved 2 July 2014. ("Unique: eight group winners in quarter finals at WC"). - FakirNL (talk) 14:17, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Costa Rica vs Greece

Why did Óscar Granados get a yellow card? Th4n3r (talk) 16:37, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think he grabbed the ball which came near the CRC bench and held it for a while, not allowing Greece to take throw-in. BleuDXXXIV (talk) 13:20, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Player positions for USA, in Belgium-USA game

Cameron, Johnson, and Zusi are wrongly placed for the USA on the pitch map. Johnson should take Cameron's Place, Zusi should take Johnson's place, and Cameron should take Zusi's place. If you look at the FIFA game report, this will become clear. Edits needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.18.5.148 (talk) 03:02, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately the policy of Wikipedia is allowing editors to use false and incorrect data, this practice means that the positional information is totally useless in many cases. Ive tried to convince other editors to seek out a better and more infallible source to no avail. --The Mercenary 73 (talk) 15:50, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and since it's to no avail (because you're wrong), perhaps you ought to let it go. Wikipedia's policy is for verifiability, not truth. I have corrected the line-ups to match the graphic. – Pee Jay 17:44, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Belgium-USA pitch map graphic is still wrong; verifiably so, thanks to the FIFA game report. According to the FIFA game report, in the "actual formation" PDF file (http://resources.fifa.com/mm/document/tournament/competition/02/39/76/56/56_0701_bel-usa_actualformation.pdf), Fabian Johnson (23) played right fullback. Look at his average position for the USA in the first 15 minutes and second 15 minutes, before he became injured. Cameron played as DM almost the whole game, not right fullback. Zusi played right winger until he was substituted. So, the pitch map graphic for Belgium-USA is incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.147.236.205 (talk) 22:33, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, matching the lineup to the errant graphic has compounded the error. Now both the lineup and the pitch map graphic are incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.147.236.205 (talk) 22:39, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Still active" in the competition

Can anyone please clarify what exactly means "still active"? At this moment only 3 teams (GER, ARG, NED)are in bold in the table, as the NED-ARG match is still playing (0-0 so far); however BRA will with whoever loses this match, so it is still "active" until the third place is decided. Feedback please? Thanks & regards, DPdH (talk) 21:20, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It looks to me like Brazil is still bold. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:55, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Number of saves for Howard in Belgium-USA

The text for the Belgium-USA match has an error. FIFA later ruled one of the saves a non-save, leaving Howard with 15 saves. http://resources.fifa.com/mm/document/tournament/competition/02/39/98/53/eng_56_0701_bel-usa_usa_playerstatistics_neutral.pdf 140.147.236.205 (talk) 23:01, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on 2014 FIFA World Cup knockout stage. 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) 20:18, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"No era penal" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect No era penal has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 December 3 § No era penal until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 22:33, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]