Talk:2022 FIFA World Cup qualification – UEFA second round

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:

November 14 to 20, 2021

Group A

Since this is a constant issue, can anyone check the math and verify that the second-place team in Group A is indeed guaranteed to be seeded? Don't forget that Portugal can still qualify for the World Cup ahead of Serbia and the groups with six teams do not count results against sixth place for seeding. Jalen Folf (talk) 08:26, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JalenFolf: Yes, Group A is guaranteed to be seeded - the team in Group A will have at least 17 points, so we just need to show that the runners-up in at least 4 other groups cannot reach that total.

Group B - Spain and Sweden play each other in their last match. A draw or win by Sweden means the runner-up in the group finishes with 16 points; a Spanish victory leaves Sweden with 15.
Group D - Ukraine can finish with no more than 12. Even if Finland were to win their last two matches (including one against France), that would leave them with 14, which is the highest total the group runner-up can have.
Group H - Croatia and Russia play each other in the last group match, and both of them defeated both Cyprus and Malta (the only teams that can finish in 6th) twice. If Croatia win, then Russia finish with 16 points in the seeding table, while a draw would only raise Croatia to 15.
Group J - Liechtenstein will definitely finish in 6th place. North Macedonia beat them twice, so they can finish with no more than 12 points in the seedings. Romania beat them once, but play them in their last match, so they will have 11 points in the seedings table if they finish second. Armenia is extremely unlikely to finish second, but even if they do, they will have no more than 11 points in the seedings.

If I felt like it, I could probably find one or two more groups that cannot have a seeded runner-up, but I have proven that Group A will definitely be seeded. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 01:42, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bizarre

If I were a casual reader and looked at the draw section - I could ONLY conclude that ONLY Austria were guaranteed a spot in this round at the moment. And that is fundamentally wrong. They are listed as being in the draw and there is nothing to indicate that the list is anything but complete. 110.33.28.251 (talk) 01:50, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They are guaranteed a spot in this round though.. S.A. Julio (talk) 15:15, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Even a casual reader should very likely see there were still some matches to be played, and that positions are subject to change. I like the format as it stands now, with bullet points for the different permutations, instead of tabulated. Matilda Maniac (talk) 05:34, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rankings

Why isn't Israel included in the list https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/2022_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_%E2%80%93_UEFA_Second_Round#Nations_League_group_winners_(best_two_advance)? They're 25 as per the current rankings MaskedSinger (talk) 04:51, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is for the best two Nations League group winners, and Israel were not a group winner (third in group B2). Matilda Maniac (talk) 05:31, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. You're 100% right. Thanks for clarifying! MaskedSinger (talk) 17:21, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FIFA and UEFA responses to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine

Wouldn’t it make more sense to wait for an official FIFA announcement regarding Russia vs Poland before jumping to conclusions on where the match would take place? If I recall correctly, UEFA does not have control over a FIFA sanctioned match like this. Jalen Folf (talk) 19:28, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is my understanding that the qualifiers are still administered by each confederation, so UEFA can require Russia and Ukraine to play at neutral sites. I also note that the FIFA report lists the stadium as "TBD," though the UEFA report still shows Dynamo Central Stadium. This is an odd contradiction with UEFA announcing Russia has to play in a neutral venue but not updating the match report page. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 20:56, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Polish national team players and president of Polish FA refuse to play against Russia. Poland FA and players refuse to play World Cup match with Russia Plingen Plungen (talk) 12:10, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Poland just refused to play the match in March so it could be a lot more complicated now Cw131007 (talk) 12:49, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, it will definitely be a lot more complicated. Despite my previous comment, I now believe it would be best to wait for FIFA to make a statement regarding the situation. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 16:01, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FIFA response at https://www.fifa.com/tournaments/mens/worldcup/qatar2022/media-releases/bureau-of-the-fifa-council-takes-initial-measures-with-regard-to-war-in Cw131007 (talk) 19:23, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. The article has been updated accordingly. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 19:41, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think the flag doesn't match. That is ROC but it is RFU. KyleRGiggs (talk) 09:47, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It could be another flag. Let's wait and see. In addition, shouldn't the full name be "Football Union of Russia" rather than RFU? RFU is the code...--Island92 (talk) 12:27, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, RFU. No "Russia" allowed. "Russia" included in the full name. See how 2022 Olympic Winter Games handle Russia. KyleRGiggs (talk) 16:05, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you.--Island92 (talk) 16:08, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hereby request to make RFU flag as "rfu-football" into Template:Country data Russia. KyleRGiggs (talk) 16:27, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FIFA hasn't presented yet the flag RFU could compete with.--Island92 (talk) 16:29, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Russia competed as RFU in last year's futsal and beach soccer World Cups, and they competed with the flag of the ROC used by the IOC. S.A. Julio (talk) 17:54, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FIFA and UEFA have suspended all Russian teams, national teams and clubs, from all FIFA / UEFA competitions.

FIFA/UEFA suspend Russian clubs and national teams from all competitions Plingen Plungen (talk) 17:40, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As they have now been banned officially, I don't think it's suitable to use anything other than the Russian flag in the article. It should instead be listed as "bye". It seems incredibly unlikely that the spot will be replaced. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:51, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) As a note, FIFA have not published any information on how this impacts the play-offs. There are a number of possible outcomes, such as the suspension being lifted if situations improve, Russia being replaced by another team or Poland getting a walkover. Until further announcements are made, let's not jump to any conclusions, such as listing Poland in the final. Anything else would be WP:OR. S.A. Julio (talk) 17:54, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We don't yet know if Poland will get a bye to the next round or if Russia will be replaced with another team. What we do know for certain is that that match will not be played in Moscow, so why does the article still say it will? – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 21:47, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because the date, kick-off time and venue had been decided before today suspension. No matter whether it will be played or not. Island92 (talk) 22:58, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Very minor point: should Russia's name be struck out at all points up to and including the draw, which took place before the ban when they were still in the competition? --202.11.207.52 (talk) 23:11, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good point – and it's now removed by Centaur271188. It would have been appropriate had the team been excluded from the draw itself. In fact we don't usually apply the strikethrough for cancelled matches either – just the "w/o" or "0–3 (awd)", depending on the decision, would be enough. --Theurgist (talk) 00:10, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the strikethrough can be removed once a meaningful decision has been made, for now it is the best option until we know how FIFA will proceed. S.A. Julio (talk) 02:19, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

'Bracket/Summary'

@Island92, Matilda Maniac, S.A. Julio, and Theurgist: Could we simplify the article a bit by removing those sections? Do they have any use beside UEFA main page's transclusion (I think 'Bracket' sections can do that job too)? Centaur271188 (talk) 22:28, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Centaur271188: The problem is that the 2022 FIFA World Cup qualification (UEFA) article is meant to have every score linked to the match summary. With a bracket there is not really a good way to link the score, as it is separated on two different lines (I have seen a few brackets before where the match summary is linked to twice in each team's score box, but to me this is somewhat awkward and unintuitive). I suppose if it's a big issue we could just place the summary tables right on the main UEFA qualifying page without transclusion, and then remove the summary from this article. However the usual style is to transclude from the round article. S.A. Julio (talk) 22:33, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Change the topic a little bit)@S.A. Julio: Hmm, 'Bracket' next to 'Summary' looks redundant (especially the brackets here have only 2 rounds), not a very big issue but I think that is something we can improve. What about trying the opposite - transclude 'Summary' to world main page then remove 'Bracket'? You reverted that change once ('we do not need match links in world article'), but we still have some links there anyway (AFC 4th round, CAF 3rd round, inter-confederal play-offs), I think having UEFA links is OK too. Centaur271188 (talk) 23:45, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Centaur271188: It might be a bit redundant, though I think visually a bracket is useful to readers as a quick overview of the competition. There is also an option as seen at 2021 CONCACAF Gold Cup qualification, where the brackets have their own section. S.A. Julio (talk) 01:12, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Italy Vs North Macedonia deserves an article

it's a historical setback and deserves a proper article like many others setbacks or uncommon results 189.92.219.49 (talk) 23:32, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Top goalscorers

Bale with 3 rather than 2. Wales v Ukraine FIFA gave it to Bale. @Centaur271188: Island92 (talk) 20:19, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hence, Yarmolenko no own goal.--Island92 (talk) 21:25, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@S.A. Julio: Can you fix it?--Island92 (talk) 20:01, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Island92:

Done. S.A. Julio (talk) 18:11, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Island92 and S.A. Julio: Sorry guys, I have been way too inactive lately. And thanks for fixing, Julio. I remember Mediocre Legacy made that change in June, then Mrloop reverted it - that I have not noticed until now. Agree that FIFA should be prioritised here, as in Julio's edit summary [1] Centaur271188 (talk) 16:32, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]