Talk:1930 FIFA World Cup
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
This article is part of WikiProject Uruguay, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to Sports in Uruguay.
If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives. |
|
| A | This article has been rated as a-Class on the project's quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance on the project's importance scale. |
 |
The article on 1930 FIFA World Cup is supported by the WikiProject on Football, which is an attempt to improve the quality and coverage of football (soccer) related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page; if you have any questions about the project or the article ratings below, please consult the FAQ. |
|---|---|
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. |
Strictly speaking, this wasn't the first World Cup. It was the first FIFA World Cup. Sir Thomas Lipton organised an international tournament, in the early 1900's which was also dubbed the The Sir Thomas Lipton Trophy or "The Lipton Crown of Italy World Cup" (websites differ on the name), so I'm not sure whether the words "World Cup" were used contemporaneously.
See:
http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/congress/9/worldcup.htm http://www.west-auckland.wear-valley-web.co.uk/history/WorldCup.htm http://www.rsssf.com/tablesl/lipton-trophy.html
- Mintguy 21:52 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Thomas Lipton Cup couldn't be First World Cup in modern terms as it was club competition.
AlexCzech 11:51, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Requested move
Football World Cup 1930 → 1930 FIFA World Cup – following the consensus of naming the World Cup articles as FIFA World Cup in Wikipedia, and consistency of naming the major international football tournaments.
Discuss here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Competitions#Requested move of Football World Cup articles. --Pkchan 10:44, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
- Moved per requested move. --Pkchan 12:57, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Full table
What is the point of this section? It was a knockout tournament! I'll remove unless anyone has a good reason to keep it. Guinnog 07:17, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- Removing, also for 1934. Guinnog 06:51, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
-
- Removing again. Please justify why this should be here, rather than reverting it again Guinnog 17:49, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
The rankings were used by FIFA to determine seeds in recent years. The tables from 1978 to present are valid and for consistency we can include the ones from 1930-1974 as well. For that matter FIFA has ranked the early tournaments anyway and a document with those rankings can be found here http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/releases/en/fwc_origin_en.pdf Libro0 17:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Third-place match
Strange, the Spanish wikipedia claims that the third-place match was planned but that Yugoslavia refused to play in protest against partial refereeing in their semifinal. Can anyone confirm or disprove this?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.244.139.218 (talk • contribs) 08:03, June 23, 2006.
- I did this search and I can't find any evidence of such a claim. Perhaps we could ask over there what the evidence is for the assertion? If true, this is an interesting fact. --Deville (Talk) 22:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
- I asked on the talk page of the Spanish article to see if anyone had a source for this. If anyone answers me over there, we can add it here. --Deville (Talk) 23:01, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- On the Spanish wikipedia they cite an article in Spanish saying that there was no third place game but, the US earned third by goal diffential --Coasttocoast 23:39, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Disputed goal totals
For the Chile-Mexico game on 16 July, FIFA says the first two goals were scored by Subiabre for Chile. RSSSF says they were scored by Vidal and an own goal by Rosas of Mexico. Which is it? \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 00:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- I would always go with FIFA; it's their tournament. --Guinnog 00:37, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Likewise in the Argentina-Chile game of 22 July, FIFA says the Chile goal was scored by Subiabre, while RSSSF says Arellano. There appear to be a LOT of these inconsistencies in the Wikipedia data; it makes sorting out who's who and what's what very difficult if not impossible. RSSSF is considered by some to be authoritative. What's Wikipolicy here? \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 00:43, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
And again: Romania-Peru, 14 July: FIFA says the first goal was scored by Desu, RSSSF says Stanciu. \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 01:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- That would be WP:V, and I'd find it hard to trump FIFA as the policy says: "...refer only to facts, assertions, theories, ideas, claims, opinions, and arguments that have already been published by reputable publishers", and they are surely reputable publishers and fact-checkers of their own tournament. Interesting discrepancy though, as you say. --Guinnog 00:55, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
I understand that, but RSSSF isn't just some dude with a website; it's pretty serious. And these are dramatic differences. Whether or not FIFA is a reliable fact-checker of 1930 events is open to SOME question. I'd like someone with knowledge of this situation to weigh in before just changing it all wholesale.\ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 01:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Another one: was the second USA goal on 17 July an own goal by González of Paraguay (RSSSF) or a regular goal by Tom Florie (FIFA), or a goal by Bert Patenaude (widely believed but disproven)? \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 01:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
OK, I found this, from FIFA World Cup goalscorers: "In earlier tournaments, FIFA match reports are known to be inaccurate, so Cris Freddi's book Complete Book of the World Cup 2006 is used as the most authentic known publication." Hmm.\ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 01:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- That's very interesting and surprising. Hmmm indeed. --Guinnog 01:10, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Well, I'm not going to make any changes until I read Freddi's book. I assume that the figures for RSSSF, Freddi, and Wikipedia are in agreement, though with the number of errors I'm finding, I wonder. \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 01:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- Oh dear. That page ( FIFA World Cup goalscorers) and presumably that book credits Bert Patenaude with 4 goals, presumably counting the hat trick whereas FIFA and RSSSF don't. So yet more discrepencies. Jooler 12:36, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- Oh, I hadn't noticed that. I AM noticing that WHOEVER is right, the Wiki pages are LOADED with internal inconsistencies -- even knowing very little in the way of verifiable concrete facts about the 1930 Cup, I know that what we have here is a stinky stew, with multiple pages disagreeing with each other.
The more I read about RSSSF, the more I'm inclined to just take them for it, as they HAVE done the research. However, their authoritativeness is undermined by some egregious misspellings of players' names, which is another area where Wikipedia is in a dire condition. RSSSF's official statistics report for 1930, at www.rsssf.com/tables/30full.html, lists "Prequinho", "Scopello" and "Sousa" in the Scorer's List, despite spelling them correctly (Preguinho, Scopelli, Souza or Souza-Ferriera) in the game summaries.
Names are a big issue with me -- it is VERY DIFFICULT to tell players apart when they are customarily referred to in four or five different ways, as is common with Brazilian, Portuguese, Spanish, and Mexican players especially. The non-Latin-character-set players can be problematic as well. There are also players with similar but different names who in some places are receiving credit for each other's goals and stuff. I've also noticed that MANY redlinked players actually DO have pages, just under another version of their name. Man, this needs some serious effort to clean up.
I can't believe that the most popular game in the world has its most basic facts in doubt -- in baseball, by contrast, the most mundane statistical details of players from the 1870s are minutely recorded. Well, I guess you could call it an opportunity.... \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 18:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- OK, here's what I did: I changed ALL the goals to the FIFA officially-reported goals. This is in accordance with WP:V, which states among other things that the goal is not truth but verifiability. To seriously do the research to figure out what the truth is would be original research and thus not allowed here. FIFA is the official source even if they are wrong. As verification I have inserted a Report link to EACH match, which is the official FIFA report for that match -- not trivia, not some journalist's article, not an unverified web page, but the real deal according to the people who run the game.
-
-
-
- However, to cover the bases, I have added ref tags, with notes below indicating exactly which goals are disputed, and to whom RSSSF credits them. I did this for goals where RSSSF reports a different time as well. The RSSSF report is linked in the External Links section, so these corrections, whether true or otherwise, can be verified.
-
-
-
- I then corrected the Scorers Table to reflect the FIFA results. The entire page now reflects BOTH the FIFA official reports AND the RSSSF disagreements. Wikipedia is not the place to hash out the truth; it is an encyclopedia, and thus gives the references. I might be more amenable to using the RSSSF figures instead IF I could find anywhere a detailed description and justification for why they think the FIFA reports are wrong. For Wikipedia to say, as it does in the goalscorers article, that "everyone knows the official reports are wrong" requires at a minimum a serious citation for why this is so. None is presented here or there. \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 00:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] Group denominations
Groups in the 1930 and subsequent world cups were not called "A", "B", "C", "D"; they were called by ordinal or roman numbers, as in "Groups 1-4" or "I-IV", or "First-Fourth", as far as I know. Letters were used for the first time in 1974, when the first round groups were called "1-4" and the second round groups "A" and "B". According to Oceano's "Enciclopedia Mundial del Futbol", Vol. 1, "El Libro del Mundial" by Eduardo Arias (ISBN 958-02-0853-0), and the fifaworldcup.com site's "Previous world cups" section (under "Results"), this is how the gropus were called in the world cups:
| Tournament | Group "names" |
|---|---|
| 1930 FIFA World Cup | Groups "I-IV" |
| 1934 FIFA World Cup | No groups |
| 1950 FIFA World Cup
1954 FIFA World Cup |
Groups "I-IV" |
| 1974 FIFA World Cup | 1st Round: Groups "I-IV"
2nd Round: Groups "A", "B" |
| 1982 FIFA World Cup | 1st Round: Groups "I-VI"
2nd Round: Groups "A-D" |
| 1986 FIFA World Cup | Groups "A-F" |
| 1998 FIFA World Cup | Groups "A-H" |
This is an often ignored detail and it might be very trivial, but I think it would be worth it to make the change to help achieve greater accuracy. - ChaChaFut 00:20, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] World Cup Referees
Has anyone got any information on the World Cup referees for the first tournament? Am looking to fill in some biographical details and enter some category. Please check my Jean Langenus entry for ideas. One of the people I am most interested in finding out about is Thomas Balway. Further information on him would be most appreciated.
