Talk:1970 FIFA World Cup

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject on Football The article on 1970 FIFA World Cup is supported by the WikiProject on Football, which is an attempt to improve the quality and coverage of Association football 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.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Requested move

Football World Cup 1970 → 1970 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 10:40, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Moved per consensus. --Pkchan 13:03, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pele

The Brazilian team, led by Pelé (who was in his fourth and final World Cup), Jairzinho, Rivelino and Tostão, is often regarded as the greatest team ever.

This line is confusing (atleast to me). It gives the impression that Pele was the captain of Brazil but the captain was Carlos Alberto (which is not mentioned anywhere in the article). Could this line be changed to the effect that these four were only the Brazilian forwards. Tintin (talk) 12:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

The main problem with this line, indeed this page, is that it keeps trying to order things, "regarded as the best ever" etc. In Brasil, the 1958 'team' is usually named as the best national team in their history, but even then they leave it open (1970, 1982, any squad without Roberto Carlos). The Banks save against Brasil is given the "arguably best ever" curse. Banks himself said he's pulled off better. Football is a game with a long history, and of many differing opinions- it rarely benefits anybody to claim a consensus. I'll reword if nobody disagrees. Wholemeal 03:20, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

It would probably be a bit better to say the 1970 team is often regarded as the best ATTACKING team ever. As many coaches, analysts, pundits and fans note, the Brazilian defence of 1970 was suspect, extending in a backward chain that included the keeper Felix. Italy's equalizer in the Final reinforced this impression for many. Virtually every serious analysis of the 1970 Cup makes this point. I added the word "attacking" to make a finer, more qualified distinction. As for Pele it is fair to say that he "led" the team, although Alberto was the captain. His reputation, skill and inspirational exhortation was clearly a key force. In the Final he proved the point, scoring one goal, and creating two.

Enriquecardova 06:42, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

This is the only article that uses such superlatives. There is little praise for Brazil in the 1958 article and reading the 1954 article, you won't even suspect that the Hungarians were any good. Tintin (talk) 07:07, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested change

Beckenbauer was not fouled but try to "win" a penalty the resulting dive/simulation caused him to break his clavicle. If he were fouled it would have been a penalty (it was not given). Reamarkable show of courage to play on - but the injury was his own fault.(yitzak) 11:52, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Goal averages

"The Soviet Union took top spot due to superior goal average."

Does anyone else find this confusing? If USSR scored 6 goals and let in one, their goal average would be 6. Mexico on the other hand scored five and kept a clean sheet. Wouldn't that make their goal average infinite, thus presumably better?

Also, is anyone else having trouble finding this page by typing in "1970 FIFA World Cup" in the search box?

CarlosCoppola 21:37, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, seems someone changed the goal average to goal difference. Yet the 1974 article (and FIFA's web site) says it was only then that "For the first time in the World Cup in both qualifying and the finals, teams level on points at the end of the group stage were separated by goal difference (replacing play-offs and goal average)." Any football historians out there with knowledge of what this is about? CarlosCoppola 08:32, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
This is my mistake, or infact FIFAs. Originally there was no explanation here on this page. I then noticed that someone had put goal difference on all of the tables for all of the World Cups going back to 1930 even though goal difference wasn't used in most of them. So I checked up and removed goal difference from the competitions where it wasn't used and tried to verify when goal averages was important to qualifying. Goal average is normally used in large league competitions where teams play over 20 games and the chances of having a clean sheet are rare. In the World Cup, play-offs used to be used and the neccesity of using goal average or some other scheme was very rare. It has never been clear whether a team with a 0-0 for/against score has a better goal average than a team with a 1-1 for/against score and indeed in my research I have read that the possibility of this problem raising its head caused FIFA some headaches in the 1958 World Cup (or might have been 54; I can't remember), but in the end the eventuality didn't happen. Anyway, in researching this and using the Times Digital Archive I found an article in The Times from Wednesday, May 27, 1970; pg. 13; which says
"From the four groups, the leading teams in each will go into the quarter-finals. If two or more teams finish level on points in the contest for a quarter-final place, goal difference will count. If the teams have the same number of points and the same goal difference, lots will be drawn to determine who qualifies. If a quarter-final or a semi-final ends in a draw - and it is a possibility that at least one will end that way - the referee will draw from a hat the name of the country to go through to the next round."
So I added this to to the article with this edit. I a bit confused by the result in Group A where the top two teams finished with the same goal difference, I assumed that they drew lots as had been proposed, or perhaps they could have decided it by the suporior goals for score. However later on I found a FIFA document [1] which specifically said that goal difference only began to be used in 1974 finals. So I thought I had made a mistake here by keeping goal difference and changed this page to say goal average. I have to admit that in my haste to "correct" the page I mis-read the goals for/against for Mexico and Russia and thought that it actually now made sense and didn't require lots or a count of goals for only to resolve who got top spot. By this time I had forgotten the full details of the Times article and just simply assumed that the FIFA document was correct and that it all made sense now, with no neccesity to draw lots or whatever. I should have known better. It looks like The Times is correct and the FIFA document is wrong. It remains a mystery whether the top spot in Group A was because of higher goals scored or because of lots. Probably th former, but who knows. Jooler 10:17, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notes section

In the notes it says that "The rules on substitution were relaxed. In previous tournaments only injured players could be substituted. This tournament allowed up to two outfield players to be replaced at any time and for the goalkeeper to be replaced if injured"

Were substitutions of any kind allowed in earlier World Cups? I've got several books that site Puzach of the USSR as the first World Cup substitution (half time in the opening match against the hosts, replacing Serebrianikov). I may be wrong, but players in previous World Cups were forced to limp out the match, or go of and leave their team a man short. Can anybody confirm otherwise? Wholemeal 03:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

No, there were no subs allowed in FIFA tournaments until 1970. Injured players, ie Pelé for Brazil v Portugal in 1966, had to be withdrawn. It was arguably this high profile incident that forced FIFA to finally accept substitutes in order to prevent teams hacking down the opposition's most talented players. Mjefm 18:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Own goal in Mexico v Italy

Another quote from Freddi (see 1950 talk): "Early sources credit the own goal… to Guzmán, and in this case they're right. Some Italian publications city Peña, but it's clearly No.14 on the replay (Peña, the No.3 wearing the captain's armband, is nowhere near the ball)." Mjefm 18:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:WorldCup1970lposter.jpg

Image:WorldCup1970lposter.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 16:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:1970Telstar.jpg

Image:1970Telstar.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:07, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:1970Telstar.jpg

Image:1970Telstar.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:50, 25 February 2008 (UTC)