Talk:2010 FIFA World Cup qualification – UEFA Group 6

Untitled

The article says that Estadi Comunal d'Aixovall stadium is home of Andorra national team. It also claims that the Aixovall stadium, which is in Aixovall, is located in Andorra la Vella. The FIFA match report and national football fedartion say that the international matches were played in Estadi Comunal d'Andorra la Vella. --SM (talk) 19:51, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Qualification note

The little .. ahem .. issue, that Aheyfromhome had with the England situation does being up a related point - which may become more relevant in the future. It does so happen that, while England can't ensure a play-off berth on the next matchday in this group (10 June), they could possibly ensure one BEFORE they play their next match (in September) with results on 12 August in Group 9. Now, we can deal with this here - after this match we could write (if England win):

On the next matchday (12 August):

• England will ensure at worst a UEFA play-off position if:
  • Scotland and Norway draw (in Group 9).

(if Norway don't win against the Netherlands on 10 June this would be)

On the next matchday (12 August):

• England will ensure at worst a UEFA play-off position if:
  • Scotland do not defeat Norway (in Group 9).

I think the Group indicator is a good idea (maybe a wikilink too).

The interesting question would be - how would we do this if there was no Group 6 game on 12 August?

Would we write (something like)

Before the next matchday (5 September):

• England will ensure at worst a UEFA play-off position if:
  • Scotland and Norway draw (on 12 August in Group 9).

and have that as a separate section? Probably. Worth considering for 12 August in particular - and possibly for Group 9 (which finishes early, so Scotland or another could ensure their play-off spot on a date after they finish playing!!!) Jlsa (talk) 15:06, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not certain this scenario is accurate anyway. If Croatia loses, it's true that they can no longer catch England - but Belarus and Ukraine both could. Belarus would be 9 back with four matches left, and Ukraine would be 10 back with four left. If they draw their match against each other (or if Ukraine wins it) and both win all of their other three matches while England loses out, England would finish tied for second and could lose out on goal difference. But it is a good idea to discuss how to present it, as the question also arises with Spain in Group 5 (they can clinch second on August 12, but it may still be possible for them to finish last among runners-up should Belgium or Turkey fall to the bottom of that group). PiGuy314 (talk) 02:50, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

And, of course, you are correct (I misremembered what Aheyfromhome had done last time - forgetting it was England win AND Ukraine not win in the info not just England win). How sad. Jlsa (talk) 03:02, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Um, surely the current "On the next matchday" stat can't be right? It says that Croatia can only be able to get to the playoffs by LOSING their next match? How's that work then? DragonQ (talk) 10:42, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Not at all, it says the only way Croatia will be able to advance would be via the play-off - ie, they couldn't win the group. (That's why we always change "only advance" to "advance only") Jlsa (talk) 12:07, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I see. It's not worded very well to be honest. This makes more sense IMO: "Croatia will only be able to qualify via the UEFA play-off if they lose." or maybe "Croatia cannot automatically qualify via winning the group if they lose."? DragonQ (talk) 09:29, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Match report links

Apparently the FIFA.com match reports are no longer functioning and need replacing. I have no problem with replacing them with working links, but I think it's inappropriate to replace them with links to an unknown site such as worldcuptimemachine.com. Is there nowhere on the FIFA site that still shows these results? – PeeJay 10:53, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Why is it inappropriate to link to "an unknown site"? It seems to be an independent well-curated archive run by fans and seems to have no commercial motive (no ads). Is FIFA the only legitimate source and if so why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:9:7E00:9C3:F52B:2368:ED87:B8D (talk) 18:45, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

I didn't say FIFA was the only legitimate source, but it's a heck of a lot better than a self-published fansite with little to no evidence to corroborate their reliability. If we must deviate from FIFA's own website (which would be the preferred option since it's their tournament and they have the final say on the official documentation), then it would be best to go for a respected news site such as ESPN FC or the BBC. – PeeJay 22:43, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

That's ridiculous. Go ahead and fix the links to something you feel is more "official" or "respected" then, I have no skin in the game. This is why nobody new edits wikipedia anymore, it's just a cabal of long-time self-righteous editors who feel they know better than everyone else. Good luck. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:9:7E00:9C3:F52B:2368:ED87:B8D (talk) 23:40, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

It seems the links to FIFA's site are still broken, at whick point do we consider replacing them with links to third party sites that compile box scores? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:9:7E00:9C3:5D7A:DAB3:C2D4:A112 (talk) 21:04, 17 July 2014 (UTC)