Talk:2014 FIFA World Cup qualification – UEFA Group F

Reversion of next match day scenarios

While I've always been on the side of including the scenarios (which is obvious if one looks at my edit history), the scenarios which were recently added/reverted/re-added on this page should not be included as written for 2 reasons:

• They were poorly written and difficult to follow.
• To avoid being too "crystal ball", the accepted practice has long been to not go past the next match for any of the teams involved, so this scenario as written looks too far ahead. (I'm too lazy to go back and find it, but I know this point has been discussed.)

So, that is why I reverted the last edit by Svmich. LarryJeff (talk) 14:58, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

• Can you expand more on why do you consider the scenarios to be poorly written? Should they be made easier to follow? If yes, should there be some explanations?
• There is no crystal ball, since the text is not a set of unverifiable speculations, it is rather a set of if ... then ... statements regarding the impact of upcoming games on the fate of some teams of the group. Svmich (talk) 18:52, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Aside from the grammar issues, there's no reason to begin with "Unless Portugal beat Russia" since everything you have after that includes a specific result of the Portugal-Russia match. And, as I stated in my previous comment, don't include anything that depends on matches past a single round of matches. LarryJeff (talk) 02:17, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Sure, the text after "Unless Portugal beat Russia" implies either win for Russia or draw, that is logically correct according to the current standings. Btw., can you explain why we shouldn't include anything that depends on matches past a single round? Now the standings became such that the next three games have specific crucial impact on the fate of specific teams. And of course if you know some better wording, feel free to improve. Svmich (talk) 05:57, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

As for the reasons to limit the number of matches looked at in scenarios, it basically comes down to keeping it as simple as possible. In other words, just looking at teams clinching or being eliminated based solely on the results of the immediate matches. If we look at the 2nd match date, what's to say we have to stop there; why not include the 3rd and so on. Using that logic, we could write out all the possible outcomes of the group based on all possible results of all future matches. As I alluded to in my original post, this idea was discussed in the past when a disagreement came up as to whether the scenarios should be included at all. Like I said, I am all for including the scenarios, in fact, I'm probably one of the most active at entering them myself. I just think we need to keep the format and especially the depth of them fairly consistent across the many articles in which they are used. LarryJeff (talk) 16:13, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Livescores

Hi

Per WP:LIVESCORES we should not add scores to matches still in play. Please wait until match is finished and then add the score. If you dont discuss here your edits will be considered disrutive and you might get warned and blocked. This has also been discussed on WT:FOOTY many times. QED237 (talk) 17:36, 11 October 2013 (UTC)