Template talk:UEFA Euro 2016 qualifying third-placed table

Conversion to module

Recent consensus at WT:FOOTY was to use Module:Sports table for football tables. I am currently converting the group tables for EURO 2016 and am suggesting to replace the third-place table by:

---

to correspond with the new style. I want to see whether there are any comments before I implement this in the live version. This has the following changes in addition to the new format:

• No away goal column, I don't think that it is needed, because it doesn't work as a tie-breaker at this point. When it breaks a tie, it would probably be better to use |hth_TTT= options to create an additional linked footnote.
• The notes are now implemented as proper footnotes, why they would otherwise be numbered 2,4,6 is beyond me. As the three options get reduced, the notes can be adapted easily as well.
• There is no sixth-place team column, in my eyes it does not add any information. To see the influence of the sixth-placed you need to go to the group table anyway. It might also cause minor confusion to people that never saw these tables, because two countries are listed.

Overall I think the changes will make this table more accessible, because it exactly matches the regular group tables. CRwikiCA talk 20:43, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

@Qed237: What is your take on this? CRwikiCA talk 15:24, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

@CRwikiCA: I am happy with that. I am not even sure if note that team may change position is needed, it is a current table and of course teams may change. We can not have column for every tiebreaker (we dont on other places) and there is already info to not include sixth-placed team. As I said I am happy with the solution. Should we have similar solution at 2015 CONCACAF U-20 Championship (playoff) and for example not use position there? In old depreciated template (not used here) there was a parameter called |group= and then the group column was added (for every row/team it was |group=A and so on)so both pos and group was shown, perhaps a future use for module. QED237 (talk) 16:30, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

@Qed237: I made the suggested change in the sandbox, if you think the version is okay, I will move it to the live version. Something similar could be used for the 2015 CONCACAF U-20 Championship (playoff), although you also make a good point about having both position and group in the standings, because both might be relevant. CRwikiCA talk 15:44, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

It's better to add a note into the template, like this. Raymond "Giggs" Ko 05:09, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

According to this: http://ru.uefa.com/uefaeuro/qualifiers/season=2016/standings/round=2000446/group=2002434/index.html Russia should have 8 points and be in 4th place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by XAKxRUSx (talk • contribs) 15:55, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

@XAKxRUSx: Always read rules: For this tournament qualification matches against the sixth placed team do not count. Moldova 6th place. Russia–Moldova 1:1. 8–1=7 points. That's all. GAV80 (talk) 16:02, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

References

Croatia Points Deduction

@Soilentred: @Qed237: @GAV80: From what I can see here there's nothing to suggest that Croatia's points deduction doesn't apply to the ranking of 3rd place teams, but is there anywhere that confirms this? Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 10:43, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

From what I know there is no way to confirm this, but I will look around. I dont see why the deduction would not apply here. Qed237 (talk) 12:58, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

I have made an attempt to contact UEFA, but no reply yet. Perhaps someone else wants to try as well. Qed237 (talk) 14:59, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Of course there isn't anything to confirm it, simply because it's not true. There is nothing, I repeat NOTHING in UEFA's rules tha would suggest deducting discplinary points on any other table, including the one used for ranking 3rd place teams. It's a fantasy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soilentred (talk • contribs) 15:19, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Croatia has been given a point deduction of course it applies in all tables, they can not have it just on one table, that is a fantasy. A decuction is a deduction. Qed237 (talk) 15:34, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

So if Croatia finishes with same points as Bulgaria, Denmark, or Italy, you would deduct 1 point from their H2H table too? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soilentred (talk • contribs) 15:38, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Dont be ridiculous, head-to-head is head-to-head. But they do have a one point deduction. Qed237 (talk) 15:40, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

But just 6 minutes ago your story wasn't "head-to-head is head-to head"; it was, I quote "of course it applies in all tables" and "A decuction is a deduction". So now you see that it DOESN'T apply in all tables and that you CAN'T spam "it's a deduction" everywhere. You NEED to provide official SOURCE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soilentred (talk • contribs) 16:03, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Head-to head record between teams is not a standings table. Qed237 (talk) 16:25, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Table is just an organised visual representation of the results. If you look at Regulations of the UEFA European Football Championship 2014-16 you can find criteria to determine best team in head-to-head results under Article 13 of Chapter II - Competition System, called "Equality of points – qualifying competition", as well as criteria for best 3rd place team under Article 15 of the same chapter called "Play-offs". Both of them are desribed and worded similarly, I'd say almost the same, and most importantly - none of them uses the "table". But I honestly don't see much sense debating with you as you're turning it into linguistic discussion instead of what you're supposed to do - provide SOURCES. I think we better wait for admins to deicide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soilentred (talk • contribs) 17:26, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

I have notified Wikipedia:WikiProject Football in this discussion for more input. Qed237 (talk) 20:37, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

If the point deduction is official (as it is) it counts for this table aswell. H2H is a different scenario, of course. Kante4 (talk) 20:44, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

If Croatia finish with the same point as other nations with the deduction, that's one situation different than finishing without it. I say we should include, it's more than official right now. Teams with deducted points also existed in Italian tournaments and I can't see anybody complaining about it. MYS77 ^✉ 02:14, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

You are all just speculating. The table in template is needed only after the group stage anyway, and the deduction will probably not change things in the end. As a compromise don't deduct and add a footnote saying it is unclear if the deduction applies. -Koppapa (talk) 06:23, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Koppapa is correct that this has emerged because what we're doing is producing these unsourced tables based on what is, effectively, original research. If we were strictly following Wikipedia's rules, such tables would not be included on these pages. That's not a reason to not have them (WP:IAR) but it is why we have this dispute. --Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 08:50, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

I understand that my opinion on this is effectively OR. However, since Croatia have had a point deducted from their total in group play (not against the team ranked 6th in their group), then logically that point must be deducted here as well. Article 14 of the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations stipulates the penalties for racist behavior by players, team officials, or fans, including deduction of standings points and being forced to play behind closed doors for third and subsequent offenses. There is nothing to say that standings points deducted during group play would be restored to determine the inter-group ranking of teams after group play is concluded. To say deducted points would be restored is a far greater logical leap than to say they would not. However, with only two group match days remaining, this question will soon be moot. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 09:46, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 22 September 2015

Croatia is deducted one point and instead of 15 points they have 14. So, in third-placed teams ranking they have 11 points instead of 12 as shown in this table - that was clarified today by UEFA and CFF. Thanks. DinamoZagreb (talk) 21:22, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

@DinamoZagreb: This sounds reasonable but do you have source from UEFA and CFF for this? Qed237 (talk) 21:52, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

I have to agree with Qed237's statement. If there is a reliable source for this information, then the edit protection is pointless because we can point to an official source. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 00:52, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Why do you need a source? There IS a source, the standing of the group H on the UEFA website. That's obvious, and crystal clear. Croatia's deducted by 1 point. So they have 14 points in their group. The ranking of the 3rd placed teams based on the team's group points minus the goals and the points against the last placed team. So Croatia have 14-3 points for the 3rd placed table. You shouldn't even consider the apply, because it's not a case. It doesn't "apply" here, it's calculated. The deduction manifests in their group, and everything else depends on that! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.209.215.41 (talk) 08:20, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Please see the discussion above. The protection was put in place because of an edit war over this very issue. The UEFA rules are not unambiguous regarding whether points deducted in group round play are restored to determine best 3rd place team. My personal opinion is that they are not, but there is nothing specifically saying yes or no. If you can find where UEFA specifically states that Croatia have 11 points in the third-place calculation, then please cite it. As it stands, UEFA doesn't have a table of third place teams, and likely will not create one until group play has completed. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 09:33, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

http://www.vecernji.hr/nogomet/hns-dobio-jos-jedan-nepovoljan-odgovor-uefe-bod-se-oduzima-i-na-ljestvici-treceplasiranih-1026237 here's the link from the Croatian newspaper (in Croatian).DinamoZagreb (talk) 16:10, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

@Slakr: I see consensus (although weak) above and now we even have a source that is linking to this article in croatian edition of goal.com. Is it enough? Qed237 (talk) 19:20, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Citation from the Regulation of the UEFA European Football Championship 2014-2016, article 14:

14.02 To compare the rankings between the qualifying groups and to determine the best third-placed team, the results against the teams in sixth place are discarded. The following criteria are applied, in the order given, to determine the rankings:

a. higher number of points obtained;

b. superior goal difference;

c. higher number of goals scored;

d. higher number of away goals scored;

e. fair play conduct in all group matches as defined in Annex C.5.1;

f. position in the UEFA national team coefficient rankings (see Annex B.1.2.b).

As you see it talks about obtained points. Croatia currently have 14 points, minus the points against the 6th team they have 11. It's unambigous in my opinion. Does it mention anywhere anything else then points? No. Does it mention anywhere the ignorance of disciplinary deduction? No. I totally aggree with Qed. There's a consensus, only one man's fantasy and I think enthusiasm stands in the way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.209.212.82 (talk) 06:54, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 23:21, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

The edit has been completed per the sources referenced. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 22:33, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Who can finish highest in the third-place teams' ranking

Please note that the fact that Ukraine currently has 19 points doesn't mean that teams with 12 points and 2 games to play can't theoretically finish first. There is a possibility that Ukraine will finish on 2nd place in which case Slovakia comes third with score of 13 points plus whatever they winin last round. So, I will correct the notes.

P.S. Why teams have so much points? Did someone mess up everthing by ignoring the fact that maches against lastteam don't count? --Hogg 22 (talk) 06:17, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Ukraine doesn't have 19 points in this ranking. Tvx1 22:15, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Current third place possibilities

I have opened a discussion at Talk:UEFA Euro 2016 qualifying#Current third place possibilities with a table of all possibilities that ill be updated every day. Please look at that before updating and if you have any question we can discuss there to keep all discussions at one place. Qed237 (talk) 12:23, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 October 2015

I will add a table which contains the current, maximum and minimum coefficients of 3rd placed teams Cnrgndz (talk) 21:09, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Not done This template is not for giving permission to edit (cant be done), and your edit will not be made anyway as the coefficient are not yet completed and will not be calculated until all matches has been played. And it does not belong to this standings table. Qed237 (talk) 21:11, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 October 2015

|win_GrA=4 |draw_GrA=3 |loss_GrA=2 |gf_GrA=13 |ga_GrA=9 |status_GrA= |win_GrB=4 |draw_GrB=2 |loss_GrB=3 |gf_GrB=14 |ga_GrB=10|status_GrB= |win_GrC=6 |draw_GrC=1 |loss_GrC=2 |gf_GrC=14|ga_GrC=3 |status_GrC= |win_GrD=5 |draw_GrD=3 |loss_GrD=2 |gf_GrD=19 |ga_GrD=7 |status_GrD=A |win_GrE=4 |draw_GrE=1 |loss_GrE=4 |gf_GrE=16|ga_GrE=11|status_GrE= |win_GrF=4 |draw_GrF=4 |loss_GrF=2 |gf_GrF=11 |ga_GrF=9 |status_GrF= |win_GrG=4 |draw_GrG=3 |loss_GrG=2 |gf_GrG=14|ga_GrG=9 |status_GrG= |win_GrH=5 |draw_GrH=3 |loss_GrH=1 |gf_GrH=19|ga_GrH=5 |status_GrH= |win_GrI=3 |draw_GrI=3 |loss_GrI=2 |gf_GrI=8 |ga_GrI=5 |status_GrI=A 27.114.168.12 (talk) 04:14, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Not done Please read the rules, matches against sixth-placed team do not count. Qed237 (talk) 10:34, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Advances to a further round?

Hello.

What do you mean, "(A) Advances to a further round:"?

The teams are in the playoff.

HandsomeFella (talk) 20:20, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Exactly, they are playing in first round (group stage) and advance to further round (play-offs). Qed237 (talk) 20:22, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

That makes no sense in this context/template. They are already in the "further round", the playoffs. "A further round" here must mean a round beyond the playoffs – and there isn't one. The note should be removed. HandsomeFella (talk) 07:59, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

They are currently in the first round, group stage. Qed237 (talk) 09:45, 13 October 2015 (UTC)