Talk:1966 FIFA World Cup
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
The article on 1966 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 1966 → 1966 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)
- Or rather moved through apathy. Jooler 13:11, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
For hursts sake u lot. The famous commentary is some of the CROWD are on the pitch.
Poor Pickles, but what has his death got to do with the article? (Pally01 14:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC))
For Hurst's sake go to http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/july/30/newsid_2644000/2644065.stm and you can hear the actual commentary which is: "some people are on the pitch..." rather than "the crowd". Either way, though, this means that the fourth goal should not have been allowed as the match should really have been halted due to the pitch invasion. Davkal 11:41, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Few goals
I don't understand the comment "1966 was a World Cup with few goals as the teams began to play much more tactically and defensively" - what is the evidence for this? The goals per match were almost the same as in the previous tournament in Chile in '62 and more than in modern tournaments. The final ended 4-2!
--203.173.42.48 00:44, 19 May 2006 (UTC) G Watson gwat@optusnet.com.au
The goals per game ratio for all world cups are as follows: 1930 3.89, 1934 4.12, 1938 4.67, 1950 4, 1954 5.38, 1958 3.6, 1962 2.78, 1966 2.78, 1970 2.97, 1974 2.55, 1978 2.68, 1985 2.81, 1986 2.54, 1990 2.21, 1994 2.71, 1998 2.67, 2002 2.52, It would seem from this that the 1962 world cup was the one where the trend for fewer goals started and this trend has continued right through til 2002. Also, while checking this I corrected the group 2 table re Spain's GF, GA & GD from 2, 4, -2 to 4, 5, -1 Davkal 12:12, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Disputed
On the article about Geoff Hurst it says: "The debate on Hurst's second goal will last forever. Advances in technology have never conclusively proved that the ball crossed the line, and generally support the opposite view, but Bakrahmov was insistent at the time and continued to justify his decision in decades to come until his death." However, in this article it says it is proven without doubt that the ball did not cross the line. There is a clear contradiction between both articles. Somebody with access to actual and reliable sources about that should check it and determine which one of the two articles is correct.
see http://www.4rfv.co.uk/industrynews.asp?ID=51603 New high definition footage shows the ball didn't cross the line. Davkal 12:13, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
I don't think the section on the final deals with the issue of England's third goal very well at present. It would probably be best, I think, to say something about the new technology immediately after the description of the goal in the main paragraph. I also don't think the line "had then goal been knocked off England would still have won" should be there. That is, in an encyclopedia we probably shouldn't go in for "what ifs". Otherwise, some German (or Scot) might write, " although had Hurst's second "goal" not been given and had play been stopped for the pitch invasion then the game would have been settled on penalties" or something.
Also, and less controversially, in the main paragraph it say's England's 3rd was scored in the 98th minute but in the summary of all the games at the bottom the time is listed as 101. I have checked another website and it says the 100th minute! Can we get this from a definitive source and amend. Davkal 13:36, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- No what-ifs. Just verifiable facts please. I'll edit the article in this direction. --Guinnog 22:35, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
FYI If it had ended 2:2 it would have been decided by "drawing lots" - perhaps tossoing a coin? However :-), since the whistle hadn't gone, the game would have been restarted after moving the crowd back, and Engalnd would still have had a second or two get get the third. -- 220.237.77.131
FYI a replay date of 19.30 BST Tuesday August 2, 1966 was announced for the event that the final finish level aet. Slumgum T. C. 12:17, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Points
Could someone explain why teams were only awarded two points for a win in the group stages and when did this change? James Fitzy 20:22, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
3 points for a win only came into football fairly recently. USA 94 was the first world cup to use this format and this is mentioned in the article on that world cup. Prior to this, it was always 2 points for a win in virtually every league competition the world over (except England which had used this system since 1981) so I don't think it needs to be mentioned re every tournament/league prior to 94. We could insert links to the stub-article Three points for a win for anyone interested???Davkal 10:18, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, although I wasn't trying to get it added in this topic. I did try to look in other topics which may mention it but to no avail. I'll check the World Cup page James Fitzy 20:36, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
ENGLANDS GROUP STAGES how come it says 2 games were played in wembley at the same time
[edit] Spain's goal v Argentina
Another victim of my Crid Freddi troubleshoot (see 1950 talk), here's what he says: "Every known source, Spanish and otherwise, credits Spain's equalizer to Pirri, who was winning his first cap - but that's not how it looks on the screen. When a Suárez cross is headed almost straight up in the air, Pirri jumps for it with Roma, but it's clearly the goalkeeper's hand that dunks it in the net like a water pop player. Not the way he'd have chosen to celebrate his 34th birthday." Mjefm 19:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:WorldCup1966poster.jpg
Image:WorldCup1966poster.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 16:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Bertil Loow
Where does Bertil Loow come from ? Sweden or Belgium ?? In the group A matches report, he written as Sweden but in the list of referee he written as Belgium. Which one is correct ?? Albert (talk) 10:16, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
