Talk:2002 FIFA World Cup/Archive 1

Archive 1

Point something out

The hand ball in the USA vs Germany quarterfinal was not 'alleged' as this article claims. Camera replays clearly show the the ball was blocked on the line by a german defender. I'm changing that. 68.102.104.2 (talk) 14:07, 29 March 2008 (UTC) Sorry, that was me. T.z0n3 (talk) 14:07, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

All-Star Squad

I seem to remember that an American, Claudio Reyna, was placed on the Tournament All-Stars squad. It was big news for us...the first American to receive that honor. Wondering why his name isn't listed... Maybe he was a "sub" on the team, like on the 2nd 11 out of 22 players? Would like to have this cleared up... --AaronM 15:48, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Ronaldo

I really can't catch this one:

He ended up with a total of eight goals in the tournament to win the Golden Boot. This was the third highest total in a FIFA World Cup since Just Fontaine scored thirteen times in Sweden '58, behind only Eusébio's nine in England '66 and Gerd Müller's ten in Mexico '70.

Gbnogkfs 12 July 2006, 13:31 UT

Tie-break

So when two teams are tied on points, does the one with the most goals advance or the one with the highest number of goals for minus goals against? --rmhermen

When team A and team B are tied on points, the following applies:

1. The team with the highest goal difference (goals made minus goals received) goes through;
2. If the goal difference is the same for A and B the team with the highest number of goals made (in all its three matches of the first round) goes through;
3. If team A and team B made the same number of goals the match between A and B is taken into account: the team that won this match goes through;
4. If the match between A and B ended with a draw the team that goes through is assigned by lot.

I hope this makes things a little clearer...

Cheers -- G_from_B

I can't figure out why the bar at the bottom is shifteed to the right. Mintguy 14:36 Dec 12, 2002 (UTC)

Almost Didn't Qualify

I don't have all of the specifics which is why I can't put this in the article but, as I remember it, Brazil and Germany almost didn't qualify for the tournament. I think that they had to wait until the last weekend of games, and had to have certain teams lose to make it into the field of 32. Maybe someone could note here on the talk page the specifics. MarnetteD | Talk 05:07, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Germany finished 2nd in their qualification group behind England, and had to play two play-off games against Ukraine. But: both England and Germany drew their last game, so if Germany had won their match they would have qualified directly ahead of England. Brazil finished their qualification third (30points, like 4th place Paraguay) of four directly qualified teams, and as long as they won their last match themselves they were sure to qualify as Brazil in 4th place had 1 point more than 5th placed Uruguay before the final round, so they were under pressure. I can't remember when they fired Emerson Leão and put Luiz Felipe Scolari in charge, that might have "saved" the qualification for Brazil? Poulsen 14:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Something else - following the sacking of Christoph Daum for drug addiction and the 1-5 thrashing by England, Germany didn't inspire much confidence (needs sources of course) and the worst Brazil qual campaign ever (I checked the qualification articles, Brazil finished 1st in all their other qualifications) didn't inspire too many either. Poulsen 15:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Merge with 2002 World Cup Tournament

I originally split off the article (and 1994 World Cup Tournament, and 1998 World Cup Tournament) because this article became too big. Wikipedia recommends trimming stuff over 32K, and as most people know, if you try to edit large articles, Wikipedia times out a lot. If this is merged back, merge the other two as well please. --DR31 (talk) 18:47, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Mildly in favour of just deleting the other page. I can see why the size might encourage de-merging and that there might be additional value in having a separate report of the matches but I would rather just have the Football World Cup 2002 page with links to match reports as I have POV concerns about the other page especially as Oliver Kahn's role in Brazil's success will be contentious between his many supporters and his many detractors.MLA 16:24, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Delete the page? No. There is definite additional value. Most, if not all, World Cup articles have more detailed information, at least about the important games. Try to cleanup POV if you think it's bad, but I personally don't see any POV in the final section. --DR31 (talk) 16:49, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with MLA, the merge should not occur. Instead, 2002 World Cup Tournament should be renamed to Football World Cup 2002 (match reports) in line with all the other subsections of this article. Then, all extraneous information from 2002 World Cup Tournament should be removed (such as the statistics section) and a note placed that the article is a subpage of this article.

If there aren't any objections, I'll do this in the next two weeks. The same for the 1994 World Cup Tournament and the 1998 World Cup Tournament articles as well. -D. Wu 22:00, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Makese sense. I will do that myself. --DR31 _(talk) 15:53, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup

This article requires cleanup. It is really not up to standard. At least three different types of tables are used for group play alone. DR31 16:53, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

I've removed the cleanup notice, as the the types of match tables have been standardized.Poulsen 17:04, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

This article really really needs clean-up. Listen guys, I know Belgium is on a down slope lately, but we're not yet bad enough to be deleted from history. I seem to remember Belgium qualifying from the group stages and facing Brazil after that. We lost 2-0 and started our descent towards obscurity AFTER that. Apparently someone wanted to create a more glamourous past for Wales, having them win the finals and everything. This is ridiculously petty, but sadly I don't know squat about wiki so I can't fix it. Can someone please restore this page ?(this is my very first post, I registered just to say this, so excuse any infractions against posting rules for now) Naglfar-Lindar 17:30, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Misjudgements section

The Misjudgements Suspicion section needs to be looked at closely. I'm tempted to delete it in its entirety. It is a good example of NPOV as it reads as if written by an Italian and contains un-verified and un-quoted perjorative statements. I'm not sure it can be cleaned-up but I won't cut it yet in case someone else can clean it. MLA 15:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I've copied the section here as there are too many issues to work on. I'll say rename it to "Refereeing controversy" - it now sounds like it was definite misjudgements. Also, it should be moved up to the general description of the WC, no reason in having it after the final. Also, it needs heavy referencing ever to fly on its own! Also, I'm pretty sure the hardened Lazio, Milan, and whatnot players did not cry themselves to sleep over "AGAIN 1966", even if it was "humiliating".. in 1966. Poulsen 15:50, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Coming back after a couple of years I noticed that any reference to the misjudgement affair, including a very critical statement by Mr. Blatter in the days of the world cup, which I had inserted, has been removed by some diligent hand. On the other hand, delirious opinions of some users that make appear the whole thing an exaggeration of some poor mind of a hooligan, have not been touched. Maybe the only way to avoid an editing war is really to delete any reference to the misjudgement affair. But the way the article is written by Feb. 19th 2008 is not objective. There have been misjudgements, mostly favouring the Korean team. I will not spend the time to reinsert the references that prove that but I will be back in two years to check if this comment has been removed from the discussion.

Hi, it might interest you to look at the my comments in this new section regarding this issue. Cheerio! Asoccer maniac (talk) 01:02, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

™

the ™ designation doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. afaik, it is to be used by trademark holders to signal their ownership for legal reasons, but not normally used by third-parties referring to it, & surely not in newspapers or encyclopedias. Appleby 21:38, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

Football World Cup 2002 → 2002 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 10:34, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

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