Talk:2015 CONCACAF Gold Cup

Football Low‑importance

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 3 times. The weeks in which this happened:

Should we put "pending" on charts while the final outcome is not yet known

In association football (and other round robin events), we list the teams standings and highlight the top two or three rows that will advance to the knockout rounds. However, the outcome is not yet known as the games are still underway. Should we be more specific and put a "Pending" in the qualification field until it is determined who will be advancing. After all, one of the teams listed may not.

Pos	Team v t e	Pld	W	D	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts	Qualification
1	United States (H)	3	2	1	0	4	2	+2	7	Advance to knockout stage
2	Haiti	3	1	1	1	2	2	0	4
3	Panama	3	0	3	0	3	3	0	3
4	Honduras	3	0	1	2	2	4	−2	1

Source: CONCACAF
(H) Hosts

user:mnw2000 12:40, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, we can't because there is one person who has changed everything into what was in his mind and such stupid boxes exists all over Wikipedia now. I wrote many times that it is confusing but he thinks that Wikipedia belongs to him and doesn't care what people want so, sorry, dude you will not win this fight (which I support). user:TigerTatoo 14:48, 8 July 2015

It was probably a decision by WP:FOOTBALL not a decision by a single person ----Nobreadsticks (talk) 13:37, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As Nobreadsticks this is a "new" format after decision from Wikipedia:WikiProject Football to make tables more MOS compatible and to reduce the difference between league tables and group stage tables like this one. User:TigerTatoo is no one to listen to, look at his contributions, all he does is complain and not discuss like a normal person (this is why no one listens to him), he refuses to understand WP:CONSENSUS despite being provided with several link to it. Anyway the rows and colors now indicate what happens on those rows (this is how it has always been on league tables) and when a team has actually qualified then statusletters are added to let readers know that they actually qualified. One of the reason was to comply with MOS:COLOR as we should not have color without text (some may be colorblind) and, as I said, this is the way league tables have been shown previously so now all tables have the same look. Qed237 (talk) 15:35, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, I creatd many discussions and all you said was - it has to be like this so where is discusion here? But Qed have to tell you that I got used to these stuff so I forgive you ;) Ever be in Poland I am buying beer. Have a great day. user:TigerTatoo 18:32, 8 July 2015

I think the text that corresponds to the color coding could be made more general, which would reflect the detachment from a specific team. Examples: Green lines in table: Top 2 to knockout stage. Blue lines in table: 3rd place team eligible for knockout stage. Buzwad (talk) 23:02, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The biggest issue with the tables as they stand is that Group A does not have an (A) after teams that have advanced, while Groups B and C do. It takes a little time to realise that this is because Group A is completed while Groups B and C are not. However, I think this is pretty unclear, and I think it would be better to leave the (A) next to the advanced teams from Group A until all of the groups are completed. I'm also not convinced about the value of the (H) next to the hosts - this add an extra layer of confusion. I am generally not in favour of the changes that have been made to the tables. User:Qed237 refers to the decision that was made by Wikipedia:WikiProject Football, but I haven't been able to find any details of the discussion, and there doesn't appear to be an open discussion for people to suggest changes or improvements. Craig1989 (talk) 03:50, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Craig1989: Yes you are right, the letters should be there until the entire group stage has finished. Qed237 (talk) 11:31, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Time zone for match start times

The article needs a prominent note somewhere (or in several places) indicating what time zone the match start times are listed in. I can't find it anywhere on the page. I infer that it is EDT for all times listed. I'd put this in myself, but I don't know what the standard is for pages like this one. Thank you. Holy (talk) 23:56, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've had no response and no one has done this, so I've added a sentence at the beginning of the group stage section and the same sentence at the beginning of the elimination stage section. Feel free to move it if it doesn't match the standard in other similar articles. Holy (talk) 17:12, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Honduras should be listed as cannot qualify for playoff for 2016 Copa America

The top 4 that haven't already qualified will go to the playoff (3 if one of them wins the Gold Cup). At best Honduras an finish is 9th due tof ailing to make the knockout stage. Assuming the four that have already qualified finish above Honduras, the lowest a qualifying spot for the playoff for 2016 Copa America could be is 8th. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:240:C400:100B:A577:8B5B:4A68:B6CF (talk) 01:14, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

fixed Beevo (talk) 01:20, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I too am not understanding this. Somebody please straighten me out. As I see it after the group stage, if one of the four who previously qualified for Copa America win the Gold Cup, then the other four who made the knockout stage will have playoffs for two spots. But, if one of those four who had not previously qualified for the Copa America wins the Gold Cup, then the three others and El Salvador would have a playoff for one spot. Altordwm (talk) 23:10, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some more research found: http://www.mlssoccer.com/goldcup/2015/news/article/2015/03/10/gold-cup-final-two-copa-america-spots-be-handed-out. That makes it sound like there will not be a playoff and the results from the Gold Cup will determine the Copa America participants. mlssoccer.com is cited on this page describing a playoff among the top 4 though. Can anybody find a source that can confirm the playoff procedure? Altordwm (talk) 00:34, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copa América Centenario qualifying play-offs Option B. GAV80 (talk) 05:07, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Panama should be listed as qualified now

With the outcome of the Jamaica-El Salvador match, whichever team finishes third place in Group B is guaranteed to have fewer points than Panama. Therefore, Panama is now mathematically through as one of the best two third-place teams. Could someone with editing power please edit the group stage results to reflect this, and also insert Panama into their proper spot in the quarterfinal against the Group C winner? --67.61.133.87 (talk) 00:02, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that was fast. Thank you! --67.61.133.87 (talk) 00:08, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]