Talk:Football/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

→

Archive 10

---

In the UK and Most Other English Speaking Countries???

"In the United Kingdom, and in most other English-speaking countries, "football" usually refers to Association football."

After listing Canada, USA, New Zealand and Australia, and explaining that none of these countries refer to soccer as football, the above statement seems to be blatantly incorrect. Where are all these 'other' english speaking countries?

Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, Cameroon, Dominica, Fiji, The Gambia, Ghana, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, Kenya, Kiribati, Lesotho, Malaysia, Malawi, Maldives, Mauritius, Namibia, Nauru, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Swaziland, Tanzania, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, Uganda, Vanuatu, Zambia, Zimbabwe. -- Arwel 12:06, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Oh and this...

"Of the 48 national FIFA affiliates in which English is an official or primary language"

Is a cop out.

Firstly, they can get away with referring to all EU countries, for instance, as english speaking countries because the EU official language is English. That doesn't make them english speaking countries.

And Finally, there are 3 types of lies. White lies, big lies and statistics! The above statistic is a carefully designed to make it look as though most of the english speaking world don't use the word soccer. How about a stat showing the sum of the populations of all english speaking countries (countries who's people speak english primarily) who use the word soccer in comparison to those that don't?

Well, soccer is not my favourite kind of footy, but....I think the person who wrote that passage is correct. According to a quick count of the list on pp.100-102 of my battered Collins Concise Atlas of the World, in 1984 there were about 50 countries in which English was an official language, a figure which did not include the EU countries you mention. Neither does it include countries like India and the Philippines, where English is the de facto common language and "football" is soccer. (I wonder how many people realise that the Philippines has more English speakers than the UK does?) So it can safely be said that "football is soccer" in all but a handful of English speaking countries and also for the vast majority of English speakers. Grant65 (Talk) 11:51, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

NOBODY claims all the EU countries as English speaking - all national languages of EU states, except Irish, are official languages; English, French and German are most commonly used for official business of the EU. English-speaking FIFA affiliates within the EU (completely different things) are England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, Malta, and Cyprus. In most other EU countries the sport is referred to as e.g. "Voetbal", "Fussball", "Boldspil", "Fotbal", "Football" etc. Apart from "Calcio",you may notice that all are literal translations of "football" or "ball game", but in any case, they are in the local language, not English. -- Arwel 12:06, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Secondly the same paragraph seems to ignore the fact that Australian people use the term 'soccer' and so do Irish people.

As an Irish person, I can tell you that most Irish people refer to the sport by its proper name: Football. The term 'soccer' is a shortening originating from 'AsSOCiation Football' Therefore, no matter what other names it has, Football is the correct and original name, and 'Soccer' refers to Football.

Yep. I live in Dublin and can concur that some Irish people obsess over that game as much as the english do. However, take a drive to the west side of the country and that all changes. That's where football is GAA football and if you want to talk about soccer it has to be qualified with the word 'soccer' or some other form of explanation. Dublin isn't Ireland. Factoid Killer 19:47, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Depends where you are in each country. Did you notice that the Australian Soccer Association changed its name to Football Federation Australia last January 1st? -- Arwel 12:06, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No. Because i'm Australian and therefore don't follow the sport or call it football.

In the interests of clarity, and because I hate to see existing posts broken up, I've just returned my last post and the preceding paragraph to the place where they they started. My opinion, for what it's worth, is that the decision to use the name "Football Federation Australia" is misguided, and probably futile as it flies in the face of at least 130 years of "football" meaning either rugby or Aussie rules. Probably less than 10% of the population mean soccer when they say "football", and while popularity of the sport may increase, I think its hard to see use of the word changing.Grant65 (Talk) 13:57, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

>Depends where you are in each country

Not in Australia. The vast majority of people who attend soccer matches in Australia are immigrants or the children of immigrants. No matter where you are in Australia, Soccer is not football.

• I could debate this with you at great length but this is not the place. Many people in Australia call soocer - football.

I lived in Australia for 25 years of my life and have not once heard anybody refer to soccer as football unless they were explaining the fact that in England it is called football.

I have to agree. The only people I have heard referring to soccer as "football" are first generation immigrants, and not all of them do either. It's a very safe assumption that "football" means either Aussie rules or rugby league, depending on where exactly you're standing.Grant65 (Talk) 11:45, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

Most football people in Australia do call the sport football, not soccer. I hear it called football all of the time. This will all be irrelevant soon as the national association is now called Football Federation Australia and most of the major media outlets are falling into line.

I made a change "In UK, and in most other English speaking countries 'football' refers to association football" to "... and in most countries not otherwise mentioned here..." because otherwise the section contradicts itself. I'm assuming that what I wrote is what the original author actually meant. DJ Clayworth 17:38, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Most football people in Australia do call the sport football, not soccer. I hear it called football all of the time. This will all be irrelevant soon as the national association is now called Football Federation Australia and most of the major media outlets are falling into line.

This is a debate I've heard through-out the world where more than one football code is played. To clarify the Irish POV, the word football is used contextually. If for example, I where to say "I've got football practice tonight" the people I'd be talking to would either know that gaelic training for me is on a Friday or would ask if it was soccer. Usually when comparing sports the terms gaelic, soccer or rugby are used. To contradict someone above, Gaelic football is often refered to as GAA, pronounced as in the ga in gag; there is no confucion with Hurling. Very rarely is rugby called football, though you may describe a ruby player as a good footballer. Soccer is only used to differentiate it from gaelic. The other "foreign" codes are usually given their full titles like American Football and Aussie Rules. Afn 10:35, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Most soccer people in Australia do call their game "football" now, but they are a relatively small minority, following the third or fourth most popular sport in terms of spectators. A TV audience of four million nationwide watched the Sydney Swans' AFL grand final win. In Sydney, which is not reknowned as an AFL city, one million watched. But "football" in Sydney usually means National Rugby League, and their grand final tomorrow will probably get comparable figures. I have to doubt that a Sydney United game would do as well. Personally I doubt that many media outlets will ever "fall into line", as you put it — showing your soccer bias — because the usage of the word to mean other games, or a variety of games, is so dominant and has more than 140 years of history behind it. For example, Melbourne Football Club (Aussie Rules) was founded in 1858 and Sydney University Football Club (rugby union) in 1863. Grant65 (Talk) 04:54, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Harvard and the forward pass in American Football

Added a minor anecdote in the "reform of american football" section that i originally learned from an english professor and harvard alum teacher of mine and provided an external link to a harvard website to site. Unsure if thats the purpose of external links but i felt that the note itself was relevant and factual.

Portal

A wikiportal (Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Association football) has been started by Johan Elisson. -- Phoenix2 21:12, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ameriball

I just ran a google query on "Ameriball". None of the hits returned in the first 2 pages pointed to this sport.

I think that qualifies as "nobody refers to it that way".

--Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 18:05, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

I just ran this [1] on Dictionary.com

--Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 18:08, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Confusing

The convention decided that, in the US game, four touchdowns would be worth one goal; in the event of a tied score, a goal converted from a touchdown would take precedence over four touch-downs. Clarify by what converted means... -Iopq 11:56, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

vandalism

I don't know why, but this article seems to be underseige by vandals atm. Every day I check my watchlist someone is reverting vandalism. What's going on? Does this article need to be protected for a few days? Jooler 23:32, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

I think it's just people surfing in, a sign that the page is being visited a lot compared to other pages. I have wondered if there is anywhere that we can see the number of visitors to specific Wikipedia articles, but I haven't been able to find such a resource. Grant65 (Talk) 03:02, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

"Footy" in the USA

A query regarding the most recent edit: is it really the case that the word "footy" is commonly used in the USA to mean only Australian rules? And not other codes? Grant65 | Talk 11:08, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't think so. "Footy" isn't used at all, at least not where I live. I would not think that someone was talking about Aussie rules if they said "footy". --71.225.229.151 17:56, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Split up the article

Football incorporates an enormous number of sports, which can be extremely confusing due to the country where the word is used. In the US, it refers to American football; in Europe and South America it refers to soccer; in Australia it refers to Australian rules football. I think the content should be merged into different articles, and the page should be deleted and replaced with a disambiguation. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 01:59, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

There are already large articles for each of the major codes of football, each of which contain the detailed information for that sport. This article deals with the development of football codes in general, and includes a note pointing readers to the disambig-of-sorts at the end of the article. It's clunky, but it seems to work well enough. Cheers, --Daveb 02:04, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I wouldn't split it. Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 03:00, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

No way. Among other things, the article is about the shared history of the many different kinds of football. It reduces the "confusion" by pointing out the many different codes to which the name football applies. Followers of particular codes may be uncomfortable with this, but the games are all related and descended from "common ancestors". Grant65 | Talk 07:39, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

As the others have implied, the reasons given for splitting it are actually reasons not to do so. I will remove the notice. 62.31.55.223 08:35, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Football game on foot

I've read this thing about football, being originally called that because it is played on foot rather than with the foot before, but frankly I don't believe it, and I think I may have even read something refuting it. Any reliable source for this? Jooler 07:57, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I must admit, this is the first place I've ever seen this definition. as this is placed near the head of the article I really would like see a reference to back this up. Markb 12:35, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

There was a similiar query a few months back at Talk:Football (word); I posted responses there, including the following:

There is nothing new about this etymology of "foot ball", there are many references to it on the web, e.g. this one from a US soccer referees' email list:

"Paul Gardner wrote in The Simplest Game

Soccer people like to claim that the word football should really be applied only to soccer. What else whould you call a game played with the feet and with a ball? Logical enough, but the argument is flawed. The word football came into use in England in the mid-fourteenth century to describe a game played not with the feet but on foot, in order to distinguish it from pastimes that were played on the horseback.'"[2]

This is interesting as well, from The Every-Day Book (1825-26) by William Hone:

FOOT-BALL.

This was, and remains, a game on Shrove Tuesday, in various parts of England.

Sir Frederick Morton Eden in the "Statistical account of Scotland," says that at the parish of Scone, county of Perth, every year on Shrove Tuesday the bachelors and married men drew themselves up at the cross of Scone, on opposite sides; a ball was then thrown up, and they played from two o'clock till sun-set. The game was this: he who at any time got the ball into his hands, run with it till overtaken by one of the opposite part; and then, if he could shake himself loose from those on the opposite side who seized him, he run on; if not, he threw the ball from him, unless it was wrested from him by the other party, but no person was allowed to kick it. The object of the married men was to hang it, that is, to put it three times into a small hole in the moor, which was the dool or limit on the one hand: that of the bachelors was to drown it, or dip it three times in a deep place in the river, the limit on the other: the party who could effect either of these objects won the game; if neither won, the ball was cut into equal parts at sun-set.[3]

(Emphasis added.)

Hone's account shows that the name "football" was applied to games which specifically outlawed kicking, long before the modern codes existed.

If there is a "refutation" of the "on foot" etymology out there, I would like to read it. I have looked high and low for such a beast, but have never been able to find it. Grant65 | Talk 13:12, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

The first reference from Paul Gardner refers to it's usage in the 14 C in England, the 2nd to an account of a game being played in Scotland 5 centuries later. As I'm sure you are aware there were many local games played around Britian with local rules , and nowhere in Sir Frederick Morton Eden's account is that paticular game called football.

BTW, I would be interested to know what games were actually played on horseback in 14th Century England anyway, so that such a distinction had to be made. Even better would be a genuine reference from the period, not a claim made on a internet mailing list. It would be helpful, for example, if someone could come up with an account of a game, with the ball being played with the foot, that was not called football. Markb 15:21, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

The sports played on horseback in the 14th C would have been things like hunting, jousting, etc. It is not Eden but Hone who is referring to the Scone game as (quote) FOOTBALL (unquote), in 1825/26. Hone understood a game that outlawed kicking as being "football", that is the point. And why would it be helpful if someone could come up with an account of a game, with the ball being played with the foot, that was not called football? The article is about usage of the word football. Grant65 | Talk 07:19, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

your explanation, backed up with only two references, still doesn't make sense. You claim that the word originated to describe a ball game played on foot, as opposed to what - jousting? Name any other game that was played 'on foot' that that could be confused with one that was on horseback? I think this is a POV usage to justify the use of the name for other games. Why not just accept that the word 'football' is used to describe several games played around the world, with a common root in 19th Century England? Markb 19:03, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I didn't see yor reply until now. I'm not sure where you're coming from. POV? My objective is the truth or the best explanation, whatever that may be. "Only two references?" How many do you want for an explanation that is extremely common? Find me a source which states that "football = "foot kicking ball". The word doesn't have a root in 19th century England; the word goes back to the 14th century at least. And I have no idea why you are asking for another "game that was played 'on foot' that that could be confused with one that was on horseback..." There were clearly plenty of games that we played on foot, many of which were referred to as football, regardless of whether they involved kicking a ball. I'm reverting your deletion; I will try to reword the paragraph in a way that makes more sense to you and anyone else who is confused.Grant65 | Talk 08:32, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the re-word. I think its a big improvement.Markb 10:35, 24 January 2006 (UTC)