/Standard for football club information

Talk:Football (soccer)/(archive 1)

Talk:Football games

JTD - please explain your last edit.

1. As some people call the sport 'soccer' (even though a minority) I thought it important to put it in the opening line, making it clear that it is the minority name. That way, from the opening everyone (soccerites, footballites) knows from line one what the article is about. It simply a logical change that recognises what you say (and I accept it) is the dominance of the word 'football' while informing others that the other word used is 'soccer'.
   
   
2. The line where you blamed the US for spreading the name soccer (apart from opening the threat of WWIII with irate Americans who might take offence - they might set George W. Bush on you, or even worse force you to listen to one of his meandering speeches!) is quite inaccurate. I was talking to someone in the FAI on Wednesday who is a friend of mine and the issue of why Ireland calls the sport soccer a lot of the time was raised. He said it seems to date back as far as the sport was played in Ireland, which is long long before anyone on this side of the Atlantic was aware of 'americanisms' or had direct access to TV, sports coverage. (Back then even Coca Cola wasn't available in Ireland!) I actually never knew the US called it soccer until you mentioned it. John mentioned how when the Irish soccer team were going to play in the US in 1994, one question the FAI had to find out was 'what do they call the game in the US?' So the name soccer in Ireland owes nothing to the US whatsoever and almost certainly came from the UK. Nor is there any evidence that it came to Australia via the US. Today we have US 'culture' on our TV screens, in our newspapers, etc. But when the name 'soccer' became widespread US culture wasn't as dominant. Jerry Springer was just a nightmare in the future. The parents of the actors in 'Friends' hadn't been born. Until the 1960s if not later, the dominant external cultural influence on states like Ireland and Australia was Britain. By the 1960s, in fact decades earlier, the word 'soccer' was widespread in both Ireland and Britain. My father's generation, who were born in the 1930s, called it that, while the Gaelic Athletic Association's infamous ban on 'foreign games' (already gone generations) banned 'soccer'. And that ban was introduced over one hundred years ago.

So your speculation on the origins of the 'soccer' name in terms of international usage being due to American cultural influences is almost certainly far wide of the mark. It had to have come from Britain, perhaps through the colonial governing class. In any case, you risked cheesing off some readers by appearing to cast their cultural gifts to the world in a disparaging light. You and I on this side of the Atlantic probably share a mutual 'attitude' towards American's cultural 'gifts' to mankind, but in this case (certainly in terms of how the name 'soccer' became common in Ireland & Australia) the evidence suggests America is 'innocent'.

(Question: how did America get the 'soccer' name? Here's a thought. If it passed to two 'Old Commonweath' states (Ireland & Australia), might it have gone, through the same British colonial governing class and their servants to a third, Canada, and from there spread to the US? It is just a thought.)

My only other change was to fill a missing word in the top line. I presumed the missing word was 'popular'. I've been out of Wiki a few minutes so I didn't get a chance to type this explanation before I got your message. I don't think the changes changed the overall meaning; one just put the alternative name where it needed to be, in the first line. The other just removed a rather provocatively worded and on the basis of my own knowledge, inaccurate claim with a simple factual statement. Most people call the sport 'football'. A minority call it 'soccer'. Good text, BTW, and I think calling it [football (soccer)] rather than [football] or [soccer] is the right compromise. At some stage, someone was going to query the use of football. This way, before more information on the game is put on Wiki, we have a set way to refer to it that should make everyone able to follow what it is about. JTD 04:48 Feb 21, 2003 (UTC)

It's undeniable that the US culture is making the name more widespread. (Google lists football under soccer for example). I wasn't suggesting it invented the word, far from it as the second sentence in the article demonstrates. As the word soccer is in the title of this page and the usage of the term is explained in the second sentence it seemed unnecessary to put a parenthesised comment just after the article definition when it's clear we're talking about the game you call soccer. Re: 'popular' I had the word order wrong when I added the word team to the text I had already written so I'd put "team most popular" instead of "most popular team" so thanks for fixing that. Mintguy .. ohh also I think "(sometimes also called soccer in some nations)" is a bit unweildy. Mintguy

(sometimes called "soocer") would be sufficient. It is sometimes called "soccer" even in England, which is where the word "soccer" came from.

In partial answer to the question of how Americans got the word soccer. The answer is that the word came from England, and many Americans were at first reluctant to use it. It is used out of neccessity. Bluelion 10:04 Feb 21, 2003 (UTC)

Bluelion -I like your edits. I've been unable to find out when the Aussie associations started using the word soccer. I've left a message on an 'Australin soccer' forum but haven't had any answer. Mintguy

Hi everyone,

This section on the name of the game was inordinantly long for what is an overview article on the sport itself. For example, discussions on the derivations of different names for the sport in different languages were inappropriate for an article of this nature. Also, as different people added their tidbits or debating points, the section had the tendency to lose flow and require reworkings.

For these reasons, I have consolidated the article to cover the major facts regarding the most common English names for the game. I have formed a seperate article to cover the more detailed information, including foreign language names. I think consolidating (and linking to detailed information) should make the Football (soccer) article more user-friendly, and I hope you agree. However, if people would prefer it the old way then I won't be overly offended if we revert. Cheers, --DaveB 07:24, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The validity and use of the name football as opposed to soccer and other questions about the name continue to generate debate just look at the bottom of this page for example. This section shoud remain. Mintguy (T) 08:15, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Mintguy,

I agree that there is a lot of debate about the terminology and further agree that it wouldn't be out of place in the main article.

However, having said that, one must question whether this general article is the place to have discussions on such matters as the derivation of foreign language terms and so forth. I would suggest that the sheer bulk of such discussion, combined with its tangental relevance to what the average reader would be looking to find out about (which is, of course, the purpose of a encyclopaedia- to help people find information), would warrant moving this more specialised information to another place.

--DaveB 10:17, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Mintguy,

Wikipedia is intended to provide information to people seeking out such information. As such, common sense suggests that the information that people are most likely interested in should take the dominant position in an article.

As much as you may find the various names of football interesting or worthy of debate, the fact is that this is unlikely to be the information users are most interested in seeing when they link to an overview article on football.

Already wikipedia states: "WARNING: This page is 30 kilobytes long. Please consider condensing the page and moving the detail to another article so it is not approaching or in excess of 32KB". As such I tried to move the detail regarding the name to another article (whilst maintaining the key points in the overview article), which you summarily reverted. This time I tried moving the naming section to a more appropriate position in the article (ie not before the details of the actual game), which you have again reverted.

I suggest that no matter how interested you (or a handful of other users) are in squabbling over the name of the sport, the fact remains that wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and its main function is providing information, and that such information should be well presented.

Cheers, --DaveB 09:37, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Rev. Moon's right-hand man, Chung Hwan Kwak, is the owner of a championship-winning football team in South Korea: Songnam Ilhwa Chunma. Would someone like to write an article on them, or better an article on Korean football? Here a website to get started. (I would write it, but I'm hopeless pro-Ilhwa so I can't write neutrally about them.) --Uncle Ed 14:32 Feb 21, 2003 (UTC)

The Koreans had great success at the last World Cup, much to the regret of the Japanese. Mintguy

JTD - Re: your edit. It's speculative and makes no mention of the fact that 'football' was used in virtually all non-english speaking nations. The word 'Football' has also remained the predominant word in Commonwealth countries where there is no rival, or more importantly - locally more popular sport to take the name football. The word soccer has become common not because of the toffs that used it but because it existed an an alternative word, as Bluelion has already pointed out. Mintguy

It is speculative because, short of holding a vast number of seances, we'll never get the info from those who were there. The point was that, where the sport came to countries were there already was a sport called 'football' and an alternative name was needed, the colonial classes may well have had access to an alternative name, given that you say its originals were among such classes. But it important not to implicitly suggest that in places like Australia or Ireland, it came from the US because there is next to no chance of that. Such countries had little contact with american sporting culture until the late twentieth century, yet the word appeared at the start of the century when their main cultural source. So if we are going to say that now it is spreading through US cultural influences (which is itself speculative!) we need to say that the while the latest 'wave' of the word originates in the US, the earlier 'wave' couldn't have, and all the circumstantial evidence suggests it must have come through links with the UK.

JTD I've never said or suggested at any time that the word spread from the US to Ireland or Australia. Nor is it implied in the text. The paragraph above the one you entered makes it clear that the word 'soccer' became popular in countries where a rival sport developed. Whether that sport existed before or after Association football is irrelevant. For the most part the word football was used interchagably for all of these sports. The first wave as you put it occured not where a rival sport preceeded Association football but where a rival sport became more popular. It simply spread as an alternative and distictive name. There is clearly no need to speculatively suggest that Carruthers and Jeeves passed it on, it was simply an alternative word that was available. As far as its spread in recent years is concerned there is no doubt that American cultural influences are involved and the Internet is another avenue in which this is taking place. Google indexing football under soccer is a good example of this. Mintguy

By the way, I just noticed today among the papers my local shop that three British newspapers and one Irish newspaper used the word 'soccer'; while two of the Bitish papers have 'Irish editions' and so could have included for that reason, one doesn't, so they had obviously carried the word in their British version too. JTD 21:42 Feb 21, 2003 (UTC)

Whatever the papers say - You'll have a hard time finding a football fan in Britain who will ever use the word 'soccer' when discussing the game. I don't think I've ever had a conversation where I've ever used the word unless it was in a similar context to this. Football is the peoples game and football is the peoples word for it Mintguy

Ohh and the papers are fond of alliteration. "soccer star", soccer supremo", "football fanatic". Mintguy

Soccer is the US name for the Great Sport of the Spherical Ball, wherein opposing teams try to kick it into the other teams goal. That's how I always heard it growing up in Boston. Then people started to tell me that the rest of the world calls it football, which confuses me since I thought that was when you have to carry or catch the funny-shaped dingus in the opposing teams endzone or kick it through the goal posts way up in the air!

I think we need a chart or table to keep all the terms straight :-) --Uncle Ed 21:09 Feb 21, 2003 (UTC)

American football, Canadian football, Association football... The article perhaps should be titled "Association Football"? - stoltz.

After a long debate. The article title of football (soccer) was settled as the best option. I was against it but I have to admit that I'm warming to it. Firstly the term "Association football" has never been an official name for the sport and was only used to distinguish it from other codes and it isn't really in common usage today. Most people know the sport as football and those who don't know it as soccer. It also allows the use of the pipe trick i.e. [[football (soccer)|]] comes out as football. Mintguy

I've added two words to the following sentence. (change bolded).

the increasing usage of the word may well owe much to the cultural dominance of the USA, which is shaping language and definitions well beyond its borders.

Reason: I agree the line is probably correct but because we cannot prove it, it is somewhat POV. Adding in the qualification may well makes it more NPOV, suggesting a likelihood rather than stating a fact that we cannot prove, even though it is a fair supposition. Is that ok with you, Mintguy? JTD 23:57 Feb 21, 2003 (UTC)

np. Mintguy

I should stay out of the "cultural dominance of the USA" controversy, because I'm OK with the way it is, because it's just a theory. But I don't buy the theory. The existence of the internet means that there is a whole lot more communication between people all over the world, and that causes language differnces to diminish. It works both ways. I've picked up a lot of British expressions. Should I blame that on "Britsh cultural dominance"? <g> I think not.

BTW, Mintguy, I like your stuff, too. I have no idea about names of the Australian Associations, but it might be interesting.

The article is looking good. I initially thought that Association football would be a good title, but nobody actually uses that except to explain where the word "soccer" came from. The way the articles are named now is good. Bluelion 09:34 Feb 22, 2003 (UTC)

"the first Association football team formed outside of England was the Oneida Football Club of Boston, Massachusetts, USA."

Should this be "Outside the UK"? I don't know, but it seems unlikely that the US got a team before Scotland or Wales. Bagpuss

It seems unlikely but it is true (or at least in essence, and perhaps needs qualification (I only just checked this out)) The Oneida club was formed in 1862, which was before the formation of FA and therefore strictly speaking they didn't play Association football to start with, but they played the dribbling game as opposed to the carrying game. The oldest Scottish football club Queen's Park F.C. was formed in 1867, and Wales and Ireland were later still. I think I need to research the Oneida thing a bit more. Mintguy

As long as you're checking. I was thinking it might have been a slip. Bagpuss

This article is getting better and better (and it was pretty damn good to start of). Well done. JTD 00:23 Feb 23, 2003 (UTC)

Well The first few paras are ok, the rest still needs a lot of work. BTW I'm still working on the history stuff (although real life has been interfering) and it's a damn muddling business, I might put some stuff up in a temp page for review, before commiting it to an article. I've got some information from various websites that I've not been able to confirm, so am reluctant to commit to. Mintguy

"though many British teams' names end in "AFC", an abbreviation for association football club. " The only proffesional clubs using AFC I can think of ar Sunderland AFC and AFC Bournmouth. A few Amateur club use it, but I can't think of any off hand. Don't you think MANY is overstating it a bit? Mintguy

Well Google finds 95,500 hits for "AFC football club", but on closer inspection, this includes ones where AFC means "Aberdeen FC", "Athletic FC", "Ararat FC", "Arsenal FC" or "Adelaide FC" as well as ones where AFC only appears in links to the page, so not in the official team name. However, "many" is a nice, vague word, so the count could be as low as 12 and I could say I was right.

Okay, I'll change it. Bagpuss

P.S. Don't forget the proposed "AFC Wimbledon". Bagpuss

If a google search produces hits to "AFC football", many will refer to "American Football Conference", which is gridball. <g> (half the NFL) And what about "aussie"? There are also an number of "soccer teams" (that's American English <g>) in the US that use "AFC", meaning "Assoc.FC". Bluelion

Well if US teams can be AFC as well, that belongs in the article. Perhaps it's a worldwide thing. Bagpuss

Please, please, be VERY careful using google searches.

remember:

• Goggle produces all matches, no matter how right, wrong, ludicrous or whatever. (There are 29,400 matches to 'Princess Diana murder', including claims that Osama Bin Laden killed her, which, supposedly, is the real reason why Blair is supporting Bush, to kill the son of a bitch who killed the 'People' Princess'. Another goggle site talks about a secret plot to kill Hillary Clinton so that Bill could marry Diana, who would then move to the US, Harry become a US citizen and be elected a senator! Do a search on Diana on google and that is the sort of garbage you will dig up as well as the real stuff.
• Google produces matches which may not mean why we wish it to mean. AFC is a classic example. Football could mean soccer, gaelic, australian rules, american, etc.

So please can we stop quoting Google searchs as though the number of references thown up means something. Those references may be right. Or they may be the rantings of a couple of paranoid nutters, who then have their ramblings read by someone, who sets up a site, who is in turn read by someone else who sets up a site, and hey presto, the numbers climb and looks credible if you do a google numbers tot. (If everyone on Wiki right now stopped what the were doing and opened sites with the words 'Wikipedia is known to be a CIA front', and left those pages sitting there for conspiracy theory nutters to read, come back in a few weeks and you could find google searches throwing up hundreds if not thousands of references to 'wikipedia = CIA links', with others then saying 'oh but everyone is saying it. Look at all the entries on google!'. While I may use google to track down information (which I then am high questioning of) I've given up treating google search numbers as being of any use whatsoever. But they simply aren't. JTD 03:13 Feb 24, 2003 (UTC)

Well, the Name section seems to be shaping up well; let's hope it doesn't become the biggest part of the article, though...

Despite my provincial American upbringing, I have become aware that football is played with a round ball and kicked into the goal in much or most of the world (you know, what we Bostonians innocently called "soccer") -- while only in America is that double-pointed thing passed and thrown and carried into the endzone.

I don't care which article "gets" the coveted football title, as long as nearly all readers will avoid an unpleasant surprise when they try to find information on their favorite sport.

I see that my old football games article is now the redirection object of football, and I wonder how everyone feels about that? (Don't worry, you won't hurt my feelings if you change it back :-) --Uncle Ed

Not any more. Bagpuss

Oh, I had seen a volleyball style game in Tailand on TV, except the players use their feet, not hands. Could it be counted as football? Also, I know there was a very ancient chinese football game, maybe it can be added here as part of the history of football. Finally, I find the list of football games here is still confusing..... Wshun

From History of football: "The earliest documented mention of any activity resembling football is found in a Chinese military manual written during the Han Dynasty in about 2nd century BC. It describes a practice known as "tsu chu" which involved kicking a leather ball through a hole in a piece of silk cloth strung between two 30 foot poles. It was not a game as such but more of a spectacle for the amusement of the Emperor and it may have been performed as many as 3000 years ago. " I might make the link to that more obvious. Bagpuss

I think Sepak Takraw is the sport Wshun saw in Thailand. Erzengel 10:18, 27 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I remember from a Tolkien biography that there seems to be an Oxford slang, where "lecture" becomes "lekker" and so on. This seems to be what the article describes, but can it be traced to a single person? -- Error

I removed the reference to Hillsborough from the violence section. Hillsborough had nothing to do with violence and everything to do with overcrowding and inadequate policing, as the Taylor report confirmed. Kelvin McKenzie has a lot to answer for.

Having said that, a section on football disasters could be useful (Hillsborough, Valley Parade, Ibrox, Munich, Torino) -- User:Varitek 24th October 2003

Question: Where is the football in the picture? It seems silly to have a photo of a football game, without a ball in. I might have missed it, since i'm kinda tired.

I removed the following:
"Although the game of soccer is well controlled by the referees the stands are not! Violence has become a part of the game and is unfortunately a major contributer to its success. The drunkness of the fans combined with the excitement of the game is a horrify combination. It has become common place for serious injury and even death to take place at a soccer game. This violence is uneccessary and ill placed because it is over a simple game. Fans should realize this and know their place as fans and not contributors. (see hooligans, Heysel Stadium disaster and Football War)."

While violence is still occasionally a problem at games it has decreased considerably due to better policing and probably simple boredom on the part of the thugs. Violence has definitely not contributed to the success of the game, in England the game was damaged by the European ban. I have been to numerous matches in the US and UK and rarely notice drunken behaviour though certainly drinking and football watching are connected. It is most definitely not commonplace to see serious injury and death in the crowd, most games are untroubled. The advice over the non-necessity of violence and non-contribution by the fans is not appropriate to an encyclopedia! (Btw, the fans are most certainly expected to contribute to the game, that's what all the singing and chanting is about, football would be less interesting without the crowd noise) If you were referring to a specific country please make that absolutely clear. Bob Palin 20:33, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I replaced the public domain photograph with one of my own. Normally, I don't replace a photo that is already on a page, but someone had questioned the appropriateness of the one that was there, so I made an exception.

Rdikeman 03:18, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)

Well done I'd been wanting to replace that photo for ages. Your picture is superb. Mintguy (T) 10:07, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

While the picture is superb it isn't really very illuminating for someone that doesn't know the game. Why is the player in white watching the player in red and what is he trying to do anyway? Who are these people? At the very least the picture needs a caption explaining the above. Better would be a diagram describing some significant part of the game or a photo doing the same, the previous picture was a (poor) attempt to do this. (I had nothing to do with it so no bias here) Bob Palin 14:44, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I think a caption will do. As for a diagram, the article has one further down :) -- Timwi 14:50, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Under the subheading Duration it says the ref is the official timekeeper and he stops his watch for injuries (example) meaning that after fulltime we play injury time. On Teev we see some guy on the sideline holding up an illuminated board showing the extra number of minutes to play. It isn't stated in Duration or in the injury time link whether the ref or a sideline official calculates the accumulated time for stoppages. Moriori 21:45, Mar 9, 2004 (UTC)

The ref calculates it then signals to the fourth official, who in turn displays it on the board, if that isn't in the text, maybe it should be.

SimonMayer 22:36, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hi,

Strictly speaking, the referee does add on time, rather than merely "stop the clock". Refer to the wording of Law 5, and the wording of FIFA documents regarding the annotation of timing for goals scored in time-added-on (ie if scored in 4th minute of the five minutes of time added on, it is written as "scored by nn in 94+ minute", not as "in 89th minute").

This is a very common area of misunderstaning, particularly amongsth north americans it seems??

Any well referenced debate?

--DaveB 01:16, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Tks for responses Simon and Dave. Yes, this IS "a very common area of misunderstanding". Being a rugby man (and must sheepishly admit from NZ), can I ask that a football afficianado explain it with an entry on the page? Cheers Moriori 01:49, Mar 10, 2004 (UTC)

As an overenthusiastic newbie :-) I couldn't help myself from filling in a few details about the first Australian associations. Perhaps this kind of stuff belongs on the vacant Soccer Australia (current governing body) page(?) The same probably goes for the US stuff, which could be moved to the stub page United States Soccer Federation. In any case I can't help feeling that the section on US associations needs re-working a bit, and the inclusion of a few more dates, etc.Grant65(Talk) 05:05, Mar 16, 2004 (UTC)

Hi Grant,

Soccer Australia is no longer the national governing body; it is now the Australian Soccer Assocation (as of late2003/2004).

Cheers, Daveb. --DaveB 09:08, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Dave, it seems you're right. For the time being *lol*, Aussie Soccer bodies come and go faster than Italian governments. Which is a problem both in terms of trying to qualify for the World Cup and in writing Wikipedia entries. Grant65(Talk) 16:42, Mar 16, 2004 (UTC)

Made quite a few changes to the US section --- e.g. added dates and early leagues' names, and changed some details that were clearly wrong. Also, it seems that no one knows what rules the Oneida FC were playing, and since they were founded the year before the English FA was formed, I thought these things should be pointed out. Hope no one is too offended :-) Grant65 (Talk) 16:32, Mar 17, 2004 (UTC)

Is the page protected or is there a technical glitch? None of my edits are appearing, although they are there in the page history. Grant65 (Talk) 09:35, Mar 18, 2004 (UTC)

Looks OK to me. Do you have an old version of the page in your cache? If you're using Internet Explorer, hit the "reload" icon while holding down the ctrl key. -- Arwel 14:23, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

It's there now, thanks. Grant65 (Talk) 17:34, Mar 18, 2004 (UTC)

What would be really great for this page would be a picture of Hackney Marshes There's something like 85 full size pitches all side by side. Mintguy (T) 16:54, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I just created the page 2001-02 in English football. I think the idea of listing English football by seasons has potential, but it would rely on fellow anoraks to create the other seasons and fill in the masses of missing information. Is anyone willing to help?
SimonMayer 00:21, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I was looking for a page on football tactics/skills and couldn't find one. So will create a stub. If you play the game please contribute ;-) Julianp 06:52, 13 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking that there ought to be an article on the Football (soccer) maximum wage but perhaps it's part of a larger article on Football (soccer) contracts that also incorporates the Bosman ruling, stuff about transfer windows etc, history of players' wages, etc ... Any thoughts?Cutler 17:51, 21 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure the "global influence of American culture" is the proper explanation for the rise in soccer; another explanation is the "waning influence of British imperialism". If, as the article claims, the word soccer is used by Australia, the United States, and Canada, this accounts for over 340 million native English speakers, which, according to the figure of ~400m total native English speakers given in English language, is approximately 85% of the total. If the rest of the world uses football as the name, it's due to the historical primacy of the 15% minority who use football, and it would be expected that in time majority native-English-speaker usage would come to dominate. --Delirium 00:18, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)

Upon some further research, it seems most English-speaking countries use soccer, with the UK and the English-speaking population of India being basically the only strong exceptions. According to the article on football, the United States, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia consistently use soccer; South Africa uses both but uses soccer more often; and Ireland uses both but there football is ambiguous, as it is often understood to mean Gaelic football. What other English-speaking countries besides the UK and India actually primarily use football? --Delirium 05:59, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)

The word soccer was of course originally a slang term for football of British origin and is still used as a slang synonym all over the world, but the sport is officially football in the vast majority of the world. Here is a list of English speaking nations and the body officiating football in those nations.

Aside from the UK (where the 4 associations all use Football), English is the first language in

1. Australia - (Australian Soccer Association), the footballers union is the APFA (Australian Professional Footballers' Association)

   The Bahamas - Bahamas Football Association

   Barbados - Barbados Football Association

   Bermuda - Bermuda Football Association

   Guyana - Guyana Football Federation

   Jamaica - Jamaica Football Federation

   New Zealand - New Zealand Soccer Administration

   Antigua and Barbuda - Antiguaand Barbuda Football Association

   Saint Kitts and Nevis - St. Kitts and Nevis Football Association

   Trinidad and Tobago - Trinidad and Tobago Football Federation

   United States of America - United States Soccer Federation

English is a primary language in:

1. Belize - Football Federation of Belize

   Canada - Canadian Soccer Association.

   Cameroon - Fédération Camerounaise de Football (FECAFOOT)

   Dominica - Dominica Football Association

   St. Lucia - St. Lucia Football Association

   Saint Vincent and the Grenadines - Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Football Federation

   Micronesia - Federated States of Micronesia Football Association

   Republic of Ireland - Football Association of Ireland

   Liberia - Liberia Football Association

   Singapore - Football Association of Singapore

   South Africa - South African Football Association

English is also an official non-native language in

1. Fiji - Fiji Football Association

   Ghana - Ghana Football Association

   Gambia - Gambia Football Association

   Hong Kong - Hong Kong Football Association

   India - All-India Football Federation

   Kiribati - Kiribati Football Association

   Lesotho - Lesotho Football Association

   Kenya - Kenya Football Federation

   Namibia - Namibia Football Association

   Nigeria - Nigeria Football Association

   Malta - Malta Football Association

   The Marshall Islands - Marshall Islands Soccer Association

   Pakistan - Pakistan Football Federation

   Papua New Guinea - Papua New Guinea Football Association

   The Philippines - Philippines Football Federation

   The Solomon Islands - Solomon Islands Football Federation

   Samoa - Soccer Association of Samoa

   Sierra Leone - Sierra Leone Football Association (disolved in June of 2004)

   Swaziland - National Football Association of Swaziland

   Tanzania - Football Association of Tanzania

   Zambia - Football Association of Zambia

   Zimbabwe - Zimbabwe Football Association

I make that 6 out of 48 nations officially using Soccer. Mintguy (T) 14:16, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

But we don't put articles at their official locations, but at the locations that are used. In many of those countries football may well be an old-fashioned name that is still used in the official titles, but no longer used in practice, much as with the AFC teams in the UK, where nobody actually describes those teams as "playing association football". --Delirium 18:11, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)

We art not considering where to put articles. Your original question was, What other English-speaking countries besides the UK and India actually primarily use football?. The word soccer is used as a slang synonym throughout the world. You assert In many of those countries football may well be an old-fashioned name that is still used in the official titles, but this just isn't the case. A number of these organisations were founded or renamed in recent years, for example, the Bahamas Football Association was formed in 1996. The Belize National Football Association was founded in 1980. The Fiji Indian Football Association became the Fiji Football Association in 1961, the Federated States of Micronesia Football Association was founded in 1999. The Trinidad and Tobago Football Association was officially changed to the Trinidad and Tobago Football Federation in 1998. There may be other similar recent changes, formations, but I don't have that information readility available. Mintguy (T) 22:00, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

As for the change coming from the increasing cultural dominance of the USA, one only has to look at Canada, where the first Canadian football associations were called the Dominion Football Association (formed 1878), the Western Football Association (formed 1880) and the Ontario Football Association League (OFAL)(formed 1901). The last of these bodies is now named the Ontario Soccer Association. The Dominion of Canada Football Association was formed in 1912, a break-away organisation , the Canadian Football Association) was formed in 1923 and disolved in 1925. The Dominion of Canada Football Association is now known as Canadian Soccer Association, I'm not sure when the name changed but it was sometime after the end of WWII. Mintguy (T)

What does that have to do with cultural dominance of the US? Seems to have a lot more to do with the increased popularity of Canadian football necessitating some other name for association football. That's completely unrelated to the US, since Canadian football is not played at all (or even known) in the US, and most closely resembles rugby, which is also rarely played in the US. --Delirium 18:11, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)

What? You seem to be completely ignorant of Canadian football. It is almost EXACTLY the same as American football. You only have to look at the Wikipedia article to know that. My point is that the use of the word football has slipped from usage in Canada to describe the association game, as Canada has been influenced by the American sport, and it is now slipping in usage the rest of the world, as US culture continues to become more influencial throught the world. For example, the fact that Google indexes the sport under soccer means that in order to get Google to recognize your football page you have to use the word soccer. Mintguy (T) 22:00, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Well, I'm not denying it's part of the reason, but I don't think it's the only, or even necessarily the primary one. The Irish don't use soccer because of the US; they use it to disambiguate with Gaelic football, especially as that sport has begun reviving a bit. The general cultural change I do agree is probably towards the US, because in previous eras the UK was the world colonial power, but these days the UK no longer has an empire and US culture has become more influential. But football was used in the first place for the same reason: the formerly "global influence of UK culture". --Delirium 07:49, Jun 14, 2004 (UTC)

The sentence we are arguing over is the use of [the word] soccer is on the rise, perhaps due to the global influence of American culture on the English language. This is not talking about the use of the word in general but the increasing use of it. I doubt that the worldwide awareness of Gaelic football has much to do with this. The sport has a qualifier to distinguish it from football. Mintguy (T) 16:05, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

It does have a qualifier when used outside of Ireland, but inside Ireland, the qualifier may be dropped, much as American football is called simply football in the US, Australian football is called simply football in Australia, and association football is called simply football in the UK. For example, the All-Ireland Football Championships (note the lack of a qualifier) are the yearly championships for Gaelic football. I'm arguing that at least part of the reason the use of the word soccer is on the rise is due to the increasing popularity of other, local, forms of football that are taking the moniker. --Delirium 21:48, Jun 14, 2004 (UTC)

That the use of the word soccer is in preferred in countries that have developed their own sport is a no-brainer. I've just noticed that what I originally wrote about this has been edited out of the article, some time ago. It used to say something like "the word soccer is predominantly used in those English speaking countries that developed their own rival sports with a claim the name football". This, or something similar, should be put back in. Mintguy (T) 22:06, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The paragrapgh read

In countries that didn't develop a rival sport with a claim to the name football, "soccer" and other names were rarely used. Today the growing use of the word may well owe much to the cultural dominance of the USA, which is shaping language and definitions well beyond its borders. However, football remains by far the most common word used worldwide to describe the sport and is the name officially used by both FIFA and the International Olympic Committee.

... and was changed to

Outside these countries the word soccer has not been commonly used and football remains by far the most common name to describe the sport, being the name officially used by both FIFA, the sport's world governing body, and the International Olympic Committee. However, the use of soccer is on the rise, perhaps due to the global influence of American culture on the English language.

.. by User:Madw in this edit http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Football_%28soccer%29&diff=3292595&oldid=3292370. Mintguy (T) 22:13, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

This section needs to be expanded or deleted. At the moment it is very england-centric. Deus Ex 14:38, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The latest finding confirms that the earliest form of football was originated in China more than 2300 years ago. The research, which involved more than 30 archeologists, scholars and historians, concluded with scientific evidence that the game has its origin from an ancient Chinese sport called 蹴鞠 -- pronounced Cu Ju ,in the province of Shan Dong, north of China. -- can we have a citation for this? I've not heard of this research, and as it has been added by an anon user I'd like a little confirmation if it's to be left in. -- Arwel 20:32, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

There is, perhaps, a reference to this on the Football page, and that is where it belongs. Association Football history begins with the FA drawing up the Laws of the Game.

FIFA is said to have officially declared China to have invented early football. Official Chinese source A-giau 19:13, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I missed a lot of things about football in this article. As it is, there's a huge chunk on what are the rules of the game (which I seriously think should be cut down), then little else. The naming conventions part is very interesting, but other than that I think there's much room for improvement. Any suggestions? Mandel 10:42, Aug 4, 2004 (UTC)

Others may be more likely to suggest something if you were less vague... what else are you missing, exactly? Note that we have separate pages for skills and tactics and for formations. --Shallot 12:07, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I've been planning to a separate page on football culture, but never actually got round to it. I would take the violence and accidents bit, and add bits on fans, and their culture (links to football chants), as well as derby games. There would be other things in there but I would need to think them up. There's still a lot to write up. Just to point out as well that the accidents bit is very UK orientated so we'd probably need to convince people to contribute some more to it. It would also help cut out the links at the end of the article as there are well too many of them. Anybody up for helping out with it? Master Of Ninja 13:22, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I've now added a page on Football culture. Feel free to add or correct. -- Master Of Ninja 12:11, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I've had the same idea. Fans/football culture is a big subject. I've been thinking about starting an article on Tifo (see http://www.tifonet.it, for instance). — Pladask 15:04, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

PS I am very tempted to reword large parts of the article for flow and feel of the text. Would I have support? But then maybe I should wait.Mandel 10:48, Aug 4, 2004 (UTC)

I saw in this section that the summer olympic tournament comes right after the world cup. As a matter of precedence shouldn't it even be after the continental competitions, as the European and South American championships are actually more watched, and more prestigious than the olympic one? -- Master Of Ninja 08:36, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Hi

I've basically started and written a lot of the Football culture article. It's linked from the main football page. However I'm not sure how many people have seen it yet.

What I'm asking for is help in adding things to it and proof-reading it as well. The article is very UK-centric, and slightly less Euro-centric. A bit of additional perspective would help.

Any volunteers to help me would be greatly appreciated.

With Thanks -- Master Of Ninja 11:03, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I advise fanatics,ignorants,vandals,idiots about impossibility a sport is certainly the most played and watched in this planet because is not a valid statistic scientifically available!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Approximately very much we know soccer and basketball are team sports probably most played and watched but cricket,U.S.A.football,Rugby football,baseball are widely spreading in the world specially in Asia where live 3.640.693.000 persons!!

Whiteholespewingtimeenginesdeadoxygenlowadviseplease. Hig Hertenfleurst 15:21, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Well that last edit makes it soooo much clearer!? Please get someone who speaks English to help you rather than Gogle or whatever. Mintguy (T)

The metric approximations for the size of the field of play can be found here:

Laws of the game

As is clearly described: The ten yard required distance to a "dead" ball is approximated to 9.15 meters. The size of the goal is in fact defined to be 7.32 x 2.44 meters.

Furthermore the laws of the game now officially defines the dimesions of the field of play and other distances in meters, keeping yards in parenthesis for historic reference. This article should probably do the same.

And I will keep correcting this as long as I have to. :)

There is no need to take an aggressive attitude. The 9.5/9.15 equivalant for 10 yards was incorrectly transcribed some time ago, and it appears on the Wikipedia's image here (Image:Football_pitch_metric.png). This image also has the dimensions of the goal transcribed incorrectly. When someone changed 9.5 to 9.144m with this edit ([1]) I used this image as a basis for "correcting" the metric equivalants. Of course your first edit of 9.14 for the 10 yards was itself wrong, but thank you for taking the trouble to check it before recorrecting it. The image with the metric equivalents needs to be modified. Mintguy (T) 23:45, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)