This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Football Mid‑importance 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

=> FC Bayern Munich won full 3 competitions / Full competition means that club's single season period = competitions single season period.

There is no room for dissent.

• (2) Within a period of Al-Hilal's single season (2019–20)

=> Al-Hilal won full 2 competitions (2019–20 Saudi Professional League and 2019–20 King Cup)
=> Al-Hilal won imperfect 1 competition (2019 AFC Champions League)

Strictly speaking, Success at the 2019 AFC Champions League Group stage is the achievement of Al-Hilal's 2018–19 season squad.

But Because success at the 2019 AFC Champions League Knockout stage is the achievement of Al-Hilal's 2019–20 season squad, Like manager of final match takes all honour, not sharing with fired former manager. I agreed that Al-Hilal's treble

• (3-1) Within a period of C.F. Monterrey's single season (2018–19)

=> C.F. Monterrey won full 1 competition (2019 CONCACAF Champions League / 19 February – 1 May 2019)

• (3-2) Within a period of C.F. Monterrey's single season (2019–20)

=> C.F. Monterrey won full 2 competitions (2019–20 Liga MX and 2019–20 Copa MX)

In conclusion, C.F. Monterrey didn't win 3 competitions in club's sing season and this treble article have wrong information currently.

I know some newspaper reported that C.F. Monterrey achieved a treble. (eg: https://www.tudn.mx/copa-mx/rayados-1-1-xolos-marcador-resumen-goles-monterrey-titulo-triplete) But this source made a mistake.

If C.F. Monterrey achieved a treble, By the same logic, Red Star Belgrade also achieved a treble (1990–91 Yugoslav First League, 1989–90 Yugoslav Cup, 1990–91 European Cup

If you compare below tables. you can understand what I mean.

Finaly, my contribution is necessary for clarifying the concept of treble and C.F. Monterrey must be deleted in the Continental trebles list.

• 2019–20 FC Bayern Munich season

• 2019–20 Al-Hilal FC season

Source: Competitions

• 2018–19 C.F. Monterrey season

• 2019–20 C.F. Monterrey season

Footwiks (talk) 18:35, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Footwiks, first please be WP:CIVIL and don't accuse me of owning the article. Second, per WP:V, all info must be reliably sourced to be eligible to be presented here, and all included trebles here are properly sourced following all the gidelines. Third, per WP:RS all your arguments, tables and info presented here are meaningless for Wikipedia, because none of this can be considered reliable, and cannot be used as sources. You, as an wikipedian, cannot be considered to be a reliable sources, Wikipedia's pages cannot be used as sources, and the only third-party link you presented lead us to Error 404, so with no sources, all of your work was pointless. Fourth, also per WP:RS, since all sources here directly state that these instances are considered as trebles, they can only be challenged if other sources, of similar quality, directly stating that they are not a treble, less than that is not acceptable. Fifth, no sources presented that a treble is tied to the concept of a "club's season", so adding such amendment would be considered WP:OR. Last, AFAIK, "club's season" doesn't exist. There are domestic seasons and continental seasons, since the seasons are formed and organized by the confederations that control the competitions, and not by the clubs. Usually a "club's season" is tied to one or another, I'm not sure if there's a standalone "club season" out there. ABC paulista (talk) 22:07, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ABC paulista Club's single season definitely exists. (1) Squad building through transfer window. => (2) Trainning including friendly matches at preseason => (3) Participation in competitions => (4) Get a grade. => (5) Squad building through transfer window. This the cycle of club's single season.

if a standalone club's single season concept doesn't exist, How do you explain them? So many football club season articles in wikipedia and somethings about club's new season (eg 2020-21 season squad photo, 2019-20 season jersey, 2020-21 season jersey)

Most football clubs synchronise their club season (period or schedule) with domestic league season (period or schedule). Because domestic league is the basic competition to participate. Especially, In Euorepeon football, Most football club's single season period and Domestic competiotions period and UEFA competitions period are same. Therefor, There’s no need to make such fine distinctions In Euorepeon football.

For examples. But In Asian football, Club's single season period and domestic single seaon period are same. Club's single season period and AFC cometition period are not same. Examples are belows;

• South Korean football club's single season (Transfer window and preseason: November 2001-February 2002 / Participation in competitions: March 2002-November 2002)

=> 2001-2002 Asian club championship: September 2001– April 2002

• Saudi arabian football club's single season: (Transfer window and preseason: July 2019-August 2019 / Participation in competitions: 2019 September - 2020 November)

=> 2019 AFC Champions League: March 2019–November 2019

In this cases, We can adopt period including final match. If South korean club won 2002 Domestic Leauge, 2002 Korean FA Cup, 2001-02 Asian club Champinship, They achived the treble

Club's single season is very important meaning at the concept of treble.

Within club's single season, If they won 3 competitions, This is the treble and simple concept. In European football, There is no room for dissent. Because most club's single season period and 3 competitions single season period are same.

But, there are exceptions in other counties (including few European country), Below descripstion(Header info) is needed.

A treble in association football is achieved when a club team wins three competitions in a club's single season. In Europeon football, Club's single season period and competition's single season period are almost same. (e.g. 2019–20 FC Bayern Munich season, 2019–20 Bundesliga, 2019–20 DFB-Pokal and 2019–20 UEFA Champions League). But in other continental football, Not all club's single season period and competition's single season are same. (e.g. 2019–20 Al-Hilal FC season, 2019–20 Saudi Professional League, 2019–20 King Cup, 2019 AFC Champions League)

Let's ask others for their opinion

Footwiks (talk) 03:24, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Footwiks You are stating very subjective, opinative ideas about the presented info, but you do understand they opinions don't matter on Wikipedia if they are not backed up by reliable, third-party sources right? Have you ever read Wikipedia's guidelines, like WP:RS, WP:V, and especially WP:CONPOL? All I'm seeing is you trying to correlate the conecept of treble with a supposed "club's season", but you are showing nothing reliable to prove your point, just hanging on WP:OR, a practice that is strongly discouraged here, practically prohibited. All that "Club's single season cycle" is contained inside a confederation's season (either domestic or continental, maybe both), so they are part of it, not a standalone concept. Standalone means not following either confederation's season, but I doubt you'll find some cases of such. And all those "Club's season articles" aren't supposed to state that each of them have their own article, but only to list their results and achievements within a confederation's season (be it domestic, continental or both). ABC paulista (talk) 04:03, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ABC paulista I have a question. Description that you support - A treble in association football is achieved when a club team wins three trophies in a single season.

What is a clear meaning of phrase 'in a single season? Is this domestic leauge's single season period? or Is this confederation's champions League's single season period? or Is this a just single year period? Phrase - In a single seaons is the most important criterion for achievement of treble. But current Phrase - in a single season is very ambiguous. It can be confusing.

In order to prevent controversies about achievement of treble, Firstly We must find clear definition of in a single season or we must clearly define in a single season. Unless there is clarification regarding the definition of phrase in a single season, The controversies are will be continued without end. Footwiks (talk) 05:13, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Footwiks It's true that the actual state of the article doesn't specify what kind of "season" it's dealing with, but that's because the sources presented don't specify it (maybe because they don't bother with the specifics, or maybe for them all confederation's seasons are valid, I don't know, I'm just speculating). Maybe some clarification would be benefitial in some way, but still we can't be the ones to define it. Wikipedia doesn't create info, it just aggregate existing info elsewhere, so we mustn't define it ourselves but find some professional, reliable external sources who do it. But until one is found, the actual ambiguity must stay per WP:RS. ABC paulista (talk) 13:21, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Currently Nobody knows. Specific scope of a single season and what kind of a single season. I know, Wikipedia doesn't create info. But We can let people know that current definition of treble is imperfect. Therefore I added the footnote. Please polish my footnote.Footwiks (talk)

We can't say it's "imperfect", because no one defined it as such, so putting such definition is WP:OR. If something is, or seems, ambiguous and undefined, we leave it as it is, with all its ambiguity, until some source defines it. That's how it must be done by wikipedia's guidelines. ABC paulista (talk) 15:59, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why didn't sources specify a single season? In my opinion, Treble come from in Europeon footall. Most Europeaon club's single season and 3 competitions single season (Domestic League, FA Cup, UEFA tournaments) are same (August to May next year). In European football, There is no need to specify about single season. If this article deal with only European football's treble, Just 'In a single season.' It's OK. But this article deal with all football club's treble all over the world. Therefore current 'In a single season.' have problem.

Specific scope and kind of a single season is unknown.' This is just current fact. Do you really think that this is WP:OR. Let's get confirmation from the others.

Footwiks Could you please stop? A discussion on the subject is currently ongoing. Please refrain from editing the article until the discussion is done and a consensus is reached, per WP:BRD. About the sources ambiguity, the only way to know is asking them yourself. About how you, as an editor, "feel" about the current article's info status, Wikipedia doesn't care about it if the info is properly sourced. You, as an editor, don't have the right to define what it is a "fact" and what it isn't, only the sources have such attribution. It's not a matter of opinion, but of guidelines, of policies, of rules. ABC paulista (talk) 16:23, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ABC paulista You always don't allow other user's good contributions. You always say no, say no, because wikipedia regulation, because wikipedia regulation. I think you are very conservative and you hope that this article stay version that you edit. Do you know this policy? Wikipedia:Ignore all rules. I think this policy is more important that wikipedia regulation you always mentioned.Footwiks (talk)

ABC paulista Specific scope and kind of a single season is unknown.' I think that this descriptions is not original research. You recognized imperfection of current treble defintion. Let me know matter of violation in Wikipedia:No original research?

Footwiks Before claiming WP:IAR, you should read WP:UIAR and WP:IARESSAYS. Because if you read so, you'd understand that this specific policy is an exception, not a rule, and should only be applied when there is WP:CONSENSUS that that's the right move, which isn't the case, otherwise we wouldn't discussing it right now. I disagree that it's a good contibution, I disagree that it's necessary, it clearly violates important policies (like WP:V and WP:RS) and by so I'm claiming WP:ENFORCE on this matter. Your proposed description is only based on an Editor's opinion, on it's perception, on a unsupported claim with with no backup from external reliable sources, and WP:OR states that such claims are considered Original Research (""original research" (OR) is used on Wikipedia to refer to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist"), and that "Wikipedia articles must not contain original research". That's how your claim violates the current policies. ABC paulista (talk) 19:27, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ABC paulista Participants are only you and me in this discussion. Let's discuss this issue(in a single season) in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football in the near future.Footwiks (talk) 13:43, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me. ABC paulista (talk) 16:24, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They are currently listed as having four, but three of them (2005–06, 2013–14, and 2014–15) were from winning the NZFC Minor Premiership, NZFC Grand Final, and the OFC Champions League. Only the 2022 treble came from them winning New Zealand's main cup competition (the Chatham Cup), the New Zealand National League (the NZFC's successor), and the OFC Champions League, but the second sentence of the article states "A continental treble involves winning the club's national league competition, main national cup competition, and main continental trophy". I believe their first three "trebles" should be removed from this list and possibly added as a footnote instead. This goes for fellow New Zealand club Waitakere United's treble in 2007–08 as well since the three competitions they won that season were also the Minor Premiership, the Grand Final, and the OFCCL. Geolojoey (talk) 20:31, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any reason to dismiss them, since in the former New Zealand Football Championship these were the main league and main cup competitions that the franchises could participate, both the Premiership and the Grand Final were considered as separate competitions, both awarded their own throphies and prizes, and the sources do cite these instances as treble winners. So I don't see what's the issue here. ABC paulista (talk) 21:36, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One, for the same reason that the Mariners above didn't win a treble. "Continental treble involves ... main domestic cup competition." The league & grand final in the NZFC league are not different competitions they're two stages of a single competition. The playoffs are not a "main cup". The sources are wrong, for the purposes of listing what this article says a Continental treble treble is. The clubs in this competition did not compete in the "main cup" of New Zealand which is the Chatham Cup. Macktheknifeau (talk) 07:21, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:RS, the sources superce an editor's point-of-view. You might not like it, but it is what it is. ABC paulista (talk) 14:54, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a "point of view", it is fact based clarification of an incorrect application of sources to the definition required for inclusion in the list being discussion. Macktheknifeau (talk) 12:13, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's considered a point of view until you bring sources that corroborate with it. Wikipedia is about Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth. ABC paulista (talk) 16:29, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This articel only talks about club football.

Nothing about the triple crown in country football. Continent championship, world championship and olympic games. 2001:1C0F:A3C:7400:14AB:4B58:FE59:3824 (talk) 15:56, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about trebles, not triple crowns. Also, you need sources to demonstrate the WP:NOTABILITY of the subject. ABC paulista (talk) 21:28, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In 1986, Club Atletico River Plate won the 1985–86 Argentine Primera División, the Copa Libertadores, and the Intercontinental Cup. Therefore, It should also be included or at least mentioned as it is the only South American to achieve that feat. ULIFOX 3XX (talk) 22:24, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't the only one to do it, others like Peñarol, Nacional, Santos, Olimpia and Boca Juniors also did so, for example. Also, I remember that tere was a section dedicated for such cases, but was removed because it failed WP:N and WP:RS, but there's a similar section for such cases on the Copa Libertadores statistics' page. ABC paulista (talk) 23:35, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is listed in the table that Kuwait SC won two domestic trebles, in 2016–17 and 2018–19, by virtue of winning the Kuwaiti Premier League, the Emir Cup, and the Kuwait Crown Prince Cup in those seasons. Now, Kuwait SC has just won the same three titles in the 2024–25 season, and this has been confirmed by official sources, yet you refuse to acknowledge it simply because no source uses the term “domestic treble.” Is this an argument? Wikipedia relies on the continuous updating of its information and articles, especially in sports. Are we supposed to wait for a source to explicitly say “domestic treble” before it can be added to the table? Mishary94 (talk) 03:10, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK, explicit attribution was the overall consensus we all achieved in previous discussions, and is supported by policies like WP:EXCEPTIONAL, WP:MINREF and WP:LIKELY, just to cite a few, so since we deiced that such is a required criteria for inclusions we can't just ignore it when we consider it "unnecessary". For example, I myself waited some months to include AS FAR here, because that was the time I took to find a reliable source for their continental treble, even though I knew that they achieved it from the get-go.

Also, your argument that the 2024–25 is a treble in the same way that the 2016–17 and 2018–19 are can be considered as WP:SYNTH and kinda WP:OCON, especially if you consider that we didn't "prove" to the reader that these still are considered to be the competitions required for a domestic treble in Kuwait, because everytime seasons are reestructured in some places, competitions discontinued and new ones created, and their importance and/or significance shifted around, so the explicit attribution also serves to prove the competitions' significances at that time for the readers.

And to give you one recent example of such: In both 2023 and 2024 Corinthians achieved consecutive continental trebles in women's football, by winning the Brasileirão, Supercopa do Brasil and Copa Libertadores, the main national league, the main (sole) national cup and the main (sole) continental competition for them, but if they had won the same competitions in 2025 would it also be considered a treble? The answer is no, because this year the women's Copa do Brasil returned, thus superceding the Supercopa do Brasil as the main cup competition in their country. ABC paulista (talk) 04:18, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You claim that there must be a source explicitly stating the titles in order for us to include the club in the article. Well, we have the reliable and widely accepted RSSSF website, which explicitly states in a dedicated note that Kuwait SC and Al-Qadsia are the holders of domestic trebles in Kuwait because they won the Kuwaiti League, the Amir Cup, and the Crown Prince Cup. This is therefore a reliable source that explicitly lists the titles. Since Kuwait SC—according to very reliable and fully official sources—has won those same titles in the 2024–25 season, and since the competitions themselves have not changed, been restructured, or replaced by new tournaments, why do you refuse to include Kuwait SC’s 2024–25 season in the list? What you are doing seems highly illogical, especially in this article, where there is clear obstinacy toward any addition. Mishary94 (talk) 15:16, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The RSSSF source only prove that this combination of titles was considered as a valid domestic treble for the 2004, 2015 and 2017 seasons, but claims nothing about the seasons before, after or in between, and as I pointed out in the Corinthians case it is not a given, just because it was valid back then doesn't automatically means it is now. The current validity is the one that has to be proven, and this validity to be thuthfull just based on past cases can't be taken for granted.

The main issue is: and since the competitions themselves have not changed, been restructured, or replaced by new tournaments can you prove that it is actually the case? How the sources prove that in the meantime a new tournament wasn't created that superceded any of these three? Maybe a new league replaced the Premier League as the first division, or maybe a new FA Cup superceded either of the cup competitions in importance, the reader doesn't know and the sources presented don't make effort to clarify so.

From the reader's perspective, nothing was shown to prove such is the case, and there is precedence for cases like that, like the aforementioned Corinthians case, or the Thai Kor Royal Cup which was the first division of their country for 80 years, until 1996 when the Thai League was created and it was "demoted" to a supercup from there onwards, until it was later discontinued.

Probably the RSSSF source will be updated and this treble will be cited there, but until then we should refrain from adding this instance, like I waited in the AS FAR case before. ABC paulista (talk) 16:03, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are making assumptions that have no basis. Even if we assume that such a change actually occurred and that the competitions were modified or restructured, it is the objector who must provide evidence proving the invalidity of the domestic treble and present proof establishing what constitutes the new domestic treble. The burden of proof lies with the claimant, not with the party that possesses a source confirming what the “domestic treble” is. As long as there is no source confirming a change to the relevant competitions, you have no right to dismiss a domestic treble supported by an official source, nor to object by demanding a new source every time a team achieves the domestic treble whose validity is already agreed upon and supported by reliable sources. Mishary94 (talk) 18:49, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The consensus we reached in the previous discussions demand that we present a source to every single instance of a possible domestic treble, and that the usage of the wording "domestic treble" is required (The source must clearly speak of domestic treble). You are the one claiming that Kuwait SC achieved a domestic treble in the 2024–25 season by winning the Premier League, the Emir Cup, and the Crown Prince Cup, thus the burden of proof is on you.

So, two aspects have to be proven:

1. That Kuwait SC won both the Premier League, the Emir Cup and the Crown Prince Cup in the 2024–25 season;

2. That winning the Premier League, the Emir Cup and the Crown Prince Cup constitutes a valid domestic treble for the the 2024–25 season;

From my point of view, the combination of both sources we brought prove the first aspect, but no source presented directly address the second one. Like I said before: The RSSSF source only prove that this combination of titles was considered as a valid domestic treble for the 2004, 2015 and 2017 seasons, but claims nothing about the seasons before, after or in between, thus inferring that this combination of titles constitutes a valid domestic treble for most recent seasons solely based on past ones is just as an assumption as you're claiming me to be doing (which is my point, if you didn't understand that before).

TL;DR, the combinations of sources that supposedly proves that Kuwait SC achieved a domestic treble in the 2024–25 season is a WP:SYNTH case, and as such is not acceptable per the WP:OR guideline. ABC paulista (talk) 19:49, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]