This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
How come there isn't any table of contents on this page? Akrabbim 01:22, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
Guys, don't you think that if the finals went to a penalty shootout the notation aet is redundant? I believe aet should be used only if the results of the match were determined by the extra time. If the game ended in a ps, then obviously the result of the match is after extra time.
I'll wait a couple of days for posts before changing anything
-- Sebastian Kessel 5 July 2005 20:08 (UTC)
Yes and no... In 1991 third place match there were PKs but no AET. http://www.rsssf.com/tablesw/wyc91.html But is it important to show that distinction? Probably not. -- Dr31 5 July 2005 20:13 (UTC)
I agree, it is kind of irrelevant... so what do we do? -- Sebastian Kessel 5 July 2005 23:39 (UTC)
I say kill it, unless someone else thinks they are important. But if you do it, be consistent; there are other pages affected: Football World Cup, Football U-17 World Championship, all the continental tournaments ( CONCACAF Gold Cup, European Football Championship, etc), and a bunch more... -- Dr31 6 July 2005 02:39 (UTC)
Makes Sense, I'll start here and try to make my way across (I already started with the Copa America). -- Sebastian Kessel 6 July 2005 15:06 (UTC)
You read this conversation and you think this is a joke!! A penalty shootout with extratime before is a different thing than a shootout without extratime. And it took almost 3 years that this nonsense was healed!-- Anaxagoras13 ( talk) 11:46, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
The name of the U-20 Tournament (this article) is "FIFA World Youth Championship" while the U-17 is called "FIFA U-17 World Championship." Even both the women's U-20 and U-17 follow the same format as the U-17. For consistency's sake, I'm proposing that this page be moved to "FIFA U-20 World Championship." Any opposition? Akrabbim 01:20, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
Starting with the 2007 edition in Canada, the tournament will be called "FIFA U-20 World Cup" [1], and apparently all FIFA tournaments will start to be called "World Cups" (see [2], very last sentence), so I guess this page should be moved, as well as that for the 2007 edition. FIFA's website hasn't changed the U-17 championship's name yet, so that should probably wait until it's clear. -- Gabbec 23:11, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
OK, I moved this page to its new title, as well as other renamed competitions. For discussion, go to Talk:FIFA#Rebranding_of_championships. -- Gabbec 06:28, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
I think the link from Quina is kind of wrong...
In the U-17 article, the top scorers are listed in chronological order, while here it is listed by number of goals. I prefer chronological. Should this be changed, for consistency as well as for easier reading? Jmcnally 16:52, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Under the Golden Shoe and Golden Ball listings, the 2003 tournament host is listed as the United States instead of the actual host, the United Arab Emirates (the listing for the Fair Play award correctly has the UAE as the host). Is there any reason for this, or is it a mistake that can be fixed? Dalton Imperial 03:25, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
The article is not clear about the exact age requirement on players. It says that the championship is "for male players under the age of 20" without clarifying what this means. Checking the regulations for the 2011 tournament, I discovered that the requirement is not at all what you would expect. Instead, the requirement is that "all players of its representative team were born on or after 1 January 1991" (§22.2). Thus players should be under the age of 20 on the last day of the year preceding the year of the tournament. Source: http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/tournament/competition/01/28/32/07/regulationsfu20wccolombia2011_e.pdf 83.250.145.53 ( talk) 09:11, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
The Golden Shoe Awards are not correct. For example, in the 1995 edition Dani won the Silver Shoe and Nuno Gomes didn't get any award, I remember that very well. And FIFA web site states the same as me: http://www.fifa.com/tournaments/archive/tournament=104/edition=191263/awards/index.html Paulojmartins ( talk) 12:48, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
In light of the recent back and forth of edits as to whether Serbia's 2015 win counts as a 2nd title following Yugoslavia's win in 1987. Arguments for: this is similar to present-day Germany and West Germany, wherein West Germany's top 4 FIFA results are counted in Germany's tally; SFR and FR Yugoslavia existed consecutively, not concurrently, so if they both had had top 4 results, the tally would be listed under a single name (Yugoslavia); FR Yugoslavia became Serbia and Montenegro, which is legally succeeded by Serbia. Arguments against: no official FIFA statement designating Serbia as Yugoslavia's medal successors; FR Yugoslavia is not the legal successor of SFR Yugoslavia; legal succession is not relevant to FIFA succession. -- Venomwind ( talk) 17:01, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
by "damso": PLEASE be aware that Serbia and Yugoslavia are 2 different countries by constitution. Yugoslavia was multinational country (all of Yugoslavias) but today Serbia is defined as country of Serbs only. It is not moral correct to Yugoslavia results to be assigned to Serbia.Comparation with Germany is not good because Germany was united in 1990,and no one lose their results, but Yugoslavia was divided (in war) so the result of all nonSerbs and halfSerbs in Yugoslavia cannot be assigned to Serbs.It is problem for international relations in Ex Yugoslavia countries. I agree that it is technically the same number in FIFA information records for YUG and SRB, but the same record does not mean the same country.
So I suggest to count medals separatly for YUG and SRB. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.245.1.18 ( talk) 15:14, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
In that time Yugoslavia consisted of croats, bosniaks, slovenes, macedonians and serbs so saying that Yugoslavia and Serbia is the same is not true. It's like taking pride on something someone else did. This shall be changed and be like this /info/en/?search=UEFA_European_Under-21_Championship where Serbia and Yugoslavia are seperated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.216.136.107 ( talk) 14:58, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Serbia should not be credited for having two titles. If you credit them for two titles because of the situation with Yugoslavia, you must give credit to all the teams that formed after the country dissolved. Does that mean that Slovenia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, and Serbia all won the cup? The Soviet Union is still given credit for winning an earlier cup, as is West Germany. Yugoslavia won the cup in 1987. If Czechoslovakia had won, would you say the Czech Republic and Slovakia both won? As others have said, saying that Yugoslavia and Serbia are the same is simply not true.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.187.138.241 ( talk) 01:30, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Yugoslavia included present day Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia/Herzegovina, Slovenia, and Macedonia. If Serbia gets credit for the '87 cup, then fine; it's split 6 ways. So looks like for the first time in history we have a six-way split for a cup! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.187.138.241 ( talk) 00:18, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
It doesn't matter what your opinion is. FIFA has made it clear that Serbia is the successor of Yugoslavia and inherits it's results. Just because Croatia can't come close to winning something doesn't mean you have to try and vandalise this page and detract from other country's victories. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.172.16.9 ( talk) 07:50, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
Detracting from other countries victories? Yugoslavia won the 1987 cup. It is a simple historical fact that is easy to confirm with a preponderance of evidence. Just like the Soviet Union and West Germany won their respected cups. Let's just rewrite history books while we're at it. Nothing wring with perpetuating misinformation seemingly.
Luizengmec ( talk) 00:52, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
This has been discussed for many other tournaments and is not unique for this tournament. Basically Serbian fottball association is successor of Yugoslavia football association and inherit their records. Same for Russia as successor for Sovjet Union and Germany as successor for West Germany. If you dont agree take it to WT:FOOTY for discussion as this spans over several tournaments. Also as mentioned above this is how FIFA does it. Qed237 (talk) 20:33, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Hundreds of edits so far done in this section all without referenced and confirmation. As now India is the only nation who submitted bid for the tournament. Need to protect this section until final confirmation by FIFA. सुमित सिंह ( talk) 06:05, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
In the bracket there's an error over which city will host which semifinal. The first one (45 vs 46) will be played in Gdynia and the second one (47 vs 48) in Lublin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.227.212.3 ( talk) 09:58, 5 June 2019 (UTC)