![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
OK, green ones have qualified, red ones have not qualified yet, and white ones are unsure which seeding list they'll be in, right? If this is correct we should probably write that, unless I had followed last years article I'd never have figured that out. :-) Also Red is usually used for FAILING to qualify, maybe we should switch to blue or something? -- OpenFuture ( talk) 07:14, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Articles do not start with "This article details the something" or "This article is about", with the exception of lists, which need to explain what the list actually lists. So please everybody: Stop adding that text back. -- OpenFuture ( talk) 06:12, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Forgive my ignorance but why are the articles called group stage yet knockout phase? SirJibby ( talk) 14:38, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Dr. Vicodine, is there a particular reason you have removed the scenarios for next matchday? Mill2093 ( talk) 19:28, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
Next match day scenarios are not referenced and are a violation of WP:NOR. Dr. Vicodine ( talk) 21:56, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:OR#Routine_calculations What about this? I really don't see why the next matchday sections have to be removed now. They've been there for as long as I can remember, and technically they are just basic additions. They also provide an easy way to look up the various scenarios for all the groups and teams. I say we have a vote on this. Motsjo ( talk) 17:16, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
I have reverted the change back. You cannot simply ignore long held practices because you don't like them. Get consensus first if you're going to do something like that. Sven Manguard Wha? 22:55, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Here's a reference for matchday six potential outcomes:
http://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsleague/news/newsid=1895780.html -
AlasdairShaw (
talk)
22:47, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
The tie-breaking criteria are applied consistently in a wrong fashion. E.g. Donetsk should be ahead of Chelsea in group E. They have equal points in matches between each other (3), have the same goal difference in matches between each other (0), have shot the same number of goals in matches between each other (4), yet Donetsk has shot 2 goals at Chelsea while Chelsea has shot only 1 goal in Donetsk. This makes Donetsk the group leader. The total goal difference simply does not enter at this point. Similarly, Munich should be on first place in group F since they have beaten Valencia. Goal difference is irrelevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.2.61.74 ( talk) 07:12, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
OK, green ones have qualified, red ones have not qualified yet, and white ones are unsure which seeding list they'll be in, right? If this is correct we should probably write that, unless I had followed last years article I'd never have figured that out. :-) Also Red is usually used for FAILING to qualify, maybe we should switch to blue or something? -- OpenFuture ( talk) 07:14, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Articles do not start with "This article details the something" or "This article is about", with the exception of lists, which need to explain what the list actually lists. So please everybody: Stop adding that text back. -- OpenFuture ( talk) 06:12, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Forgive my ignorance but why are the articles called group stage yet knockout phase? SirJibby ( talk) 14:38, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Dr. Vicodine, is there a particular reason you have removed the scenarios for next matchday? Mill2093 ( talk) 19:28, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
Next match day scenarios are not referenced and are a violation of WP:NOR. Dr. Vicodine ( talk) 21:56, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:OR#Routine_calculations What about this? I really don't see why the next matchday sections have to be removed now. They've been there for as long as I can remember, and technically they are just basic additions. They also provide an easy way to look up the various scenarios for all the groups and teams. I say we have a vote on this. Motsjo ( talk) 17:16, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
I have reverted the change back. You cannot simply ignore long held practices because you don't like them. Get consensus first if you're going to do something like that. Sven Manguard Wha? 22:55, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Here's a reference for matchday six potential outcomes:
http://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsleague/news/newsid=1895780.html -
AlasdairShaw (
talk)
22:47, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
The tie-breaking criteria are applied consistently in a wrong fashion. E.g. Donetsk should be ahead of Chelsea in group E. They have equal points in matches between each other (3), have the same goal difference in matches between each other (0), have shot the same number of goals in matches between each other (4), yet Donetsk has shot 2 goals at Chelsea while Chelsea has shot only 1 goal in Donetsk. This makes Donetsk the group leader. The total goal difference simply does not enter at this point. Similarly, Munich should be on first place in group F since they have beaten Valencia. Goal difference is irrelevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.2.61.74 ( talk) 07:12, 8 November 2012 (UTC)