Talk:Association football

Object of the Game

The first paragraph reads: "The object of the game is to score by kicking the ball into the opposing goal." Heading is also a way to score, so shouldn't it read "The object of the game is to score by kicking or heading the ball into the opposing goal"? 69.251.210.39 (talk) 23:46, 11 February 2013 (UTC)S Milner

True. But technically your could use your shoulder, chest or even your backside to score. A more general term may be needed. However as it is an introductory paragraph its primary purpose is to online the basics so personally I have no problem with it Cls14 (talk) 10:54, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

2nd paragraph states: "Outfield players use their feet to kick the ball and occasionally their head". Kick the ball with their head? Maybe 'control' rather than kick? Markb (talk) 14:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

The real problem with that second paragraph is that it states that "outfield players use their feet to kick...their head". Kicking the head is surely a foul of some sort, isn't it? --Khajidha (talk) 15:16, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

The most significant and primary improvement needed is in the article's name. 'Association' football is not an existing sport. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeoThugs (talk • contribs) 10:39, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

You are clearly either a troll or just ignorant. Where do you think the word "soccer" comes from? – PeeJay 22:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello LeoThugs, this has been discussed, at length, on previous discussion pages. Please check there. The official name of the sport is Association Football, you are 100% wrong Cls14 (talk) 08:24, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Football/Assoc Football

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Shouldn't the heading be Football, not Assoc. Football? I've never heard of it being called 'Assoc football'. Is this done in the name of consensus/neutrality? Because the only ones who care are Americans/Canadians. The rest of the word calls this sport Football, not Assoc. Football.Oxr033 (talk) 16:57, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

I would say it is for neutrality, yes. Different countries in the Anglosphere derive different meanings from the word "football". In Ireland, it could be Gaelic football, in Australia it could be Australian rules football, in the US it could be American football, so for Brits to presume that association football is the one that deserves to use the "Football" article title would be pretty arrogant. The term "association football" may not be commonly used, but at least it is neutral. – PeeJay 21:27, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Why don't we break it down by population. What percentage of the world refers to 'association football' as 'football'. It must be about 90%Oxr033 (talk) 20:00, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't see how that's relevant, and I also don't think this conversation is going to get anyone anywhere. There is no reason to move the article from its current location due to the inherent unsuitability of the alternatives. – PeeJay 22:24, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, we could do that, but it makes no sense to count those whose native language isn't English as it is native speakers who set the norms that these non-native speakers learn. Doing that we then look at List of countries by English speaking population#List in order of native speakers and discover that this would mean that the page title should be "soccer" as that is what it is called in the most widely spoken dialect of English. I somehow doubt that you would be willing to accept that, so why expect everyone else to accept the title of this page being changed to "football" when in many dialects of English "football" means something quite different. While "association football" may be considered obscure or overly technical in some dialect of English it is not wrong in any of them. --Khajidha (talk) 17:13, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Association Football is its proper name, just as there are other codes of football like "American Football", "Canadian Football", "Gaelic Football", "Australian Rules Football", "Swap Football", "Street Football" and the like. As there are a couple/three different names for this code then using the official one was a great consensus that will be closely guarded by those who put it in place :-P Cls14 (talk) 07:12, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"The king sport"

Vvven added this nickname on 20 May 2013, but I am somewhat confused as to what is meant. I presume that this is a translation from a Spanish or Portuguese original, but I don't think that this is a particularly well done translation. Specifically, I am not sure if this is better rendered "the king of sports" or "the sport of kings". Does anybody know which is meant? --Khajidha (talk) 16:31, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

In Britain the "Sport of Kings" is horse racing. As this is supposed to be written in British English I would suggest removing this name, or at least made clear where it comes from. Dja1979 (talk) 03:47, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't know how popular the name is in non-English speaking countries. Might be better to have the name in the original language? Cls14 (talk) 09:59, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Clarification of description needed

comment - I do not know how to undo the lock to fix some issues with this article. It notes that a goalkeeper 'is only allowed to touch the ball with his hands and arms inside his box', this is a crude description for a non soccer knowledgeable person... a better description would be that the goalkeeper is allowed to touch the ball with ANY part of his or her body inside the box, though once outside the box, regular soccer rules apply, which means even the goalkeeper cannot touch the ball with hands or arm. Just wanted to add this to help clarify soccer to the people who maybe need better clarification - and to add to the overall quality of wiki :) (BigSoc (talk) 12:27, 30 August 2013 (UTC))

FIFA =! IFAB

In the opening paragraph, football's international rulemaking body, IFAB, is parenthetically identified as FIFA. The IFAB is actually composed of 8 voting members: 4 from FIFA, and 1 apiece from the English, Scottish, Irish, and Welsh FAs. It is FIFA that puts on the World Cup. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.91.18.21 (talk) 09:02, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Football Association redirect

Football Association should not redirect to this article. The Football Association, better known as the FA, is the organisation in England that wrote down the rules of the game one hundred and fifty years ago (today) and governs the game in England. It has its own article but when you type football association in the search box it redirects to the Association Football article. Jts1882 (talk) 09:33, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

It's more complicated than that. if you type in Football Association (note the capital A) it redirects to the FA page. if you type in Football association it redirects here. => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 09:43, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

As far as I am aware many countries governing bodies for the sport are also know as their Football Associations i.e. Polish Football Association, Cuban Football Association etc (I'm using random countries but you get my drift....). When I get time I will re-direct Football association to a disambiguation page that I'll create which lists as many of the national FA's that I can find. Cls14 (talk) 10:37, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Done Cls14 (talk) 15:09, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

• Although I agree with the creation of a standalone football association article (and moving the Football Association redirect to point there), this does mean that there are a lot of links which point to that article that really should point to The Football Association. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 16:37, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

I made a start on changing the relevant links last night. Will continue to do so. Any help by anyone would be greatly appreciated, it'll be a long job! Cls14 (talk) 10:59, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

More cites needed

I'm not sure if the article has suffered from editing creep over the years, but as a featured article there are sections of this page which either have no cites, such as "Variants and casual play", or just a single cite with entire paragraphs unreferenced. Should this not be addressed? FruitMonkey (talk) 09:20, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

...and I didn't really want to mention the dead links, but there are several dead links too. FruitMonkey (talk) 09:34, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Use of Association Football in Australia

Could the editors here take a look at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(Football_in_Australia). There is an attempt by supporters of Australian Rules football to prevent football being called Association football as per the consensus here. Considering that the FAQ at this talk page specifically mentions Australia & Australian Rules, shouldn't we be working to prevent such inconsistency with Association football being used in Australian football articles? Thanks. Macktheknifeau (talk) 00:21, 29 March 2014 (UTC)