Talk:FCSB

Court Decisions

The history of the club has already been stated in the court decisions in 2021. 1947-1998 the football section of the Army Sports Club Steaua Bucharest was active, 1998-2003 AFC Steaua was active and in 2003 SC FC FCSB SA has illegally registered in the first league and has illegally registered the logos at OSIM. This has already been proven in court. UEFA and FIFA has no say in this, exactly the same way they have no saying in any other case judged by any court in the world. 82.174.69.36 (talk) 20:16, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Hold your breath about what has already been proven in court since retrials have been ordered in both trials concerning FCSB. tgeorgescu (talk) 06:17, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

One process, regarding some logos, not the history, name or trademark. The name is final, Trademark final, History at the supreme court. You are in denial? 193.231.104.153 (talk) 10:57, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

https://www.scj.ro/1094/Detalii-dosar?customQuery%5B0%5D.Key=id&customQuery%5B0%5D.Value=300000000753242

https://www.scj.ro/1094/Detalii-dosar?customQuery%5B0%5D.Key=id&customQuery%5B0%5D.Value=300000000798700

From a Romanian newspaper: https://www.digisport.ro/fotbal/verdict-in-procesul-pentru-marca-steaua-intre-fcsb-si-csa-decizia-inaltei-curti-de-casatie-si-justitie-1574745

I have no dog in this fight, I simply follow what the courts have decided till now.

I don't care if FCSB wins or loses those cases, I simply care that the verdicts are accurately rendered.

According to https://api.osim.ro:8443/tm-registry/results.htm , the trademark "STEAUA BUCURESTI" is pending litigation (storage no. 040052).

You conflate between being temporarily enforced and final verdict. There is no final verdict about those.

AFAIK this is like asking the International Court of Justice to decide whether Stephen the Great is a hero of Romania or a hero of the Republic of Moldova. tgeorgescu (talk) 21:57, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

And https://www.digisport.ro/fotbal/liga-1/palmaresul-echipei-steaua-se-rejudeca-inalta-curte-de-casatie-si-justitie-a-admis-recursul-fcsb-ului-1691204

Official view of UEFA: https://ziare.com/fcsb/fcsb-steaua-uefa-1745505 tgeorgescu (talk) 01:50, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

And yet, until a retrail shows and pr proves otherwise, this entire pages information is incorrect. FCSB only came into existance in 2017. That is fact and law as of the time of me writing this. All information on this parge needs removing and transferring to the CSA STEAUA BUCURESTI page instead, UNTIL otherwise changed in court. As it stands now, CSA hold all the records and information on this page, likewise the list of records page also. It is very obvious that the editors of FCSb are extremely biased and have no interest in portraying accurate information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7C:C054:DA00:24E3:51F7:20C2:6622 (talk) 12:37, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Evidence? tgeorgescu (talk) 12:56, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Update: https://www.digisport.ro/fotbal/palmaresul-stelei-judecat-azi-la-inalta-curte-de-casatie-si-justitie-cand-se-va-lua-decizia-2251379 , which means business as usual (nothing newsworthy).

Another source (says the same): https://www.prosport.ro/fotbal-intern/azi-se-judeca-palmaresul-stelei-toate-detaliile-celui-de-al-doilea-termen-dintre-csa-si-fcsb-19604732 tgeorgescu (talk) 20:18, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Verdict postponed to 28 March 2023. Lawyer Virgil Boglea says that "action of noticing" does not amount to much, juridically speaking, and that it isn't executory. So, yeah, it seems likely that CSA will win such dispute, but the victory will be tainted by general irrelevance. https://www.digisport.ro/fotbal/liga-1/o-noua-amanare-in-procesul-pentru-palmaresul-stelei-hotararea-inaltei-curti-de-casatie-si-justitie-2279689 tgeorgescu (talk) 17:59, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

So, yeah, Mr. Talpan lost many years with a futile litigation. Meanwhile his main claim might be struck with the statute of limitations. tgeorgescu (talk) 13:32, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Nobody won the case, a retrial has been ordered: https://www.digisport.ro/fotbal/liga-1/cazul-palmaresului-celor-de-la-csa-steaua-si-fcsb-se-rejudeca-2304299

Mr. Talpan decidedly not happy: https://www.sport.ro/fotbal-intern/zdecizie-absolut-halucinanta-florin-talpan-a-iesit-la-atac-dupa-decizia-iccj-de-rejudecare-a-procesului.html tgeorgescu (talk) 03:09, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

STOP SHOWING PRESS ARTICLES WRITTEN BY "journalists" that get money from the owner of football club fcsb. Judges don't care about some fool's articles. They only take in consideration contracts and signed paperwork! 92.40.219.204 (talk) 04:52, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Even assuming that those journalists do take money from him, they didn't invent the verdicts. The verdicts are available on https://portal.just.ro and https://www.scj.ro/ , thus very easy to be checked by anyone who understands Romanian. tgeorgescu (talk) 04:55, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Wrong! The “Fotbal Club Steaua București” association (@owns the historic club according to the 1st article in its statute , which hasn’t been nullified)now called “SC FC FCSB SA” was founded in 2003 (note association , not team). That’s also why the entire trial is wrong from a sporting perspective. The honors are tied to the historic team , not the company/association who manages it (note the Rangers case). Also , the trial isnt executory. It is literally useless. In conclusion , the info on this page is correct 2A02:2F05:D108:700:9426:987F:58F5:2886 (talk) 20:58, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 31 August 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. No such user (talk) 12:00, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

---

FCSB → FC FCSB – The name of this page is not consistent with the naming conventions for articles on sports teams. In cases where there is no ambiguity as to the official spelling of a club's name in English, the official name should be used. There are numerous examples to be found, such as Manchester_City_F.C.. Please support consistency accross Wikipedia by renaming and moving this article to FC FCSB. For avoidance of doubt, this information can be found on the official website of the team - English language version: This is the only official website (...) and it is a registered trademark ©FC FCSB SA. Gunnlaugson (talk) 22:06, 31 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 23:18, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support This page should be moved as to avoid any confusion and as per the naming conventions for articles on sports teams. Most English and Romanian sources seem to indicate that the official name of the team is Fotbal Club FCSB, and this is actually mentioned in the article itself. Fecoca3620 (talk) 09:43, 4 September 2022 (UTC) — Fecoca3620 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

You have 1 edit. End-of-season-updates (talk) 16:35, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose move. Assuming the Steaua-related names are off limits, the common name of the club is FCSB, not FC FCSB, as established in the previous move discussions. O.N.R. ^(talk) 10:42, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose move. As per UEFA (FCSB). In my opinion, you should not continue with this mockery. End-of-season-updates (talk) 16:32, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. GiantSnowman 17:00, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose as above and UEFA etc. links. GiantSnowman 17:03, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

  So why is the Wikipedia page for Dinamo Zagreb GNK Dinamo Zagreb and not simply Dinamo Zagreb? All the Wikipedia articles on football teams follow the naming conventions. This article should follow them too. Gunnlaugson (talk) 22:35, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

  The FCSB HATERS are gathered to destroy the page of this team. What about Atletico Madrid? UEFA says the club is COMMONLY known as FCSB, also the official website says FCSB including West Ham FC playing 'FCSB'. They are called FCSB including by the Gazeta Sporturilor and Prosport. Your goal is to destroy the identity of this team. End-of-season-updates (talk) 17:17, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support This is becoming a total farce with biased editors opposing a move that is completly in line with the naming conventions for articles on sports teams. This move request should be reviewed by objective senior editors. The Wikipedia naming conventions clearly state that where there is no ambiguity as to the official spelling of a club's name in English, the official name should be used. They do not state that the common name should be used, hence we have articles such as Real Madrid CF, FC Bayern Munich or FC Shakhtar Donetsk, to give some random examples, and pretty much any football team that has a Wikipedia page - but not FC FCSB. Why is that? For avoidance of doubt, the common names in English for the aforementioned clubs, as all the UEFA and other links, are Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, and Shakhtar Donetsk. Why the double standards? Why not use the common practice on Wikipedia, why not follow the naming conventions? This is abusive behaviour and should not be tolerated, as the current title or the page, FCSB, is not only against the naming conventions, but also creates confusion due to the similarity to FC_Steaua_București or CSA Steaua București (football). Support this and end the confusion and double standards of the biased so-called editors. Gunnlaugson (talk) 22:25, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Please see WP:RM#Nom. Dekimasuよ! 07:11, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

• @Gunnlaugson: Provide WP:RS that in the real world the name of the club is FC FCSB. E.g. by Googling "FC FCSB" (including quote marks) I get seven pages with results, which are kind of too few. tgeorgescu (talk) 23:50, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

  Very happy to. Here's a link from UEFA showing the recent draw for the UEFA Europa Conference League group stage this year clearly indicating the name of the club is Fotbal Club FCSB. How is this not recognised by UEFA then? In the footer of the official website of the team you can clearly see the text ©FC FCSB SA. Here are some further links from reputable English language sources, including the ESPN and New York Times: link 1, link 2, link 3, link 4, link 5, link 6, link 7. This page should be changed exactly to avoid any confusion. The official name should be used as it is used for all sports teams accros Wikipedia and as per the naming conventions of Wikipedia. Gunnlaugson (talk) 15:45, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support - This page should follow the naming norms for football clubs. More so for a club that is named with an acronym. Putting that FC before removes the ambiguity. Also this name is used by UEFA. (Gabinho^>:) 16:34, 5 September 2022 (UTC))

  There are the no such "norms". You think they are but they don't exist. Atletico Madrid is not called CD Atletico Madrid or CD Atletico Madrid SAD. They are called FCSB including by the Gazeta Sporturilor and Prosport. COMMONLY KNOWN AS JUST ATLETICO MADRID. NOT CD ATLETICO MADRID SAD. End-of-season-updates (talk) 17:17, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose – Absolutely no one refers to the club as FC FCSB, FCSB is the common name. See Inter Milan. 8Dodo8 (talk · contribs) 11:17, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• FCSB is a bit of a unique case because of the issues over rights to the Steaua name, but Inter Milan serves as a good counter-example to any claim that FC is always part of the common name. O.N.R. ^(talk) 12:51, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• • Yes, I remember the name of the article stayed as FC Steaua for some time and we barely managed to move it to FCSB, since many English sources (and even some Romanian ones) still used the Steaua name. But now it’s clear, everyone adopted the usage of the name FCSB, nobody says FC FCSB probably because of how stupid it sounds. And yes, there are many examples of clubs without "FC", but I think Inter is the most famous one.8Dodo8 (talk · contribs) 13:38, 14 September 2022 (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.

Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2023

FCSB is a football club founded in 2003, not 1947 as this page suggests. This has been established by Romanian court officials many years ago. This page also has other errors like the number of titles FCSB has won. The history that this article claims FCSB has previous to 2003 belongs to CSA Steaua Bucharest, another Romanian football club. FCSB has used Steaua Bucharest's identity for over 10 years. The owner of FCSB has been sued over this and lost some years ago. CSA Steaua Bucharest also has a Wikipedia page which is fairly similar as a result of FCSB trying to claim the identity of Steaua Bucharest. In conclusion, this page has many problems all because FCSB claims to be Steaua Bucharest. Sima69420 (talk) 18:25, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

 Not done There is no final (definitive) court verdict about that. Correct me if I am wrong, by providing WP:SOURCES for your claims. tgeorgescu (talk) 21:54, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Romanian court decided that the history from 1947 to 1998 belongs to CSA STEAUA BUCHAREST. Football club fcsb was founded in 2003 and illegally used the identity of Steaua Bucharest. 92.40.219.204 (talk) 04:55, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Meh, partially true. The historical record belongs now to CSA, but only for the time being, since a final verdict does not exist thereupon. And UEFA has its own rules and its own mind, and has disregarded the Romanian court decision in a public statement. Yup, that logo is a small detail, but it says that according to UEFA, FCSB is the winner of the 1986 European Cup final. See also https://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsleague/history/clubs/50065--fcsb/ Newspaper article: https://www.digisport.ro/special/reactia-lui-gabi-balint-cand-a-vazut-ca-uefa-a-folosit-sigla-fcsb-ului-in-dreptul-trofeului-cce-cucerit-de-steaua-in-1986-2433415 Another: https://as.ro/fotbal/liga-2/marius-lacatus-prima-reactie-dupa-ce-uefa-a-pus-sigla-fcsb-ului-in-lista-castigatorilor-cce-ce-sa-fac-sa-ma-dezic-de-steaua-297242.html Yet another: https://www.prosport.ro/fotbal-intern/superliga/uefa-a-dat-lovitura-decisiva-celor-de-la-csa-steaua-reactia-lui-gabi-balint-cand-vede-ca-apare-sigla-fcsb-in-dreptul-cupei-campionilor-castigate-de-steaua-in-1986-19674562 Did UEFA admit it was wrong? Did they made public a rectification? tgeorgescu (talk) 09:03, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

The decision regarding the records belonging to Steaua Bucharest (the 1986 ECC and the 1987 Supercup) is final. It was established so by the ÎCCJ this spring, when they sent FC Fcsb's request for its own records to be recognised back at the appeals court. The sping decision said that Steaua's records belong only to Steaua, that the records of AFC Steaua belong only to AFC Steaua and that the issue of the Fcsb records needs to go back to trial. This autumn, the Bucharest Appeals Court looked over this issue and made a decision. At the ICCJ, they will not look over the entire lawsuit. They will only look over the issue of fcsb's records, the ones that start from 2003. So the decision regarding the European Champions Cup is final. That belongs to Steaua and there is no way it will ever change. But I know you will lie and refuse to do the right thing, because you are as partisan as possible. Not that it matters though. Whether you like it or not, this page will have all references to Steaua removed from it sooner or later. I look forward to seeing you cry about it :)) TPTB (talk) 11:00, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

See the last message at #Court Decisions: the team owns its own history, not any of the companies which own the team. It's like suing the Romanian Academy to change Stephen the Great to Stephen the Terrible. Courts do not change history.

And, frankly, I have no dog in this fight. For me it is just get the popcorn. tgeorgescu (talk) 17:25, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

You are embarrassing yourself. There is no difference between a team and the legal entity that owns the team. In fact, saying this is nonsense. The team and the legal entity are the same thing. If you are trying to suggest that they are not the same, please show me an ID for the team. Legal entities have identification numbers so that they can pay taxes, do business, sign contracts, etc. Can the team, as you suggest it, do this? No it cannot. Because the team does not exist.

And the decision from the latest trial says this exact thing. This is why Steaua is credited with its own records, AFC Steaua with its own records and FC Fcsb with its own records, to which it was unable, for some reason, to bring any evidence that proves they actually belong to it.

Like I said, I look forward to seeing you cry when this page will eventually be updated with the correct information. TPTB (talk) 09:27, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

sc fc fcsb sa is not steaua bucharest

this in not steaua bucharest!!! 2A02:2F0A:B20B:F200:3372:F5EA:9DB1:5E65 (talk) 21:34, 3 November 2023 (UTC)