Talk:2012–13 Premier League

Football: England / Season Start‑class Low‑importance

	Association football portal 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 articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	English football portal This article is supported by the English football task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the season article task force.

Cazorla asissts

Santi Cazorla has 8 assists in the premier league, not reflected in the top assists table, someone please add this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.143.103.158 (talk) 23:55, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Other players have more assist then shown. The statistics is from ESPN not offical sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.243.184.229 (talk) 10:34, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And this is the exact reason why we should not include assists; there is just no absolute definition of what an assist actually is. Some people even consider winning a penalty to be an assist! – Pee Jay 12:17, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Should we use the official website as a source for statistics instead? EPL Stats Jatinbhatt blap (talk) 15:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Location Of clubs

As there is currently a consistent flipping between 'Manchester' and 'Trafford' I suggest a comment be added next to the name so that people don't continually change it. Similar comments could be added next to other sections for which a consensus has been reached that uninformed users continue to change. This could include

changing the map to England and Wales when Swansea are safe

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, SOMEONE PLEASE PROTECT THE VANDALISM ON THIS PAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.27.154.198 (talk) 16:50, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stadium Names & locations Spudgfsh (talk) 19:20, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No comment should be added next to the name at all. Trafford is a borough in its own right just like Manchester, hence Old Trafford. Stevo1000 (talk) 01:19, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Content dispute

Hi there. There seems to be a dispute between a few editors regarding the name of Newcastle United's stadium. Although there is one source which gives the name Sports Direct Arena, there has been no discussion on the talk page and no further sources have been provided by either side; thus, there is no consensus on this issue. I've fully protected the page for two days and urge those involved to come to a resolution by talking about it on this page. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:54, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was under the impression that there was a discussion on the page for the current season '2011-12 Premier League' which agreed that the sponsored names would be used. The problem seems to be that there are a lot of Newcastle fans out there that do not like the change in the name and they keep changing the name where ever it appears (both here and the current season). A page from the Premier League was used previously as a reference before it was changed to the current one by myself. The current reference is from the official Newcastle site which names their stadium. I personally cannot think of a better reference than the club itself. Spudgfsh (talk) 20:15, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

not one person in the world refers to the ground as the sports direct arena. Its like having the page for 'Gay' meaning 'Happy' as that is what it actually means. The sports direct name is not used at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.6.127 (talk) 09:34, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment My apologies to those discussing the name issue. I stuck my nose in and maybe made a mess of things. Mostly I got confused between 2011-2012 and 2012-2013. :( Though I sagely suggested reading and commenting on the talk page, I didn't take advantage myself (I thought that I had...long day)... at any rate, I made a change to the 2011-2012 Premier League page (thinking it was 2012-2013) that I thought might be a compromise. If consensus is that the old name should not be used at all, so be it. My apologies for making a mess of things! I'll bow out now :) Wikipelli ^Talk 20:08, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Official Reading 2012 Calander Brian McDermott (Manager) is Irish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.176.117.3 (talk) 12:30, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mathematically Safe Teams

Fulham are now Mathematically safe from relegation — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheElite1911 (talk • contribs) 16:09, 21 April 2012 (UTC) Sunderland are too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.165.52.246 (talk) 12:53, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As are West Brom. These need adding to the page when it becomes unlocked later on today. Spudgfsh (talk) 17:02, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Text about relegated teams...

Is it necessary or relevant to have a paragraph about wolves being relegated, surely it belongs in the 2011-12 season page not here? If there were a section similar to the one in the 2012–13 Football League Championship which lists all of the changes (including any changes in the rules) it would be better than the current paragraph which doesn't feel like it fits. --Spudgfsh (talk) 20:22, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, the paragraph about relegated teams (or team movement in general) is indeed a standard paragraph; see also the MoS for league seasons. Similar paragraphs may also be found in various European top league articles. The reason behind having prose for team changes instead of just having a list is simply to avoid that season articles consist of just a lead and a whole bunch of tables. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 20:52, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Overcrowding on the map

Given there is now 6 London teams following the promotion of West Ham the map is getting very overcrowded. Is it time to add a separate map for London similar to that used in 2011–12_Football_Conference#Conference_South? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spudgfsh (talk • contribs) 16:07, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. The standard procedure for such a case is to have a marker for the city (without a link), optionally a little larger than the usual size, and a list of the city's teams in one corner of the map. See 2011–12 Liga I or 2011–12 Russian Premier League for examples. By the way, that Football Conference South example should be treated in exactly the same way. There also was some related discussion about the maps in the Football League articles over at WT:FOOTY which yielded the same result; the discussion may be found there in the archives. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 16:16, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively, the labels may be moved around via hidden markers; see for 2011–12 Fußball-Bundesliga for an example. However, this may get a little tricky for the 2012–13 map. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 16:22, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Position per round

How about adding a "Position per round" table after the League table like some of the other league's pages e.g. 2011–12_La_Liga? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcokie (talk • contribs) 10:12, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:2011–12 Premier League#Positions by round revisited (yes, again!) for a similar discussion. The outcome of it was to not have such a table because of various reasons. The arguments for or against an inclusion should not have changed between seasons. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 11:03, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think its good and descriptive to have positions per round.99.28.213.244 (talk) 16:09, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, I think it's a good idea to have positions per round as it allows people to see how the teams have progressed or regressed during the season and I believe it should be added from this season. Why is it that the La Liga page has it but the Premier League does not?--DMVillan (talk) 13:39, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have read the discussion that Soccer-holic had posted? Because I think you don't. Stigni (talk) 12:11, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Brendan Rodgers

At the moment, Liverpool and Swansea are currently negotiating compensation. He isn't officially a Liverpool manager. Until either Liverpool or Swansea confirm this, please leave LFC manager as Vacant and Swansea manager as Brendan Rodgers. Even the statement by the Swansea chairmen said they are negotiating compensation and that is the latest official statement regarding this. Mr tim111 (talk) 10:46, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The same for Paul Lambert (Norwich & Villa)--Spudgfsh (talk) 17:22, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Teams tied on points/goals/goal difference

I notice the table currently shows teams listed strictly as unique places 1–20, even though there's no reason that, say, Fulham would be ahead of Swansea or vice versa under the stated tiebreakers. There also doesn't seem to have been any discussion about it here or in comments, although there has been some back and forth between listing teams with unique numbers and listing some teams as tied. Is there any way we could sort this out? 2602:306:CEA0:6300:21C:26FF:FE94:75DC (talk) 03:09, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rule 24 from section B of the 2011-12 premier league handbook states "Subject to Rule B.31, if any 2 or more Clubs have scored the same number of points, have the same goal difference and have scored the same number of goals in League Matches in that Season they shall be deemed to occupy the same position in the table."

On a slightly less relevant note, rule 31 of section B states "If at the end of the Season either the League Champions or the Clubs to be relegated or the question of qualification for other competitions cannot be determined because 2 or more Clubs are equal on points, goal difference and goals scored, the Clubs concerned shall play off one or more deciding League Matches on neutral grounds, the format, timing and venue of which shall be determined by the Board."

Those rules being taken into account they should be classed as being in the same position

Spudgfsh (talk) 17:46, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Goals and assists

It seems there are definitely some discrepancies here, particularly in the assists table. The official Premier League site is very different to the ESPN source used, but surely the former should be favoured as the official source? The ESPN one is WAY off. Andre666 (talk) 12:09, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is how you define an assist. the different sources have different definitions. Spudgfsh (talk) 12:17, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But surely the official Premier League statistics are what we should be going by? Andre666 (talk) 13:20, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion has always been that because the definition of an assist is so subjective there will always be a dispute between different sources. Players don't get an 'assist bonus' like they generally get a 'goal bonus' so no-one cares that much whether they are credited with an assist or not.

I wouldn't have an assist table on the page at all because there is no definitive definition of what one is. The official stats are no better or worse than any other, they are just different. Spudgfsh (talk) 13:48, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think an assist table is useful, but the official source should be used as that is where it counts. I thought an assist was just the last kick before the goal? Andre666 (talk) 13:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Last kick? Last prod? Last faint brushing of the boot? Where do you draw the line? Where does anyone? Some people say that winning a penalty counts as an assist! Assists should not be listed here. Cheers. – Pee Jay 00:09, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with you PeeJay2K3, very subjective to define an assist and since the article should represent a worldwide view, we should stick to what's agreed on – namely goals and cards. C 679 12:31, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, its a lame reason to move away from keeping assists on the page because few people could not make up their minds. I hope it comes up at end of season at least. I hated it when assists where removed from some players' club stats because apparently some people were not sure!! This keeps happening every year, not sure if it is a good enough reason to remove the table altogether. Sometimes all you need is some faith.Deepak (talk) 4:46, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Wigan-Europa League

Wigan as they are in the FA Cup final will qualify for the Europa League as they will win it going to the EL Group stage or as runners up, going to the 3rd Qualifying round, with Swansea in the playoff round and the 5th placed time in the EL Group Stage. Please edit it to allow people to see that Wigan have qualified for the EL, round uncertain.OJDriscoll (talk) 17:02, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ManCity can still mathematically finish 5th so therefore Wigan have not qualfied for Europe as of yet.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 17:14, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The rules are unclear as to what happens when the fifth places premier league team wins the FA Cup. According to the premier league the runners up only qualify when the winners are in the champions league. Spudgfsh (talk) 18:28, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A club always takes the spot into the later round, so they take the FA Cup spot in the group stage. The next best team in the prem not already qualified in a later round or the champions league , in otherwords 6th, will take the Europa League spot to the playoff round. Anyway, although Man City can finish 5th, the chances are slim. A bit more help - if the FA Cup winner qualifies for the Champions League by a top 4 finish (although 4th doesnt gurantee you a place) or winning the CL the Runners Up go to the EL 3rd Qualifying round, the League Cup winner to the EL Playoff round and the 5th placed team to the EL Group Stage.OJDriscoll (talk) 18:57, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]