Talk:1967 Football League Cup Final

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Good article 1967 Football League Cup Final has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
September 9, 2012 Good article nominee Listed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 11, 2012.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Queens Park Rangers came from two goals down at half time in the 1967 Football League Cup Final to eventually win with a goal scored by Mark Lazarus?

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:1967 Football League Cup Final/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: NapHit (talk · contribs) 14:38, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Lead

  • Bold links should be avoided per WP:CONTEXTLINK.
  • I would consider structuring the first sentence in a similar vein to 2012 Football League Cup Final, so you fully summarise the match and competition for the reader
  • If you're going to use abbreviations I would provide them after the first use of the long name, for instance: "it was contested between Queens Park Rangers (QPR) of the Third Division and West Bromwich Albion (WBA..."
  • Per WP:Lead, I would expect the lead t have at least three paragraphs think it needs more expansion, again I would refer to the 2012 article I mentioned for an idea on the appropriate length
  • "the Football Association" should be linked
  • Those should all be completed, I've redrafted the lead based on the 2012 article as suggested. Miyagawa (talk) 15:24, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Route to the final

  • "by two goals to one" just 2–1 instead
Still a few instances of this, by four goals to two is a few sentences after
Fixed that one and found a by two goals to nil later on. Miyagawa (talk) 17:44, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
  • "They were drawn against Leicester City in the following round where three quickfire goals in the second half saw them come back from being 2–1 down to win the match by four goals to two." Few problems here, firstly this a long sentence and it has no commas, one should after following round again just produce a scoreline instead of spelling out the score. Finally try and avoid journalistic tones such as "quickfire goals".
  • "snuck through a packed Leicester goalmouth..." again not really encyclopaedic writing
  • "QPR were pressured in their match against Carlisle United..." not sure I've heard the word pressured before relating to a football match, would elaborate what you mean by pressured. In what way were they pressured. Sentence as a whole doesn't make sense either mention pressured then it suddenly jumps to Marsh scoring twice to give QPR victory. Also the hyphen in 2-1 should be an en dash, see a few more instances of this later on, so would check them all.
  • "stage a come back..." not keen on this perhaps "recover a deficit'?
  • "In the 55th minute, Marsh scored his 34th goal of the season, headed the ball home after a corner kick from Allen." think there is a word missing in the third part of the sentence as its doesn't read right at the moment
  • "then hit a backheel pass..." -> "then back heeled the ball..."
  • "who slotted it home..." more journalistic writing
  • We have Third Division in Lead then Division Three in this section, be consistent
  • "but waited until the last twelve minutes..." waited is the wrong choice of word, suggests they could have scored when they wanted, which I doubt was the case, change to "but they did not score until the last twelve minutes of the match. Take the win on the night is redundant as you've already stated they won
  • "Marsh initially took the lead for QPR, but Birmingham came back with a goal from Eric Barber. A further goal from Marsh, and a goal from the club captain Mike Keen." this sentence is out of place, either remove it or place it before the bit about them winning the game 3-1. Also last bit in this is dramatically incorrect
  • hat-trick should be linked on first instance
  • would mention albion received a bye in the first round to provide context
  • "WBA played Manchester City on 5 October 1966 in the third round, and although they won the game 4–2, they were pressed hard for the victory." in what way where they pressed hard for victory? needs elaborating on
  • No mention of WBA's match against Swindon
  • "After going a goal down after nine minutes against Northampton Town, but the team fought back to win 3-1." no need for but makes the sentence dramatically incorrect
  • Link West Ham United in prose
  • "with a goal from Clarke and a hat-trick from Jeff Astle." Firstly there is no mention of Clarke previously so his full name should be used. Also link hat-trick and the players
  • "when they still had all four goals from the first leg to catch up with." -> when they were still four goals behind from the first leg."
  • Jones is mentioned yet, his full name is not mentioned previously, always use players full names on first use
  • "with the game ending at a score of 2–2
  • "to the final on aggregate." provide the aggregate score
  • WBA section needs expanding, as its nowhere near as long as the QPR section, could be seen as undue weight to QPR
  • I've made those modifications now, although there is a couple of remaining problems. I've exhausted my sources and haven't been able to find any newspaper report about the WBA vs Swindon match, so I only have the score. Also the reports just had more detail for the QPR section so I included them rather than any intention to overweight the section, I think at the time the reporters couldn't quite believe the cup run they were having. I would have expected more coverage of WBA as they were the holders but the articles just aren't there. The only thing I can think of is that the League Cup wasn't given much credit up until this point, and so WBA's coverage was somewhat concentrated on being in the First Division. Miyagawa (talk) 15:24, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Pre-match

  • "The final of the cup"
  • "West Bromwich Albion were coming into the game as the holders of the trophy, aiming to become the first team to hold onto the cup." WBA were the defending champions and were aiming to become the first team to retain the Cup.
  • "At the time of the 1967 final, WBA were still in the tournament from winning the League Cup in the previous year, although were 3–0 down to Bologna after the first leg played." -> WBA were still in the competition at the time of the final, although they had recently lost 3–0 to Bologna in the first leg..." need to add what round they were in.
  • avoid one sentence paragraphs, also WBA's kit is their normal kit so would mention that as well
Would just merge this into the following paragraph, as the current paras are small anyway. NapHit (talk) 21:09, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
  • "Each team's supporters were allowed to purchase as many tickets as they liked, as opposed to Wembley based FA Cup Finals up until this point, where each team were limited to only 15,000 each." -> Each team's supporters did not have a limit on the number of tickets they were allowed to purchase. This was despite a limit of 15,000 for FA Cup finals which were also held at Wembley.
  • "A crowd of nearly 100,000 were expected..." were should be was
  • Those should all be fixed now too. Miyagawa (talk) 20:13, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Match

  • "Rangers started the match as the slower of the two sides, with the higher tier team showing some considerable pace on the pitch." Few redundancies here, "the match" and "as" are not needed. Higher tier team should just be WBA, also what do you mean by considerable pace, could be construed as they were just running around faster
  • "left wing..." should be left hand side of the pitch, people unfamiliar with football terminology will stuck as to what that means
  • "being slipped through a gap into the back of the net by Clark." journalistic tone, need to clearly state what happened for the benefit of the reader, try before Clark's shot went through a gap in the WBA into the goal.
  • "with WBA goalkeeper Dick Sheppard being forced to save a shot" -> with WBA goalkeeper Dick Sheppard saving a shot
  • "but the next major attack did not occur until the twenty fifth minute" major attack is bait POV and should be 25th minute
  • "He struck at the ball resulting in a spectacular save from Peter Springett in goal for Rangers..." struck at the ball? what's wrong with shot, also sensationalist writing like spectacular should be avoided
  • "QPR briefly had a chance for a break themselves" I know what you mean but someone not familiar with the terminology of football will not. use counter attack instead of break
  • "and he passed the ball to a colleague..." would prefer the-mate but would prefer to know who that team-mate was
  • "run ragged", "shuffled the ball", "launched into an attack", "were forced to clear rapidly." more examples of journalistic writing
  • In all the Match section needs a good copyedit, to weed out redundancies and sensationalist writing
  • Match should just be Details, no need to repeat the match
  • Why do you not provide the positions for the players as is common in most football match articles. I know the numbers link to the position, but that is easter egg linking and should be avoided
  • All of the above should now be completed, I also re-sectioned the Match section as per the 2012 article. Miyagawa (talk) 20:13, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Do you have a ref for the attendance, lineups?
  • Thought this might be a problem, but the Macey book comes to the rescue once more. It had the line-ups and match details in there - although the WBA and QPR lineups were in different sections of the book, hence the multiple citations given. Only thing it didn't have was the formations, so I haven't been able to include those. Miyagawa (talk) 20:28, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Hold that thought, just checking on something else and found the formation in a scan from the Evening Standard here: [1]. I'll add it to the article. Miyagawa (talk) 20:41, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Ok, that's now added. The scan from the Standard also listed the substitutes, and so I've added those as well. Miyagawa (talk) 22:17, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Post match

  • "Queens Park Rangers victory in the final marked was the first occasion..." dramatically incorrect
  • "Both teams received £18,000 as their share of the gate." again need to explain what you mean by gate, someone could read that the wrong way, gate receipts would be better
  • "However the Fairs Cup committee required that the teams must be from only the highest tier of each nation's league systems." -> However, the Fairs Cup committee required that only teams from the highest tier of a nation's league system could enter."
  • "West Bromwich Albion returned to the final once more in the 1970 Football League Cup Final..." -> West Bromwich Albion reached the final again in 1970...
  • "while Queens Park Rangers would have to wait until the 1986 Final when they became runners-up for the first time against Oxford United." should be a separate sentence, and just say they were beaten by Oxford not became runners-up for first time, makes it sound like they achieved something when they lost
  • See a number of instances where hyphens in year ranges are used instead of en dashes
  • Those should all be fixed now, I ran the script to fix those hyphens. For some reason I thought I'd already run it! :) Miyagawa (talk) 20:13, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

References

  • Out of interest what do the numbers in The Times refs refer to?
  • Those are the issue numbers as I've used the Times Archives and was using direct scans of the hard copies rather than a digitised website based version. Miyagawa (talk) 15:24, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
  • ref 24 needs a date and the author adding
  • ref 25 The Telegraph should be The Daily Telegraph

A few issues to fix here, will put the article on hold for seven days so these issues can be addressed. NapHit (talk) 14:38, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

  • I haven't finished fixing all the issues you've raised, but I just wanted to say thanks right now for the comprehensive review. I agree with everything you've said - I hadn't realised just how poorly written I'd made this one and you deserve credit for trawling through it all. Miyagawa (talk) 20:14, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I just happened to read this article while looking at WP:GAN, and thought I might as well add a couple of things that jumped out at me as I read it.

  • While Queens Park Rangers are often referred to as QPR even in formal contexts, the same is seldom true for West Bromwich Albion and WBA. "Albion" would be a better short form for when multiple mentions occur in a paragraph.
  • the seventh season of the Football League Cup, a football competition for the 92 teams in the Football League - not all 92 entered, that didn't happen until 1969–70.
  • Is there any further material available that gives a reason why QPR did not play in hoops? Oldelpaso (talk) 11:29, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks, I've changed the WBA instances to Albion as recommended, and removed the "92" part of that line. As for QPR's shirts... well at the time they kept messing with the team strips, there's a lovely strip they wore around this time which was made of silk - looks daft on all the photos because it reflects the flash. I haven't been able to find any reason why they didn't wear their normal home strips - only that they didn't. Same goes for Albion, you'd have thought that one of the teams would have worn their home shirts. Miyagawa (talk) 17:34, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm happy with the changes that have been made and the article now meets the criteria. Great work. NapHit (talk) 21:09, 9 September 2012 (UTC)