Talk:Russia national football team

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Panama-Kits[edit]

Why both kits are from Panama. Urgent change is needed! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.21.34.140 (talk) 12:04, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Undated comment[edit]

Assembly Russia an assignee assembly USSR, on this appearance data on World Cup not verne.

First International tsarist russian game fake?[edit]

plus

finland was part of russia in 1912 so how could they play against russia? it would be like englands VS. devon or something of that nature. Pure inuyasha 21:21, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, indeed. I don't see why pre-1922 statistics are included in the article, while the Soviet staistics are excluded. For one thing, Russian Federation is not legally a successor to the Russian Empire, while it is a successor to the Soviet Union in all its property, liabilities, etc. --Ghirla -трёп- 13:15, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
When recognizing the USSR, most nations recognized the USSR as the successor to the Russian Empire. - Sikon 11:27, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
It would be more like Denmark vs. Faroe Islands... Conscious 08:25, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, Finland was part of Russia, but still it's no fake. They played in the 1912 Olympic Games. The Other Saluton (talk) 14:48, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Finland was a part of the Russian Empire, but not a part of Russia. The situation was somewhat similar to Canada as a British dominion. The Czar was the regent under the title of Grand Duke, but Finland had its own independent government, law, citizenship and borders. The FA of Finland was founded in 1907, and is therefore considerably older than the Russian one. -91.32.240.58 (talk) 02:33, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Hiddink Coaching Russia[edit]

Finally Russia get a good coach. What does everyone think abouyt this???

Well, it's a little too late for the World Cup '06, isn't it? :(

USSR → Russia?[edit]

The official 2006 World Cup website has allocated USSR's records to the Russia team. See here. I would just like to say that I don't think Wikipedia should follow suit. It's not like Germany inheriting West Germany's record. They don't even wear the same kit.

I've noticed though, that Football Federation of USSR redirects to Football Union of Russia. Is it really the same organisation?
 SLUMGUM  yap  stalk  23:37, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

No it's not, and there's a separate article on the USSR national football team. BTW I always wonder what the difference between Russia and Germany (or, say, Serbia) is. Russia, at least, is the legal successor to USSR. Conscious 08:24, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
If Russia doesn't inherit USSR's record, why does it inherit the record of Imperial Russia? Bull-Dozer (talk) 00:05, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Flag[edit]

Why does the template:Infobox National football team have the flag of Imperial Russia on games which took place after 1896? According to List of Russian flags the current Russian flag was also in use then. Yellow up 22:10, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Red or white kits?[edit]

I'm not 100% certain on this, but according to FIFA's official website (link) Russia play in red kits now, not white. They played in red at home to England which seems to confirm this. Anyone know any more? 21 November 2007.

Yes, Russia play in red kits now, as USSR always played. If you want to get more info, check out UEFA.com webside. 92.243.166.102 (talk) 14:43, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
USSR alternated between red and white kits Goliath74 (talk) 17:50, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Russia plays in both kits, but red kit is de-jure home one.--195.182.143.44 (talk) 11:32, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Russia(n)[edit]

Should this article be "Russia" or "Russia" national football team? —ScouterSig 23:02, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

"Russia". This is common English usage, see Category:European national football teams. Conscious (talk) 18:08, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Overhaul to Russian national football team history section[edit]

Hello to all russian football fans or anyone interested, this is thedefenceman. Just so you all know, I am in the process of revamping the history section of the article. I want to make it more fluid and readable otherwise it looks like a laundry list. I also want to include more key people such as players and managers who impacted Russian football Lastly I thought it maybe necessary get rid of the vast tournament detail in order to focus on major events and turning points but I have not decided on that yet.

Thank you, and I hope that this will benfit the overall article and I am completly open to comments or suggestions and encourage people to leave them. But I ask everyone to PLEASE NOT REVERT OR CHANGE THE CURRENT WORK IN PROGRESS.

Thanks again,

Thedefenceman (talk) 04:57, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Biggest win (7-0 against San Marino)[edit]

It says in the template that Russia's biggest win was against San Marino in 1995, which ended 7-0. It also says that the game was held in San Marino, which means it was an away game? If so, the places of teams should be switched (e.g. San Marino 0-7 Russia). Artyom (talk • contribs) 23:54, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

 Done. I switched them.   Jhony  |  Talk   13:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Russia Soccer History[edit]

If "FIFA considers the Russia national team the direct descendant of the CIS and USSR national teams," then why isn't there records exist before the 1994 world cup? Kingjeff (talk) 00:25, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I think everyone has decided to keep those records separate for clarity and more relevance. Same has been done for Serbia, Czech Republic, etc. --Palffy 01:09, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Merging makes sense, splitting also makes sense. So who cares? :)  Jhony   02:09, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

But a very clear table that clearly seperates each section into time periods should be good enough. Not including these records makes out that they were really seperate teams when they're not. Kingjeff (talk) 05:24, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Well they kind of were different teams. If their records were put together, then there would be no need for the USSR National Football Team article, etc. Besides, the USSR National Football Team has its own records (such as Blokhin holding the most appearances and goals) and its certainly far from recognized that those records were set for the Russian National Football Team, considering he never played a game for them. I think this could be a very divisive issue if the status quo was changed... --Palffy 01:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Kingjeff, take a look at http://fifa.com/associations/association=rus/ranking/gender=m/index.html (Honours section), FIFA recognize USSR and Russia as the same team. However Ukrainian editors like Palffy will argue to the death against a possible merge, so we have separate articles so far...  Jhony   01:55, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Well, I personally won't get in on this argument--I probably am pretty biased with regards to the subject--(and besides, I like Kingjeff as an editor =))..but I just don't see the need to put the records together--I think it's more accurate and specific when the records are kept separate of each other. Feel free to ask others' opinions about this, but I'm thinking this might be nitpicking and we're probably better off adding new content to WP than debating something trivial. --Palffy 04:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
I doubt that everyone share your view on clarity, relevance, accuracy etc. Anyway WP:OR (Wikipedia does not publish original research or original thought) is still a policy.  Jhony   11:33, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
How about a compromise, where individual records of the USSR players do not count for Russia but the scores do? Goliath74 (talk) 17:56, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Palffy can argue what ever he wants to death. But from what I've seen in these discussions is that FIFA declaration stands. Kingjeff (talk) 06:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I think logic would say to seperate into pre-soviet era (If there is one), the Soviet era and post soviet era distinctly with showing 4 different totals. Kingjeff (talk) 06:20, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

You mean Russian Empire, Soviet Union, CIS and Russian Federation eras? Yeah, hovewer it would be better if we obtain a wider consensus (for example, at WP:FOOTY).  Jhony   11:20, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree about getting consensus. But in all cases I've seen, it's always gone to what FIFA says about it. Kingjeff (talk) 15:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

It seems discussion on this issue has died. I'm wondering whether we are going to proceed with including the Soviet records in this article? We don't need to delete the Soviet article, which should be left alone, but we do need to include Soviet records here. FIFA makes these rules, not Wikipedia. --Mad Max (talk) 06:31, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
The problem has been solved one way here and on the Czech and Slovakia national football team pages, and another way on the Serbia national football team page. I'd personally prefer a full listing with notes, like on Serbia's page. That doesn't remove the point of the historical team page for USSR for me, as that page will have to be referenced for other teams like Ukraine, Kazakhstan, etc.Lejman (talk) 14:55, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Russian Empire included Poland, Finland, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Azerbajan, Georgia, Armenia, Tajikistan... Why do you count stats of Russian Empire and don't count stats of Soviet Empire? This was absolutely the same country only with different politics.

Defeat[edit]

Why data about biggest defeat of modern Russia from Portugal (1-7) was deleted? Russian Federation and Russiam Empire are different national football teams.Maybe we also can add data of biggest won/defeat of Soviet Union team here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.106.153.154 (talk) 22:39, 21 June 2008 (UTC)


Yep, you are right. Because Russian Empire is the same the USSR + Poland and Finland. Russian Empire included Ucraine, Belarus, Estonia and etc. That is, Russian Empire nearer to the USSR than to Russia, that is, the biggest defeat was from Portugal 1-7. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.76.188.97 (talk) 17:03, 9 April 2009 (UTC)


a WC1994 change[edit]

The article incorrectly stated that Russia were already eliminated when they defeated Cameroon 6-1. That is not so. In the 1994, 4 3rd place teams advanced out of the group stage. There were still chances (although the results had to decisively go Russia's way) that Russia could advance. So, I made a change from "Already eliminated" to "Teetering on elimination". Goliath74 (talk) 17:55, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Away Kit[edit]

The kits are not the ones that match the UEFA Euro 2008 kits. Here they have the home kit is all red, thats right, but the away kit is white shirt and BLUE shorts. Thats not the correct.--AJ44 (talk) 00:24, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

It's correct, you're wrong. --Ipinkbear (talk) 09:13, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Please update: NEW UNIFORM[edit]

Russia now has a NEW UNIFORM. Please update. MaIl1989 (talk) 12:52, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Dervies[edit]

Do you know anything about international derbies of Russia national football team?

I think there are some derbies with Russia. Russia vs Latvia, Russia vs Estonia, Russia vs Israel and so on. What do you think?Mark Ekimov (talk) 12:31, 8 April 2009 (UTC)


Yes, I have all derbies between USSR's republics. Pavel Kraev

Ranking[edit]

Highest Elo ranking was June 1996. That's right. But it was a 3 position not 8. Watch it in FIFA site —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.200.24.84 (talk) 16:04, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Contradiction[edit]

This article seems to only describe the Russian team after the fall of the Soviet Union. That's okay. However, look at this article: Germany national football team. It seems to cover Germany even before Nazism. Look at the "biggest win" in the table. It says that Russia lost to Germany in 1912. When you click on Russia, it leads to this article which says something else since it only considers Russia after the Soviet Union. --2.245.119.0 (talk) 22:19, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Roster Looks Odd[edit]

There's a player by the name of Iosef Stalin listed in the team roster, and he was apparently born on January 1st, 1990 lol

Might wanna fix that

WillasTyrell (talk) 11:24, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Badge[edit]

I understand there has been a lot of debate whether to put the badges in the national team articles, but why is the national coat of arms instead of the badge in this article? --AndSalx95 (talk) 20:45, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

I suppose because there is coat of arms on the kit, and the article badge refers to the Russian football union as an organization, and this badge wasn’t used since 2012, when it was replaced with the coat of arms, as I remember. --BlackDraGoN (talk) 04:08, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

RFC on logo of Russian Football Union vs the Russian coat of arms in the Infobox image[edit]

The consensus is to use the logo of Russian Football Union for the infobox image instead of the coat of arms.

Cunard (talk) 05:35, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

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.

We need to start a new consensus whether we can use the Russian Football Union logo or the Russian coat of arms in the infobox. There has been too much edit instability (probably be declared edit warring if so be) revolving around the use of the logo, with editors (including me) switching the coat of arms with the logo and vice-versa, and this has been going on forever. We should acknowledge two factors, one for each side:

There is a much needed consensus or else there will be continual edit warring between not two users but multiple. For the consensus, state Support if you want to use the logo for the infobox image or Oppose if you want the coat of arms to remain as the primary infobox image. - Josephua (talk) 04:20, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Support - Recently, I noticed the Polish national football team has switched from its coat of arms to a logo, reflecting off the growing trend of Wikipedia articles of national football teams using logos rather than the coat of arms. To have the Russian national football team to be the only outlier in the national football team articles will create confusion among readers, with reasons maybe being "Does the Russian football team not have a logo?" or "Is Wikipedia trying to separate Russia from other countries?" In summary, it does the Russian national football team injustice. If we're not legally allowed to use the logo, I am willing to have the summary re-adjusted as well as encouraging other users to discuss with the copyright holders to have a logo that can be legally used for this article infobox. Otherwise, I stand by the second point, and believe this is legal to have it remain in the article infobox. I also support a re-assessment by administrators to allow use of this logo in this article. - Josephua (talk) 04:20, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 08:40, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
Well the England national football team and the French national football team both use a crest that is heavily based on the logos of their respective football unions, in this case, a blue and white coat of arms for England and a rooster. They are indeed very stylish and unique, of which the Russian football union logo succeeds in doing instead of the Russian coat of arms right now which is used for formality. In addition, Poland has kept their coat of arms in their shirts and in the article, use the logo as the infobox image, and since the Russian football team should reflect Poland, given that it uses a logo as its infobox image, as well as have the shirts to have the coat of arms. - Josephua (talk) 13:09, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Support we should use national team logos for all national teams, if they have them, and if they pass our NFCC guidelines. SportingFlyer T·C 05:20, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Seems to go along with the style and guidelines of other national teams. Comatmebro (talk) 00:42, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Support - Seems like it has no reason not to use the logo in this instance. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 09:03, 30 October 2019 (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.