Talk:Football in the United Kingdom

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Football Mid‑importance 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. United Kingdom Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Can we really refer to NI as a nation? Unionists consider it part of the British nation, and Nationalists consider it part of the Irish nation. Very few indeed consider it a nation in its own right.

It is a footballing nation. sjorford →•← 19:24, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

OMG, you're questioning something which has been debated for YEARS!Leemorrison

This article is anglocentric in the extreme.

Is it? At every stage it covers England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (in that order, which is fair enough as it goes by size). England tends to dominate the history, but then England had a greater role in the early development of football than the rest of the UK. Could you point to any examples of extreme anglocentricism? - Green Tentacle 18:55, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

True, it's not deliberately anglocentric. Still, it's pretty crushing to look at the Northern Ireland club's performances. Crusaders 0-7...oh my gawd, we suck! Leemorrison 19:27, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

but a player is generally eligible for whichever nation he, his parents or grandparents were born

This means one grandparent is enough, right? It isn't completely clear. Also, a source would be nice - I've looked in the Welsh FA regulations (but not the others) and couldn't find anything. --Dtcdthingy 22:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"The matches were either played over two legs or in groups where teams play each other twice, the aggregate scores counting both matches in each pairing are listed below." That's a bit odd; why show aggregate scores for league results where an aggregate score was not used? --John (talk) 17:51, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With NI facing Wales at the Euro 2016 knockouts, I have noticed Scotland v Wales games (such as world cups 1978, 1986 and 2014 qualifying), Wales v NI and NI v Scotland games aren't mentioned, even though they should be as nowhere in this article says that there should only be England results. 86.155.0.226 (talk) 08:46, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Work in progress :) Kivo (talk) 09:29, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Strayacj: and @PeeJay: - please discuss here rather than edit warring. If either of you edit the article(s) again without clear consensus you will be blocked.

My view is that the Millennium Stadium is a football stadium and should be included here. GiantSnowman 13:53, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's a stadium that has hosted major football events, therefore it is a football stadium. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:31, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with the above - being primarily a rugby stadium does not prevent its inclusion on a football list, and being acknowledged as a football venue does not tarnish its status as a rugby venue. Crowsus (talk) 14:37, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bit late to the party there, chief! I already posted on

WT:FOOTY to get other opinions. I think threats of blocks are a little heavy-handed. – PeeJay 15:08, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

A block is a bit crazy, but a football stadium is a stadium... that hosts football matches! There are plenty of athletic track stadiums that also play football, which would still be a football stadium. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:11, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully @PeeJay and Lee Vilenski:, I count 8 reverts from PeeJay within a 16 hour period, with no attempt to discuss it with the other editor in question other than edit summaries. In the circumstances both editors are lucky not to have been blocked already! GiantSnowman 16:58, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's a multi-use stadium and has often been used for football. Unless something happens that means they stop using it for football matches then it's fine to include it in this list. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 15:51, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A stadium doesn't have to be used only for football to be a football stadium. -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:27, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here we go again, multi-use venue is preferred. Don't priorities one sport over another especially when Rugby is such an important part of the venue. Govvy (talk) 16:30, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Govvy: - with respect, I think you are missing the point ever so slightly. The issue at hand is not deciding on the exact terminology which should be used to describe the stadium. What is being debated is whether the stadium should be listed on this article as among the largest football stadia in the UK. There is one user who says it should not be included because it is "officially" not a football stadium...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:34, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, I am not against that, you know, some people are dyslexic, and it helps when topic of the conversation has more clarity in the lead paragraph! :/ Govvy (talk) 16:38, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Millennium Stadium is a multi-purpose football and rugby stadium (to be precise, Rugby Union) It is used by the national sides of both sports and, in my opinion, shouldn't be described as one or the other. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 17:30, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@REDMAN 2019: So what say you to its inclusion in the list of the UK's largest football stadiums in this article? – PeeJay 18:06, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PeeJay I would say yes, while it's not a dedicated football stadium it is still used for the sport, therefore it should be included. The same goes for any Rugby Union lists that it qualifies for. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 18:08, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, I agree. I wonder if User:Strayacj has seen this discussion... – PeeJay 18:10, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, but I note that at

WT:RU#Is Millennium Stadium officially a football stadium? he/she says that he/she will "allow" the Millennium Stadium to be listed in this article...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:50, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Presumably if we're including the Millennium then Murrayfield needs be included as well as it has hosted football matches? Though then it basically becomes a duplicate of the largest UK stadiums list (minus Twickenham).

Whereas if the Millennium is removed from the list then it should be made clear in the text that the table is for stadium which are primarily used for football matches.Boothy m (talk) 14:24, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say there's more of an argument not to include Murrayfield than to leave out the Millennium Stadium, but I wouldn't argue against it. Right now, the Millennium is the concern. – PeeJay 18:43, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@

It was flagged at

WT:FOOTY. I thought it might take a while for consensus to emerge on the matter and this is not a terribly frequently edited article. However, seeing as the fuss seems to have died down (largely because the main culprit has stopped editing), I've unprotected it now though. Number 57 18:13, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks! :) Lennart97 (talk) 18:15, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]