Talk:List of men's footballers with 50 or more international goals

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Number of penalty goals

Maybe it would be interesting to see (in a new column) how many of the goals of these players were by penalty.

Hello!
I totally agree with this. Showing how many of these goals are coming from penalties (which definitely are easier goals to make than all the other goals) would be interesting. After all, it's the second decade of the 21st century, CR7's saga needs to be demythologized.
P.S. When writing on talk pages, you have to sign your posts using four consecutive tildes...
Cheers!
talk) 06:38, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

References

Unfortunately, these pages seem to have been hijacked somewhat by people wanting to 'demythologize' players they dislike rather than provide an encyclopaedic treatment of the topic. Saying that penalties are 'definitely are easier goals to make than all the other goals' is nonsense of course. A one yard tap-in to an empty goal is easier. BillyJones1000 (talk) 22:26, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello wiseacre!
It was a wrong use of language/poorly phrased: what I meant is goals from penalties are easier goals to make than all the other goals, and, obviously, except from one yard tap-in to empty goal. Is it better phrased now? Does it pass your liking level?
Also, I must add I used to play football, so I am not saying this just because of watching football behind a screen, but it's coming from experience.
By the way, even though it's irrelevant to the subject, I would like to inform you I have been a supporter of Portugal's national team since the time they weren't popular, i.e. since the time they had 0 trophies in senior level (probably you weren't even born then), and CR7 is among my favorite players of all time and I would enjoy it very much if he breaks all the football records in existence, but, as a scientist (also, as my profession has nothing to do with RSSSF or FIFA or IFFHS, et c., I have no profit or any personal gain other than providing football information, and I am objective to all my edits), I like to see things in as much detail as possible, so I can't ignore the fact many of his goals are coming from penalties. Is the encyclopaedic treatment of the topic the scientific one? If it is, then I myself provide an encyclopaedic treatment to the topic.
Now, if there is any issue, it's that these pages usually get hijacked by people overliking players and tampering reality, rather than people who proceed to "hate/dislike" distortion of the reality, or at least that's what I have seen in most of the cases.
Have a nice day!
Best regards!
Lorry Gundersen (talk) 14:14, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You can be rude if you want. It makes you look bad and is of no concern to me. If you say penalties are easier to score than all goals other than 1 yard tap ins to an empty goal you're still wrong. Yes, I used to play football too, possibly before you were born, so I understand what I'm talking about. I'm sure it would be appreciated by all if you could restrict yourself to edits appropriate for an encyclopaedia. Have a great day! BillyJones1000 (talk) 20:53, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:15, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Mabkhout

Hello!

For everyone's information, despite the source claiming a total of 80 goals, the right total is 79 goals, based on several news' coverages and a video proof, as explained here, which is a talk in WikiProject_Football.

Kind regards,

Lorry Gundersen (talk) 07:52, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Recent flags for additional citations for verification needed and listed sources may not be reliable

Hello ItsKesha!

1) RSSSF is problematic according to you, but not according to WP's community: not only it's established as a reliable source (see the talk here, but it is also used vastly in WP – range #59,501 to #60,000). For completion, you can also check WP:Potentially unreliable sources, WP:Reliable sources/Perennial sources and WP:Deprecated sources.

2) While RSSSF is used by more than 75%, not only it's established as reliable – see 1) – and not considered problematic by WP's community, but also there are only two organizations conducting such statistics (the other is IFFHS), with FIFA using stats either from RSSSF or IFFHS or both in case the product is the same. In addition, while RSSSF is used throughout the article as the primary source, when updating editors have been taking all other sources into account, including statistical databases/sites (such as SoccerWay, GlobalSportsArchive, National-Football-Teams, and so on), online football or sports journals and news, books, et c., which can be easily understood after watching the article's history and the notes within the article, which notes not only add extra info, but also explanations when a deviation/modification from the source needs to be made.

Therefore, for the reasons previously explained above, I have decided to remove these flags.

Kind regards,

Lorry Gundersen (talk) 08:00, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

1) RSSSF being "established as a reliable source" is closer in time to Chesterfield getting to the FA Cup semi-final than it is to the present day. That archived discussion has no relevance in today's world and should definitely undergo a new discussion. 2) RFFFS aren't the only two organisations tracking player appearances, that is absolutely nonsense as... you yourself state? More than 75% of the sources are from the one source which is demonstrably unreliable per one of the articles cited in this very article. Therefore, for the reasons previously explained above, I have decided to reinstate these flags. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 21:57, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Amateur football shouldn't be included

There is no basis whatsoever for the inclusion of amateur football in this list. We don't include amateur football, beach football, indoor football, masters football, Sunday league football, youth football. This list is for senior internationals only. Thoughts, @Lorry Gundersen? All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 13:32, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Yes, I agree this list is for senior internationals only and in it I can only see senior internationals to be included and no other kind. Now, as this is about the inclusion of Vivian Woodward, as one can see in the edit history, I am under the impression his inclusion is perfectly explained both by the sources and their notes, and also in the article. These matches you are removing have explanations in the sources of why they hold a senior international status. What do other football editors think about this? Kind regards, Lorry Gundersen (talk) 14:36, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The sources accompanying the note don't actually explain anything, the note included is purely original research. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 16:44, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the explanation of the note explains that it is viewed as a senior international from the perspective of the senior opposition the amateur side faced, it certainly doesn't say it is viewed as a senior international from the perspective of the amateur side, in fact the note says the exact opposite! All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 16:45, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! As explained to you more than once elsewhere, RSSSF is considered reliable and not OR in WP. Saying that is purely OR makes no sense when the WP community disagrees with this. Now, regarding the explanation, it is clearly stated that the questioned matches are considered senior internationals by all FAs participated apart from the English FA, and because at the time only England had two national teams, while the NT of each other country was just one, and was at the same level of the amateur NT of England. The
English national amateur team, regarding the period of time we are talking about, is indeed an exception to not including amateur numbers. Finally, bear in mind this article is neither a FIFA only article, nor the statistics regarding the NT of a specific record here are coming from each respective federation as, if that was the case, then Mokhtar Dahari should have been first with 125 goals. Kind regards, Lorry Gundersen (talk) 17:02, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nothing in either source makes mention of what the note says. Unless of course you would quote it for me here, I must have missed it? This article is a "list of men's footballers with 50 or mote international goals" article, we go off what the reliable sources say. No reliable sources other than two have Vivian Woodward with 75 international goals. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 17:11, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Lorry, why have you reverted the changes made? All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 21:07, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Why not? Was there a consensus reached about removing Woodward? I don't think so! Kind regards, Lorry Gundersen (talk) 09:29, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Was consensus reached about adding amateur goals? Hmm. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 17:22, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! As explained more than once and by more than one editors, these matches you removed are considered official by all relevant FAs, apart from the English FA, and, since the article takes into account all FAs, as well as the statistical sources, which are in agreement with what the majority of the FAs claim, he has been added with the relevant notes. You never reached to a consensus for the opposite, neither here nor in
WP:Footy (relevant talk there can be found here). Kind regards, Lorry Gundersen (talk) 17:50, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
If the FA don't think Vivien Woodwards goals count, they don't count. It's really that simple. You also haven't produced any reliable sources that say Woodward's goals count. You added amateur goals without consensus, I don't need consensus to remove. That's how consensus works. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 17:58, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Kesha. You seem to genuinely believe that the goals that Woodward scored for England Amateurs are amateur goals. But just because the team’s name is England Amateurs it does not mean that their goals are necessary amateur. Woodward scored these goals against full representative sides of Europe. And whilst these England amateur matches are not considered full senior internationals by FIFA and the FA, they are deemed to be by the FA of their opponents. As such, the England amateur side delivered the biggest defeats in the history of several European nations; the Netherlands in 1907, Germany & Belgium in 1909, and Sweden & Hungary in 1912 (as Great Britain), beating them 12–2, 9–0, 11–2, 12–2 and 7–0 respectively. England amateurs even participated in the Olympics of 1908 and 1912 as Great Britain, a tournament in which Imre Schlosser (who is on this list) scored four goals. Why should Schlosser's goals in the Olympics be included and not Woodward's? All of this leads me to believe that these goals should be included. All my warmest wishes, Kesha. Barr Theo (talk) 14:40, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"And whilst these England amateur matches are not considered full senior internationals by FIFA and the FA"; this is the only sentence you should have bothered writing. Also, the vast majority of reliable sources say Harry Kane is England's top goalscorer, ergo Vivien Westwood isn't, ergo his goals for the amateur team do not count. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 18:14, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I didn't produce any reliable sources that say Woodward's goals count? RSSSF's and IFFHS' sources that are in the article (also in the external links as general links) are both considered reliable sources in WP. If this changed and I wasn't informed, please inform me with a link to a WP Footy talk deciding that. Kind regards, Lorry Gundersen (talk) 23:56, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Neither source says they count as official goals? That's original research. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 17:18, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, even if the sources say what they claim you say they do, two source is demonstrably a fringe theory in this matter and should be avoided. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 17:19, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As already discussed on the same topic in WikiProject_Football #Amateur_football, with the opposing federations – regarding RSSF and IFFHS – we have more than the two sources who agree altogether, which you haven't denied either.
BelgiumRBFA, NetherlandsKNVB - OnsOranje,HungaryMLSZ, SwedenSvFF, GermanyDFB, Switzerland SFV, DenmarkDBU,FinlandSPL, FranceFFF

The opposing federations as a source itself are probably more decisive. Just a small note that the official match reports can be viewed on the websites of the opposing federations and coincide with statistical evaluations of the RSSSF and IFFHS. These federations see the matches against the England amateurs as representatives of England and most of them call this team simply "England" as well and do not make any distinction here.Thus, the goals scored by their national players against them are also listed in their rankings as official goals in official matches and the results achieved (goals conceded, wins/losses/draws) are naturally listed in their overall official international balance sheet. In no statistics are defeats/wins by "England" (as England amateurs) subtracted from their overall international balance sheet.That the FA lists Harry Kane as their official top scorer is no contradiction to the fact that Vivian Woodward's goals are scored in official Senior A international matches. Miria~01 (talk) 12:47, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've not disputed that the respective federations consider those games full internationals for their nations. Do those federations consider it a full international for England? Do the FA consider it a full international? Do any reliable sources consider it a full international for England? Do any reliable sources beyond two niche statistics websites consider Vivien Westwood as England's leading goalscorer? All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 17:32, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The only thing to be clarified is whether this list must be in unanimous agreement with all associations or not. And the obvious majority consensus is that these players/goals should still be listed despite the fact that an association has a different approach, but without refraining from pointing out the dispute in the note. Miria~01 (talk) 20:08, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
None of those sources claim it was a full international for England, that is either original research or pure conjecture, or both. Several mention that it was the amateur team, and Hungary outright lie because they actually played Great Britain in the Olympics. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 20:35, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
These are the associations' websites and only the official games according to them are shown. Nobody denies that these are not official games for the FA. However, according to the other federations, the RSSF and IFFHS, these are considered official games and that's why Woodward is here with 75 goals.
Further – regarding the olympics and Hungary – the same goes for the Netherlands,Sweden or Finland ;-) Depending on the association, it is different (in the case of the Olympics) whether GB or England is named. It was official games anyway. Miria~01 (talk) 21:11, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'll just repeat what I said in my last comment and hope you actually read it this time - "None of those sources claim it was a full international for England, that is either original research or pure conjecture, or both". All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 21:36, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I also like to repeat myself: "They claim it's official for their own association" (on which you agreed on) and is seen as such by the RSSSF and IFFHS. You do not need the approval of the other association to list it as official in your own records. Each association has its own records and no one has the authority to rise above one or the other. Again, we don't disregard here the fact that these are not, according to the FA, official games for England, nor that Harry Kane is England's top scorer. Miria~01 (talk) 21:57, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But it's completely irrelevant to the discussion if those games were official for Germany or Netherlands or whoever! You're completely missing the fact that absolutely none of those associations are saying the games were official for England. England definitely don't say they were official for England. The mass of reliable source which describe Harry Kane or Wayne Rooney or Bobby Charlton as England's top goalscorer at any point in the last 50 years make no mention of Vivien Westwing being England's top goalscorer. Goals he scored for England's amateur team are completely non-entity to this list and to reliable source. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 22:49, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! The article is about international goals and takes into account all FAs, not only what the English FA considers official matches and goals, and what not, apart from what do the statistical sources claim. Also, it is not about what each FA lists as their senior national team goalscorer. There is another article (the list of top international men's football goalscorers by country) about this. The case of Vivian Woodward is a legit exception, and this is why there are the notes to explain his inclusion, as well as a gray background. P.S. The fact that you seem to have never heard of him (as you are constantly mistakening his name and/or surname) is irrelevant. Kind regards, Lorry Gundersen (talk) 01:59, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For the 49th time, the games may have been official for Germany, Hungary or whoever, but they weren't for England. This doesn't mean that appearances for Germans in these games do not count, it means appearances for England amateurs do not count. "it is not about what each FA lists as their senior national team goalscorer" - no, it's what reliable sources say! And reliable sources say Kane, not Vivien Leigh! All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 18:19, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Have you found any sources yet that these were official games for England? All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 00:07, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
support the inclusion of England Amateurs goals from a german persepective:
On the occasion of their 1000th international match, recently on June 12, 2023, the German national team played this special game against Ukraine (Germany snatch a draw against Ukraine in 1000th international game celebration | Reuters). Four of this games (between 1908 and 1913: Int. Match No.2, No.4, No.12 and No.26) were against the
English national amateur team as official international matches, although FIFA and FA
does not count them as such. The FA and FIFA and count the game on 10 May 1930 (Germany's Int.Match 77) as England's first international match against Germany.
see also: Germany national football team results (numbered) de:Liste der Länderspiele der deutschen Fußballnationalmannschaft
I think the games of the
English national amateur team are a real exception to the rule of whether amateur goals should be counted, where I support the existing rejection of the counting. Miria~01 (talk) 15:34, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
As it was likely the main German team of the day, it might be fully expected they view it as a full international, however, England amateur internationals aren't viewed as full internationals, nor are B teams. Scoring for an amateur team isn't the same as scoring for the senior England team. ~~~~ All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 16:41, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_men%27s_footballers_with_50_or_more_international_goals&oldid=1203662022"