Talk:2015 Rugby World Cup – Europe qualification

Untitled[edit]

Have changed the templates used for Division 2A-2D from 2012-14 to 2012-13, as this correlates with the qualification schedule.Magpieram (talk) 06:27, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that makes a lot more sense. For 2011 qualification, I used the two year template for both ENC and qualification, as that was the ENC format at the time. At the end of the first year, I eliminated the template, and put a table on the qualification page which would not be updated further and put an identical table on the ENC page that would continue to be updated for the competition. But with a change to the ENC format, this way makes more sense.My Dinner With Andre The Giant (talk) 19:13, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Format Change[edit]

Possible format change to page, to more reflect the run of the tournament: Rather than having the ENC as a separate section, have the tables and games incorporated into the playoff rounds they are linked with. For example, have the ENC Div 2D and 2C in Round 1, have 1A in round 5, etc. Also, please do not delete the templates. One user did this, and had a number of errors in tables and results. Templates are linked to this page and the 1st and 2nd Division ENC pages. The templates should be replaced after the completion of the tournament. Magpieram (talk) 01:58, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like the suggested format change, except for the fact that it happens to reflect the official version of things...so I think we should do it.My Dinner With Andre The Giant (talk) 09:49, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cyprus[edit]

There are questions as to whether Cyprus, who are not a full member of the IRB, will be eligible to qualify, or proceed with qualification, out of the 2C pool. In articles on IRB.com, they indicate that Cyprus are in the running for the world cup, yet FIRA-AER (the governing body of rugby in Europe) indicates they are not eligible. Will need to confirm this and update the page accordingly. Magpieram (talk) 01:11, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck! I don't think the IRB will do anything about this until their hand is forced. Even then, I think they will pretend it is not an issue until Cyprus is eliminated, either at the group stage or beyond. I honestly think they don't actually care.My Dinner With Andre The Giant (talk) 09:48, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bulgaria eliminated?[edit]

I note that Bulgaria are shown as eliminated in Div 2C by virtue of having lost to Hungary, even though the two teams finished on the same number of points. Surely if Slovenia beat Austria by fewer than ten points, and do not gain a bonus point, Bulgaria would finish top of the group (each of the teams on nine points would have beaten one of the others and lost to the other). Am I missing something, or is Bulgaria still in with a faint chance of qualifying for the knockout phase? Grutness...wha? 12:47, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. If Austria were to beat Slovenia and not gain a bonus point, then they would all be even at 9 points. The first tie-breaker is match points in the games between tied teams. In this case, each team would be 1-1 against the others with one bonus point each for 5 points - thus we have to move on to the next tie-breaker, which is points difference in games between the tied teams. Putting this graphically:

Place	Nation	Games				Points			Bonus points	Table points
Place	Nation	played	won	drawn	lost	for	against	difference	Bonus points	Table points
1	Hungary (85)	2	1	0	1	35	31	+4	1	5
2	Bulgaria (79)	2	1	0	1	43	42	+1	1	5
3	Slovenia (81)	2	1	0	1	22	27	-5	1	5

Games 2012-2013

	6 October 2012	Hungary	28 - 23	Bulgaria
			Team Sheet Report

	27 October 2012	Slovenia	8 - 7	Hungary
			Team Sheet

	6 April 2013	Bulgaria	20-14	Slovenia

Thus, a bonus point victory for Slovenia means that Slovenia finishes on top. A draw or a loss for Slovenia means that Hungary and Bulgaria are tied at the top, and Hungary wins the tie-breaker by virtue of beating Bulgaria. A non-bonus-point victory for Slovenia means a three-way tie, which would ultimately invoke the second tie-breaker, which would favor Hungary by virtue of their better points difference in games not involving Austria. My Dinner With Andre The Giant (talk) 17:26, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you go here ( http://www.fira-aer-rugby.com/group-129.htm ) you will find a drop-down menu under the orange bar labeled "2012-14 - European Nations Cup > ENC 2C", which is where you can find the tie-breaking procedures. My Dinner With Andre The Giant (talk) 17:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah - OK. Thanks for that -I assumed a situation similar to that used in football would exist where the next stage would be points difference overall, not just in matches between the tied teams. Thanks. Grutness...wha? 00:43, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In football (UEFA) it is also goal-difference in head-to-head matches after points in head-to-head. In football it is NEVER (!!!) overall goal-difference after points in hth.--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 08:29, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bizarre Revision - Tate Modern?[edit]

The draw for the qualification groups was held at the Tate Modern on 3 December 2012. The qualification format is the same as 2011. The teams were drawn into six groups of six teams, three groups of five and one group of four.

By December 3, 2012, 27 qualifying matches had already been played (40 have been played since, 33 have yet to be played.) The pools were already determined, as of the end of the 2010-2012 ENC Nations Cup cycle. And, according to the IRB at that date, there was no pool of 4. It was only considerably later that they figured out that Cyprus was not eligible.

I'm not sure how this revision makes sense.My Dinner With Andre The Giant (talk) 20:44, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Table[edit]

Whoever takes care of this article should have an additional table showing the head-to-head scores by the standings table such as in the following one. Nergaal (talk) 16:37, 8 February 2014 (UTC) [reply]

Pos	Team v t e	Pld	W	D	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts	Qualification
1	Germany	10	10	0	0	34	7	+27	30	Qualify for final tournament	—	3–0	3–1	6–2	6–1	4–0
2	Turkey	10	5	2	3	13	11	+2	17	Advance to play-offs	1–3	—	3–2	2–0	1–0	2–1
3	Belgium	10	4	3	3	21	15	+6	15		0–1	1–1	—	4–4	4–1	4–1
4	Austria	10	3	3	4	16	17	−1	12		1–2	0–0	0–2	—	3–0	2–0
5	Azerbaijan	10	2	1	7	10	26	−16	7		1–3	1–0	1–1	1–4	—	3–2
6	Kazakhstan	10	1	1	8	6	24	−18	4		0–3	0–3	0–2	0–0	2–1	—

Source: UEFA
Rules for classification: Qualification tiebreakers

Special heading for Georgia vs Romania?[edit]

I note that the final Georgia-Romania match in Group 1A has been treated differently to the other group matches and given its own heading as "Europe 1/2 decider". Surely this is spurious. If all the group matches had been played, and then a stand-alone final was scheduled between the two teams finishing first and second in the group, this would make sense. But this was only the group decider by chance - it was a group match, the same as all the others, and surely should be treated the same way as the others. Grutness...wha? 11:46, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's ludicrous and needs to be fixed.My Dinner With Andre The Giant (talk) 19:06, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you mean, "it was the group decider by chance". You can't by chance have a decider. The winner could have been decided a week before the Georgia-Romania match. I think as it was the decider, in terms of who qualifies not in terms of the ENC, it should show what was there before deletion. If Belgium-Russia was the decider then that would have been treated like so. This article is specific to Rugby World Cup Qualifying, not the European Nations Cup and who wins the title.

Basically what I am trying to say, the matches that determine who qualifies, should include line-ups and further details. IE, Georgia-Romania, African Qualification Final, Canada-United States playoffs, United States-Uruguay playoffs, Cook Islands-Fiji and Repechage Qualification round, first and second leg. Rugby.change (talk) 18:33, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"You can't by chance have a decider." Yes, you absolutely can. It happened to work out that two teams were considerably better than all the rest, and the competition came down to the these two teams facing each other in their last game being separated by a single point and having already eliminated everyone else, but that was simply by chance that it worked out that way this year. What if, for example, Romania had defeated Georgia last year and gone into the final game this year with a 6-point lead? Which match would have been the "decider"? Simply, there wouldn't have been one. Or what if Georgia and Romania had played each other in their first match this year? Would you dub a match from the sixth round of games a "decider" simply because it happened to include the eventual top two teams? All those other examples that you gave were situations where it was designed to be one or two matches between two teams, but this qualifier was a league structure, which does not inherently have a "decider". It is "decided" by the accumulated results of 30 games. Also, this year's Romania-Georgia match did not determine who qualified. That had already been decided before the match was played. It simply determined which went in as Europe 1 and which as Europe 2.My Dinner With Andre The Giant (talk) 19:20, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate what you have said. But I think you have got the wrong of the stick. I think you think I have done the line-up for Georgia and Romania because I think they are the best teams. But I would have done the line-ups if the decider was between Belgium and Spain. However, I understand the rest of which you have said, and I will not revert the edit and will keep the article as it is. Rugby.change (talk) 16:51, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on 2015 Rugby World Cup – Europe qualification. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:37, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on 2015 Rugby World Cup – Europe qualification. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:26, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 101 external links on 2015 Rugby World Cup – Europe qualification. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:31, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]