Loading AI tools
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Copa Confraternidad was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 14 October 2023 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Argentina–Brazil football rivalry. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
Copa 50imo Aniversario de Clarín was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 30 September 2023 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Argentina–Brazil football rivalry. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Argentina–Brazil football rivalry article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The article has a number of things missing.
Mariano(t/c) 10:28, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Roca Cup sources :
1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roca_Cup
2) http://www.rsssf.com/tablesr/roca.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.223.147.50 (talk) 19:16, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Both Argentina and Brasil had successful youth teams in 1983. In the final of the 1983 South-American competition (held in Bolivia), there were many incidents of violence (Argentines singled out Dunga as an especially dirty player). Both national teams reached the final of the world youth championship (held where?) (the rosters were basically unchanged) and the violence repeated itself. (Mariano: Arg's coach was one Carlos Pachamé...)
On one match in the late 60s, Pelé was playing very good—even by his high standards—and a frustrated Argentina fan shouted: Ché negro, teléfono ("Black [man], phone call [for you]").
Don't play stupid, Argentinian.^ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.70.182.24 (talk) 14:37, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Don't say a word if you don't have a clue of argentinian talking manners. "Negro", like stated before, is not even in the vacinity of being necessarily a racial or mean slur. You people can't help it to feel pursuited by that word. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.244.218.22 (talk) 16:00, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
If the Argentina fan use first the word "Ché" as you say...not racial concept..."Ché negro, teléfono"...is more, that is a kindest use of the word...well, my nickname also is Negro...... ask to Alphonse Tchami if when The Boca Juniors fan sing him "Olé Olé Olé Negro Negro" were insulting him or giving his blessing like a Boca Star--186.62.182.23 (talk) 19:29, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Some Argentine press (such as diaries Crónica and Diario Popular) have insisted in calling Brazilian football teams macacos ("monkeys"), but the term never caught with the general public. On the other hand, some of the fans' Anti-Brazilian songs do refer to the "blacker" nature of the Brazilian team.
The word "macacos" not is used in Argentina...is more, the common word to that animal here is mono...--186.62.182.23 (talk) 19:32, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
The 1990 World Cup match was clearly dominated by Brazil, but the team who did score was Argentina, through Caniggia (after a sensational pass by Maradona). In one incident, Brazilian defender Branco drank from a bottle supplied to him by an Argentine field assistant (true name of "Galíndez" here). Branco felt dizzy afterwards. When he some of the Argentines about the true contents of the bottle, he did not receive a conclusive answer. After a few years, it was disclosed in the press (source here) that Argentine coach Bilardo had added (substance name here). (Controversy timeline here, including Diego's admission on TV in 2005).
(Warning: POV). Many Argentines who are of the opinion that Maradona was greater than Pelé are willing to admit that Ronaldinho may possibly surpass both as the greatest player of all time.
During Maradona's tv show "La Noche del Diez" in 2005, when Pele was invited, he asked about the issue. Maradona confirmed and when Pele asked for the names of the responsible people he said "I tell you the miracle, but not the name of the saint". Ronnie Schneider Forget about it, man. I've lived my entire life in Capital Federal and have never heard such a thing. It's an excelsious player, but he's really far from Maradona's and Pele's skills. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.244.218.22 (talk) 16:04, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Section looks like crystal-balling. Remove? Conscious 10:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
The title of this article is Argentina vs. Brazil. Logos with the opposite positions : Brazil and Argentina...always respecting both countries...regardsCloretti2 23:13, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
I will take out logos201.1.152.19 02:03, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Inserting logos again...Cloretti2 02:05, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Hello people, I just created the Macaquitos article, an old infamous argentine offensive joke against Brazilians. --Celso Daniel 21:39, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Well, then you should create the Cucarachas article as well, given this is the infamous brazilian offensive joke against Argentines ;). 17:40, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
While reading the Incidents section of the article, I realized how all of the incidents defend the National Football team of Argentina and it seems to imply that Brazil has only won because of chance. Mariano seems to be the main editor of this article and his affiliation with the national team of Argentina would naturally cause him to defend the Argentineans and try and refute the Brazilian successes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cuenca (talk • contribs).
I removed "This is perhaps due to a greater proportion of Brazillian footballers playing with overseas clubs." on Argentina having better results in South America, sicne this is not only unsourced to be true (I actually doubt it), and second, it is especulation. Argentinians have been playing in Europe since the beggining of the 20th century, several even nationalized Italian and played for other countries. There's also no need to tell that a huge number of Argentine players currently play abroad, perhaps as many as in Brazil, with a population 4 or 5 times smaller. Mariano(t/c) 13:03, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Pretty much all of the incidents are all obviosly tilted towards Argentina. The Pele-Maradona rivalry section does not take into account the claims by many observers that many TV stations and Newspapers urged Argentines to vote for Maradona in the Fifa awards, with one TV station even giving free internet access, leading to claims of rigging.Nor does it mention countless other polls where Pele has come in front. And besides, most footballing expers will tell you it is unfair to compare them. Maradona was an Attacking Midfielder come supporting striker, while Pele was a deep lying forward. And can someone add the number of matches played, and who has come out in front?
I've removeed the incident section, which was obviously not neutral and confirmedly written by the Argentine user Mariano, which, despite claiming having used as main source a Brazilian page, has omitted every single incident where the outcome clearly favoured Brazil over Argentina (for example, the much memorable "jogo do olé", in which Brazilian players treated the Argentines as mere playthings). He rightfully didn't omit the racist manifestation on the side of Argentines, but, well, if he omitted every single incident where Argentines behaved in such a way, there would be no reported incidents in favour of Argentina.Guinsberg (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 14:59, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Mr. "Selecciones de la Vida", I agree with you on your "Readjusted table to show current tournaments on top" in the club level. But we need first to ask here to others wikipedians what do they think about this change. From Conmebol and RSSSF we see that all "Copa Sudamericana","Copa CONMEBOL", "Copa Mercosur","Supercopa Sudamericana" are in the same level of competition, so maybe they shoud be in the same row. You also said that "The 2008 title is already included with the South American U-20 Championship which now serves as the qualifier to the Olympics Games" if that is true we realy need to remove the last Brazilian's title, but first we need a source. Only one thing I don't agree with you: Both "Artemio Franchi Trophy" and the two first "Intercontinental Championship" aren't officially recognized by FIFA, but the RSSSF source says that both of these competition can be considered a pre-cursor of "Confederations Cup". We have two choiches, or we remove both argentinians titles and we only recognized the FIFA's officially, or we left them because they have the same importance. I think the second choice is better because it's more fair, but we need to listen other wikipedians to change it anyway. Sorry for my bad English, my first language is Portuguese, so I can't speak English very well.--Italodal (talk) 06:28, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
The 1980 Mundialito is another example of an international friendly tournament with no official recognition that may only serve as an unofficial precursor. There's no official recognition that signifies a certain level of importance. The only tournaments recognized retroactively by FIFA are the 1992 & 1995 editions of the King Fahd Tournament. http://www.fifa.com/tournaments/archive/tournament=101/awards/ Selecciones de la Vida (talk) 16:48, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Important information : Italodal, Artemio Franchi Trophy is not a tournament.Is a simple match played between the reigning European champions and Copa América winners.
Brazil (Copa América winners)played too two matches against European champions, in :
20-12-1989 Rotterdam Netherlands (European Champion 88) 0-1 Brazil (Copa América 89 winner) 25- 3-1998 Stuttgart Germany (European Champion 96) 1-2 Brazil (Copa América 97 winner)
But, if you considered Argentina match against Denmark in 1993, should considered Brazil matches against Netherlands in 1989 and Germany in 1998. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.223.147.50 (talk) 22:59, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Italodal, the only tournaments recognized retroactively by FIFA are the 1992 & 1995 editions of the King Fahd Tournament. http://www.fifa.com/tournaments/archive/tournament=101/awards/ Selecciones de la Vida.
In my opinion, a simple trophy (Artemio Franchi Trophy) disputed between two nations is not in a same level of Confederations Cup, and can´t be considered in statistics.
IMPORTANT NOTE: Italodal, Artemio Cup isn´t FIFA official tournament, but only a FRIENDLY match between Argentina and Denmark. Rey Fahad Cup (1992) is Confederations Cup precursor.
View : http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/statisticsandrecords/headtohead/team1=arg/team2=den/index.html
http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/fifafacts/mencompovw/51/99/04/fs-299_06a_comp-winners.pdf
In my opinion, you shouldn´t exclude Artemio Cup in the Confederations Cup row. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.1.114.15 (talk) 22:33, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Important information : Conmebol officially recognized two tournaments : Recopa Sudamericana (organized by Conmebol) and Recopa Mundial (organized by UEFA and Conmebol)wins by FC Santos (Brazil). View : http://www.conmebol.com/articulos_ver.jsp?id=58211&slangab=S.
Conmebol and FIFA officially recognized 1948 South America Club Championiship (precursor of Copa Libertadores) wins by Vasco da Gama (Brazil).View : http://www.fifa.com/classicfootball/clubs/club=1882504/index.html
In my opinion this titles should be included in statistics. Recopa Sudamericana (1968) is in same level of Supercopa, Copa Mercosur or Copa Sudamericana. Recopa Mundial is in same level of Intercontinental Cup. And 1948 South America Club Championiship is in same level of Copa Libertadores. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.223.147.50 (talk) 22:13, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
-Italodal, there are 03 officially recognized retournaments by Conmebol and FIFA not yet included in statistics : Recopa Sudamericana (organized by Conmebol), Recopa Mundial (organized by UEFA and Conmebol)wins by FC Santos (Brazil) and 1948 South America Club Championiship (organized by Conmebol and precursor of Copa Libertadores)wins by Vasco da Gama (Brazil). In my opinion this titles should be included in statistics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.223.147.50 (talk) 22:40, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Italodal, Vasco da Gama was admitted in Conmebol Supercopa João Havelange (competition played from 1988 to 1997 by the past winners of Copa Libertadores) as winners of the 1948 South American Club Championship. View : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercopa_Sudamericana . View : http://www.rsssf.com/sacups/supcopa97.html
Important note : FIFA officially recognized 1948 South America Club Championiship (precursor of Copa Libertadores) wins by Vasco da Gama (Brazil).View : http://www.fifa.com/classicfootball/clubs/club=1882504/index.html.In my opinion this title should be included in statistics, in Copa Libertadores row.
Internacional de Porto Alegre (Brazil) wins Copa Suruga Bank 2009, official tournament by Conmebol.View :http://www.conmebol.com/competiciones_evento_index.jsp?evento=2006&ano=2009&slangab=S. In my opinion this title should be included in statistics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.223.147.50 (talk) 16:57, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Italodal, FC Santos (Brazil) wins two tournaments, not only one:
1) Recopa Sudamericana (organized by Conmebol) - Santos (Bra) beats Peñarol (URU) in final. View http://www.rsssf.com/sacups/supcopa68.html
2) Recopa Intercontinental (organized by UEFA and Conmebol)- Santos beats Internazionale (ITA) in final. View : http://www.rsssf.com/tablesr/recopa-int.html
View : http://www.conmebol.com/articulos_ver.jsp?id=58211&slangab=S.
In my opinion two titles (Recopa Sudamericana and Recopa Intercontinental) should be included in statistics, not only one (Recopa Intercontinental).
Recopa Sudamericana (tournament held once in 1968-69. Participating teams were those South-American clubs that had won the Intercontinental Cup until 1968 - Peñarol (Uru), Santos (Bra) and Racing Club (Arg). Recopa Sudamericana is in same level of Supercopa (competition played by the past winners of Copa Libertadores 1961 to 1997 and winner of 1948 South America Club Championiship), Copa Mercosur or Copa Sudamericana.
Recopa Intercontinental [(disputed by Internazionale (Ita) - Internazionale qualified directly because Real Madrid withdrew without playing - and the winner of the 1968 Recopa Sudamericana (Santos)] is in same level of Intercontinental Cup.
Italodal,1948 South America Club Championiship is considered precursor of Copa Libertadores. View http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copa_Libertadores. View : http://www.rsssf.com/rssbest/rssfaq.html.
Please, pay attention in Vasco da Gama History in FIFA Site (view http://www.fifa.com/classicfootball/clubs/club=1882504/index.html):
The Victory Express
Vasco won the Campeonato Carioca again in 1929, 1934 and 1936, before embarking on the most dominant period in their history. Indeed, between 1945 and 1952, they added five state prizes to their collection and won the 1948 South American Club Championship, a once-run, round-robin tournament that is recognised by CONMEBOL as the precursor to the Copa Libertadores, in Santiago, Chile. There, Flavio Costa's charges swept to glory unbeaten, an honour not even an Alfredo Di Stefano-inspired River Plate, nor the great Nacional side of Atilio Garcia, could deny them.
Honours
In my opinion this title is official and should be included in statistics, in Copa Libertadores.
Done--Italodal (talk) 04:39, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
The game stats are wrong. Someone counted the Olympics game when it was an under 23 team. It was not the senior team and it does not count. You should put the stats claimed by CBF and the stats claimed by AFA. CBF: BRazil has 36 wins 23 draws and 33 losses. http://www.cbf.com.br/confrontos/30002.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.115.237.197 (talk) 12:41, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Italodal, FIFA stats are wrong. FIFA counted one match pre-olympic game, with Brazil and Argentina under 23 team (30.08.88 - Los Angeles - Brazil 1 - 1 Argentina - Nations' Cup) - view http://www.rsssf.com/tablesa/arg-u23-intres.html.
FIFA counted too one irregular match (12-10-1920 - Buenos Aires - Argentina 3-1 Brazil). This match started with 8 players on each side. FIFA rules : match should start with 11 players on each side. View : http://www.rsssf.com/tablesb/brasargres.html)
The RSSSF stats are more corrects. You should put the RSSSF stats and exclude FIFA stats. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.223.147.50 (talk) 21:59, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Italodal, there aren´t controversy in matches disputed in 07/08/1968 and 11/08/1968. FIFA and RSSSF counted this matches.
There are controversy only in three matches :
1) 30.08.88 - Los Angeles - Brazil 1 - 1 Argentina - Nations' Cup. Pre-olympic game, with Brazil and Argentina under 23 team. View http://www.rsssf.com/tablesa/arg-u23-intres.html.
2) 12-10-1920 - Buenos Aires - Argentina 3-1 Brazil). This match started with 8 players on each side. FIFA rules : match should start with 11 players on each side. View : http://www.rsssf.com/tablesb/brasargres.html)
3) FIFA miss counted one regular match : 22-10-1922 - São Paulo - Brazil 2-1 Argentina - Roca Cup. This match was counted by RSSSF. View : http://www.rsssf.com/tablesb/brasargres.html
Brazil is being affected by FIFA stats.
In my opinion, you could show data from FIFA AND RSSSF stats, in other words, both statistics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.223.147.50 (talk) 17:37, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Done--Italodal (talk) 04:39, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Italodal, congratulations for changes in stats. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.92.188.185 (talk) 20:38, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Panamerican Championship is completely different from "Football at Pan American Games". First because it isn't played by adult teams, second because "Football at Pan American Games" is a competition that is part of the Pan American games that are disputed since 1951. The Panamerican Championship is almost the same tournament as is today's Copa America (South America countries with some CONCACAFs countries). This tournament was played by adult selections, unlike the "Football at Pan American Games", and in my opinion I think we should put it in the same row of Copa America.--Italodal (talk) 05:19, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Panamerican Championship isn´t almost the same tournament as is today's Copa America. Copa America is organized by Conmebol and Panamerica Championship no. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.92.175.217 (talk) 01:18, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Important information : The Panamerican Championship was a football tournament held by the Panamerican Football Confederation every four years from 1952 through 1960. Since the Americas' premier tournament, Copa America, was restricted to South American teams, the Panamerican Championship was an attempt to create an Americas-wide championship. (view : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panamerican_Championship). The Panamerican Football Confederation was a football federation formed in 1946 in an attempt to unite all of the countries from the Americas. The body's only achievement was organizing the Panamerican Championship for the Americas (view : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panamerican_Football_Confederation). This tournament isn´t almost the same tournament as is today's Copa America, organized by Conmebol (Conmebol only in 1993 Copa América edition included Concacaf countries), and in my opinion I think we shouldn´t put it in the same row of Copa America. Panamerican Championship is a tournament, organized by Panamerican Football Confederation. Copa América is other tournament, organized by Conmebol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.223.147.50 (talk) 21:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Italodal, Artemio Cup isn´t FIFA official tournament, but only a FRIENDLY match between Argentina and Denmark. Rey Fahad Cup (1992) is Confederations Cup precursor. http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/statisticsandrecords/headtohead/team1=arg/team2=den/index.html)
In my opinion, you shouldn´t exclude Artemio Cup in the Confederations Cup row. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.1.114.15 (talk) 21:35, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Due to several championships created, and many of them extinct, the table of titles at club level is very confusing. It's difficult to know which cup is official and what is the importance of each cup. According to Conmebol, the following championships are official:
-FIFA World Club Championship -Intercontinental Cup -Copa Libertadores -Copa Sudamericana -Copa CONMEBOL -Copa Mercosur -Supercopa Sudamericana -Recopa Sudamericana -Copa Interamericana -Copa Oro -Supercopa Masters -Copa Masters Conmebol -Recopa Intercontinental(Supercopa de Campeones Intercontinentales) -Copa Ganadores de Copa Plus the newer Suruga Bank Championship
All of these championships must be in the table. However is hard to sort the minor cups by their importance level. I suggest to follow the Conmebol's ranking: http://www.conmebol.com/ranking_index.jsp?slangab=S The cups which have similar weight should be in the same section.
The Copa Oro, Supercopa Masters, Copa Masters Conmebol and the Copa Interamericana have a weight of 15 points. The Copa Ganadores de Copa and the Recopa Intercontinental(Supercopa de Campeones Intercontinentales) have a weight of 10 points. All those cups should be in the same section because they have almost the same weight. Conmebol didn't range the Suruga Bank Championship yet, but I think it has the same weight of the minor cups above. However, maybe it shoud be in a different section because this cup isn't defuncted.--Italodal (talk) 06:44, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Italodal,1948 South America Club Championiship is considered precursor of Copa Libertadores. View http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copa_Libertadores. View : http://www.rsssf.com/rssbest/rssfaq.html.
Please, pay attention in Vasco da Gama History in FIFA Site (view http://www.fifa.com/classicfootball/clubs/club=1882504/index.html):
The Victory Express
Vasco won the Campeonato Carioca again in 1929, 1934 and 1936, before embarking on the most dominant period in their history. Indeed, between 1945 and 1952, they added five state prizes to their collection and won the 1948 South American Club Championship, a once-run, round-robin tournament that is recognised by CONMEBOL as the precursor to the Copa Libertadores, in Santiago, Chile. There, Flavio Costa's charges swept to glory unbeaten, an honour not even an Alfredo Di Stefano-inspired River Plate, nor the great Nacional side of Atilio Garcia, could deny them.
Honours
* 1 South American Club Championship: 1948 * 1 Copa Libertadores: 1998 * 1 Copa Mercosul: 2000 * 4 Brazilian Championships: 1974, 1989, 1997, 2000 * 3 Rio-Sao Paulo Tournaments: 1958, 1966, 1999 * 22 Carioca State Championships: 1923, 1924, 1929, 1934, 1936, 1945, 1947, 1949, 1950, 1952, 1956, 1958, 1970, 1977, 1982, 1987, 1988, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1998, 2003.
In my opinion this title is official and should be included in statistics, in Copa Libertadores row. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.223.147.50 (talk) 19:22, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Italodal, FC Santos (Brazil) wins two tournaments, not only one:
1) Recopa Sudamericana (organized by Conmebol) - Santos (Bra) beats Peñarol (URU) in final. View http://www.rsssf.com/sacups/supcopa68.html
2) Recopa Intercontinental (organized by UEFA and Conmebol)- Santos beats Internazionale (ITA) in final. View : http://www.rsssf.com/tablesr/recopa-int.html
View : http://www.conmebol.com/articulos_ver.jsp?id=58211&slangab=S.
In my opinion two titles (Recopa Sudamericana and Recopa Intercontinental) should be included in statistics, not only one (Recopa Intercontinental).
Recopa Sudamericana (tournament held once in 1968-69. Participating teams were those South-American clubs that had won the Intercontinental Cup until 1968 - Peñarol (Uru), Santos (Bra) and Racing Club (Arg). Recopa Sudamericana is in same level of Supercopa (competition played by the past winners of Copa Libertadores 1961 to 1997 and winner of 1948 South America Club Championiship), Copa Mercosur or Copa Sudamericana.
Recopa Intercontinental [(disputed by Internazionale (Ita) - Internazionale qualified directly because Real Madrid withdrew without playing - and the winner of the 1968 Recopa Sudamericana (Santos)] is in same level of Intercontinental Cup. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.223.147.50 (talk) 19:24, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Regarding above subject kindly find the correct information
Brasil and Argentina met each other till 28th sept.2011, 98 times
Brasil won 39 match , scored 152 goals Argentina won 35 match,scored 150 goals Draw took place in 24 match
The above result considering matches finished with penalty kicks as DRAW,but if it is considered as winner and looser, then Brasil won 42,Argentina 36 ,Draw 20 match.
Thanks Designce (talk) 09:54, 8 October 2011 (UTC) 8th oct.2011
Actually, the current head to head is 34-34. Argentina was ahead but Brazil tied with the last match.
http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/statisticsandrecords/headtohead/team1=arg/team2=bra/index.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gonzaloges (talk • contribs) 06:42, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Someone add "brazilian soft drink.
Maradona is pleased that it was all a dream and remarks that he perhaps drank too many Guaranas". 108.54.62.227 (talk) 02:06, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Officialy he has scored "only" 794. This article should not perpetuate the myth of the "1000 gols". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.15.67.219 (talk) 22:10, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
based on this world cup (2014)
their conjecture is irrelevant. every other section in this passage has actual matches. there is no match this time, so adding a section to speculate about what happened in the semis is pointless. 1 we could speculate about their rivalry in every world cup. without matches its irrelevant. 2 we are just showing bias to the contemporary and bias to conjecture.
yes, the tournament is in brazil, which throws up some interesting questions as argentina have made it and brazil have not. but no, this hardly seems to be relevant to a section about two teams that always hate each other, and has until now be focused on their matches. 77.100.67.56 (talk) 11:50, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
36 for Brazil, 36 for Argentina, the rest (25) are ties, 300 Goals Scored, 152 for Argentina, 148 for Brazil? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.45.44.57 (talk) 23:23, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello, there's been some recent vandalism from a user with this account (119.30.35.78). He makes malicious edits on this three pages (Argentina national football team, Argentina–Brazil football rivalry and Roca Cup), by posting a false result from a game that never happened and using a false link that redirects to a dead website. Hope some measures could be taken by a mod. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.133.166.106 (talk) 18:44, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Argentina–Brazil football rivalry. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:28, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change the number of goals and winner in result section. That is currently it is Date:13 December 1925,Venue:Argentina Buenos Aires Score:90-1 Winner:Brazil Comments:1925 Sudamericano
Edit the Score:4-1 and winner is Argentina 2405:204:D380:ABF9:0:0:B81:C8A1 (talk) 10:39, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:54, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:38, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
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) 20:08, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
What measures could be taken to prevent the huge amount of vandalism that this article has suffered? Often the numbers of matches are changed in order to just mess up the statistics.Svartner (talk) 08:52, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
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) 23:37, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 January 2024 and 24 April 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): APC04OU (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Mparra179, HornNest.
— Assignment last updated by HornNest (talk) 14:57, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi everybody. There is a conflict in the final count of matches between Argentina and Brazil. There are two FIFA´s official sources, and a lot of other sources (Rsssf, AFA, Promiedos, etc) that differ between them. FIFA´s sources are clearly the most important, because they are from the Mother house of world´s football association... No source can be avobe a FIFA source, it would be ridiculous!
One FIFA source, from 23 november 2023 (after the Brazil 0 - 1 Argentina for 2026 WC qualifiers in Maracaná) says they are tied in 42 victories each . Another FIFA´s source, from february 2013, says Argentina is 1 match up. . After Feb. 2013 (date of this other FIFA´s source), there are 4 victories each and the rest are ties, so the final count would not change. So for this FIFA´s source, Argentina would be above for 1 match... To see the complete list of matches according to FIFA click in "Advanced search", and then in "Show all matches".
FIFA do not recognize these matches:
AFA (Asociación del fútbol argentino) totally agrees with the FIFA´s source of Feb.2013... The AFA´s source is from 2019 (November) after Argentina 1 Brazil 0 in Riad. After that match, they played 3 matches, with 2 victories of Argentina and 1 tie... So, according to this, Argentina would take the lead for 1 match... Here is the AFA´s oficial list of matches, after Argentina 1 Brazil 0 in Riad (Nov. 2019):
According to me, only FIFA´s sources are neutral, because they are not from Argentina nor from Brazil, and the most importan association in football is above any other organization or confederation. I think we should take only FIFA´s sources to put in the article, except the "notes" in the "Unrecognized matches" or "Unofficial matches", to clearify why there are 6 matches that are not counted by FIFA. --Raúl Quintana Tarufetti (talk) 23:08, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
The list of matches was widely referenced by me, one-by-one, citing different sources (World Elo, RSSSF, 11v11). The @User:Raúl Quintana Tarufetti, which appears to be a single-purpose account, has been trying to impose WP:POINT for weeks, based on an article on the FIFA website that alleges the confront is tied without providing further details. The list of matches is explained, has both Argentine and Brazilian sources, and can be easily checked. Svartner (talk) 23:54, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Providing further details on the matches presented above
The 1922 Copa Roca and Copa Confratenidad were not actually played by Argentina's main team, something that normally happened at that time, but they appear on the list of official matches in all the sources I presented. , , , .
The 1968 matches were played by the representatives of Rio de Janeiro and Minas Gerais officially as the Brazil national team, as happened in the Copa Bernardo O'Higgins and Taça Oswaldo Cruz. In 1956 in the Copa Raul Colombo, in turn it was a match of the Rio de Janeiro state football team.
The 1920 match has a series of problems, mainly due to a case of racism committed by a newspaper, and in some sources it really does not appear as completely official, but I mentioned that there is divergence between Brazilian sources (which do not consider the match) and Argentines (who are considering the match). Svartner (talk) 00:14, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
All sources mentioned by you as "joke" (RSSSF, WorldElo, 11v11) are the base reference for official matches in other articles:
The reason? Because they are the sources that detail the list match by match, providing accurate information. The articles you posted give a final number of the confrontation, but do not detail the games one by one. A completely out of context number.
The sources you present from FIFA, one is without details, the other is outdated and archived, and can no longer be found on the official website. El Grafico's source, different from the others, presents a list, but with a different count compared to your previous editions, removing a series of matches without further context, and in disagreement with all the others sources. Therefore, it is clear that the edits I made are in accordance with the project adopted on en.wiki, while yours (which were only brought up now, such in previous editions you simply removed referenced content and changed the numbers arbitrarily) are merely speculative. Svartner (talk) 05:48, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello. As I said a few days ago (more than a week) I waited here in the talk page to see if we could reach an agreement according to reach a solution in the count of matches in the article. Unfortunately, as it´s happened a few months ago, nobody came to say anything, so I made a hard work to show the 3 versions of the count of matches of this article.
As I proved in this talk page a lot of times, there are a few sources that say they are tied (included one FIFA´s source), a lot of sources that say Argentina leads by one match (including a FIFA´s source whit the complete list of games in history), and a few sources that say Brazil leads by 1 or 2 matches. The article as it was before this new editions, was clarely not neutral: the only version it had was the brazilian one, not seeing those sources (I repeat: 2 from FIFA, the major football association in the world, and one from AFA, the major association in Argentina´s football, with also the full complete list of matches recognized) that had another count of matches. So, I included the 3 versions, to be 100% neutral... It´s is all explained with serious and neutral sources and notes. The reader of the article will have the 3 versions and will know that there is a dispute in the official count of matches.
PLEASE, do not revert. Correct if there are mistakes of style, or grammatical but not the content. Raúl Quintana Tarufetti (talk) 23:49, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Under "other names" we have Clásico del Atlántico and Clássico do Atlântico listed, but no source for either and we don't mention it in the lead. Can this be sourced? Koncorde (talk) 23:05, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Hello everybody. User:Koncorde and User:Svartner: I found an official AFA´s document from 1968 that gives no room for discussion about these 2 games... I found digitized the 1968 AFA´s Memory and Balance. It is on the internet, in the "Library of AFA". http://biblioteca.afa.org.ar/libros.html (Biblioteca AFA in spanish). There are many of them digitizeds, and I will continue searching. In the 1968´s book, you go to the page 32 and 33, and you will see the sumary of those 2 games. Not need to know spanish, are very clear the summaries. And as I told you lot of times, it was not Brazil national team... Those matches were played between Argentina and a Rio de Janeiro selection (August 7) and Argentina vs Minas Gerais Selection (August 11). Please, see here . The summary says "COMBINADO RÍO DE JANEIRO VS. ARGENTINA" and "SELECCION MINAS GERAIS VS ARGENTINA". As you can see, AFA always (alredy in 1968) counted them as unofficial matches, against state selections, not against Brazil. Now, we can discover (and not only "interpretate") why AFA do not count those matches as "Class A full international games": that´s because always considered them not against Brazil national team. As you can see in the source of the "Memory and Balance" of AFA, already in 1968 they were considered unofficial, and considered as 2 matches against 2 provincial rivals. Can you see Koncorde, why AFA "ignored" those 2 games?... Simple... I hope we can following unraveling the puzzle.
Said that, we must re write the part of 1968 games in the related articles of Argentina and Brazil. Above all this Brazil national football team results (unofficial matches) (they don´t figure) and Brazil national football team results (1950–1969) (they figure as official, and not as Rio´s Selection and Minas Selection).
What else do we wait, Koncorde? Raúl Quintana Tarufetti (talk) 05:05, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Hello everybody. A little "introduction": recently, a few days ago, I demonstrated that AFA, in their official Memories and Balance from 1968, clarely recognised as Argentina national team played against a Rio de Janeiro´s selection (first) and vs a Minas Gerais Selection (then) instead of against the national team of Brazil, as Elo Ratings and one source of Rsssf.com assert. For those who didn´t see, please click here and see the pages 32 and 33 from the AFA´s official book of the Memories and Balance from 1968 . As at this stage almost everybody know, the two matches were won by the Rio de Janeiro´s team (4-1) and the Minas Gerais team (3-2) and this 2 sources (Elo Ratings and ONE source of Rsssf, that clarely Svartner and Koncorde value the most) incredibly say that were won by Brazil… See . They both appears; the two games won by "Brazil"… Here we have a big discrepance, because for AFA, oficially they were 2 unofficial matches against 2 State´s selections, but for Elo Ratings and ONE source of rsssf.com (another source from THE SAME Rsssf.com includes them at the list of Argentina national team unofficial matches ) were “official” and against Brazil, and not vs State´s Selections... This clarely demonstrates that neither Elo Ratings nor Rsssf.com are 100% reliables... Above all, Elo Ratings...
Well, adding more discrepances and confusion, and as I am intelectually honest, I searched and searched and searched and found today in the 1956 official book of AFA´s Memories and Balance, that the december 1956 match (Raul Colombo cup, that also counts as official according to Elo Ratings and Rsssf.com and as unofficial in this rsssf.com source ), AFA (in this book) counts it as played against Brazil, that was represented by a “Federación Metropolitana de Football” team... In the infobox of the match of this book says Argentina 2-Brazil 1… See here, the page 60 . Here, it is ambiguous: by one hand, AFA tells the brazilian team was a “Federación Metropolitana” team, but in the infobox of the match says “Argentina 2 – Brazil 1”… And in the description of the line ups they put Argentina (whit the players) and Brazil (with the players)! Well, I´am already very confused because moreover, AFA´s source from the 2023 do not count this match as official against Brazil and either FIFA´s 2013 source . Raúl Quintana Tarufetti (talk) 22:26, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.