Talk:Germany national football team/Archive 1

message: Shouldn't away shirt be grey rather than black? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.255.219.52 (talk) 18:15, 15 October 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Away shirts in the 2000's 

message: I have heard a lot of rumours surrounding the German National Team's Green Away Jersey's and the history of it all.  I've heard it has something to do with the Republic of Ireland being the first team to play West Germany after WW2.  Is this just a myth or is it true?
:The first team to play West Germany after WW2 were the Swiss, first in 1950 and then again in 1951. (By the way, the Swiss were the first team ever to play Germany in 1908 and the first team to play the reunited Germany in 1990.) Ireland was the fourth team in the fifth match. See the Rec Sports Soccer Statistics Foundation page on Germany. Also, as a German follower of football I have never heard of this rumour before. I would believe this is a myth. Spike 18:56, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably to make Template:Nft work.   But I know that United States national football team was redirected to United States men's national soccer team so if you feel compelled to make a similar move, I see no reason why you couldn't be bold as long as you live the redirect in place. - PhilipR 23:17, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

text: It's because it isn't better grammer, its worse, German is an adjective, where as Germany is a noun. German national football team is simply describing a national team (any team) as german. whereas as Germany national football team is the correct term. Philc TECI 00:01, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Germany's Green Away Jersey History 

message: I noticed that the text still said, "As token of respect, [West] Germany's away strip has been green to this day – representing a united Germany."   Since the red strip is right there in the diagram, I found that a bit odd, but in light of the above discussion I found it odder still!   I changed the date to 2000, cited as the date for most recent abandonment of green in Kiwiwiki's post above.   Regardless, it's a bit funny to mention their symbol affection for Ireland that supposedly lives on to the present juxtaposed with visual evidence that said symbol has fallen by the boards! -- PhilipR 23:17, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Green away strip revisited (consistency) 

message: It's interesting that it has the English direct article, because AFAICT this is a nickname used exclusively by English-language association football writers, not Germans.   Everything German I've ever read (admittedly, I'm not a native speaker) calls it the Nationalelf.   Yes, Mannschaft means team in German, but to my understanding it's just a generic term.    Can someone set me straight by showing me where the German NT is called merely Die Mannschaft (no, not Die deutsche Mannschaft)?   Or do we need to go edit England to say "The side", and United States to say "The team", and Brazil to say "O time", and so on?  - PhilipR 22:25, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In German, "die Mannschaft" ("Man ship") is not a nickname, just a very common terms for any team, even if female or mixed. "Die Nationalelf" usually refers to Klinsmann's boys if not stated otherwise, as the DFB also fields the various younger male teams (U21, Olympic team etc.) and of course the successful female team, but I would not consider this a nickname, as it is not "nick" enough. The terms "the Nationalelf" and "the Mannschaft" might be used by English speakers in regard to the German team, though, which makes sense then. Besides, "O Selecao" is used for the Brazilian team, in Brazil and elsewhere, isn't it? --Matthead 00:34, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, yes, the words for selection are used in Spanish and Portuguese speaking countries because that implies the national team, as opposed to any generic team.   But I don't believe you could call Real Madrid or Corinthians a selección or seleção.  You might call them un equipo or um time, among other terms.   So that's my point -- that it's mixing the common German word for team in as a nickname.   If English-speaking writers do, ignorantly (?), call it the Mannschaft is that sufficient to make it a nickname?   Not in my view.... I'll let others opine. - PhilipR 04:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

text: "Mannschaft" should be removed as nickname. It just means "team" and is a totally common term for any side ("die englische Mannschaft" = "the Englisch team"). Even "Nationalelf" isn't a nickname really, though it might be a bit more specific than "Mannschaft". -- EnemyOfTheState 21:31, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Recently, one can hear Klinsmannschaft sometimes. Also, "die Auswahl" (selection) is used as an alternative term. Or just wait two weeks and then use "Weltmeister" for the next 4 years. :-D --Matthead 23:52, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think Germany will be calling itself "Weltmeister" in my lifetime. And I'm 17. Yes, that's exactly how much I faith I have in that team. The Frederick 07:36, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, I'm afraid to say that I disagree with calling Die Mannschaft just a nickname. The official name of the German football team is Die deutsche Nationalmannschaft (The German national team), therefore Die Mannschaft sounds like a proper short form to me. Because the DFB is using Die Nationalmannschaft in it's publications, even the term Die Nationalelf sounds more colloquial to me. MikeZ 17:55, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  On a second thought, I just changed the infobox, if that's ok with you guys. MikeZ 18:02, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Mannschaft 

message: I removed the POV tag since I couldn't see any discussion on this page that referred to any neutrality dispute. Would anyone like to point out how this article might not be neutral? --die Baumfabrik 02:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality Tag Removed 

message: Frequent edits to this page have tried to change the statement that Germany is the strongest European football side to indicate that Italy is better. While Italy has won more World Cups, the statement is not based on counting World Cup Championships, but rather on the total historical record of the team. Italy has won four World Cups, one European Championship, and one Olympic Gold (total of six major awards), and Germany has won three World Cups and three European Championships (and one Olympic Gold if you count East Germany, that's at least six major awards). Furthermore, Germany has been by far the more consistent team. Germany has never failed to qualify for a World Cup (although Germany was banned in 1950 for political reasons), but Italy did fail to qualify once (consequently they have both participated in 16 cups). Germany has reached the World Cup semi-finals eleven times (more than any other country) and the finals seven times (a record shared with Brazil), compared with Italy's eight and six respectively. Since Germany's first appearance in the European Championship, it has participated in every succeeding championship for a total of nine appearances (more than any other country and more than Italy's six). If there is a comprehensive analytic argument to show that some other European side has been more successful in international competition please bring it up so we can discuss. 68.48.174.174 20:21, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nevertheless it is useless to count who is "the best". By the way my edit did not say that Italy is better it said that Germany and Italy are the most succseful teams, nothing more - and I think this is much better than to say the best, because this is always a point of view- for example in the FIFA World Rankings Germany is not "the best" European tema. By the way - the World Cup is much more important than the European Cup and if it is right to count the East German titel for the German national football team is also disputable. Maybe if you count all together many (or the most) would say Germany is the most succesful, but speakign about "The best" is at least in my opinion out of place. But if you only feel good when the article says Germany is the best European team - I don't care so much, but because the Best is not countable is this case (how many points a team get for World Cup, how much for European Cup?) I would never say someone is the best. --Knarf-bz 09:56, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It really does come down to weighing the cups against each other. I'd argue that the Euro Cup is worth more, just because a team is more likely to come up against very powerful opposition. Sure, the World Cup is nice, but can a tournament claim to showcase the best of the best with teams like T&T, S&M and Saudi Arabi competing? No offence to those countries, but they're not exactly the best in the world. The World Cup is just more hyped. The Frederick 11:45, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "The World Cup is just more hyped"??? Maybe we can disagree on the fact if ranking should be done according to number of WCs or number of titles, but for sure a World Cup is worth more than a European Cup. At least because in WC a European team can meet Brazil and Argentina, which do not appear in a EC. It is true that in WC you meet T&T and SA, but you will agree that in a EC you can meet even worse teams. Consider also that in WC, in the last editions, only major teams won, while in EC you have also victories of Denmark and Greece.--BaldClarke 10:12, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: please do not add successes of Olympic Games to the record, for footballers, the Olympics are a joke, no big nation that I am aware of takes that competition seriously. It is simply not comparable, as you never have the top selection, it is only a U23 squad!! No footballer takes the Olympics for serious. And when it comes to the question which is the "best" European team, the only point that Italy has is WC titles. That's fine, but what about all the others factors? Germany: Second in the all-time world cup table, World champion 3 out of 16 (18,75%), WC final appearances 7 out of 16 (43,75%), semi final appearances 11 out of 16 (68,75%), three EC titles (33,3%), five EC final appearances (55,6%). Sorry, but the main thing that is disputable here is to count pre-war World Cups fully, these World Cups were nice, but not comparable. So simply deduct two Italian titles, and where do you get? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.143.76.189 (talk) 03:40, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. In terms of pure silverware and records, Germany is still better than Italy, or at least equal. Three World Cups, three Euro Cups, a FIFA World Youth Championship, all sorts of qualification and appearance records, and if you want to count it, DDR's Olympic gold. Discussion over. The Frederick 10:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I forgot to mention another important stat, just for your info: Germany, together with Brasil, holds the record for the longest WC final appearance streak (as Americans would probably call it), 3 times in a row (1982 - 1990, Brasil 1994 - 2002). How many consececutive WC final appearances can Italy bring forward?62.143.76.189 22:15, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The answer is: "who cares?" Do you think England would exchange their world cup title for all of the second places and the records of Germany? If you don't think so, you are smart, and should be able to understand that coming first once is better than coming second eighteen times. Have a nice weekend.--Uyet Ustranimii 00:46, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You miss the point. I agree, coming first is definitely better than being a runner-up. But you reduce the evaluation of the overall success of a team simply to the number of titles, but you might also consider the constancy of team performance. Which team is better, I ask you, a team that won the World Cup once and in the other world cups never made it to the second round (or did not even qualify), or the team that made it to the WC final 18 times but lost all of them?62.143.76.189 01:08, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The first is "more successful".--Uyet Ustranimii 23:36, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So you are saying that a team that makes it once to a major tournament and wins it is better than a team that is an 18-times runner-up. Interesting point. That means, regarding European level, that Greece is among the top teams, although they made it only twice to the European Championship. They failed to qualify ten times (!) and in their first tournament 1960, they went out in the first round, losing  7:1 against France. Yeah, I agree, that is top performance evaluated over the long-term of the competition. England and Portugal will be delighted. 62.143.76.189 00:44, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, definitely. Are you saying that a Greek fan would exchange Greek team's victory in EC with Portugal record in the same competition?--Uyet Ustranimii 02:17, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I am not saying that. I am saying that you entirely neglect the fact that Greece failed to qualify ten times. 62.143.76.189 10:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not want to neglect that Greece has only one noteworthy championship, but, as long as "success" is what matters, they have been champions once, and Portugale never. Therefore Greece is more successful (as regards EC) than Portugal.--Uyet Ustranimii 21:22, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

text: You miss the point again. I understand that you do want not neglect the Greece EC title (I do not either), but you do neglect the ten time EC qualification misery of Greece. You have not referred to that, that is very weak. In order to shorten the discussion, the point here is if you evaluate success on absolute terms or on relative terms. You argue on absolute terms, I refer to relative terms, that means what is the overall record in the competition. Greece had twelve chances, failed ten times, went out in the first round once and won the title once. The point I am making here is that if you fail many times to qualify, that should be considered, nothing else. 62.143.76.189 21:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Basically, it's weighing who's more successful and consistant: the team who's reached the semi final in almost every tournament, or the team who won because all the major countries boycotted the tournament (these are hypothetical). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by The Frederick (talk • contribs) 09:02, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Germany: three Euro Cups. Italy: one. Who's stronger now? The Frederick 14:20, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

text: To call the European Championship a secondary tournament is very debatable. Certainly, it sounds better to be called World Champion than a European Champion, however from a quality point of view, the European Championship is harder to win. Certainly, the WC gets more attention, but you should not forget what teams play in the first round in the World Cup, I doubt that Germany would be able to win a match in the EC by 8-0 as they did in 2002 against Saudi Arabia, it is much harder to reach the quarter final of the EC than to get to the quarter final in the World Cup. If you really look at it, the World Cup is nothing else than a European Championship plus Brasil and Argentina, despite the good performances of African teams in the nineties and South Korea in 2002. But these performances were not sustainable, South Korea did not even qualify for the WC 2006. 62.143.76.84 19:59, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Germany as Best European Side or only Second Best? 

message: I see a war with an issue about adding players on the list. However, the edit war must be reduced into haltation before it gets any worse, like temporarily banning IP addresses for making any further disruptions to harmless pages and/or creating useless articles. One of the questions I have to ask: why does Robert Huth not belong to this article? --Gh87 05:43, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He had played against Ecuador. He should play against Portugal around the third place, too, but became injured when heating up . Phoe 15:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

text: None of you is faking. - The English version of the article differs from the much longer German version. The current squad is always available on http://www.dfb.de/dfb-team/nationalteam/spieler/index.html. If changes occur it is updated immediately by DFB. Please let this page be decision maker for current squad! Oldnag85 19:01, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Bad idea. If this removal can solve the problem here, fine, but do not export it elsewhere without discussion.--Panarjedde 14:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issue with war on adding some players on list 

message: How likely is he going to return to the national team anytime soon? I don't see him returning anytime soon. Did he even make an appearance at the 2006 FIFA World Cup? If he's kept on any of the current or recent lists, then it's a clear case of crystal balling. Kingjeff 11:58, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He had played against Ecuador. He should play against Portugal around the third place, too, but became injured when heating up . Phoe 15:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Robert Huth on the national team

message: The only thing preventing him from playing internationals since the world cup is because he was injured. Unlike Robert Huth, He was a regular up until the injury and to assume otherwise would be crystal balling. Kingjeff 11:58, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: None of you is faking. - The English version of the article differs from the much longer German version. The current squad is always available on http://www.dfb.de/dfb-team/nationalteam/spieler/index.html. If changes occur it is updated immediately by DFB. Please let this page be decision maker for current squad! Oldnag85 19:01, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Per Mertesacker on the national team

message: To solve a lot of problems I suggest to either remove this section or to find rules for addition and removal of players in this list. The actual removal due to injuries should be neglected - instead a mark currently injured should be added. If the section remains e.g. only player called up within a 3 to 6 months period should be mentioned and afterwards deleted. Oldnag85 19:25, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Bad idea. If this removal can solve the problem here, fine, but do not export it elsewhere without discussion.--Panarjedde 14:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of ''Recent call-up'' 

message: There is a small mistake in this paragraph.
Vogts did not stepp down after the Worldcup 1998. He resigned on 07.07.1998 after 2 bad matches against Malta und Romenia
source: http://www.wdr.de/radio/wdr2/westzeit/stichtag/175822.phtml
--172.176.172.188 18:18, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mixed results in the 1990s - Vogts stepping down 

message: I have also heard rumors about the green being from Ireland.Being from Ireland many people say it was when playing here after the war.When they arrived they had no kit so the irish gave them one.this lead to the germans keeping the green as their away colour.
:Up until no references are provided, this is just a rumor.--BaldClarke 21:20, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Green Away Kit 

message: Why is there a "first international" for reunited Germay (Germany - Switzerland in 1990)? With the reunification the football federation of East Germany simply ceased to exist. So from the foundation of the German FA until now it has been the same federation and all achievements under the name "West Germany" are equally acccountable to "Germany".
As far as I'm aware there has never been a team that has offically played under the name "west Germany" or its german spelling, ever!  The two German states translated in English were the German Democratic Republic and the Federal Republic of Germany.  East and West were just lazy cold war terms used to differenciate the two states, so I find this argument utterly pointless!
Federal Republic of Germany = West Germany
German Democratic Republic = East Germany Kingjeff 17:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  German FA legal successor to West Germany 

message: The German team of today is the official successor of the West German Team. I think the page should be merged, because in the German wikipedia exists also only one article. Yoda1893 21:10, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Support. I'm kind of surprised that there are still two articles. Besides, it is not the successor, it is the same team, always representing DFB. It was only called "West Germany" during the time the Saarland and/or East Germany fielded teams of their own. -- Matthead discuß!     O       05:16, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How much of the West German team article is already in this article. Wouldn't it make more sense just to redirect it instead of going through the entire merging process? Kingjeff 00:19, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

text:  the pages are merged Yoda1893 01:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't necessarily oppose the merger but I strongly believe the article sections need to be presented in a way to clearly distinguish the three major eras (Pre-WWII, 1954-1990, and After the Reunification), which I think should be main sections within the article. I can think of encyclopedic and technical reasons for this: The article would look in agreement with those related to the History of Germany, and when linking to West Germany national football team, the links can be approximated/piped to the corresponding section. --ChaChaFut 04:57, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

text: There is probably less case for a separate West Germany article than the separation of Ireland national football team (IFA) from Northern Ireland national football team.  I don't mind either way. BTW prewar and 1954 are not appropriate era dates; Germany played friendlies till 1942 and  from 1950, and unofficial matches in between. jnestorius(talk) 08:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge with West German Team 

message: ::I don't necessarily oppose the merger but I strongly believe the article sections need to be presented in a way to clearly distinguish the three major eras (Pre-WWII, 1954-1990, and After the Reunification), which I think should be main sections within the article. I can think of encyclopedic and technical reasons for this: The article would look in agreement with those related to the History of Germany, and when linking to West Germany national football team, the links can be approximated/piped to the corresponding section. --ChaChaFut 04:57, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is probably less case for a separate West Germany article than the separation of Ireland national football team (IFA) from Northern Ireland national football team.  I don't mind either way. BTW prewar and 1954 are not appropriate era dates; Germany played friendlies till 1942 and  from 1950, and unofficial matches in between. jnestorius(talk) 08:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: OK to merge but re-structure sections

message: The article states that the green away jersey coming from a play against Ireland is an urban legend. However, the link given actually supports the claim. -- Zz 15:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Green jersey redux 

message: It is quite strange to claim that Germany holds the record of second best team in the World Cup, based on a link (provided in an edit summary nonetheless) that creates a ranking giving two points for each victory and one for each draw. Since WC is a cup, the number of cups won is a better indicator than the artifact created by the German Football Federation.--Uyet Ustranimii 14:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why are you counting the points instead of the cups? (It would be nice if you can aslo explain what does "It is also an insult as a German that you would but Italy ahead of Germany" mean) --Uyet Ustranimii 19:57, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

text: P.S.: Maybe you meant "you would put Italy ahead of Germany". If that is the case, that it would be stupid nationalism. In any case, we should be coherent with other articles, and since FIFA_World_Cup#Successful_national_teams says Italy is second, don't change it; if you don't agree, have FIFA_World_Cup#Successful_national_teams changed before this article. --Uyet Ustranimii 20:08, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I backed too, with a link to a neutral source. And your nationalism, which is also racist, is stupid. Definitely.--Uyet Ustranimii 20:26, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Because it's technically incorrect. The Final is only one match whereas, my way shows every world cup match. By the way, I've already reworded it showing it as the w-d-l record and not. If you really insist on putting your way in, you could as long as my way is still in there. Kingjeff 20:44, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you count Olympic games records by number of total medals or by number of gold-silver-bronze medals? I ask you for a competition like a World Cup or Olympic games in which the ranking over several competitions is made in contrast with my approach.--Uyet Ustranimii 20:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Let's try again: why should we present a different way of ranking than the one in FIFA World Cup?--Uyet Ustranimii 21:02, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

text: You avoided answering, let's try again: why should we present a different way of ranking than the one in FIFA World Cup?--Uyet Ustranimii 21:16, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Don't worry about me, answer the question: why should we present a different way of ranking than the one in FIFA World Cup?--Uyet Ustranimii 21:41, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

text: In that case, change that page first.--Uyet Ustranimii 21:53, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

text: If you can check it against an external reference, it is ok to add it.--Uyet Ustranimii 11:29, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

text: They have a slight tendency to twist the data to show what they need. As your "league table" shows clearly.--Uyet Ustranimii 01:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  It is an objective truth, that Germany has never lost any away WC qualifying match so far, there is no way that you can prove me otherwise, just check the www.rsssf.com website, that is mentioned above (if you think that that is not an objective source, please tell me which is one in your opinion). The only thing that has to be checked is if there is any other nation that has never lost an away WC qualifying match (and that I really doubt) 62.143.76.189 00:01, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second best record in WC 

message: I have a nice stat, that might be worth to be added to the article. In its WC qualifying history since 1934, Germany has lost only two matches: 1985 in Stuttgart against Portugal (0:1, before the match Germany already had qualified for Mexico 1986) and 2001 in Munich against England (1:5). That means that Germany so far has never lost any away WC qualifying match. That is true, you can look it up! This is probably unique in the world, however this statement has to be doublechecked. I am pretty sure that all the big guns lost at least one away match (both Brasil and Argentina lost presumably once in La Paz or somewhere else on the continent and the European top teams as well (okay, not in La Paz of course ;-)). 62.143.76.189 02:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can check it against an external reference, it is ok to add it.--Uyet Ustranimii 11:29, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

text: They have a slight tendency to twist the data to show what they need. As your "league table" shows clearly.--Uyet Ustranimii 01:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  It is an objective truth, that Germany has never lost any away WC qualifying match so far, there is no way that you can prove me otherwise, just check the www.rsssf.com website, that is mentioned above (if you think that that is not an objective source, please tell me which is one in your opinion). The only thing that has to be checked is if there is any other nation that has never lost an away WC qualifying match (and that I really doubt) 62.143.76.189 00:01, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  World Cup qualifying statistic 

message: ====Merge====
# Kingjeff 14:44, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Voting

message: # Kingjeff 14:44, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: What happen with the original Current squad and Recent call up section? I think the new Starting Line Up and Germany II Team is a bit excessive. Several players name are mentioned twice and there is no clear reference on the team starting line ups. Starting line up will be different from time to time and this section is purely original research. Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Starting line-ups for similar issue on this. Moreover, the 11 Starting Line Up players mentioned there never played together in German's last 11 match since Low took over. I'd say we need to delete this, but I don't want to start any dispute so I'm asking for opinions here. Martin tamb 20:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely delete this. Unless Joachim Löw actually posts his starting line-up in this article, it's a worthless part of the article. Jrielaecher 23:47, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Starting Line Up and Germany II Team 

message: Where is the home stadium of Germany national football team? 211.201.165.46 10:32, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't have one. Germany plays its home games at different venues. There also is no clear hierarchy and theoretically no stadium or city is assured to host a specific number of games per year/decade. Malc82 17:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is the home stadium of Germany national football team? 

message: I have put in the European Championship Record section the last tournament Euro 2008 for the Mannschaft as Qualified. I have also noted at the bottom that this tournament is still in the qualification process. If anyone disagrees that this should be there please write to me at the bottom of this comment.
Thank you.
KoolSoccerKing 12:55, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  European Championship Record 

message: I think the article gives a wrong date of birth for goalkeeper Robert Enke. His correct date of birth is August 24, 1977, not April 5, 1979. Obviously the date of birth of Timo Hildebrand was copied mistakenly .--84.133.29.79 (talk) 15:43, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Robert Enke 

message: Substituted at 20:36, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment