Talk:Football Australia

message: I'm adding a list of national level teams controlled by the FFA as it came a shock that there wasn't currently one, fell free to add any I forgot!
Simba1409 (talk) 04:09, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Teams 

message: I expaned the section as it was extremely short. In fact it could be expanded further if you want to read the source it has quite alot of info.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.213.253 (talk) 08:21, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy 

message: The article opens with the following.
:"Football Federation Australia (FFA) is the governing body for the sport of football (soccer) in Australia."
Per Engvar we ought to be using Australian English so what's with calling the sport football?  If the FFA want to use the word, that's up to them, but we don't have to follow suit.  If editors here can't cop soccer I'd be okay with association football but the word football generally refers to either rugby or Aussie rules in Australian English. JIMp talk·cont 03:18, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Australian English changes, especially as immigrants bring in new words and values. I have no problem with Association football, because when I look at the media, I see "soccer" being used less and less. Perhaps we should see if we can gauge consensus on this? --Pete (talk) 22:41, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair point, it does change.  You're also right in saying that the media are using "football" more and more to refer to the sport.  Still, I think that the majority of normal Australians would say "soccer".  Also "soccer" is unambiguous. Jimp 07:47, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use Australian English 

message: Two IP editors (who I suspect are the same person posting from two places) are repeatedly trying to impose on the article some undicussed changes which significantly alter the perspective of parts of the article describing the creation of the FFA. I reverted, with explanatory Edit summaries and after posting on the editor's Talk page, to no avail. No Edit summaries and no Discussion have been forthcoming from our IP editor(s). I've possibly already technically gone too far on the WP:3RR front, so I really need some backup here. HiLo48 (talk) 23:57, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced, POV changes by IP editors 

message: It should not, while the two orginisations are pertinent to each other they are not the same orginisation, I suggest we create a new article for the discussion of Soccer Australia and that all content related to soccer Australia be forked to that article rather than having the current redirect page --Orestes1984 (talk) 13:10, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It's normal for most sports on Wikipedia to have the article on a single peak national body incorporate the record of its historical precursors. Most readers simply want to read about the peak national body, and should not be forced to look at different articles. The article content will make it clear that the two that concern you are not the same body. HiLo48 (talk) 18:55, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with HiLo48, there's no need to split the content up, there has been 6 organisations in various forms and they should all be detailed fully on this article.--2nyte (talk) 23:55, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soccer Australia redirects here 

message: There is a discussion at WP:NFCR#File:Socceraustralia.png regarding the non-free use of :File:Socceraustralia.png in the article. All interested editors are welcome to participate. Thanks in advance. - Marchjuly (talk) 08:42, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-free use of File:Socceraustralia.png 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Football Federation Australia. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://vff.org.vn/news/pdf/fifa-approves-australia-move-650.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:00, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Football Federation Australia. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.acescolombia.com.co to http://web.archive.org/web/*/http:/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:39, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Football Federation Australia. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090205172915/http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23259207-5006068,00.html to http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23259207-5006068,00.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:32, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Seems to me that this article is not up to date re the FFA.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.211.33 (talk) 11:21, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not up to date 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Football Federation Australia. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141217101940/http://www.migrationheritage.nsw.gov.au/exhibitions/worldcup/timeline.shtml to http://www.migrationheritage.nsw.gov.au/exhibitions/worldcup/timeline.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:46, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Clearly there is some dissatisfaction with the way Wikipedia deals with the name of the sport. I have commenced discussion at Naming_conventions (Football in Australia) and I invite contributions. --Pete (talk) 06:52, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: mate the late great Les Murray called it football so it is, I reckon wogball is as legit as soccer. The dicussion on the wikidpedidias is everyonone should have to distinguish which code they are talking about- footy can refer to league or aussie rules but neither are rarely called football- the only two codes which are refered to as football are association and american, maybe some kiwis call unionn football? Australian rules is definatly footy or aussie rules- and more recently by people out side-AFl, but AFL is the peak governing body and major professional league not the game of footy. 124.170.107.64 (talk) 13:10, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it soccer? 

message: Thanks HiLo48 for inviting me to talk about this. I understand your points you have raised. I think this comes down to what your intent about the dubious claim is. I mean I don't think it is dubiouis in regards to the FA CEO saying it would not cost anything, he did say that. That was then reported by the Australian Associated Press (AAP) and picked up by numerous realisable media sources. The sentence used is pre-empted with "Football Australia Chief Executive, James Johnson, told the media" so the reader knows this is in context to what this person said. As for what he said, I think it was done in good faith, but it probably just needs additional context around it. It was made in reference to costs associated with obtaining company and domain names. The FA had previously obtained these at an earlier time. So the immediate cost to the organisation at the time the change was voted on and agreed to at the AGM in November 2020 would have been nil. I agree there would have been associated flow-on costs to the organisation post the change being agreed to, such as stationary and graphic design costs. Perhaps it would have been better for him to have told the media 'there is no immediate upfront costs to the organisation as the FA already owns the website domain and company names'. We could of course update the text to provide this additional context but then it would need the first part removed as the CEO did not say that. Of course this sentence could be removed all together. Does not bother me. Thoughts? Volrath2002 (talk) 14:03, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Removing it might be best. It's really pretty trivial stuff in the broader scheme of things. Alternatively, we could go a little bit tabloid in our writing (common enough in sports articles anyway) and write "claimed" instead of "told the media". HiLo48 (talk) 23:26, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

text: Triviality of the statement is on the money. How about this: 'Football Australia Chief Executive, James Johnson, advised the media the organisation already owned the domain and company names for Football Australia and the change would help unify the branding with the state member federations.'Volrath2002 (talk) 01:46, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious marker for cost of rebrand to FA from FFA 

message: In Australian english both League and Australian Rules are coloquialy refered to as Footy and rarely football- the world game has been refered to as football throughout many differeent governing bodies. What I'm wonerering is if socca or wog-ball is more 'Australian' than soccer. I don't care but there's historical precedence for Associatian Football being refered to as football, while league and aussie rules are footy. On a side note aussies rules should never be refered to as AFL, or should we call Association Football FIFA. 124.170.107.64 (talk) 05:10, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: There have been extensive discussions on this. Have a read of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Football in Australia) to see the results, and its Talk page if you would like to review the discussions yourself. (You will need several hours for the latter exercise.) HiLo48 (talk) 06:49, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Australian english?