After all, I am not the only one (read the previous
post) to . . . speculate that (may be)
the Third Place Match was not played.
Exactly, you are not the only one - I
was not referring only to you!
I myself wrongly assumed that Ghana
was probably not the national team, along with Piet and Mark (and
nobody else posted to disagree with us). So this was a good reminder to us
all about the dangers of speculation in general ;-)
However, even *after* this reminder,
two of you then speculated that the third place
match was not played, despite that I had already listed it above as a
confirmed match result (because I had consulted a source which
reported it). This is why I am puzzled. I don't understand why my
findings were being disputed in this way – they are based on
bonafide publications. Sure, maybe some of the publications were
wrong and maybe your suppositions are right. But you need some
evidence first. Until then, why not stick with the version I wrote,
which is based on the evidence I gathered.
Speculation is only necessary when we
find two (or more) sources which disagree, then we may speculate on
which is correct (preferably the conflict of sources should be noted). Or when we have no source whatsoever, in which case
it is preferable to instead try to find one (as I did). Anybody can look at
this tournament on wikipedia and see that something looks strange
with Ghana & Romania. That is very obvious. But not everybody
is willing to actually go to consult some sources and try to find the
missing info and work to establish the real situation.
Nobody else provided any other
information/sources/evidence here on this tournament since I first
posted. Nor offered any intention of finding more. We could use
help from a Romanian (I asked Romeo Ionescu, no response). We could
use help from an Iranian (I emailed two, no response). The Polish
information came from Gwidon Naskrent, an impeccable researcher with
a long history on RSSSF (and there can certainly be no questioning
his interpretation of the Polish text because he is a professional
So until more real information is discovered, I would prefer to leave any remaining
question marks and unknowns as they are, without “guessing” them.
It may encourage someone who does have access to Farsi or Romanian
newspapers one day to plug the gaps.
think it would be interesting to know the reasons for Romania XI
handing a walkover to Poland U-21.
Well of course, and if I knew I would
have written something. Even the Polish source did not mention
anything about it, strangely. If anybody wants to suggest somewhere
for me to look, or someone to ask, please do.
I even looked in the “Tehran Times”
around the dates of this tournament. Unfortunately that “newspaper”
is really just an anti-Zionist propaganda pamphlet, and did not have
any coverage of local sport at all. There is also something called
“Ittila'at” in the British Library which I think is a Farsi
newspaper. I might look at that next time.
The information clearly exists somewhere. For example, here is a list of Iran vs Syria matches, with lineups:http://www.farsnews.com/printable.php?nn=8505240104
Agree with your point about saturation.
RSSSF is a good example of this – extraordinary in-depth coverage
of East German players league appearances, or club colours of small
islands, but other topics are neglected. But this is a simple
consequence of the fact that, like Wikipedia, the content of RSSSF is
determined by the contributions made. There is no real editing of
content per se, and certainly no directing of research into areas
where info is lacking. For that, we would need some sort of
academic-style Institute, with funding. And what is the only
organization that could potentially establish such an Institute?
In fairness, people in those countries may not be interested in those
'exotic' places (but many people on this forum are)
I have plenty of requests for a
password on cantab.net from people all over the world. You can also
check your hit counters on The Roon Ba. There are plenty of people, in a variety of countries,
who collect the same sort of info as us. But most of them just
collect. They do not necessarily find anything “new”
historically, and do not actively publicize or share what they have.
They cut and paste other people's work (usually without asking or
citing), then they reformat it into their own private and personal
database. If only they all worked together!
My main limitation is financial - I
simply can't afford to do as much research as I'd like to. But if I
did have more resources, I'd want to spend the time and effort
researching every country, not just 1 or 2. I'd be looking at
African, Caribbean, Pacific Island newspapers trying to find out new
Well yes that's exactly what we did
do together last year, a joint work in which you provided the
accommodation and cooking, and I provided the transportation and
funding. In future we could work out some other distribution of
resources, and maybe also recruit more people in the work. Maybe we can have a whip round to buy your train tickets ;-)
Libraries are there, open every day
(almost), waiting to be used. There is nothing special about what we
did really, any other collector/enthusiast could do the same.