Remove this ad

Lead

Sep 19 16 7:57 PM

Tags : :

Has anyone ever corresponded with UEFA regarding a factual error on their website and seen it successfully changed?  No, me neither!!

I advised them of a couple or errors in respect of goalscorers involving British clubs in the qualifying rounds from this season’s Europa League but am still waiting for the details to be change on the site or some feedback to myself, which I asked for.

Are they similar to the IFFHS / Dr Pöge?

Thoughts and comments welcome

Last Edited By: Ted Best Sep 19 16 8:02 PM. Edited 1 time

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Remove this ad

#1 [url]

Sep 19 16 8:23 PM

Dunno about UEFA, but with these things it's really just a matter of pot luck whose desk your email lands on and what mood they are in at the time.

My least favourite dealings were with Reuter and CANA in a furtive attempt to get access directly to archive agency news reports rather than go via the newspaper "middle man" .

Quote    Reply   

#2 [url]

Sep 22 16 6:49 PM

I used to send them some corrections, mainly concerning the past editions of the European Cup/Champions League, such as exact names of stadiums, exact names of players, exact names of coaches and so on.
I did this many years ago. At the beginning they were extremely interested and corrected the data just some hours later. But after a while my messages began being ignored and a lot of data from their website still need corrections. So I don't know whether the accuracy of their contents is still a priority for them.
Also, catching imprecisions is not easy and takes time, so the frequence of my messages has considerably diminished, considering that it would have been fruitless.

Quote    Reply   

#3 [url]

Sep 25 16 3:29 PM

With UEFA’s records two of my pet hates concern nationalities and stadium names:

They change the nationality of referees (and clubs) to the country they are of today and not leave it as the name it was at the time i.e. Yugoslavian split to Serbian, Croatian etc.

A (random) quick glance at their UEFA Cup records for 1976-77 has Derby County playing at Pride Park and Juventus playing at the Delle Alpi !

It is quite funny that a number of referees are recorded as “not available” when many years ago they were able to provide me with archive records which contained all the referees (except for the early years). Perhaps they have since lost their records?

Quote    Reply   

#4 [url]

Sep 25 16 5:20 PM

Haha, yes my favourite one of those is FIFA having "PR China" in the 1936 Olympics.

UEFA: probably the "brain" doesn't talk to the "body". Websites are often outsourced, so the data on the web doesn't necessarily reflect data in the filing cabinet.

Quote    Reply   

#5 [url]

Sep 26 16 7:03 PM

I remember one of my most recent feedbacks was about the famous 1956/57 European Cup match Manchester United 2-2 Real Madrid. If you please take a look at this earlier version of uefa.com you can see that the stadium which was indicated was Maine Road. But I was sure that the game was played at Old Trafford. Therefore I let them know and the info was updated.

Among the info I sent them which still need to be corrected, there is the Benfica's line-up over their 1960/61 European Cup match against Újpest in Hungary. If you please take a look at the uefa.com link, you can see that they indicate Manuel Serra. But I'm sure António Saraiva did appear for Benfica, as confirmed by four famous newspapers from those days: Diário de Lisboa, Népsport, A Bola and Record.

Another one: 1990/91 European Cup: Crvena Zvezda 3-0 Glasgow Rangers. Uefa.com states Milorad Ratković replaced Dragiša Binić at 78'. But I'm sure Ratković didn't enter at all. I could consult all the most important British and Yugoslavian newspapers from those days, and Ratković was never mentioned. But the conclusive evidence is the video of the match, which clearly shows that Binić was still in and missed a goal chance towards the end of the game.

I'm “specialized” above all in the European Cup/Champions League winning squads. This is the file I created after years and years of researches and close examinations.


nfm24 wrote:
Haha, yes my favourite one of those is FIFA having "PR China" in the 1936 Olympics.

UEFA: probably the "brain" doesn't talk to the "body". Websites are often outsourced, so the data on the web doesn't necessarily reflect data in the filing cabinet.

Yeah! Another classic example was the flag of South Vietnam, that, if I well remember, was the one of North Vietnam...

One of the most evident technical errors on uefa.com is the fact they consider Hertha Berlin as winners of the 2006 Intertoto Cup. But that year the trophy was won by Newcastle United.

Last Edited By: Luca Oct 7 16 8:27 AM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   

#6 [url]

Sep 27 16 6:17 PM

Luca

It is interesting to note in the two UEFA pages for the Real Madrid v Manchester United match that along with the change of stadium (correctly changed to Old Trafford) Tommy Taylor's goal time has changed from 62' to 52'.  I've checked my records and I believe 62' is correct, although I have 61' in my records. My original research, where I used Daily Express, Daily Mail, Daily Mirror, Daily Herald, News Chronicle all have 61' / 62'. IFFHS have 62'. To be fair I have also seen 51' and 52' along with 56' but believe 61' / 62' is most likely correct.

A quick check of El Mundo Deportivo, La Vanguardia and ABC on-line and they all appear to have 61' / 62'.

Anyone want to inform UEFA ?  No.... me neither.

 

Quote    Reply   

#7 [url]

Sep 27 16 8:01 PM

Goal minutes are highly sensitive to fluctuations. The problem is that in order to verify the true minute of a goal, you generally need either a very detailed commentary which keeps mention how many minutes have passed (so you can rule out the wrong option), or a video/audio recording of the match. Otherwise we are at the mercy of the dodgy cheap timepieces of the journalist, and whether or not he read it correctly and then no subsequent typos were made.

Whereas the stadium error is just poor.

Quote    Reply   

#8 [url]

Sep 28 16 11:44 AM

According to Corriere Dello Sport from 26/04/1957, it was scored at 58'

According to La Provincia Di Cremona from 26/04/1957, at 59'.
A definitive answer can surely be given by Marca, which, unfortunately, is not available online, but only at Biblioteca Nacional de España in Madrid.


I have just noticed that another feedback I sent them a couple of years ago has recently been fixed. I refer to the 1965/66 European Cup match Real Madrid 4-2 Anderlecht, played in Madrid on 09/03/1966. The previous version of uefa.com reported, in the Real Madrid's line-up, the following players: Félix Ruiz and Francisco Serena. But, after long investigations, I could discover that Ramón Grosso and José Veloso played instead. I'm 100% sure, because all the most important Spanish, Belgian and Italian newspapers from the following day clearly confirm my point. Now it is updated.







Quote    Reply   

#9 [url]

Sep 28 16 12:26 PM

It is very hard to find out in which minute a goal was scored. I have been reporter for amateur soccer matches in the Rotterdam area for 24 years. Before we had the 90+1 etc, sometimes it was a guess when a goal must have been scored. I remember a match which ended 2-1, all goals scored in the 13 minutes of injury time. So the scoreline was given as 96. X. 0-1, 100. Y. 1-1, 102. Z. 2-1. As some newspapers had the rule that the match finishes at 90., a scoreline as 83. X. 0-1, 85. Y. 1-1, 89. Z. 2-1, was another option. As it is not very clear how many delay there was in injury time, the scoreline also could have been 86. X. 1-0, 87. Y. 1-1, 90. Z. 2-1.

This makes it very difficult to find out what is right. Each newspaper have/had their own criteria. It is more complicated when a reporter even uses a stopwatch and took a look at after the goal was scored. Let's take Luca's example. First both reporters had to find out who scored the goal, then he take a look at his stopwatch. One reporter sees 58:07, 58:08 and guessed the goal was scored five seconds before he took a first look on his stopwatch, so the goal must have been scored at 58:02 which is the 59th minute. His colleague immediately looked as his stopwach after te goal was scored and saw: 57:59, which is the 58th minute.

Last Edited By: Fast Midfielder Sep 29 16 10:21 AM. Edited 2 times.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad

#10 [url]

Sep 28 16 6:30 PM

Thanks for your comments everyone.

I agree there are often fluctuations in recorded goal times in 'old' match reports due probably to the various methods employed, as stated by Fast Midfielder.

When I did my earlier research and I had different times recorded I would normally either go for a 'mean' or 'median' figure depending on the quality of the report(s) or the frequency the goal time was recorded. I personally like the modern approach to recording goal times in stoppage time i.e. 45+2, 90+4.

Just for the record in respect of Taylor's goal I will be leaving my records as 61' and feel 52' is just too early in the second half for the goal to have been scored. The match reports I used would have been from reporters who would have been at the game rather than an agency report.

Quote    Reply   

#11 [url]

Sep 29 16 1:40 AM

Yes an important point is that multiple newspapers citing the same agency report don't count as distinct sources. So sometimes we might appear to have three newspapers favouring one version of events, and only one newspaper with another version, but the score is actually 1-1. Also agency reports could be trimmed down (sometimes abruptly) by a newspaper's editor to fill the available space in a column.

Quote    Reply   

#12 [url]

Sep 30 16 7:04 PM

Fast Midfielder's anecdote about the Rotterdam area makes me remember two other messages I sent UEFA about the most important Rotterdam club, Feyenoord, that have not been corrected yet on uefa.com.
The first one regards the substitutions effected by Feyenoord during their 1969/70 European Cup match versus KR Reykjavik. If you please take a look at the uefa.com link, you can see the following data: Eddy Pieters Graafland replaces Coen Moulijn at 28'; Ruud Geels replaces Henk Wery at 35'. But I'm sure that Cor Veldhoen replaced Henk Wery at 46', while Ruud Geels replaced Coen Moulijn at 26'. Eddy Pieters Graafland was a goalkeeper and didn't participate in this game! I've consulted three different Dutch newspapers from the day 18-09-1969, and they all report the substitutions I've cited above.
The second one regards Vorwärts 1-0 Feyenoord, again from the 1969/70 European Cup, where you can see that a player called Hermanus Vrauwdeunt replaces Theo van Duivenbode. But this is impossible, as Hermanus Vrauwdeunt was born in 1915!! That was his son, Piet Vrauwdeunt, who only won one cap during the 1969/70 European campaign.
So, not only goal minutes can create confusion. Also substitutions can be a tricky issue, as I have already pointed out above talking about Crvena Zvezda 3-0 Rangers.

Quote    Reply   

#13 [url]

Oct 6 16 6:47 PM

Luca

Re: Your research into the Crvena zvedza v Rangers match and the non Binic (Ratkovic) substitution after 78 minutes. I also had this substitution in my records as it was noted in a number of British newspapers and periodicals. It is most unusual for a substitution to be recorded that didn’t actually take place. Normally it is the unrecorded substitutions that are seen.

You have probably noticed this yourself but having looked at UEFA.com I noticed that on 78 minutes number 14 McCoist replaced number 11 Huistra for Rangers. Binic wore number 11 and Ratkovic 14. A case of a mix-up in the press box with reporters assuming that Crvena zvedza had also substituted their number 11 with number 14?

Quote    Reply   

#14 [url]

Oct 6 16 8:27 PM

On some occasions (though I can't now give any specific examples) I've seen match reports giving phantom substitutions - I think these commonly arise after an aborted sub, e.g. a player is standing ready to come onto the field but then there is a goal or something happens to change the mind of the manager. Conversely, the most commonly missed subs in match reports are the subs just in the aftermath of a goal or a major incident - the cameras are replaying the action while the sub goes on. It can be up to 5 minutes later that the TV captions mention the sub, so people using only the TV footage cannot be sure when it was actually made.

Quote    Reply   

#15 [url]

Oct 7 16 8:26 AM

In this case the definitive answer is given by the following video, at minute 19:33:



A Serbian friend of mine told me that the commentator said: "Exactly 10 minutes to the end of the match, Red Star-Glasgow Rangers 3-0". After some seconds, Crvena Zvezda forward Binić misses a goal chance. So he was still in at 80'. Moreover, at minute 20:12 of the video, we can see again Binić in action. After some seconds, the match ends. So this means he was not replaced. Also three Yugoslav newspapers and magazines from the following days (Politika, Novosti and Sport), don't mention the Binić (Ratković) substitution.

nfm24 wrote:
My least favourite dealings were with Reuter and CANA in a furtive attempt to get access directly to archive agency news reports rather than go via the newspaper "middle man" .

That would be an interesting idea, Neil. I mean: having access to the historical archive of a press agency, in some cases, could be even more helpful than a normal newspaper report. Have your attempts ever been successful?

Quote    Reply   

#16 [url]

Oct 7 16 3:56 PM

(I just became distracted watching the Prosinecki show.)

No. But maybe you would have better luck. The closest I got was a phone call with the guy who had Reuters pre-internet archive, but he has since retired and there seems no replacement.

Quote    Reply   

#17 [url]

Oct 8 16 8:51 AM

nfm24 wrote:
(I just became distracted watching the Prosinecki show.)

That's why Rangers' assistant coach Walter Smith, before facing Red Star, exclaimed a famous: «We are f****d!» icon_smile.gif

Luca wrote:
having access to the historical archive of a press agency, in some cases, could be even more helpful than a normal newspaper report.

Obviously not always. If I well remember, just after the resounding United States' success over England at the 1950 World Cup, a famous press agency (I can't recall its name precisely) reported a large 10-1 win in favour of England, rather than the real score...!

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help