Talk:Argentine Primera División

Champions since Inicial 2012

The article states that only one club will be Champion per year. "both winners have to play a match which determines the champion of the season unlike the Apertura and Clausura seasons that proclaimed a champion each." But the "Champions" section still features Velez as 2012 Inicial Champions. If I get the document of AFA right (and the quoted sentences from this article prove my opinion) Velez is not "2012 Inicial Champion" since Inicial is no championship on its own. It is the first half of a championship with Torneo Final being the second half and the winners of Inicial and Final play a match to determine who is going to be the ONE Champion of the year.

The AFA announcement( http://www.afa.org.ar/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=16395:nuevos-torneos-&catid=180:afa&Itemid=219 ) reads as follows:

"El Comité Ejecutivo de la AFA decidió que se dispute un solo campeonato de 38 fechas dividido en dos torneos de 19 jornadas[...]."

In English: "The AFA Executive Committee decided that a single championship is played in 38 rounds divided in two tournaments of 19 rounds each[...]."

"El ganador del torneo Inicial y el vencedor del torneo Final se enfrentarán en un partido, en estadio neutral, al término del segundo certamen y determinarán el campeón del año."

In English: "The winner of Inicial and Final tournament will face each other in a match at a neutral stadium, after the second event and determine the champion of the year.

Later in this document they also say that winners of Torneo Final and Torneo Inicial will receive money and a trophy.

But the trophy the Inicial winners and Final winners get is not the championship trophy of Argentina who will be rewarded only to the champion that is the winner of the match between Inicial and Final winners. I think it should be listed seperately somehow. Of course it makes sense to list the winners of Inicial and Final but not as champions. To me winning of the Inicial doesn't seem to be Velez' 9th title. There is only one champion per year and the others are "only" the winners of the respective tournaments. That's what the reform tells us: in the past there were two champions per year(Apertura and Clausura winner), but from now on we will see only one per year. Correct me if I'm wrong or show me that AFA said or wrote somewhere that Inicial and Final winners will be counted as champions in the statistics of the federation. Maybe I just didn't see it since my Spanish is far from good.

--Klugioh (talk) 00:26, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Logos

There's a really good site with free logos. Only condition is to name them. High Quality Football Logos It would be good to donwload those missing. Including some that are no longer in 1st division, but had been, such as Huracan, Argentinos, etc. Also should update international competition's pages. --Marianocecowski 09:58, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Argentinos Juniors is in First Division (as of now...). Bear in mind that most clubs have changed logos at some point. elpincha 12:47, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Club Position

We should make a desition regarding Tournament and Position for the clubs.

We could -put the current Position and League at tie of edit-, or we could put the ending Position of the past Tournament.

For example, Clausura 2005 is about to finish, and we can set all the Positions at the end of it. But when the Apertura begins, are we going to modify the data after every weekend? Seams to me better to keep last Tournament's Positions. Comments? --Mariano June 30, 2005 07:24 (UTC)

You're right about the need for consistency. But enforcement would be difficult, so let's be tolerant... I hope nobody got mad about my putting the championship in Miguel Angel Russo's article a few minutes before it was actually true... elpincha 30 June 2005 08:18 (UTC)

Over 32Kb

The size of the article finally crossed the 32kb limit. And I was hoping to add another table with all the relegations/promotions[1]. Should we make another page with the detalied statistics and leave only the short ones? -Mariano 13:47, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

I think we should split and also consider a cleanup to eliminate redundancies between this entry and the Football in Argentina article. elpincha 08:42, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Well, Football in Argentina is a rather slim article, but the history part of Primera División Argentina could be moved there and be only referenced here.

The Top-3 table and records perhaps deserve an article of theirs own. We could leave only the second table with number of titles, or not even that. I wanted also to keep a table on relegation/promotion, probably in a forth article. We will need to think good names for such articles though. -Mariano 12:59, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Axis

"No team from outside the Buenos Aires-Rosario axis has ever won a title, and a reversal of this trend is not likely to occur in the foreseeable future."

What do we do with Quilmes and Estudiantes LP? It can be argued that Quilmes is from Bs. As, but Estudiantes?? I don't think ELP qualifies as a Buenos Aires team, since La Plata is not even included in the Greater Buenos Aires area...

Maybe Buenos Aires is meant to be about the province, although pairing it with Rosario would be odd. Maybe "only teams from Buenos Aires and Rosario have ever won a title, yadayada". Don't forget to sign with ~~~~. SpiceMan (会話) 13:12, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

I think it has already been solved by Sebastian himself. -Mariano 13:58, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Oh, c'mon Spice, are you going to chastise me for not signing once? Bummer! :):):)

Related to the matter in hand, I did try to fix it, mainly to avoid the odd pairing between a province and a city. :)

--Sebastian Kessel 16:00, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Top scorers

Argentina - List of Topscorers Mariano(t/c) 12:30, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

What is this, Macaya??? :-) Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 16:01, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Why, the list of top scorer of each season of the Argentine football! Mariano(t/c) 08:03, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I know, gracioso, I mean what it is for. :) Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 16:03, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, eventually we will have to make an article from it, doncha think? Mariano(t/c) 08:05, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I do m'friend, I do... Good foresight. :) Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 16:38, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Teams in Primera Division

che loco, shouldn't there be a table or list with all the teams currently in primera division?! This article has everything about primera but nothing on the teams currently playing in it :S Arg2k 18:15, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Third place finishes

During the Metropolitano and the Nacional, many of the seasons featured semi-finals. How was it determined which of the losing semi-finalists deserved the third place finish?

In Nacional 1982, the table in this article gives Talleres 3rd place, even though Estudiantes (the other SF loser) finished above them in Group C, and lost their semi by a smaller margin 0-3 as opposed to 4-8. The only surviving factor is that they lost to the eventual champions, but in the very next season Temperley lost to the eventual champions, but Argentinos Juniors were credited with the 3rd place. If no-one comes up with an explanation I would like to amend the table to include both losing semi-finalists. King of the North East (T/C) 11:53, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

As no-one replied to this for 7 month I went ahead and made the changes a few days ago. EP 18:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Method to determine Copa Libertadores and Copa Sudamericana places

How does Primera División Argentina determine which team will participate in the Copa Libertadores and Copa Sudamericana? For example, as Copa Libertadores 2008 starts around February, does the result of the Apertura 2007 determined the places? Or the entirely result of Apertura and Clausura 2005/06? Or the result of Clausura 2007 and Apertura 2007? The question is the same for Copa Sudamericana. Can anyone help? Salt (talk) 05:57, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Historically the results of the previous season determined participation, therefore Copa Libertadores 2008 was represented by Apertura 2006 champions Estudiantes, Clausura 2007 champions San Lorenzo. 2007 Libertadores holders, Boca Juniors and the three best placed teams from the combined points of Ap06 and Cl07, excluding the three already qualified.

Participation for Copa Libertadores 2009 will be determined using: Apertura 2007 champions, Clausura 2008 champions, Apertura 2008 champions,the two best placed teams from the combined points totals of the three seasons combined.

Participation in Copa Sudamericana is determined like this: Boca Juniors and River Plate by invitation, the 4 best placed teams from the combined points totals of Apertura + Clausura.

Complicated stuff huh? EP 20:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, it's really complicated. Thanks for your clear explanation.

But there are still somethings that I would like to make sure. For the new system for Copa Libertadores 2009, is it a long term system and will also be used in the future? If so, then wouldn't it be so strange that for the winners of Apertura, it can participate the Copa Libertadores twice because it can play in the Copa Libertadores this season as well as the next season?

For the Copa Sudamericana, are Boca and River Plate invited every year certainly? And who is the invitor, the Argentine Football Association or the CONMEBOL?

Lastly, before the current Apertura and Clausura system was adopted, how were the two places of Copa Libertadores allocated?

I hope I didn't ask too much. I hope this part can be explaned more clearly in the article as it is quite confused for those who are not familiar with South American football. Your answer would certainly be a great help! Thanks! Salt (talk) 15:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

1. In future it will be worked out with the combined Clausura and Aperura for the year before. Therefore Lib 2010 will involve teams qualifying via Cl 09 + Ap 09. But I'm not 100% sure of this.

2.River and Boca are invited by CONMEBOL every season no matter where they finish in the table, then the best four finishes amongst the rest, (Arsenal get an additional place in Sudamericana 2008 as holders).

3.Before and during the early years of the Ap & Cl system they had a pre-libertadores liguilla tournament, similar to qualification events still held in Uruguay. Before that the winners of the Metropolitano and Nacional qualified automatically. I would leave the history of qualification out of the article though, as the qualification process is already complicated enough to confuse most people. The qualification information for specific seasons can be found in the Seasons in Argentine football articles. EP 18:10, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your answer again! I totally agree with you that the history of the qulification is too complicated to be included in the main article. Nonetheless I think it is valuable to be included in somewhere at wikipedia. So I am planning to start a new page on the historical change and add a link in the main article. Though it may not be a long article, I think it is helpful for those who are interested in Argentine football, like me.

BTW, I find one more strange thing. As there are places for those best teams in the combined table in the previous season in both Copa Libertadores and Copa Sudamericana, it is necessary that all those places are allocated to the same teams, isn't it? For example, the three best team get the Copa Libertadores spots in the combined table must also get the places in Copa Sudamericana because they must be 3 of the best 4 teams. So the teams participating in these two cup must be nearly the same? It is very strange, isn't it? Salt (talk) 05:55, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

The Metropolitano and Nacional

I have got some questions concerning these two competitions.

1. In the article, it is said "Originally, the Metropolitano was a regular two-group championship, from which the six best teams of each group would advance to the Nacional." However, as what I have found in 1967, the Metropolitano was a 2 groups tournament, while the Nacional is a league of 16. If the best six teams from Metropolitano qualify to the Nacional, isn't it a 1w teams competition? Why is it a 16 teams tournament?

2. It is said "In 1970 the tournaments were separated; the Metropolitano had its own qualifying groups, and the Nacional two groups and play-offs." If tournaments were finally separated the Metropolitano finally had "its own" qualifying group in 1970, does it mean Nacional is the qualifying groups for the Metropolitano before? But how is it possible that a later held Nacional can act as the qualifying group for the Metropolitano?

3. In question one, it says teams of the Metropolitano qualified to the Nacional, while in question two it says teams in Nacional qualified to the Metropolitano. What is the relationship between the Metropolitano and Nacional?

4. It is said that "Nacional, which was open to teams from the provinces", it seems it implies that Metropolitano only allowed teams in the old competition to participate. Is it true? If so, is this policy continue until the end of Metropolitano-Nacional era and teams not in the old competition could only play in one tournament (the Nacional) in a year? What were the exact criteria of eligibility to play in these two competitions?

I found the concerned section in the article is quite confusing. I don't really understand the content. Hope someone can help. Thanks a lot. Salt (talk) 17:31, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

See this, qualification and relegation details are given there. (follow the links 1961-1970,1971-1980 and 1981-1990). Regards EP 17:18, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Gimnasia's two stars

Somebody please excise the nonsense, or somebody may die (laughing). It is Argentine consensus that amateur-era titles do not count, and the three cups mentioned are remembered by nobody. Atlanta never claimed to be a "champion" the way Gimnasia does. The only reasons Gimnasia claims two stars are envy of its richer neighbor and utter disregard for what everybody else agrees on. elpincha (talk) 03:43, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

talk: Despite your non-neutral (it is clear in your statement) point of view, I'm telling you that "amateur" leagues have always been official. Championships held during the amateur era (1891-1930) have the same status than the tournaments held since 1931. You can take a look at the AFA Library to corroborate this. - Fma12 (talk) 12:45, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Map

I've seen some pages that have a map of the country showing where each team is located. I thought this would be a nice addition to the article. Anyone agree? I would do it but i have no idea how Arg2k (talk) 20:52, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:La Liga which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RFC bot 13:30, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Primera División of Spain which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RFC bot 18:00, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Estudiantes and Gimnasia

Is it necessary to add (La Plata) in these cases? Considering they're the most important clubs with those names, and that there's no other Estudiantes or Gimnasia this season in the Primera División championship, they'd oddly be confused. I think the parenthesis should be removed in both cases. Ipsumesse (talk) 14:24, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

I consider it is necessary because other teams named "Gimnasia y Esgrima" and "Estudiantes" have also played in Primera División. - Fma12 (talk) 12:46, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Removal of information

I came to the article looking for the table of top 3 finishes and it had just disappeared. I'm not sure who removed it but I believe that when information is deleted from an article it should at least be discussed.

Club	Champions	Runners-up	Third Place/ Semi-final
River Plate	33	25	13
Boca Juniors	23	18	14
Independiente	14	14	11
San Lorenzo de Almagro	10	11	14
Vélez Sársfield	7	7	10
Racing	7	6	12
Newell's Old Boys	5	3	6
Estudiantes de La Plata	4	4	9
Rosario Central	4	4	4
Argentinos Juniors	3	1	2
Ferro Carril Oeste	2	3	1
Huracán	1	4	4
Lanús	1	3	3
Banfield	1	2	2
Quilmes	1	1	0
Chacarita Juniors	1	0	2
Gimnasia y Esgrima La Plata	0	5	4
Tigre	0	2	0
Talleres	0	1	6
Unión	0	1	2
Colón	0	1	2
Racing de Córdoba	0	1	0
Deportivo Español	0	0	3
Platense	0	0	2
Atlanta	0	0	1
Atlético Tucumán	0	0	1
Godoy Cruz	0	0	1
Temperley	0	0	1

This table was not removed but modified due to it only shows the titles won during the professional era. The Primera División was established in 1891 and all the champions from that year to 1934 should be listed. That's the reason because the list was changed, updating its contents. Fma12 (talk) 20:49, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Belgrano renaming controversy.

Media sources have reported that the 2012-13 season has been renamed in honour of the sinking of the Belgrano. the full name for the season will be the Crucero General Belgrano Primera División (Cruiser General Belgrano First Division)[2]

Fifa has asked for clarification on the issue due to a possible breach of Fifa statutes Fifa has requested the AFA to provide further information on this matter and reminded the AFA of Article 3 of the Fifa Statutes which prohibits any kind of discrimination against a country, private person or group of people on account of ethnic origin, gender, language, religion, politics or any other reason..[3], [4]. I thought it may be useful to ad the information to the article. Dlv999 (talk) 16:28, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

IFFHS Ranking

I would not rely on this ranking. The IFFHS seems to be the creation of some German academic oddball Dr. Alfredo Pöge. I have checked the statistics provided by the organisation and they are pretty shallow for an organisation claiming to be the leading experts. (http://www.iffhs.de/?b002ec70a81534cd003f10) They are adding international games decade by decade - but all this information is readily available from the many sports historians in most countries. Anyway....here is the history of a very obscure organisation. Its so droll, that it feels like a satire. These are just a bunch of hobbyists - it doesn't seem like a serious research organisation http://www.iffhs.de/?b3120fe3016e23617ff3c17f7370eff3702bb1c2bb19

Now, what really caught my imagination is that the new president is this guy, an Arab fellow, who wants to move the HQ from Bonn to the UAE. Has this guy been duped into believing that this is actually a major international organisation? http://www.uaefa.ae/en/index.php?go=news&more=15251

So I looked up in the German Telephone Book the current HQ address of this international organisation: Borsigallee 15, 53125 Bonn. And who lives there...... Ursula Pöge — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.126.61.161 (talk) 23:23, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Copa Libertadores section not up to date

"Not sure what will happen beyond 2009" surely we know the rule changes by now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.140.250.125 (talk) 12:37, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Amateur+Professional eras

Fma12 (talk) 20:52, 16 April 2013 (UTC) There's misstake in article. Amateur and profesional championships are not summarized in Argentina.--Soul Train (talk) 16:26, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

That was corrected some time ago. I personally did the changes adding all the champions from the amateur era (1891-1934). Fma12 (talk) 20:52, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

The combined listing is incorrect. The AFA webpage clearly lists the Amateur and Professional eras as separate, much like the National cups, so there should be two listings for the championships. 186.134.36.114 (talk) 03:11, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

The AFA only distinguish "amateur" and "professional" for the periods (1891-1930, 1931-present) but winning teams are all listed in the same table. - see AFA website nowadays. - Fma12 (talk) 12:49, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Godoy Cruz

GCAT play in the city of Mendoza, (not Godoy Cruz itself which is a town just outside the city). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.0.1.3 (talk) 01:18, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

AFA PDF's

I found a couple of Spanish-language PDF's (1 & 2) that explain what the AFA are doing next year and over the next couple of years. Maybe everyone has already seen these. If not, I hope they can help someone update this article with the new information. Equineducklings (talk) 04:52, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Unclear part - the basic format of this well-known league

All the 30 teams play each other ONCE, with the exception of extra meeting/meetings with a special opponent. But how many rounds is played during the season ? 30 rounds or 31 rounds. Are there really first a "normal meeting" between the special pairs ? And after that - is there then one or two extra matches played (like the games Bocca Juniors vs River Plate) ?? And by the way, are the special Classicos, played during the normal season, or are they all played during one and the same the same round ? In the last match of the season ? Otherwise always nice to read about South-American football. Try to add some more information, for instance average attendances and some more statistics. Boeing720 (talk) 02:06, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Boeing720, in the current Primera División season (2016-17) are 30 teams that play each once (29 rounds plus the clásicos (derbies) round). The clásicos will be played in the round 24th (on April 16, 2017). The complete list of games (in brackets, the city) to be played are: Boca–River (Buenos Aires), Rosario Central–Newell's (Rosario), Independiente–Racing (Avellaneda), San Lorenzo–Huracán (Buenos Aires), Estudiantes–Gimnasia (La Plata), Colón–Unión (Santa Fe).

For further information, see this link detailing the complete list of games. Thanks for your interest in South-American football, and let me know if you need more information - Fma12 (talk) 12:56, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Argentine Primera División. 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/20141223205616/http://www.afa.org.ar/revista/julio_2013_29/index.html to http://www.afa.org.ar/revista/julio_2013_29/index.html

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).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:50, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

There is something fundamentally wrong with this article name

The literal translation is not Argentine but Argentina. The style of the original name should be maintained so that at least there is not the hint of "colonial grammarism" being imposed on others.2605:E000:9149:8300:8456:C015:5821:6E1 (talk) 12:26, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

A similar discussion was had at WPFOOTY at the beginning of May, see: here. The article name is correct given how WPFOOTY names articles, it's consistent with its (e.g.) Peruvian and Bolivian counterparts. If you disagree, feel free to visit Wikipedia:Requested moves. R96Skinner (talk) 14:13, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Okasy, let us look at say for example Peru: http://es.wiki.x.io/wiki/Primera_Divisi%C3%B3n_del_Per%C3%BA . A literal translation of the introductory para is "The First Division of Peru - known as Liga de Fútbol Profesional or simply Liga 1 and for reasons of sponsorship like Liga 1 Movistar, is the highest category of the official soccer championships in Peru. It is organized by the Peruvian Football Federation. At the moment it is conformed by 18 clubs." Peru = Peru; Peruanas = Peruvian. So that example flies inconsistency in the face of logic. The question is not of the propriety of the move but the proper article title. Are users suppose to now second guess just what is the trend in article titles especially for sports? Is the title of the host country Argentina or Argentine? I venture to say it is Argentina. Yes there are instances where the host country name ends in and "ine' or "ian" but that depends on the title of the host country.2605:E000:9149:8300:B139:B5F:118:A405 (talk) 03:33, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

As mentioned, if you wish for a change of article title - visit Wikipedia:Requested moves. R96Skinner (talk) 12:35, 16 June 2019 (UTC)