Talk:Treble (association football)

=> FC Bayern Munich won full 3 competitions / Full competition means that club's single season period = competitions single season period.

There is no room for dissent.

• (2) Within a period of Al-Hilal's single season (2019–20)

=> Al-Hilal won full 2 competitions (2019–20 Saudi Professional League and 2019–20 King Cup)
=> Al-Hilal won imperfect 1 competition (2019 AFC Champions League)

Strictly speaking, Success at the 2019 AFC Champions League Group stage is the achievement of Al-Hilal's 2018–19 season squad.

But Because success at the 2019 AFC Champions League Knockout stage is the achievement of Al-Hilal's 2019–20 season squad, Like manager of final match takes all honour, not sharing with fired former manager. I agreed that Al-Hilal's treble

• (3-1) Within a period of C.F. Monterrey's single season (2018–19)

=> C.F. Monterrey won full 1 competition (2019 CONCACAF Champions League / 19 February – 1 May 2019)

• (3-2) Within a period of C.F. Monterrey's single season (2019–20)

=> C.F. Monterrey won full 2 competitions (2019–20 Liga MX and 2019–20 Copa MX)

In conclusion, C.F. Monterrey didn't win 3 competitions in club's sing season and this treble article have wrong information currently.

I know some newspaper reported that C.F. Monterrey achieved a treble. (eg: https://www.tudn.mx/copa-mx/rayados-1-1-xolos-marcador-resumen-goles-monterrey-titulo-triplete) But this source made a mistake.

If C.F. Monterrey achieved a treble, By the same logic, Red Star Belgrade also achieved a treble (1990–91 Yugoslav First League, 1989–90 Yugoslav Cup, 1990–91 European Cup

If you compare below tables. you can understand what I mean.

Finaly, my contribution is necessary for clarifying the concept of treble and C.F. Monterrey must be deleted in the Continental trebles list.

• 2019–20 FC Bayern Munich season

Competition	First match	Last match	Starting round	Final position	Record
					Pld	W	D	L	GF	GA	GD	Win %
Bundesliga	16 August 2019	27 June 2020	Matchday 1	Winners	34	26	4	4	100	32	+68	076.47
DFB-Pokal	12 August 2019	4 July 2020	First round	Winners	6	6	0	0	16	8	+8	100.00
DFL-Supercup	3 August 2019		Final	Runners-up	1	0	0	1	0	2	−2	000.00
Champions League	18 September 2019	23 August 2020	Group stage	Winners	11	11	0	0	43	8	+35	100.00
Total					52	43	4	5	159	50	+109	082.69

Source: Competitions

• 2019–20 Al-Hilal FC season

Competition	Started round	Final position / round	First match	Last match
Pro League	Matchday 1	Winners	23 August 2019	9 September 2020
King Cup	Round of 64	Winners	3 November 2019	29 November 2020
2019 Champions League	Round of 16	Winners	6 August 2019	24 November 2019
2020 Champions League	Group stage	Group stage (withdrew)	10 February 2020	23 September 2020
FIFA Club World Cup	Second round	Fourth place	14 December 2019	21 December 2019

Source: Competitions

• 2018–19 C.F. Monterrey season

Competition	First match	Last match	Starting round	Final position	Record
					Pld	W	D	L	GF	GA	GD	Win %
Torneo Apertura	21 July 2018	8 December 2018	Matchday 1	5th	21	12	3	6	29	20	+9	057.14
Apertura Copa MX	1 August 2018	31 October 2018	Group stage	Runners-up	8	5	2	1	14	6	+8	062.50
Torneo Clausura	5 January 2019	18 May 2019	Matchday 1	3rd	21	10	6	5	35	23	+12	047.62
CONCACAF Champions League	20 February 2019	1 May 2019	Round of 16	Winners	8	5	2	1	16	4	+12	062.50
Total					58	32	13	13	94	53	+41	055.17

Last updated: 6 March 2019
Source: Mediotiempo.com

• 2019–20 C.F. Monterrey season

Competition	First match	Last match	Starting round	Final position	Record
					Pld	W	D	L	GF	GA	GD	Win %
Torneo Apertura	20 July 2019	29 December 2019	Matchday 1	Winners	24	12	4	8	39	29	+10	050.00
Copa MX	31 July 2019	4 November 2020	Group stage	Winners	10	8	1	1	22	8	+14	080.00
Torneo Clausura	18 January 2020		Matchday 1		10	0	5	5	10	17	−7	000.00
FIFA Club World Cup	14 December 2019	21 December 2019	Second round	Third place	3	1	1	1	6	6	+0	033.33
Total					47	21	11	15	77	60	+17	044.68

Last updated: 24 April 2020
Source: Mediotiempo.com

Footwiks (talk) 18:35, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Footwiks, first please be WP:CIVIL and don't accuse me of owning the article. Second, per WP:V, all info must be reliably sourced to be eligible to be presented here, and all included trebles here are properly sourced following all the gidelines. Third, per WP:RS all your arguments, tables and info presented here are meaningless for Wikipedia, because none of this can be considered reliable, and cannot be used as sources. You, as an wikipedian, cannot be considered to be a reliable sources, Wikipedia's pages cannot be used as sources, and the only third-party link you presented lead us to Error 404, so with no sources, all of your work was pointless. Fourth, also per WP:RS, since all sources here directly state that these instances are considered as trebles, they can only be challenged if other sources, of similar quality, directly stating that they are not a treble, less than that is not acceptable. Fifth, no sources presented that a treble is tied to the concept of a "club's season", so adding such amendment would be considered WP:OR. Last, AFAIK, "club's season" doesn't exist. There are domestic seasons and continental seasons, since the seasons are formed and organized by the confederations that control the competitions, and not by the clubs. Usually a "club's season" is tied to one or another, I'm not sure if there's a standalone "club season" out there. ABC paulista (talk) 22:07, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

ABC paulista Club's single season definitely exists. (1) Squad building through transfer window. => (2) Trainning including friendly matches at preseason => (3) Participation in competitions => (4) Get a grade. => (5) Squad building through transfer window. This the cycle of club's single season.

if a standalone club's single season concept doesn't exist, How do you explain them? So many football club season articles in wikipedia and somethings about club's new season (eg 2020-21 season squad photo, 2019-20 season jersey, 2020-21 season jersey)

Most football clubs synchronise their club season (period or schedule) with domestic league season (period or schedule). Because domestic league is the basic competition to participate. Especially, In Euorepeon football, Most football club's single season period and Domestic competiotions period and UEFA competitions period are same. Therefor, There’s no need to make such fine distinctions In Euorepeon football.

For examples. But In Asian football, Club's single season period and domestic single seaon period are same. Club's single season period and AFC cometition period are not same. Examples are belows;

• South Korean football club's single season (Transfer window and preseason: November 2001-February 2002 / Participation in competitions: March 2002-November 2002)

=> 2001-2002 Asian club championship: September 2001– April 2002

• Saudi arabian football club's single season: (Transfer window and preseason: July 2019-August 2019 / Participation in competitions: 2019 September - 2020 November)

=> 2019 AFC Champions League: March 2019–November 2019

In this cases, We can adopt period including final match. If South korean club won 2002 Domestic Leauge, 2002 Korean FA Cup, 2001-02 Asian club Champinship, They achived the treble

Club's single season is very important meaning at the concept of treble.

Within club's single season, If they won 3 competitions, This is the treble and simple concept. In European football, There is no room for dissent. Because most club's single season period and 3 competitions single season period are same.

But, there are exceptions in other counties (including few European country), Below descripstion(Header info) is needed.

A treble in association football is achieved when a club team wins three competitions in a club's single season. In Europeon football, Club's single season period and competition's single season period are almost same. (e.g. 2019–20 FC Bayern Munich season, 2019–20 Bundesliga, 2019–20 DFB-Pokal and 2019–20 UEFA Champions League). But in other continental football, Not all club's single season period and competition's single season are same. (e.g. 2019–20 Al-Hilal FC season, 2019–20 Saudi Professional League, 2019–20 King Cup, 2019 AFC Champions League)

Let's ask others for their opinion

Footwiks (talk) 03:24, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Footwiks You are stating very subjective, opinative ideas about the presented info, but you do understand they opinions don't matter on Wikipedia if they are not backed up by reliable, third-party sources right? Have you ever read Wikipedia's guidelines, like WP:RS, WP:V, and especially WP:CONPOL? All I'm seeing is you trying to correlate the conecept of treble with a supposed "club's season", but you are showing nothing reliable to prove your point, just hanging on WP:OR, a practice that is strongly discouraged here, practically prohibited. All that "Club's single season cycle" is contained inside a confederation's season (either domestic or continental, maybe both), so they are part of it, not a standalone concept. Standalone means not following either confederation's season, but I doubt you'll find some cases of such. And all those "Club's season articles" aren't supposed to state that each of them have their own article, but only to list their results and achievements within a confederation's season (be it domestic, continental or both). ABC paulista (talk) 04:03, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

ABC paulista I have a question. Description that you support - A treble in association football is achieved when a club team wins three trophies in a single season.

What is a clear meaning of phrase 'in a single season? Is this domestic leauge's single season period? or Is this confederation's champions League's single season period? or Is this a just single year period? Phrase - In a single seaons is the most important criterion for achievement of treble. But current Phrase - in a single season is very ambiguous. It can be confusing.

In order to prevent controversies about achievement of treble, Firstly We must find clear definition of in a single season or we must clearly define in a single season. Unless there is clarification regarding the definition of phrase in a single season, The controversies are will be continued without end. Footwiks (talk) 05:13, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Footwiks It's true that the actual state of the article doesn't specify what kind of "season" it's dealing with, but that's because the sources presented don't specify it (maybe because they don't bother with the specifics, or maybe for them all confederation's seasons are valid, I don't know, I'm just speculating). Maybe some clarification would be benefitial in some way, but still we can't be the ones to define it. Wikipedia doesn't create info, it just aggregate existing info elsewhere, so we mustn't define it ourselves but find some professional, reliable external sources who do it. But until one is found, the actual ambiguity must stay per WP:RS. ABC paulista (talk) 13:21, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Currently Nobody knows. Specific scope of a single season and what kind of a single season. I know, Wikipedia doesn't create info. But We can let people know that current definition of treble is imperfect. Therefore I added the footnote. Please polish my footnote.Footwiks (talk)

We can't say it's "imperfect", because no one defined it as such, so putting such definition is WP:OR. If something is, or seems, ambiguous and undefined, we leave it as it is, with all its ambiguity, until some source defines it. That's how it must be done by wikipedia's guidelines. ABC paulista (talk) 15:59, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Why didn't sources specify a single season? In my opinion, Treble come from in Europeon footall. Most Europeaon club's single season and 3 competitions single season (Domestic League, FA Cup, UEFA tournaments) are same (August to May next year). In European football, There is no need to specify about single season. If this article deal with only European football's treble, Just 'In a single season.' It's OK. But this article deal with all football club's treble all over the world. Therefore current 'In a single season.' have problem.

Specific scope and kind of a single season is unknown.' This is just current fact. Do you really think that this is WP:OR. Let's get confirmation from the others.

Footwiks Could you please stop? A discussion on the subject is currently ongoing. Please refrain from editing the article until the discussion is done and a consensus is reached, per WP:BRD. About the sources ambiguity, the only way to know is asking them yourself. About how you, as an editor, "feel" about the current article's info status, Wikipedia doesn't care about it if the info is properly sourced. You, as an editor, don't have the right to define what it is a "fact" and what it isn't, only the sources have such attribution. It's not a matter of opinion, but of guidelines, of policies, of rules. ABC paulista (talk) 16:23, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

ABC paulista You always don't allow other user's good contributions. You always say no, say no, because wikipedia regulation, because wikipedia regulation. I think you are very conservative and you hope that this article stay version that you edit. Do you know this policy? Wikipedia:Ignore all rules. I think this policy is more important that wikipedia regulation you always mentioned.Footwiks (talk)

ABC paulista Specific scope and kind of a single season is unknown.' I think that this descriptions is not original research. You recognized imperfection of current treble defintion. Let me know matter of violation in Wikipedia:No original research?

Footwiks Before claiming WP:IAR, you should read WP:UIAR and WP:IARESSAYS. Because if you read so, you'd understand that this specific policy is an exception, not a rule, and should only be applied when there is WP:CONSENSUS that that's the right move, which isn't the case, otherwise we wouldn't discussing it right now. I disagree that it's a good contibution, I disagree that it's necessary, it clearly violates important policies (like WP:V and WP:RS) and by so I'm claiming WP:ENFORCE on this matter. Your proposed description is only based on an Editor's opinion, on it's perception, on a unsupported claim with with no backup from external reliable sources, and WP:OR states that such claims are considered Original Research (""original research" (OR) is used on Wikipedia to refer to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist"), and that "Wikipedia articles must not contain original research". That's how your claim violates the current policies. ABC paulista (talk) 19:27, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

ABC paulista Participants are only you and me in this discussion. Let's discuss this issue(in a single season) in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football in the near future.Footwiks (talk) 13:43, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Fine by me. ABC paulista (talk) 16:24, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Should Auckland City be listed as having four continental trebles or one?

They are currently listed as having four, but three of them (2005–06, 2013–14, and 2014–15) were from winning the NZFC Minor Premiership, NZFC Grand Final, and the OFC Champions League. Only the 2022 treble came from them winning New Zealand's main cup competition (the Chatham Cup), the New Zealand National League (the NZFC's successor), and the OFC Champions League, but the second sentence of the article states "A continental treble involves winning the club's national league competition, main national cup competition, and main continental trophy". I believe their first three "trebles" should be removed from this list and possibly added as a footnote instead. This goes for fellow New Zealand club Waitakere United's treble in 2007–08 as well since the three competitions they won that season were also the Minor Premiership, the Grand Final, and the OFCCL. Geolojoey (talk) 20:31, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't see any reason to dismiss them, since in the former New Zealand Football Championship these were the main league and main cup competitions that the franchises could participate, both the Premiership and the Grand Final were considered as separate competitions, both awarded their own throphies and prizes, and the sources do cite these instances as treble winners. So I don't see what's the issue here. ABC paulista (talk) 21:36, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

One, for the same reason that the Mariners above didn't win a treble. "Continental treble involves ... main domestic cup competition." The league & grand final in the NZFC league are not different competitions they're two stages of a single competition. The playoffs are not a "main cup". The sources are wrong, for the purposes of listing what this article says a Continental treble treble is. The clubs in this competition did not compete in the "main cup" of New Zealand which is the Chatham Cup. Macktheknifeau (talk) 07:21, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Per WP:RS, the sources superce an editor's point-of-view. You might not like it, but it is what it is. ABC paulista (talk) 14:54, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

It is not a "point of view", it is fact based clarification of an incorrect application of sources to the definition required for inclusion in the list being discussion. Macktheknifeau (talk) 12:13, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

It's considered a point of view until you bring sources that corroborate with it. Wikipedia is about Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth. ABC paulista (talk) 16:29, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Central Coast Mariners didn’t win a treble (that qualifies for this article listing)

Regardless of what "sources" say, the Mariners only won a single trophy that would be part of a Continental or Domestic Treble that we list on this article. The listings here aren't every team that has won three trophies in a season. If that were true it would be filled with teams who won a main cup or league as well as pre-season exhibition cups, one-off super cups, league cups or teams in countries with weird systems that have trophies for winning Apertura\Clausura splits & regional cups like in South America. Did they win "three trophies". Yes. Is that what this article is for listing? No. The AFC Cup "is the second-tier competition of Asian club football", it is not the "main continental trophy". The Australia Cup is the "main domestic cup competition" in Australia, and the Mariners were knocked out in their first game. And for clarity sake, they didn't win a regulation Double (association football) either, once again because the Australia Cup is the domestic cup. QED. Macktheknifeau (talk) 09:05, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

We must make another list and call it “another treble”, and put in it those clubs that achieved the treble consisting of lower-level continental championships (such as the European League, AFC Cup, etc.), for example, if Bayer Leverkusen had won over Atalanta, it would have achieved a treple (Bundesliga, DBK Kopal, Europa League), an achievement worth mentioning in the article but separated from the main list. --Mishary94 (talk) 12:23, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Schestos, this question was already discussed before in this talk page, like this and the consensus was to only include the main ones like the sources state. Before that were many more inclusions on the table consisting of scondary continental or domestic cup competitions. Here's how was this table before ABC paulista (talk) 13:38, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

I agree that the table should only include clubs with the real continental treble according to the definition:
winning the club's top-level domestic league competition, main domestic cup competition, and main continental trophy.

In my opinion, a separate section and table with the second continental trophy would make sense, as other Wikipedias (es:Triplete (fútbol) or de:Triple (Sport)) do.

Although winning a second-tier continental trophy (e.g. Europa League) has also been described as a continental treble, it is not as widely accepted. This is also mentioned in the article. Nevertheless, there should be no deviations for a second-tier continental treble from the other two needed achievements:

• main winning the club's top-level domestic league competition
• main domestic cup competition

And for Central Coast, as correctly explained, even for a second-tier continental treble definition would not be sufficient. Miria~01 (talk) 14:12, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

I'd agree with you if there are sources that cite this achievement and list these instances in some way, enough to satisfy WP:N.

And if that would be the case, what about a list for the ones who won both the main domestic league and continental competition, but only a secondary cup competition, like Liverpool on the 1983-84 season, or Thai Farmers Bank on the 1995 season? Even winning both the main continental and domestic cup competitons, but a lower-tier league trophy would be possible on some confederation, though I don't know if it ever happened. ABC paulista (talk) 15:53, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Let's say it more precisely, we would have a another section with two subsections and their tables in it:

• Continental treble (the genuine one with the definition as we have it now),
• Second-tier continental treble
  • Domestic double (league and main domestic cup double) + second-tier continental trophy
  • Second-tier domestic double (league and league cup double) + main continental trophy

It would be more in line with this article Double (association football), where different double achievements are distinguished.

Sources:

What is treble in footballs, Olympics.com

Will Xabi Alonso's Bayer Leverkusen land a historic treble and banish the ghosts of 2002?, Bundesliga.com

Porto fulfil treble dream, UEFA.com, 15 June 2003

Andre Villas-Boas elected Porto president in landslide win espn.co.uk

Bayer Leverkusen träumt vom kleinen Triple, sport.sky.de

Translated excerpt from german:

EUROPA LEAGUE: The longest road to the title. The small treble of championship, cup and UEFA Cup or Europa League has so far only been won by IFK Göteborg (1982), Galatasaray (2000), FC Porto (2003 and 2011) and CSKA Moscow (2005). If everything goes according to plan, Leverkusen still have five games left in this competition.

In German, the reporting always refers to the "small treble" when the most important continental trophy is not won, but only a second-tier continental trophy. Miria~01 (talk) 16:37, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, these sources do cite these kinds of "trebles", but most of them either cite them as part of the "generic" kind of treble, were any combination of 3 titles count (like supercups counting for domestic trebles), or they lump them together in the domestic and/or continental ones. For WP:N, there should be global coverage for these kinds of trebles, recognizing them as standalone achievements, setting their inclusion criteria, and some should tally them separately from other kinds of trebles. The Sky Sport source is a start, but still not enough.

And also, I wouldn't set the Double (association football) article as an example because most of the info stated there is unsourced, that article is a kind of a mess. For long I've been wanting to do a cleanup there, in a similar style that has been done here, or the List of association football teams to have won four or more trophies in one season one, with fixed criteria and only sourced doubles being eligible for inclusion there, but I haven't been having the time to work on such a long article. ABC paulista (talk) 19:18, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

IFFHS, 10 June 2023

In 14 cases, the continental trophy in consideration was the main one (Champions’ Cup/League), in the remaining 5 cases (which can be defined as “small trebles”) the 2nd by importance, UEFA Cup/Europa League (these cases are marked in grey in the table). Bayern, Barcelona and Al Ahly managed to make a treble twice; Porto made two “small trebles”.

spox.com, 22 May 2024 (in German)

Bayer Leverkusen are German champions and have all the trump cards in their hand to win the so-called "small treble" of the championship, the DFB Cup and the Europa League this season.

sportbuzzer.de, 24 August 2020 (in German)

With the second major treble (winning the championship, cup and Europa League is referred to as a "small treble") after the one under legendary coach Jupp Heynckes (2012/13)

goal.com, 4 April 2024 (in German)

as in the case of Bayer Leverkusen - when it comes to the Bundesliga, DFB Cup and the Europa League. This variant is now often referred to as a "small triple".

uefa.com, 9 February 2017 (in German)

*These clubs have won the treble of national championship, national cup and UEFA Cup or UEFA Europa League

---

Probably I'm more influenced by the German media, which makes a clearer distinction with the "small treble". In sources from the English media, treble is generally referred to as three major titles without clear distinction. Therefore, I can understand why a "small treble" is not included here in the article. Miria~01 (talk) 20:38, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

These are very good sources, especially the IFFHS one, though I don't undestand why both IFFHS and Olympics cite Mamelodi Soundowns as a Continental treble winner, since it didn't win the Nedbank Cup, the main South African cup, but won the Knockout Cup, making it more similar to Liverpool's 1983-84 case. ABC paulista (talk) 00:05, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

I assume that Olmypics.com used the IFFHS as a source. Since both have the same clubs listed only by UEFA and CAF. Same goes for transfermarkt, treble winners. And Mamelodi Sundowns is simply a mistake (due to poor research) at IFFHS. Of course it's just an assumption. Miria~01 (talk) 00:45, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

I tend to call the new list the "small treples", as IFFHS calls it. --Mishary94 (talk) 00:47, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Expanding additional lists or diluting the requirements is just going to create a huge amount of WP:LISTCRUFT. Teams who won a lot of trophies or second tier comps can have that information on their own club & seasonal pages. There's no need to turn what is a neat, compact article with well defined requirements for the listing sections into a free for all of any club who picked up three random trophies in a season. Macktheknifeau (talk) 05:09, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Domestic treble

Hello @ABC paulista:, Regarding Nadroga, the source the source here explicitly says that the domestic treble in Fiji consists of the Fiji Premier League, Fiji FA Cup, Inter-District Championship:

For this to happen, the Delta Tigers need to win two more of the three titles still to be played this year: Vodafone Premier League, Inter-District Championship and Fiji FACT....

Therefore, it is a Domestic treble, according to the sources, which proves that the club achieved the aforementioned titles in 1993.

Regarding Athletic Bilbao, you did not mention the reason for Reverting the edit, although it is clear that it is not a domestic treble because the Bizcaya Championship title is a regional competition, as well as unofficial, and therefore cannot include it in domestic treble.

Regarding the domestic treble introduction, this is considered an elaboration in more detail, because I have noticed that there are people who include the Super Cups as part of the domestic treble, so I see nothing to prevent it, especially since the second source that I included details about what the domestic treble is. --Mishary94 (talk) 01:48, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

First, I ask you to comply with WP:BRD, which state that one shouldn't re-revert until the matter is solved. Now, I'll divide the discussion for better clarity:

About Nadroga, the source you presented here talks specifically about the case of Rewa in the 2020 season, and per WP:STICKTOTHESOURCE and WP:OR, we can't assume or interpolate that the same was valid for Nardroga almost 20 years prior. And the consensus within the project is that trebles can only be included if reliable sources do refer them as such and that they comply with the most accepted criteria. Nadroga's case might pass on the second criteria, but still need to have a source explicitally calling it a treble.

About Bilbao, the lead state that A domestic treble involves winning three national competitions—including the league title, the primary cup competition, and one secondary competition, such as a secondary cup or state-level league., thus reginal and state-level competitions are usually accepted within domestic trebles, and the Biscay Championship was a official competition run by Regional Federations that were all under the Royal Spanish Football Federation, thus being official within the spanish football structure.

And about the "elaboration" you tried to promote, no new info was presented and could be considered as a rehersal of the same info presented on the lead, thus being redundant, and per WP:CONCISE and WP:REDUNDANCY it should be avoided to not bloat the article with repeated info. And the source you presented state that A domestic treble involves winning three national competitions—normally the league title, the primary cup competition, and one secondary competition, so it doesn't specify what kind of secondary competition is being considered, thus it doesn't outwright deny the eligibility of regional titles. ABC paulista (talk) 02:37, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Well, you want to include the Bilbao treble in the list because the Bizcaya Championship is a secondary domestic competition, even though there is no source confirming that it is a domestic treble, and at the same time you refuse to include the Nadroga treble despite there being a source that talks about the domestic treble in Fiji under the pretext that: “We can't assume or interpolate that the same was valid for Nardroga almost 20 years prior.” I think this seems a strange for me.

In any case, I suggest that this source be our reference so that there is no disagreement about what the domestic treble is, and as you know, RSSSF is a reliable and respected source here on Wikipedia, which clearly states what the domestic treble is in Fiji and in all countries, we find that the domestic treble in Fiji of three competitions, namely Fiji Premier League, Inter-District Championship and Battle of the Giants, which contradicts the Oceania source that I put. RSSSF also did not mention the Bilbao treble, and this indicates that RSSSF does not count regional championships as part of the domestic treble. To resolve the dispute, I will rearrange the table according to this source. If there is an objection, please express it. --Mishary94 (talk) 03:40, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

I concur with Mishary94's argument. Athletic Bilbao is complete WP:OR and WP:SYNTH from two different sources. But not a single one says that Athletic won a domestic treble

In addition, at Bilbao the RSSSF source is explicitly stated as a reference for the double, but at the same time it explicitly says that they did not win a domestic treble, so clear Wikipedia:Cherrypicking. I would recommend that the lead should be made more precise so that no regional competitions are included. There is also no source in the article that includes regional competitions in the domestic trebles. Miria~01 (talk) 10:45, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

That's right, there is no good reason to add the Bilbao treble, I will rephrase the table according to the RSSSF source. --Mishary94 (talk) 12:07, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

@ABC paulista: I'm still waiting for you to respond to the discussions, as for retrieving the edit without justification, this is stubbornness and the imposition of opinions. I have reformulated the table according to the RSSSF source. What is your objection to this step? --Mishary94 (talk) 16:35, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

You two are way too hurried to solve this situation as soon as possible, and are rushing things way before they could be considered to be solved. I have real life appointments, like work, school and other appoinments, to attend to so I can't be here all the time. The revert I did earlier was during my lunch break from work, when I had just a few minutes before going back, but not enough to give a proper response here, and now I just came back from it. Tl;dr, I can't be here all the time.

So I ask you two to be understanding and empathetic, lets mantain Wikipedia:Etiquette and not try to rush a resolution to this situation because there's no rush, Wikipedia won't go anywhere while we wait for each other responses, so let's keep the discussion on a pace taht everyone can follow without stressing anyone.

Also, please be WP:CIVIL and assume good faith, because I justified my revert with WP:BRD, which is still in progress and with WP:WEIGHT, which I will elaborate further soon. Just, please give me time to do so, and refrain from being so WP:BOLD all the time. We have all the time we can muster, there's no hurry for this kind of process, so, Mishary94 and Miria~01, I just ask for some patience. ABC paulista (talk) 21:20, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

With all due respect, that also applies to your perspective. The "domestic trebles" with included regional competitions and their reference sources never spoke of domestic trebles. This is based on WP:OR and WP:SYNTH, so removal of these is justified. WP:CHERRY-PICKING in the sources should also be avoided, as already mentioned.

WP:BRD does not justify violating the WP:3RR, which you with @Misahary94 broke. That's why I ask you to refrain from reverting until you have supported your point of view with credible sources. Nothing is set in stone and can be restored accordingly if several credible sources present that regional cup competition are counted to a domestic treble. Miria~01 (talk) 22:17, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

This argument is backwards, because the majority of the sources currently presented here only state that for a domestic treble one must win the "domestic league", "domestic cup" and a "secondary cup", in a vague manner that generally don't specify the scope of these competitions. "Domestic" is a somewhat-vague adjective that can mean many things within a location, so domestic competitions can be national-level, regional-level, or even city-level competitions can fit the description.

So with the sources not making distinction on what scope are counted towards the domestic treble, we can't make the distinction ourselves, because doing so without sources backing us up would be WP:OR. Assuming that "domestic" means "only-national" is the real WP:SYNTH of this situation.

The only ones that are currently excluded from here are the Supercups, but that's because the sources exclude them themselves, it wasn't Wikipedia's initiative to do so, so per WP:V, if we want to stricken the criteria even more, there should be multiple sources that do such so we can follow suit.

Tl;dr, what should be proved is not that Regional Competition are counted to a domestic treble, but that they aren't counted, just like was done with the Supercups. ABC paulista (talk) 22:52, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Miria~01 and Mishary94, about Athletic Bilbao, after reading through the soruces I tend to agree with you on this removal, there's no mention of a treble for this instance so it doesn't follow WP:V. I guess it passed trhough the cleanup that happened before and just stuck up here, but no Cherrypicking because it was unintentional. Please be WP:CIVIL.

About the RSSSF source, while being considered to be reliable, it cannot be the sole source for the domestic treble and/or be the one to set the criteria, because that would fall on WP:UNDUE when we are dismissing the other sources with other criteria. For the RSSSF criteria to be fit to be adpoted here, more reliable sources should be presented citing the same criteria, in order to gain enough notoriety to justify WP:V outweight the current ones. RSSSF doesn't own the definition of domestic treble, so we can't act as such. ABC paulista (talk) 22:28, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

I agree with that. RSSSF should not be the only source and should be confirmed by other sources.

For me, it was primarily about Athletic Bilbao 1930-31 and the regional competition.

I was also surprised why for Linfield 1921-22 and 1960-61, the regional County Antrim Shield was chosen for the domestic treble, which I cannot find to be confirmed in any source. The Gold Cup or the City Cup, which they also won in these respective seasons, are considered as league cups (secondary cups] for the whole of Northern Ireland and make much more sense to include for a domestic treble. In this respect, I am open to evaluating each individual domestic treble individually, but this should also be supported by sources. Miria~01 (talk) 23:03, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

@Miria~01: @ABC paulista: Yes, I also agree. Originally, RSSSF is the source we rely on, but if there is another reliable source that contradicts the treble mentioned by RSSSF for a specific country, then I am in favor of changing the treble specific to that country.

For example :

Source No. 1 (RSSSF) identifies the domestic treble of Fiji:

Fiji doubles consisted of league and IDC; Trebles additionally include BOG.

Source No. 2 (Oceania Football Center) defines the domestic treble of Fiji:

For this to happen, the Delta Tigers need to win two more of the three titles still to be played this year: Vodafone Premier League, Inter-District Championship and Fiji FACT....

So, the first source says that the domestic treble in Fiji includes Fiji Premier League, Inter-District Championship, and Battle of the Giants, while the second source says that the domestic treble in Fiji includes Fiji Premier League, Inter-District Championship, and Fiji FACT.

In this case, Fiji is an exception and its domestic treble is subject to change. This, in my opinion, is the best solution. --Mishary94 (talk) 23:26, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

But that's the current modus operandi for this article. You were the one to remove the ones that aren't cited by the RSSSF source. ABC paulista (talk) 23:42, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

What I'm advocating that we should follow the majority, just like it's done with the Continental Treble. Currently the majority of the sources don't make distinctions regading the "secondary domestic competition", so any domestic competition could be counted as secondary, except the Supercups. If that leads to multiple kinds of domestic trebles, or opportunities for such, so be it and we just follow suit.

About the regional competitions, like I said above, first it must be proved that the majority don't count these for the domestic trebles, if not, we should count them the same way we do with the others. ABC paulista (talk) 23:43, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

I couldn't find at least one source that counted the regional championships as part of the domestic treble, and even the sources that were created for the Bilbao treble did not mention that the Bizcaya Championship was part of the treble. --Mishary94 (talk) 23:54, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Like I said above, the way the sources phrase the "secondary cup" makes no special distinction, so any domestic competition counts regardless of its scope, except the Supercups which the sources explicitally exclude. So what should be proved is that regional championships aren't part of the domestic treble not the other way around. They are countable until proven otherwise, just like it was done for the Supercups. ABC paulista (talk) 00:09, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

It is as if you are saying to me, prove to me that Juventus is an African club, or you want proof that Barack Obama is the president of China! We are talking about a DOMESTIC treble, not a regional, and domestic competitions are competed by all the clubs in the country's regions. How do you want to include a regional competition in the domestic treble? --Mishary94 (talk) 00:28, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Regional competitions are domestic, period. Everything that's played within a country or is part of a national league system is domestic. National competitions are domestic, regional competitions are domestic, state-level competitions are domestic, even city-level competitions are domestic.

World, International, Intercontinental, Continental and Subcontinental competitions aren't domestic because they are played by teams which aren't part of the domestic scope, or is organized by confederations that are above a nation's confederation, but everything that it's under these national confederations is game.

Like I said before, being "domestic" doesn't denote in what level it's being played, or what's its scope. Being domestic doesn't automatically means that it must be nationwide, and it's not up to us to make such distinctions whithout reliable sources backing it up. ABC paulista (talk) 00:58, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

In the beginning, you asked me for a source that defines the treble for the countries (Fiji, for example), and now you say that we cannot rely on one source because the sources differ in their definition of the treble. What do you want me to do? I relied on the most reliable source, which is the RSSSF organization, which completed its thirtieth year this year, so if there is a disagreement in the treble for a specific country, it is more correct to open a new discussion for that country.

All respect and appreciation to you in your real life, and we do not ask you to quickly discuss with us, but we oppose retrieving the edits because you are creating a dispute out of nowhere. --Mishary94 (talk) 22:51, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

I asked you to present a source that outright calls Nadroga's 1993 case as a treble, not to define what a source consider and consider not a treble, you were the one that tried to justify this club's inclusion by this argument, which is not enough per the consensus.

About the RSSSF, it may be considered reliable, but the matter of being the most reliable is just your personal view, which per WP:POV should be avoided. So, to also avoid WP:UNDUE, it should be presented sources tthat corroobrate with RSSSF's criteria, at least in a similar quantity and quality to the ones that are currently presented on the article.

About the reversal of the edits, this was to comply with WP:BRD which state that once a change is reverted, it shouldn't be re-instated until the discussion is settled. You are the ones who are violating this guideline by mantaining a contentious edit with the discussions still ongoing. ABC paulista (talk) 23:19, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

But you contradict yourself. You criticize, and rightly so, that there is no source that names it that way. But that was exactly the case with the ones that have now been removed. These were simply inserted in WP:OR by giving sources for the title wins.

1) However, I think we can find a consensus here that if the domestic treble is not outright named that way, it should not be there. Additionally, a note should also be provided if sources contradict each other, e.g. contradiction of RSSSF to a news/media source, if you are adding a domestic treble by sourcing it with the news/media source.

2) There should also be no interpretations as to which titles are part of the domestic treble, but rather specific sourced (e.g. which secondary cup for the domestic trebles of Linfied in 1920-21 and 1960-61). For Linfied could be at least a note that it could be anyone of the several secondary cups, if no source can be found to express it specifically.

3) We could also reach a compromise regarding your criticism of a pre-exclusion of regional competitions. If a domestic treble is sourced outright with a regional competition, then an additional note should be inserted in the table, which mentions that the domestic treble contains a regional competition. Miria~01 (talk) 13:11, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

I rememeber some of them, and these were called trebles by the sources. The majority, if not all of them, had some source(s) that called them either "treble" or "triple crown", which in some languages and cultures have the same meaning and are used interchangeably. Just to give a few examples from some baffling removals, 1996-97' Al-Ittihad (Al-Ittihad witnessed a golden era in the mid-nineties AD after the club won the treble (Premier League, Crown Prince Cup, and Saudi Federation Cup) in 1997), 2018's Al-Duhail (Al Duhail players and officials celebrate their domestic treble — QNB Stars League, Qatar Cup and Amir Cup — at their club on Sunday evening.), Toronto FC (Toronto FC win first domestic treble in MLS history) and Libertad (Copa Paraguay: Libertad won the triple crown).

About your points, I'll address them separately:

1) Most sources only use the term "treble" or "triple crown" to cite these instances, most don't distinghish them by "domestic" or "continental" one, so I don't think that it's feasible or fair to make the the criteria even more restrictive. Also, I don't think that the proposed note is necessary because many countries hold multiple cups, especially in Asia, so I don't think that's wrong to assume that these can have multiple forms of domestic treble;

2) Agreed, but also note that some teams also achieved a quadruple or quintuple during the same season, so determining which titles were part of the treble might not be that straightforward;

3) If the souces don't make the distinction between trebles that involve regional titles and those who don't, we shoudn't either to not fall into WP:OR territory. ABC paulista (talk) 22:52, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

1) Note that winning Apertura and Clausura tournaments in one season is not considered a double win as both are league tournaments. RSSF- Argentina 'Doubles'

There was also clearly no domestic treble for the clubs from Brazil. These belong in the article Triple Crown of Brazilian Football. The sources also never speak of a domestic treble, so that would be WP:OR to label three title wins as a treble in this article, which would also contradict with the other sources. In general, in Brazil the term "triple crown" is used to win any three official titles in the same season.[1][2]

In South America ( CONMEBOL ), the considered "treble" includes the national championship, Copa Libertadores and Intercontinental Cup or Club World Cup.[3]

An example what is maybe considered in South America as a treble, but not belongs to the article. There are sources that describe the additional Super Cup as a treble or other three titles (as in the previous discussion) with secondary continental competition. But the consensus is clear to not include them and stick to the definition of the main sources.

in Asia ...assume that these can have multiple forms of domestic treble

We should really be very strict about something like this and not interpret it, as it is very subjective. It should be very clear which titles belong to the domestic treble. A source for that have to be found.

3) Since there were no sources for regional competitions that included the domestic trebles, this is only hypothetical.

If some have been wrongly removed, they should of course be restored if they are referred to as domestic treble in the source. Miria~01 (talk) 23:47, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

It might be true that winning Apertura and Clausura tournaments in one season is not considered a double win as both are league tournaments, but that doesn't hold any bearing on the treble. In both Libertad and 2013's Atlético Nacional's cases they won their respective national cups, so their treble cases still stand.

The sources also never speak of a domestic treble, so that would be WP:OR to label three title wins as a treble in this article, which would also contradict with the other sources. - They don't contradict because the sources don't exclude the possibility of non-national competitons being part of domestic trebles, which I said many times in this discussions and getting kinda tired of repeating myself.

In general, in Brazil the term "triple crown" is used to win any three official titles in the same season. [...] An example what is maybe considered in South America as a treble, but not belongs to the article. - Outside Europe the usage of terms like "continental treble" and "domestic trebles" is way less common, usually these instances are just referred as "treble", so I don't think it would be fair to exclude them because of such linguistical and cultural differences.

We should really be very strict about something like this and not interpret it, as it is very subjective. It should be very clear which titles belong to the domestic treble. A source for that have to be found. - Let's make an hypotetical: A team of Hong Kong wins a domestic treble by winning the Premier League, the FA Cup and the League Cup, later achieve a second treble by winning the Sapling Cup instead of the League Cup, then later it won another domestic treble by winning the Senior Shield algonside the Premier League and the FA Cup. Then, in one season, the team wins all five of them, and the source state that it achieved a domestic treble, but doesn't state which competitions constitute the treble. How it should be handled in this article? ABC paulista (talk) 00:58, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

What you keep suggesting is WP:CHERRYPICKING. In the context of editing an article, cherrypicking, in a negative sense, means selecting information without including contradictory or significant qualifying information from the same source and consequently misrepresenting what the source says.

The source must clearly speak of domestic treble. It has nothing to do with fairness towards other languages ​​and cultures. You want to interpret sources subjectively yourself and select what you want to insert. There is nothing wrong with creating a Wikipedia article that contains possibly all of the Triple Crowns in South America, which, as the sources stated, in my reply has nothing to do with the "treble" in this article.

Even in the Portuguese Wikipedia this distinction is made: pt:Tríplice coroa

• Tríplice continental (Continental treble)
• Tríplice doméstica (Domestic treble)
• Tríplices coroas no futebol brasileiro

Regarding the hypothetical Asian example:

At some point in the season the domestic treble must be mentioned and then we should hold on to these competitions, as this RSSSF does. RSSSF - HongKong Trebles Miria~01 (talk) 01:17, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

There's a lot of trebles cited here that would have been removed if I had the power to choose it myself, but didn't because of Wikipedia's guidelines and sources presented, and I expressed this feeling multiple times in this page, so don't accuse me of cherrypicking because if I were truly doing so this article would be very, very different. WP:CHERRYPICKING was, and still is, when you both were arguing that the sources xcluded the regional competitions when they weren't.

You must also understand that the portuguese Wikipedia page has lots of european portuguese editors involved, but looking at the sources presented there, most brazilian, none use "triplete" (portuguese equivalent to "treble") but "tríplice coroa" (portuguese equivalent to "triple crown"), even to refer to european continental trebles. And the spanish page recognizes the interchangeability of these terms, with the sources fairly divided with spanish ones mostly using "triplete" (spanish equivalent to "treble") and the latin-american ones using the "triple corona" (spanish equivalent to "triple crown").

About your proposal, I still think it would be too limiting and too RSSSF-centered, but I admit that it better address WP:V than the previous status quo. Also, you kinda addressed most of the issues I had with the recent changes, and the remaining points we'll just have to agree to disagree on them, so I'm ready to concede. I'm neither satisfied with the outcome, nor fully on board with the proposal, but I won't oppose anymore for the time being. ABC paulista (talk) 04:12, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

FYI: @ABC paulista and Mishary94: Regarding the clubs removed for the domestic trebles (including the South American Triple Crowns), I have contacted the RSSSF and asked for an explanation for their absence. Perhaps there will be an update on RSSSF soon that might defuse some of the discussion.Miria~01 (talk) 13:04, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Australian trebles

Mishary94, could you please explain why you removed the Australian trebles? Your argument doesn't hold up when the Premiership and Grand Final are awarded separately from each other and the presented sources do consider them as separate titles. Also, the continental trebles of both Auckland City and Waitakere United from New Zealand are included here and both include Premiership and Grand Final, and I don't see any current objections from them. ABC paulista (talk) 03:32, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

ABC paulista Hello, how can there be a separate competition that requires the top six of the league to participate in it? It's like the Super Cup but more so, I don't think it's a second major cup competition. Are there neutral international sources that state that they are part of a domestic treble? --Mishary94 (talk) 03:41, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Spanish La Liga acknowledges Melbourne's Victory 2009 domestic treble, ESPN acknowledges both Victory's 2015 one and Sydney's one and FIFA acknowledges Waitakere's 2008 continental treble. All of them include Premiership and Grand Final titles, and some of them were included in the article. ABC paulista (talk) 03:58, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

I think the argument makes sense, I actually retracted my edit. --Mishary94 (talk) 04:07, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Australian domestic trebles don't qualify at all unless you change what the meaning of a "domestic treble" is to something different that the qualifications given in the article. The NSL/A-League Championship (determined via a Grand Final) isn't a "secondary domestic cup", it's the match that determines who wins the A-League (or the NSL for Melbourne Knight's example). The Premiership (and NSL Minor Premiership) isn't "the league", it's an award for whoever finishes top of the home & away portion of the A-League before the finals series that ends with the Grand Final to determine who the actual A-League champion is. None of the 4 examples listed for Australian domestic trebles should be in the list. There has to my knowledge never been a season of a national football league in Australia which has two cup competitions, only seasons with one cup competition (eg the NSL Cup, A-League Pre-Season Cup or Australia Cup) and a league system that finished with a finals series and a grand final to determine the actual league winner. If they are in the list they probably need a footnote type thing explaining that they aren't true "trebles" but get celebrated as important achievements nonetheless. Macktheknifeau (talk) 00:53, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

That's your subjective point of view on the matter, but the sources presented above disagree with you, and per WP:RS and WP:POV the sources have precedence over wikipedian's opinions on the matter. Also, there's no "true" definiton of a treble, but for all accounts the premiership title is no different from all other league titles arount the world and the Grand Final can be seen as either the main cup competition (for New Zealand frranchises like Auckland City and Waitakere United, who weren't eligible to compete in the Chatham Cup, thus the Grand Final was the only domestic cup competition of their league) or a secondary cup competition, like for Australia, USA and Canada, since secondary cup competitons have no further technical definitons and thus, the playoffs fit the criteria. ABC paulista (talk) 01:43, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

It's not "subjective" or an "opinion" when there's a specific definition on the article page. "Domestic treble is usually made up of the league, main domestic cup and the most prestigious secondary domestic cup". The Premiership is very much different from other league titles because it's not what determines who "wins the league". The Grand Final is what determines who wins the league. In the 2022/23 A-League season Melbourne City finished 1st in the round-robin section but lost the Grand Final to the Central Coast, and that means the Mariners won the league, not City. NSL/A-League finals series isn't a "secondary cup", it's what determines who wins the NSL/A-League, and there is no secondary cup at all. Any sources about the A-League will match this statement as well, no-one in the media called Melbourne City the A-League winners in 2022/23 because they lost the Grand Final. Macktheknifeau (talk) 02:04, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Macktheknifeau, we must not follow any source that mentions a “domestic treble” and make it an excuse. The standard must be clear. The secondary cup must be a separate tournament, and if there is more than one secondary cup tournament, we must follow the source that mentions which one is more important. We have reached the point of mentioning two different trebles for the same club, but with different titles! The list is clearly arbitrary, we should stop this nonsense and follow a source that sets clear criteria, such as RSSSF. --Mishary94 (talk) 02:33, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

There's no source that state that secondary cup competitons must be not tied to other competitions, not even RSSSF state so. And even that was the case, that would exclude most of league cups because they're pretty much tied to their respective leagues.

About the secondary competition "importance", the sources presented don't explicitally state which ones are the most important for each league/country, and without that we can't make it ourselves, otherwise it would be WP:OR. Just like there's no source that exclude the possibility of having multiples configuations for trebles for countries with more that 2 cups, even the RSSSF cite some cases of such. ABC paulista (talk) 02:54, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Macktheknifeau the sources above do list the premiership and the grand final separatey, thus disagreeing with you. Even A-League themselves recognize the premiershipand give a trophy for it, thus being an official title, and do recognize domestic trebles that include both the premiership and the grande final ABC paulista (talk) 03:03, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

I should note I'm not saying we shouldn't necessarily exclude or include them, because they are considered a "form" of a double/treble by the media/sources/fans, but if included it should be included with a note or explanation in the text because of the unusual nature of the A-League compared to most national league structures. Yes there is an award for the team that finishes first, but it's of a similar stature to a Minor premiership in other Australian sports codes which is lesser importance. Neither the A-League premiership (for the round-robin season) or the Finals Series are "secondary cups" is my main point, because the finals aren't a cup trophy at all, they're an extension of the regular league season via play-offs. Macktheknifeau (talk) 06:27, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Although the league structure is unusual, this treble still falls in the "one league, two cups" template that fits the main criteria. Also, the A-League isn't the only one that is formed by a regular-season/playoff structure, like I said above there are trebles from the US, Canada and New Zealand which follow the same format, so I don't think that such a note or explanation is warranted. ABC paulista (talk) 21:12, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

I agree with his conclusion above from @Macktheknifeau.

However, to accommodate both views, we could, for example, place these Australian trebles in a subsection of the domestic treble, in which this national peculiarity of how a domestic treble is understood for their national league, is also explained.
-> "Domestic trebles outside the main definition" Miria~01 (talk) 13:59, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

While I don't dislike this proposal, creating such subsection would reopen the space for the inclusion of all those trebles that include either regional titles or bothApertura and Clausura league titles, but most of all it would open the possibility to include one with Supercups, and that might trivialize the achievement and would make the article much bigger and messier than it is. My fear is that it would become similar to the Double article, but I think that it merits its own discussion. ABC paulista (talk) 21:05, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Al-Duhail

Mishary94, could you please explain why Al-Duhail needs to include the Qatari Stars Cup? Where it's written that a domestic treble can't be comprised of the Emir Cup and the Quatar Cup? ABC paulista (talk) 04:04, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

We are talking about a second cup competition, not a mini-competition consisting of four teams in the top four places in the league table. The Qatar Cup is actually a Super Cup, but it differs in name. --Mishary94 (talk) 04:11, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Qatar Cup's case is not too different from the Premiership/Grand Final from above, and they already have their own supercup as the Sheikh Jassim Cup, so the argument doesn't hold up. ABC paulista (talk) 04:16, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

No, the Qatar Cup does not rise to be a second cup competition in the presence of the Qatar Stars Cup. The latter is larger and broader in terms of the participation of teams, as 12 clubs participate in it. And it is a league cup (it is clear from the similarity of the names: Qatar Stars League and Qatar Stars Cup). --Mishary94 (talk) 04:30, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

And where it's written that the Qatar Cup can't be part of a domestic treble? Where it's written that the Qatar Stars Cup is the main secondary competition, and not the Qatar Cup? ABC paulista (talk) 04:40, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

As shown, the treble includes the league, cup competition and league cup competition. The Qatar Cup is not a league cup. There is no "reputable" source that considers the Qatar Cup to be part of the domestic treble like the RSSSF Mishary94 (talk) 04:44, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

You showed nothing at all. Not all trebles include league cups, it's written nowhere that the Qatar Stars Cup is considered to be a league cup, and Gulf Times is a reputable source that calls it a domestic treble. ABC paulista (talk) 05:01, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Some sites write a “domestic treble” as soon as a club wins any three domestic titles, and this is not an argument. Here the same site states that Paris Saint-Germain achieved the domstic treble last season, even though Paris won the league, the cup, and the Super Cup. So the argument doesn't hold up. Mishary94 (talk) 05:21, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

It doesn't matter, that's why we "filter" these instances to check if they comply with the most accepted criteria, and Al-Duhail's case pass in all metrics, since it includes the main league, the main cup and a secondary domestic cup, there's no supercup (like the Sheikh Jassim Cup) or regional cup included in the mix. And FWIW, other sources like Qatar Tribune, Alkass,AS from Spain, even AFC recognizes the treble. ABC paulista (talk) 20:59, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

No, the domestic treble consists of the league, the country cup, and the league cup.. This is clear. The Qatar Stars Cup is the league cup competition in Qatar. The matter is clear and does not need to be complicated. If the treble included the Qatar Cup, RSSSF would include in his list. --Mishary94 (talk) 22:55, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

You're basing your argument solely on the RSSSF source, and the earlier consensus was that we wouldn't do that to not give it WP:UNDUE, you agreed on that (Yes, I also agree. Originally, RSSSF is the source we rely on, but if there is another reliable source that contradicts the treble mentioned by RSSSF for a specific country, then I am in favor of changing the treble specific to that country.), while most of the other sources (Goal.com, Oceania Football Center, for example) don't explicitally state that the secondary cup must be a league cup, they just statd that it must be a "secondary domestic cup" with no further specification, and per WP:WEIGHT we should give preference to the majority.

And even if the majority did state that the League Cup is required, there's no proof that Qatar Stars Cup is indeed considered to be as such on the qatari football. ABC paulista (talk) 23:33, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

The Goal website took its information from Wikipedia. How do we consider it a source? He mentioned the Bilbao treble based on the Wikipedia page. See the version of the article before Goal's article. Yes, I have decided not to rely on RSSSF as the sole source, but not with this randomness. See, for example:

• Source 1: Gulf Times says that Paris Saint-Germain achieved the domestic treble in the 2023-24 season by achieving: “The French League, the French Cup, and the French Super Cup.”
• Source 2: Goal.com (the source you are citing) says that Al Hilal achieved the domestic treble in the 2023-24 season by achieving: “The Saudi League, the Saudi King’s Cup, and the Saudi Super Cup.”
• Source 3: Kingfut says that Ahly Jeddah achieved the domestic treble in the 2015-16 season by achieving: “The Saudi League, the Saudi King’s Cup, and the Saudi Super Cup.”
• Source 4: Kooora.com says that Al-Ahly of Egypt achieved the domestic treble in the 2017-18 season by achieving: “The Egyptian League, the Egyptian Cup, and the Egyptian Super Cup.”

Are we going to include these trebles in the article based on these sources? You are making the article random by citing random sources. It is better to cancel the list than to work this way..

My son's school team achieved a domestic treble, they won the schools league, schools cup and county schools super cup, I would like to include it in the article, I will put a random source confirming these championships, can I?

I don't know why you want to complicate things, intercept from nothing, and create sources randomly.

The RSSSF website sets clear standards for us to say a domestic treble. If there is another reliable source that mentions clear standards for a domestic treble, here we can rely on the other source. As for the mere presence of the word “domestic treble” this is not evidence --Mishary94 (talk) 02:39, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

About the "accusations" of Goal.com copying Wikipedia, this should be proved with more than mere circunstantial evidence, and even if that was the case it wouldn't be much of a problem since they brought their own reasoning about these to the article, even questioning Bilbao's case way before it was questioned here.

Also, sources like Goal.com, Gulf Times and KingFut, are fully professional journalistic outlets that fully meet WP:RS criteria, with none being cited as perennial at WP:RS/P, so your statement of them being "random sources" isn't sustainable. FWIW, in some other languages, like portuguese for example, RSSSF is deemed as an unreliable source and they discourage citing its info.

These sites citing domestic trebles which include Super Cups doesn't automatcally make them unreliable as a whole, that's not how WP:RS works, it's just that the journalist/writer of the article considered as such by their own point of view that doesn't reflect on the sources' other articles.

We have to rememeber that the concept of trebles, being them continental, domestic or otherwise, isn't set in stone and everyone can have their own criteria over it. Neither me, or you, or RSSSF, or IFFHS or anyone else has ownership over the concept, so for better clarity WP:WEIGHT reccomends that the most supported viewpoint should be given the most proeminence, and currently most of the sources don't cite that the secondary cup must be a League Cup but exclude Super Cup from the count, and that's why we don't include ones that cite Super Cups as part of it. But that doesn't mean that the majority are "right" and the minority "wrong" on the matter, just different points-of-view that can chage over time, so if one day the majority deems that Super Cups can be part of trebles, or that second-tier continental cups can be part of continental trebles, so be it and we have to adapt and follow suit. That's not the case for now.

Your opinion that I bring "ramdomness" to the article and and "create sources randomly" is untrue, because I don't create new info (it would be WP:OR, which is a no-no), I only bring info that arleady exist per WP:SECONDARY. The examples you brought above were made by reliable sources and, in more commom circunstances, could be added, but I wouldn't do it myselfand would remove them if someone else added here, because they include Super Cups, which the majority exclude from the achievement. Just like your "son's school team" woudn't be added because it doesn't include the federation's main trophies, which are required by the most supported criteria.

Your statement that the RSSSF sets clear standard doesn't exclude the others, because they set criteria as clear as RSSSF, they just happen to not be as restrictive as you seem to prefer. Furthermore, even RSSSF itself deviates a lot from it's own criteria, having many exceptions and citing trebles that don't include League Cups. ABC paulista (talk) 23:11, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Toronto FC

Mishary94, why Toronto's case can't be considered to be a treble when they are playing at the MLS? Even the MLS itself considers it a legit domestic treble. ABC paulista (talk) 04:10, 17 June 2024 (UTC)