This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball
This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance
"Derby breton" has never qualified matches between Rennes and Nantes. As the articles points out, the first game was in the 1960's, whereas Nantes left Bretagne in 1956. This articles sounds very much like a biased way of presenting Nantes as part of Britanny. Here, there is just no reason. PetiteSalade on the French wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.77.125.64 (talk) 11:06, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This article specifically refers to the Derby Breton, which has historically been contested between Rennes and Nantes. Yes, since the emergence of several other Brittany clubs (Lorient, Brest, and Guingamp), the derby name has branched out to involve these teams. However, the derby is still, again I say historically, been contested by Rennes and Nantes. Nantes not residing it Brittany has nothing to do with the article. It, however, should because Nantes supporters get a lot of grief from Rennes supporters, due to the rivalry, because the city does not have an affiliation with the current region of Brittany. However, the city does have affiliation with the OLD HISTORIC PROVINCE. — This article and many more sum up how the Rennes—Nantes rivalry is above any of the other clubs based in Brittany. — Joao10Siamun (talk) 11:54, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
so indeed the qualification of Rennes - Nantes as "derby breton" is a mere biased perception by a few supporters, a interesting but limiting fact that should be mentionned in the article. A simple google search proves my point. PS ~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.62.7.52 (talk) 20:16, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Diese Website benutzt Cookies. Wenn du die Website weiter nutzt, gehe Ich von Deinem Einverständnis aus.OKNeinDatenschutzerklärung