The Football Thread

[stanton]

Uruguay won the Olympics 24, 28 and the first WC in 1930. But the first WC wasn't worth the name with practically every then great European team not participating. After the WC had started the further Olympic football games are of no further interest as many nations send only amateurs.

Actually the first WC, which was really worth the name, was 1954. Only Russia was still missing then.

[titoli]

Actually the first WC, which was really worth the name, was 1954.

Yeah, sure.

[titoli]

Italy ain't goin' nowhere. But we knew it before the tournament started. The defense is embarrassing.

[titoli]

I believe the number of worldwide viewers for the World Cup final dwarfs that of the Super Bowl. But you can't compare a yearly event to a quuadrennial event.

Yeah, sure.

[stanton]

Yeah, sure.

Not because Germany won it, because it was the first one in which all great football nations (except maybe the USSR) participated.

1950 was overshadowed by the aftermath of WW II. Amongst many others 2 of the then best teams (Hungary, Argentina) did not participate.

Before the war the big distances between South America and Europe were a major problem. The interest in such a tournament was not high enough to undertake a 2 - 4 lasting weeks journey by ship.

1930 was an America Cup, and 1934 and 1938 were basically European Cups, but without the British teams. The then best South American teams from Uruguay and Argentina stayed at home.

[stanton]

I believe the number of worldwide viewers for the World Cup final dwarfs that of the Super Bowl. But you can't compare a yearly event to a quuadrennial event.

I'm sure that the yearly European Club League (aka as the Champion League) is also bigger than the Super Bowl.

[titoli]

Not because Germany won it,

Yeah, sure.
Then we could also argue that only the last handful of WC are the good ones as  all of the nations now are there. The same would go for the other sports, as biking, tennis and boxing only in the last 20-30 years are really global sports, compared to the times when tournaments were played between a dozen of players. But this is nonsense. If England didn't participate  in the first three WC that doesn't mean much because we have seen that in 1950 they were beaten by an amateur USA side. In 1938 Italy won against Leonidas' Brazil and Hungary, while Germany won his first cup in a much  less praiseworthy way: I think that Italy's second WC is much more solid than your first.

[noodles_leone]

Times change, the players got older and after 3 titles in a row (no team achieved this before)

FRANCE:

1998 World Cup
Euro 2000
2001 Confederations Cup

(the team even won a friendly game against a "world football team" somewhere in the early 2000's)

they are probably full up. Many expected this happening already in 2012.

Still, it is an asthonising result.

I'd feel a little bit more confident about my country if the spanish team would go on strike.

[stanton]

Yeah, sure.
Then we could also argue that only the last handful of WC are the good ones as  all of the nations now are there. The same would go for the other sports, as biking, tennis and boxing only in the last 20-30 years are really global sports, compared to the times when tournaments were played between a dozen of players. But this is nonsense. If England didn't participate  in the first three WC that doesn't mean much because we have seen that in 1950 they were beaten by an amateur USA side. In 1938 Italy won against Leonidas' Brazil and Hungary, while Germany won his first cup in a much  less praiseworthy way: I think that Italy's second WC is much more solid than your first.

The point is if the presumably then best were there. And that was often not the case before 1954. For different reasons.
Many great tournaments had starting problems. The first EC is also not that much worth, as half of the European nations did not care about it.

In 1938 England denied the Fifa offer to play at the WC (after Austria was annexed by Germany and had to quit). Instead they played against the WC champion a few weeks after the WC, and beat Italy there. Which surely gave them the feeling to be the real champ.

[stanton]

FRANCE:

1998 World Cup
Euro 2000
2001 Confederations Cup

The Confed Cup hasn't much value. What counts is the EC and the WC. And I think both are now more tricky to win then in former times.

But France was surely a deserved winner in 98 and 00.

[titoli]

In 1938 England denied the Fifa offer to play at the WC (after Austria was annexed by Germany and had to quit). Instead they played against the WC champion a few weeks after the WC, and beat Italy there. Which surely gave them the feeling to be the real champ.

That was in 1934. England picked up the place and the month (they preferred, of course, to play in bad weather). That means little. In 1939 there was a draw. Of course the feeling they might have, but they should have known better.

http://www.englandfootballonline.com/cmpfr/CmpFrTmMatches1872.html

[stanton]

Well, ok, but I checked some other things. In 1954 the USSR had thanks to comrade Josef not much of a team, but Argentina passed again, like in 50 and 38. In 34 they only sent an amateur team.

Before the 50s Argentina and Uruguay were the dominating teams in South America.

[titoli]

Well, ok, but I checked some other things. In 1954 the USSR had thanks to comrade Josef not much of a team, but Argentina passed again, like in 50 and 38. In 34 they only sent an amateur team.

Before the 50s Argentina and Uruguay were the dominating teams in South America.

But in the 30's the best players were playing with Itay: namely Monti and Orsi.

[mike siegel]

From what I've seen until today I'd love to see the 1974 final again.
Both the Netherlands and our team started out best so far. Sorry Ronaldo, maybe some other time..

[stanton]

But in the 30's the best players were playing with Italy: namely Monti and Orsi.

Maybe. Actually I do not know much, nor do I have much interest, in football before 1950. It's so awfully long ago. And there was a lot of chaos. But Italy definitely belonged then already to the great football nations. Brazil's rise began in the late 40s and Germany's probably with the surprise win of 54, or maybe not before in the mid-60s a new generation of superior players surfaced.


What do the Italians think about the WC 34?

While according to my books the WC 38 was a deserved win, in 1934 (with an almost completely different team) they most likely had from the quarter-final on the referees as very dominant 12th player on their side. Descriptions of the games sound like a lot of scandalous decisions in favour of Italy.