Posted it before but the technical reports are also interesting: http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/technicaldevp/50/09/71/wc_66_tr_314.pdf http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/technicaldevp/50/09/67/wc_70_tr_313.pdf http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/technicaldevp/50/09/65/wc_74_tr_312.pdf Says also things about Pelé etc. Yes, that's probably the reason. Netherlands wasn't necessarily the favourite to win the match. Brazil started bad, but played a lot better in the first two games of the 2nd grp stage (writes also Ian Morrison in his excellent World Cup book; pages 268-270 to be precise; stating that they showed why they won 3 World Cups). In general it is occasionally cited that they have been the only side to beat all three South American superpowers at the World Cup stage (in a single tournament ofc). You're right. For me it is, 1970 Pelé: Czechoslovakia as best game by far (Pelé was also better against Uruguay as Italy I'd say). 1986 Maradona: Belgium by far. 1974 Cruijff: Bulgaria probably (but FF gives only 5/6 against Bulgaria in comparison with a 6/6 for both Argentina and Sweden games; 5/6 against Uruguay too btw).
Well brazil was always among the favorite teams to win WC (except in 90 and 2002), especially in 74 they are the winner to defend the title. In WC74 Holland were clear favorites in winning WC, 2nd Germany and 3rd Brazil
2002 World Cup Brazil: 4-1 Argentina, Italy, Spain: 9-1 France, Netherlands: 10-1 Poor Jome, stick to football you know about!
It is my understanding (could be wrong) that they were not really a strong favorite prior to the tournament, actually having some trouble qualifying. As the tournament went on and they displayed their outstanding total football they gradually became "the team to beat".
It's hard to find a real ODDS for WC74 now, but as I remember .... just before WC, Holland and Bayern leading the % to win with Holland (thanks to Cruijff name) edged a bit ... (I could be wrong with a few % off though) 'Maybe Puck can find a link or so?
here is a article from -der spiegel-...issue 26 ,1974.... its mentioned germany was the clear favorite.......2:1 odds ,1 day before the worldcup has startet...in januar 1974(severall months earler) germany was favorite too with bookmakers 5:2 odds,italy 5:1 odds and brasil 9:2 odds.... 14 of 16 NT team trainers have called germany to be the favorite before the wc has startet....only the trainers from zaire and brasil called brasil to be the favorite..... however after the first grouphase holland,poland and yugoslavia have joined the favorite list too.... this is the information -der spiegel 1974 offer... http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-41708334.html
Thanks for the link ... great ... Like I said I could be wrong (between Germany and Holland for some % of odds) but they were favorites to win (more so then Brazil and Italy ) The three teams with the most dangerous wingers - Yugoslavia, Holland and Poland - were in fact, even before the Federal Republic took last weekend against East Germany, moved up to new favorites alongside Germany. "Holland could be world champion," Uruguay coach Porta consoled himself after the defeat. Holland Sweeper Haan: "These Germans can beat us before."
The three main favourites were West Germany, Brazil and Italy. West Germany had an edge obviously as hosts (and because they had hosted the Olympics of 1972 as well, thus big experience as organizer). The Netherlands wasn't part of the favourites, no. Some people of the ITV panel doubted whether they could get out of the first group stage. However, Cruijff was fancied to be the major star of the tournament. It was expected that he would play very well, and up to his level. Magazines published before the WC had often him on the cover. In preview lists of 'major stars to watch' Cruijff was regularly the only Dutchman mentioned (as opposed to other countries). Examples are the panels of the BBC and ITV. And many thought (Sir Alf Ramsey said it too) that a player of his standing has to show something. In a way it was a bit similar as the situation at Ajax of course, where the other Ajax players became envious/jealous of how Cruijff received all the attention by the European media... They felt it was very unfair (this is reflected a bit in the Ballon d'Or rankings). Some players like Keizer received a similar salary as Cruijff but they felt resentment about his fame and all the publicity he received. It contributed to his departure, for sure. https://www.bigsoccer.com/community/...nd-goals-scored.1865250/page-57#post-26129944
Yes base on MEDIA and in big names (as common sense Brazil, Italy and Germany ) ... but Football "purists" or professionals (at time) did consider Holland with Cruijff among TOP4 teams if not TOP2 favorites
A brief excerpt of Tyler & Moore - 'The big matches, a decade of world soccer 1970-1980', section 'Holland: team of the decade.' "It was a time for prediction, and among the experts Holland were barely considered, only the [ITV] panel's chairman [Brian Moore] plumping for an outright Dutch victory. Sir Alf Ramsey, Brian Clough, Jack Charlton and Pat Crerand selected, accurately as it turned out, a triumph for West Germany. Brazil were the choice of Derek Dougan and Malcolm Allison, while Bobby Moncur put his faith in Italy. Cruyff was on everyone's list of outstanding players to watch out for, but he was the only Dutchman." Page 79. https://www.bigsoccer.com/community/...nd-goals-scored.1865250/page-74#post-28574196 Four years later the Netherlands was among the favourites though, but some bit behind hosts Argentina who were expected to win the competition 'by hook or by crook'.
Yes I read those but I meant those came from a "commonly safe choices" by big names. At times, who would dare to route for Holland (even very strong but more like a "dark horse") based on their history? Brazil (3WC) Italy (2) Germany (1) are more like "safe choice" for me. In 78, with their "history built" since 4 years ago (very close) of course they would have earned more respect. I do not understand why Argentina got big before WC78?
Have you asked me for the date in which the odds were posted, or are you still trying to embarrass yourself here, schwutt?
Hello PDG, I received today the excellent 'Hamlyn international book of soccer' from 1977. I read a positive review in the 'football compendium' and I managed to find it somewhere cheaply. It helped to remind me that Michels was also the type of coach to train his sides in such a way that they start strong but fade a bit later on. This also happened when he was Ajax manager (1969 and 1971 EC finals are good examples) and when he managed the euro88 side. The so called 'periodisation' he applied was often criticized for this as well. Later, when science had progressed, he admitted that this was a flaw in his coaching (he had been convinced by the scientific evidence). Obviously individual player quality is only part of the story. One can raise many things but the book mentioned above summarizes it in this way: "But perhaps the memory lingers longest on the Dutch who, disorganised and virtually managerless not long before the competition, were swiftly blended by Rinus Michels, and Cruyff, into a cheerful and persuasive force, always ready to improvise and fluently inventive when they did so. On or off the ball they were all involved. In Neeskens, Rep, Rensenbrink, Van Hanegem and Cruyff they had the most gifted forward line on view; in Cruyff, the most gifted player." Page 173 (underlined part explains why no one vouched for them beforehand; also their defensive problems were widely known abroad) One can find allusions to that on many pages. Just as example: "West Germany probably won because of greater stamina; in skills the Poles were their equals." Page 172 1966 World Cup also fairly obvious, pages 158-163. From the same book again (1977): "Once more home ground proved a significant bonus. In ten World Cups only five nations had grasped the trophy and on four occasions it had been the host." Page 173. Ofc there was some home ground advantage as also shown by the telling fact that the losing finalist kept a higher ELO rating than the winner (1930, 1950, 1954, 1978 are the only four instances).
I'll post all 'famous players' mentioned by them in a other thread. But I think you are interested in what they (it is written by multiple writers) write in the 1977 about Pelé his style: "In ball control, dribbling, speed, shooting and vision he had no peer." Somehow more elaborate descriptions of the then still active Cruijff (they say Pelé is the most recognizable football player and he would probably win a poll when organized - no mistake about that): "Cruyff's ball control and pace, combined with a balletic balance, individual repertoire of skills and sheer perception set him in a class apart - even in the great Dutch side of the 1974 World Cup tournament." Page 46 (concerning the iconic European Cup sides) In the 'famous players' section: "He is the complete footballer, but the skills which put him above the rest are his ball control and mastery of pace. Phenomenal acceleration takes him past baffled opponents into positions where he scores goals, or more often sets them up for colleagues." Page 99. Strangely it does not end there? If I manage to find more about Pelé his style (accidentally overlooked?), I let you know.
In 1950, the losing finalist was the host, btw. But until 1978, it was true, that only 3 host nation weren't Semifinalist in "their WC" (1938, 1954 & 1970). This could show that before modern era, if a host had a (very) good team, the home ground advantadge could be a big factor to reach final rounds. For argentine question, it was know that the "1978 squad's process" was taking very very seriously, without improvisation like other WCs. Add to this, they had a great generation in the 70s, the home ground advantadge. So, even when Argentina had width in quality players since first WC, only in older eras, the quality was a factor enough to win tournaments, but not enough in modern era, when training and tactics become very important.
yes ... like USA 94, S Korea/Japan 02, like South Africa 10 , or coming up Qatar 18 = no chance really
'The Sunday Times magazine' of June 2, 1974 had a description of the players coming into action. I pick the most interesting descriptions. Dragan Dzajic A thoroughbred left winger. His elusive ball skills, mastery of the banana shot and precise crosses are beyond question. His courage, following a broken left leg, will be fully tested in Germany [sic!], where he plays while on extended leave from his military service Vladislav Bogicevic Wears the No. 6, but has a free role to come forward from defence. He has an instinct to be in the right place at the right time, displaying the cool, inventive and casual air of Scotland's Jim Baxter and at the same time, as a bachelor of 23, a similar playboy image Franz Beckenbauer The original 'strolling player'. Beckenbauer comes forth from the back of defence gathering up the threads by which he controls his own team and unhinges the opposition. In 10 years at the top no-one has detected how it's done. If Beckenbauer begins to hurry, suspect the stands have caught fire Gerd Müller Arguably the most dangerous scoring forward of our times. The menace is hardly apparent as Germany advance, using Müller as the 'wall' to bounce passes off, but in the penalty area he is transformed; quick, fierce, adroit... and, somehow, even taller Luis Pereira The best centre-half Brazil has had since the war. Tall, black, powerful and adventurous. At first nicknamed 'Chevrolet' for his wild forays upfield, he is now more mature. He had a long battle to win a place in his club team, where two famous centre-backs barred his way Billy Bremner Captains the Scottish team from midfield, but he will also lead them into attack and prop the defence. He has all the skills of a great player, and his back-heeling of the ball in tight situations is an identifying label, but his forte is commitment; it's an odd match when he hasn't had a rival by the shirt-front... or the throat. He's red-haired, naturally Ken Dalglish A delightfully subtle forward player: not for him the brazen frontal assault on goal, he pick the lock rather than batters down the door. Watchers notice him first sneaking in from the periphery in the split-second before his decisive shot. So do rivals Gianni Rivera Midfield inside-forward, playing his fourth World Cup at the age of 30. A lucid talent with immaculate technique, great flair in his passing and a surprisingly powerful shot. He has been with A.C. Milan since 1960, but he comes from Alessandria, son of a railway man Johan Cruyff Has the world stage to confirm his status as the most complete footballer. Far more than a goalscorer, watch him wriggle free from tight situations; the acute, baffling changes of direction, the spun passes and, if necessary, the readiness to chase right back to tackle Carlos Caszely Striking inside-forward. Small but brave, fast, thrusting and skilful. Scored many important goals for Chile last year before joining Levante in Spain. Best Chilean striker since Leonel Sanchez punched Italy's Maschio during the 1962 World Cup Christo Bonev The general and jack-of-all-trades of his forward line. The only world class Bulgarian, he accepts immense physical punishment, yet persists in dramatic solo runs. He's unlikely to score seven goals in one World Cup match, as he's done against Greek opposition Kazimierz Deyna This unobtrusive midfield player acts as a kind of sorting office. Balls wrestled by a merciless defence are sent to him for assessment and onward dispatch. When he takes his it's because he chooses to; he's working to rule, but in the sense of preparing to conquer In total 48 players are briefly discussed. On top of that, it has a very long profile of Cruijff. If I unintentionally overlooked some major player (PDG?), I might add.
Look back at WC1974 .... with some head lines: “Having dazzled with their style and finesse when winning the Henri Delaunay Trophy in 1972, West Germany were expected to win this World Cup on home soil.” The West Germans were gathering strength at just the right time. And by finishing behind the East Germans in their group, it meant that they had avoided Holland,Argentina and Brazil in the second group phase. While West Germany had been struggling to kick-start their World Cup, a new team were adding some colour to the proceedings. Led by the charismatic Johan Cruyff, Holland set the opening round alight. The Dutch had no real pedigree on the world stage, having made just fleeting appearances at the 1934 and 1938 World Cup finals, and even their current team had struggled during the qualifying stages, but the appointment of Barcelona manager Rinus Michels as coach just three months before the tournament was the catalyst for the side of 1974. On the surface the 1974 World Cup finalists couldn’t have been more different, but in reality both were exponents of their own kind of Total Football. West Germany had taken the European Nations Cup in 1972, their style described by The Times as “elegance and inventiveness”, while the backbone of the Dutch team came from Ajax, European Champions three times in a row. “The idea of total football was that that everybody can play in every position, that everybody plays in the team and could go where he wants,” explains Ruud Krol. “It takes a lot of discipline. You must have the freedom to go forward, knowing that the position behind will be filled. You need quality players. At that time we had one super player and maybe five or six world-class players, and the rest were of top European level.” Cruyff destroyed Argentina and then later Brazil to lead his team into final: However, Der Bomber, as usual found a loose ball from nowhere and struck the winner, that ended Cruyff's TOTAL FOOTBALL DREAM
I guess: super player = Cruijff world class = Krol, Neeskens, van Hanegem, Rensenbrink and Rep/Suurbier