English Football Revolution of the 1960s?

Discussion in 'Soccer History' started by Gregoriak, Jan 12, 2012.

  1. Gregoriak

    Gregoriak BigSoccer Supporter

    Feb 27, 2002
    Munich
    To underline the point/question I made at the start of the thread, I had a look at the first ten weeks of the 1959-60 and 1960-61 seasons and noted down the most outrageous results and then compared it with 10 years later. Look at this:

    1959-60

    4-4, 1-5, 5-2, 5-2, 4-3, 3-6, 5-0, 4-6, 6-0, 5-0, 1-5, 5-1, 9-0, 3-4, 5-1

    1960-61

    5-2, 7-2, 5-3, 4-3, 6-0, 5-0, 5-2, 6-1, 5-0, 3-4, 6-3, 6-2

    1969-70

    no such results in the first 10 weeks

    1970-71

    5-2, 3-4, 6-2, 5-0

    If this had been Serie A results compared over 10 years, it would have not taken anyone by surprise as the defensive progress known as catenaccio would have explained this. Yet in England, football didn't undergo such a dramatic turn to defensive football as in Italy. Also, it can't solely be attributed to defenses becoming better over 10 years - in Germany for example, high scorelines didn't disappear but continued right into the 1970s and even early 1980s.

    So I am still a bit puzzled how this very notable drop in goals in English first division football came about?
     
    RoyOfTheRovers repped this.
  2. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    What caused the decline in Germany?

    Maybe it was delayed because of the transition to a vastly different tactical scheme (from 4-3-3 to 5-3-2 and man marking to more sophisticated systems).
     
    RoyOfTheRovers repped this.
  3. Gregoriak

    Gregoriak BigSoccer Supporter

    Feb 27, 2002
    Munich
    I am not sure whether it's just explained by defenses getting better organised and more professional. If that was the case, then goals scored should drop continually over the decades. In Germany, the low-point was the late-1980s but during recent years, goal scoring level is rising again. How could that be, when today all Bundesliga sides apply "sophisticated" defensive systems, unlike in the late-1980s, when almost all teams were man-marking in defense?
     
    RoyOfTheRovers repped this.
  4. RoyOfTheRovers

    Jul 24, 2009
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England



    [This is a tribute thread from a Rovers fan site that has testimony from fellow eyewitnesses to Clayton in action:



    http://www.brfcs.com/mb/index.php/topic/23713-ronnie-clayton/



    http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/8484744.Blackburn_Rovers_legend_Ronnie_Clayton_dies



    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/sport-obituaries/8102976/Ronnie-Clayton.html



    This is Ivan Ponting's excellent obit and profile of Clayton fr. The Independent w/a fellow eyewitness to seeing Clayton in action down in the reply thread:



    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/o...or-blackburn-rovers-for-20-years-2122434.html



    I wanted to get these profiles up first because my laptop has been on the "wonky" side here lately...]
     
  5. RoyOfTheRovers

    Jul 24, 2009
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    PDG1978 repped this.
  6. RoyOfTheRovers

    Jul 24, 2009
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England



    [Once again, you are quite welcome, mate...

    I'm assuming that you must have been asking about how and where (Eddie) Clayton lined-up in that v. United league match @ "WHL" in Oct. of '65: Clayton seemed to be wearing the No.8 as an "othodox"-type of I-F. I'll assume that you can figure out how Clayton approached the position based on the video and his Margate FC fan profile...]
     
  7. RoyOfTheRovers

    Jul 24, 2009
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    [This is actually "Puck" quoted here:]




    [This was Busby & Murphy's latter day "W-M" variant version/4-2-4/4-1-3-2/whatever-you-wish-to-call-it formation: Best would've been playing his unique hybrid between an "orthodox"-type and a "G-S I-F" w/Charlton coming back deeper and "running the show" as the so-called "D-L C-F" and Law wearing the No.10 in the "spearhead" role.

    United's other common formation of this time was Busby & Murphy's take on a 4-3-3 where Best commonly lined-up as a dynamic, all-action "MF"; as out-lined and discussed by Clive Bond in the reprint of this article from the March of '67 edition of the FA News:



    http://manutd24.co.uk/2011/08/01/retrospective-4-manchester-uniteds-tactics-in-1967/



    Notice that Bond refers to Law playing as the "spearhead" for United and that he specifically states that Law used to line-up as an "orthodox inside-forward"...

    "Greg": you might have read that article once before but it has good info about formations and tactics in the '60s & I apologise if it seems that I've hi-jacked your thread, mate...]
     
  8. RoyOfTheRovers

    Jul 24, 2009
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England


    [In our conversational wandering(s) about I didn't get back to this before I left: Carter mostly lined-up for England as the "roving"-type of I-F in his younger years and then moved up to more of an "orthodox" I-F role as he got older. When Carter and Mannion were "paired" at I-F for England; Carter most commonly played as the "deep-lyer" (I-F) while Mannion filled the more "creative"-/"orthodox"-type role.

    If you've ever seen any contemporary commentary about this: one of the reasons why Carter was praised for his now often under-appreciated qualities as a ball-winner was because as a "roving" I-F that was ideally part of his job on the pitch...]
     
    PDG1978 repped this.
  9. RoyOfTheRovers

    Jul 24, 2009
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    [This is Stan Cullis praising the ball-winning hard work of Carter, Jimmy Hagan & Roy Swinbourne in a passage from his book "All For the Wolves":



    "At the time of Swinbourne's accident, I knew that Wolves would find it very difficult to replace a key man in the tactical plan. I did not realize that, three years later, as we played in the European Cup for the first time, I would still be without an adequate substitute.
    For Swinbourne was one of the few powerful forwards in the modern game who could fight and tackle for every ball in the manner of Peter Doherty, Raich Carter or Jimmy Hagan."



    [It's from bonus post No.7 in this Spartacus Educational profile of Stan Cullis:



    http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/WOLVcullis.htm




    I really need to post some info on Jimmy Hagan one of these days IMO...]
     
  10. RoyOfTheRovers

    Jul 24, 2009
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England



    [Edwards seemed to be more effective as the "deep-lying" W-H at, say, United; because the likes of Jackie Blanchflower or Bill Foulkes at centre-half had both the instinct and the sense to "hold the centre" of the defence. Edwards was also quite good w/the ball at his feet and was at least effective at starting attacking sequences from deeper areas. Edwards wearing the No.5 shirt wasn't such a great idea because if he left his position to go after the ball United played w/a de facto back-three...]
     
  11. RoyOfTheRovers

    Jul 24, 2009
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    Since he was mentioned in that Cullis quote and he's quickly becoming a forgotten LEGEND; here's Sheff. United and England's Jimmy Hagan:



    http://www.football-england.com/jimmy_hagan.html



    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/obituary-jimmy-hagan-1148385.html



    http://www.sheffieldunited-mad.co.uk/feat/ed31/lane_legends_jimmy_hagan_142742/index.shtml



    http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=710618



    I was lucky enough to see Hagan in action as well; so if any of you happen to have any questions about him just LMK...
     
  12. RoyOfTheRovers

    Jul 24, 2009
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
  13. RoyOfTheRovers

    Jul 24, 2009
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    @/for "PDG" & "Puck":

    Some excellent footage of Greaves as the "scoring"-type of I-F working off of Gilzean wearing the No.9 shirt:







    It rather reminds you that players such as Gilzean & Greaves (Colin Bell, Pat Jennings, Francis Lee & the like) aren't just rated and remembered as top-class footballers because they looked sharp in black & white photography... ;)
     
  14. RoyOfTheRovers

    Jul 24, 2009
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    Two vids of Man. United utilising the 4-3-3 formation in the '66-'67 (English) 1st Div.:











    There were little tweaks (such as Best playing on the left-hand side of the three man front-line); but it's still the same basic formational framework that Bond mentioned...
     
    PDG1978 repped this.
  15. RoyOfTheRovers

    Jul 24, 2009
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England



    [Also, as I pointed out to "Puck" here recently: if Nobby Stiles was in the team, he was ready to "slot back" and cover and support J. Charlton in the centre of defence because Stiles usually lined-up as a "deep-lyer" w/United...]
     
  16. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    Geoffrey Green (in many ways I like that writer by the way) looks in his "soccer in the fifties" book in a nostalgic way back to the 1950s. The book was published in 1974.

    In the preface he signals a few trends that took place in the 1960s and beyond. It shows a table of how much the amount of goals per season have fallen.

    Table A shows how between 1950 and 1959 15420 goals were scored.

    Between 1964 and 1973 (same amount of years) only 13182 attempts found the net.

    He blames:
    • "The tensions and pressures of the game have multiplied enormously as have rewards for the successful and the punishments for the failures." It has become a 'serious' profession.
    • He blames the 1966 World Cup and how it made the "ultradefensive alignment of 4-4-2" popular "which so many sides play these days, even on their home ground." This defensive alignment is aggravated by not with playing with the right men, and Green makes the analogy with Chapman his Arsenal. Football is reduced to "bingo between goalposts" by tacticians.
    • The ongoing specialisation of positions. "Front runner", "midfield provider", "target man", "striker", "sweeper". Not to mention how Alf Ramsey his hammering on "work rate" stimulated defensive tendencies.
    • Some reflections on the changing mentality of coaches and trainers.
    Some final excerpts:
    "I wonder what men like Di Stefano, Pelé, Stanley Matthews, Tom Finney and a host of others would have said to the modern theorist sitting on his parlour playing with figures and ideas that might sound and look all right on paper but which are proving the death of self-expression. No wonder George Best became bored, disillusioned and disenchanted with it all, an artist who threw away his canvas and brushes and with them his inborn genius to entertain and excite."

    "It will be seen that there has been a loss of more than 2000 goals over the last decade at the top level of the game, or roughly 200 goals fewer on average per season. The sadness is that this has happened at the top where it should matter most since that is where fashions are, or should be, set. Particularly significant is the decline following Sir Alf Ramsey's 4-3-3 and 4-4-2 alignments for the World Cups of 1966 and 1970.
    I believe I have made the point. Table A encompasses the age of four or five forwards up and of penetrating wing play on both flanks; table B reflects the bleak desert when the winger largely went out of fashion and where the overcrowded midfield became the central area of dreary attrition.
    All the world loves a goal, but the world is being starved and the time is ripe for some adventurous new thinking. At the present rate of striking football would seem to have a great future behind it.
    But then each to his own generation and doubtless the youth of the present will one day in turn sigh for their own past. As someone once said - things don't change, they merely alter."


    The last sentence reminds me of a Cruijff quote that is in the book I recently found (with various remarks and quotes). He said something very similar:
    "Everything has been invented and done before in football. Only the circumstances change."
    (23 April 1997)
     
    RoyOfTheRovers and msioux75 repped this.
  17. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    This is of the 1957FA Cup final.


    That was in his 'deep lying' role right?
     
    RoyOfTheRovers repped this.
  18. RoyOfTheRovers

    Jul 24, 2009
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England




    This is the '57 FA Cup Final full match version kindly uploaded by a mate of my brother's on YouTube:



     
  19. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    Yeah, in Pathe highlights I saw a while ago it is visible that he played for England more like a midfielder (what we call today a midfielder) like you said. The orthodox/attacking type of wing-half.
     
    RoyOfTheRovers repped this.
  20. Tambling Fan

    Tambling Fan Member

    Jun 1, 2014
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    The same conversation was happening on terraces and in newspapers at the time.

    I think there are a lots of reasons that overlap each other.

    The 50's tactical revolution as all about getting forwards into scoring positions by being more mobile and more flexible than orthodox defenders. So defensive tactics had a lot of catching up to d0.

    English football was still handicapped in development, both by the fixed wage cartel of the football league clubs and the old boy network of the FA. English football was blown away by the Hungarian whirlwind in the 50's and significantly. one Alf Ramsey played in that England team as a defender and never played for England again.

    The tactical response for the England team was to introduce a deep lying Centre Forward into their line up in a system know as The Revie Plan with Don Revie taking the role.

    The Sixties were a time of remarkable stability in English football. Many of England's legendary managers and teams span that Era

    Man Utd Matt Busby 1949/69
    Liverpool Bill Shankley/Bob Paisley 1959/74 - 83
    Leeds Don Revie 1961/74
    Spurs Bill Nicholson 1958/74
    Chelsea Tommy Docherty/Dave Sexton 1961/67 - 74
    Arsenal Bertie Mee 1966/76
    Man City Joe Mercer/Malcolm Allison 1965/72 - 73

    With so many teams retaining the same Manager and Coach and often the same nucleus of players, tactical play became much more sophisticated with a lot of onus on preventing goalscoring. The man to man marking system of the 40's and 50's was clearly outdated by the fluid play of contemporary midfielders and roving inside forwards. If you take the 66 world cup side as a model you had one big lump to command the air (Charlton) a far more mobile and intelligent tackler along sidehim (Moore) and a pair of old fashioned attacking wing halves playing deeper in the back four (Wilson and Armfield/Cohen) with Stiles closing down the man breaking through. This became more sophisticated as the Zonal system of defense was developed where each player, not only the defenders, had a role to play depending on where the ball was, without the goalkeeper having to issue ad hoc directives. So defensive tactics were evolved not to chase the players but to cover more space and eventualities.

    Most teams adopted a central midfield stopper, which had disappeared when the 3rd back was introduced in the 30's. This was often at the expense of a winger, with many teams playing a lopsided formation with 3 men across midfield and one winger to feed crosses to the front 2. Leeds retained a 4-2-4 formation sharing the holding role between Bremner and Giles, but later introduced Yorath to that role. Spurs had Allan Mullery, Liverpool Tommy Smith. Man Utd Slites. Chelsea preferred to allow Ron Harris to clear up in defense and played Cooke and Hollins in a more creative role.

    However this produced an overall trend towards more defensive football, especially among away sides who would often play 4-4-2 with a screen of defensively minded midfielders when playing a much stronger side. This resulted in the introduction of 3 points for a win in 1981.

    If you look at the tenure of all these managers you will see that by the early 70's most of them were in decline and were facing the break up of aging teams. Manchester United were relegated in 1974 Chelsea in 75 and Spurs in 76 Brian Clough emerged to win the League with unfashionable Derby County and Notts Forest at a time when the greats of the previous decade were facing lean times. QPR attained their best ever finish and Liverpool alone really dominated English football in the '70's. So the gap between the best and the rest had been greatly reduced... and would not grow again until the creation of the Premier League and the Champions League.

    So you can say that there is a great many circumstances behind the statistics on paper.
     
    Gregoriak, PDG1978 and msioux75 repped this.
  21. Tambling Fan

    Tambling Fan Member

    Jun 1, 2014
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Additionally, when comparing the Early Sixties to the Seventies, Liverpool, Leeds and Chelsea were second division sides in the Early Sixties in Chelsea's case just for one season but of course relegated the season before, Leeds were relegated in 1960 too and these three teams would emerge as some of the strongest in the next decade.

    Wolves were an incredible attacking team in the late 50's/early 60's scoring over 100 goals in 59/60 as did Manchester United. Relegated Leeds scored 76!

    Over the early Sixties Blackpool, Bolton, Blackburn, Preston and even Wolves would be relegated in favor of the new generation of teams playing a more balanced style of football. Spurs ran riot scoring over 2 goals a game in their double year with a 4 -2 - 4 formation. Teams that didn't adapt got relegated and either solved the problem (Leeds Chelsea and Man City) or were replaced by teams that had (Liverpool and Sunderland)

    Liverpool, Leeds and Man City all won the league soon after promotion from the 2nd division in the mid Sixties.
    Wolves and Ipswich won the League in those high scoring seasons at the beginning of the decade and were relegated soon after.

    In 1959/60 Burnley won the league, they lost 7 away games, Wolves in 2nd place lost 9 away games. These days it's considered that in order to win the title you can't lose more than 5 games total. Of the rest only Tottenham (5) and West Brom (7) lost less than 9 away games.

    In 1971 Arsenal Won the League, they lost 6 away games, none at home. 2nd place Leeds lost 2 away games with 8 draws, Spurs in 3rd place lost 2 and drew 9 away. Wolves Lost 9 drew 7 Liverpool lost 6 drew 7 ..... 5 0-0 6th Place Chelsea lost 6 drew 9 away.

    Leeds were the highest scoring team in the division with 72.... 4 less than when they were relegated in 1960.
     
    Gregoriak repped this.
  22. PDG1978

    PDG1978 Member+

    Mar 8, 2009
    Club:
    Nottingham Forest FC
    Interesting explanations mate (deeper reasons than just the playing of two full-time centre-backs which is the main idea I had).

    Forest, I believe, were still using a 4-2-4 in the mid to late 60's including when they came 2nd behind Man Utd in the league? With still somewhat of a wing-half type CB in Hennessey with McKinlay sweeping up behind from what footage I've seen?
     
  23. Gregoriak

    Gregoriak BigSoccer Supporter

    Feb 27, 2002
    Munich
    Excellent insight by Tambling fan!
     
  24. Tambling Fan

    Tambling Fan Member

    Jun 1, 2014
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Not every team adapted the midfield stopper in the mold of Stiles or Mullery.

    Spurs deployed Makay and Blanchflower in what would be considered a defensive 4 - 2 - 4 in their double team.

    Leeds used Bremner and Giles in a much more adaptive role in the same formation ttowards the end of the decade. But all these players could take care of themselves.

    People often ask why Glen Hoddle didn't get picked for England more often..... because Bryan Robson and Ray Wilkins were more comfortable with someone playing between and behind them at international level.
    Not something they needed with Man Utd.

    The trend for managers was to pack the midfield and play for a draw rather than risk being humiliated by a big defeat. Perhaps that's why they all kept their jobs for so long!
     
    Gregoriak repped this.
  25. Tambling Fan

    Tambling Fan Member

    Jun 1, 2014
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Playing 2 full time center backs was actually a shift towards more attacking football because previously the full backs were also central defenders, marking the inside forwards. What we call full backs today were wing halves who would man to man mark the wingers and link up with their own wingers like a modern attacking full back such as Ashley Cole. Having a dual centre back team of one big aerial defender and one tackler released one defender for a midfielder in that 4 - 2 - 4 system and one inside forward adopted a free role allowing another midfielder to drop back. This is what was happening in the late 50's and early sixties. Young players were coming into the game, having played traditional football as schoolboys and were coached into these new systems by people like Malcolm Allison, Don Howe and Dave Sexton rather than by the managers. In W M you technically have 7 potential attackers but as 2 are on each wing, 2 of them will always be redundant. In 4 - 2 - 4 you have 6 potential attackers (plus a possibility of an overlapping full back such as Ray Wilson or Jimmy Armfield) This would overwhelm a W M side, hence those big scores by attacking sides. Playing 4 - 3 - 3 away from home at Anfield or Elland Road in the late Sixties/Early Seventies was damage limitation, and as the stats show, the top teams weren't too shy about playing for a draw away either.
     
    Gregoriak and msioux75 repped this.

Share This Page