The best players of the season 1980-1

Yes, I understand but they hadn't an subscription to quarter-final or semi-final places.

Aston Villa and, to a lesser extent, Everton are sometimes also seen as kind of 'one-hit wonders'. A book about the European Cup (I think you know it, it is written bij Keir Radnedge, an Englishman) describes Villa as a side without major talents.
Nottingham Forest is sometimes also seen in that way, although I personally disagree and have the feeling that the talent of the Forest side is somewhat downplayed in order to make the Clough myth even a bit bigger.

I have to say though that I've not seen much footage of Villa. I saw the most of Forest I think.



The ballon d'or rating is also peculiar for that year by the way. No major tournament and yet only two EC-finalists (Dalglish and Stielike) named in the list:
http://www.rsssf.com/miscellaneous/europa-poy81.html
(I'm not saying that Madrid and Liverpool had no talented players, in fact, I'm tempted to say the list is flawed although both teams disappointed domestically)

 

On the other hand, Dalglish was injured and out of shape for that season so he may feel himself lucky he had received some votes, as only Liverpool player.

 

Yes I think Forest had a good collection of quality players that could understandably achieve the success they did.

I remember reading Clough's comments about the invincibles Arsenal side that beat Forest's unbeaten games record and he stated that his Forest team didn't have an Henry or a Pires, and I think that's true (even moreso they didn't have a Cruyff or Eusebio or similar players like previous European Cup winners had). But players like Shilton, Archie Gemmill, Anderson, Robertson, Woodcock, Francis and others to an extent would be rated among the top players if in the Premier League today I think.

I'm not saying any other manager could necessarily do the same as Clough did arriving at Forest at that time, but though teams sometimes can have a decent collection of talent without doing great and also these players may have not been maximising their potential before Clough arrived, I do think he got a decent 'hand' dealt to him with Robertson, O'Neill, Woodcock and Anderson all at the Club when he arrived. He takes great credit for making Robertson such a top left-winger but he also admits Woodcock was nearly let go (he was loaned out before establishing his place in the team) and made Clough re-think his view that an 'inside-forward' should be a bit tougher than Woodcock was.

Generally, regarding this thread Forest were in a bit of a dip in 80/81 and Shilton and Anderson maybe as their only candidates would make sense (Aas might be worth looking into for the following season while Metgod despite his cult status and great free-kicks at Forest would seem to be most worthy in 80/81 as comme has put him - he played very well vs Ipswich although perhaps it should be noted that he had a better effect in attack than defence wheras in the Holland-France game from '81 (actually 81-82) he didn't seem as influential in midfield in a Holland side in their own dip as alluded to in this thread; by then ex-Forest players Woodcock and Francis would both seem to have better claims in 81/82 than 80/81).

 

Then you are underestimating the strength of PSV in 1988 I think, although PSV played some very negative, disgusting football with low television-ratings in Holland (but they had and have not the same amount of fans as Ajax and Feyenoord). On the other hand, the eternal talent Vanenburg finally learned to play more disciplined and focused which eventually became a factor in euro88. That is what most sour critics forget.
They were also unpopular for their extensive financial backing from Philips, they were nicknamed 'the money-team'. Portuguese teams were at that time also quite strong I believe.

On the other hand, I do not know all players of Everton equally well. Someone like Steven was a decent, reliable winger but not extremely talented/technically gifted. I also know Graeme Sharp and Reid a bit, didn't notice something special (to be fair, I had the impression Reid was one of the weaker England players in 1986WC, but I see he won the PFA award the year before). Lineker, Southall, Ratcliffe and Stevens were of course outstanding players for their position.

 

I had this great website bookmarked:
http://www.lfchistory.net/

With many extensive profiles and stats of players. Maybe helpful.

 

What about Petrović-Pižon ? Definitely one of the most prominent attacking midfielders in Europe at that time.

 

Yes, that is also my impression, neither is it needed to have those top talents.

Rinus Michels once said that 16 players with the talent of John Bosman is enough to become world champion (as opposed to talents of the Gullit caliber), but Holland usually doesn't have 16 players of that quality.

Clough is often also credited with finding talented players who didn't fit elsewhere. Szymanski and Kuper also wrote this in their book 'why England always lose'. The kind of difficult, fickle, unpredictable persons, who were cheap to buy but had undeniably some talent.

In that sense, his myth is deserved but he deliberately chooses for players who could kick a ball.

Eventually, that is often the key to sustained success because if everyone plays 'classical' 4-4-2, then you have no surprises for your opponent. So players like Woodcock, who don't fall in a 'mould' can be very helpful.

Metgod was often commanded by the NT-coach to play in midfield, to his own dislike by the way. He wanted to have space before his nose.

I noted yesterday in another thread that NT-coach Zwartkruis used over 40 players, which was way too much. Comme also says this in this thread.

The qualification campaign for 1982 was arguably the weakest since 1970. Holland was for 1984 unlucky (Spain-Malta 12:1, big trauma) and for 1986 stupid (Kieft and Van Basten suspended, amongst other things), which resulted in a even bigger trauma against the Belgians.

I said against you in a PM that Metgod was unlucky during his career. He was part of the 'in-between' generation and once he moved to Real Madrid, he was out of the picture (because the new coach had learned it was difficult to build a team around players playing abroad). At Real Madrid he was unlucky that they bought another foreigner Valdano after two seasons, so he moved on. By then, he was perceived as too old, despite being 26 years old, to build a new Holland defense around.
He had a nice Indian Summer at Feyenoord though, although there are videos around where a young Bergkamp is toying with him

 

Probably in every season from about 1978 to the year when he started to play for Arsenal (at least a candidate). At that time he was Red Star's most important player, in a time when the club dominated the former Yugoslavian league.

 

Took me a while to translate (did a part yesterday, finished it today).

I think the programme is recorded between WC1982 and euro84.

Interviewer: "Is it the ultimate happiness to score a goal?"
Ceulemans: "Yes, I think so. You showed the goals from my best season, I think, when we became champions and I scored 29 goals [i.e. 1979/1980]. I think for every player it is, yes, something special to score a goal, you get extra joy.. I like to score every week a goal [smile]."
Interviewer: "In the National Team you have evolved from being the most advanced man towards being more of a attacking-midfielder, did you like the decision of Guy Thys? [the NT-coach]"
Ceulemans: "The trainer decides. In Bruges that is also the case. I had to play behind two strikers. The trainers decides and I accept it".
Interviewer: "But if you had the privilege to chose for yourself?"
Ceulemans: "Then I prefer to play 'at the apex' [typical Flemish/Dutch football language], in the front-line."
Interviewer: "But you perhaps perform better as you are now playing for the national team, from deep positions, falling back?"
Ceulemans: "Yes, as I said earlier [seems that this is not the complete interview], I prefer to have space, then it is better to play behind the strikers."
Interviewer: "You are also quite tall, 1.88 meters, that is maybe a bit too tall for a striker. You need, as you said, space to perform. That is probably related to your body length, your long legs, considering your style of moving, walking, working?"
Ceulemans: "Yes but I do not dare to call it a disadvantage. The crosses reaches you more easily. I would not dare to call it a disadvantage but I need space. Up front, I'm usually playing against three, sometimes four, man, so it suits me if I fall a bit back".
Interviewer: "We also searched for images of Ceulemans for Belgium".

[footage]

Interviewer: "Have you recorded this on tape?"
Ceulemans: "Mmmmm yes, all matches of Belgium at the World Cup are recorded by me."
Interviewer: "A habit?"
Ceulemans: "No, certainly not. No, it was the first time I do it, for the rest I have no images."
Interviewer: "The World Cup is probably the pinnacle so far, what does it mean for a footballer? You are now 25 years old. [confirming it was filmed between the 1982WC, July 1982, and February 1983]"
Ceulemans: "Yes, I think every player is longing for it, thus to play there, and certainly for a country as Belgium, which is perhaps allowed to participate one or two times in every twenty/thirty years. That is of course a high point in my career, and that you may experience that... that is a good feeling"
Interviewer: "You didn't start well and then, we have seen it against Hungary, came the revival, what were the causes?"
Ceulemans: "That always depends on small things, I believe. That small bit of confidence... what is confidence...?"
Interviewer: "Are you such a sensitive person, that a small thing..?"
Ceulemans: "Because it took a while for me to score a goal, you begin to doubt, hesitate. I think that is not only for me the case but for every attacker.
But it [the tournament] did not went on well for me. Eventually I could create the equalizer that brought Belgium in the second round. That gave me the kick-start to go on."
Interviewer: "The team is still carried by it?"
Ceulemans: "Yes, I think so. I'm injury free and that was one of the most important reasons I think."
Interviewer: "If we have a guest in our programme he is allowed to choose footage he wants to see. You choose for Eddy Merckx [the greatest cyclist of all-time, although some say Lance Armstrong is the greatest]. Why?"
Ceulemans: "Because Eddy Merckx was in my eyes the best. I've seen the previous episodes and there you had picked the best... McEnroe, Pelé... Hence, I also picked the best, Eddy Merckx."
Interviewer: "We will take a look at Merckx."

[footage of Merckx]

Interviewer: "That is also a bit your style 'zwoegen' [there is not a proper english word for it, it is related to working hard but not entirely the same], working on character?"
Ceulemans: "Yes, I think so. You cannot compare Merckx with me but I have maybe the same style".
Interviewer: "We gonna see you now working at euro 80"

[footage of Ceulemans at euro80]





My own opinion: I think you do him injustice to portray him as a mere hard worker. In the video you also see him scoring a fine goal against Ireland I think, where he shows a nice Van Basten-esque turn, move, agility and nice shot.

 

Woodcock was certainly very good at linking play as well as being able to run in behind and also a good finisher with both feet. He wasn't a typical striker. Your comment also applies to Robertson in that he wasn't a stereotypical winger that would run down the line and cross at every opportunity but more of a playmaker/winger although he did play very much on the left side - his unpredictability (although he often did similar things) gave a different dimension to the team's play I think though as suggested earlier in terms of extravagent ball skills and athleticism he wasn't like Cruyff or even Pires for example.

I understand why Metgod would thrive more coming into the play as an extra man rather than in midfield, but actually at Forest he may have fared a bit better as a midfielder although as I've mentioned he did play as a centre-back too. Forest were the purest footballing team around I think but in English football centre-backs didn't really operate like liberos (even Hansen who did still show some libero-like capabilities) and Clough achieved his early success by instructing players to perform their role which for a centre-back would be defending and getting the ball to a team-mate (Martin O'Neill similarly tells his players what they are good at and to concentrate on that although his teams aren't as much pure footballing ones as Forest were including in the European Cup era when O'Neill himself played for them).

 

Thanks, and I'll re-watch to see if any of the Euro '80 footage is new to me (I understand the cycling now though).
Confirmation if it was necessary that 79/80 would be the best candidate for a world class season for him (maybe others in the mid-80's).
I also think he was more than a hard worker (saw a great solo goal for Bruges on Youtube in the same period, maybe 70's, before it was taken down; the goal you highlight is also a quality finish for example).

 

Well, he says that he prefers, at that time at least (in hindsight I think it is filmed between november 1981 and february 1982, because he says he is injury free and they certainly wear 'winter clothes') the striker position and like to score goals so that colors maybe his perception. Nevertheless, he only began to regain his best form in the calendar year 1982.

His mid80s period is indeed often seen as the best of his career, for his successes with the NT (he became the captain in 1984 after Gerets was convicted for - an attempt to - match fixing) and his matured all-round play. Against the USSR (in the video I posted here a while ago) you also see him directing players, pointing towards where a ball should be sent (in the baking heat of Mexico), etcetera.

 

It showed an assist from the '82 World Cup but it's probably winter judging by the jumpers (they seem mid-80's type clothes to me).
His goal in the '86 Play-Off is also quality IMO although it seems as I think you've mentioned before he liked to interlink with team-mates and could score and help create quite simple goals as well as the high quality individual ones at times (maybe more of them earlier in his career but he was also a good creator combining wingplay/dribbling and well timed passing for example at Euro '80).
His stats suggest a good enough 80/81 (especially playing increasingly in the midfield) for an inclusion as a 1* player probably but given he'll be included in other years I'd understand comme preferring to leave him out without any clear reasons to include him for that season.

 

Errrrrm, sorry, I meant between november 1982 and february 1983 (where he turned 26, the interviewer mentions that he is 25).

He was injury free at the 1982 world cup and cites it as a reason for the relative success (the particular tense he uses also hints that he was injury free at the time of the recordings).

Sorry for the confusion.

 

No problem - I did think you'd already realised he was talking about the '82 World Cup anyway.
Not to go off on a tangent, but I wonder whether a player like Ceulemans would decide to move abroad if playing today (he famously turned down AC Milan to stay at Bruges) either because the quality of 2nd tier leagues would not be as good even if Belgium had a comparitive group of players or purely because the financial offers would be too high to decline now. Anders Lund is another example though it seems he very much wanted to stay in Norway thus turning down Ajax so with the same feelings perhaps he would indeed stay even today (he was a non-flyer too although of course Bergkamp largely coped with that ok in recent years).

 

I was thinking about it and this question can be approached from different angles.

I personally believe that cultural dispositions had a stake. It are stereotypes but Dutch people are acknowledged as rude, arrogant, loud-spoken, open to the outside world, self-confident, creative etcetera. Belgians sometimes complain "In every country of the world you see a sign of Heineken", relating to the openness of Dutchies, which Belgians, according to the stereotype, lack. It has to be said though that also many Dutchies complain about the sheer arrogance of Dutch footballers.
Belgians on the other hand are: soft-spoken, humble, polite, precise, focused, introvert, conservative (in terms of 'change') and whatever more.

While it are crude stereotypes, you can make a case that there is some trueness in deciding to move towards another country. Ceulemans didn't move because he was afraid to miss his family, his village and his Belgian beers (really). I think this is perhaps also at play for Norwegians vs Danish people. Danish are renowned for their open stance to the world and maybe that is why many Danish footballers leaved the country (although they often went to quasi-similar cultures such as Germany, Holland and Belgium).
Ceulemans was also afraid to not perform as well in another country and football-culture.

That last thing was also an issue for most Dutch footballers in the past. Would they reach their full 100% in another culture?

I think it is safe to say that this is not an issue anymore. Although one can argue about whether Van Persie reaches his potential, a Van Persie on 90% is still a very good player and top of the cream.
Dutch academies even educate with selling to the Premier League in mind. This means, they partly select young kids with another 'culture' in mind.

Last thing: it is not only about money. I read in the weekend the biography of Marco van Basten. In the summer of 1984 he received an offer to play at Fiorentina where he could earn 4 times more. But he didn't. He had still the idea that Ajax had enough quality to do something special, esp. when Cruyff came.
Furthermore, he saw the fate of his predecessor Wim Kieft in Italy, who had it difficult to settle himself. That backed him off.
It only became an issue when he was scoring as if he did it with one leg. Journalists began to ask what it was worth. Van Basten replied that the matches against Feyenoord and PSV were enough proof, where Ajax often lost against but Van Basten was a pain in the ass for the defences. He rightly said "It is easy to play good when you win, it is difficult to play good when you loose", but he did it.
But the debate held on. Cruyff advised him to move to Spain, where he could earn big money, if he wanted to leave. But Spain was no option for him. It had the reputation of being a cannon-fodder league, it would never convince others and himself of his qualities. So if he moved, he wanted to go to Italy, where the defence was tough and teams played negative. This in order to prove that his record at Ajax was no fluke and to prove at hindsight to the critics what he has done for Ajax (he mentions something similar in the Footballs Greatest video, when he discusses the 1987CWC final, he said that he wanted to grab the chance so critics couldn't say he wasn't a winner).
At the end, the clashes with Cruijff and the departures of Koeman and Vanenburg to PSV sealed his desire to leave (at that time, he also doubted whether the Dutch NT would ever learn from their mistakes). And with an rotten ankle, he still did some good things in Italy.

N.B. That Koeman and Vanenburg opted to go to PSV also says something about that time. Vanenburg went because he had problems with Cruyff, culminating in benching him 'for tactical reasons' while he was at top of the 'footballer of the year' ranking. Vanenburg didn't go abroad but went to the nearest competitor, PSV. Koeman though, did it for the money and made no secret of it. I think he also had every right to complain because his contract at Ajax wasn't that good, which wasn't a signal of confidence, to say the least.

 

Forgot to say:
The critics responded that it was easier to recharge yourself for a (maximum) dozen important matches in a year than being completely focused in every match, such as in Italy.

When Ajax had some European successes in 1986/1987 he began to doubt whether it was a good idea to leave. But eventually, there was no turning back after the clashes with Cruijff. The authors of the book also speculate that it would have been explained as a capitulation if he had decided to stay at Ajax at last moment.

 

Thinking that way PDG,

There was also less of a need for Ceulemans to move abroad. Ceulemans had according to himself a good contract at Brugge. Furthermore, because he was a midfielder, his goals were seen as a bonus and not approached with the attitude 'how would he fare in Italy?'.
On top of that, Ceulemans ended pretty high in the Ballon d'Or rankings, kind of unique for a Belgian player. And proved himself at two World Cups, one euro and also one cameo appearance in WC1990 (big difference with MvB!!). He was the captain and it was obvious who was the jewel in the crown. It was also obvious who commanded the other players, who was the leader in the field, that was he, above the likes of Gerets and Pfaff (if you compare this with MvB: Cruyff tried to make a midfielder of him, you can see him wearing number 6 in a dozen of matches, but MvB preferred to stay a specialist with all-round skills rather than developing into a complete player with specialist skills - if you understand the slight difference I make).

There was no need for Ceulemans to prove himself I believe. His talent was unquestioned in his own country and, considering the Ballon d'Or rankings, also recognised in the rest of Europe.

Just my thoughts.

 

Thanks for your thoughts Puck. I guess also the Milan team may not have been doing great when they tried to sign Ceulemans (I'm not sure I've ever seen a date quoted so for example I don't know if it was before or after the video interview I posted was given). I think the preference to stay living in Belgium does seem to have been a big factor though (Scifo of course had Italian heritage, although overall his first move there to Inter Milan is reported to have been a bad one in that he struggled to fit in despite scoring a few excellent goals). It's an interesting point that van Basten felt some pressure to prove himself in Italy and it would make sense that Ceulemans felt he was already appreciated at the level of player he believed he was so had nothing to prove as such.

I know Christian Eriksen has stated he's staying with Ajax for now when interest has been shown in him particularly from the Premier League, but it sounds like he'd have ideas about moving at some stage unlike Ceulemans. Brian Laudrup staying at Rangers rather than going to Barcelona in 94/95 might be a similar situation to Eriksen's in that he stayed where he felt comfortable, appreciated and free to play in the role he wanted and it was in a 2nd tier league (the Dutch league is probably further away from the elite than it used to be and Rangers at that time had good money). In theory, I think the money at any relatively big club is going to be substantial (excessive?) nowadays so players could comfortably stay where they are, but an additional pressure is certainly the widening quality gap between leagues overall and the trend of moving which means a lot of the top International players from a country will play abroad and hence other players will probably be more tempted to do so.

Anyway, we'd probably best not get too far off track from the 80-81 discussion but it's interesting to analyse Ceulemans decision (I wonder actually whether his reputation wasn't harmed at the time by staying at Bruges but in hindsight his legacy would've been more noted if he had for example starred as one of the top players in Serie A for a while even without the player of the year awards he got in Belgium).

 

Tremendous effort!

Uwe Krause didn't play for West Germany.

For Dortmund, Burgsmüller usually was listed as a midfielder (#8 was his number), not a pure striker. He liked to come from a deeper midfield position, "sneaking" into the penalty box. He was not a playmaker. Definitely finesse and shrewd type of player, but not a great conductor.

Hamburg had trouble with their manager Branko Zebec at that time who was often drunk and even appeared on the bench being drunk. This also undermined the respect he had among his players. This had already been a problem during the 1979-80 season but the club stuck to Zebec as they hoped he could deal with this and because he was an excellent manager. But it got worse over time and finally they sacked him in Decemer 1980.

.... or they might have been eliminated in one of the earlier rounds like the great Liverpool in some of their campaigns!