Properly Deciphering Historic Team Sheets

[Twenty26Six]

I apologize if this topic crosses out of the realm of admiration for soccer history and more into an analysis question. This isn't so much of a formations question as it is how I should be reading the team sheets given from classic matches? [Note: I'm talking specifically about RSSSF listed team sheets from previous World Cups.] (http://www.rsssf.com/tablesw/worldcup.html)

I suppose four things come into play here. [Please, bear with my incomplete knowledge of all history and feel free to point out any errors/incorrect assumptions on my part.]

*The standard formation of the times. [WM, MW, 4-4-2, 4-3-3, 4-5-1, etc.]

*The different adaptations used by each country. [Allowing for obviously that no positioning is always strictly adhered to]

*The generally accepted positions for star players. [Knowing how players such as Czibor, Garrincha, Beckenbauer, Moore, position themselves on the field gives a better understanding of where there teammates are libel to be stationed.]

*The idea of which numbers may represent which positions on the field. [Ex: #1 is Keeper, #7 and #11 are wingers]


I've got three examples of this to draw from and hope that I can get a better idea of what the team sheets are trying to give me in terms of formation, position and tactics.

Example #1 - Hungary [Switzerland '54]
Quarterfinal Match vs. Brazil

HUN: Grosics - Buzánszky, Lantos, Bozsik (c) - Lóránt, Zakárias - M.Tóth,
Kocsis, Hidegkuti, Czibor, J.Tóth

*Style of times dictates 3 defenders, 2 deep midfielders, 5 attackers shaped either in a W or M.

*Hungary played with a single deep lying CF as referenced by Comme here - Switzerland '54 (http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=315755)

*We know that Zoltan Czibor was generally considered a left winger but Puskas was absent and so can we safely assume Czibor was moved up to the front line to pair with Sandor Kocsis?

Based on these assumptions can we assume the team sheet from the game is telling us this?

1 - 2, 3, 4(c) - 5, 6 - 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 [Names replaced with #'s for space concerns]

..is equal to...

____8_____10____
7______9______11
____5_____6_____
_2_____3______4_
_______1________

Questions which arise...

*If the players are listen in order [#] based on position than doesn't common practice tell us that the "fullbacks and "front 5" should be listed right to left?

*Isn't the right fullback commonly coined as a #2, while left is #3. Left winger being #11, and right winger being #7?

*When we classify Boszik as right-half? What position is most likely he to be in? and why is he listed amongst the first 3 players after the keeper. [Ex: HUN: Grosics - Buzánszky, Lantos, Bozsik (c)]

===============

I've been given some insight to this by Comme but would appreciate other input. I'll also try to post some other examples later from like, as well as seperate, periods.

[Twenty26Six]

Example #2 - Hungary [Switzerland '54]
Final Match vs. West Germany

GER: Turek - Posipal, Kohlmeyer, Eckel - Liebrich, Mai - Rahn, Morlock,
O. Walter, F. Walter (c), Schäfer. [Anyone who can shed more light on the formation played by the Germans would be better suited than I would to analyze it. Perhaps it could shed more like on the subject.]

HUN: Grosics - Buzánszky, Lantos, Bozsik (c) - Lóránt, Zakariás - Czibor,
Kocsis, Hidegkuti, Puskás, M.Tóth.

Do we see here in the "front 5" [w/ Puskas back in the line-up] a more likely representation of how they played? [apart from the Q-Final v. Brasil used in Ex. #1]

7, 8, 9, 10, 11 displayed as...
---Kocsis(8)----Puskas(10)---
Czibor(7)--Hidekguti(9)--Toth(11)

So then how do we see our "back 1-3-2"?

1 - 2, 3, 4 - 5, 6 presumably as...?
----Lorant(5)---Zakarias(6)----
Buzanszky(2)-Lantos(3)--Bozsik(4)
---------Grosics(1)---------

But as Comme points out in his write up of Switzerland '54 we see Bozsik as a right-half. Again a slight mystery as how we see this player and how the team sheet classifies him.

But maybe we are meant to see...
1 - 2, 3, 4 - 5, 6 as...

Buzanszky(2)-Lorant(5)--Zakarias(6)--Bozsik(4)
---------------Lantos(3)-------------
---------------Grosics(1)------------
...with Buzansky and Bozsik as progressive sidebacks, and Lorant and Zakarias meant to hold the deep midfield only as well as protect like centre halfs.

It's tough for me to make a statement either way but the latter seems it could be likely.

Note: Numbers in parenthesis do not necessarily stand as markers of position. I use them as to show where they lay in the order of names amongst the team sheet.

[Gregoriak]

HUN: Grosics - Buzánszky, Lantos, Bozsik (c) - Lóránt, Zakárias - M.Tóth,
Kocsis, Hidegkuti, Czibor, J.Tóth

What I notice here is that RSSSF put one of the hyphens incorrectly.

It should read:

Grosics - Buzanszky, Lantos - Bozsik, Lorant, Zakarias - M.Toth, Kocsis, Hidegkuti, Czibor, J.Toth.

In the WM-system, the names attributed to each position would be:

1 Goalkeeper - 2 Right Full Back, 3 Left Full Back - 4 Right Half Back, 5 Center Half, 6 Left Half Back - 7 Outside Right, 8 Inside Right, 9 Center Forward, 10 Inside Left, 11 Outside Left

In classic WM-formation, this would translate to:

--11 Toth---------9 Hidegkuti----------7 M.Toth

----------10 Czibor----------8 Kocsis

------6 Zakarias---5 Lorant----4 Bozsik

-------3 Lantos---------------2 Buzanszky

-------------------1 Grosics

Czibor was moved from outside left to inside left to replace Puskas. The center half was playing more deeply between the two full backs actually in classic WM, like this:

----11 J.Toth----9 Hidegkuti-----7 M.Toth

-----------10 Czibor------8 Kocsis

-----------6 Zakarias------4 Bozsik

-----3 Lantos------5 Lorant-----2 Buzanszky

-------------------1 Grosics

Here the WM is clearly visible, but to be in line with the sheet formation, I will put the center half in his original location between the half backs.

It is important to note that this is just a schematic look at it, Hungary did not exactly play like that. Most notably, Hidegkuti did not play up front but withdrawn.

Example #2 - Hungary [Switzerland '54]
Final Match vs. West Germany

GER: Turek - Posipal, Kohlmeyer, Eckel - Liebrich, Mai - Rahn, Morlock,
O. Walter, F. Walter (c), Schäfer. [Anyone who can shed more light on the formation played by the Germans would be better suited than I would to analyze it. Perhaps it could shed more like on the subject.]

HUN: Grosics - Buzánszky, Lantos, Bozsik (c) - Lóránt, Zakariás - Czibor,
Kocsis, Hidegkuti, Puskás, M.Tóth.

Do we see here in the "front 5" [w/ Puskas back in the line-up] a more likely representation of how they played? [apart from the Q-Final v. Brasil used in Ex. #1]


It appears as if RSSSF set all the hyphens that separate the full backs from the half backs wrongly.

West Germany played like this:

-----11 Schäfer------9 O.Walter------7 Rahn

------------10 F.Walter-------8 Morlock

-------6 Mai---------5 Liebrich---------4 Eckel

----3 Kohlmeyer-----------------------2 Posipal

-----------------------1 Turek


Or in sheets: 1 Turek - 2 Posipal, 3 Kohlmeyer - 4 Eckel, 5 Liebrich, 6 Mai - 7 Rahn, 8 Morlock, 9 O.Walter, 10 F.Walter, 11 Schäfer

[Note that the shirt numbers are by and large not the actual shirt numbers used in the tournament, Fritz Walter wore number 16 for example]

Similar scenario again with the Hungarians:


--11 M.Toth---------9 Hidegkuti----------7 Czibor

----------10 Puskas-----------8 Kocsis

-------6 Zakarias-----5 Lorant----4 Bozsik

-------3 Lantos----------------2 Buzanszky

-------------------1 Grosics

Or in sheets: 1 Grosics - 2 Buzanszky, 3 Lantos - 4 Bozsik, 5 Lorant, 6 Zakarias - 7 Czibor, 8 Kocsis, 9 Hidegkuti, 10 Puskas, 11 M.Toth

Again, using the numbering system in the classic WM-system. Zoltan Czibor in this game actually was moved from his standard outside left/left wing position to an unusual outside right position. After the game was lost, the Hungarian press argued that this was one of the reasons the team did not perform up to standard and Hungarian coach Sebes had a lot of criticism to take for that "chess move".

[Twenty26Six]

Yes that makes much more sense. On the RSSSF Guide to Contents page it stated this. (http://www.rsssf.com/tablesw/wcf-full-intro.html)

"Line ups: Captains are marked with (c). It was assumed that pre-war teams played 1-2-3-5, in the 50s this was changed to 1-3-2-5 (WM system), later to 1-2-4-4 (Brasil in 1962), 1-3-3-4, 1-4-3-3 and finally 1-4-4-2. Of course where there was evidence that a team used a different style that the one widely adopted at the time, this has been taken into account."

Apparently, because of the supposed transition in tactics they goofed in how they presented it.

Gregoriak, thanks for clearing that up. I've got some other questions but those can be saved for another day.

[dor02]

At RSSSF, they have the same problem with starting line-ups for other competions too.

For instance, I looked at Spurs' starting line-up for the 1987 FA Cup Final and they had Ossie Ardiles' name last. Usually a forward or striker's name would be last, not a midfielder.

Another example was the list of Napoli's 1987 Scudetto winning team. They list the best possible team in 2-3-5 formation. I don't get it.

[Gregoriak]

Yes that makes much more sense. On the RSSSF Guide to Contents page it stated this. (http://www.rsssf.com/tablesw/wcf-full-intro.html)



Apparently, because of the supposed transition in tactics they goofed in how they presented it.

Gregoriak, thanks for clearing that up. I've got some other questions but those can be saved for another day.

Bring 'em on!

[Gregoriak]

At RSSSF, they have the same problem with starting line-ups for other competions too.

For instance, I looked at Spurs' starting line-up for the 1987 FA Cup Final and they had Ossie Ardiles' name last. Usually a forward or striker's name would be last, not a midfielder.

Another example was the list of Napoli's 1987 Scudetto winning team. They list the best possible team in 2-3-5 formation. I don't get it.

Annoying!

[dor02]

Annoying!Exactly!

For me, in particular, it's a pain because I used to create some of these teams and players on computer games like FIFA 2000 and FIFA 2002.

Regardless of any situation, they should list the players in their rightful order and line them up in the proper formation.

[Pingudo]

West Germany played like this:

-----11 Schäfer------9 O.Walter------7 Rahn

------------10 F.Walter-------8 Morlock

-------6 Mai---------5 Liebrich---------4 Eckel

----3 Kohlmeyer-----------------------2 Posipal

-----------------------1 Turek



I was asking something similar here:

http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=194026&page=3

[Russian Scouser]

Actually, what is interesting is that even though nominally Rahn was the outside right (right winger, if you like), he actually played quite a free role against the Hungarians in both matches at that world cup and he actually set up Germany's first in the final from the LEFT, where no Hungarian was picking him up.