RibbyBollywood
17 Jun 2008, 11:41 AM
The fact is that the game was different. Players didn't run through the field and build actions to score, but they tried their best to always keep their right positions in the field and, staying in that position, pass the ball and let the main scorers (and not other players) shot when they have the ball.
It was a static and tactical way to play football, and there were lots of fight to "conquist" your position.
We just can't judge with our parametres the actions/fouls of those games... and anyway now they are a piece of the history of football. And IMO Italy deserved to win, because they really were the best. It isn't a case that the Milan stadium is called "Giuseppe Meazza".
Yeah, and Argentina wouldn't send a first string team to play in 1938 because Italy was poaching them as has been stated by many sources!
And key Brazilian players in '38 did not play and there is reason to think they may have been paid.
A lot of history there, defending champs Uruguay apparently were not sending teams to these tournaments in protest.
It was a static and tactical way to play football, and there were lots of fight to "conquist" your position.
We just can't judge with our parametres the actions/fouls of those games... and anyway now they are a piece of the history of football. And IMO Italy deserved to win, because they really were the best. It isn't a case that the Milan stadium is called "Giuseppe Meazza".
Yeah, and Argentina wouldn't send a first string team to play in 1938 because Italy was poaching them as has been stated by many sources!
And key Brazilian players in '38 did not play and there is reason to think they may have been paid.
A lot of history there, defending champs Uruguay apparently were not sending teams to these tournaments in protest.