First its it worthy 36$? no sarcastic ! Well after a quick read of Puck's link, I do agree that football was becoming much faster (from passing speed to team rythm in movement) - so it's true - one can not measure (like if they did?) but one can tell the difference from even WC90's to lately 2010-14. However if one say that speeding game is part of the "evolution" of football? it's a good question *or dilemma, that Football is "supposed" playing so fast! My two cents: 1- Pros: it's good for entertainment value, as most people seem having no time now aday then back then - so speeding teh game is likely to keep people hope alive for a gaol happening at any time .. "SOON" - hence more tickets selling more shirts selling ! 2- Cons: if one play football, he should notice that speed would kill the precision and agility of a player - more like chancing in a "premade system" - Example of Tikitaka, Xavi has notime to think but (reflex) pass square to the left where he knows (pre-made) Iniesta should be there or he coule make a quick thruball where Messi would be available. So once the system works, it's great fluidity and fans are amazed. A dilemma is that thsoe passes were more like a relex (at high tempo) , rather than "calculated" a la Pele of 70 or Zico/Socrates of Brazil 82 .... (in a slower speed) So your choice! If prefer basketball kinda football then this is a great time. (or evolution) But for me , it's just killing off the "human" factor in such a game = BIG DILEMMA (of a so called "evolution") and yet "evolution" often means better?!
haha agree with first bold ... also kinda agree with 2nd bold. Pele might not score 100goals in SerieA 80 but very possible 30+ (or even more) Last bold, well regardless or exclude those friendlies (or exhibitions that I am not sure if you know what they are?) Pele had a very very high GPG against all big teams from top Europe Clubs to top NT in Copa and WC = FACT That was how he got famous, not bc of the so called 1000goals (which Biscan freideinrich and last Romario could do) hence the last bold is irrelevant
Football was played at such a slow pace compared to today that it's not worth comparing players from different generations IMHO Even I can do great things with the ball when I'm not being pressurised ....
yeah like you do in circus? we are talking about doing score goals in WC or in real big games OK? so ... WC in 60 to 90 were never pressure? get lost and get abck to your corner back yard - and do not forget to post it in youtube LOL let me tell you the true story (similar to your example) Everyday I saw at least a dozen of different kids practicing steps over, elasticos , rabona in a my Junior highschool ground - and expand to teh whole world tehre would be like millions can do those tricks (not under pressure) yeah .. and tell me from 2010 to now how many great players coud run at defense and performed a "proper" steps overs to score gaols like R9 in his best days in 90's? so one of those kids could repeat like you: "even I can do a step overs why not Messi , nor Maradona? " stupid eh? just a simple example of a step over ! and Football is much much more than that!
No for football fans but perhaps yes for researchers. I forgot to mention that the increase of passing is the only thing with obvious evolution in the paper but, as SirWellingtonSilva pointed out, there are a few factors influencing it. Also, I think Gregoriak post is more interesting. http://forums.bigsoccer.com/threads/how-much-football-has-changed.1687646/
These were the boots used in the 1954 WC. Not quite as archaic looking as the ones James posted above, but still. Has anybody heard people claiming that the likes of Kocsis or Puskas would have scored twice as much as they did if equiped with more modern shoes? And what would be needed to say then about the likes of Meazza and Sindelar then, what would they have accomplished if able to use the shoes Pele used 30 years later? This ones were used in the 1958 WC apparently, so I dunno where James took that image from, for this one does look old but not so ridiculous. Just Fontaine broke Kocsis's WC scoring record with these shoes... I guess these guy would be scoring by the hundreds with Cronaldo's shoes then, right? By 1962 they looked like this already: This one is from 1966: By 1982 they had these: You can see how the evolution continued here https://www.footy-boots.com/adidas-world-cup-football-boots-archive/
Just to clarify: I'd agree with this. I thought the physically demanding nature of the First Division, due to playing many games, would suit Pelé well. One of his key qualities was the ability to play many consecutive games with relatively little rest in between (even though it were occasionally just friendlies). He coped that better as many other players, I think. His physiological durability, although occasionally tested beyond the limit, was arguably better as many other legends (his 'rival' Eusebio had that too I'd say). The First Division was probably played at a higher pace and intensity as the Brazilian leagues though. Angelillo did this in 1958-59 just slightly before the league GPG went down (it was 2.93 GPG, funnily unmatched since then; by the mid-60s it was 2.10-2.30). I suppose Pelé his chances would have been (a little bit) better at the early part of 1958-1965 as at the back end of the time frame. One of the better comparisons would be to look at the other Brazilian forwards who moved to Italy or Spain, and how their scoring compared with their scoring in Brazil (Paulista or Carioca). No, although I think they were surpassed by the 70s and 80s Spaniards, I wouldn't underestimate their toughness and steeled midfield warriors. In my opinion those accounts are sometimes invariably compounded and inflated by other recurrent 'allegations' towards the Italians during the 1970s. Most notably allegations about match fixing, crowd hostility/pressure (Italy had no representative in 1974-75 season due to Lazio crowd troubles), referee bias, hotel tricks (Helenio Herrera) and corrupted doping controls. For ex. Brian Glanville his European Cup book has a whole chapter about the 'Golden Fix' (although it also mentions Spanish and other examples, it is mostly focused on Italy). In a rush those accounts about brutality might have been inflated by the other recurring and partially related assumptions. Teams entered the field with the false/right expectations and found confirmation in what happened (e.g. confirmation bias, congruence bias, reinforcement theory, 'hostile attribution bias'). The irony is that sometimes teams accused the referee of being biased on purpose, while actually it was probably the crowd and soft-soaping that steered his actions. I can imagine that this dynamic 'compensates' for the lack of foreign players. The complaints against Spanish clubs (for ex. Tottenham-Barca 1982, Celtic-Atletico 1974, Barca-Anderlecht 1978) were to a lesser level 'blurred' and ignited by other assumptions and observations. That can also mean though that - despite possible inflated complaints making the newspapers - the roughness by Italian teams becomes pressed down in the collective consciousness, because more exciting stories about gamesmanship are out there to tell. Plus, as already observed, it still had a number of ageing foreign veterans and stars. Who are perhaps, in some way, in a better position to comment on the developments and evolutions than the brand new players. Both have pros and cons: veterans might be conditioned in such a way that they don't see the differences any longer, while new recruits are still adapting and finding their pathway in a new environment with new challenges and advantages. Which 1970s European Cup tie, involving an Italian team, can compare to the live play roughness and incessant hacking at Celtic-Atletico of 1974? (in part. Jimmy Johnstone was a victim)
I cite from your link: All of that is included in the previously posted link. A few major weaknesses can be mentioned (most of them already mentioned by both links themselves), but not every article is about the 'why' question. Many just focus on who, what, where and when and not on why or how. The link you provide instead doesn't dive into the 'why' question either. Especially when, as you say, there is no approaching consensus about the subject ("some figures correlate").
No. Good point. I've read however that Puskas himself preferred the old balls and shoes. I think it's in the 'Puskas on Puskas' book, too. Also the ball saw a massive change between 1954 and 1964 (with ups and downs, it wasn't an entirely gradual change). Maybe not surprising that (some) pros prefer the material they grew up with.
By the way, someone should post the games by River Plate in the Copa Libertadores 86 season. A team that played with a speed and precision that would give vertigo to most current-day opponents. @Once @Vegan10 @argentine soccer fan @msioux75 @RiverGaucho @canis
Many have also raised in the past that Pelé did actually score 41 goals in 38 games against Italian opposition. While that is a considerable achievement (even with a few penalties once in a while), I always thought that the particular conditions of those friendlies inflated these stats. I suppose that the record of Gerd Müller against Italian opposition is a more realistic estimation of what Pelé might approximately do against Italian opposition; 6 goals in 15 games (8 in 17 incl. national team games). Where three of these goals fell in high scoreline matches: 3-3, 5-5, 2-4. Say, something between 0.33 and 0.50 as a realistic estimation. By the way, and this connects very well to the first point of the video in the starting post (I tend to agree with most of the other points), it can be noticed that Gerd Müller (topscorer at the WC) played his last club match a month before the World Cup started (May 1970). As was the case with almost all European teams present. Pelé played his last club match in February 1970, and his last competitive (non-friendly) match at December 1969.
In "The Beautiful Game" sub-forum most likely. But I'm sure in Bigsoccer there are some Brazilian posters who watched Pele with Santos and Brazil NT, or some American posters who watched him with Cosmos. I believe @RoyOfTheRovers may have watched him live at WC66.
The team you mention Pipiolo is quite a story. A side that won every tournament they took part in the 85-86 season. Most remarkably the team that dominated the Argentina Primera Division sold its best player, Enzo Francescoli who was the top goalscorer with 26 goals, to Racing Paris, yet still won the Copa Libertadores with a different style of play, based more on speed and counterattacks the the traditional River Plate style. During the Argentina Primera, the team famously beat Argentinos Juniors 5-4, with a Francescoli hat-trick. At the time Argentinos was the defending Libertadores Champions. Later, we beat Velez 3-0 to clinch the title before winning 2-0 in La Bombonera against Boca in a game known forever es "La Pelota Naranja" because the boca goalie Hugo "el Loco" Gatti played with an orange ball. The team featured no less than 5 world cup winners in the starting XI- Captain Americo "Tolo" Gallego, Beto Alonso, Oscar Ruggeri, Hector "el Negro" Enrique and Nery Pumpido. We had some great Uruguayans. The man who scored the goal that won the 1986 Intercontinental Cup Final was the speedy Antonio Alzemendi, the same man who a year later would eliminate Diego Maradona's Argentina on home soil in the Copa America. Nelson Gutierrez was also a rugged defender who starred on Uruguay. The team also featured some young guns, Nestor Gorosito and Pedro Troglio may not be known out side of Argentina, but they are household names and are both coaches in the Primera Division Currently. its worth noting a young claudio caniggia was also part of the squad, although he didn't feature much in the Libertadores, he was a key man in the 3-0 domination of Alujaense of Costa Rica in the Interamerica Cup. Up front was a beast of a man, Juan Gilberto "El Buffalo" Funes who would tragically die just 6 years later. He was a real handful, just a monster up front. He was such an idol at Millonarios in Bogota (there is a great friendship between River and Millos) that their fans nicknamed themselves "La Barra del Buffalo" Gol de Funes en la Final Beto Alonso y la pelota naranja Antonio Alzamendi vs. Steua, pase de Alonso Golazo de Francescoli a Argentinos Golazo de Franescoli a Polonia en Mar del Plata
Yeah, the 18-year-old Caniggia was the young starlet off the bench for River Plate. Also, Centurion, who would be banned for steroid use (presumably in error), and Goycoechea as backup keeper.
I never watched Pele at his best live LOL I only watched his older form at Cosmos with Beckenbauer Carlos Alberto in NASL .... ( vs Best, Cruijff Eusebio) ... and guess what? he was older and still stood out ======================================== It so funny that "history repeats itself" : (back then I was just like many younsgters now who thought Pele was a "myth" LOL) Back then I was always arguing against my dad, my uncles ... that Cruyff is indeed a better player (than Pele) and he is the best ever ... Now that my dad had passed away and I never had chance to come up and say: " sorry dad, I was young and clueless and that you were right- Pele is the best ever"