It was very wrong to change the time of the game. Without a doubt, and without me or any Brazilian getting emotional about this, the change was beneficial for Argentina and harmful for Brazil. I am skeptical about Peru just imploding under pressure. I have read accounts by ARGENTINES about corruption in that tournament, specifically accounts by Madres de Mayo. But as far as soccer is concerned, I have no problems saying that 78 Argentine squad was good. My view is that the refereeing was biased towards them above and beyond the mere Peru game, and that is why many soccer fans say that Argentina team will never get the recognition Argentine fans say it deserves.
I assume you're referring to the complaints about a Dutch player (I forget his name now) who had a protective cast on his wrist. It delayed the game by several minutes. I agree that it was a lowly act - if the cast posed any dangers to other players, why did that Dutch player wear it in previous games without either complaints from other opponents or any injuries caused by that during the games?
oh please.. that is the biggest bunch of biased bollocks.. ridiculous... you want to know what is disgraceful? people who cannot accept when a certain team they dislike wins a world cup... twice.. and has more achievements than the country from where the sport originated.
by achievements you would of course mean: buying a match in WC 78, fisting the ball in the net in 86, and having your star player ending up being a coked up disgrace? As for being better than england? hmm, well all i can say to that is that our record against you in the WC is 3-2 and one of those losses was thanks to Maradona's ridiculous handball, the on you argies call the "hand of God" which just goes to show you argies consider cheating virtuous. I believe the real hand of God is that which banned your fat crack monkey from football in the 90s.
The 1982 game was also interesting. Up until that game, all four teams were tied in points. Poland went to the second round based on that victory. All 5 goals were scored in the second half.... it was a classic case of self-destruction. Italy also went through because they scored a goal against Peru which ended as 1-1. Cameroon finished third with three draws..... they remained undefeated. In fact, they remained undefeated in WC Finals until 1998. I looked at the first round result. Peru went ahead of Holland because of goal difference. Ramon Quiroga saved a pk against Scotland. If he did not save it, both Holland and Peru would have beaten Scotland with the same scoreline. The difference would have been the games against Iran.
I think you meant to say the player with the cast was Rene van der Kerkhof. As I remember, it was a bizarre moment waiting to get the world's biggest game underway. Agree with you on Neeskens' outstanding tournament.
While conspiracies are fun, if last year's 4-0 Depor Milan scoreline occurred in 1970, everyone would be yelling that Señor Franco had suddenly become a Deportivo fan.
Ah, yes ... upon further review, you're right. Rene had a cast; Neeskens had a broken rib. PS. I still meant to say Neeskens. I was merely wrong.
..err.. you sure about that? I know games that go to penalties are officially draws, but extra time wins/defeats can't be, other than for betting purposes. You often get TeamA 1 TeamB 1 (TeamA won 5-4 on pens), but I'd like to see anywhere where it records a result of England 1 Cameroon 1 (England won 3-2 aet)
Not only is this wrong (RichardL has it right--games decided on penalties are recorded as draws, not games in extra time, which are wins/losses with the notation "a.e.t."), but Cameroon lost in 1994 anyway, so they certainly weren't undefeated going up to 1998.
they also lost 4-0 to USSR in the 1990 group stage, as well as going down 3-0 to Brazil and 6-1 to Russia in 1994, but apart from those 4 defeats, they were indeed undefeated until 1998.
Hmmm...so Peru can beat Scotland (when they were good) and Iran by a combined score of 7-1, draw HOLLAND (you know, the finalists), and then lose to Argentina 6-0????? I don't think so. For those of you still delusional, here's an except from a Slate Article by Franklin Foer: "Then there's my favorite murky incident: the 1978 game, when Argentina trounced a Peruvian team that inexplicably started four inexperienced reserves. Just as inexplicably, following its lopsided defeat, Peru received 35,000 tons of Argentine grain as a "humanitarian" gift."
They drew Holland on a missed PK, and also lost to Brazil by a large scoreline. Brazil and Argentina drew their game. So if Brazil and Argentina are comparable sides, Brazil got unlucky and sent several shots off the woodwork in a large win, why can't the Argentines do that? Lest we forget, Peru didn't have much to play for in that game.
Is that the same Franklin Foer who wrote a book relating globalization to soccer? You'd think he'd have done a bit more research about the political issues of the late 70's. At the time, Peru supported Argentina diplomatically during Argentina's dispute with Chile, on the issue of sovereignty over the Beagle Channel, and that is why Argentina gave Peru some favorable terms on grain. Hardly 'inexplicable' by South American political, economic and diplomatic standards. It had nothing to do with football. On the other hand, there is a very believable theory which implicates Cesar Menotti, Daniel Passarella, and Mario Kempes in the assasination of John F. Kennedy. Would you like to discuss it?
Of course, this is the same Franklin Foer who, in an article, called Lazio "Mussolini's team" (wrong!) and proceeded to discuss Lazio's supposed racist tendencies by showing they bought a lot of Argentine players, who're partial to that sort of thing (you know, Peron and all). He knows almost nothing about football.
You can look at the situation with results only. Peru has nothing to play for, but had everything aginst Scotland, Iran and Holland. They were a damn good team abck in 1978. Once they are out.... it is different situation. It is not the onkly time in the history of the game where this happened. On the top of my head, Nigeria lost to Paraguay in WC 1998 and Spain went out, despite thrashing Bulgaria. And Norway beating Brazil at the same WC, Morocco went out. Of course, the political situation caused some comspiracy. I do agree that people can associate the game with politics, but Argentina beating Peru 6-0 was entirely possible.
1) I agree that Foer doesn't know his soccer (he's a too-cute Barca fan), but he does know his politics: he's a writer for the New Republic. 2) So the favorable terms and "diplomacy" between Argentina and Peru was just a big conincidence that happened to coincide with the biggest game in the history of Argentina??? 3) Do you really want to get into a discussion of how the Generals ran Argentina in those dark days and how they exploited soccer for political gain??
1) Completely agreed with the political situation and the possibilities of a fixed game in the given political climate. I believed that it is likely to be a fixed game, but Ramon Quiroga was not the only player in it. He got no chance at 5 of the 6 goals. he could be in it too. That was the original post I started the thread. 2) However, we can discuss the political climate non-stop, but it still does not make Argentina incapble to beat Peru 6-0 at the given situation. It happened in sport all the time. I did not see how Peru's results against Holland, Iran, and Scotland would change anything for the Arg-Peru game. I knew how great Peruan team. After reading the threads, I am more convinced that Argentina was capble of beating Peru by 6 goals. This is my position.
I'd like to see a list of Argentina's most lopsided wins in WC history. I'm convinced they were all against extremely weak teams (like the 5-0 win against Jamaica. I'm not saying it's impossible, just not very likely.
I see. He writes for 'The New Republic'. That makes him an expert on Argentine politics? Do you know what you are talking about? Argentina and Peru have traditionally been close allies for many years, and have usually supported each others position, as for example during the Beagle channel dispute between Argentina and Chile which I mentioned. It had nothing to do with football. This is a topic that trancends the thread, but I'll be glad to talk about it if that is your wish. The military coup which brought the Junta to power happened in March 1976, right before I turned 12 years old. I have experienced those difficult times and they have influenced my life forever. I lived in those dark days. My father received death threats by leftists insurgents. One of my schoolmates was kidnapped by the leftists. A close friend dissapeared and was probably killed and tortured by the Military. I was drafted for the Malvinas war, although I didn't see action. I was in the soccer stadiums, and I even got to see the monster Jorge Rafael Videla in person, up close. So, even if you have studied that period of time in Argentine history, I suspect I that I know much more about this topic than you ever will. As it relates to our football, let me tell you how I saw it, from a front row sit. 1) The World Cup was awarded to Argentina long before the Junta came to power. It is true that the junta tried to use the cup for propaganda purposes, but that is not how the people felt. Football went on during the time of the Junta as it always had in Argentina, and the love which we have for the game has nothing to do with the junta. I could say that we probably got even more into the game to escape the political reality, because at the time we couldn't discuss politics, we couldn't discuss anything out in the open without being in danger, so all we had was our football, and all we could discuss was football. And that, perhaps, added to the great passion for the game which our nation always had and which the world saw in our people at WC 1978. 2) Cesar Luis Menotti, the Argentine coach, had nothing to do with the Junta. In fact, it is well known that Menotti was a leftist intelectual who had many contacts with the radical leftist groups in the universities and he was alleged to have had ties with guerrilla groups. When he was coaching the club Huracan, it was common to see the banners of insurgent leftist organizations like 'Montoneros' among the fans. Menotti was the coach of the National team before the Junta took power, and because of his prestige the Junta couldn't remove him. In fact, the dark irony is that Menotti fit the profile of the type of people who dissapeared during those times. But because of his prestige as well known player and coach, the Junta could not touch him, and because of the importance the Cup had for their propaganda purpose, they had no choice but to embrace him. In fact, on the national team Menotti sorrounded himself with other known leftists, like Dr. Pizzarotti, and as long as they were with him they were also untouchables. It is true that leftist and human right groups have criticized Menotti for 'allowing himself to be used by the Junta as a propaganda tool'. I will quote what he wrote after the fact, in answer to those charges: Menotti: 'Many people could say that I have coached teams during the time of dictatorships, in an epoch when Argentina had governments with which I had nothing in common, and even more, they contradicted my way of life. And I ask, what should I have done? Coach teams to play badly, to base everything on tricks, to betray the feelings of the people? No, of course not... We were conscious and we all knew at the time that we played for the people. A people that, at that moment in Argentina, needed a new point of departure for doing together something different... We tried to play in the best way because we understood that we were obliged to give back the spectacle of football to the people. To give it back through victory, if this was possible, but, after all, in the pleasure of playing honest football. Each of us had an order when we entered the field the day of the final: To look at the people in the stands. We are not going to look at the stage-box of the authorities, I said to the players, we are going to look at the terraces, to all the people, where perhaps sits the father of each of us, because there we will find the metal workers, the butchers, the bakers and the taxi drivers. As one of 'the people' of the time, I believe Menotti speaks the truth. I can say that in the darkness of the times, the World Cup win did a lot for the lives of the common people who were dealing with the difficult times. Some people outside the country, and even well meaning Argentine organizations like 'Madres of Plaza de Mayo', later associated the victory with the Junta, and because of their hatred of the junta they tried to plant their seeds of doubt on the victory. But the issue became more a political agenda than a reflection of what happened in the soccer field. Political pundits have spoken about conspiracy theories, because of their political dislike of the junta, but nothing was ever proven, and all is based on innuendos and suppositions. I think it is unfair to the players who won this title, and who brought happiness to so many of us.
come back when your glorious team wins a eurocup.. then you'll have something to stand on... otherwise, you just reek of jealousy and self-pity.