I wondered why Santos didn't participate in the Copa Libertadores - the wikipedia page has the following explanation in 1966: Wikipedia about Santos in 1967: Sadly, no direct source for either claim. I tried to find something myself - the old Brazilian newspapers are FULL of headlines and information about how much money certain games earn for a team - is it really shocking that "money is the #1 objetive" isn't a new development? This is from 1965 - the last time Santos played the Copa Libertadores: 25/03/1965 – Santos 5 x 4 Peñarol-URU Renda: Cr$ 36.598.500,00 06/03/1965 – Santos 2 x 1 Universitário-PER Renda: Cr$ 20.776.600,00 26/02/1965 – Santos 1 x 0 Universidad de Chile-CHI Renda: Cr$ 23.448.900,00 For comparison their highest earning home State league games: 19/09/1965 – Santos 0 x 1 Palmeiras Renda: Cr$ 41.609.500 16/10/1965 – Santos 0 x 0 São Paulo Renda: Cr$ 32.696.000,00 14/11/1965 – Santos 4 x 2 Corinthians Renda: Cr$ 100.894.500,00 I tried to find information about price money they would get for the Copa Libertadores title, could only find something for the State league from 1968 though. NCr$1 = Cr$1000
Funnily, the 1970 World Cup did have in the end a looong and elaborate preparation that took six months.
Yeah, the reason is money. Not money earned from their national league (which didn't even exist yet), but money from foreign tours. Santos were the Harlem Globetrotters of football. I imagine the home team takes the receipts in Libertadores games? Great business for the smaller teams, but how much is Santos going to rake in when "The Strongest" drops by for a walkover? Well, the numbers posted give a good indication.
As I already said in this thread, it is also one of the reasons Brazilian teams dropped out altogether (the world soccer from a to z book from 1973). The other related one was they wanted to have "preferential treatment" (sic).
Does it say what kind of preferential treatment? I imagine either a higher share of the gates, or a walkover into the games against Argentinian and Uruguayan teams. Can't say I blame them, really.
They wanted a higher share of the money (which they got, higher than the Argentines). They also wanted refs who did not allow Spanish speaking teams to beat the crap out of them... Article notes Estududiantes made a substantial loss during their run while "it is widely believed some clubs spent a lot on bribing referees." Lol. I will post the whole article tomorrow.
Stuff about Brazil - mostly Rio based from Jornal dos Sports (really detailed, pleasantly surprised). I'm trying to get more about SP. So in general those were the most capped players: XI Rio state league 1967 - was voted on by 33 journalists: Another one from "Revista do Esporte": Rio State 1968 End of 1968 player of the year: That part is pretty impressive: Clodoaldo had 0 caps at that point. Felix, Brito and Everaldo didn't look like locks for the team either. A player that seems to be popular here and a good option is Tostão, so I looked at what he did. A special case because he plays in Minas Gerais state league and the current time frame is limited to the state leagues and Taca '67. Honestly this league is one of the most imbalanced farmer's league I've seen so far while researching. There is one HUGE game vs Atlético, another decent one vs América This is what the league table looks like in 1967 - those three teams are the only ones with a positive record. In 1968 it's Atletico, Uberlândia, Formiga. Here are his goals scored vs the "positive" teams. We could look further at reports - goals could be misleading - or look at performances vs lower ranked teams (Tostão was overall league top scorer in both seasons) but in my opinion there is a lack of meaningful club games he played in that timeframe. Getting a bit ********ed over a bit by using the European style calendar. Getting eliminated by Nautico in the Nation wide competition doesn't look glorious either. If I'd be limited to just two Brazilian I would select Pelé and Gérson for sure - I consider both of them locks. Beyond that I think Carlos Alberto, Jairzinho, Tostão look like possibilities. Edu or Toninho worth looking at too.
Here it is claimed he also put the European Cup in that bracket, during the 1969-70 season at least. However, the season [1969-70], foreshortened by England's early departure to Mexico to defend their World Cup crown, was to bring nothing but heartbreak for Leeds United. Billy Bremner and Don Revie were Footballer and Manager of the Year, and for many months looked likely to celebrate a remarkable treble of League title, European Cup and FA Cup, but unprecedented fixture congestion destroyed both their chances and the players. In March and April, Leeds played 17 matches, with 9 of them squeezed into the space of 22 days. Revie's long running feud with Football League secretary Alan Hardaker meant that he got little sympathy when requesting assistance with rearranging fixtures, and something had to give. First the League title race was conceded to Everton when Revie incurred Hardaker's wrath by fielding teams made up entirely of reserves. The manager decreed that the European Cup and the FA Cup took precedence over the League, but a succession of replays, injuries and exhaustion took its deadly toll. Leeds hammered Chelsea in the Cup final with Eddie Gray enjoying the game of his life, but lapses in concentration allowed the Londoners to steal two equalisers. Then Celtic caught United on two off nights in the European Cup semi-final to eliminate them with some ease. The season ended in empty bitterness when Chelsea came from behind in the Cup final replay at Old Trafford to snatch an extra time winner. It is difficult to overstate the depth of the despair that engulfed the Elland Road club in that doom-laden spring. If nothing else, Don Revie finally appreciated the risks of over-ambition and spreading the jam too thinly. It was a heart-rending way to learn http://www.mightyleeds.co.uk/managers/revie6.htm ?????
I made this great find in "NepSport" - Euro XI voted on by journalists from several different country Dec 1967 Dec 1968 Here we can see the number of votes for each player and every country's representative mentions the best player from his league. Karol Jokl might be a surprise. Charlton and Beckenbauer made it 12 out of 13 times - looks like Mr. Eric Batty was the only one who excluded them judging from his WS XI. CSSR Player of the Year - this explains how the voting for the award works that is found on wikipedia. It's a fanvote organized by the magazine "Stadion".
Maybe @schwuppe can help a bit with this (for both players, Adamec and Cruijff) and also things like what he thinks of their record/displays in meaningful or 'big' matches. He has already covered carlos alberto.
I remember this season well. Before it started the FA Cup was the priority. With fixture congestion in March and April the league was abandoned to concentrate on the cup competitions. Losing to Celtic in the EC semi-final was disappointing (Hunter's absence was a blow), but it was nothing compared to the reaction to defeat in the FA Cup Final. Some Leeds supporters blamed the Football League for not allowing fixtures to be rearranged. The matches against Celtic were fairly quickly forgotten. Fallout from the 1970 FA Cup Final and replay lingered on for years. As Norman Hunter said in Leeds United Book of Football No 2: "If ever there was a heartbreak moment for Leeds, this was it."
About Beckenbauer: There were indeed a lot of games were Bayern conceded 3,4 and even 7 goals ones vs Nürnberg. First of all what I found out is that this was the last season where the game grades you see on the "Kicker" website and the "Rangliste" were handled by different magazines. The grades for the 1967/68 season were done by "Sport-Magazine" (based in Nürnberg), they merged with "Kicker" (based in Munich) in mid 1968. The "Rangliste" was always done by "Kicker". Another thing is that the scale is from 1 - 4 and not 1 - 6 like it is currently, which explains the inflated grades accross the board. (1 = great, 2 = good, 3 = average, 4 = bad) From the game reports it look like he just had some below par performances, but it is mentioned that he played through injury in the 1st half of the season. Was classified "International Class" in Winter '67. Consider the games were Beckenbauer gets a "3" to be pretty bad. Even if it technically means average, the game report suggests otherwise. The league campaign is underwhelming for Bayern, but Beckenbauer seems to be easily their best player and there is more underperformance from the rest of the team. They made it to the CWC SF though - haven't looked at it in detail. There is a certain game this season which gives him a huge boost - the friendly vs Brazil. Beckenbauer and Overath are praised endlessly by both German and Brazilian media for it. The full game is available - haven't watched it yet. Beckenbauer is listed as a midfielder in NT games, while Bayern games I checked have him as a central defender.
Yes certainly this is one of the best games by Overath I've seen. Not without surprise some football fans have made a compilation of it. 'World Soccer' not impressed by the Brazil NT display and team selection though: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwL4ev1QI1K6elJzeG9NckZkSUk/edit
Here it is. This is an excellent book by the way. Remembering your comment here this profile on Van Himst is pretty comprehensive (as example). Two rare compilations (from later seasons) here and here. One of the most skilled, able players of the low countries in my view (I'm for 1/4th of Belgian heritage so I grant myself the right to broaden and generalize the comment).
What Eurocentric propaganda is this? Everyone on the Internet knows the Libs was easily on par with the EC!
23 for 1967-68: Gerson, Pele Beckenbauer, Schnellinger Banks, Bobby Charlton Facchetti, Rivera Amancio, Pirri Djajic, Fazlajic Eusebio Best Cruyff Van Himst Adamec Dunai Lubanski Shesternev Perfumo Figueroa Spencer Two Estudiantes players represented Argentina during the 12 months from 1 August 1967. Pachame played four times (including once as substitute) and full-back Manera three.
Does anyone know anything about the source for Figueroa's "Best Player in Uruguay" award? I find it suspicious as I do not know of any other player getting this award. I am not sure the award even exists, maybe just something a fan put on his wiki? No other player I have seen has received "Best Player in Uruguay" award. If it was a real thing you would think Spencer or Rocha would have one at some point. I think it is important as he is getting a lot of votes this season and I assume it is based on this.
I think the idea of a player getting the benefit of the doubt or transcending team achievement is related to two things, the league/team the play in/for and the stage of their career. It is much easier to give an established player the benefit of the doubt. It is also easier to transcend achievement playing in a big league or for a big team. With Cruyff you see this, In 77 he is considered a top five player in the world at the minimum (some have him higher) without winning any major titles. This is the time in his career where he is established as multiple time best player in the world and is playing for Barcleona. It might not be fair for players like Lubanski and Cruyff early in their careers that they do not get rated until their breakout season in European competition, but in a situation like this where the 23 slots go fast it is hard not to give the benefit of the doubt to a player playing in a stronger league when domestic achievement is the biggest part of a resume for a season.
I don't think "Kicker" was based in Munich - either before or after the merger with "Sportmagazin". I've had a look at a 1967 issue of "Kicker" and it states "editorial team: Frankfurt am Main" and "publisher: Axel Springer, Hamburg". "Printed in Frankfurt". After the merger it was published by "Olympia Verlag" in Nuremberg while printing was also done partly in Frankfurt/Main and Hanover.
As you know I don't like heated arguments etc, but I think as this line of discussion can just be a matter of opinion and personal feeling kind of matter, then maybe it's helpful for me to give my take, as then it explains how someone can vote for the likes of those players (although I did leave Lubanski out for 66/67 - I don't feel inclined to say I'd reverse that if I could now but interesting and confirmatory of his level perhaps - while his absence from the East German poll results hinted perhaps the opposite despite Ballon d'Or votes - that he made the B Team for year 1967 as reported by the Hungarian press and shown by schwuppe recently)….. I feel it is feasible to give the benefit of the doubt to probably the better player (at the time) and/or the better performing player over the period concerned, even if the competitions they are involved in for any length of time are lower level and/or less prestigious. That explains I guess how I ended with Cruyff as a lock for 67/68. I would say also that Ajax's result against Real Madrid was comparably close to that of Manchester United, and it's clear Cruyff (in the Amsterdam leg) was playing very well and creating several openings (from footage and written accounts). Also maybe the hindsight thing comes into play here, but the Netherlands went on to produce two finalists (one winner) of the European Cup in the next two seasons. I think there was more parity between leagues then compared to now of course too, because in the main a leagues players were made up of their own national players. Sure, some like the Italian league imported some top players, and are also relatively big countries with established football tradition, so the pool of players is large. So yeah, I've no issue with including players (maybe putting them in a top 5 is more difficult and maybe that's fair and realistic) on that basis - the question marks come from lack of footage, match reports etc (we are limited in what we can find out even if the internet helps and people can do some great research of written sources as we've seen). I feel it's a bit harsh to automatically exclude them, so I suppose I'm voting more on the balance of probability. I do think it's ok though if people have different perceptions about players, and also a different methodology if we put it like that, because surely that's also the case with real life real-time votes. Whether with equal access to footage etc as we have now I'd be putting Cruyff higher for 67/68 (impossible for 66/67 lol) and raising Lubanski too? Possible, especially as we don't know (like with Charlton for 66/67 even in a high profile, well documented and covered league) whether the very best pieces of play and goals of Cruyff will even be recorded, or whether Lubanski scored any goals comparable to the one Hazard scored last night for example. I hope that makes sense, and explains how someone can see things a slightly different way. I think it's possible to really penalise quality players playing in their own nations' league - not that the points totals (as shown by Peru/Titanlux) should really be taken so seriously at the end of these projects I think - the more interesting thing should be compiling the lists for each year. Using Hazard as an example again, I do think that even today (and even when the English league has more of an advantage over others due to buying up a lot of the world's best players), he has finished low in the Ballon d'Or when his level of play has merited better (and I would be pretty sure I'd have voted him among the top players even without CL action in some seasons). So I get where you are coming from, but I guess it's good if peoples feeling/criteria (delete as appropriate) varies a bit as long as we all work to the same basic instructions (especially having established the time period).
Without repeating myself all over again (e.g. the already high standing of Ajax as a team; Lubanski pretty much delivering the goods against each great opponent he played against incl. Manchester United, yes, plus his 'class' with the ball), it has to be said around 1977 he was certainly widely seen as as the best player in the world. Press agencies as Reuters and Associated Press consistently write that way (there is a Singapore website where those can be searched), as does The Times. Or Placar of Brazil (playing against ADG ), or Shoot. Even Eric Batty was at the time convinced! "While he wears the number 9 shirt I have re-positioned him in my mind and accept him for what he had to become: a midfield general [...] I cannot think of any other player". Whether that idea was merited (and was by now 'overrated') is a different discussion, but for internet folks it seems to be less of a problem, say, Maradona finishes 8th in the league in 1985 (and has no international goals or assists). Another telling example is later Ballon d'Or winners Rossi and Platini saying this at the end of 1979 or Keegan this in 1980.
It seems Lubanski was better recognized internationally in the early 70s, despite his production going down a bit (domestically, not in international matches). Don't think he changed his position that much. At that time however his path was blocked a bit by G Muller (in the most extreme case, the ones below): https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/unofficial-european-ideal-teams-1971-1980.1985633/
Yeah, he was incredibly unlucky with his injury too. As were Poland - can you imagine the Polish 1974 World Cup team, with the addition of a Lubanski in the form he was in in the game he sustained the injury in (against England at home)? Anyway, I hope in general I didn't come over as thinking everyone should definitely look at things the same way as I do, in terms of voting. Of course I very much hope the way I look at it is considered valid enough, otherwise I'd struggle to retain enthusiasm and desire to be involved I think. Overall anyway, we are all making relatively similar choices so we're not a million miles away in approach or assessments, and it's good to see the consensus results from a good number of participants (I guess Tom is finding that very useful and interesting, and hopefully as he wanted/expected when opening the threads).