South American Championship 1942 Brazil 2-1 Peru Although mathematically still with possibilities, the victory of Brazil established one clear observation: their frontline has not shined. The likes of Zizinho, Tim, Pipi, Russo, Amorin, contrast with past Brazilian forwards. It is their defense and goalkeeper that has sustained triumphs. Peru is viewed as a difficult side, not a contender, but a squad that gives problems to the top teams. For the Limeño side, Lolo continued to shine for his “intelligence and effectiveness.” Magallanes, once again played well. At this point the tournament is considered to be played at a “discrete” level, inferior to the previous competition held in Chile.
South American Championship 1942 Argentina 3-1 Peru Argentina won well, but it was a difficult match that needed the intervention of 2 goals from José Moreno to unlock Peru’s “good” defense. For Peru, backup goalkeeper Soriano stood out, and their defense did well until late in the second half before Moreno broke the deadlock (the game was 1-1 until the 65th minute). For Argentina, the defenders Perucca and Alberti played well, and Moreno had been decisive with his 2 goals, both scored with his head, a common speciality of his.
South American Championship 1942 Uruguay 1-0 Brazil Uruguay and Argentina are the fittest sides in the competition. Every other team declines in the second half and can’t keep up with the intensity of these two teams. Uruguay, like Argentina, don’t have a strong defense but possess the strongest attacks. This was Uruguay’s first real test after beating Ecuador and Chile. Without anyone standing out, Obdulio Varela maintained firmness in the backline, while Rodriguez showed potential in attack, but overall inconsistent display from Uruguay’s frontline men. For Brazil, once again they “showed a great defense but a weak attack”. This Brazilian side had been just as difficult for Uruguay as it had been for Argentina to crack open. It was said that Brandao had been the director of their midfield, with Domingos and their goalkeeper Cajú as the standout figures. But Uruguay had showed more resolve, more experience, better physical conditioning and deservedly won.
South American Championship 1942 Peru 0-0 Chile Pacific rivals met off in a match more for their honor than for aspirations of winning the title. The stars of the match were both goalkeepers, Sergio Livingstone for Chile, and Juan Honores for Peru. Peru, once again was viewed as a technically good side, while Chile a more sober and practical team. Peru had boasted one of the best defenders in the competition: Juan Quispe. But for Chile, after producing previously poor displays, had improved thanks to recovering various players that had been missing, most notably legendary goalkeeper Livingstone.
South American Championship 1942 Brief summaries of these matches. Uruguay 3-1 Paraguay Headline: “The best triumph of Uruguay” Anibal Ciocca, the Uruguayan centre-forward, was the star in an “excellent” display. Peru 2-1 Ecuador Headline: “Ecuador lost by the minimum difference” Despite the defeat, Ecuador had produced its best match in the competition. Not much else was addressed in the source.
South American Championship 1942 Argentina 0-0 Chile This match was controversial and Chile abandoned the game after 43 minutes with some ‘erroneous’ calls by the official. The referee had awarded Argentina a penalty kick, which then was rectified after enormous protestations from the Chilean side. The official was from Peru. Now, historically, Peru and Chile are pacific rivals and have always had issues. Problems between Chile vs Argentina always existed as well, with wars and later Chile would betray their neighbors in the Falkland’s war of 1982, when Chile allowed Britain to use their coastal bases, which was not the case with Peru, who denied them access. So lots of controversy in this match which witnessed Chile’s manager, the Hungarian Ferenc Platko, order his team off the pitch. The official was severely criticized in the South American press. Now before the match was suspended, Argentina had been the more dangerous side, but the star of Chile and the field was goalkeeper Sergio Livingstone. He kept a clean sheet until Chile decided to abandon. However, Argentina were awarded the win since Chile refused to continue. At this stage a final of Argentina vs Uruguay was shaping up.
First time I heard about a peruvian referee, called Cuenca. To be honest, Perú doesn't have a tradition on good referees
South American Championship 1942 Uruguay 3-0 Peru Uruguay convincingly beat Peru in pursuit of the title. It was the last obstacle before they met Argentina for the crown. Uruguay are viewed as not an extraordinary team, but have improved in harmony as the tournament has progressed. Aníbal Ciocca had made a name for himself and the good play from Chirimino in this game boiled down to the competent management of Pedro Cea, who introduced him in place of the injured Varela. Uruguay has also with Argentina been the best conditioned side, with the fittest players. Peru had not played well, were less defensive than in their match vs Argentina, and this opened up the game for the home team. At the bottom photo, Brazil defeated easily Ecuador 5-1 but not much is covered, other than the fact they won “brilliantly” and “easily.“ The final would boil down to Uruguay and Argentina, but first Brazil and Paraguay would fight for third place.
South American Championship 1942 Brief summaries of the last rounds before the final. Brazil 1-1 Paraguay The draw gave Brazil the third place spot, in what was viewed as a deserved finish. Brandao, Dominguez and Cajú were the best for Brazil. This team had undoubtedly the best defensive side of all entries, but lacked strong forwards. It was said that had they produced great attackers, that Brazil would have been the team to beat. For Paraguay, their 4th place finish was justified, but in a tournament that was viewed as ‘mediocre’, it was not an honorable finish. Chile 2-1 Ecuador Not much is said other than Chile surprisingly had difficulty in beating the minnow of the competition.
South American Championship 1942 Final Uruguay 1-0 Argentina The final came down to the two best sides of the competition. It had been 12 years since these two nations had met again in a final and in the same stadium that controversially crowned Uruguay world champions in the 1930 World Cup. El Gráfico headlined “Argentina did what they could” This was a game that the stars never distinguished themselves. Obdulio Varela disappointed. José Moreno didn’t make any impact. The best player on the field or best performer was Angel Perucca, the Argentinian midfielder. With the Argentinian defense shaky, the midfield, anchored by Perucca, who helped out his defense and attack, was their strongest point. Uruguay won well, were better in the second half and knew how to administrate the game after they took the lead. Neither Enrique Garcia or Pedernera could turn the tide in Argentina’s favor and Masantonio up front as the lonely centre-forward of Argentina was too isolated and easily shut down by Uruguay’s centre-backs. The absence of Argentina’s defender Alberti was also seen as a key to Argentina’s defeat. Only Perucca and Gualco were said to have played well for Argentina because the rest of the team didn’t live up to the expected standards. Uruguay won but it wasn’t viewed as a great team. The sides of 1912, 20, 24 and 30 were better. Argentina were not great either, depleted from not having Antonio Sastre, Martino, Baldonedo and other important players from San Lorenzo and Independiente. For Uruguay, the centre-back duo of Romero and Muñiz were the standout players in the final, marshaling and shutting down Argentina’s attacks, but Angel Perucca was generally viewed as the best player on the pitch.
This man was viewed as the best player in the final. Later on more on a final review of the 1942 Championship with the opinion of Guillermo Stabile, Argentina’s manager.
The six matches in this competition were the only ones in which four of Uruguay's more famous players of the time - Ciocca, Porta, Obdulio Varela and Severino Varela - all played together. Uruguay won all six games.
I find this part especially interesting, as selection patterns are one of the things I have to rely on to a degree when evaluating players from this time. Is there any more information on why San Lorenzo and Independiente players are not present? Sastre being mentioned makes sense, although I had always assumed he was not part of this competition because he left for Brazil for the 1942 club season, as 41 was his last domestic season in Argentina. This competition takes place between the 41 and 42 Argentina domestic seasons. Martino already being mentioned is especially interesting, as at this point he has just completed his first ever season in Argentina and is yet to be capped. He must have had quite a debut.
The text doesn’t go into details but said that San Lorenzo and Independiente were on tour and that Martino was San Lorenzo’s best forward in 1941. It is apparent though that some clubs would not release their players for the preseason or at least the main priorities of certain players were with their clubs.
In your account of the 1987 American Cup you do not speak of Roberto Rojas' performance in Chile's 4-0 win against Brazil.
I’m sorry, mate, but that match covered by Clarin is missing from my collection. Above listed is what I had regarding Chile’s games. If I find that missing piece I’ll surely post it.
The Brazilian paper O Globo Sportivo had some good reviews of the Copa America 1942 that included player listings. Firstly, here's their own all-star team: Gualco (ARG) Domingos (BRA) Oswaldo (BRA) Affonsinho (BRA) Brandao (BRA) Dino (BRA) Barrios (PAR) Pedernera (ARG) Laferrara (ARG) Moreno (ARG) Garcia (ARG) Also, here the players from the Brazilian team list their own opinions on the best players. In general, the opinion seemed to be pretty divided.
O Globo Sportivo, expressed this about NTs at CA 1942: - Brazil had the best defense. - Argentina had the best attacking line. - Uruguay was only "garra charrua" - Paraguay, a revelation, a cohesive team playing with the heart. - Perú, exhausted first matches (long travel), then many injured players. - Chile, playing for less to more (hardly decent) - Ecuador, totally novice team. The XI chosed by Globo Sportivo, seems a mix between the best defense and the best attack. O Globo Sportivo, also mentioned the most regulars or better players: GK: Gualco, Honores, Livingstone DF: Da Guia, Muñiz, Alberti MF: Affonsinho (Best player), O.Varela, Dino FW: Barrios, Pedernera, S.Varela, Laferrara, Moreno, Tim, E.García. Opinions from 22 brazilian players about CA 1942 best players: GK: Honores(7), Gualco(7), Caju(3), Livingstone. DF: Da Guia(6), Salomon(3), Hungria(2). MF: O.Varela(12), Brandao(5), Perucca(4), Gambetta(3), Medina, R.Rodriguez. FW: Pedernera(19), Moreno(16), Barrios(7), LE.Castro(5), Porta(4), Tim(2), Laferrara(2), S.Varela(2), Alcivar, L.Fernandez, Magallanes.
Guillermo Stabile’s opinion about this 1942 competition I’ll summarize the interesting parts. He starts by saying that for years he has a place in El Gráfico to write his views about his impressions over events and that he does it with the best of his responsibilities in producing the best insight without holding back anything. In 1942 the Argentinian team had problems but so did they in 1941 in Chile and overcame those obstacles. Despite defeat in the final to Uruguay, where the home team deservedly won, one cannot view Argentina’s loss as a failure. Quality of play in decline I agree with the views that said that the quality and level of the teams was inferior to the one held a year ago in Chile (...) The decline can be transitional or accidental. All I can say is the teams of Uruguay, Chile and Argentina in 1941 were better than this year. Football was played better over there and games were more entertaining. This time we cannot say there was a great team. It was easy to note errors in all their lines, whether individually as in combinations. The Brazilian Defense Only one exception in this South American exposition: the Brazilian defense. In block the Brazilian defense needs to be noted. It was the best of the competition and the most complete that the country produced in years. Their third place finish is justified because of their notorious contrast between defense and attack. It seems logical the other final rankings in the tournament, with only one more exception: Peru could have been placed above Paraguay had they not been so concerned with the defensive game. The case of Chile is another matter. In my view that team fell apart by large margins because of tactical errors. That system implemented early on — man to man markings — which cannot be applied in a South American Championship. In their local tournament at home it may be different (...) The Ecuador team is viewed as modest, weak physically, but improved game to game. Uruguay His impression is that they were a well deserved winner and he congratulated them, but that the team lacked quality and spirit of fight. Argentina could have beaten them and no one would have complained. Individual stars There weren’t many individual values that impressed me for their conditions. But as I’ve said the Brazilian defense, where Domingos resulted as the best (...) Brandao was in great form, but as witnessed in the last game, Perucca demonstrated that he was the greatest centre-half in the competition. Caju, an excellent goalkeeper, and Tim a classy forward, intelligent and hard worker. In the champion side stood out the centre-backs of Romero and Muñiz, especially in the final. Another good element of Uruguay was Gambetta and in a discrete attack only Zapirain stood out (...) The best player for Peru was the right back of Juan Quispe and then the right half Guzman. For Paraguay I liked the right winger Barrios, skilled and scorer, and for Chile the goalkeeper Sergio Livingstone. Argentina We lost like we could have won (...) To lose by one goal in Montevideo is not a failure at all just as it wouldn’t be for Uruguay to lose to us in Buenos Aires (...) The Argentinian team was inferior to past years, and to put things in perspective, we couldn’t place every player in their proper positions as other teams were able to do. From the 6 games played the best was against Brazil, to the point that it’s considered the best game of the tournament. He laments that he couldn’t have the best team with all the best players available but he also points out that his team was still inferior to what could have been expected from them. The team was in top physical shape but in the final there was a dilemma of fielding the left-back position. Two of their top players were sick: Alberti and Valussi. It was in that area that Argentina would concede the goal that eventually cost them the match.
This information, along with my info, places Obdulio Varela out of contention as the best player as retroactively was given to him, although admittedly he was highly regarded overall. Edit: of course these views are not from the Uruguayan point of view. I wonder if the home tabloids had a different perception...