Leafing through sports newspapers from 1964, I have read several articles that refer to the Oscars for the best European soccer players. As far as I can understand, a jury of 34 journalists chose their 11th European ideal in early and mid-1963 and early and mid-1964. After the 1964 Euro Cup, that election would conclude. At the moment, I do not know anything else, nor which journalists gave their favorite players, nor what was the sum of total votes ... In any case, waiting for you to offer more information in this regard, I contribute this cut appeared at the end February with the election of the ideal XI of the "third wave", probably corresponding to the period of the second semester of 1963.
Indeed, at the end of the Euro Cup, the final XI came out after the four semi-annual votes. It was the one published in this cut. In my opinion, the presence of Heylens and Guarneri is surprising. I would like to know if Burgnich, Rivilla, Olivella and Moore were close to them, since, for this season, I saw them better positioned.
However, a month earlier, Estadio published a European XI, which I imagine will correspond to the 4th vote, that of the 2nd semester of 1964, with which, presumably, the recently published article would be the sum of the 4 semesters and , therefore, the definitive for the set of the two seasons (1962-63 and 1963-64).
After @ManiacButcher's interesting findings, I think the European Oscars puzzle is solved: 1st ballot: early 1963: Schroijf; Wendling, Maldini, Schnellinger; Solymosi, Masopust; Kopa, Jurion, Seeler, Eusebio and Gento. 2nd ballot: mid-1963: Bernard; Armfield, Maldini, Trapattoni, Schnellinger; Coluna, Masopust; Kopa, Eusebio, Rivera and Moulijn. 3rd ballot: early 1964: Yashin; Armfield; Maldini, Schnellinger, Facchetti; Trapattoni, Rivera; Van Himst, Eusebio, Greaves and Bobby Charlton. 4th ballot: mid-1964: Yashin; Heylens, Guarneri, Schnellinger, Facchetti; Voronin, Suarez; Amancio, Eusebio, Van Himst and Corso. I think it was 4 votes nothing more, but if someone finds something else post it, maybe better in this particular thread.
Hey Titanlux, where did you find the formation with Bernard, Coluna and Moulijn?? The ballot published in Brazil in June of 1963 is the first one?.
That's a nice thread, I was wondering about those long time ago but couldn't find anything about them. Here's how the award looked (it's Yashin & Voronin).
I understand that the order is as I have posted. I am sending you this clipping to see if you draw the same conclusion.
I may be wrong, but this award seems to be something similar to what ESM is currently doing. What I'm not sure is if every six months they did a separate vote or if from the first one the previous votes were accumulated, although I'm more inclined to the first option since, for example, the left end is always different. We keep digging to see if somewhere we can get more information. Anyway, this information plus the one from "Il Calcio..." seem to me to be extraordinary sources to get an idea of the elite at that time.
Journalists seem to have jumped all over the place to make XI. The French publication "Sport & Vie" asked 10 reputed specialized journalists from different places about the ideal team of the world team that could face the British team. This was published in mid-June. I have been counting the votes of each interviewee and the numerically ordered list would be as follows: 1st.- Schnellinger, Pelé and Eusebio: 10. 4th.- Maspopust and Garrincha: 9. 6th.- Maldini: 8. 7º.- Rivera: 7. 8º.- Djalma Santos, Coluna and Gento: 4. 11º.- Gilmar: 3 12th.- MacKay, Yashin, Eyzaguirre, Di Stefano, Costa Pereira and Jusufi. 18th - Szymaniak, José Augusto, Seeler, Popluhar, Blanchflower, Nicolay, Bernard, Vicente, Nilton Santos, Netto, Moulijn, Pluskal, Puskas, Kopa, Charlton, Cliff Jones, David, Rojas, Soskic and Altafini. With these 37 players we have to make an ideal XI, which could be: Gilmar; Djalma Santos, Maldini, Schnellinger; Coluna, Masopust; Garrincha, Rivera, Eusebio, Pelé, Gento. These 11 coincide with those published by the magazines that echo this news, although some of them change the order of the midfielders and center forward. He ido contando los votos de cada encuestado y la relación ordenada numéricamente sería la siguiente: 1º.- Schnellinger, Pelé y Eusebio: 10. 4º.- Maspopust y Garrincha: 9. 6º.- Maldini: 8. 7º.- Rivera: 7. 8º.- Djalma Santos, Coluna y Gento: 4. 11º.- Gilmar: 3 12º.- MacKay, Yashin, Eyzaguirre, Di Stefano, Costa Pereira y Jusufi. 18º.- Szymaniak, José Augusto, Seeler, Popluhar, Blanchflower, Nicolay, Bernard, Vicente, Nilton Santos, Netto, Moulijn, Pluskal, Puskas, Kopa, Charlton, Cliff Jones, David, Rojas, Soskic y Altafini. Con estos 37 jugadores hay que hacer un XI ideal, que podría ser: Gilmar; Djalma Santos, Maldini, Schnellinger; Coluna, Masopust; Garrincha, Rivera, Eusebio, Pelé, Gento Estos 11 coinciden con los que publican las revistas que se hacen eco de esta noticia, si bien, algunas cambian el orden de interiores y delantero centro.
Is that from June 1963 mate (rather than June 1964)? If so, I guess they were talking about suggested teams for the scheduled match between England and a FIFA Rest of the World XI (I know that in the end Pele was not available, and the team was considered a bit on the aged side): 1963 England v Rest of the World football match - Wikipedia I guess one voter accidentally included Bobby Charlton, when no English players were meant to be mentioned (since the game would be against England and Charlton would be playing for that opposition XI).
Nice find Titanlux! If I'm understanding correctly, this confirms that the 2nd selection is actually specifically for the 2nd half of 62/63 (January to July), not for the season overall? In that case the oscars seem to be a vote on the best players in 6 month periods then (so some players are getting selected for the 1st half of a season and also for the 2nd half).
According to what is written on the articule, your understanding is correct, PDG1978. It seems like the best xi of the semester. Hey Titanlux, what's the source for this new finding in portuguese??
I think so. That's why I put it because then it means that they were semester voting but not cumulative. Hence the changes from one semester to the next.
http://bndigital.bn.gov.br//acervo-digital/Revista-do-Esporte/144118 It is free to download. Little by little I have been downloading the pages that most interested me up to number 303 of 1964.
It seems a bit uncertain again about whether this is for the final semester out of 4, or for the whole period of 62/63 and 63/64. Anyway, several players got into the XI for the first time, so the late 63/64 period must weigh heavily in any case it seems.
I would take the option that the first half of 1964 was taken into account in this last vote. It is another matter whether any of the voters took earlier merits into account. In any case, if it were possible to access the votes for all 4 semesters, we would definitely be in no doubt.
I suppose it's even possible that the second half 62/63 XI was incorrectly described due to confusion and that that was meant to be an XI for all of 62/63, and then the next one (start of 63/64) was meant to be from the start of 62/63 to end of 1963 calendar year (even though we thought otherwise before - that article was from Placar or somewhere was it - anyway a Brazilian publication not a 'first hand' one from an involved publication from France, Italy or wherever). It's interesting and useful to see anyway, and clearly those entering the XI in a particular period had been considered to have had good merit based on form in that period. You're right that the voting description or just the numbers would make it clear I think.
Clearly there was a change at some point from using WM to using 4-2-4 anyway. It seems less likely to be a 2-season XI with that in mind, but I don't know - maybe it was just decided that 4-2-4 would have been the more appropriate system at some point (the early 63/64 selection doesn't have a right winger though really does it, but maybe just because those 4 forward players all received more votes than any right winger even if people were including right wingers in their XIs). What is also possible though maybe is that there is a 4th team we haven't seen yet, specifically for second semester of 63/64, and that the final one Titanlux has shown is additional, which would make sense as an overall XI for the whole period I think (even though a few new additions are in there). But who knows, maybe it was that they did three semesters individually, and then an overall XI for the whole period without a 4th semester team (like it seems from the cuttings)!
Ok, I had a final brainwave lol. When I saw the post yesterday, I noticed the mention of '18 months' (18 mois), and at first I guessed probably it meant basically the two seasons (meaning 18 months of football - except thinking about it it surely seems more than 20 months, more like 22). What I wonder now (which seems like it can make sense according to the clippings discovered, and also according to the players selected in each of the four XIs at the end of each semester) is whether each time (not just the final time in mid 64) votes were taken based on the previous 18 months of football (a bit like the 18 month Ballon d'Or concept i.e a season plus end to a calendar year being considered in effect). So it could be (I'm not sure of course) like this: Vote at end of 1962 is for all of 61/62 and the start of 62/63. Vote in mid 1963 is for all of 1962 and the end of 62/63. Vote at end of 1963 is for all of 62/63 and the start of 63/64. Vote in summer 1964 (after the Euros) is for all of 1963 and the end of 63/64 (including the Euros). What would still be in question is whether it was done cumulatively (voting on each semester added up), but I would suspect not because the project hadn't begun at the end of 1961 (after the start of 61/62). So if this is the case I'm thinking it would just be a straight ballot about a world XI for 18 month periods, taken every 6 months over the two years in total. The 'Oscars' would be awarded based on form over those previous 18 months in effect.
Yes, now I think it's 90% likely what I said in the post above (especially after reading the English text).