Pre-War Personalities and Their Best Players

Yeah, that was the one I wondered about (he played for 'Woolwich Arsenal' at one point; maybe the online info about his appearances and positions played is just really lacking because he was playing in WW1 times in unofficial games?).

 

Or maybe more likely, he or the reporters accidentally wrote Charlie Bell (because of Charlie
Roberts) but it was Alec/Alex Bell...
Facebook
Alex Bell - Wikipedia

 

Interesting to compare with his 1968 selection (post #350). Zamora, Nasazzi, Bauer and Matthews survived the 13 years.

'Billy' McNeill replaced Horvat, 'Tommy' Gemmell replaced Hapgood, Liedholm replaced Netto, Eusebio replaced Zizinho, Di Stéfano replaced Ademir, Pelé replaced Puskás and 'Bobby' Charlton replaced Wieser.

[Putte' Kock's best ever XI (1968): Zamora – Nasazzi, 'Billy' McNeill, 'Tommy' Gemmell – Bauer, Liedholm – Matthews, Eusebio, Di Stéfano, Pelé, Charlton]

 

I get the impression the piece is just stating he didn't put them in his XI ("not impressed enough to include them") from an Austrian perspective. Not a comment by him saying he wasn't impressed by them as such, it seems, anyway.

He played in a Sweden-Austria game in 1923 where Weiser played for Austria (and scored, although Sweden won).

Maybe he didn't consider Liedholm so much a valid option as left half in 1955 (as opposed to basically inside left, even if having played that role in a deep-lying orchestrator kind of way - he did play from left wing in the 1948 Olympics where Kock was involved with Sweden's squad of course too though).....

 

Although Liedholm had been playing in more of a half-back/deep midfielder role during 1954/55 already after Milan signed Schiaffino (but Kock was probably not seeing much of that I guess anyway)....

What's hard to know is whether Kock would have put Liedholm as 2nd option at inside left in 1955 (or like with Pozzo in 1953 whether Puskas would be his top player at that point). After seeing Pozzo's 1953 teams I did get thinking what my WM choices might be (not forgetting that whenever we try anything like this we're still being guided by views of others from back then etc quite a bit I suppose) and had pencilled in Liedholm as 2nd inside left option after Puskas indeed (partly that call being solidified by the idea that one of the inside forwards; perhaps Liedholm in Team B and Di Stefano who I'd placed as inside right in Team A, could play a more withdrawn role and vaguely compare to a post-mid 1953 XI and B XI playmaking midfielder in that sense, while one of the wing halves, Sarosi or Varela, could vaguely compare to a 2nd centre back for post-mid 1953 teams!):
Teams to mid 1953: A - Grosics (Hungary); J.Andrade (Uruguay), Nasazzi (Uruguay), V.Andrade (Uruguay); Bozsik (Hungary), Sarosi (Hungary); Di Stefano (Argentina), Puskas (Hungary); Matthews (England), Piola (Italy), Finney (England), B - Beara (Yugoslavia); Buzanszky (Hungary), Parola (Italy), Hapgood (England); Varela (Uruguay), Ocwirk (Austria); Meazza (Italy), Liedholm (Sweden); Boniiperti (Italy), Bican (Austria/Czechoslovakia), Puc (Czechoslovakia)
Teams from mid 1953 to now if using 4-2-3-1 with one mid more of an anchor player and the wide attackers being in hybrid winger/AM kind of roles in theory: A - Yashin (USSR); Cafu (Brazil), Baresi (Italy), Moore (England), P.Maldini (Italy); Platini (France), Beckenbauer (Germany); Messi (Argentina), Pele (Brazil), Cruyff (Netherlands); Van Basten (Netherlands), B - P.Schmeichel (Denmark); Carlos Alberto (Brazil), Figueroa (Chile), Scirea (Italy), Nilton Santos (Brazil); Neeskens (Netherlands), B.Charlton (England); Best (N.Ireland), Maradona (Argentina), M.Laudrup (Denmark); Eusebio (Portugal)

I guess if you tried such XIs for pre-1953 based on your impressions @CristianoPuskas then potentially Orth and/or Alex James for example or even David Jack and/or Bastin could be in mind for a place in A or B XIs....?

 

I noticed btw on this page that the Italian report clipping seemed to highlight Puskas and Bozsik for that Italy-Hungary 1953 game:
Italy - Hungary 0 : 3, 1953.05.17. (photos, data) • Magyarfutball.hu - Hungarian football database
"The Italians invited us to the stadium inauguration, obviously with the aim of fighting back for the 3:0 victory in Helsinki, defeating the Olympic champion and the national team, which was considered the best in Europe at the time. Well, it didn't quite happen like that.

József Bozsik, a hundred-time national team player, remembers the match as follows:
"We prepared very much for this match, as it was about taking revenge against the Italians after almost three decades for the many defeats. I didn't consider our 3:0 victory at the Olympics complete from this point of view... Before the match, the tactical instruction was that since center forward Galli and left winger Amadei are the two best Italian strikers, this time I should play a defensive role and Zakariás should help the attacks. After 15 minutes, however, it turned out that our attacks were somehow faltering, "Zaki" could not get into harmony with Hidegkuti as I could. I felt on the pitch that it couldn't go on like this. On my own, I switched to the attacking role again, and the machine started. I remember I took a ball off the pitch in the middle of the pitch, made two tricks, then put the ball in front of Hidegkuti next to the Italian Grosso. Nándi took it and put it in the goal. The team could not have received a better nervous reliever. After that, everything went as usual. Lóránt Gallit completely turned him off from the game, Puskás also got more and more momentum, and the only question was how many goals we would win the match with. Öcsi scored two more goals, but the 3:0 result did not express the picture of the game at all. The Italians even fell into their own trap by putting the match on early afternoon, when the thermometer showed over 30 degrees Celsius in the scorching sun. We were also better able to handle this, because we usually had the ball and the Italians ran after it. Our 28-year-old dream came true, we beat our dreaded opponent on our own field."
"The Olympic Stadium in Rome was inaugurated with the final of the European Cup. According to an old football legend, the home team always wins at the inauguration of the pitch. So they were preparing for a serious celebration and, of course, a victory in Rome, and they were also fueled by the desire to fight back. In order to be successful, the match was scheduled for early afternoon, in case the great heat would help the home team, dumbing the Hungarians.
The match was very important for us as well. Of course, winning the European Cup after winning the Olympic title would be an incredible success. Also, after the victory in Finland, we now have the opportunity to beat the Italians at home, after 28 years. The national team was prepared for the Italian attacks expected at the beginning of the match.

The match started with really fantastic home attacks, but with security defense we managed to fend them off and lead calm counterattacks from them. Under the leadership of Bozsik, our national team successfully fought the Italian attackers and led dangerous attacks towards the opponent's goal. The initial little nervousness passed and the leading goal was scored before the end of the half.
In the second half, there was no doubt, even in the most biased ones, about the victory of the Hungarian team. We could handle the pace much better, and the afternoon heat (!) as well. Our tactical and technical superiority would have made even a multi-goal victory realistic.

The Hungarian national team has won the European Cup!

Not to mention: the Hungarian team turned out to be a spoiler of the celebrations and after 28 years, we won again against the Italians at the inauguration of the stadium in Rome.

Italian press opinions:
"The Hungarian team captivated the Italian audience with its brilliant play."
"The spectators of the Olympic Stadium in Rome could see a football that will be a lasting memory for them..."
"The highly skilled Hungarian masters swept away the Italian national team."
"Overwhelming superiority. The Hungarian team is the best in the world...""

 

I began to get more appreciation/understanding for how Puc was rated, but I did have him, Orsi and Loustau all in mind for one place (if considering Finney on the left, with Matthews on the right): like I've noted before it could be said putting two and two together that Orsi chose Puc ahead of himself and Loustau (re: saying Loustau was better than him, and putting Puc in his all-time XI), but maybe that's over-assuming and anyway others could see it differently. I guess I also thought with a WM an attacking left wing who scores goals, and could play inside too, was a good fit.

You would put Alex James as inside left I guess (in withdrawn role), unless Puskas there and James alongside a more defensive half back? Orth could be (old-fashioned/Danubian - kind of like Sindelar) CF, or ball-playing/old-fashined CH or left half maybe himself I guess? Maybe you would think it's too early to confirm Puskas (though evidently others did so as we see) for an XI at that point (but then in some years maybe too late because of Pele maybe haha!)? He was much more a scorer than James was of course though. I sense you may not be totally convinced he was 'better' than Orth and/or Gyorgy Sarosi....and I suppose some old-timers seemed of that mindset, though others didn't....

 

I thought about this, and this became my selections:

Team A: Trautmann – D. Santos, N. Franklin, V. Andrade – Bozsik, Ocwirk – Di Stéfano, Puskás – Matthews, Kocsis, Czibor.

Team B: Grosics – Hanappi, J. Charles, N. Santos – B. Wright, O. Varela – Hidegkuti, J. Schiaffino – Julinho, G. Nordahl, Loustau.

 

Bobby Charlton for example certainly rated Trautmann very highly; meanwhile there is a quote from Yashin about himself and Trautmann (or as it was stated "the German lad who played in Manchester" - it made me wonder if the quote was a wind-up haha but I assume Yashin did say it) having been the two world class goalkeepers apparently....
City remember Bert Trautmann on 100th birthday milestone

I was erring on the side of caution (though not to the extent of leaving out ADS or Puskas indeed) with players who may have peaked after mid 1953. It could be fine margins I guess, but I'd think Hidegkuti's peak may have come, or started, or confirmed itself, later in 1953, Kocsis's in 1954, Czibor's in 1955, but anyway they still all seem like good ideas to me too (although it doesn't hold for my mid 1953 to now XIs I suppose I did somewhat share your modernity preference/perspective when it came to the XIs for earlier times - without enough good footage from the older days it's hard obviously though) Setting the date to around the end of 1955 perhaps I'd be putting all of Kocsis, Hidegkuti and Czibor in Team B (using deep-lying centre forward and Meazza moved to inside left in theory). I erred that way (caution on picking before peak or without much of a peak) with Djalma and Nilton Santos too, without being sure by any means to be honest. I guess in your Team A Di Stefano and Kocsis would be somewhat interchangeable between inside right and centre forward, depending on the exact system being lined up.

 

Although maybe that's not exactly what I am/was thinking: I'd have to consider if and when I'd be bringing in Schiaffino! But yeah, I think I had in mind for example that by end of 1953 Hidegkuti could have been in Team B as deep-lying centre forward.

Schiaffino was, along with Charles and Julinho indeed yeah, in mind for me too in terms of players who may or may not have been at peak (edit: Charles as centre back I mean anyway) and/or would be a Team B contender, by the cut-off point. I still don't really feel sure whether he peaked as Penarol or Milan player (and tbh I still don't have a clear personal idea on whether he would be ahead of Pedernera - again it's one where the old-timer views seem to vary and Pedernera could be valid enough as inside forward option I guess, even though he was nominally centre forward in his prime).

EDITED to add and bolden the word not as I missed it out at first somehow!

 

Yeah it's close margins probably, and with limited footage it gets almost impossible in some cases to be sure if it's too early or not.

Hidegkuti I would think is pretty safe choice when it comes to peak though, considering his age – 31 at the time. Also he played first time as deep centre-forward for Hungary away to Switzerland on 20 September 1952 (with great success as a substitute, helping turn the match around from 0–2 to 4–2).

Yeah, Di Stéfano and Kocsis could be interchangeable, but I would think it's best to have Kocsis as the spearhead. Kocsis with his great heading ability and Matthews on the wing would probably be a lethal duo, while Di Stéfano could use his playmaking skills.

I made a list with age of all the players below. John Charles is very young, so could be argued it's too early for him I guess, but he was an exceptional talent. Obviously too early in terms of reputation and achievements, but in terms of ability it could be possible, I would think.

Kocsis is the second youngest, but his best year in terms of goalscoring was 1952 (goal average). 1954 was his second best year, and the best in the national team.

Age of players on Team A:
Matthews: 38 years on 1 February.
N. Franklin: 31,5 years.
Trautmann: 30 years on 22 October.
Bozsik: 28 years on 28 November.
Ocwirk: 27 years on 7 March.
Di Stéfano: 27 years.
V. Andrade: 26 years.
Puskás: 26 years on 1 April.
D. Santos: 24,5 years.
Czibor: 24 years.
Kocsis 24 years on 21 September.

Age of players on Team B:
Varela: 36 years on 20 September.
Nordahl: 32 years on 19 October.
Hidegkuti: 31 years on 3 March.
Loustau 30,5 years.
Wright: 29,5 years.
N. Santos: 28 years.
Schiaffino: 28 years.
Grosics: 27 years on 4 February.
Hanappi 24,5 years.
Julinho 24 years.
J. Charles 21,5 years.

 

Good contributions again mates.

Yeah, I think it's particularly hard to try the exercise with 'our own opinions/estimations' because there is some decent but limited footage for players of 'modern' times as of 1953 and more sparse clips of older players.

In my mind I'd gone to Teams C and D in theory, but I thought since it was a bit off-topic as well (the thread is more about the choices of existing and mature figures back then) that keeping my post just A and B was more appropriate (linking to talking about Puskas and at that stage when Pozzo made his teams Liedholm too as feasible inside left options). For sure I'd feel undecided though - there would be lots of inside forward options, and also among wingers I'd not be sure at all (I could have added Praest to the list for left wingers by mid 1953, potentially making four close options I'd have in mind behind Finney, even when excluding Czibor as well as Gento and Skoglund who mainly played his LW games later in his career anyway; and it could be similar for the right if I had Matthews as clear 1st considering putting Finney on the left - even without giving benefit of doubt on Julinho or young Garrincha (who would only be feasible on prime form/talent in theory but I kind of assume a stretch on that too even if Pele arguably wouldn't be in 1959 or even 1958....or it might be suggested even 1957!) or Kopa as right winger, I'd still have Boniperti, Ghiggia, Basora and Munoz in mind as a minimum array of options I guess....).

Yeah I was keeping in mind re: Hidegkuti that a) we're talking about a stacked position/role whether inside forward or deep-lying number 9, in terms of other options, and b) it does seem feasible (or safe?) to lean towards him fully developing/peaking in his early 30s, and after adapting to that role of deep-lying number 9. And I can have my own view that he was one of the main stars (or the single best player all in all on the day) vs England in 1953 (which seems to pretty much align with the views of others anyway) for example, but I couldn't say the same for that Italy game (and the reports seemed indeed if anything to highlight Bozsik in addition to Puskas) for example. What's sure is that after the 1952 Olympics Sebes began to use him iin the new role rather than Palotas and that he gelled perfectly with Kocsis/Puskas and with Bozsik, as such. Going through available goals footage I had thought his best two goals might be one vs Finland in 1951 and one of the (late) 1953 ones vs England, and best two assists one to Puskas vs England 1954 and one to Kocsis vs Scotland 1955, but it's a bit tenous to use that as any real guide. Trachta had located some assist data for Hungarian league from a source once and if accurate it had I remember 1949/50 and 1952 as his top goal contribution % seasons in Hungary (but it was 1953 when he was Player of the Year and with a significant part of the assessment being his form for MTK in the race with Honved I believe even if Internationals and the England game in particular might be weighed in too). Kocsis was in some European/World XIs of 1952 as shown on the forum, and his best goal contribution seasons seemed to be 1952 and 1954....but yeah lots of insider or CF competition from established as well as upcoming stars by mid 1953, and 1954 considering World Cup, then the following year/s too seem very notable for him as an International player especially, in terms of scoring (though I picked also one vs Finland 1951 as well as a WC goal in group stage vs W.,Germany from '54 as his possible best available to see goals - his best assist seems the remarkable outside-boot curl pass to Czibor vs Sweden in 1955 I felt for sure!) but also team play....

 

@Kroos46 or @La-Máquina might be able to help clarify the translation, but it seems like either WM/'Sistema' 3-2-2-3, or (because the word midfielder is used re: Parola) more the classic Metodo 2-3-2-3:

Zamora; Domingos, Parola, Maroso; Liedholm, Bozsik; Meazza, Puskas; Matthews, Piola, Orisi
Or
Zamora; Domingos, Maroso; Liedholm, Parola, Bozsik; Meazza, Puskas; Matthews, Piola, Orsi

Anyway he does put Liedholm in already in his new role (when he moved to wing half he was placed nominally at least as right half I know for Milan) quite soon after Kock made his XI - at least if it's meant to be WM. For me maybe it seems more natural with Bozsik right half and Liedholm left half (where Kock later did put him), considering their predominant legs, but I guess he was regularly seeing Liedholm operate as Milan's 'number 4' that season, and the previous couple (though occasionally he still played as number 10 I think also in that period).

@TerjeC I meant to mention this page of 1951 Hungarian league player ratings earlier too (one source of course; it seems Palotas was Player of the Year so perhaps his ratings could be better with others - the translation says Puskas and Hidegkuti both had their best run of form in the earlier part of 1951 I remember anyway):
https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/g...e-best-players.2112404/page-120#post-42550528

 

The translation seems well-done; there might only be one error regarding Carlo Parola. The text refers to Carlo Parola as the best "WM System Centre-half".
If anything is unclear, I am at your disposal.

 

Thanks mate! Yeah, so it seems like he used a 'Sistema' (WM) formation, common in Italy in late 40s and early 50s, with Parola more a centre back than midfielder (in England it was also common to keep calling the centre back a centre half for a long time I know i.e 'WM centre half' which wasn't really a centre half/centre mid as the original term was intended).

In English terminology Liedholm and Bozsik would be right and left half, and Meazza and Puskas inside right and left, but I suppose Meazza and Puskas are being deemed AMs so sort of (attacking) 'halves' in that way, forming a kind of diamond in the 3-2-2-3, and the roles (and descriptions, except interni is used instead of mezzo for those inside forwards after 1950/51....) are basically matched with how it's done here for example I think aren't they....
https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/various-stuff-i-found-from-the-40s-60s.2092755/#post-37409448
https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/various-stuff-i-found-from-the-40s-60s.2092755/#post-37409454
https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/various-stuff-i-found-from-the-40s-60s.2092755/#post-37409459
Btw 1957/58's version is here (linked from the Wikipadia page of John Charles):
Corriere dello Sport 1958 - 39 - Fascicolo: 126

 

Also found just now (I checked Gunnar Gren's Wikipedia in case 1949/50 might be available with him in it, but saw instead 1953/54 was available which is one schwuppe hadn't located back then too):
Corriere dello Sport 1954 - 35 - Fascicolo: 131

 

I also noticed (checking Liedholm's Italian Wikipedia page, looking again for something for 1949/50) that a writer called Bruno Roghi wrote this about Nils Liedholm, in 1955.
""The peculiar gift of the long and agile Swedish player does not consist only in the refinement of his touch of the ball and the precision of his pass. It lies above all in his natural inclination to see clearly and to shed light on the tangles of the game actions. Don't ask Liedholm to throw himself on the ball with the impetus that distinguishes his friend Nordahl. He is not even a player who obeys the stimuli of the immediate impulse. From the first to the last minute of the game there is a mysterious calculating device in Liedholm's brain. There is almost always the feeling that the athlete performs a very quick and precise mental operation before venturing out to hunt and capture the ball. He thinks about what he has to do with the ball even before he draws it into his range. Hence the game at the same time meditated and clear, sober and geometric of the precious player of the Milan lineup.»"
Apparently in Il Calcio Illustrato but he was employed in the 1950s by Corriere dello Sport it seems anyway.

Maybe Roghi's All-Time XIs would be interesting to see, if they exist (I don't really trust that AI gives me the correct info so it's better to have an original source)....

 

Yes, the only difference is that Lampredi writes 'mezzo' instead of 'interno' but otherwise, the roles are all written the same way. I believe that was your question (my English is quite bad, so I apologize).

I’m not sure if Roghi ever put together an all-time XI; I’d have to do some research on that. As for Liedholm, I think there’s little more to add—he was a truly fantastic player and, in my opinion, the most important player for Milan in the 1950s. I’d even place him above Schiaffino, for whom he gave up his left inside forward position to drop back into a right half role

 

Thanks again mate. After a cursory search online I get the impression Roghi would potentially be nationalistic/loyal to Italians in any selection (at least in the 1930s), but they could be interesting anyway, and it seems in the 1950s he did several of those pieces like he did on Liedholm (including one on John Charles for example) with indicative and expansive descriptions....

EDIT - Your English is very good I think! I am probably not very clear when I write my replies (in terms of indicating as and when I am asking a question for example) to be honest - I guess my 'question' in that case would be kind of rhetorical (I felt pretty sure I had the answer to it, but yeah thanks again for the confirmation).