It just becomes very difficult with such old players, and if not careful we would be discussing my pre-conceptions vs your pre-conceptions rather than player vs player I guess, if that makes sense, I think. I do think it's feasible Friedenreich didn't have his most impressive game (among several played in a short space of time) vs Winkler's team. 'Shot' I don't know, but for 'breakthrough ability' it would seem harder to say that about the game vs France. It's also possible Winkler had a much different view of Friedenreich than other people (likely even, it might seem). I can understand the basis for your reservations, but it all feels a bit hypothetical/theoretical (from either side probably though, including pro-Friedenreich). I would think writing him off or playing him down too much (considering he was in Stabile's own XI for example in the 1950s) based on Winkler's comments would be a bit hasty though personally. Remember that I don't have the same impressions/viewpoints as such re: more modern players in terms of constant progression, so I guess it makes sense that you would naturally assume/perceive that applying to earlier football too (including best individual players), moreso, automatically. There were comments being made that football style had regressed though, becoming more kick and rush oriented, in Britain (England predominantly I think) - that was the view of Jimmy Hogan too who played a role in implementing a more skillful and cohesive game in Hungary as we know - on that note maybe an interesting link is this one about that Corinthians tour of Europe that Isaque had mentioned: Corinthian Tours 1904 - AUSTRIA-HUNGARY & GERMANY TOUR In Easter 1904 the Corinthians visited the Austro-Hungarian Empire for their first ever tour on mainland Europe. It only came about ironically after G.O.Smith and W.J. Oakley's attempt to organise an American tour collapsed. So on the recommendation of the Oxford and Cambridge University teams who had both visited Hungary, it was decided that it would be more exciting than a west of England tour. The first match in Budapest, played before a large crowd, was against Magyar Testgyakorlók Köre Budapest (MTK) and resulted in an easy 6-0 victory. This was followed by a 9-0 thrashing of Budapesti Torna Club and bettered still by a 12-0 win over Magyar Athletikai Club. The Corinthians were so impressed by the hospitality and spirit of their Hungarian hosts that they donated a trophy, The Corinthian Cup, which became the centre-piece of an annual tournament competed amongst Hungary's top amateur teams for the next three decades. In return, the Corinthian Club was presented with a gold medal by the City of Budapest at the farewell banquet. After these games the club departed for Vienna where hosts Vienna FC were beaten 7-1 in front of 5,000 spectators - the largest gathering at a football match in the country. After making their mark in Austria, the Corinthians moved swiftly onto Prague. There, SK Slavia Prague were encountered and were much stronger opposition than the previous matches, having played the game longer than those elsewhere. Slavia had gone the whole season unbeaten and were one of the finest teams on the Continent. The match, played in front of 4,000 spectators finished 7-4 to Corinthians despite Slavia taking the lead on more than one occasion. The second match against a Prague Select XI finished 4-1 in favour of the Amateurs. The final game of the tour was against VfB Leipzig, German champions in 1903, and despite only having twelve fit players, a further 4-1 victory resulted. Playing seven matches in twelve days, Corinthians had travelled across three countries scoring 49 goals and conceding just seven in the process. Now, for the 14-strong squad, the historic tour was complete. The English had made their mark. As reported after the 7-4 victory over Slavia Prague, “The people were delighted with the play of the Corinthian forwards. The halves were all good, but the backs did not tumble to the Bohemian game. A more pleasant game was never played.” The tour concluded with a trip to the Opera, as described by the touring correspondent for the Sportsman “In the evening, the players were provided with a real treat and heard “Tannhäuser” at the Opera House. It was a delightful wind-up to a most enjoyable tour, throughout the whole of which nothing but kindness and unbounded hospitality had been met with.” Tour Members: B.O. Corbett, W.J.H. Curwen, S.H. Day, H.A. Lowe, L.J. Moon, M. Morgan-Owen, W.J. Oakley, G.O. Smith, W.U. Timmis, G.C. Vassall, H. Vickers, G.E. Wilkinson, I.G. Witherington, O.E. Wreford-Brown. Date Opposition Score 2-Apr MTK Budapest 6-0 4-Apr Budapesti Torna Club 9-0 5-Apr Maygar Athletikai Club 12-0 7-Apr Vienna F.C. 7-1 9-Apr Slavia Prague 7-4 11-Apr Prague XI 4-1 13-Apr VfB Leipzig 4-1 1904 - Scandinavian Tour Gravel pitches, Royalty and Motor-races! In 1904, Corinthian FC ventured to Scandinavia for their inaugural tour of Sweden and Denmark. A trip into the unknown was the best way to describe the 1904 tour to Scandinavia. At that time little was known about Scandinavian football. The trip was organised by Mrs Wreford-Brown who also travelled with the party, leaving from Tilbury. Most of the pitches in Sweden at this time were gravel and it was common place during winter to flood them and use them as ice rinks. This failed to deter the tourists as Swedish Champions Örgryte IS of Goteburg were defeated 4-0 in the first match. By lake, canal and rail the tour continued eastward to Stockholm where three games had been arranged at Ostermalms Idrottsplats - the original home of Djurgården IF and close to the site of the current Olympic Stadium - a pretty ground, although the pitch was grassless. The first match against Upsala University saw the Corinthians win 11-0 with Moon hitting an impressive eight, in front of the Crown Prince of Sweden. The second was not an official game and the two sides split up their players to make it more of a contest. The last game against a Stockholm XI, played in front of a record attendance for Swedish football finished with a 15-1 victory, with Moon 5, Bryant 4 and McIver 4 recording good scores. Most peculiarly, the team were entertained with an evening of swimming and diving exhibitions before dining out with music and dancing. Typically, their Swedish hosts had provided wonderful entertainment throughout the tour with nights at the Opera, a visit to the Royal Palace and afternoons of yachting and bathing. One reporter’s highlight was being driven around the Palace Gardens – “we were taken in five motor-cars for a beautiful drive round the Palace Gardens at the speed of thirty miles an hour on rough and narrow roads.” Quite the adventure! Next stop was Copenhagen and the opposition were found to be of a much higher standard, though in the first match it was reported that the turf was ‘very rough and bumpy’ and for this, the Corinthians were not at their best. The standard of opposition mirrored this as their games against Copenhagen Academical and Copenhagen BoldKlub were won 3-1 and 4-0 respectively. However, the Academical keeper was praised for keeping the score down. Sadly, the enthusiasm and vigour of the Swedish crowds were not replicated in Denmark and attendances were low with sparse crowds. Perhaps the Danish public were a few years behind in their love for the game, despite the higher standard of opposition. The tour is credited with giving fresh impetus to Swedish football and once again Corinthian FC donated a cup to their host nation to be competed for by the Swedish amateur clubs, called the Corinthian Bowl, which became the centre piece of the Swedish football season in subsequent years. Tour Members: F.H.Bryant, B.O. Corbett, W.J.H. Curwen, H.W. Hewitt, C.D. McIver, L.J. Moon, O.T. Norris, T.S. Rowlandson, W.U.Timmis, H. Vickers, C. Wreford-Brown, H.R. Yglesias 29 Aug ÖRGRYTE IS 1 Sep UPPSALA UNIV. 3 Sep STOCKHOLM 5 Sep COPENHAGEN AC. 7 Sep KJOBENHAVNS BK 4-0 11-0 15-1 3-1 4-0 ?? MOON 8, MCIVER 2, BRYANT MOON 5, BRYANT 4, MCIVER 4 MCIVER 2, BRYANT BRYANT 2, MOON, MCIVER, Nice work finding the Chapman pre-1920 XI - that'd be interesting to know in full for sure, It's possible he didn't see much of Smith playing (with no TV of course) though I suppose, or was a little biased against his style of play even (this is speculation which could apply to anyone picking any XI of course - he was said to be the more 'robust' type of inside forward himself and his Arsenal favoured a direct game despite having the skilled James in midfield, but those would be tenuous things to use to make any assumption that Smith would be less favoured by him than others I'd think). He would know Charlie Buchan well of course for example though, and Woodward surely yes I'd think so. I noticed in the British media archives there was talk in the North East newspapers (or one of them) of Shepherd vs Buchan, with fans writing in to comment (obviously club bias could play a part). IIRC some were picking Shepherd, although more Buchan maybe, and Buchan was considered to have more outright class/quality I think (I didn't save the piece to my computer or anything though and am not subscribed now).
I got as far as 125 with my attempt, putting Moreno and Friedenreich, tentatively, in the final section. I adjusted the first 3 groups in terms of size as it seemed more satisfactory, but I was borderline on M.Laudrup and/or Baresi for top 18 to be fair, and could be close to having Matthaus and Bergkamp or Henry perhaps joining top 30.... I probably moved a few players into a different decade, estimating on combination of peak and career, but I think several players will be suitable for a previous and/or following one (some would suit better an overlap between two decades I suppose in effect). I'm as usual quite stacked in the middle section (50s to 90s) - I don't know whether there is some sort of logic in terms of the game taking a while to start producing a lot of great players and/or hitting a bit of an impasse in players developing more than their predecessors (after all High Jumpers still use Fosbury Flop technique from the 1960s!) or not (I know it can be unintentional era bias in theory but yeah leaning to 'best' players as opposed to having even amounts from each decade by default I seem to have a big middle section indeed still)
I think that's 126 actually, counting them up again! (EDIT - It's not now, as I've removed Suker who can go in top 150 section....)
Geza Toldi is another of the older Hungarians who would be an interesting name to consider (he won't be in my 250 though, and I'm not saying I really think he should be necessarily), given his placings (as 6th inside left among a stacked list of options, and as joint 27th with Schaffer) in these votes among Hungarian historians: https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/n...stern-european-nations.2109938/#post-38676111 I think I'm right in saying it's him who scores from the edge of the box (not Sarosi) in this highlights video for Ferencvaros vs Lazio in 1937: This was the best Bican video I found in the past I remember:
I completed the full attempt now, including another dozen from predominantly pre-1946 from number 100 onwards now, as well as making sure not to be too sparse on recent players (or not as much as it was looking like after the 1st 100 anyway). I think the next in mind, to take it to 20 predominantly pre-1946 players, might have been Braine and Sastre, but it's difficult to say obvioiusly. Perhaps some other GKs, from that era, could be there - I always assumed Zamora would be there or thereabouts, and I began to appreciate more the reputation Planicka had for example too. I've got 16 goalies in overall without those already though, and obviously it helps to be able to see and appreciate visually what Hellstrom or Gilmar could do for example (but it goes against giving the benefit of doubt to older players to omit the older ones I suppose).
I see there is not many pre-WWII. players in the lists above. I would like to share the opinions of some of the names who really commented on their "best player": https://arfsh.com/article?id=927
I found this profile of Arthur Friedenreich, written by the newspaper "O Globo Sportivo" in 1951. https://memoria.bn.gov.br/DocReader/DocReader.aspx?bib=104710&Pesq=arthur Friedenreich&pagfis=11605 Some highlights: - One of the most popular men in Brazil, better known than many famous figures in politics and other activities. - He began his career as a left winger. He played in all five attacking positions. - He was a coach and stylist, improviser and builder, scorer and dribbler, measured and cunning. - His goals, his passes, his feints had mechanical precision and unmistakable style, absolute security and perfect technique. - This player was fantastic, who in 1931, at the age of 39 and with 22 years of football, became champion once again and won, in a handful of matches, 32 goals. - Fried's physical phenomenon is as important as his technical phenomenon. - But with his reasoning he made magnificent passes for his teammates to easily score goals. One pass from Fried, half a point won..." - What a shame that "el Tigre" did not have the opportunity to establish himself in the eyes of the world's critics during his best days. - He only had the opportunity to show off in Europe once. He was admired. It was on his debut in Paris. In a climate unknown until then to Brazilian players and on a horribly waterlogged pitch, Fried made an extraordinary impression and a Swedish critic wrote that he had never seen a center forward like him. He was 33 years old at the time.
Thanks mate. The things that stand out here (as informative, beyond what we might already perceive, to an extent at least) are I think the clear reference to him as a 'passer' and setter up of chances (maybe somebody can even try to do some work on his assist numbers), and the further indications about his longevity (some parallels with a Matthews in some respect perhaps seem feasible in that aspect?). It's Tegner being referred to at the end I'd assume - 'Swedish critic'.
Good contribution mate - it continues to be updated by the looks of it (I remember seeing it before). I remember seeing a reference to Meredith picking Bobby Walker too for example (but at another time maybe being uncertain he was a better inside right overall than Bloomer in effect IIRC?), so I guess there can be variation in players nominations, but interesting to see he said Crabtree at some point too. Without trying to speak for msioux, I guess it's hard without the visual footage to trust/believe the idea about players from the earliest times having been superior to stars that followed, but that's not to say it's impossible. In that aspect I guess the natural indication is to think a bit similar to how Terje thinks in general, even if it's evident when it comes to later years (within this new century) personally I'm not doing that so much when it comes to the best players vis a vis previous generations. I know that the pace of the game was said to have increased since G.O Smith's time, but also that in England the quality/style of play in his time (as opposed to the time of Cobbold when there was less passing, even if Tinsley Lindley for example still talked glowingly about that era) was said to be finer than how it was in England in the early part of the 20th century (more based on skill). I've enjoyed reading about the likes of Goodall and Smith anyway for sure....
I haven't looked at it in detail yet, but on that topic this page looks interesting also: Part 1: The greatest players in history – I did see now that Pozzo said about Meazza after the England game of 1933 that: (I haven't seen anything yet that replaces his comment about James that is alluded to on the above link I see too - I saw one quote that Meazza was to him like Pele was to the rest of the world, but I was unsure if that was a real quote anyway) "Meazza did his best, but he wasn’t the real Meazza, the man that in those circumstances would resolve the match by himself."
To re-mention again though some other calls I remember seeing - Stanley Matthews for Cruyff: https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/f...-players-g-o-a-t.2124069/page-3#post-41643783 Matthews English league XI, published in a 1997 book: https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/interesting-best-xi.325564/page-64#post-41987995 Pat Jennings; George Hardwick, Eddie Hapgood; Danny Blanchflower, John Charles, Bobby Moore; George Best, Wilf Mannion, Tommy Lawton, Jimmy Greaves, Tom Finney (also mentioned were Gordon Banks, Neil Franklin, Cliff Bastin, Raich Carter, Peter Doherty, Alex James, Bobby Charlton, Paul Gascoigne, Alan Shearer, Nat Lofthouse, Stan Mortensen) Sebes choosing Puskas as top player ahead of Pele, and picking the following Xis: https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/p...eir-best-players.2126578/page-7#post-42686963 Hidegkuti also picking Puskas: https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/how-good-do-we-think-puskas-actually-was.2127586/#post-41705996 The World Sports calls seem a bit contradictory, between 'pro older legend' and 'totally modernist'. Presumably some different journalists were involved, albeit in a similar time period (I had forgotten this piece vegan10 posted had indeed been from as late as mid 50s apparently): I'm guessing Jimmy Hogan, as I noticed he'd written for World Sports at some point I think, may have been prominent in helping to put Orth, along with James, as the top player/genius in their list (see the readers vote including James in the top British players list, but with Hapgood at the top though, and with no Finney there but for example Willie Hall instead, who ended above James in that vote too curiously - maybe low voter numbers could be a factor also) I remember noticing as well that after that 1954 poll, as summarised by Peterhrt, the Chilean publication had a piece saying that Europeans didn't know enough great South American players, and citing some names such as Pedernera, but their actual own selected XI (again different journalists involved) had players such as Robledo that was playing for Newcastle United....
I'm kind of volunteering myself to add on the points for others if and when other top 250 players attempts come in by doing this, but here would be the standings after just the calls/perceptions of @msioux75 and myself so far, using a system of 10 points for msioux's top category (top 5) down to 1 point for his final category (top 250), and settling on making my own selections fit that format more but allocating 9.5 points to Platini, Di Stefano, Beckenbauer and Messi (in theory two in category 1 and two in category 2), 8.5 points to Van Basten, Eusebio, Puskas and Zidane, and 7.5 points to Ronaldinho, Dalglish, Rivera and Finney.... 20 points: Johan Cruyff, Diego Maradona, Pele 19.5 points: Alfredo Di Stefano, Lionel Messi 18.5 points: Franz Beckenbauer 17.5 points: Michel Platini, Ferenc Puskas 17 points: Ronaldo Nazario, Cristiano Ronaldo, Zico 16.5 points: Eusebio, Marco van Basten, Zinedine Zidane 16 points: Roberto Baggio, George Best, Bobby Charlton, Garrincha, Gerd Muller 15.5 points: Ronaldinho 15 points: Franco Baresi, Lothar Matthaus, Giuseppe Meazza, Romario 14.5 points: Gianni Rivera 14 points: Didi, Luis Figo, Ruud Gullit, Thierry Henry, Raymond Kopa, Michael Laudrup, Paolo Maldini, Stanley Matthews, Bobby Moore, Karl-Heinz Rummenigge, Juan Schiaffino, Matthias Sindelar, Lev Yashin 13 points: Dennis Bergkamp, Frank Rijkaard, Andriy Shevchenko 12.5 points: Kenny Dalglish 12 points: Gianluigi Buffon, Cafu, Jairzinho, Mario Kempes, Sandor Kocsis, Ladislao Kubala, Jose Manuel Moreno, Neymar, Adolfo Pedernera, Rivaldo, Rivelino, Gyorgy Sarosi, Peter Schmeichel, Xavi 11.5 points: Tom Finney 11 points: Gordon Banks, Josef Bican, Elias Figueroa, Andres Iniesta, Kaka, Pavel Nedved, Johan Neeskens, Gaetano Scirea, Luis Suarez Miramontes, Zizinho 10 points: Florian Albert, Carlos Alberto, Dragan Dzajic, Paulo Roberto Falcao, Nils Liedholm, Valentino Mazzola, Kylian Mbappe, Raul, Rob Rensenbrink, Hector Scarone, Socrates, Tostao, Francesco Totti 9 points: David Beckham, Jurgen Klinsmann, Ruud Krol, Gheorghe Hagi, Denis Law, Sandro Mazzola, Nilton Santos, Daniel Passarella, Fernando Redondo, Matthias Sammer, Omar Sivori, Hristo Stoichkov, Fritz Walter, George Weah 8 points: Jozsef Bozsik, John Charles, Kevin De Bruyne, Teofilo Cubillas, Kazimierz Deyna, Just Fontaine, Gerson, Jimmy Greaves, Nandor Hidegkuti, Robert Lewandowski, Gunter Netzer, Gunnar Nordahl, Paolo Rossi, Patrick Vieira, Dino Zoff 7 points: Jose Leandro Andrade, Gabriel Batistuta, Djalma Santos, Duncan Edwards, Giacinto Facchetti, Zlatan Ibrahimovic, Kevin Keegan, Gary Lineker, Josef Masopust, Luka Modric, Alessandro Nesta, Andrea Pirlo, Arjen Robben, Roberto Carlos, Dejan Savicevic, Lilian Thuram, Jean Tigana 6 points: Ademir de Menezes, Eric Cantona, Arsenio Erico, Samuel Eto'o, Ubaldo Fillol, Eden Hazard, Alex James, Tommy Lawton, Leonidas, Manuel Neuer, Ernst Ocwirk, Raimundo Orsi, Gyorgy Orth, Silvio Piola, Robert Pires, Uwe Seeler, Peter Shilton, Luis Suarez, Wim van Hanegem 5 points: Paul Breitner, Fabio Cannavaro, Rinat Dasaev, Enzo Francescoli, Hughie Gallacher, Francisco Gento, Ryan Giggs, Glenn Hoddle, Brian Laudrup, Jari Litmanen, Jose Nasazzi, Dragan Stojkovic, Obdulio Varela 4 points: John Barnes, Karim Benzema, Laurent Blanc, Oleg Blokhin, Zbigniew Boniek, Jan Ceulemans, Thibaut Courtois, Alessandro Del Piero, Preben Elkjaer, Arthur Friedenreich, Paul Gascoigne, Steven Gerrard, Alain Giresse, Antoine Griezmann, Jimmy Johnstone, Julinho, Pierre Littbarski, Wlodzimierz Lubanski, John Robertson, Rui Costa, Mohamed Salah, Antonio Sastre, Bernd Schuster, Enzo Scifo, Alan Shearer, Ricardo Zamora 3 points: Dani Alves, Claudio Caniggia, Amadeo Carizzo, Iker Casillas, Mario Coluna, Zoltan Czibor, Marcel Desailly, Kurt Hamrin, Fernando Hierro, Oliver Kahn, Ronald Koeman, Frank Lampard, Henrik Larsson, Luis Monti, Alan Morton, Wolfgang Overath, Jean-Pierre Papin, Michel Preud'homme, Sergio Ramos, Franck Ribery, Luigi Riva, Davor Suker, Safet Susic, Berti Vogts, Faas Wilkes, Gianfranco Zola 2 points: Manuel Amoros, Cliff Bastin, Vladimir Beara, Ferenc Bene, Andreas Brehme, Emilio Butragueno, Antonio Cabrini, Jose Luis Chilavert, Hector Chumpitaz, Domingos Da Guia, Dixie Dean, Didier Drogba, Paulo Futre, Gyula Grosics, Erling Haaland, Alan Hansen, Thomas Hassler, Jorginho, Junior, Philipp Lahm, Grzegorz Lato, Bixente Lizarazu, Sepp Maier, Ladislao Mazurkiewicz, Billy Meredith, Roger Milla, Michael Owen, Karel Pesek, Pirri, Frantisek Planicka, Johnny Rep, Juan Roman Riquelme, Wayne Rooney, Ian Rush, Hugo Sanchez, Jose Santamaria, Karl-Heinz Schnellinger, Clarence Seedorf, Allan Simonsen, Wesley Sneijder, Marco Tardelli, Virgil van Dijk,Ruud van Nistelrooy, Arturo Vidal, Pietro Vierchowod, Ivo Viktor, Vinicius Jr, Bernard Vukas, Billy Wright, Javier Zanetti, Branko Zebec 1 point: Aldair, Amancio, Giancarlo Antognoni, Osvaldo Ardiles, Bebeto, Colin Bell, Giuseppe Bergomi, Zvonimir Boban, Giampiero Boniperti, Careca, Petr Cech, Toninho Cerezo, Clodoaldo, Edgar Davids, Frenkie de Jong, Roberto Donadoni, Trevor Francis, Giuseppe Giannini, Gilmar, David Ginola, Gunnar Gren, Ivan Gudelj, Gerhard Hanappi, Ronnie Hellstrom, Alex Jackson, Pat Jennings, Soren Lerby, Felix Loustau, Stan Mortensen, Roger Piantoni, Antonin Puc, Bryan Robson, Dominique Rocheteau, Rodri, Lennart Skoglund, Neville Southall, Alberto Spencer, Edwin van der Sar, Valery Voronin, Bobby Walker, Yaya Toure, Zito Hopefully that's all correct. @msioux75 you would have 6 more points to allocate to 6 more players in theory I guess if you wanted....
Sorry, 31 more players I should have said of course, in theory! You were going for approximately 200 but allowing a few more in the top 250 category I suppose anyway msioux. No need to post some more if you're not interested in doing it anyway obviously (or too unsure about selecting more players and/or deciding on any more early ones to go in....).
Many lists are from 50 years ago, so, the pool is less extended. Anyways, interesting to make comparisons between players
Re: Corinthians. Here is a book from 1906 about them (Annals of the Corinthian Football Club). It's about their foreign tours, have results of Sheriff of London Shield, full overwiew of games played, full list of members and which one were internationals. Also it have a section where some of the players describe how to play each position successfully (could give a better understanding of the old 2-3-5, I have read, some of it before, but not all.) Can also be downloaded as .pdf (3.85 MB) The Chapman XI wasn't really a find, but something I have known for a long time reading it on this forum. Chapman was 15 when G. O. Smith played his first match for England in 1893. He also included Spiksley on left wing, who was almost three years older than Smith, so should be well aware of Smith. It's only Englishmen in the team (Simpson grew up in Scotland, though, but born in England and therefore played for England – like John Goodall for example too), so I guess it's meant as best English, not British, pre-1920 team. Here is also two quotes from Peterhrt, which supports the Chapman not an amateur fan claim I made (where I got the information in first place too, I think): I wouldn't call Friedenreich vs. the five British pre-conception. Information have been gathered – so more 'post-conception' if anything. But sure, it will never be possible to really know. It's player As (no footage – well maybe five seconds from 1913 FA Cup final for example which involves Hampton & Buchan, but not anything I remember) vs. Friedenreich (barely player B/tiny bit of footage). Impossible to say, maybe Friedenreich was better than some of them, or maybe none. Brazil was amateur until 1933 (São Paulo 1925, I think. In 1926 they had two leagues, one amateur and one professional – Friedenreich played in the amateur one and was strongly against professionalism, from what I understand). That a player from such a environment should be better than all the best professional strikers, in a region where they had played professionally since 1885, seem close to impossible. Maybe better than some of the names, though, it's very uncertain. Maybe if saying Friedenreich was better than Shepherd or Watson, could be like saying Lautaro Martínez or Julián Álvarez is better than Haaland or Lewandowski because they are more technically skilled. Maybe. More kick and rush was maybe an natural development, and not a sign of weaker football – Less beautiful, but more effective – since the professionals were result oriented. With a quite limited technical level of the players back then (1912 Summer Olympics a reference point again) probably going more direct (with a somewhat clear plan about it) would be more effective. No point playing fancy football without really high-quality players. For Corinthian it was different, they were more artist, I would think. Results didn't matter so much for them (they even missed penalties deliberately, because it was against the Corinthian philosophy to think your opponent used illegal means). If interested and if you're able to get an impression from the 1913 footage; what do you think of the 1912 Olympics compared to the 1913 FA Cup Final? 1912 had the best amateurs in world playing, while Sunderland and Aston Villa were surely the two best professional clubs in world 1913. Another thing I thought about, and have done before too, but have not bothered to actually check, is how many times Switzerland were actually able to put three passes together without losing the ball in the 1924 Olympics Final. My impression when watching the footage a while back is that could not have been many, but I didn't count. ------------- Some random comments: I guess we could say Fosbury flop is still used because that technique made that limited sport fully developed. ------------- Interesting to see so many selecting James as best player – maybe I should put James in my 1920s debutants Team of Decade (whole career count, not only 1920s) over Meazza. Meazza ended up with the bigger reputation though, and bigger merits. Don't have a visual impression of James as a player, through footage, either – which I have of Meazza. But even Pozzo selecting James is interesting and something to think about. Not easy to go for James on blind trust though – very much against the modern popular belief too. ------------ Matthews should have been able to get Doherty in to his English League XI, when he list him as 9th greatest – and 2nd greatest Brit! Alex James wrongly called an Englishman on that picture you shared, I see – twice. You mentioned Hall, but Warney Cresswell in fifth is quite strange too – not exactly a key player for the national team. I see on the other picture now there is named a selection from Norwegian 'Sportsmanden': Zamora (he was highly regarded as I have seen in Norwegian newspapers from 20s; already named goalkeeper of tournament in 1920s Olympics too – see below) – ?, ? – ?, ?, ? – Matthews, D. Jack, Lawton, Puskás, Meredith. I don't find anything about the selection made. There are 214 editions of Sportmanden in the digital archives of the National Library, but all from 1933 and 1934. David Jack and especially Meredith is a bit weird choice though – considering it's December 1953 (I found one newspaper mentioning the final team/result in a short notice). Probably not the most competent guy selecing that team. (Morgenbladet, 10 Sep. 1920). "A big plus for them [Spain] have also been that they have the tournament's best goalkeeper in their team". https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/all-world-cup-winners-classified.2129338/page-3#post-42454937 Don't think there were anyone in these newspapers aware of the British professionals in 20s though – like Elisha Scott for example. Although some English clubs made visits to Norway, but not Liverpool.
I'll take my time on the other points mate, but thought the full transcript (at least the selection section, without intro/outro/over-elaboration on stats) of Stanley Matthews selection could be good to see for you maybe (I dug it out again to check whether it was implied that Doherty would fit the system less than Mannion, but it wasn't...and in theory his XI could be seen as a call for Greaves over Doherty too, as it was obviously feasible/normal to have one centre forward and two supporting inside forwards, not necessarily a goalscoring inside forward and more a midfielder like he has even if the diagram in the book shows the 5 forwards in a line still): "Pat Jennings is, withoit doubt, my first choice goalkeeper, even though that means making Gordon Banks my alternative. Jennings was the first 'keeper to me, who really controlled his entire area. George Hardwick, the immaculate Middlesbrough player who captained England just after the war, gets my vote at right-back even though he won only 13 caps - all as captain, incidentally. Eddie Hapgood, who won 30 caps, was a class left back in an outstanding Arsenal team. Bobby Moore gets in on merit, but Neil Franklin, one of England's all-time great centre halves can only get on the bench. My skipper is John Charles, the Gentle Giant and an oustanding centre-half or centre-forward. George Best and Tom Finney would play wide in my team - but even Tom, who iis rated one of England's best ever, only gets a vote when I have thought long and hard about 'Boy' Bastin, the legendary Cliff who played for Arsenal and still holds their goalscoring record today even though he played on the wing. There have been great inside forwards over he years and I edge Wilf Mannion over Raich Carter, which leaves Peter Doherty without a place, and he was some player. And what about wee Alex James, another from that era of Arsenal dominance of our game, and Bobby Charlton? There would be more skill on my bench than in most modern teams of the last decade. Two modern players would sit comfortably alongside them though: Paul Gascoigne and Alan Shearer. I go with the powerhouse Tommy Lawton as my centrre forward, with Jimmy Greaves alongside him. The way the game is played today, little Jim would probably earn his team as many penalties as goals. Having opted for Lawton, I sadly have to put Nat Lofthouse on the bench alongside my old pal Stan Mortensen" Of course there is a difference re: Frank Swift vis a vis Jennings and Banks though too (1995 and 1997 is close though, and the date of selection could even have been closer than a full two years). Quickly to make a start on some other points: - As it's longer I'd even be clearer on seeing this 1913 FA Cup Final excerpt (maybe saying highlights rather than random moments would be a tad misleading though) was low-level Sunday league standard as it were (in modern times, or 'my times' if you like although I didn't see much Sunday league in reality - I would say I'd be disappointed if I wouldn't play well enough to be the best player of the 1913 FA Cup Final, unless the video is misleading, on a ramdom day playing down the park in the 90s/00s say, and would think of several of my mates who I would think could easily be so for example though in theory....) - maybe seeming more clear re: the attacking play rather than just play out of defence even, and for both teams as opposed to one of them (not to say I perceive or saw clear indications of exceptional level, or something out of place in Sunday league, by modern standards of the British team's forwards as such - I kind of hope that I didn't see anything I thought was 'bad' from Middelboe since he had a great reputation at the time of course, but Sophus Nielsen was surely not in any of the action we saw anyway I guess, which was centered near the Danish goal IIRC....) Aston Villa 1 Sunderland 0 - FA Cup Final - 19th April 1913 The indications from this 1910 clip are a) kick and rush/low-level Sunday League indeed to be fair/honest, and b) inferior in quality to more modern players, and way below the Rest of World/Europe 1953 level. Newcastle United v Barnsley in the 1910 FA Cup Final - what great footage! Newcastle won it after a replay 2-0 at Woodison Park after the first game... | By Magpie 24/7 - Newcastle United | Facebook - I'd maybe be thinking of Friedenreich over Shepherd (in theory) more in the realms of 90s Ronaldo over 90s Shearer for example (not to say either older player would be the equal of the modern comparison but I just mean in general terms - the soloist vs the box scorer....). Or potentially an Orth over a Szoboszlai, or Toldi over a Sallai if we talk in term of older Hungarians with possibly (?) more elaborate skills and/or flair vs (vague) modern equivalents, which maybe would be feasible even if I haven't seen sufficient (individual action or certainly prolonged game) footage of the older ones.... I'll add more on the other points another time....(I hope I'm not too harsh re: impressions of those FA Cup Final videos of course - I did notice an overhead pass/cross attempt, albeit unsuccessful, for example also....but yeah there's maybe no point trying to be kinder to the extent that my comments would be unrealistic and not in line with my true impressions...even if the footage is minimal and surely not a 'game highlights' package either like I say, as such).
To comment further on these points (I think there are still some more things for me to respond to from other parts of the post yet though): I mentioned a Ronaldo/Shearer possibility earlier, but re: Haaland I guess it could in theory be more akin to saying Marmoush is better than Haaland or Lewandowski because of being more skilled, which as I've alluded to perhaps I see potential for (yet at the moment I'd have Haaland closer to consideration for a top 250 historical 'top players' list [he was in msioux's top 200 also anyway], even if number of years already as a prominent star plays a big factor in that probably vs Marmoush I'd say even though he'd younger actually - I did put Lewandowski in my 250 I posted of course anyway, though at Marmoush's age I'm fairly sure he wouldn't be there for me either, despite already having been very notable as Borussia Dortmund player, with some excellent games such as vs Real Madrid in the CL of course too). I suspect Shepherd was not a physical outlier in ways that Haaland is though, so maybe that wouldn't be a perfect comparison anyway. Yeah, it seems to be that the Norwegian selection didn't have a back line included? The Danish one had Male and Hapgood as right and left back (ahead of Swift in goal) and Parola as centre half (Cajkowski right half; can't read/recognise left half right now) then Matthews-Jack-Dean-James-Bastin as the front 5. Finney did say Male and Hapgood were the equivalents of Uruguayans Gonzalez and Martinez here: https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/british-football-best-xis-1863-1939.2124483/page-9#post-42468451 He didn't mention Male, but mentioned Hapgood as a 'reserve' left back for his own 1997 English league XI anyway Sam Bartram, goalie himself, picked Swift in 1st here https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/british-football-best-xis-1863-1939.2124483/page-6#post-41246659 But here he had Banks https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/interesting-best-xi.325564/page-64#post-41856294 Nils Liedholm also put him as his world XI goalie: Not in his playing days XI (maybe because he deemed Swift from before that - there are some other minor changes though, not related to that - the team with Swift in is picked a year after the one with Yashin in): 4266505d-9361-41e8-bdcc-40f3ebaf2afe-jpeg.138614 (1440×1920) ced7f18a-f883-4ce7-80b9-93bb36e4fbee-jpeg.138613 (1440×1920)
@TerjeC I'll wrap it up with the other things that came to mind to comment on: - I guess Chapman picking Needham over Crabtree could also point a little to favouring a robust player over a more measured one (not too sure though, and I gather that Crabtree did have some physical qualities and Needham was quite skilled at least for a half back and liked to involve himself in the forward play IIRC). - Bobby Walker's own 1928 XI looks different for example, and G.O Smith is there (Needham over Crabtree also for him though - of course both those seem to have had calls as top player overall, over the forwards, from some of the older guys who lived the era so it's not a straightforward call maybe anyway, if Crabtree wasn't placed in a different role) https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/british-football-best-xis-1863-1939.2124483/page-10#post-42859173 Billy Walker's XI from 1960, and assessment (maybe he didn't consider, or even watch foreign players - I would have thought he could be interested to see England vs Rest of Europe or Hungary but whether he watched those game I don't know): https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/british-football-best-xis-1863-1939.2124483/page-7#post-42295687 On the other hand he did say his 1959 FA Cup winning Forest team was his best one (Finney also had words of praise for the style of that team and Walker's management preferences I had seen in the archives I remember). The back-line is like Chapman's actually in his XI, but further forwards his selections are relatively more modern (but as he alludes to not extremely modern). - Remember that Jimmy Hogan disagreed with the predominant English style of play that had developed and then his teachings/style had led to the Hungarians going to Wembley and out-playing and out-scoring England comprehensively (even though he said he'd never imagined a team could play so well still apparently) - that was in part because they had better players as a collection, but maybe that can't be separated from the ways players are taught to play totally can it? Isaque did put this Alex James clip on Youtube, with a nice piece of skill/deception/composure at the end of it, but it's only a glimpse of course and I haven't seen a lot overall (maybe it's not really possible anyway - I saw his FA Cup Final goal for example): Wee Alex James Some indications of some good control/ideas in 1920s Hungarian football, on a tricky pitch, in this little clip Isaque uploaded too for example: Molnár-Kalmár-Hirzer combination
Yeah Swift too; didn't catch my attention initially. Matthews selects 10 attacking players, then suddenly a goalkeeper appears. Well, interesting to read the transcript though. I guess he would have placed Doherty and Swift further down on his list on second thoughts. I guess Ronaldo vs. Shearer could be just a good comparisons as I made yeah, and more 'nations related' – and this one more in favour of Friedenreich of course. Orth–Szoboszlai in general I would say is quite a bit way-off comparison. Sceptical to most of these, but Matthews–Joaquín I liked. Yeah, I think Marmoush is a more skilled player than Lewandowski and Haaland. I think you were a bit harsh, a little bit, on the FA Cup finals. Don't know how good you are/was playing football, but that was a pretty strong statement that I would naturally be a bit sceptical to – not a big deal though. Most seem to prefer having John Charles as a CB/CH than CF it seems in best XIs – but maybe also to make room for another big name player in attack, I guess. Hard to figure out that left half of Denmark selection, and Norway don't seem to have a defence or midfield selected, yeah. Here is another Bartram selection I just saw. Hibbs in goal – Bartram don't seem to be the most reliable source, changing it around a lot. https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/british-football-best-xis-1863-1939.2124483/page-7#post-42353646 Chapman could have selected Crabtree at left back too, though. But he preferred Pennington. 'Bobby' Walker's team doesn't look so strong as Chapman's though, and Chapman a bigger authority. But yeah, Walker seem to prefer Gilbert Smith. Chapman maybe the one most worth listening to of football personalities, as maybe the best coach before WWII. Rappan worth a mention too, as a clever tactician – and Struth, the Ferguson before Ferguson maybe. He was more an expert on training as I understand it, though, and building a winning environment/culture with the highest standards. Won the league in 25 of 34 seasons (including war league, which was won 7/7). Maybe Pozzo worth a mention too, since he won two World Cups – although with good amount of help from external powers. Re: Hogan. I guess we could say more kick and rush maybe more effective and gave better results in short term, but trying to play properly is better for the development, and best long term solution. Hungary crushing England is 1953/1954 though, so much later. England crushed Hungary 6–2 in Dec. 1936, and generally British football doing very fine until late 40s in terms of results.
Thanks for the extensive reply again - maybe I should try to wind it down and not cause you to need to reply further on the same points (but obviously feel free if you want to and then it could be me that doesn't need to eventually), but just to note or clarify a few more things again then.... - Haha, yeah maybe I don't even really know totally 'how good' I was at football (it's not something I'd particularly care about though), but I suppose the comments about my mates were a bit more third person at least. I would say I could (increasingly) believe an Orth was in real terms better than me or any of my mates, and a Friedenreich too, but on the other hand based on 'saying what I see' there didn't seem to be much of anything exceptional happening in the FA Cup Finals (but I am pretty sure a genuine highlights video with the best moments would at least show something better here and there, and not to forget the reputation of a Buchan - on the reputation it could be easy to think the same of him as I said about Orth or Friedenreich...but then again it took a bit more of an extensive viewing of Orth skills/play to start to be less sceptical about him - even if I still find it hard to take some of the pro-Orth comments literally as they make him seem like a combination of many great, at his moment, future, players and on a par with anyone in history maybe - others that began to wonder if Sarosi was better as a centre forward or centre half or in general during the 30s, or included Schaffer in an XI and not Orth such as Sebes, could in theory be under-playing Orth too much but it's just very hard to say I think, and maybe Sebes didn't see a huge amount of either overall but happened to see better games of Schaffer even, or he just thought Schaffer would fit better at CF even if not better overall, even if some would still disagree on that evidently). It's interesting in a way though maybe that suddenly I am more modernist in that particular respect (comparing professional players in top teams of the 1910s to young adults of the 1990s), which would be a total reverse. I guess though young adults/kids of the 90s were not only potentially further evolved (I'd be sceptical of this as an argument, but anyway it's there (even if we shouldn't overlook the reported 100m times of Josef Bican for example whose athletic prowess would seem to have been exceptional and he's a player from not very long after the 1910s who began to develop as a person/player during that decade even I suppose), as are any health related advances that would apply to the general population in theory), but also were taught, to the extent they were taught, football from a more modern perspective, and perhaps more pertinently even watched their favourites on TV or even at the stadiums playing professional football and saw all the techniques used - the general ways of controlling a ball, making a pass, some tricks, shots etc (of course the balls in the 1910s were different) and could instinctively copy that themselves. Orth-Szobozslai can't be detached from what I think about Orth overall I suppose (which I find hard to be certain about). For clarification I do think Matthews was a better player than Joaquin more than likely, but yeah the use of similar kinds of moves is quite striking at least. Yeah John Charles in all-time XIs could be a bit like with Gyorgy Sarosi (even in 1930s XIs or all-time XIs made in 1950s or something...); more likely to appear as CH/CB, even if peaking in level and fame perhaps as a CF (in Sarosi's case, not necessarily a true number 9 type as we'd see it now). Also Breitner for example (LB compared to CM) is a bit similar in that respect I guess. Yeah, Bartram's selections did vary, especially for goalkeepers - he did say in the 1978 piece that Harry Hibbs was his idol as a lad though (without putting him in the 12, but it's not certain that he was excluding players from that long ago and it reads more like later goalkeepers were better I'm thinking maybe?....which would seem like a change of mind in theory yeah). I think on Chapman vs Bobby Walker XIs we could get in the realms of preconceptions vs preconceptions again a bit (if I used the right term even, but hopefully you get what I mean - uncertainties leading to different conclusions we are both unsure of in effect anyway). I could think Walker's team looks better (I think that's what you meant by stronger - if it was Chapman's XI being physically stronger I guess that would seem likely but then the Walker XI, based on what we can read would seem perhaps of greater quality/skill?), but it's not any kind of concrete feeling I'd have about that obviously. Yeah it does seem that Hungary in the 1930s played the neater football vs England and lost by such a big score apparently, albeit in a one-off game it can happen of course, and there were closer games with the Czechoslovakians and Austrians and Pozzo felt that with a fully fit Meazza Italy would win in 1933 (according to the reports, including English ones, playing the more cohesive and skilled football). Maybe England's play was of better quality and/or less kick and rush in the 1930s (and 1950s) than in the 1910s too, but yeah that pattern could even have been more pronounced in the 1910s (games where England played direct and won by a lot vs a team playing more possession-based football, I guess - not that I am an expert on that era at all so I could be misunderstanding a little in theory). It's true that great players could be less inclined to pick suitable XIs than great managers (though less inclined to pick the best individual players is a differerent issue I suppose isn't it?) although the Bobby Walker XI doesn't look unbalanced like some Dream Team XIs selected by players can sometimes be if they are stacked with attackers and attacking midfielders - he's still picking half backs and full backs of course (the systems back then had a lot of forwards anyway, so Chapman also picks the same amount).
Going back to Lewandowski, maybe I would decide to concur with msioux putting him as 2020s player actually on balance! (because finally the peak occured here, albeit soon afterwards an age-related decline). In theory I could move Zanetti to 2000s and Pirlo to 2010s too, although msioux didn't do the latter one, understandably as peak would be questionable and overall he was more significant in 2000s. Also I probably ended up removing some strikers I might have included in a top 250 due to making sure I got a few more recent players in and/or not being too light on goalkeepers, full-backs etc. I guess Seeler, Hugo Sanchez and suchlike couldn't be too far away for me too at least anyway (even if I probably do lean to goal makers over goal scorers indeed overall I suppose).
Well I like sports cars and I used to follow F1 and MotoGP until about the time you were referring to, but not so much afterwards. Another thing that could be said, about MotoGP the 500cc motorbikes used to be heavy beasts, they demanded big guys to ride them. Fleas were suited for 125cc for their agility and small weight, but it was way harder than today to go past the 250cc. Schwantz, Rainey, Lawson, and Fogerty in Superbike, those were absolute savages! I've had my two Alfa Romeo in my life, manual driving of course, but it's been eons since I last watched a grand prix. About players, of course there were talents but there's too much difference in the level a whole movement given by professionalism. This complete list of ALL the international friendlies played by EVERY british team until WWII is a treat and speaks for itself. https://www.rsssf.org/tablesb/brit-ier-tours-prewwii.html There was some occasional win or draw by foreign teams before WWI, drowned in a sea of demolishing losses even against amateurs, not only Corinthians but also Cambridge and below. Bigger teams like Newcastle, Tottenham, Chelsea etc. mopped the floor with foreign teams. Same for the first South American tours, between 1905 and 1914, and some of them probably featured Friedenreich with Paulistano. Things started to change in the early 20s, with many countries evolving with covert and then overt professionalism. By the end of the 20s, and even more so in the 30s, things were drastically different. Many bad losses for top tier british teams, something reflected in the away results for England, Scotland and Ireland. That's why players and their achievements are commesurable according to the professionalism criterion IMO. Before the 1920s, there's no way the world's greatest players weren't Buchan, Bloomer, Woodward, GO Smith, and so on, then this doesn't necessarily mean a Schlosser and the likes couldn't distinguish themselves at that level; the danish Middelboe played for Chelsea in the 1900s; but it's a matter of weighing and attributing an absolute value to players in their own period, rather than relative to a disomogeneous competition. Exactly as it's a matter of weighing afterwards. We can see how all these formations and rankings and polls are a curiosity at best, then when it comes to delivering at top level it's another story. I also attach Pozzo's testimony of the first ever South American tour by italian teams, in 1914 right before the start of WWI. Pozzo was FC Torino's manager in that tour. A few weeks earlier, Pro Vercelli (Italy's strongest team at the time and proudly amateur) did its tour as well, and had to return due to the start of the war, after two draws and two narrow losses, one of which against Paulistano, so there could have been Friedenreich playing, although I don't see him in the picture of the Paulistano (alleged) formation for the match. Torino, on the other hand, was scheduled as well for 4 games in Brazil, but ended up extending their stay...waiting for the war to end! So they played two more games in Brazil, ending with 6 wins out of 6 and 26/3 goals for/against. They beat the current league champions Corinthians twice. Pozzo mentions some players who impressed him, doesn't mention Friedenreich but we don't know whether he played or not in any games, and says the Brazilians were great soloists but very lacking in teamplay and cohesion. Then Torino went to Argentina, where they got 2 narrow losses against local selections, before beating the Argentinian national team 2-0. Then they were forced to get back to Italy because they were drafted for the war (and some of those players would lose their life in it). In light of that as well as of the results of the British teams above, it's very hard to consider South American football of the time as superior to the European continental one, and anywhere near the level of England and Scotland. Probably they gained an edge while Europe stopped for the war. But again, in my opinion the "greatest" before 1920 are british, and professionalism is too relevant a criterion to think otherwise. Schlosser better than Puskas or Friedenreich better than Pele is nonsense. Lastly, probably the best South American before the 20s was Piendibene. Still in 1924, he was voted as the best player of the continent by a poll (again...) by the argentinian magazine El Grafico (a little more credible because Argentinians voting an Uruguayan definitely means something).
Probably when we start to talk about motorbikes it is me that suddenly doesn't know much lol, but I know Carl Foggerty of course (and from earlier Barry Sheen too) as well as Valentino Rossi for example obviously! Yeah, that was my assumption, that perhaps a Schlosser or Friedenreich could do well individually for a top British team in theory, but that the British teams had advantages (as difficult as it is to discern how and why looking at the 1913 FA Cup Final footage! - as you say though as soon as others starting developing more then things changed). Good links and pages re: the tours - Friedenreich didn't play for Paulistano until 1918 though I don't think. He was playing in this game though I see in 1914: [Jul 21, Tue] [at Estádio das Laranjeiras] BRAZIL 2-0 EXETER CITY [Oswaldo Gómes 28, Osman 36] MARCOS [América] LORAM, Reginald - - PÍNDARO [Flamengo] FORT, John NERY, E. [Flamengo] STRETTLE, Sam - - LAGRECA [AA São Bento] RIGBY, James RUBENS SALLES [Paulistano] LAGAN, James ROLANDO [Botafogo] HARDING, Gus - - ABELARDO [Botafogo] HOLT, Harry OSWALDO GÓMES [Fluminense] HUNTER, William FRIEDENREICH, Arthur [Ypiranga] WHITTAKER, Fred OSMAN [América] LOVETT, William FORMIGA [Ypiranga] GOODWIN, Fred Maybe this one too? 17- 9-1922 CA Paulistano - Select Merchant Ships 7-1 Friendly Sao Paulo I never thought it likely that Schlosser was playing at a higher level than Puskas or Friedenreich than Pele though, no. The Piendibene win in the El Grafico poll is for sure interesting. Guillermo Stabile did seem to rank Friedenreich over Piendibene though, while picking them both out for skill and technique along with Gabino Sosa.
On this day: July 21 1914 – Brazil vs Exeter City | Exeter City F.C. Brazil v Exeter City F.C. (1914) - Wikipedia (Friedenreich did go on to play vs Argentina in the game Brazil were preparing for I see too, but hae and his team didn't score in a 0-3 loss Argentina v Brazil, 20 September 1914 - 11v11 match report They were kind of on a par by 1916 though, in terms of the national team, it seems 1916 South American Championship - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Then they took the title of course in 1919: 1919 South American Championship - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) Although for context: 1913–14 Southern Football League - Wikipedia 1913–14 in English football - Wikipedia