Some OLD World Cup trivia

Discussion in 'Soccer History' started by schwuppe, Feb 1, 2012.

  1. Lucas...

    Lucas... Member+

    Dec 18, 2012
    Barbosa was, perhaps, the player who was more sad by that defeat. He was widely criticized and people considered him guilty for the loss of the title.

    ''In Brazil, the largest penalty for a crime (prison) is 30 years. I paid for a crime I didn't commit since 1950, 43 years ago'' Barbosa said, 1993. It was what he felt with the judgment of the people, especially in the yearsafter 1950.
     
    RoyOfTheRovers repped this.
  2. comme

    comme Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 21, 2003
    Baltazar started the tournament because Zizinho was injured, so they moved Ademir to inside right and played Baltazar at centre-forward. Zizinho came back for the game against Yugoslavia and that led to Baltazar dropping out.
     
  3. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    Yes, I read it in Jonathan Wilson his book and also the Glanville book I think but without those tactical details I think. Do you know a book that has less prose but more (very) accurate details about the World Cup?
     
  4. comme

    comme Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 21, 2003
    I'm writing one myself at the moment to be out before next year's tournament as an ebook. Basically there is no great book in English available for the whole tournament that has sufficient detail.

    It depends what type of thing you are after exactly, but the best of what is currently out there at the moment is one by John Kobylecky, Ken Knight and Serge Van Hoof which runs up to 1970. This has photos of every team ever to participate and the name of every player to play in qualifying. Not vast amounts on each game, but is very good for what it does.

    The next best is one by Cris Freddi which runs up to 2002. Those include quite a bit of good information, but the way it is formatted makes it something to find out something very specific rather than to get a good feel for a tournament or who played particularly well.
     
  5. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    I was looking for that first book some while ago but it seems almost impossible to find. What is the best way?
    Did a quick query again on google and no vendors again..

    I've seen the second book. That is a good one indeed.

    Thanks anyway.
     
  6. comme

    comme Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 21, 2003
    I got it from SoccerBooks years ago. Van Hoof runs Heart Books so they might have it.
     
  7. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    I personally like the official Fifa films of each World Cup. Of course it always portrays the perspective of the victor, which is understandable, but the 'odd' camera angles show things not always directly visible on the live television cameras. The close-up images of players engaging a dribble, being fouled, motivating team-mates etc. are very good to see.
     
  8. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    I read now through Freddi his book (though this one ends at 2006) but I feel that Glanville his book provides a more accurate impression.

    As (myopic) example: in the section of the 1974WC Holland is both in the match against Argentina and Brazil portrayed as the criminals. While at that time, despite the natural sympathy for Brazil, especially the Brazilians were viewed as the main culprits (Freddi does not even mention the expulsion of Luis Pereira). Both books also cover the final in a different tone.

    There are some other things which (in my view) are either inaccurate or do not match with how it was experienced at the time. While nothing is wrong with an independent thought, the format of the book prints it in a rather dry and 'factual' way.
     
  9. Once

    Once Member+

    Apr 16, 2011
    I just finished watching teh below footage of Brazil vs Holland 1974

    The first 18 minutes of game or so are missing, so I dont know what happened during that phase of the game. As for the rest, it was Holland committing not only more fouls than Brazil in number, but quite hasher ones as well. I noticed Van Hanegem floored Rivelino nastily at least twice, from behind... In the last 15 minutes, probably frustrated for the 0-2 disadvantage and for the harsh play of the Dutch, I see Rivelino losing it a little and Pereira being sent off. But that was after enduring the pretty rough game of the Europeans. At least that is my personal impression.
    Also, I noticed that even when he was involved in both goals, Cruyff had very little contact with the ball.
     
  10. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    The amount of fouls was 28 for Holland vs 25 for FIFA and media darling Brazil. Doubt whether one can notice the difference with the naked eye. Brazil opened the battle with three (sanctioned) fouls in a row but after 15 minutes it was 4:3 for the Netherlands.
    Rarely mentioned in any story: the referee was West-German and his team was already qualified for the final.

    The Cris Freddi revisionist job also omitted the punch of Marinho towards Neeskens when the ball was out of play. Should've been a straight red.

    The 1982 World Cup is also pretty horrible.

    Anyway, thought that Glanville his book does overall a better job (including the story telling about this semi-final).

    Have for the rest no illusions. It will always be that way in every tournament (see also last european championship), and said in the draft thread some things about my view (about a general 'conspiracy' against smaller nations and the Dutch, hence the incredible high average of registered fouls in the world cup, just as some other second-tier and third-tier nations). Only the 1950s Hungary seem to remain a widely applauded darling, while that was of course a prestige project, a semi-club team full with 'shamateurs', of one of the most horrible systems the world has seen.
     
  11. comme

    comme Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 21, 2003
    I think Freddi is better for detail, Glanville is better for story telling. You can read whole chapters of Glanville in one go. He's a great "writer". However, when you watch games back Glanville gets a lot of things wrong I think.

    I like both, but I personally think I can do better.
     
  12. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    What are straight factual errors on his part?

    It is an advantage that he wrote the chapters while it happened (since the 1970WC). That is also a disadvantage but as reader you know that.
    Freddi presents them as 'facts' (as said, I also felt 1982WC as horrible). While it is not wrong to look back with the eyes of today, I feel it can be better, and even some of the bolder statements can be better substantiated with facts (for example: the fouls stat I mentioned above is not from his book but from a vintage book, verified by newspaper articles).

    I have btw the 2006 version and not the 2002 one. Dunno whether that makes a difference:
    [​IMG]


    Apart from books written about individual tournaments, which magazines and newspapers do you plan to use?
     
  13. Once

    Once Member+

    Apr 16, 2011
    Let me say it better.
    I did not watch the first 18 minutes or so of the first half, so I do not know what happened there. Maybe Brazil kicked the crap out of the Dutch, I dunno.
    From that moment onwards, it seems to me that Holland committed more fouls and, additionally, the fouls they committed seemed to me quite a bit harsher than those made by Brazil. Im not saying criminal, nor that half the Dutch team should have been sent off. Im just saying they were visibly rougher than Brazil imo. And I do recall Rivelino going down two or three times product of these actions, at least two of them via tackle from behind by Van Hanegem (not saying Rivelino was the main target of the fouling, I just remember him getting floored). He did not even get cautioned.
    And in the last 15 minutes of game, with Brazil already down 0-2 and probably frustrated because of that and the (in my personal view) rough treatment they had been receiving from the Dutch (that is, after the first 18 minutes of the first half and before the last 15 minutes of the game), they seem to have gotten violent, the most illustrative example of it being the sending off of Pereira.

    Again, I did not count them, but I did get the impression Holland was much rougher and committed more fouls than Brazil between minute 18 of the first half and before the last 15 minutes of game.
     
  14. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    No hard feelings Once but after 15 minutes Brazil had already conceded their 'advantage', 4 vs 3.

    This is a report from another perspective:
    http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~goldkeep/Holland74/Brazil.htm

    In the 'links section' the author clarifies that he is unable to read Dutch (and probably he can't read Portuguese too).


    Glanville wrote:
    "The Brazilians had beaten Argentina 2-1 in an all-South-American match at Hanover, the first time these famous rivals had ever met in the World Cup. Their decisive match, at Dortmund, was a sorry affair, redeemed by Holland's two marvellous winning goals in the second half. The Brazilian defence kicked, chopped and hacked from the first; and it must be said that the Dutch, thus provoked, returned the treatment with interest. Twice Brazil should have scored when the Dutch offside trap broke down, but first Paulo Cesar, then Jairzinho, missed palpable chances.
    In the first half, Neeskens was knocked cold by Mario Marinho. In the second, he was scythed down by Luis Pereira, who was sent off by the unimpressive West German referee, Herr Tschencher. Pereira could have no complaints, yet he had undeniably been one of the best defenders in the tournament; a tall, strong, mobile N*gro [sic] of impressive authority.
    Holland's goals redeemed the game, marvellous in their lightning simplicity. First Neeskens dashed down the middle, found Cruyff on the right and lobbed the swift, immaculate return over Leao's head, then Cruyff superbly volleyed home Krol's left-wing centre. Holland were in the final."

    And no, Glanville has never been a Holland cheerleader.

    You are however not alone: the sports editor of the largest quality paper over here (in)famously scathed them throughout the tournament.


    Another classic is the 1982 semi-final in Seville, where Freddi harshly states (or implies) that the right team won. But again, the way it is written make such things noticeable (more like an unsubstantiated fact, as if it is common sense).
     
  15. comme

    comme Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 21, 2003
    Quite a few times where he gets the goalscorers wrong or he . Primarily he's just sketchy in his coverage. He'll devote hundreds of words to some games and potentially none to another. Sometimes (and this is true for Freddi as well) you watch clips or games back and his description of things is way off.

    I can almost always tell with Freddi what book he has based his stuff on. For instance most of his stuff on 1962 comes from a book by Donald Saunders which I have. The descriptions of certain things are extremely similar (to the point of being clearly copied). The same is true for 1966 and Hugh McIllvanney's book.

    No fault to him for that because the footage is highly sketchy before 1966.

    Yep I have the same but although it is called that it was issued in the build up to 2006, so cuts off after 2002.

    World Soccer, the Times and then as we get closer to the modern day the rest of the British press. My principle source though for everything 1966 onwards is DVDs of the games themselves rather than written sources.

    Before 1966 I have to use Saunders for 1962, Camkin for 1958, Finn for 1954 and then those German books (the Agon series) for 1950 and before. Also I use autobiographies like Finney, Matthews, Puskas, Wright for the England stuff.

    The official films for 1954-62 are also decent. After that they start to get too artistic IMO.
     
    RoyOfTheRovers repped this.
  16. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    Which ones do you feel are the best? Apart from WS and the Times.

    (yes, I implicitly asked this in the Pelé thread; always assumed that The Times used to be the best for football)
     
  17. comme

    comme Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 21, 2003
    Probably the Guardian, Telegraph and Independent.

    Honestly though the problem for the modern tournaments isn't obtaining the material it is editing it down.

    You go from famine (the early tournaments) to feast in terms of available material.

    It's looking at over 200,000 words long and that is not including the statistical sections providing line-ups etc.
     
    RoyOfTheRovers repped this.
  18. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
  19. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    Another good example is the 1954WC section. Prefer again Glanville over Freddi I think.
     
  20. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    Also remarkable is the change in tone by Glanville about the 1962WC. In the 1968 'soccer, a panorama' book he is far more negative (including negative about Brazil; he uses a Puskas quote to strengthen his observation) about the tournament as in the 'story of the world cup' book. Especially the judgement about that Brazil team is far more positive in the 'story of the world cup' book. Very bizarre to see the difference. He is also a bit more restrained about Garrincha in his earlier work; less generous with superlatives. The violence in many games, and by a few teams in general (the Chileans, the Czechs, the Italians, the Germans; to name a few) received more emphasis in the earlier book.

    The 1966 World Cup coverage looks very similar in many ways, except that the emphasis on key players was a bit changed (some became a bit more emphasized while others less, compared with the earlier book).
     
  21. RoyOfTheRovers

    Jul 24, 2009
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
     
  22. ~*GabrielG

    ~*GabrielG Member

    Jul 14, 2011
    It's fun to imagine (especially for video game purposes) who the world 11 are, but is there any practical utility for coaches or players?
    A related question: Has there been an evolution in which skills get players into the top 11? E.g. used to be more shooting oriented for strikers, now we see more great passing, dribbling for ex.
     

Share This Page