Wisden Footballers of the Year

One name to throw into the discussion for 1921 (if not already inducted for the previous period, which I'm thinking he might not be but I'll leave that to the experts!) - Arthur Friedenreich:

- Top scorer, at a very high rate and total, of the Paulista
- Not allowed to play in the Copa America as a black player, despite doing very well in it previously (sentimental aspect?)

The questions might be lack of International games/goals but that might be offset by being unfairly excluded by default.

Just thought I'd kick things off with a suggestion anyway, not a recommendation as like I say we have experts on this era who'll be making better calls than me.

 

One thing I think about these type of awards looking retrospectively from 1921 back is that they would try to address major themes of the era and be relatively inclusive as oppose to selecting purely the best players.

Pre 1888

I think Kinnaird is a must as clearly the dominant player of early football in London.

After that it get murky.

Charles Campbell has a big case as the captain of Queen's Park and Scotland throughout the entire era, winning a record 8 Scottish Cups. He played 10 times vs England with a 7-2-1 record. He was Scotland record cap holder until 1892 despite usually only playing a single international vs England per year At different times someone like Arnott, Smith, Ker, MacKinnon, McNiel, or Wier may have been more brilliant but he was there with all of them and was considered one of the best backs of the time, if not the best. He would be my second priority.

Walter Arnott has a great case also has the greatest fullback of his time. He would be my second prioraty for a Queen's Park player. If I to look at a third Queen's Park player Smith, Ker, McNiel, Wier, and MacKinnon would all be close to the same level. I read a lot of newspaper reports from this archive and Wier and McNiel seemed to have a higher peak to me than MacKinnon. Ker and Smith may have reached a higher level than any of those three. I might put McNiel in the front of the group though as he had the longevity and the quality and some real standout moments in big matches like the 7-2 win vs England in 1878. Newspaper archive: http://www.londonhearts.com/scores/images/hnews/1878.html

Nick Ross is a good candidate based on pure quality, but Preston never won anything in this period. I guess he could be representative of the movement to top Scottish players to England. Archie Hunter is another possible fit for this niche, a brilliant Scot playing in England but missing national team opportunities, as well as being professional. Both were considered one of if not the best players ever at their position when the era ended.

Cobbold is a strange case for me, as what he accomplished for Corinthians is hard to asses in the big picture of things. To my knowledge he never had any signature performances vs Scotland which is also a mark against him. The main thing that speaks for him as far as I know are qoutes from observes of the time identifying him as the best dribbler in the world.

I might consider Bambridge above him for the best English forward of the time. He was England's record goalscorer for most of the era and had multiple star performances vs Scotland.

Another player I might consider is Jimmy Forrest, the first great professional who led his team to three FA Cups and became a mainstay in the England side.

I think I would vote for the following

1) Kinnaird
2) Campbell
3) Arnott
3) An amatuer English forward, Bambridge or Cobbold. I am fine either way.
4) An early Scot proffesional playing in England, Ross or Hunter.
5) One of Queen's Parks forward, MacKinnon, Wier, McNiel, Smith, or Ker. I perfer McNiel, Ker or Smith.

1888 - 1904

This is a tough one. I can see why you included 5 English players as on an individual basis they are the biggest names with the best resumes in many ways. England was also dominant for so much of this period. But Scotland quickly equalized balance when they recalled there top players from England in the late 1890s, and many of the best English teams were loaded with Scots at key positions. James Cowan was considered the best player of the most successful team of the time Aston Villa. He also had success when he was recalled to the national team. Ned Doig and Hugh Wilson also had similar profiles of being star players for a top English club and then being recalled and having success vs England, winning in 96 and 97 breaking England's 6 year unbeaten streak.

Once Scotland recalled their top players from England to the national team the results went like this.

1896 (Glasgow): 2-1 Scotland
1897 (London): 2-1 Scotland
1898 (Glasgow): 3-1 England
1899 (London): 2-1 England
1900 (Glasgow): 4-1 Scotland
1901 (London): 2-2 Draw
1902 (Glasgow): 2-2 Draw
1903 (London): 2-1 Scotland
1904 (Glasgow): 1-0 England

The Rangers players who were key during this time for Scotland and dominated club football for Scotland should also be considered, mostly Alex Smith and Neil Gibson.

It will be very hard to leave out any of the 5 players you already listed. Goodall was the best player on the team that was considered the best in an absolute sense ever, Preston's Invincibles and was one of England's stars through the 6 year unbeaten streak in the 1890s.

Bloomer is very tough to leave out as he ended this era as the top scorer and cap holder all time for England and played well vs Scotland. His club career is also excellent but he never won any trophies despite coming close.

Smith is considered the best of the three English forwards by many and was excellent internationally. He was a talisman for Corinthians and the amateur ideal, but his actual accomplishments with the club are hard to decipher and in my eyes inferior to the professionals.

Bassett was one of the great wingers of the time and England's biggest star of the 6 year unbeaten streak along with Goodall. He one two FA Cups but West Brom was never considered a great club side.

Needham had an excellent club career and was great for England and was considered the best halfback of his time.

My thoughts are only two of the three English forward can make it although I am not sure which ones should. Also one of either Bassett or Needham should be replaced by their Scottish/Rangers counterpart, Smith of Gibson.

My picks in bold

1) Bloomer, Goodall, or Smith (One of the three great English forwards)
2) Bloomer, Goodall, or Smith (One of the three great English forwards)
3) Cowan, Diog, Wilson, Raisbeck (One of the great Scots abroad in England)
4) Needham or Gibson
5) Bassett or Smith

Still unsure as leaving Bloomer out is really tough. Maybe all three of the forwards plus Cowan and Smith? All three of the forwards plus Needham and Cowan? I just find it hard to go so heavy English when the best English teams of the era were dominated by Scots (Preston 6 of 11 starters in 1889, 8 of 11 starts in 1890, Sunderland all Scots, Liverpool, Everton, and Aston Villa all had Scots at key spots as well) and The Scottish national team seemed to have a slight advantage over England once it recalled its top players.

1904-1920

In my opinion a Newcastle rep as clearly the best team of the era and a Scottish Rep are needed. Walker of Thomson as a Scottish Rep. Newcastle is tougher to pick out a single star between Rutherford, Veitch, Howie, and McWilliam. I would also give Piendibene serious thought as the first great South American.

I would go with

1) Crompton (English rep, record cap holder until 1952 best Fullback of his time)
2) Woodward (Record English scorer until 1956, playing with both amateurs and pros helps also)
3) Bobby Walker (Scotland's record cap holder until 1931 and possibly the most stylish brilliant player in Britain during this time)
4) Schlosser (as the best continental player rising up in the absence of English football around WWI)
5) Piendibene (The first great South American player)

I don't see a single Newcastle player that fits, they seemed more of a complete team.

 

Looking back, I'm going to align with both @Pipiolo and @Tom Stevens and plump for 1920 as our starting year. It makes logical sense, with 3 major tournaments and the resumption of league play.

WIth that in mind, I've some initial proposals:

1) Billy Meredith - Aged 45, helped Wales to the British Home Championship title. A suitable first recepient of the award, not only for this season but for career recognition as well.

2) Fred Morris - Scored 37 goals for league champions West Brom, who set a new record with 104 goals. They were dominant in the league, winning by 9 points (16 if it were 3 points for a win), and scoring a new high of 104 goals, so deserve a representative.

After those two, you have Uruguay winning the South American Championship and featuring a 6-0 drubbing of Brazil, so we need someone from here. Angel Romano perhaps?

Also the Olympics took place, with Belgium triumphing. Robert Coppee appears to be the Belgian stand out and Herbert Carlsson was top scorer, including 5 in one match.

 

I hadn't recalled earlier whether Tom had put Friedenreich in his top 3 for 1921 on the FIFA Ballon d'Or replication thread, and he has.

I went to have a look if he'd done so for Kalman Konrad actually (not quite, but prominently mentioned still) - his impact in Austria and particularly his dribbling seems well documented and praised, and the Austrian Cup Final of 1921 was probably quite a big game - it doesn't seem clear to me what role he played in the Final itself or even the cup run altogether, or whether his form was better than in 1919/20 or similar at least. Perhaps he's one to consider anyway.

I know Tom's criteria will differ slightly from what we need to look at here (with some decent overlap) although I shouldn't think it should be a surprise if for the very early years (from 1921, EDIT: or 1920) we end up with quite a few of the same names featuring heavily.

 

Meredith and Piendibene (possibly best Uruguay player for SAC) could already be named in the legacy group and would be ineligible.

I also might leaning towards Pennington over Morris as he has the story of being a great player before the war and then coming back and winning the league in a dominant fashion after the war. He also set the record for England's oldest capped player.

Orth I think is a strong pick for this year, as is Pesek.

Coppe or Swartenbroeks as a Belguim rep.

 

It depends how we want to approach it. In theory, the legacy group would be named at the same time so they could be eligible for the yearly lists. I'm happy with either approach however.

This works for me.

We need a Belgian rep, and can easily go with either.

 

Without wanting to jump ahead too much, I think that there's one shoe-in for 1921 who would not likely get serious consideration for 1920. Andrew Wilson scored 4 of Scotland's 7 goals in the Home Nations, including the game winning goal in every match.

 

An interesting consideration is that probably the 1920 (seems we're going with that if comme confirms it seems fine) selections would be being made at the same time (if we put ourselves back in real time in theory) as the preliminary selections.

Maybe that would play a part in deciding re: Piendibene (might one of comme's suggestions get in as he can be put in the 1920 selection, or alternatively others lanman/Tom have named for that year if he and even Orth too went in for the period ending in 1919; or it could be someone like Ohaco would get in for that instead of Piendibene with the rationale he can be selected for the current year).

Just thought I'd mention it as it's the one time such leeway could apply I'd think.

I'm wondering how far away Tinsley Lindley would have been away from consideration for the first or second period, just out of interest; rather than suggesting he should be in (I don't think he will have slipped comme/Tom's minds or anything).

 

Just to add, I have no objections to any of the names put forward for the first 3 periods. I'd be happy with most combinations from them.

 

@peterhrt what are your thoughts on the first three periods?

 

Yes, sorry, I see my thought is a duplicate now (I took longer to convey it!). I do think there might reasonably be a tendency to err on the side of picking 'finished' players in the legacy selection as opposed to players in their primes (especially if a year can already be assessed so it's not based on predicted form) but it might depend on how many great candidates there were for 1920 itself and/or how clearly a player like Piendibene would be deemed to be making the list of 5 for the period ending in 1919 (obviously comme didn't originally have him in, and Tom hasn't seemed to indicate he'd be a clear number 1 or something).

 

.....also on how Piendibene's form compared in 1920 to before of course (maybe Tom means, unlike Orth, Piendibene was past his best by then, and he wasn't the Uruguayan lanman mentioned with Meredith either)

.....but it seems he was Player of the Tournament in the Copa America at least (like Friedenreich the year before)

 

Thoughts for the first period.

In mid-1888 one can envisage Wisden's editor reflecting back twenty years on Queen's Park; the early FA Cup; Scotland's dominance over England in internationals; the introduction of professionalism in England (with migrant Scots to the fore); and the amateur backlash.

Kinnaird personified the FA Cup. Charlie Campbell and Arnott were Queen's Park's finest. Campbell featured when Queen's Park and Scotland were at their most dominant, first showing what could be achieved with teamwork. Arnott was in mid-career in 1888 and international results had evened up. His last appearance against England during this period was a 5-0 home defeat.

Nick Ross was the greatest of the early professionals, although Englishman Jimmy Forrest enjoyed more success, winning three successive FA Cups with Blackburn Rovers, the first three by a team with paid players in it. Forrest had featured in two draws and one defeat for England against Scotland by 1888, as England began to turn the tide, but he missed the 5-0 victory.

Amateur Cobbold played in the same three internationals against Scotland, also scoring in an earlier defeat and missing the victory. But his main impact was in the amateur Corinthians FC challenge matches against Forrest's Blackburn, where Corinthians came out very much on top. Looking back now, it is easy to see Corinthians representing a peripheral, unofficial, vainglorious and ultimately futile movement against professionalism. At the time it would have been seen as more than that: a class battle every bit as important as the national one between England and Scotland. Wisden would certainly have viewed it that way, and there is no doubt that it would have come down firmly on the side of the amateurs, just as it did with cricket.

In 1888 “Nuts” Cobbold would have been Wisden's standard-bearer; aristocrat Kinnaird its hero of a golden past when amateurs ruled unchallenged. Charlie Campbell's prominence in the two great early teams would be recognised. And the other two names would probably be Ross and Forrest. Replacing Forrest with another Scot would leave only one English representative of Victorian Britain, and Wisden would never stand for that.

 

I would list Jose Piendibene for 1920 as the best player for Uruguay. Other important players at the South American tournament were Angel Romano and Americo Tesoriere.

@msioux75

 

By 1904 Wisden would have accepted the professionals more readily but the first name on its list would still be GO Smith, the greatest of all amateur footballers. The fact that he was a good cricketer as well would make his selection even more certain. One feels that Needham, another handy cricketer incidentally, would also be chosen.

The outstanding club sides between 1888 and 1904 were Preston and Aston Villa. Preston were a hard-nosed team who knew how to win, and very much a team. Villa had more outstanding individuals and I agree with Tom that James Cowan should be one of the five selected. He also provides a deserved Scottish presence in an era that was very strong for England.

Nick Ross was Preston's best player. If he makes the list for the previous era, then John Goodall is a sound choice. Goodall's good form for England continued after his move to Derby.

I think the remaining place would go to Bloomer. He would not be Wisden's favourite kind of footballer. But the Gibson and Pickford assessment, recently posted by comme, reveals that Bloomer's goalscoring came eventually to be accepted as something of an art, rather than just the business of providing the finishing touches to someone else's work. Also his reputation has outlived those of his contemporaries.

 

1904-1920 is more difficult.

Meredith is probably the best British footballer over the period. Although one can imagine Wisden championing his cause, I personally wouldn't pick Woodward. Too many of his international goals were against weak opponents and too much of his domestic football took place in lower leagues.

There should be a Scottish presence and, like Tom, I would be inclined to go for Bobby Walker. In the past I looked in vain for a particularly good year for him (Hearts did not win many trophies), but he seems to have been consistently good over a long period and his 29 appearances for Scotland are easily the most for anybody before 1914.

Of the remaining candidates, comme and Tom both have Crompton and Schlosser. Comme then chooses Hardy (we haven't had a goalkeeper yet though Tom mentioned Doig) while Tom goes for Piendibene. All these seem valid. So is Friedenreich, who by 1920 had already been Paulista leading scorer five times and had won the Copa America.

I would probably pick one Englishman, Crompton or Hardy. Then two of Friedenreich, Piendibene and Schlosser.

If we want a goalie in the first fifteen then Hardy. Otherwise Crompton. And maybe save Friedenreich for later.

 

I would definitely take Piendibene over Friedenreich as the South American rep for this period. All of the sources that are from that period or shortly thereafter name him as the top player of his era. Piendibene had 30 caps before 1920, Friedenreich only had 11, with his first major impact in 1919.

Another interesting point brought up by peterhrt's analysis is do we want to try to replicate Wisden's method or do we also want to try to replicate what we think that type of organization would have selected?

 

I agree with Meredith for sure, left him out somehow. @peterhrt d you have any thoughts on who the best Newcastle rep would be if one wanted to go that route?

 

I vote for 1920 for the starting year, too.

The reasons behind Tom's suggestions are very strong, much more whether the retrospective awards should reflect the main topics in their era. But it's hard to leave out players as Bloomer in the second era or Meredith in the third era.

btw, talking about 1920. If Piendibene is named as honorific member, then Romano will be the South American option for this first year.

For Belgium, my vote will be for Swartenbroeks, who had the greater recognition among Red Devils.
The czech "Kada" is a strong candidate too.

 

For this period, McWilliam, Veitch or Howie. McWilliam played 8 internationals for Scotland; Veitch 6 for England (union activities didn't help), and Howie 3 for Scotland.

McWilliam and Veitch were in the all-time British XI Ivan Sharpe put together in 1952. But so were Hardy, Crompton, Pennington and Charlie Roberts from this time. "Gentleman Jim" Howie ticks the sportsmanship box.

There is not much to choose between the three. McWilliam may be narrowly ahead.

 

To summarize proposed candidates

The Amateur Era (Before 1888)

Arthur Kinnaird
W. N. Cobbold
Walter Arnott
Nick Ross
Billy MacKinnon
Charles Campbell
George Ker
John Smith
Henry McNeil
Jimmy Forrest
Archie Hunter
Charlie Bambridge

The Early League Era (From 1888 to 1904, when FIFA was founded)

Steve Bloomer
G.O. Smith
John Goodall
Ernest Needham
Billy Bassett
James Cowan
Alex Smith
Neil Gibson

The Early International Era (From 1904 to 1920)

Billy Meredith
Vivian Woodward
Imre Schlosser
Bob Crompton
Sam Hardy
Jose Piendibene
Arthur Friedenreich
Colin Veitch
Peter McWilliam
James Howie
Charlie Thomson
Bobby Walker