Jump to content

Argentina 78: a reappraisal


nate

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, lubo_blaha said:

The squad had 15 players playing for top 12 teams in England that season including 9 in the top 6. The remaining players (aside from Alan Rough) played for Rangers and Aberdeen, the top 2 in Scotland and both European trophy winners within a few years of the World Cup. Admittedly I wasn’t born at the time but was the squad really that overhyped?

England had a squad full of top English-based players and didn't even qualify.

I think there is validity to argument; but equally a squad of world champion material couldn't have failed to win any Home Nations after 1977... finished behind Spain + Romania in Euro 76 qualifying... finished 2nd-bottom behind Belgium + Austria + Portugal in Euro 80 qualifying... etc. etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a danger in equating what having loads of players at big English clubs meant then, with what it would now.

Even the very top English sides were essentially picked from the best players in the British Isles.  These clubs competed against others reliant pretty much on home grown players, in European competitions.

That's very different from the World Selects that such sides basically amount to now.

Even in such terms though, Scotland was overrepresented and clearly did produce relatively huge numbers of very capable players.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said:

England had a squad full of top English-based players and didn't even qualify.

I think there is validity to argument; but equally a squad of world champion material couldn't have failed to win any Home Nations after 1977... finished behind Spain + Romania in Euro 76 qualifying... finished 2nd-bottom behind Belgium + Austria + Portugal in Euro 80 qualifying... etc. etc.

Yes it's easily forgotten in the all conquering Premier League era but back then the English league was not levels above most other established football countries (although their clubs did have an extraordinary run of success in the European Cup).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a danger in equating what having loads of players at big English clubs meant then, with what it would now.
Even the very top English sides were essentially picked from the best players in the British Isles.  These clubs competed against others reliant pretty much on home grown players, in European competitions.
That's very different from the World Selects that such sides basically amount to now.
Even in such terms though, Scotland was overrepresented and clearly did produce relatively huge numbers of very capable players.  


Appreciate the world football landscape was completely different back then, but we still had players at some of the best teams in Europe. The World Cup came at a time when English sides won the European Cup 6 years in a row and there were a good few Liverpool and Forest players in the Scotland squad.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Uncle Scan said:

MCLeod perfered midfield were out of form by the time Argentina came around. Sourness was under used and McGovern wasn't even selected as McLeod didn't know he was Scottish. That took a phone call from Clough who wanted to know why his Captain wasn't even considered. 

Absolutely this, Souness should have started every game. McLeod fell into the age old trap of being over loyal to players who had delivered in the past.

That said if Masson had scored that penalty v Peru we might not be having this discussion today.

I'm not saying we'd have won the thing but we really should've reached the second phase.

 

Edited by Lurkst
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, BFTD said:

I don't know if it had any effect on the lasting view of our performance at the tournament, but it probably didn't help that Peru lost all three games in the next round, didn't score a goal, and shipped six goals to Argentina. There must have been a few folk thinking that they'd been shite after all.

To be fair, Peru losing 6 goals to Argentina, had nothing to do with football and everything to do with an evil Junta cancelling debt and sending a large grain shipment to an impoverished country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lurkst said:

No longer on the iplayer but it's on YouTube :) 

 

That was good to watch again.

It's clear that McLeod got a lot wrong.  We were relying on winging it in a way that even then, must surely have been unusual at such a level.

It was quite moving when his wife was talking about watching him out there on TV though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, lubo_blaha said:

 


Appreciate the world football landscape was completely different back then, but we still had players at some of the best teams in Europe. The World Cup came at a time when English sides won the European Cup 6 years in a row and there were a good few Liverpool and Forest players in the Scotland squad.

 

Three Scots , including Des Bremner , when Villa won it although one of the others did not cover themselves in glory international wise

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lurkst said:

Absolutely this, Souness should have started every game. McLeod fell into the age old trap of being over loyal to players who had delivered in the past.

That said if Masson had scored that penalty v Peru we might not be having this discussion today.

I

 

You are forgetting the drugs test. They might have deducted us points

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ewan8472 said:

Three Scots , including Des Bremner , when Villa won it although one of the others did not cover themselves in glory international wise

1 cap between them 

3 scots in a current European champion would have 250

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

Yes, because generally all the players in the European champions have to be good now, whereas back in the day teams had a few good players and lots of average ones.

They were all good 

They beat bayern munich in the final 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Monkey Tennis said:

You're overdoing this.

Peru were indeed South American Champions, but they'd won it back In 1975.  Brazil and Argentina had been in the same group, meaning only one progressed.  Peru got past Brazil by the drawing of lots.  Obviously they were a decent side who we probably did underestimate.  I think the 'South American Champions' tag perhaps paints a slightly misleading picture though.  They did indeed fare poorly in the subsequent stage.

As for us being overrated, there may be something in that.  I think we did have weaknesses in a couple of key positions.  However, we also had some really good players, a few of whom had either just won the title in England, or the European Cup.  A school of thought says we peaked the previous year when winning the Home Internationals and touring South America.  Again though, there was nothing outlandish about thinking we could make an impact.  Our performance against the final bound Dutch would certainly suggest as much.

Your absolute dismissal of the off field factors and their morale sapping effect is a bit daft in truth.  They're well documented and plenty of those involved have highlighted them.

I do agree that it wasn't our worst tournament, but it was a bad one.  What made it worse was vaulting expectation, but the levels of expectation, whilst perhaps a little exaggerated, were not as fanciful as you now wish to claim.

The levels of expectation were mightily fanciful. They were based on nothing more than wishful thinking borne of ignorance. The same squad of players, more or less, at Argentina finished 2nd bottom of our 1976 (and 1980) EC qualifying groups ( or 3rd & 4th if you like). Most of the so-called big hitters that constituted the Argentina squad also played during this period…Dalglish, Jordan, Hartford, Gemmill, Jardine, Buchan etc. Our results were at best mediocre. Our results in the Home Internationals immediately prior to Argentina likewise (winless in the 3 games). Our very participation at Argentina was largely due to The Hand of Joe, it could be argued, particularly by the Welsh. This doesn’t sound like the kind of stuff likely to inspire vaulting expectations, does it? But that’s exactly what happened, and here’s why…

… you’re making the same mistake gullible punters made in 1978: you’re thinking that our players were better than they actually were, on the basis that more than a few of them were successful club players, medals and all. The gulf between club football and International football back then was vast. Dalglish was an example of this truism…he was very rarely more than moderately influential at international level, despite sackfuls of caps and a stellar club career. 

If Peru enjoyed a bit of luck on their way to becoming South American champions, then they would be no different from dozens of others who win tournaments (you’ll also presumably know they won 3-1 away to Brazil during this lucky streak of theirs)They were a damn good side and proved it by winning our Group. They were better than us, no question. It was no disgrace losing to Peru. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other thing that needs reappraising is the thought that we were in any way close to beating the Dutch by the three goals needed to get through the group. Losing to us by less than 3 meant they progressed but dodged Argentina and Brazil in the second stage and that's what they set out to do. They pretty much strolled upfield and pegged it back to a one goal lead shortly after that Gemmill goal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Arabdownunder said:

The other thing that needs reappraising is the thought that we were in any way close to beating the Dutch by the three goals needed to get through the group. Losing to us by less than 3 meant they progressed but dodged Argentina and Brazil in the second stage and that's what they set out to do. They pretty much strolled upfield and pegged it back to a one goal lead shortly after that Gemmill goal. 

Bit silly of them to take the lead against us then, I'd have thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, nate said:

The levels of expectation were mightily fanciful. They were based on nothing more than wishful thinking borne of ignorance. The same squad of players, more or less, at Argentina finished 2nd bottom of our 1976 (and 1980) EC qualifying groups ( or 3rd & 4th if you like). Most of the so-called big hitters that constituted the Argentina squad also played during this period…Dalglish, Jordan, Hartford, Gemmill, Jardine, Buchan etc. Our results were at best mediocre. Our results in the Home Internationals immediately prior to Argentina likewise (winless in the 3 games). Our very participation at Argentina was largely due to The Hand of Joe, it could be argued, particularly by the Welsh. This doesn’t sound like the kind of stuff likely to inspire vaulting expectations, does it? But that’s exactly what happened, and here’s why…

… you’re making the same mistake gullible punters made in 1978: you’re thinking that our players were better than they actually were, on the basis that more than a few of them were successful club players, medals and all. The gulf between club football and International football back then was vast. Dalglish was an example of this truism…he was very rarely more than moderately influential at international level, despite sackfuls of caps and a stellar club career. 

If Peru enjoyed a bit of luck on their way to becoming South American champions, then they would be no different from dozens of others who win tournaments (you’ll also presumably know they won 3-1 away to Brazil during this lucky streak of theirs)They were a damn good side and proved it by winning our Group. They were better than us, no question. It was no disgrace losing to Peru. 

So any fortune Peru enjoyed in becoming South American Champions needs dismissed, yet the luck we benefited from in getting past Wales is terribly revealing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...