Argentina 78: a reappraisal

[Gordon EF]

Wasn't even close to being born in 78 but obviously part of what makes it seem like a total f**k up was the quality of the squad we had and the expectation going into the tournament.

From what I've heard, a large part of it was ignorance about the teams we were facing. Speaking to my dad about it he was saying that people knew Peru were a good team but the feeling was that they were "passed it" because most of the players were the same squad as they had in 1970 and there was a general "who the f**k are they?" feeling about Iran. I think general ignorance about teams from different continents was probably a lot more common back then. You couldn't look up squads and results in the blink of an eye and you tended to only see most teams every 4 years, if they managed to qualify.

The fact that we went and beat Holland in the last game pretty much cements it's place in f**k up history because all that did was highlight what the team was actually capable of. Beating Iran or drawing with Peru would have seen us go through.

We very clearly underestimated Iran and Peru but I don't buy that they were actually great sides that Scotland team couldn't and shouldn't have at least gone one better than in terms of results.

Asian football wasn't exactly strong at the time and Iran got gubbed by Holland and Peru and didn't qualify for another world cup for 20 years. Peru were clearly a good team but they got demolished in the second group stage, 3 defeats, 0 goals and 10 conceded. A draw with them should not have been beyond that Scotland team. And a win against Iran should certainly have been expected. Either result would have put us through.

[nate]

34 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

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?

You’re being silly now. Luck is an imponderable. It comes, it goes. You don’t win international tournaments without a bit of it, because of the number of games required in doing so. And seldom do middle-ranking nations like Scotland qualify for major tournaments without a bit of it too, whether by dint of dodgy refereeing, unforeseen late winners or whatever.

What is “terribly revealing” is your inability to accept that Peru were a better team than us, despite the historical facts staring you in the face. That’s why they were seeded above us and that’s why they won the Group. Simple. Facts trump opinions. I suggest you remove your head from the sand and stop deluding yourself with the notion that our 78 squad was better than it actually was (and ultimately proved to be). They were a bunch of decent international players but no more than that, propelled into an extremely tough WC Group. I think they did rather well down there, given the squad’s limitations.

[craigkillie]

Definitely a troll rather than a serious discussion then.

[nate]

8 hours ago, Arabdownunder said:

A few years ago I worked with an Argentinian from Cordoba who was a teenager in 78. When he found out I was from Scotland he started laughing and told me the Scottish players were notorious around town for being out on the piss every night during the world cup 

At least it won’t happen in bevvy-averse Qatar. Double mint teas, anyone?

[Meldrew]

On 27/11/2021 at 16:32, nate said:

All this excitable chat about imminent WC qualification got me digging into past tourneys. Something baffles me. It always has. Why, exactly, is Argentina 78 dismissed as a calamity, if not our international nadir? It certainly can’t be because of results at that tournament. We claimed a creditable 50% of the available points, a feat bettered only ONCE in 11 WC & EC qualifications. What’s more, our group was excruciating, containing as it did…

1) Holland: reigning WC finalists, and heading for another final weeks after playing us, and generally regarded as the best team never to win the damn thing. That’s a mighty tough opponent by any reckoning.

2) Peru: reigning South American champions, no less. Anyone with even a thin knowledge of football knows you don’t get to be top dogs down there without being a bit special.

3) Iran: they’d been Asian champions for about 10 years and were undefeated in 14 qualifiers for the 78 tournament ( they won 12 of these matches, says Wiki)

This is the equivalent of us reaching Qatar and drawing the likes of Croatia, Argentina and whoever No.1 in Asia currently is. How would we fancy our chances against that kind of trio?

If there’s a candidate for worst showing at a Finals it should be France 98, not Argentina 78 ( ancient World Cups in the 1950s aside)

I suspect the reason why 78 is held up as a so-called disaster has more to do with good old Scottish ignorance and parochialism - uniformed hacks feeding rubbish to even less informed punters - than what actually happened on the pitch down there. 
Come to think of it, Euro 2020 might even top France 98 for pish results.

Next time someone insists Argentina 78 was the pits, you can argue otherwise.

Or am I missing something?

Over to you, old timers!

not very fair to come at this with a modern day education, there was nowhere near the attention to detail we give to other teams today and while you try and make an equivalent for Qatar, Scotland in 78 would be a present day Belgium.

[nate]

22 minutes ago, Meldrew said:

not very fair to come at this with a modern day education, there was nowhere near the attention to detail we give to other teams today and while you try and make an equivalent for Qatar, Scotland in 78 would be a present day Belgium.

Why would Scotland in 78 be a present day Belgium ? (World Cup semi-finalists last time out and the best team in the world if FIFA’s ranking system is anywhere near accurate).

[Insert Amusing Pseudonym]

We'd lost 5 of 31 games in the 3 year run up to the tournament.

England twice, East Germany away, Brazil away, Czechoslovakia away.

We beat England home and away,  knocked the European Champions out in qualifying, and had went on a successful (football wise if not PR wise)tour of South America including a draw with Argentina in a game that was anything but friendly.

The squad (ludicrous claims about European football being a significantly lower level than international football at the time aside) was full of players who were playing at the top of European football

We'd finished unbeaten in 1974.

But aye, we had no right to expect to beat an Iran team who shipped 7 goals in their other 2 games

Loads went wrong, but it should have been a very good team and the tournament was a disaster.

 

[nate]

2 hours ago, Insert Amusing Pseudonym said:

We'd lost 5 of 31 games in the 3 year run up to the tournament.

England twice, East Germany away, Brazil away, Czechoslovakia away.

We beat England home and away,  knocked the European Champions out in qualifying, and had went on a successful (football wise if not PR wise)tour of South America including a draw with Argentina in a game that was anything but friendly.

The squad (ludicrous claims about European football being a significantly lower level than international football at the time aside) was full of players who were playing at the top of European football

We'd finished unbeaten in 1974.

But aye, we had no right to expect to beat an Iran team who shipped 7 goals in their other 2 games

Loads went wrong, but it should have been a very good team and the tournament was a disaster.

 

I see you’ve snuck in double digit Friendlies into that opening stat. Friendlies are worthless as a form guide. Everyone knows that. They’re used for tactical tinkering, blooding youngsters, fitness generators etc. You’ve also cited another Friendly ( 1-1 v Argentina) as some kind of prop for your argument. A draw with the future World Champions sounds mightily impressive, until you see the team they started with against us, only 4 of whom began v Holland in the WC final a year later. That’s not to say an away draw with Argentina’s second or third string is without merit, but it wasn’t the real deal of competitive international football. It was a warm up. A chance to experiment. It might have been a blood’n’snotters spectacle but it was still a Friendly.

Finishing unbeaten in 1974 is irrelevant to Argentina 78. There was a huge rebuild going on. Only 6 of the 74 squad made it to Argentina. Not to mention a different manager with a different tactical philosophy, such as it was.

You’ve also included a raft of Home International fixtures in your opening stat. I’m not sure these annual battles are useful for gauging our quality on the wider and more taxing global stage back then. Beating Northern Ireland every 2 or 3 years was hardly the stuff of legend. Even big bad England were rotten during the period in question. They qualified for nothing in the 70s. Papped out of 4 consecutive tourneys at the Group stages. But despite England’s rankness, our mindset back then appears to have been…well, if we’re beating England then we must be REALLY good. I enjoy stuffing England as much as the next man, but that kind of thinking was wrongheaded. The Wembley 77 win probably started all this Argentina bravado in the first place. The Home Internationals were a Trojan Horse of self-delusion.

A more reliable gauge of our form and likely chances prior to Argentina 78 is to start from the 1976 Euro qualifiers and take it from there, focusing on the real stuff of competitive matches against European opposition. Our record was averagely decent. About a 50% win rate. Admittedly, during this relevant period we only beat one top rated side (Czechoslovakia) Apart from that there was really nothing much else to shout about. There wasn’t much else to shout about after Argentina either, finishing 2nd bottom of a 5-team Group with more or less the same bunch of players in the 78 squad. I think that’s telling us something.

If, as you seem to be suggesting, having players enjoying club success in Europe during the 70s was an indicator of a national team’s likely worth, then how come England’s most barren international streak in their entire history coincided with their clubs marauding to about 10 or more European finals at the same time? It doesn’t compute. If this kind of logic held water, then how could Scotland possibly fail to qualify for anything in the 1960s, despite all those Scots boasting European Cup medals? ( Celtic, Man U). The reason is because the gulf between club and international football in the 70s was indeed vast.

IRAN: Yes, we should have beaten them, because we had the superior ranking, which also means we had superior players. I have never claimed anything otherwise. I merely pointed out that there was an historical precedent for a written-off Asian nation causing an almighty WC upset, and getting to the QFs in the process.

We were seeded 3rd in our 78 Group and that’s exactly where we finished. That’s a glaringly obvious indicator that we performed to expectations, no more no less (in the same way that we recently exceeded expectations by finishing 2nd in our WC qualifying section). And by “expectations” I mean the real-world fact-based objective ranking/seeding system, not the expectations of a heart-ruling-the-head hunch that appears to be responsible for some folks’ curious idea that we were much better in the mid-to late 70s than we actually were.

[Meldrew]

6 hours ago, nate said:

Why would Scotland in 78 be a present day Belgium ? (World Cup semi-finalists last time out and the best team in the world if FIFA’s ranking system is anywhere near accurate).

because we were as good as anything around on our day and won f**k all, just like Belgium.

 

who gives a f**k about their semi finals, Turkey & South Korea have both featured at that stage, and FIFA rankings are wildly flawed, or are you telling me that the United States are actually the 12th best team in the world and very close to switching places with 11th placed Germany ?

[craigkillie]

Games in 1974 are irrelevant (except when it's how teams performed at the 1974 World Cup) but the 1975 Copa America is hugely relevant.

[Marlow]

Doomed to get off to a bad start defensively in the critical opening match from before the start of the tournament: Danny McGrain and Gordon McQueen being injured were massive, massive blows. Then for the Peru game, Sandy Jardine was also injured and Willie Donnachie was suspended. This meant the inexperienced Stuart Kennedy, good player though he was, was our only available fullback (McLeod and the SFA had taken Gordon McQueen even though all the medics had said he'd never be fit for any stage of the tournament so the squad was minus a defender) and the great Martin Buchan was forced to play at left back for the only time in his career. Rioch wasn't match fit and he and Masson had been off form for months. Bud Johnson was a moron waiting to erupt into a dumpster fire. And all this against the South American champions playing in South America. The team probably put on a better performance against Peru than they should have, actually.

Souness should have been brought in for the second game - I can just about understand McLeod's loyalty to Masson, a very, very talented player, for the first game, but no real playmaker in the second match was idiotic.

Kind of agree 82 squad should have done better - more talented and sensible with a legendary manager, however, he made some really poor choices in Spain.

 

 

 

 

[Insert Amusing Pseudonym]

4 hours ago, nate said:

I see you’ve snuck in double digit Friendlies into that opening stat. Friendlies are worthless as a form guide. Everyone knows that. They’re used for tactical tinkering, blooding youngsters, fitness generators etc. You’ve also cited another Friendly ( 1-1 v Argentina) as some kind of prop for your argument. A draw with the future World Champions sounds mightily impressive, until you see the team they started with against us, only 4 of whom began v Holland in the WC final a year later. That’s not to say an away draw with Argentina’s second or third string is without merit, but it wasn’t the real deal of competitive international football. It was a warm up. A chance to experiment. It might have been a blood’n’snotters spectacle but it was still a Friendly.

Finishing unbeaten in 1974 is irrelevant to Argentina 78. There was a huge rebuild going on. Only 6 of the 74 squad made it to Argentina. Not to mention a different manager with a different tactical philosophy, such as it was.

You’ve also included a raft of Home International fixtures in your opening stat. I’m not sure these annual battles are useful for gauging our quality on the wider and more taxing global stage back then. Beating Northern Ireland every 2 or 3 years was hardly the stuff of legend. Even big bad England were rotten during the period in question. They qualified for nothing in the 70s. Papped out of 4 consecutive tourneys at the Group stages. But despite England’s rankness, our mindset back then appears to have been…well, if we’re beating England then we must be REALLY good. I enjoy stuffing England as much as the next man, but that kind of thinking was wrongheaded. The Wembley 77 win probably started all this Argentina bravado in the first place. The Home Internationals were a Trojan Horse of self-delusion.

A more reliable gauge of our form and likely chances prior to Argentina 78 is to start from the 1976 Euro qualifiers and take it from there, focusing on the real stuff of competitive matches against European opposition. Our record was averagely decent. About a 50% win rate. Admittedly, during this relevant period we only beat one top rated side (Czechoslovakia) Apart from that there was really nothing much else to shout about. There wasn’t much else to shout about after Argentina either, finishing 2nd bottom of a 5-team Group with more or less the same bunch of players in the 78 squad. I think that’s telling us something.

If, as you seem to be suggesting, having players enjoying club success in Europe during the 70s was an indicator of a national team’s likely worth, then how come England’s most barren international streak in their entire history coincided with their clubs marauding to about 10 or more European finals at the same time? It doesn’t compute. If this kind of logic held water, then how could Scotland possibly fail to qualify for anything in the 1960s, despite all those Scots boasting European Cup medals? ( Celtic, Man U). The reason is because the gulf between club and international football in the 70s was indeed vast.

IRAN: Yes, we should have beaten them, because we had the superior ranking, which also means we had superior players. I have never claimed anything otherwise. I merely pointed out that there was an historical precedent for a written-off Asian nation causing an almighty WC upset, and getting to the QFs in the process.

We were seeded 3rd in our 78 Group and that’s exactly where we finished. That’s a glaringly obvious indicator that we performed to expectations, no more no less (in the same way that we recently exceeded expectations by finishing 2nd in our WC qualifying section). And by “expectations” I mean the real-world fact-based objective ranking/seeding system, not the expectations of a heart-ruling-the-head hunch that appears to be responsible for some folks’ curious idea that we were much better in the mid-to late 70s than we actually were.

England in 72 were beaten by the winners in the quarter finals, 74 they were knocked out by a Poland team that finished 3rd in the world Cup, 76 they lost out in the group stage to the winners and 78 they were knocked out by Italy who finished 4th.

Qualification was far more hazardous for the big teams in those days and plenty of top teams missed out on world cups and the euros cause the draw was far more open than it is now.

Friendlies certainly weren't the tinker fests you get now, ridiculous to suggest that.  Far less subs and international football was still seen as the pinnacle of the game rather then the inconvenience to clubs it is now.

As for Scotland in the 60s - beat off the eventual winners in a playoff for the 62 World Cup, didn't enter the 64 Euros, lost out to Italy (who went on to win the 68 euros and do pretty well at the 70 World Cup) in 66 qualifying and we blew qualifying for the 68 euros despite beating the reigning world champions away.  Fine margins on all them - certainly no lack of quality in those teams.

Facts are while there was some overhyping of our overall prospects in 78 - we had a disaster of a tournament when we should have got out the group as a minimum.  74 is relevant to our expectations, because the 78 team went in looking far better than the 74 team had (1973 was an absolute horror show).

[Thane of Cawdor]

 

This was the Scottish squad in 1978. It would take some degree of hubris to believe that these guys could win a World Cup. All decent players at club level, but Souness and Dalglish the only two approaching world class. Those two would be the only candidates from that squad to be anywhere near the 100 best Scotland internationals of all time.

The mad hype at the time was as much the gallus swagger of 'here's tae us, wha's like us' as any genuine belief that we would win the World Cup.

Scotland's World Cup squad 1978

 

                                  D.O.B.        CLUB                       WC
      1 GK Alan Rough             25 Nov 1951   Partick Thistle
      2 DF Sandy Jardine          31 Dec 1948   Glasgow Rangers            1974
      3 DF William Donachie       05 Oct 1951   Manchester City (ENG)      1974
      4 DF Martin Buchan          06 Mar 1949   Manchester United (ENG)    1974
      5 DF Gordon McQueen         26 Jun 1952   Manchester United (ENG)    1974
      6 MD Bruce Rioch            06 Sep 1947   Derby County (ENG)
      7 MD Don Masson             26 Aug 1949   Notts County (ENG)
      8 FW Kenny Dalglish         04 Mar 1951   Liverpool (ENG)            1974
      9 FW Joe Jordan             15 Dec 1951   Manchester United (ENG)    1974
     10 MD Asa Hartford           24 Oct 1950   Manchester City (ENG)
     11 MD Willie Johnston        19 Dec 1946   West Bromwich Albion (ENG)
     12 GK Jim Blyth              02 Feb 1955   Coventry City (ENG)
     13 DF Stuart Kennedy         31 May 1953   Aberdeen
     14 DF Thomas Forsyth         23 Jan 1949   Glasgow Rangers
     15 MD Archie Gemmill         24 Mar 1947   Nottingham Forest (ENG)
     16 FW Lou Macari             07 Jun 1949   Manchester United (ENG)
     17 FW Derek Johnstone        04 Nov 1953   Glasgow Rangers
     18 MD Graeme Souness         06 May 1953   Liverpool (ENG)
     19 FW John Robertson         20 Jan 1953   Nottingham Forest (ENG)
     20 GK Bobby Clark            26 Sep 1945   Aberdeen
     21 FW Joe Harper             11 Jan 1948   Aberdeen
     22 DF Kenny Burns            23 Sep 1953   Nottingham Forest (ENG)

 

 

 

 

Edited November 29, 2021 by Thane of Cawdor
Repetitive text

[qos_75]

If anyone is after a book on the topic, Archie’s one is a great read. 

 

 

[Insert Amusing Pseudonym]

20 minutes ago, Thane of Cawdor said:

 

This was the Scottish squad in 1978. It would take some degree of hubris to believe that these guys could win a World Cup. All decent players at club level, but Souness and Dalglish the only two approaching world class. Those two would be the only candidates from that squad to be anywhere near the 100 best Scotland internationals of all time.

The mad hype at the time was as much the gallus swagger of 'here's tae us, wha's like us' as any genuine belief that we would win the World Cup.

Scotland's World Cup squad 1978

 

                                  D.O.B.        CLUB                       WC
      1 GK Alan Rough             25 Nov 1951   Partick Thistle
      2 DF Sandy Jardine          31 Dec 1948   Glasgow Rangers            1974
      3 DF William Donachie       05 Oct 1951   Manchester City (ENG)      1974
      4 DF Martin Buchan          06 Mar 1949   Manchester United (ENG)    1974
      5 DF Gordon McQueen         26 Jun 1952   Manchester United (ENG)    1974
      6 MD Bruce Rioch            06 Sep 1947   Derby County (ENG)
      7 MD Don Masson             26 Aug 1949   Notts County (ENG)
      8 FW Kenny Dalglish         04 Mar 1951   Liverpool (ENG)            1974
      9 FW Joe Jordan             15 Dec 1951   Manchester United (ENG)    1974
     10 MD Asa Hartford           24 Oct 1950   Manchester City (ENG)
     11 MD Willie Johnston        19 Dec 1946   West Bromwich Albion (ENG)
     12 GK Jim Blyth              02 Feb 1955   Coventry City (ENG)
     13 DF Stuart Kennedy         31 May 1953   Aberdeen
     14 DF Thomas Forsyth         23 Jan 1949   Glasgow Rangers
     15 MD Archie Gemmill         24 Mar 1947   Nottingham Forest (ENG)
     16 FW Lou Macari             07 Jun 1949   Manchester United (ENG)
     17 FW Derek Johnstone        04 Nov 1953   Glasgow Rangers
     18 MD Graeme Souness         06 May 1953   Liverpool (ENG)
     19 FW John Robertson         20 Jan 1953   Nottingham Forest (ENG)
     20 GK Bobby Clark            26 Sep 1945   Aberdeen
     21 FW Joe Harper             11 Jan 1948   Aberdeen
     22 DF Kenny Burns            23 Sep 1953   Nottingham Forest (ENG)

 

 

 

 

Cool, literally 10 off them were in the top 50 best Scottish players of all time poll the BBC ran recently, and Danny McGrain would have been had he made it.

You can argue the merits of that list, but claiming Jardine, McQueen, Buchan, Robertson and Jordan wouldn't be top 100 candidates is blatant nonsense

 

[Monkey Tennis]

26 minutes ago, Thane of Cawdor said:

 

This was the Scottish squad in 1978. It would take some degree of hubris to believe that these guys could win a World Cup. All decent players at club level, but Souness and Dalglish the only two approaching world class. Those two would be the only candidates from that squad to be anywhere near the 100 best Scotland internationals of all time.

The mad hype at the time was as much the gallus swagger of 'here's tae us, wha's like us' as any genuine belief that we would win the World Cup.

Scotland's World Cup squad 1978

 

                                  D.O.B.        CLUB                       WC
      1 GK Alan Rough             25 Nov 1951   Partick Thistle
      2 DF Sandy Jardine          31 Dec 1948   Glasgow Rangers            1974
      3 DF William Donachie       05 Oct 1951   Manchester City (ENG)      1974
      4 DF Martin Buchan          06 Mar 1949   Manchester United (ENG)    1974
      5 DF Gordon McQueen         26 Jun 1952   Manchester United (ENG)    1974
      6 MD Bruce Rioch            06 Sep 1947   Derby County (ENG)
      7 MD Don Masson             26 Aug 1949   Notts County (ENG)
      8 FW Kenny Dalglish         04 Mar 1951   Liverpool (ENG)            1974
      9 FW Joe Jordan             15 Dec 1951   Manchester United (ENG)    1974
     10 MD Asa Hartford           24 Oct 1950   Manchester City (ENG)
     11 MD Willie Johnston        19 Dec 1946   West Bromwich Albion (ENG)
     12 GK Jim Blyth              02 Feb 1955   Coventry City (ENG)
     13 DF Stuart Kennedy         31 May 1953   Aberdeen
     14 DF Thomas Forsyth         23 Jan 1949   Glasgow Rangers
     15 MD Archie Gemmill         24 Mar 1947   Nottingham Forest (ENG)
     16 FW Lou Macari             07 Jun 1949   Manchester United (ENG)
     17 FW Derek Johnstone        04 Nov 1953   Glasgow Rangers
     18 MD Graeme Souness         06 May 1953   Liverpool (ENG)
     19 FW John Robertson         20 Jan 1953   Nottingham Forest (ENG)
     20 GK Bobby Clark            26 Sep 1945   Aberdeen
     21 FW Joe Harper             11 Jan 1948   Aberdeen
     22 DF Kenny Burns            23 Sep 1953   Nottingham Forest (ENG)

 

 

 

 

When did Masson re-join Notts County?  I'd thought he was still playing for Derby at the time of the World Cup.

[Thane of Cawdor]

27 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

When did Masson re-join Notts County?  I'd thought he was still playing for Derby at the time of the World Cup.

Just goes to show - I thought he was at QPR at the time.

[Thane of Cawdor]

36 minutes ago, Insert Amusing Pseudonym said:

Cool, literally 10 off them were in the top 50 best Scottish players of all time poll the BBC ran recently, and Danny McGrain would have been had he made it.

You can argue the merits of that list, but claiming Jardine, McQueen, Buchan, Robertson and Jordan wouldn't be top 100 candidates is blatant nonsense

 

Of course they would be candidates since they played international football for Scotland, but they wouldn't/shouldn't be successful . Scotland have played international football since 1872, I wonder what era the electorate came from - and their team affiliations. It also becomes complicated if you allocate nine places for each position which I don't suppose the poll did. I am reminded of Andy Robertson presenting a signed Liverpool strip to some Scouse kid who gave his pocket money to a local food bank. He got Firmino to sign the shirt on the grounds that no-one wants the left back's strip. 

[Monkey Tennis]

46 minutes ago, Thane of Cawdor said:

Just goes to show - I thought he was at QPR at the time.

He left QPR for Derby in October 1977, then moved on to Notts County in August 1978.  I think he had a pretty awful time with Tommy Docherty at Derby.  He was obviously still with them at the time of the World Cup in June.  The Peru game with the penalty miss was his last cap.

[Insert Amusing Pseudonym]

1 hour ago, Thane of Cawdor said:

Of course they would be candidates since they played international football for Scotland, but they wouldn't/shouldn't be successful . Scotland have played international football since 1872, I wonder what era the electorate came from - and their team affiliations. It also becomes complicated if you allocate nine places for each position which I don't suppose the poll did. I am reminded of Andy Robertson presenting a signed Liverpool strip to some Scouse kid who gave his pocket money to a local food bank. He got Firmino to sign the shirt on the grounds that no-one wants the left back's strip. 

Right, so our 9th best goalkeeper should be in the top 100 in the interests of fairness?

Come on