The Wunderteams of football history and why they never won a title in their prime
Quincy
The world cup 1934 came a little bit late for them. Two years before
nobody could have stopped them, but in 1934 they were still the best,
but lost the Semifinals against Italy because the refery was
completely on Italy's side because of the the pressure of the Italian
regime.
WC1934 SF: Austria - Italy 0:1
Wunderteam 2: Hungary 1952-1956:
This one was the biggest upset in football history as Hungary was
completely on their prime in 1954. They should beat the German team in
the group stages 8-3, won in QF against Brazil 4-2 and in the SF
against defending champion Uruguay 4-2.
That was happenend in the final though is still unexplicable for most
experts. Many bad things came together. Puskas played even obviously
not 100% fit, the heavy rain, the inredible team spirit of the Germans
and a lot of bad luck.
WC1954 F: Hungary - Germany 2:3
Wunderteam 3: Holland 1973-1974:
1974 was A similar situation to 1954: Holland the best team of the
world and taking out all big names for the eventual World Champion,
Germany. The only difference now was that Germany was not the big
underdog here as they had themselves their prime just 2 years before
and so the Dutch faced another very strong team in the finals. Bad
luck.
WC1974 F: Holland - Germany 1:2
Wunderteam 4: Portugal 1999-2000:
The way the young Portugals around Figo became U21 World champions
some years before was so amazing that is wasn't that big surprise that
they easily sent home Germany and England in the group stages of 2000.
In the SF against World Champion France it showed that they were sill
too young to handle such a clever and routined defensive team as
France at this point.
EC2000 SF: Portugal - France 1:2 n.V.
Wunderteam 5: Czechia 2004:
5 years are gone since there match against Holland in EC2004, where
the Czechs beat them 3-2. People are still talking about the finest
and fastest match of all time with plenty of goal chance on both
sides. But similary to the Portugals 4 years before they ran against a
super defensive team in the Semifinals (Greece) and that was the end,
even though they were clearly the better team.
EC2004 SF: Czechia - Greece 0:1 n.V.
ken.o...@gmail.com
> <snip>
Is one of the requirements for a wunderteam that they can't come from
S. America?
Abubakr
> Wunderteam 1: Austria 1931-1933:
>
> The world cup 1934 came a little bit late for them. Two years before
> nobody could have stopped them, but in 1934 they were still the best,
> but lost the Semifinals against Italy because the refery was
> completely on Italy's side because of the the pressure of the Italian
> regime.
> WC1934 SF: Austria - Italy 0:1
Not true. Uruguay was reigning World Cup and Olympic Champions. They
were the team to beat but declined to defend their title as protest
against the perceived snubbing of their tournament by European
countries four years earlier.
> Wunderteam 2: Hungary 1952-1956:
>
> This one was the biggest upset in football history as Hungary was
> completely on their prime in 1954. They should beat the German team in
> the group stages 8-3, won in QF against Brazil 4-2 and in the SF
> against defending champion Uruguay 4-2.
> That was happenend in the final though is still unexplicable for most
> experts. Many bad things came together. Puskas played even obviously
> not 100% fit, the heavy rain, the inredible team spirit of the Germans
> and a lot of bad luck.
> WC1954 F: Hungary - Germany 2:3
This was probably the strongest side in a WC that didn't go on to win
it.
> Wunderteam 3: Holland 1973-1974:
>
> 1974 was A similar situation to 1954: Holland the best team of the
> world and taking out all big names for the eventual World Champion,
> Germany. The only difference now was that Germany was not the big
> underdog here as they had themselves their prime just 2 years before
> and so the Dutch faced another very strong team in the finals. Bad
> luck.
> WC1974 F: Holland - Germany 1:2
Not as bad as Hungary as the Germans were quite formidable in their
own right.
> Wunderteam 4: Portugal 1999-2000:
> The way the young Portugals around Figo became U21 World champions
> some years before was so amazing that is wasn't that big surprise that
> they easily sent home Germany and England in the group stages of 2000.
> In the SF against World Champion France it showed that they were sill
> too young to handle such a clever and routined defensive team as
> France at this point.
> EC2000 SF: Portugal - France 1:2 n.V.
The Euros don't count.
> Wunderteam 5: Czechia 2004:
> 5 years are gone since there match against Holland in EC2004, where
> the Czechs beat them 3-2. People are still talking about the finest
> and fastest match of all time with plenty of goal chance on both
> sides. But similary to the Portugals 4 years before they ran against a
> super defensive team in the Semifinals (Greece) and that was the end,
> even though they were clearly the better team.
> EC2004 SF: Czechia - Greece 0:1 n.V.
Ditto.
You forgot Brazil in 82, one of the last truly great teams to play in
the WC. Not even the winners of subsequent tournaments have generated
as much admiration and given as much joy to football lovers as that
brilliant side did losing it. Those were the days when regional styles
were upheld with pride and their juxtaposition in matches were a major
source of the WC's appeal. Nowadays everybody plays the same and it
ain't no jogo bonito.
chris909
> On 22 Nov, 23:48, Quincy <ab...@email.de> wrote:
>
> > Wunderteam 1: Austria 1931-1933:
>
> > The world cup 1934 came a little bit late for them. Two years before
> > nobody could have stopped them, but in 1934 they were still the best,
> > but lost the Semifinals against Italy because the refery was
> > completely on Italy's side because of the the pressure of the Italian
> > regime.
> > WC1934 SF: Austria - Italy 0:1
>
> Not true. Uruguay was reigning World Cup and Olympic Champions. They
> were the team to beat but declined to defend their title as protest
> against the perceived snubbing of their tournament by European
> countries four years earlier.
>
Still, that does not necessarily mean they were the team to beat, as
the WC1934 was held in Europe. As a southamerican myself I hate to say
that to this date no Southamerican team has won the WC in Europe. Some
say that it was this Austrian team that pioneered the total football
technique.
> > Wunderteam 2: Hungary 1952-1956:
>
> > This one was the biggest upset in football history as Hungary was
> > completely on their prime in 1954. They should beat the German team in
> > the group stages 8-3, won in QF against Brazil 4-2 and in the SF
> > against defending champion Uruguay 4-2.
> > That was happenend in the final though is still unexplicable for most
> > experts. Many bad things came together. Puskas played even obviously
> > not 100% fit, the heavy rain, the inredible team spirit of the Germans
> > and a lot of bad luck.
> > WC1954 F: Hungary - Germany 2:3
>
> This was probably the strongest side in a WC that didn't go on to win
> it.
>
Definitely.
> > Wunderteam 3: Holland 1973-1974:
>
> > 1974 was A similar situation to 1954: Holland the best team of the
> > world and taking out all big names for the eventual World Champion,
> > Germany. The only difference now was that Germany was not the big
> > underdog here as they had themselves their prime just 2 years before
> > and so the Dutch faced another very strong team in the finals. Bad
> > luck.
> > WC1974 F: Holland - Germany 1:2
>
> Not as bad as Hungary as the Germans were quite formidable in their
> own right.
>
True, although the football total from The Netherlands managed to
pretty much trash anybody, including a 2-0 win over East Germany who
had beaten West Germany in the previous round. Poland also deserves a
minor distinction. Could have been the winner with Lato being the top
scorer.
> > Wunderteam 4: Portugal 1999-2000:
> > The way the young Portugals around Figo became U21 World champions
> > some years before was so amazing that is wasn't that big surprise that
> > they easily sent home Germany and England in the group stages of 2000.
> > In the SF against World Champion France it showed that they were sill
> > too young to handle such a clever and routined defensive team as
> > France at this point.
> > EC2000 SF: Portugal - France 1:2 n.V.
>
> The Euros don't count.
>
EC? Who cares ;- ) The WC it is, everything else is what happens
between two World Cups
> > Wunderteam 5: Czechia 2004:
> > 5 years are gone since there match against Holland in EC2004, where
> > the Czechs beat them 3-2. People are still talking about the finest
> > and fastest match of all time with plenty of goal chance on both
> > sides. But similary to the Portugals 4 years before they ran against a
> > super defensive team in the Semifinals (Greece) and that was the end,
> > even though they were clearly the better team.
> > EC2004 SF: Czechia - Greece 0:1 n.V.
>
> Ditto.
>
> You forgot Brazil in 82, one of the last truly great teams to play in
> the WC. Not even the winners of subsequent tournaments have generated
> as much admiration and given as much joy to football lovers as that
> brilliant side did losing it. Those were the days when regional styles
> were upheld with pride and their juxtaposition in matches were a major
> source of the WC's appeal. Nowadays everybody plays the same and it
> ain't no jogo bonito.
Brazil is always a contender and was a great team in 82 as well, but
if there is any World Cup that Italy deserved (clearly 34-38 and 06
were not) then it was this one, with the formidable Zoff and Rossi.
Although light years behind these teams, I remember Denmark 1986 and
the golden generation of Colombia 1994-1998 as fantastic teams (that
lacking the experience choked on the big stage). Also Argentina 06 is
worth mentioning. They produced a fantastic first round with a clinic
in juego bonito and had the QF game against Germany in the bag before
losing it in penalty kicks.
Clément
>
> Still, that does not necessarily mean they were the team to beat, as
> the WC1934 was held in Europe. As a southamerican myself I hate to say
> that to this date no Southamerican team has won the WC in Europe.
Except for Brazil in 1958.
Abraço,
Luiz Mello
Quincy
> On 22 Nov, 23:48, Quincy <ab...@email.de> wrote:
>
> > Wunderteam 1: Austria 1931-1933:
>
> > The world cup 1934 came a little bit late for them. Two years before
> > nobody could have stopped them, but in 1934 they were still the best,
> > but lost the Semifinals against Italy because the refery was
> > completely on Italy's side because of the the pressure of the Italian
> > regime.
> > WC1934 SF: Austria - Italy 0:1
>
> Not true. Uruguay was reigning World Cup and Olympic Champions. They
> were the team to beat but declined to defend their title as protest
> against the perceived snubbing of their tournament by European
> countries four years earlier.
Not true. The Austrian team 1931/1932 was as dominant as the Hungarian
team 1952-56, only their period was much shorter. E.g they beat
Germany 5-0 and 6-0 at this time. In 1931 Austria would have handled
Uruguay easily, especially in Europe.
Quincy
Yes, this is the only case for winning the WC on the "foe" continent
at all.
Brazil profited here a little bit from a quite weak final opponent
Sweden, who had been helped out by refereeing before the final.
Abubakr
> On Nov 22, 9:35 am, Abubakr <deltara...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 22 Nov, 23:48, Quincy <ab...@email.de> wrote:
>
> > > Wunderteam 1: Austria 1931-1933:
>
> > > The world cup 1934 came a little bit late for them. Two years before
> > > nobody could have stopped them, but in 1934 they were still the best,
> > > but lost the Semifinals against Italy because the refery was
> > > completely on Italy's side because of the the pressure of the Italian
> > > regime.
> > > WC1934 SF: Austria - Italy 0:1
>
> > Not true. Uruguay was reigning World Cup and Olympic Champions. They
> > were the team to beat but declined to defend their title as protest
> > against the perceived snubbing of their tournament by European
> > countries four years earlier.
>
> Still, that does not necessarily mean they were the team to beat, as
> the WC1934 was held in Europe. As a southamerican myself I hate to say
> that to this date no Southamerican team has won the WC in Europe. Some
> say that it was this Austrian team that pioneered the total football
> technique.
It would have been a contest between the two 'river schools', the
Danubian the La Plata one that never happened. Still it's worth
mentioning that Uruguay were the winners of the last two Olympic
tournaments, on European soil no less, and had wowed their hosts who
had not seen football of that standard before. And neither had
European teams won in Sth America and still haven't. The Sth Americans
have won in Europe so Uruguay might have been the first.
The Argies have a long history of shooting themselves in the foot. In
1957 they had trounced the Brasucas three zip in the Copa America but
then on the eve of the WC, the FA decided to banish from the team
their stars such as Sivori who had run away to the Serie A. They could
only make the quarters.
Then came Pekerman who couldn't hold his nerve against the Germans.
Still Argentina are one of the few teams ( couple of Africans and
Russians are others) who still uphold their traditional game and must
be commended for consistently producing the best football in WC
tournaments in this era of homogeneity of drabness.
Enzo
> Still Argentina are one of the few teams ( couple of Africans and
> Russians are others)
Argentina produce unmitigated trash nowadays. The latest example
is their friendly against Spain. They are rubbish, from top to bottom.
Abubakr
No matter, they were still the best side at the last WC and many more,
which Spain have yet to achieve in all their years of trying (though a
case could be made for 2002).
Quincy
> It would have been a contest between the two 'river schools', the
> Danubian the La Plata one that never happened. Still it's worth
> mentioning that Uruguay were the winners of the last two Olympic
> tournaments, on European soil no less, and had wowed their hosts who
> had not seen football of that standard before. And neither had
> European teams won in Sth America and still haven't. The Sth Americans
> have won in Europe so Uruguay might have been the first.
Your forget that 20 years later, 1954, we saw that very contest
between the two "river schools" as very strong defending champion
Uruguay (took out England in QF) faced Hungary in the semifinal even
without Puskas.
Result: Hungary wiped the European soil with the Uruguayan team as
they did it with Brazil one match before.
Abubakr
> On 23 Nov., 01:30, Abubakr <deltara...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > It would have been a contest between the two 'river schools', the
> > Danubian the La Plata one that never happened. Still it's worth
> > mentioning that Uruguay were the winners of the last two Olympic
> > tournaments, on European soil no less, and had wowed their hosts who
> > had not seen football of that standard before. And neither had
> > European teams won in Sth America and still haven't. The Sth Americans
> > have won in Europe so Uruguay might have been the first.
>
> Your forget that 20 years later
An age! What's your point?
, 1954, we saw that very contest
> between the two "river schools" as very strong defending champion
> Uruguay
Yes we did.
>(took out England in QF)
And England were strong? Didn't they get their arses handed to them by
the Magyars a year before?
faced Hungary in the semifinal even
> without Puskas.
>
> Result: Hungary wiped the European soil with the Uruguayan team as
> they did it with Brazil one match before.
Oh? 4-2 in extra time is wiping floors now is it? To me it's a hard
fought win. No doubt Hungary were the best side in the world at the
time and they proved themselves against the South Americans.
The Austria of the early thirties, OTOH, did not. The Uruguay of the
same period did. They were the first WC winners as well as taking the
last two Olympic titles on European soil.
Clément
> On 22 Nov., 23:57, Clément wrote:
>
> > Except for Brazil in 1958.
>
> Yes, this is the only case for winning the WC on the "foe" continent
> at all.
>
> Brazil profited here a little bit from a quite weak final opponent
> Sweden, who had been helped out by refereeing before the final.
By "profiting a little" you mean avoiding West Germany in the final?
From the top of my head, they were probably the best side Brazil
didn't face in 1958, after being drawn with England and the USSR, and
meeting France in the semis (France being the other great team that
year).
That said, Sweden were fairly good themselves, and were at home.
Hardly a weak opponent.
Abraço,
Luiz Mello
Quincy
I know, they only played European teams. It's a pity the Olympics 1932
did miss out football because of the WC.
But anyway their results in that period is stunning and as dominant as
the Magyars in the 50ties. Examples:
16.05.1931 Wien ÖSTERREICH - SCHOTTLAND 5:0
24.05.1931 Berlin DEUTSCHLAND - ÖSTERREICH 0:6
16.06.1931 Wien ÖSTERREICH - SCHWEIZ 2:0
13.09.1931 Wien ÖSTERREICH - DEUTSCHLAND 5:0
04.10.1931 Budapest UNGARN - ÖSTERREICH 2:2
29.11.1931 Basel SCHWEIZ - ÖSTERREICH 1:8
20.03.1932 Wien ÖSTERREICH - ITALIEN 2:1
24.04.1932 Wien ÖSTERREICH - UNGARN 8:2
Clément
> On 23 Nov, 09:21, chris909 wrote:
>
> > Although light years behind these teams, I remember Denmark 1986 and
> > the golden generation of Colombia 1994-1998 as fantastic teams (that
> > lacking the experience choked on the big stage). Also Argentina 06 is
> > worth mentioning. They produced a fantastic first round with a clinic
> > in juego bonito and had the QF game against Germany in the bag before
> > losing it in penalty kicks.
>
> The Argies have a long history of shooting themselves in the foot. In
> 1957 they had trounced the Brasucas three zip in the Copa America
Granted, Argentina were fairly dominant in the matchup against Brazil
until probably the mid 1950's. However, those old-time South American
Championships are not a very good measuring stick of these countries
relative strength (as it's questionable whether Brazil put on a full-
strength effort at these tournaments back then).
This is not to disagree with your point (I actually don't), just an
aside.
> but
> then on the eve of the WC, the FA decided to banish from the team
> their stars such as Sivori who had run away to the Serie A. They could
> only make the quarters.
They actually were eliminated on the first round, after losing to West
Germany (1-3), beating Northern Ireland (3-1), and being routed by
Czechoslovakia (1-6), a losing margin never repeated until the recent
WCQ drubbing in La Paz.
Abraço,
Luiz Mello
Enzo
Beside the point. I am quoting you, both in this thread ( emphasis
mine ).
"Still Argentina ***are*** one of the few teams ..."
"No matter, they ***were*** still the best side ..."
My point was made in response to the first of the above.
Besides, they were emphatically not the best side in 2006.
They were outplayed by Mexico.
Abubakr
> On Nov 23, 2:39 am, Abubakr <deltara...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 23 Nov, 13:34, Enzo <s_debgu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Still Argentina are one of the few teams ( couple of Africans and
> > > > Russians are others)
>
> > > Argentina produce unmitigated trash nowadays. The latest example
> > > is their friendly against Spain. They are rubbish, from top to bottom.
>
> > No matter, they were still the best side at the last WC and many more,
> > which Spain have yet to achieve in all their years of trying (though a
> > case could be made for 2002).
>
> Beside the point. I am quoting you, both in this thread ( emphasis
> mine ).
>
> "Still Argentina ***are*** one of the few teams ..."
> "No matter, they ***were*** still the best side ..."
Not beside the point because they could still play the best football
in the next WC.
> My point was made in response to the first of the above.
A bad year does not a tradition break. Don't be so pedantic.
> Besides, they were emphatically not the best side in 2006.
> They were outplayed by Mexico.
So what? There was no team that wasn't outplayed in 06 at some point.
Alessandro Riolo
> Still Argentina are one of the few teams ( couple of Africans and
Does that means we will finally end to read about Italian
catenaccio? :p
Apart the joke, but ever since I have been seeing football matches at
NT level, that would be 1978, the Italian NT has ever played in the
same way (with some atrocious peak, like during Sacchi tenure).
Abubakr
You got a point but the reason why the Italians were not mentioned was
because their 'catenaccio' brand is the blueprint for today's
'homogeneity of drabness', adopted by all and sundry. Add in a little
(of the negative aspects of) English hustle and long ball ( also
naturalised by the Italians in the late 90's) and we have our loose
end...
Funny that you should mention 78 and Sacchi, as in Argentina and
England at Euro 96 was one of the few times the Italians have opted
for the more expansive Calcio creed in their traditions. They didn't
win which is probably why we haven't seen it all that often again.
Mark
Talking of very good teams of the past, how do yous rate Peru 1970-78?
World Cup quarter-finalists 1970, Champions of South America 1975
(beating Brazil away from home (who had beaten Argentina away) on
their way to the title), World Cup quarter-finalists 1978; and had
Teofilo Cubillas playing for them.