Was football in the old days sh*t?

Xavi6

Sensational thread title is sensational, but it's a genuine question.

Watching The Ashes and they're going through its history complete with footage from way back when and the technique etc was suspect to say the least. Obviously that evolves over time which brings me to my point.

Was football as dodgy? The equipment was average to say the least so it would have been difficult to be as nimble on your feet as you can be nowadays. There's also a lot more emphasis on fitness and eating well which is obviously beneficial to players.

Or were these players even more talented as they were able to be so good inspite of crap footballs and heavy boots?

Would the likes of Stanley Matthews, Bobby Moore and Tom Finney have cut it today in the modern game or were they only good relative to the time in which they played? I don't know cause I've never really seen them play.

Just got me thinking anyway.

KeithAFC

Xavi6 wrote: »

Sensational thread title is sensational, but it's a genuine question.

Watching The Ashes and they're going through its history complete with footage from way back when and the technique etc was suspect to say the least. Obviously that evolves over time which brings me to my point.

Was football as dodgy? The equipment was average to say the least so it would have been difficult to be as nimble on your feet as you can be nowadays. There's also a lot more emphasis on fitness and eating well which is obviously beneficial to players.

Or were these players even more talented as they were able to be so good inspite of crap footballs and heavy boots?

Would the likes of Stanley Matthews, Bobby Moore and Tom Finney have cut it today in the modern game or were they only good relative to the time in which they played? I don't know cause I've never really seen them play.

Just got me thinking anyway.

I'd say back in those days more players could actually play football with some degree of skill. By having the passing ability, being able to control the ball when running with it at some sort of pace. These days, the game is too full of players who are only powerful and only offer strength but very little else.


Back then, the pitches were terrible but seeing of the footage, you had players being able to dribble in such conditions, being able to avoid tackles and still be able to control the ball. Nowadays, players struggle to control the ball on world class pitches, players mis place simple passes all the time, to the degree were I have to question how some players made it as professional.

OPENROAD

Xavi6 wrote: »

Watching The Ashes .

Your boys taking a bashing at the moment

eagle eye

KeithAFC wrote: »

I'd say back in those days more players could actually play football with some degree of skill. By having the passing ability, being able to control the ball when running with it at some sort of pace. These days, the game is too full of players who are only powerful and only offer strength but very little else.


Back then, the pitches were terrible but seeing of the footage, you had players being able to dribble in such conditions, being able to avoid tackles and still be able to control the ball. Nowadays, players struggle to control the ball on world class pitches, players mis place simple passes all the time, to the degree were I have to question how some players made it as professional.

The game is faster, the ball has to be hit harder as it has to get to the other guy quicker than it did in those days. Thats the reason for more misplaced passes.

I do agree though that there are 'athletes' playing the game now who wouldn't have gotten into a first team back then. By the same token there are a lot more players playing the game now who would have been big stars back then too.

I think you have to accept that the best players back then would have been stars in today's game. The likes of Maradona would certainly have been a worldwide superstar in any era.
Intelligent players like Kenny Dalglish, Ronny Whelan, Liam Brady would all be stars in today's game. I do think though that the average footballer today is of much higher quality than years back. They have the advantage of better football education, better fitness and basically a much more professional approach to the game.

Its just evolution and its always going to be like that.

chughes

eagle eye wrote: »

I do think though that the average footballer today is of much higher quality than years back. They have the advantage of better football education, better fitness and basically a much more professional approach to the game.

While I can't disagree with what eagle eye says here, I like to think that there is more to football than just athletic prowess.

I'm in my early 50's and can well remember watching Match of the Day and The Big Match and many teams had individuals who were termed characters. These were the people who provided the entertainment value to matches and this is the characteristic that's missing in most top class teams now. Football is part of the entertainment industry but sometimes it doesn't feel like that any more.

Given the lifestyle of many of these characters, they would probably not get into the first team nowadays. There is a balance to be struck between athletic prowess and entertainment and nowadays I think the balance is too far on the athletic side.

The Muppet

The ball has played a major factor in how the game has developed. The current ball travels much faster than the old leather ones. I played with the old balls in my youth and when you kicked them it was like kicking a brick, when they were wet it was even worse. I think Ronaldo would disintegrate if he had to kick a wet old ball, he certainly would not be getting the movement in it that he does with the modern ball.

Todays players have a healthier lifestyle and are fitter and would have more stamina. I don't think they have any more natural skill than the old players when science is removed from the game, I don't know of any modern player that could hit a ball like Bobby Charlton or dribble like Best, Players of that calibre would flourish in the modern game imo.

eagle eye you talking a of a later era than Xavi6.

Footballers are more athletic and powerful now, that's probably a given.

I'd be suprised if there was much of a change in technical ability though (speaking about British footballers here)

The top players back then would be top players now.

eagle eye

The Muppet wrote: »

The ball has played a major factor in how the game has developed. The current ball travels much faster than the old leather ones. I played with the old balls in my youth and when you kicked them it was like kicking a brick, when they were wet it was even worse. I think Ronaldo would disintegrate if he had to kick a wet old ball, he certainly would not be getting the movement in it that he does with the modern ball.

Todays players have a healthier lifestyle and are fitter and would have more stamina. I don't think they have any more natural skill than the old players when science is removed from the game, I don't know of any modern player that could hit a ball like Bobby Charlton or dribble like Best, Players of that calibre would flourish in the modern game imo.

eagle eye you talking a of a later era than Xavi6.

Lol, I forgot about the ball. It could be cruel on a cold day especially if you caught it with your big toe in the wrong spot.

I know I'm talking about a later time than the players he mentioned but comparing the late 70s to now there is a huge gap between the average player then and now. I can only imagine it is bigger going further back. Like how can anybody of us decide how good Billy Meredith was?

JohnnyRyan99

I reckon someone with the mind set of a tough tackling centre half will say the old days were great, tackles were stronger, less diving... Where men were men and not Ronaldoing all over the pitch... Good tough football the contact sport its meant to be... Where players like Best, Maradona, Cryuff etc. should be even more celebrated because not only were they tremendously skillfull but were able to do it while being absolutely butchered! And all this while being scuttered at the same time!:pac:

But nowadays with so much effort put in off the field in terms of diets, stanima and speed training it's hard to see how the stars of yesteryear would have faired!

Argh difficult question to answer really, so many different variables to take into account! I suppose the only question is was football in the old days sh*t? The players weren't..... only the ball, the coverage, the pitches, the boots and the hairdoo's were!

Men were men back then unlike some of the pre madonnas these days.

Didn't some goalkeeper play half a cup final with a broken neck? Granted you couldn't make subs back then but still ! Double hard bástard

JohnnyRyan99

rarnes1 wrote: »

Men were men back then unlike some of the pre madonnas these days.

Didn't some goalkeeper play half a cup final with a broken neck. Granted you couldn't make subs back then but still ! Double hard bástard

Bert Trautmann

City Goalie at the time:cool:

Mister men

It's a different sport now. Players have to much power now and the fans have changed for the worse. Managers like Mourinho and players like Ronaldo are everything that i despise about the modern game. Sky sports have a lot to answer for.

Het-Field

Well, I think posters on this website would agree that the most recent World Cup was a snorefest. Opinions of the World Cup on this website were heavily weighted in favour of mediocre to poor.

Obviously, the abilities of the modern footballer are far greater given the facilities, and equipment (fitness, training and playing). Further, the remuneration of the current crop is far greater then in years gone by (I think Fitzsimons or Cantwell once spoke of the remuneration given by the FAI to its internationals as "an ice-cream". This provides extra incentive for players.

However, the top heavy fixture list in the club domain has crippled international football. The aformentioned facilities and remuneration have also allowed for intensive meddling in the player's medical position, and the creation of "playboy lifestyles" for players who are paid amounts of money which they simply not worth. I would venture that int he 1990s Denis Irwin was the best left-back in Britain (although he did have competition from Winterburn, Le Saux, and Stuart Pearce). He was a most successful defender, with a workmanlike attitude, and while well remunerated, he never let it interfere with the job he had to do. Contrast that with Ashley Cole, who is and was the best full-back in the noughties. The man is as dislikeable as they come, and his personal-life has often interfered with his on-field abilities.

I would maintain that Rugby Union had its hayday between 1994-2003. Once England introduced the use of the kicking game as a major facet of the game, it became an absolute snorefest (I admit it has improved in the past two years). Further, the scrum was traditionally an relatively informal exercise at re-setting the play after the ball was knocked forward. Today, it has become a hotly contested part of the game, with many hours of practice put in, in the hope of collapsing or wheeling the scrum to ones advantage. This has been an appalling development for the rugby purist who must endure several scrum resets throughout the 80 mins.

Football may have resembled a Benny Hill sketch (the words of a learned friend of mine), and the facilities were piss poor. However, football is not at its ultimate level of entertainment today. In the 1990s we had several neck and neck title races, often amongst more then 2 clubs. Further, relegation was never a dead certainty for ANY team like it is currently. Football is evolving, but I believe it is evolving for the worse.

AgileMyth

One big difference these days is that the worlds top players all compete against each other, usually in one of the three big European leagues.
The likes of Matthews only really played against the top British and Irish players. This would have left the top league an awful lot worse (ability wise) than it is now.

Tom10

Impossible to say - in the early days tactics and formations were so stifled and rigid you would think it was the FAI who were in charge of them. But I think an athlete is an athlete no matter what generation and if they grew up in this one I'm sure they would rise to a similar standard in the modern game as they had in the previous one.

I guess the question is, would Messi survive in the old game and would Pele score in the modern one.

3hn2givr7mx1sc

Mister men wrote: »

It's a different sport now. Players have to much power now and the fans have changed for the worse. Managers like Mourinho and players like Ronaldo are everything that i despise about the modern game. Sky sports have a lot to answer for.

The game needs more Mourinhos, imo. He adds a bit of character to the game, which it lacks.

Tom10

baz2009 wrote: »

The game needs more Mourinhos, imo. He adds a bit of character to the game, which it lacks.

Well he is entertaining but his tactics can be painfully negative, ala, his Inter team against Barca last year (but it was probably the best defensive performance I've ever seen which is something to be admired too).

aidan24326

rarnes1 wrote: »

The top players back then would be top players now.

That's how I'd see it. If the top players of bygone eras were around today, they would simply have to adapt to the demands of the modern game, the demands that are there now in terms of fitness, conditioning, diet etc. I've no doubt the acual raw skill level of alot of those guys was probably just as good, there's no reason to think otherwise. In contrast, you'd have to wonder how some of today's miollycoddled stars would fare against some of the butchers from the old days who'd be kicking lumps out of them.

Prufrock

Football changed when England played Hungary in 1953. Hungary had players who were into fitness and had a coach who managed their diet/training. The England lads trained a few times a week but still drank and smoked. Hungary went on to beat England 6 - 3.

It changed how managers saw football. People saw the value of guys who could run all day and cover ground for 90 mins. This was the start of a new trend that influences football today.

The English players were skillful but fitness was key.