Remove this ad

#161 [url]

Apr 10 11 10:31 AM

Luca wrote:
I think that we have to wait for. When IFFHS website will publish all the matches of the period 1921-1930, we can compare the IFFHS list with FIFA list. But now it's impossible.

That might take many years. The 1911-1920 match results have been published since at least 2007, but still no match details.

Luca wrote:

IFHHS declare that they recognize as "A" matches also the matches played over 1952 and 1956 Olympic Games, while FIFA, on this press kit http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/fifafacts/stats-centclub/52/00/59/fifacenturyclubmen.pdf declare that they recognize only matches played up to and including 1948 Olympics...

And even not all of them, because FIFA writes something like with some exceptions. But they don't write which the exceptions are.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad

#162 [url]

Apr 10 11 6:44 PM

Another bizarre example...

On 30-01-1993, Denmark played a friendly against USA. According to Rsssf.com, Denmark and USA fielded their best teams

http://www.rsssf.com/intldetails/1993ic1.html

and both Associations recognize this match as "A". But I've just checked Fifa's website and this match is not recognized... Quite strange...!

Quote    Reply   

#163 [url]

May 14 11 6:11 AM

Here you can find an article about the 11-06-1939 match Netherlands - Yugoslavia. Dutch newspaper Het Vaderland reports on 15-05-1939 not a FA XI but an official Dutch national team will probably play Yugoslavia at the Olympische Dag on 11-06-1939 in Amsterdam.

This article also shows how easy it can be to make errors. The Dutch line up, which already was given show nearly the same Dutch national team that played eight days before an official A-international match against Switzerland. Only Freek van der Veen is not included for the 11-06-1939 match and will be replaced by Abe Lenstra. The reason Lenstra was selected was because he was the star in a match a Dutch FA XI played against a Belgium side. Thanks to his three goals in the last 15 minutes that match ended 4-4.

Reading following article one cannot blame that at least some people in Netherlands would have thought Netherlands - Yugoslavia of 11-06-1939 would have been an official international match. The reality is both Dutch and Yugoslav FA regard this match as unofficial.

http://kranten.kb.nl/view/article/id/ddd%3A010018435%3Ampeg21%3Ap010%3Aa0185

Quote    Reply   

#165 [url]

Jun 17 11 7:45 PM

Yesterday IFFHS published a note http://www.iffhs.de/?f00b90b003e0f443e0f952bda15405fdcdc3bfcdc0aec70aeeda083c0b adfirming that all the matches played by Great Britain from 1908 Olympics to 1920 Olympics are considered "A" matches for England only.

Quote    Reply   

#166 [url]

Jun 17 11 10:21 PM

Luca wrote:
Yesterday IFFHS published a note http://www.iffhs.de/?f00b90b003e0f443e0f952bda15405fdcdc3bfcdc0aec70aeeda083c0b adfirming that all the matches played by Great Britain from 1908 Olympics to 1920 Olympics are considered "A" matches for England only.

Unbelievable! We all know UK is not England. We all know England is just as Scotland (in 2011 the question is for how long) and Wales a part of UK. How can a team in which a Scotsman (1912) and a Welshman (1920) played be labelled as England?

But I read more amazing things in this article. How about the Sweden v Hungary match played on 19-06-1914? Two days before the full "A" international Sweden vs. Hungary (1:1) [(played in Stockholm on June 21, 1914], another game – Sweden vs. Hungary (1:5) [played in Stockholm, on June 19, 1914] – was held without any ceremony preceding it. This first match was not a full "A" international. The invitations sent out to the players from the Swedish league selection already informed them that the match on June 19 would not be a full "A" international. This match also was not registered with FIFA. Contemporary documents from the "Svenska Fotbollförbundet" (Swedish FA) make it clear that only the second encounter, on June 21, 1914, was a "Federation Game". Also, the Swedish line-ups shown in Hungarian books are incorrect. Sweden’s actual line-up for the first match differs by nine players, the one for the second match by three. As it was, two Swedish internationals were injured shortly before the match, and so two from the league selection were quickly nominated for the full "A" international (i.e., the match on June 21).

Or what about the 1919 Paraguay v Argentina matches which were de facto Paraguay v Argentina B? In May 1919 the Paraguay’s national team played Argentina’s "B" team in full compliance with FIFA regulations. The reason was that Argentina’s "A" team was in Brazil for the South American Championship (Copa América). Almost 75 years later, the Argentina FA followed Paraguay’s request to declare these four matches full "A" internationals. No objection can raised to this, as such an agreement between two national FAs is perfectly acceptable.

Quote    Reply   

#167 [url]

Jun 18 11 1:28 PM

IFFHS really had me jaw-dropping on Great Britain's games being "official A internationals" (under England or separately). Well, they can officialize whatever they want, but no national FA is going to rewrite their official matches list because they say so.

Sadly, the IFFHS list is as good as anyone's, which means it is not of much help. The approach taken by www.eu-football.info is much better, since they include any game recognized as official by one of the European FA, adding an asterisk to the other side if it does not.

Quote    Reply   

#168 [url]

Jun 19 11 9:56 AM

silvermane wrote:
IFFHS really had me jaw-dropping on Great Britain's games being "official A internationals" (under England or separately). Well, they can officialize whatever they want, but no national FA is going to rewrite their official matches list because they say so.

Totally agree and I don't see very much consistency in their way of approaching matches to be official or not. I browsed the 1911-1920 list of official A-internationals. Most of the matches played by a dissident Argentine XI i.e. are not regarded as official except both matches played in 1914 against Brazil. Can anyone explain why IFFHS made an exception for the Argentine dissident teams that played against Brazil?

silvermane wrote:
Sadly, the IFFHS list is as good as anyone's, which means it is not of much help. The approach taken by www.eu-football.info is much better, since they include any game recognized as official by one of the European FA, adding an asterisk to the other side if it does not.

The only good thing on the IFFHS list is imho that they explain why some matches are included or not, i.e. the 19-06-1914 match Sweden - Hungary. These explanations clearify some crucial details about matches which are very useful. I used to include that match in my lists, but because of the explanation I read it became clear to me that imho Swedish FA is right not to include this match. IFFHS lists are no bible of course. Just a tool that can help us to decide for ourselves if we can include some matches or not. The set up of the www.eu.football.info is much better, but not 100% complete. An example is the 11-06-1922 Norway 7-0 France match that initially have been regarded official by at least one of both countries' FA, but later have been deleted. Read more about on following topic http://roonba.20.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=956

Quote    Reply   

#169 [url]

Jun 19 11 10:41 AM

The GB matches in Olympics 1908 and 1912 are certainly England only. The 1908 tnmt was organised by the FA and the 1912 by the SvFF. I believe all the GB players in the matches 1908 through 1920 were English amateur only. This doesn't mean they should be added to the record of England 'A' team!

www.soccer-db.info

Quote    Reply   

#170 [url]

Jun 19 11 11:56 AM

According to the report on the IFFHS side UK fielded in 1912 a Scotchman and in 1920 a Welshman. These two facts are already reason not to regard this matches as England international matches. Do you also want to count a match in which Netherlands field Lionel Messi as official for Netherlands?

Even if the UK sides of the 1908, 1912 and 1920 Olympisc Games would have fielded only Englishmen the matches these UK sides played still cannot be regarded as official A-internationals for England as these sides were restrictive teams in a restrictive competition. England were not allowed to field professional players, so could not field ts strongest possible team if the team manager wanted to.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad

#172 [url]

Jun 19 11 8:31 PM

Fast Midfielder wrote:
Can anyone explain why IFFHS made an exception for the Argentine dissident teams that played against Brazil?



That's really inexplicable... Does anybody know something more?


trekky76 wrote:
That's strange; who was the Scotsman? The lineups I have are all-English.


I am not very expert, but I have found out that the player Thomas Burn was born in Spittal (Northumberland), a town not far from Scotland.
Hey, Fast Midfielder, who are those players? I am very curious...

Quote    Reply   

#173 [url]

Jun 19 11 8:39 PM

Luca wrote:
I am not very expert, but I have found out that the player Thomas Burn was born in Spittal (Northumberland), a town not far from Scotland.
Hey, Fast Midfielder, who are those players? I am very curious...

I don't know. The IFFHS site write themselves the UK team fielded at the 1912 Olympics a Scotsman and at the 1920 Olympics a Welshmen. Yet they count this matches as official A-internationals for England. The latter is very strange indeed because if a match will be counted as official A-international for England all England players should be Englishmen and we all no Scotsmen and Welshmen are no Englishmen.

Quote    Reply   

#174 [url]

Jun 19 11 9:24 PM

Maybe some player was born outside of England? This doesn't mean they aren't English. We are well aware of Irish players being caped by both IFA and FAI..

www.soccer-db.info

Quote    Reply   

#175 [url]

Jun 20 11 7:25 PM

According to Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Walden Harold Walden (Olympic champion in 1912) was born in India, but it seems that his family was surely English.

Quote    Reply   

#176 [url]

Jun 20 11 7:34 PM

It in this article http://www.iffhs.de/?f00b90b003e0f443e0f952bda15405fdcdc3bfcdc0aec70aeeda083c0b IFFHS writes in the England / Amateurs part in 1912 a Scotchman and in 1920 a Welshman played for the UK team. When the match details of that team will be published (today they published Argentina 1911-1920), I assume they will explain who this Scotsman and Welshman are.

Quote    Reply   

#177 [url]

Jun 22 11 5:58 PM

I've contacted IFFHS about the two matches played by Argentina against Brazil in 1914. As you know, Argentina was represented by the FAF - a dissident federation which wasn't affiliated to FIFA. However, IFFHS regards those matches as "A". I was quite lucky, as the legendary Dr. Alfredo Pöge answered my question.
This is his message:

Dear Sir ,

That were definitive two official full "A" internationals - because the
Federación Argentina de Football had received (of the national sport) the instruction to represent Argentina. Besides the
both national football associations of Argentine were already in
negotiations, weche ended few later with a uniting - among the leading
of the national sport authority.

All conditions for a full "A" international were given! We have also
spoken with both national FA - all is okay!

Best regards
Dr.Alfredo Pöge

Quote    Reply   

#178 [url]

Jun 22 11 7:12 PM

Great job Luca!

It seems you have good contacts with both FIFA and IFFHS. Please can you ask Dr. Pöge about the matches played by a team labelled as Czechoslovakia amateurs in the 1925-1934 era? I asked Dr. Pöge about the status of this match and other matches played by Czechoslovakian amateur team already in 2007. He answered me the Netherlands v Czechoslovakia amateurs match of 18-04-1927 is one of the 9 matches Czechoslovakia amateurs played between WW1 and WW2 that are official A-matches according to FIFA. When I asked him which 9 matches, he asked me to be patient because IFFHS will publish this one day on the internet. After 2007 I found out at least some of the Czechoslovakian sides also fielded some professional players. More about this matter you can read on following topics.

http://roonba.20.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=1720&highlight=
http://roonba.20.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=955&highlight=

Quote    Reply   

#179 [url]

Jun 23 11 7:11 PM

Ok, I'll try to contact them again one of these days.
Netherlands A - Czechoslovakia Amateurs, played on 18 April 1927 in Amsterdam, was deleted by FIFA in 2010, so also IFFHS could have changed its idea and probably now this match is no longer recognized as "A". But it's just a supposition...

Quote    Reply   

#180 [url]

Jun 23 11 8:35 PM

Please take notice IFFHS site and FIFA site does not match. The Russia 0-9 Hungary match played on 12-07-1912 is on IFFHS site included as official A, but FIFA site does not include that match. The same goes for the Argentina 2-0 Uruguay match played on 25-02-1912. So I don't think there is much consistency between both lists.

FIFA site also include following four matches between Argentina Dissident Team and Uruguay in its list:
21-01-1933 Uruguay 2-1 Argentina
05-02-1933 Argentina 4-1 Uruguay
14-12-1933 Uruguay 0-1 Argentina
15-08-1934 Argentina 1-0 Uruguay

On the IFFHS list I also noticed something odd. The 1921-1930 A-internationals are not published, but if you click some button you can already find the countries. So you will see there are also countries as Austria, England, Hungary as well as Austria amateurs, England amateurs and Hungary amateurs (the only three countries with a separate amateur team). There is besides Czechoslovakia not a Czechoslovakia amateurs. This fact makes me very curious what IFFHS did with the nine matches Czechoslovakia amateurs (+ some professional player(s)) played in the 1925-1934 era. Especially because of Dr. Pöges answer to me in 2007.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help