Author: Vesselin

The First Division played the usual format: the league was divided into 4 groups of 5 teams at first and the top two of each group moved to the next direct-elimination stage. The two teams with least points in the first stage were to play the relegation play-off. Atlas and Tampico were the unlucky ones and their fight for survival was tight: each team won its home leg 1-0, so a third match had to be played in San Luis. Only now Atlas managed to survive, winning 3-1.

Tampico lost and was relegated. May be. There is always a big may be in Mexico.

The losers of the first stage were:

UNAM – 4th in Group 1 with 38 points.

Cruz Azul – 3rd in Group Group 2 with 43 points, unfortunately missing the play-offs on worse goal average.

The winners, going ahead were: America and UANL from Group 1, Univerisdad de Guadalajara and Deportivo Neza – Group 2, Zacatepec and Atletico Espanol – Group 3, and Atlante and Monterrey – Group 4. Was it a normal league, Atletico Espanol and Monterrey would not have been going ahead – Atletico Espanol earned only 33 points and Monterrey – 40. Cruz Azul had 43, Puebla – 41, and Atletico Potosino – also 41, which placed them 4th in the strong Group 2. But the division of the league into 4 groups often favoured otherwise weaker clubs.

In the quarter-finals earlier results did not matter, of course. Atlante eliminated Atletico Espanol.

Monterrey was eliminated by America.

Zacatepec was eliminated by Deportivo Neza, and

Universidad de Guadalajara lost to UANL. UANL was the only team not losing a leg – they went ahead with a tie and a win, all the others depended on aggregate goal difference after losing one leg and winning the other (the home one).

In the semi-finals a single goal decided the winner in the first pair:

Deportivo Neza lost the home leg 0-1 to Atlante and managed a 0-0 away, but that was the end of them.

One goal decided the other finalist too:

America lost the first leg 0-2 and won their home leg 1-0, which was not enough.

Thus, the final was between UANL and Atlante. UANL won 2-1 at home, then Atlante prevailed 1-0 and the match went into overtime. Nobody scored and the title had to be decided by penalty shoot-out. Only now UANL prevailed 3-1.

Atlante came close, but was unlucky to lose on penalties in front of home crowd. Such is life… the club had three stars,who helped, but also were disappointed at the end: the Argentinians Ruben Ayala and Ricrado La Volpe, and the Brazilian striker Cabinho, who already was a legend in Mexico.

Joy in the other camp – Universidad Autonoma de Nuevo Leon, known as Tigres.

One can say the boys were lucky, but their record during the season argues differently: if it was a normal league, Tigres would have been 4th after the first stage and only Atlante won more matches and scored more3 goals than them. They lost 10 games out of 38, but proved how shrewd and dedicated they were in the play-offs: 3 wins, 1 tie, and 2 losses. Atlante still had better record – 3-2-1, but their single loss was against UANL at the final and when it came to penalties, Lady Luck was not on their side. As a whole, UANL Tigres prevailed with the second-best record – not exactly just lucky.

Tigres delivered when mattered and won their second title. Their Uruguayan coach Carlos Miloc knew his job more than well – his career was a string of successes and he made Tigres a winning team.

Tigres may not have had players with the fame of Ayala and Cabinho, but they had major stars as well – the Peruvian striker Geronimo Barbadillo and the Mexican midfielder Tomas Boy were the leaders, the other key foreigners were experienced and helpful, although not such big names: the Urguyan defender Osvaldo Batocletti had already long strong career in Mexico and lesser known Brazilians Roberto da Silva and Geraldo Gonsalves helped as much as they could.

Mexico Second Division. Technically, playing for one promotional spot and the complicated mixed formula of the championship brought Oaxtepec and Tepic to the final. Oaxtepec hosted the first leg and won 1-0. Small lead, but they were also better in the second leg, winning 2-1.

Little known Coras Tepic had very strong season indeed, but lost. Coming so close to promotion and losing however minimally is always a disappointment, but otherwise it was good season – 2nd in the Second Division.

Oaxtepec were the champions of Second Division, a rare achievement, which also meant promotion to top flight.

Possibly, a picture of the team – at least, a photo of that period. Some names sound familiar – Vucetich, Negrete – but were they the well players or just namesakes is hard to tell. Transfer politics in Mexico were a bit strange, depending mostly on current money and ambitions, yet, it was unlikely leading players to appear in Second Division. Great for the moment, but the real test for Oaxtepec would be the next season.

 

Honduras created some interest, thanks to the good World Cup performance – and it was ‘discovered’ that the country resembled somewhat a black African country in football matters: it was divided somewhat, having a region of English-speaking and predominantly black population, a bit in conflict with whites, blacks, and natives, speaking Spanish. Whatever social tensions existed, in football terms they translated into favoritism of one or the other group, perhaps not as bad as it was in Africa. The World Cup performance was interpreted in this way: English speaking Hondurans were perhaps the key , for they had discipline and rational approach the Spanish-speaking Latinos lacked. The blend of the two cultures worked well. Was that true or not is hard to say. What can be said is that Honduras run a national championship for a long time and had old clubs.

Olimpia (Tegucigalpa), founded in 1912, won the 1982 championship. They were traditionally leading club, as usually clubs from capitals are, and this was there 13th title.

Standing from left: Oscar Garcia, “Indio” Ruiz, Roberto “Pirata” Fernandez, “Nilo” Martinez,

Mauricio “Guicho” Funez, Oscar Banegas.

First row: Alberto Merelles, Victor Romero, Hector Ucles, Alberto Centurion, Mario Hernan Juvini Carreño.

English-speakers were not presented here, judging by names, and the club was represented by only 2 players at the World Cup, none of which is pictured above. Whatever it was, locally Olimpia was strong even if other clubs – Real Espana, certainly – had more ‘stars’.

 

The World Cup brings attention to otherwise obscure countries – El Salvador was the typical outsider, familiar from the past, but Honduras left very good impression. The obvious development of the ‘Third world’ leads to paying more attention: both El Salvador and Honduras had long football traditions, but the scale was small and local. No famous clubs, no famous players – nothing to compare with Mexico. But both countries were more football-oriented than most Central American and Caribbean nations. Still, almost nothing could be said of their national championships, save for raw statistics.

Atletico Marte (San Salvador) won the Salvadorian championship this year. The club was quite young – founded in 1950 – but already was popular and leading one.

Practically nothing can be said about the champions – certainly they had national team players and some local stars, but the real information can be summed up in this: Atletico Marte won their 7th title.

CONCACAF organized international club tournament since 1959. But it was difficult to organize, maintain, and even more to make it popular. North and Central America is strange region – three huge countries and many tiny ones, especially those on the Caribbean islands. Economically, even without counting USA and Canada, the differences were and are enormous – almost entirely speaking of degrees of poverty. Politically, the small countries were ruled by various dictatorships for years, often ‘complimented’ by US military presence. Cultural traditions differed as a result, including sports: former British colonies tended to develop cricket. US influence made baseball and basketball popular. Back north, football was also in disadvantage, eclipsed by baseball, American football, basketball, and ice hockey. As a whole, only Mexico and French-influenced Haiti (which has the oldest football federation in this part of the globe) were football-oriented. But Haiti was desperately poor all the time and thus unable to develop the game. Lastly, to CONCACAF belonged countries otherwise belonging to South America – the three Gayana states and some islands, which should have been South American countries if geographic location was followed. The situation made staging international tournaments difficult and records are scarce – even in 1982 the CONCACAF Cup of Champions and Sub-champions leaves empty pages: how many teams from how many countries is unknown. It is still unknown did Deportivo FAS (El Salvador) played any match at all. Only two matches from the Caribbean section are known, but apparently there were more, because Don Bosco (Dominican Republic) was eliminated, along with another club, whose name remains uncertain – Palo Seco or Trintopec of Trinidad and Tobago. The Northern and Central Section, in which Deportivo FAS was supposed to play was also a big mess: 8 teams entered on paper – 2 from Mexico, 2 from USA, 2 from Guatemala, and one from Honduras and El Salvador each. Deportivo FAS was not among these initial clubs – Independiente was the Salvadoran representative. NASL had nothing to do with CONCACAF tournaments, so the US representatives were never heard of clubs – New York Pancyprian Freedoms (as the name suggests, a club belonging to the Cypriot immigrant community) and Brooklyn Dodgers. On what basis New York local clubs came to represent USA is unknown, but they did not play at all. They withdrew along with the Mexcian Cruz Azul. UNAM (Mexico) appeared in the second round and eliminated Vida (Honduras) – 2-2 and 5-0. No problem in the third round either – UNAM eliminated Comunicaciones (Guatemala) 2-2 and 3-0, and reached the final.

The Caribbean Section produced a final between teams from far South, if Northern-American at all – Defense Force (Trinidad and Tobago) vs Robin Hood, or SV Robinhood (Suriname). Robin Hood won 1-1 and 5-2.

The tournament final was quite unequal – Robin Hood vs UNAM.

Brave name, but there were limits… whatever football Suriname ever produced is associated with Holland: families moved often to the former colonial center and the kids were Dutch – Frank Rijkard and Ruud Gullit, for instance. Suriname had no noticeable players and no chance to have any, plus money were short. So short, the club decided to play both final legs in Mexico. They ‘hosted’ the first leg in Queretaro and managed a scoreless tie. UNAM won the second leg in Mexico City with great difficulty – 3-2. It should have been an easy win – the Pumas were leading 2-0 in the 25th minute. Ricardo Ferreti scored in the very first minute and in the 25th Luis Flores made it 2-0. But Klinker scored for Robin Hood two minutes later. In the 41st minute Ferreti scored his second goal, opening again 2-goal lead – which did not lasted: Rustemberg scored a penalty in the 44th minute. Exciting first half – and nothing later. No goals in the second half, the result stayed. Robin Hood was brave finalist indeed.

UNAM won the CONCACAF Champions Cup for the second time. It was not really noticeable tournament and the victory was not easy, but was important one for the club – the team coached by Bora Milutinovic was still rising from obscurity and beginning to collect trophies. International success, however small, was important for the image – in sharp contrast to traditional Mexican power like Cruz Azul, which seemingly decided there was no good reason to spend money on CONCACAF tournament. UNAM was building prestige and trophy room, they needed it.

The African Player of the Year award was voted in the end of 1982 and, as usually is, favoured those appearing at the last big international competition – the World Cup, in this case. And the results were fairer than usual, for Algeria and Cameroon played more than well at the world finals. Lakhdar Belloumi (Algeria) was voted third and he was the only top player still stationed in Africa – GC Mascara. Second was his compatriot Sallad Assad, playing for Mulhouse (France).

Thomas N’Kono was voted best, getting 83 points – 29 more than Assad, Hardly anybody could argue the fairness of the vote: N’Kono was voted 3rd in 1979, number one in 1979, and 2nd in 1980. The world ‘discovered’ him at the World Cup, but the Cameroonian goalkeeper was already a star in Africa. His excellent performance at the world finals got him immediately European contract and at the time of the vote he was playing for Espanol (Barcelona).

Already charming the Spaniards with his skills and trade-mark training paints he ever used instead of shorts, N’Kono replaced the Belgian national team goalkeeper Theo Custers in Espanol and at 25, he had many years to play ahead of him. N’Kono won his second continental award, a rare achievement, which, given his age and the move to solid European club, suggested more awards in the future.

The African Cup Winners Cup was almost played in full too – only Printing Agency (Somalia) withdrew without playing at ll and Gor Mahia (Kenya) decided to withdrew after losing the first leg at home against Dinamo Fima (Madagascar). Al-Mokaoulun (Egypt), Hearts of Oak (Ghana), Power Dynamos (Zambia), and Djoliba AC (Mali) reached the semifinals and here results were interesting: Power Dynamos prevailed at home 2-1 over Djoliba AC and then managed to tie the second leg 0-0. Al-Mokaoulun was seemingly on the losing end after home 1-1 tie, but surprisingly they won 2-1 visiting – not only home matches in Africa almost always were the decisive factor, but Hearts of Oak were traditionally strong team on continental scale. Anyhow, the final opposed the Egyptians to the Zambians, first leg played in Zambia. Neither club ever won a the trophy and neither club was familiar to anybody outside Africa – and perhaps not to many in Africa too.

Power Dynamos was also a very young club, established in 1971.

Al-Mokaoulun was older, but if there were familiar Egyptian names, this club was not among them. It looked like sudden rise. The boys won 2-0 visiting and repeated the same result at home – Al-Mokaoulun won the Cup Winners Cup for the first time and made Egyptian football dominant this year on club level. Well done.

 

The African Champions Cup finished in December 1982. There was a sense of normalization at last – only one club withdrew, US Goree (Senegal). The other sign of normalization was the clubs, reaching the semi-finals – they represented Nigeria (Enugu Rangers), Egypt (Al-Ahly), Zaire (FC Lupopo), and Ghana (Asante Kotoko). That is, teams from the countries recognized for advanced football on the continent. Al-Ahly and Asante Kotoko qualified to the final. On the surface, the finalists were different – Al-Ahly never reached continental final. Asante Kotoko was going to its 5th final, having won the Cup once in 1970. As a whole, Ghanaian football was represented at the final for 7th time and Egypt’s – for a 3rd time. However, both countries won the trophy only once before – Asante Kotoko in the 1970s and Al Ismaily in 1969 for Egypt. Technically, Asante Kotoko should have had the edge not only by tradition, but also because Ghana just became the continental champion, but the Egyptians were economically better and since they did not participated in the last issue of the African Cup of Nations, there was no way of comparing strength.

The first leg was in Cairo and it pretty much decided the winner – Al-Ahly finished with a 3-0 lead. Two weeks later, in Kumasi, Al-Ahly tied the second leg 1-1 and won the Cup.

This is picture of Al-Ahly in 1981, which at least is a close approximation of the new cup holders. It was a great triumph for the club, but also for the country. As for the squad… nothing really can be said. May be the only thing of real import was the coming of sponsorship to Africa – in this case, the deodorant firm Old Spice. The international victory was important in another sense too – Al-Ahly was the strongest Egyptian club – since the establishment of the national championship in 1949, they won 17 titles (including 1982) in the 26 championships played. Such strong tradition needed international success and at last Al-Ahly got it.

The other big international championship of the year was the 13th African Cup of Nations. It took place before the World Cup and, as ever before, did not attract any attention outside Africa, perhaps even less then before. The championship went throw preliminary stages, somewhat better scheduled than in the earlier editions, and final tournament of 8 finalists, hosted by Libya. The hosts and the current holders of the title – Nigeria – qualified directly for the finals, so the rest of the continent played for 6 places. And as ever before earlier stages were not played completely, for teams withdrew up to the finals – Benin, Uganda, Gabon in the preliminary round; Tanzania and Equatorial Guinea in the first round; Egypt in the second round. Politics played bigger role than lack of money and the political factor was entirely unpredictable, often changing in the last minute, and hard to figure out, for there were domestic political factors and international hostilities both playing role. And on top of everything – football politics, which were even more mysterious. Upper Volta did not appear at all in the first round, but went directly to the second round, for instance – possibly, it was lucky draw, for the number of countries qualifying to the first round was uneven – 23. And only in the second round Upper Volta played football – they qualified in the preliminary round without playing, for Gabon withdrew, then they apparently got lucky buy and at last played their first match in the second round against Algeria, which utterly destroyed them – 0-7. Hosting the second leg, Upper Volta managed a 1-1 tie and was out – but if they had been lucky again in this round, having to meet Egypt, instead of Algeria, they would have reached the finals without playing a single match. But who knows… against Upper Volta, Egypt may have decided to play. Since African football had no consistency so far, plus having been unknown, there was pretty much no way to judge were there any major upsets: Zaire, seemingly strong football country, was eliminated in the second round, but by Ghana, another continental ‘powerhouse’, so it was not exactly a surprise elimination. This was perhaps the only traditionally strong team missing the finals. The final 8 were divided into two round-robin groups, which played in two coastal Libyan cities on stadiums surprisingly large for anyone paying attention: of 50 000 and 80 000 capacities. That was another thing – during the late 1960s and the 70s, many African nations built large stadiums. Larger than most European stadiums. The sport was popular, but the reason for erecting large facilities was difficult to explain: yes, there was consideration of future needs, but it was also something to boast about, an easy way ‘to solve’ social and economic problems, and also to have facilities for major public political events like parades. Libya had no strong football, even by African measures, but had plenty of oil money and a dictator – stadiums were built. Anyhow, the finals proceeded game after game and when the group stage was completed, it was mostly interesting as a compliment to African performance at the following World Cup.

Group A (Tripoli)

1.LIBYA 3 1 2 0 4- 2 4

2.GHANA 3 1 2 0 3- 2 4

3.Cameroon 3 0 3 0 1- 1 3

4.Tunisia 3 0 1 2 1- 4 1

Group B (Benghazi)

1.ALGERIA 3 2 1 0 3- 1 5

2.ZAMBIA 3 2 0 1 4- 1 4

3.Nigeria 3 1 0 2 4- 5 2

4.Ethiopia 3 0 1 2 0- 4 1

The top 2 of each group went to the semi-finals. Both matches were played on March 16. In Benghazi Ghana prevailed over Algeria in overtime 3-2. It was dramatic match – Algeria was leading 2-0 in the 62nd minute and Ghana equalized just before the final whistle in the 90th minute.

In Tripoli, the hosts won 2-1. Zambia was the first to score in the 29th minute, but eventually the Libyans scored 2 goals in the 38th and 84th minutes.

The match for the bronze, played in Tripoli, went for Zambia – they won 2-0. Algeria finished 4th.

The final, also played in Tripoli, was another drama – Libya and Ghana played to a tie in the group stage, in which Ghana equalized in the last moment – 89th minute. They were first to score a goal, though, and the pattern repeated in the final – Ghana scored in the 35th minute, thanks to Alhassan. Libya equalized in the 70th minute by Beshari. Neither team managed to score another goal – not in regular time and not in the overtime. The winner had to be decided by penalty shoot-out and only here Ghana prevailed 7-6.

Ghana won the championship, maintaining its status as the most successful African team – it was their 4th.

Libya achieved its biggest success, but was unable to win even when coming very close. Most likely it was incidental success, due to home turf, large supportive audience, and the usual help officials provide to hosting nations. Murkier details are not even important: Africa was full of dictators pulling their weight, so there was nothing strange if Qaddafi did as the others. Under-the-table money were part of the game everywhere too. Visiting teams hardly ever brought supporters wit them for the obvious reason: wide-spread African poverty and lack of convenient transportation. Hosts had the advantage by all accounts and no big deal.

Ghana was another story – first of all, its record was getting long: success in the 1960s (1963 and 1965), 1970s (1978), and now in the 1980s. Strong continuity, but the successes of the national team run against international club records and the fact that the country so far did not reach World Cup finals. Because of that the players were entirely unknown and the winning team had no European-based professionals. But there were two foreign-based players: George Alhassan played for FC 105 (Gabon) and the captain Emmanuel Quarshie for Zamalek (Egypt). Africa was technically amateur as a whole, but professionalism was beginning to creep in one way or another. There was no doubt that Alhassan and Quarshie were paid for their services in Gabon and Egypt – otherwise there was no reason at all to go there, especially to Gabon, which generally was in worse economic state than Ghana. There was one more interesting case in the winning team, but it brings the coach first of all to the light:

Charles Kumi Gyamfi was and perhaps still is Ghanaian football legend, but he was also more than just football hero. As a player, he was winner of the African Cup of Nations – this is the sporting part. He was also ‘king’, one of many tribal aristocrats, which provided him with funds to travel, meet, and watch the sport’s greats – as the picture shows, he went to see the 1962 World Cup in Chile. Thus, he gathered current knowledge of the development of the game, which few African coaches had even in the early 1980s. And he had enough political clout because of his status. To a point, he was better positioned than European and South American coaches in Africa, for it was difficult for politicians to tamper his choice of players, tactics, and preparation. Yet, some would say he favoured his own people at the expense of others, but this was a reality in Africa anyway – in his case, he was in position to easily defend himself: his team won the continental championship, he was success both as a player and as a coach. Among his chosen squad was the forward Ben Kayede, playing for Aurora, not a first division club. This was a problem, because it looked like Gyamfi favored second-rate talent and the inclusion of Kayede provoked a lot of criticism from all sides. The ‘unfriendly fire’ is easy to understand, but the ‘friendly fire’ needs explaianation: Aurora was not independent club, but the second team of Ghanaian big club Hearts of Oak. A B team, a farm club, the place those either too young or not good enough were sent to get experience. So, a player not good even for the bench of Hearts of Oak was suddenly in the national team – but the boy so well and Gyamfi was right. As for the age of the hero, it was hard to say how important it was – most likely he was very young, but African teams often included teenage players in their national teams and the future internationally recognized star Abedi Pele in the Ghanaian squad was only 17 years old at the moment. Anyhow, clout and keen eye surely helped Gyamfi in the building of the winning team and not only because of Kayede case – he relegated three ‘senior’ players to the bench – Seth Ampadu, Opoku Afriyie and Joe Carr – replacing them with Sampson Lamptey, George Alhassan and Owusu Mensah. After coming back with the continental cup nobody had the guts to protest and criticize – Gyamfi was right all the way.

But it was not just Ghana to focus on: this championship was particularly interesting after the World Cup. Cameroon and Algeria reached the African championship finals. Cameroon was eliminated at the first stage, but without losing a match. However, they won none too – three ties, which they repeated the Cameroonians repeated at the World Cup a few months later to the letter: even their scoring record was the same – 1-1. Algeria won their preliminary group and finished 4th in the African championship, but only the shameful scheming of West Germany and Austria prevented them from reaching the second round of the World Cup. Suddenly, there was more to African football then ever before: take out Libya, but Ghana and Zambia were seemingly at the same level as Cameroon and Algeria – that is, pretty much at par with the European and South American teams. At last Africa came strong – the best teams were not exactly running on occasional enthusiasm, but were actually close to the best: judging by the World Cup performance of the losers of the African championship. That meant further development, boosted by more African players getting professional contracts in Europe. May be , after years of empty prophesies, African football came of age in 1982 – ironically, at continental finals nobody cared for and almost completely forgotten right away.

The aftermath. Commentaries and evaluations of the World Cup continued for months, as ever, and summery of them would be something like that:

Nothing particularly new was shown at the finals. Nothing revolutionary for sure – there was evolution only, into something named ‘rational football’. By now, elements of total football were a must – changing positions, covering the whole field, pressure of the opponent, physical fitness. As a whole, the defensive elements of the old total football were present, but a lot of the real strength of the it – the attacking ones, were not much in evidence. Rational football was pretty much that and it had something cold and cynical at its roots: overrun the opponent and break it down, no matter how. ‘Professional fouls’ became the norm: it was even easier to kick down the opponent and stop their attack in early stage than trying to get the ball cleanly. Only victory mattered and victory became quite a wide term after the shameless meeting of West Germany and Austria – one can get what they want even by losing. But nothing else than final victory mattered anymore, it was a war and instead of total football, there was total war.

The torn jersey of Ardiles against Italy exemplified best the new philosophy at its ugliest.

The new formula was generally seen as successful: 24 teams was not the perfect number, but it was a matter of refining only. On the positive side were the outsiders – with the exception of El Salvador, the rest played well. The biggest revelation was the wonderful performance of the African teams – they were up to date tactically and pretty much equal to the Europeans and South Americans. Asian teams obviously improved too – to give more spots to the ‘developing world’ was clearly a step in the right direction. Out of 6 ‘outsiders’ only one – El Salvador – equaled the old notion of an outsider.

Cameroon was arguably the strongest ‘outsider’ and the big discovery, coming very close to reaching the second stage, along with Algeria, which was plainly robbed of advancing, but Cameroon left stronger and more lasting impression – they were truly equal to the ‘big teams’. New Zealand, Kuwait, and Honduras lost and were still weaker, yet, they played competent football and no fear.

Referees are always criticized, but seemingly this time there were too many mistakes – to the point that it was questionable are the referees up to date with the modern game. It is difficult to say which incident was the worst – Schumacher sending Battiston to hospital for months, almost killing him; Gentile systematically destroying the best players of the opposite team; the penalties given to Spain or the penalties not given to USSR.

Perhaps the accident of the long stoppage during the France – Kuwait match, involving the Police was the worst – the Soviet referee Stupar did the unthinkable: bending under outside pressure, changing his mind, and disallowing a goal already called a score. It was not mere mistake and it was not putting a blind eye – it was reversing a decision, because somebody from the stands said so. The shame of the meeting between West Germany and Austria, however, showed entirely new problem, going outside the rules – the teams clearly did not play, fixing convenient for both result in the very beginning. Yet, technically, there was nothing to be done – they moved the ball around. Wasting time was done for years, but as long as the ball moves… it was inside the rules.

Fans. Hooliganism was still British phenomenon, but it was developing to the point when it was actually preferred Birtish teams not to reach finals. There was no other solution so far, especially because violence happened largely outside the stadiums. The biggest threat were the English fans.

Politics. This was coming to the realm of the exotic – the Falkland Islands war had importance before the beginning of the World Cup: England considered to withdrawal, but decided to play.

The Argentines made a patriotic photo of themselves, which was almost grotesque – foorball players are supposed to smile at such photos, and they did. But a war is hardly a laughing, jolly matter. At the end, only Ardiles suffered from the conflict – he had to move to play in France for awhile, although neither he, nor Tottenham Horspur wanted that.

Two records were set:

Norman Whiteside of Manchester United and Northern Ireland became the youngest player ever, playing at World Cup finals – he bettered Pele by few months, still 17-years old in round numbers. And it is a record unlikely to be bettered.

At 40, Dino Zoff became the oldest player to appear at World Cup finals – his record was bested in 2014, but he also became the oldest world champion, which very likely is not going to be equaled or bested.

Two teams captured the minds, leaving many observers to optimistic statements – Brazil and France.

Football was alive, because of them and they introduced pleasant styles, bringing joy back to the game. But it was painfully clear that ‘rational’ football was getting the upper hand – both artistic teams were eliminated by teams with the opposite philosophy. Compared to the brutal teams, thinking of war, not of fun, Brazil and France appeared naïve. They also made very clear that the new reality required strong players at every position – may be not great players, but competent and strong above average: both France and Brazil lacked good goalkeepers and paid dearly for that – it was no longer possible to compensate a weak position by simply outscoring the opponent.

Injuries – an old and inevitable plague, but it looked like no other World Cup was so much affected by injuries. Rummenigge, Keegan, Boniek, Platini, and others were either not fit and suffering during the tournament, or missing key games. Perhaps Belgium paid the highest price – with van der Elst arriving injured and Pfaff and Gerets getting injured early in the tournament, Belgium was simply destroyed. Current football was collective and individuals seemingly mattered less, yet, it became clear that results depended mostly on key stars – without them collectivity was not lost, but the team was losing, not winning. But the new kind of players were pretty much similar work-horses and the absence of a star was getting nearly fatal – back in 1962, Brazil had enough talent to win the World Cup without injured Pele. It was no longer possible in 1982, almost no team had a player capable of replacing a star – and the coaches, without options and fearing a loss, preferred to field injured players, even when it was clear they contribute next to nothing.

Discoveries. The World Cup was still the place to find hew talent and a market place. For most of the world, it was the moment to see at last those only heard of – Socrates, Falcao, Maradona. Along with them were the entirely unknown, like Thomas N’Kono. Frankly, not much real discoveries were made and Maradona underperformed. But considering the transfer contracts, the World Cup remained the number one place to get noticed or confirm one’s worth – Platini and Boniek signed with Juventus, Pfaff with Bayern (with specific clause about behavior, for Pfaff had a record of short temper bursts and misconduct), N’Kono with Espanol, Maradona with Barcelona. Africans moved to Europe, South Americans too, the New Zealander Winton Ruffer was not missed and also got European contract – the World Cup was important and players knew it well – this was giving hope for the future, for players were going to try their best at the finals to get noticed.

Thomas N’Kono, one of the genuine discoveries of the World Cup, instantly becoming a star.

The best of the finals were both obvious and controversial – yes, there were discoveries and players performing more than well. Lato, for example, who got a second wind. Others did not satisfy at all. Yet, no matter what people saw and what journalists commented during the tournament, the team of the World Cup displayed something else: Dino Zoff (Italy), Luizinho (Brazil), Junior (Brazil), Claudio Gentile (Italy), Fulvio Collovati (Italy), Zbigniew Boniek (Poland), Falcao (Brazil), Michel Platini (France), Zico (Brazil), Paolo Rossi (Italy), Karl-Heinz Rummenigge (West Germany). The new World champions got most players, as ever, but some were here on reputation, rather than actual performance, or because there were no really great players as some posts. The very system – 4-4-2 – suggested the change, favouring ‘realistic’ football – fewer strikers. Paolo Rossi was voted best player of the tournament, which was a bit suspect – like in 1978, there was no really fascinating and great player from start to end, and those playing well at the last stages were preferred. Rossi also was the best scorer – with 6 goals, all scored in the last three games. Not much… no more great scorers, was the sad conclusion.

Maradona and Socrates – both out of the best 11, but voted among the top 15 players of the championship. Socrates was great, Maradona – almost nothing. He particularly failed a s leader and many felt he was greatly inflated player. That was also a brief summary of the finals – highs and lows, fulfilled and unfulfilled expectations, and the sad reality of ‘realistic’ football – both players went home early. The third player of similar fame and caliber – Platini – fared differently:

He performed as expected, coming to his peak. He led France as a true leader and to a higher point than Brazil and Argentina. And he was a problem in the same time, noticed well before the finals – France was often stronger and certainly more collective without him. Without him, France was losing leadership, some creativity, and scoring power. With him it was not so together and was a weaker fighter. Peculiar problem for Michel Hidalgo, but also a general problem with the establishment of ‘realistic football’ – artistry was becoming liability and there was no real place for imaginative players. Better play like the Germans – no fun workaholics, extracting positive result at the end.

More or less, that was the summary of the 1982 World Cup.