The close season is generally the time for basking in past glories, so for those of you have the time and the patience I will take you on a short trip down memory lane to a period which many consider to be the Golden Years of English football before Alf Ramsay and his “wingless wonders” changed the face of the game for ever in the 1966 World Cup campaign.
There were many things different about the way the game was played back then and tactically it was almost unrecognizable from what we see today. To begin with, the organization of the team was completely different. The standard formation would be what we would now call 3-4-3 or 3-2-2-3, if you could find any team nowadays that played this quaint system. Apart from the goalkeeper of course, whose standard equipment would a woolen vest, cloth cap and very rarely a pair of gloves, except in deepest winter - the use of gloves to improve grip on the ball would have been considered cheating - the defence consisted of three players, two full backs, right and left and a centre back, called rather confusingly the centre half. The term centre back, a diabolical Italian invention, did not come in until the late 1960s. With one or two notable exceptions, these players restricted themselves exclusively to defence. The concept of the attacking full back was completely unknown and if a right back did ever make a foray up to the half way line he would generally be booed back with a “What are you doing up there then?”. Defenders also rarely came up for corners. Probably the best English defender of this period was Billy Wright, the Wolves centre half, but he was slow by present day standards and had none of the elegant skills of say a Rio Ferdinand. He was an effective tackler, however, and it was said his clearing passes always found a teammate. Defenders were expected to tackle and defend and were not asked to show clever ball skills. If ever one did try to dribble his way out of trouble he would generally be greeted by a chorus from the touchline, “Stop fairying around. Boot it upfield!”.This was not always bad advice, as in those days the ball, which was all leather, was a lot heavier than today, especially when wet and fine touches were a lot more difficult. A notable exception to the standard pattern was the Welshman John Charles. He had started as centre forward but even as a centre half liked to get forward and was a notable goal scorer with some late runs into the box. He was a an extremely fit and powerful player, however, who had no trouble in getting back to defend – players were a lot less fit in those days, many were known to smoke and drink and few I suspect would have been capable of running the 10-11 kilometers in a game that is expected of the modern player.
In front of the defence were two wing halves, right and left. These were roughly the equivalent of today’s defensive midfielders and their chief task was to tackle and win the ball. These were not generally the most creative players in the team and the best example I can think of, though of course Sir Alf Ramsay would never have called him a wing half, was Nobby Stiles. Stiles was definitely a player who harked back to the former era. Another great wing half, though a less typical one, was Man Utd’s Duncan Edwards, whose career was cut so tragically short in the Munich Air Disaster. Edwards was a tall and powerfully built player, a complete contrast to the terrier-like Stiles. Unusually for a wing half he was not only a good ball winner but a fine passer and reader of the game. He could also get forward and score goals, not something that the wing half was noted for.
Then there were the inside forwards, right and left.These were what would we would now call attacking midfielders. They needed a good understanding and the best pairing I can remember for England was Fulham’s Johnny Haynes and Tottenham’s Jimmy Greaves. Though the best “ball-playing inside forward” was generally reckoned to have been Wilf Mannion of Middlesborough, a fact which I can’t verify as I never saw him play, being of a slightly earlier period. Greaves was very unlucky to be left out of the 1966 World Cup and had substitutes been allowed at the time, Ramsay would surely have brought him on in the later stages. Every player had to be capable of going for 90 minutes in those days, another factor which contributed to the relative slowness of the game. Haynes and Greaves represented two opposing aspects of the inside forward’s game. Haynes relied on elegant skill and immaculate ball control. He was not as versatile technically as many of the modern game’s “creative” players nor was he as fast but he was a perfect passer and a gifted exponent of the “through ball”. At a time when tricks and unorthodox plays were actively discouraged he could also pass the ball with his right foot behind his left leg and vice versa à la Cristiano Ronaldo, which often drew calls of approval or alternatively, when it didn’t work, boos.
Crowds in those days behaved a great deal differently to today. The vast majority actually watched the game and though tactically extremely conservative, “Come on Ratface, give it some welly!” to a player who was “hanging on” to the ball too long for example, could be very knowledgeable. The only standard accoutrement of the football fan would be a scarf and a rattle which was swung around above the shoulder to make a sort of clacking sound. Banners were rarely seen and certainly never fireworks. The “Bobby” patrolling the touchline – there were rarely more than 2 or 3 - was a figure of fun, but he (never of course she) seldom had to do any serious work at a game. Seating was only for directors and conditions on the terraces were often extremely crowded and uncomfortable. The only way the crowd was separated was by a series of “lean on” barriers, but if you got pressed against one this could be very unpleasant if not actually dangerous. Many terraces were completely open to the elements and in wet weather could be pretty miserable. Facilities in general at all but the very best grounds were extremely spartan and the toilets, for example, often unspeakable. Pre-Hillsborough safety at grounds was not a priority and I can remember as a boy being genuinely scared during the rush at the end for the exits. Food was not available inside the ground but there was no ban on alcohol and it was not common to see fans very drunk. I remember once as a teenager feeling very sick because of the stench of beer on people’s breath. Violence at games was almost unheard of, despite the fact that there was definitely a lot more drunkenness and though away supporters were sometimes subjected before or after the game to pretty intimidating verbal assaults, I never saw one physically attacked. Rhythmical chanting or singing was extremely uncommon, though West Ham’s famous “I’m for ever Blowing Bubbles” goes back I think to the 1920s. The first really popular soccer anthem was Liverpool’s heartwarming “You’ll Never Walk Alone” which was adopted from a pop song of the early 60s by Gerry and The Pacemakers. Black players were rare and if one did play was invariably the subject of racial abuse, which in those days of course went completely unpunished and was often the source of considerable laughter.
The second type of inside forward was the electrifying Jimmy Greaves. He had very quick feet and a devastating burst of speed which could take him straight past defenders. Much more individualistic and less of a team player than Haynes (it was this “fault” that probably kept him out in 66, Haynes was by then already past his best) he was a great goalscorer and a brilliant “inside right”.
One of the main differences tactically between pre-66 and now was in the use of wingers. These players would generally spend most of the match waiting on the touchline inside the opponents half for a good pass. They were not encouraged to defend and their main function was to provide good crossed balls to the centre forward. Probably the best two wingers of this epoch for England were Stanley Matthews of Blackpool, then one of England’s premier teams and Tom Finney of Preston. Matthews’ style was unique. It was said he had the ball tied to his bootlace. He certainly seemed to have a remarkable knack of sending a defender the wrong way and though he nearly always favored the outside break, it was remarkable the number of fullbacks who couldn’t “pick” him. I suspect his style, which owed more to ballroom dancing than soccer on occasion, would not fool as many fullbacks nowadays. At least they would be quicker to recover than they were then. However, I never saw him tackle and very rarely inside his own half. Players were not encouraged to get out “out of position”. If a winger for example, happened to wander infield in search of the ball he would inevitably hear a bellow from the touchline, “Get back on the wing you *****, where you belong!”
I could not leave this section without mentioning the extraordinary George Best. Although Best only just qualifies chronologically, joining Man Utd as a teenager in 1963, he is worth including if only because he perfectly illustrates the transition from the "classical" to the modern footballer.Hounded by the press as much for his off the pitch antics as his play, nothing about Best was orthodox, from his Beatle haircut to his popstar lifestyle and by the standards of the former age he was fabulously wealthy. Before the 60s professional footballers rarely earned more than the average working man. On the pitch too there was very little of the former era in the way he played, combining as he did the best qualities of both a winger and an inside forward. Positionally he was extremely unorthodox and rarely if ever stuck to the touchline, popping up almost anywhere on the pitch in search of the ball. Although he tackled only occasionally, he seemed to have an almost limitless repertoire for beating defenders. He was one of the few players I saw who could poke the ball between a defender's own legs and pick it up the other side. He also used to deliberately tap the ball against his shins and pick up the rebound, something which the great Sir Stanley would never have attempted. He could pass and shoot with both feet from almost any position, including when seemingly completely off balance and he scored some remarkable goals. Running with the ball he reminded you more of a kid in the schoolyard, skating through a crowd of bystanders and to steal a quote from another great sportsman of the era, he would "float like a butterfly, sting like a bee". Also modern was Best's ability to self destruct, in his case mainly due to alcohol abuse, and whereas Sir Stanley Matthews continued playing at the highest level until the ripe old age of 47, the burnt out Best managed 20 years less.
The final position was centre-forward. The chief attributes for a player in this position were speed and strength. He needed to be able to (physically if necessary) hold off a challenge but mostly get on the end of a cross. Good heading ability was of course paramount. Centre-forwards were much less frequently asked to “hold the ball up” or “lay off” and playing in the manner of Crouch with your back to the goal a lot of the time, would have been regarded as form of homosexual perversion. The best exponent I ever saw of this style of play was Bolton’s Nat Lofthouse. The idea of operating two strikers in tandem like Keegan and Toshack, for example, was a much later invention.
Cracks were beginning to appear, however, in the system and the 6-3 home defeat by Hungary, was a wake up call for a style of play that placed too much emphasis on getting forward and not enough on defence, though I have to say that on the whole there were fewer boring games with everyone behind the ball in 1960 than there are today. The chief flaws in the old style of play were the single central defender and too many wide players, leaving you dangerously exposed to attacks down the centre, something which Puskas and Co ruthlessly exploited.
There were an number of other small but significant differences. No substitutions I have already mentioned. The Manchester City goalkeeper, Bert Trautmann, famously played the final 15 minutes of the 1956 Cup Final with a broken bone in his neck! There were also no red or yellow cards. This meant that fouling did not have the same stigma as it does in the modern game – well even less - and indeed some players were famous for it. Bayed on by the crowd, many defenders were often encouraged to foul, “Get stuck in, you pansy!”. If you were a winger, for example, you expected to get fouled several times during a game, but if you were good enough, you could sometimes turn the situation to advantage with a neat sidestep. Tom Finney, a more direct and powerful runner than Matthews, though a less mazy dribbler, was a master of this. The only real sanction a referee had was to send a player off, but I can never recall one ever doing this, despite some appalling provocation on occasion. I think they were scared of the abuse they would inevitably suffer and the reputation for having lost control in game. Thanks to the antics of certain notorious players like Chelsea’s “Chopper” Harris, however, the situation was in danger of getting out of hand and the modern system of cautions introduced, which has been reasonably effective
Was the game better then? Who can say? Without doubt, the technical standard of football has improved immensely. Even the greatest players of that period did not have the technical skill of say a Cristiano Ronaldo or the sheer effrontery of a Ronaldinho. There was a lot less emphasis on individual brilliance – I never saw anyone even attempt a bicycle kick, for example, and bouncing the ball on the chest and thigh would have been regarded as, at best, a party trick, though there were some brilliant players. It was the classical values of good passing and teamwork that were paramount. The game was a lot more static than it is today, with players sticking to clearly defined roles. It was not until 1974 that Cruyff and Co with their famous “Total Football” finally got rid of this sort of demarcation. Today a fullback is expected to play like a winger and a centre forward ( I still find it hard to use the term ‘striker’) defend at corners. This would have been unthinkable in 1960. Certainly players are a lot fitter today than they were then, though strangely, despite the sometimes crude defending, there seemed to be fewer injuries.
On balance overall I’d have to say the game has improved, but there is still a lot to look back on with nostalgia.
Ian Fraser.
