ON THE SUPERIORITY OF THE URUGUAYANS
— Louis Delblat | 02/04/1925 —

Of the South American visitors that the European football world has had or will have the opportunity to see evolve, it seems obvious that the most prestigious are those of the Club Nacional de Montevideo, champion of Uruguay.

Argentinian club Boca Juniors suffered a defeat in Spain and managed a few narrow victories.

The Brazilian club of São Paulo, after easily dominating a French team that was in no way representative of French football, had great difficulty getting rid of the Stade Français and had to bow to the Football Club of CetTe.

Club Nacional de Montevideo played five matches in France. They beat Paris by 3 goals to 1, Normandy by 5 goals to 0, the North by 7 goals to 0 and Stade Bordelais by 4 goals to 0. Only the French team held them in check. It is fair to say that this match was shortened by twenty minutes and that the superiority of Uruguay, although it could not be transformed into goals, nevertheless seemed obvious to the 30,000 people who attended the match.

Overall, it is no exaggeration to say that Club Nacional de Montevideo is representative of the best football played in South America.

*   *   *

Uruguay triumphed at the 1924 Olympic Games. The Club Nacional de Montevideo is of approximately equal value to that of its country's national team. Does this mean that the superiority of the Uruguayans is global?

In sport, and more particularly in football, the line does not exist. The clearest reasoning in the world, the predictions which seem infallible can be destroyed by ninety minutes of play.

Uruguay triumphed at the Olympic Games. Does this mean that they would repeat their success if the Olympic tournament started again tomorrow? They may be beaten. They would leave no less of a favorite.

I attended the five matches played in France by Club Nacional de Montevideo. I've seen just about every major team representing European amateur football. There are none that are equal to or better than the Montevideo club. There are none that possess all of its qualities to the same degree. It may be that there have been or still are players in Europe equal to Petrone, Scarone, Zibechi, Andrade and Mazali. Perhaps Spain has in Zamora a goalkeeper like Mazali. Perhaps the Italian Cevenini had Scarone. Perhaps the Frenchman René Petit — but where, the Frenchman — is as good as Zibechi. Perhaps another Frenchman, Paul Nicolas, at the height of his powers, was not far behind Petrone, and perhaps the English amateurs G. O. Smith and Vivian Woodward surpassed him. Perhaps the Hungarian Fogl is as good as Uruguay's best backs. Perhaps the Swede Kock comes close to Romano...

But which country has, not one or a few players, but enough players to compose a team both as brilliant and as homogeneous as that of Uruguay?

In the amateur ranks and in Europe, the Uruguayans have no rivals worthy of them.

*   *   *

Should we conclude that Uruguay is world superior? Minute. What do you think of English and Scottish professionals? Are they not equal or superior to Uruguayan footballers?

I had the opportunity to ask this question to two men who know English and Scottish professionals well: MM. Jones, referee from Normandy, and Mac Dewitt, player from the Cercle Athlétique de Paris.

Mr. Jones, after the Uruguay-Normandy match, told me this:


— I refereed for several years for the English professionals. I know them perfectly. The Uruguayans play perfectly. However, I am convinced that the best professional English team would beat them by one or two goals. The game of English professionals is equal in technique to the Uruguayan game. But it is rougher and it is this roughness, this harshness that would give victory to the English. These would be superior in defence and equal in attack. From then on, they would win.


Mac Dewitt knows Scottish professionals inside and out. Now, his opinion is exactly similar to that of Mr. Jones. Mac Dewitt even claims that the amateur team of Queen's Park Rangers, which is, moreover, honorably in the Scottish League, would be able to inflict a failure on the Uruguayans.

MM. Jones and Mac Dewitt won't mind me telling them that in this case they are goldsmiths. But their opinion is perfectly justified. I add that it is shared by many sportsmen knowledgeable about football.

One conclusion is obvious: the global superiority of Uruguay will only be demonstrated as much as it is manifested over the English and Scottish professionals.