IN FRONT OF THE CHAMPIONS OF URUGUAY THE PARISIANS PERFORMED WELL
— Maurice Pefferkorn | 09/03/1925 —

In wishing the Paris team a comforting defeat yesterday morning, I admit that I was struggling to hide the apprehension of seeing them do badly in the face of adversaries whose dangerous value all of Europe is paid to know. No one dreamed of seeing the Paris team, not defeated, but on a par with the team which, champion of Uruguay, has eleven internationals in its ranks, including eight Olympics. It was just a matter of knowing if our people were going to hang on and be able to hold their adversaries high enough so that the future seemed less gloomy than the recent past.

Well, we had this surprise. We saw the Uruguayan players largely dominate in science and tactics than those from Paris. But they played with heart, not as a beaten team, but as a team which fought for its chances and attacked often. Several Parisian offensives were excellently carried out. If only one of them resulted in a goal, which was also nicely executed, several others could very well have had a happier fate. I do not want to say that Uruguay did not deserve its victory, but only that the Parisians showed themselves to be very progressing, that they often knew how to organize pleasant attacks and that they repeatedly forced the Uruguayan defence to get employed.

Moreover, one remark will provide proof of what I am saying: the defence of the Montevideo players yesterday made as much of an impression on us as the attack, if not more. This means that they were threatened and had the opportunity to have their talents admired.

The goalkeeper Mazali, who was rarely seen at work during the Olympic Games, was remarkably sure and clear-sighted. In front of him Arispe and Foglino showed great class. However, they were caught at fault several times and found themselves obliged to rectify compromised situations. They almost always succeeded thanks to the effectiveness of their play on the man and on the ball.

The half-backs did their role as half-backs; they participated as much in the defence as in the attack. They controlled our forwards most of the time, thanks to their heading and the speed of their start. Their relaxation ensured they had possession of the ball more often. Andrade showed himself, once again, to be the best, although he did not demonstrate as great a virtuosity as last June.

The forwards operated in the way we know. Petrone had some impressive breakthroughs through our defence and repeatedly looked like he was going to beat them. With him Romano stood out especially for his hooks, his feints and his dribbling. Castro, of whom we were highly praised, showed himself to be almost the equal of Petrone and Romano. But Scarone and Urdinarán were not quite up to them.

Overall the team seemed less ready than at the time of the Olympic Games. Is it because they have just disembarked and have not sufficiently recovered from a long journey? Is it because their training is not as comprehensive as then? Is it because the climate is less favorable than that of our month of June? Is it finally because ours had to disturb the harmony of their game? Still, they were a little less brilliant than nine months ago. In particular, their shots were marked by direction and strength.

*   *   *

The Paris team presented a first-rate defence. Cottenet had excellent blocks. But at the start of the game, his clearances seemed a little weak. He is an extremely courageous player who does not hesitate to dive into the opponent's legs. Vignoli and Pollits formed a line of full-backs the likes of which we have not seen in a French team for a long time. The first is in great form; it is a solid bulwark for the France team. Pollitz had a bit of a weak start to the game; but he subsequently put to his credit some very clear judgments.

Our half-backs had a huge job to do. Dauphin was perhaps the best overall, although the end of the game saw him drag his feet a little. Bonnardel, without being as brilliant as he used to be, played a very good match; his understanding with Vignoli is perhaps not yet perfect, but it could improve between now and 22 March, as these two players still have two great matches to play together between now and then. Dupoix had good times and bad times. His lack of relaxation meant that he was often beaten by his opponents. His age was beginning to show. But admit that he had a lot to do with the Scarone, Petrone and Castro triplet who made him travel a lot, but he also got in a lot of trouble. A little slow to get going, he was better in the second half and always more comfortable in attack than in defence.

Bunyan was not the Bunyan of his great days. He seems tired after a hard season. However, he got along very well with Cordon who was the best forward in the line yesterday and played a very good game. On the right wing, the young Gosselin distinguished himself in the first half with rapid runs followed by precise crosses. But he disunites during the second. Barberat had happy inspirations, but through his slowness he missed many opportunities. He also lacks activity and fulfills his inside forward role quite poorly. Sentubéry, a little neglected by his comrades, but not by Andrade, did what he had to do very properly.

In summary, this pleasant and moving game put a little balm in our hearts and allows us to hope that the next outings of the French team against Brazil, Uruguay and Italy will be very satisfactory.