Archive. Football. Statistic & History
Document |
A document created by for the whole football community
Ferencváros F.C. - Mitropa Cup 1932

Author: Isaque Argolo | Creation Date: 2022-05-24 16:23:49

Data providers: Isaque Argolo.
The champions of Nemzeti Bajnokság I. would face F.C. Juventus, winners of the Prima Divisione 1931/32 in the first round of Mitropa Cup 1932. In decline, Hungarian football mainly saw Ferencváros as its hope to represent the Hungarian soil in the main continental competition. Ferencváros had won every match in the championship and with extreme scoring authority and confidence in a line of extraclass half-backs.
Both of the quarter-final matches between these two teams would be the main event of the tournament. On the one hand, due to the Bianconeri's efficiency, speed and determination, it would be enough for most authorities to consider Juventus as the favorite of the battles. Furthermore, some authorities even mentioned that Ferencváros won all the matches due not only to their own merit, but mainly due to the low level of opponents in Nemzeti Bajnokság I. FORWARD LINE PROBLEMS
Ferencváros faced one of the best defenses in Europe, despite the peak of the performances of Gianpiero Combi, Virginio Rosetta and Umberto Caligaris together had passed. Of course, in the Hungarian Championship there was not a defense even close to the qualities of these players, even more with a Bertolini making up the Italian defensive system and with a very dynamic Luis Monti. Nevertheless, the performance of Fradi's forward line was completely precarious.
There were several problems, the first being the clear lack of precision in the shots of the forwards, mainly József Takács II., who was far from being the great shooter that was recognized in Europe, and Vilmos Kohut who did not have the same quality of shooting. Moreover, in addition to the lack of precision, Ferencváros exaggerated in their offensive combinations, thus, passing the ball when evidently they were in a clear shooting position.
In addition to the clear precariousness of the shots, another interesting point was raised by Zoltán Blum, the team's coach. Blum commented shortly after the match in Turin: — The lack of ideas among our strikers is terrible... If Gschweidl were playing for us, we would have won the Turin match in a historic proportion.
This comment by Blum reminds the reader that Friedrich Gschweidl was constantly intended by Ferencváros, even before Sárosi was frequently used in Fradi's attack. Gschweidl, already in the second half of the 1920s, had proposals to play for Ferencváros or A.C. Sparta. With that, the quality of the offensive line would theoretically increase noticeably, in addition to the permanence of Gyurka in the half-back line.
Clearly Ferencváros' best line was half-backs, mainly because of the young star named György Sárosi. Already in the first game, he put on an exceptional performance that would eventually be complemented by another great performance in the second game. Antal Lyka had a hard time against Raimundo Orsi, but he played satisfying matches. Gyula Lázár could have played a superior role in the second match, but this was not the case.
Ferencváros was eliminated as Hungary's last hope, as Újpest had already been eliminated by First Vienna. These two eliminations, mainly that of Ferencváros, made the main Hungarian authorities rethink the system and style of play adopted. Otherwise, as mentioned by a journalist, Hungary and its teams could withdraw from international matches. The reports
Mitropa Cup, Quarter-Final, 1st match: 29/06/1932, Tuesday 16:30. F.C. Juventus — Ferencváros F.C. 4:0 (2:0) Place: Stadio Comunale, Turin - Referee: František Cejnar (Prague). Attendance: about 12.000. F.C. Juventus Coach: Carlo Carcano. XI: Combi(c) — Rosetta, Caligaris — Varglien I., Monti, Bertolini — Sernagiotto, Cesarini, Vecchina, Ferrari, Orsi. Ferencváros F.C. Coach: Zoltán Blum. XI: Háda — Takács I., Korányi — Lyka, Sárosi(c), Lázár — Táncos, Takács II., Turay, Toldi, Kohut. Goals: Orsi(14min), Cesarini(2, 44min; 56min), Sernagiotto(59min).
This was a long-awaited match for the public that followed the Mitropa Cup. As much as the two teams were not at the same previous level and regularity in the match that was presented in their respective championships, the match stood out as a great confrontation.
Through half-back play Ferencváros dominated the actions of the midfield, however, with a completely unrecognizable attack, the construction carried out by the half-back trio failed. In addition to Ferencváros' forwards exaggerating their combinations, many occasions for a clear shot on goal were snubbed or impressively missed.
As much as the match was an extensive 4:0 result, it is almost of a unanimous opinion that the result does not reflect the match and not even the conditions of Ferencváros' defensive system. Blame was consequently placed on offensive ineffectiveness and lucky goal situations on the part of Juventus.
Háda played a good game, especially when he got busy at the end due to constant incisive advances by Juventus. He, however, conceded two unexpected goals. Korányi was the best defender.
The best sector of Ferencváros was by far the half-back line, as they had extremely capable players, in addition, of course, to a dominant Sárosi. Lázár, due to a direct injury in the match, ended up mitigating his performance. Lyka did well.
In the attack, only Toldi existed. Ferencváros' left insider proved to be a fighter and hard worker on the offensive line. In addition to him, Turay played a game that was above Kohut's, Takács II. and Tancos. However, the centre-forward was far from being effective in his actions. THE EFFECTIVENESS OF JUVENTUS
On the home side, Juventus showed a very effective football, but they would eventually demonstrate the great football played in the Italian Championship 1931/32 in the second half of the match. As much as the result was too extensive, Juventus played better and deserved an eventual advantage against Ferencváros.
During the first half, Juventus' defensive system showed uncertainties, but they maintained their success without conceding goals and leveraged their game in the second half. Combi made good saves and Ferencváros' attack would need much more to overcome Rosetta and Caligaris, in addition to the defensive returns of Bertolini.
Going towards the half-back line, Varglien I. played a game below, but centre-half Monti, despite not having produced his usual game, had enough knowledge to make good his usual distributions and to destroy Ferencváros' offensive actions.
Orsi and Cesarini were Juventus' offensive line best players. Cesarini is a player with high versatility, technique and knowledge to carry out strategic actions. Even so, he proved to be an excellent scorer. Alongside Cesarini, Sernagiotto played a fine match, but not comparable to Orsi's advances. Ferrari and Vecchina performed below.
* * *
Rinaldo Barlassina: The better team won. Ferencváros was still better in the first half, but after the break the roles seemed to have completely changed.
Dr. Taparone: Ferencváros played beautifully in the field. The result is a bit “strong”. But if there is no strength, there is no football.
Gianpiero Combi: It's better not to make a statement. We must not make a statement.
František Cejnar: Juventus' victory would have been realistic for two goals, because the other two goals could have been easily worked out by Ferencváros.
Béla Mailinger: I wonder how such a match could end with a 4:0 result.
Sándor Klement: We played a brilliant half, with great misfortune, even though we could have won a match then. It is incomprehensible how Ferencváros gave up the second half. And the weak behavior in front of the Italian gate is incomprehensible. The players of Juventus, on the other hand, threw themselves into all our actions with the well-known self-sacrificing devotion.
István Weiss: The result should have been reversed in the first half. Then we would be talking about a completely different result now. Mitropa Cup, Quarter-Final, 2nd match: 03/07/1932, Sunday 18:00. Ferencváros F.C. — F.C. Juventus 3:3 (2:2) Place: Üllői út, Budapest - Referee: Eugen Braun (Vienna). Attendance: about 8.000. Ferencváros F.C. Coach: Zoltán Blum. XI: Háda — Takács I., Korányi — Lyka, Sárosi(c), Lázár — Táncos, Takács II., Turay, Toldi, Kohut. F.C. Juventus Coach: Carlo Carcano. XI: Combi(c) — Rosetta, Caligaris — Varglien I., Monti, Bertolini — Sernagiotto, Cesarini, Vecchina, Ferrari, Orsi. Goals: Sárosi(3, 15min[penalty]; 18min[penalty]; 80min[penalty]) — Orsi(25min), Cesarini(2, 30min; 65min)
The clash of styles and systems was notorious. Ferencváros, on the one hand, had a style that was not as effective as that of Juventus, who carried out the simple and turned his actions into goals. Ferencváros tried to complete actions the hard way, so there was a clear mitigation of chances on the part of Fradi's team. On the Juventus side, while their football was not equivalent to the performance at the Stadio Comunale, their fast, determined and objective football was enough to achieve a great result in Üllői út. A VERY WEAK FERENCVÁROS
Another bad performance on the part of the Hungarians, Ferencváros' offensive line made the same mistakes as in Turin. Furthermore, the defensive system was precarious, too. Only the half-back line showed football above the other lines.
The goalkeeper Háda performed poorly. Takács I. was not enough to stop the offensive actions of Juventus forwards. Korányi was the least worst.
The half-back line was clearly Ferencváros' highlight. Sárosi was the best player of the match, only he made a spectacular performance on the Hungarian side. Lyka tried to nullify Orsi — a few failures on occasion — but performed a satisfactory match.
Fradi's attack was once again precarious and almost entirely mirrored the match in Turin. Toldi and Turay were the main names. On the right side of Fradi's advances, as they had already been severely criticized for their performances in the Comunale, Takács II. and Táncos were non-existent. BIANCONERI
Juventus played a match in the same way Bruno Roghi, the renowned editor of Gazzetta dello Sport, described what it would be like. Juventus were once again simple, precise and completely cold in their actions. Faster, more individualistic play and unexpected actions were crucial aspects of the visitors' performance.
Juventus knew perfectly how to behave in the direction of the match, they didn't let themselves be shaken when the score was 2:0 for Ferencváros, no. Juventus showed determination and superiority in their actions shortly after that. They even reversed the score of the match to 2:3. Juventus clearly were, without a single doubt, a team of strong psychological.
Combi, with the exception of the penalties, all and three unstoppable, did fully his duty and in front of him Rosetta and Caligaris fought well. Caligaris this time played a batter match than Rosetta.
The half-back line was the main reason for Juventus' affirmation in the next phase. They worked tirelessly from the first minute to the end of the match, especially Monti, the architect and main destroyer of Juventus. Varglien I. stood out more than Bertolini this time.
On the offensive line, Juventus repeated the highlights of the first game. Cesarini was the best of the forwards, without a doubt. When in great conditions Cesarini proves to be a player of the highest class. Orsi played at the height of his game. The movements, the knowledge of these two players is the main weapon of the Juventus offensive. Sernagiotto was better than in the first game, but below Orsi and Cesarini. Following them, Ferrari worked intensively and Vecchina played a regular game.
* * *
Mór Fischer: Even if the competent authorities do not meet now, Hungarian football will be ruined.
Dr. Lajos Mariássy: Ferencváros played well in the first quarter of an hour, after which the conditional disadvantage collided. The more sensible football was played by Juventus. It is not possible to say whether the direct defense or the line of attack was weaker in Ferenncváros.
Baron Manzoni: If we were judged like this, there would be at least fifty penalties for every match.
Carlo Carcano: The match was nicer in Turin, where both teams played better. The boys were upset, so there were so many clashes. The audience was very fair. We felt we were heading in our direction with friendly emotions. Sárosi is wonderful.
Dr. Taparone: Ferencváros played well but, like Turin, could not score a goal. Sárosi is great.
Pedro Sernagiotto: I'm not used to the team yet, so the game went weaker.
Mihály Pataky: The Italians are good. If we didn't get that equalizing goal after 2: 0, maybe we could have hoped... The result is realistic.
György Sárosi: Nothing to say.
Mihály Táncos: I have nothing to say.
Eugen Braun: I don't want to have a match like this many times! Three penalties are rarely awarded... Who was better? Well, I have no idea.
Sándor Bíró: Ferencváros played very badly, so they couldn't win.
Gusztáv Csárdás: The Italians were better, they deserve to advance in the cup. From Ferencváros, only Sárosi answered.