Archive. Football. Statistic & History
Document |
A document created by for the whole football community
Czech football: 1922 or 1942? — Comments

Author: Isaque Argolo | Creation Date: 2022-08-28 14:37:30

Data providers: Isaque Argolo.
Prof. Dr. Rudolf Pelikán: In my opinion, the 1922 team would win. I believe that it has a better half-back line, which is always decisive after all. There is enough evidence for that, the most famous are the successes of the Iron Sparta, just as this season's wins of A.C. Sparta in the league were possible only because of the half-back line.
Bohuslav Tesař: When comparing the team of 1922 with the team of 1942, I consider both defenders of 1922 to be more reliable and the half-back line Kolenatý — Káďa — Perner is still unattainable in performance. Although I consider the attack of the 1942 team, especially its three inside players, to be technically superior to the 1922 offensive line. Since football is a game in which the result cannot be predicted even with the teams being evenly balanced, so I am not trying to do that either. I'll just say one thing. I would really like to see again in full force those who have benefited so much from the good name of Czech football.
Jan Vaník: We used to have a few technically and tactically great individuals who would surely surpass today's players. But, unfortunately, they were alone. Their teammates often did not understand them at all and so often the effective work of players remained unused. Now there is less individuality, but more collectivism, which is definitely for the benefit of the whole. This also balanced the balance of power of the individual clubs and the exclusive position of Sparta and Slavia disappeared.
» And that's why today's team would face earlier stars, or their biggest weapon would be precisely in interplay and in thinking about the opponent's performance. Even today, there are great individuals in the league teams. However, they have the advantage that others can better adapt to their game, which, after all, if it is to be successful, must be based only on a system of cumulative combination. This feature, with some exceptions, was not available in the past. Therefore, the dominant position of Sparta and Slavia, which concentrated in the fields of my activity in their ranks only the best players.
» The old Slavia and the iron team of Sparta kept their place only because their players controlled the combination system perfectly. When Slavia had a well-coordinated whole between 1902 and 1912, they were invincible. In the same way, in the years 1918—1925 Sparta held the primacy in the Czech football.
» Of today's players, Bican is a self-made talent who is very reminiscent of Václav Pilát with his game. Among the others, he highly praises the technical Kopecký, the rugged Senecký, the refined Říha, the energetic hard worker Smejkal and the great tactician Zástěra. These play above average, and this average is now so high in the league and somewhere in the division that, overall, I have to give priority to today's performance over the past.
Karel Petrů: In order to estimate the chances of the teams from 1922 to 1942, it would be necessary to know — in addition to their perfect physical preparation — also their psychological preparation. If it had been equally perfect on both sides, I would have given more hope for victory to 1922 team, simply because it was a team that relied more on the work of the entire team than today's 1942, who relied too much on Bican. Also, the class of individual players is, in my opinion, more balanced with the 1922. But football is not mathematics, and so perhaps even the most correct assumptions, because they are, after all, nothing more than theory, would be turned on their head by the match itself.
Dr. Karel Myška: I understand very well the readiness and certainty of Pilát, with which he immediately assembled the team of 1922, and I can very well quote the considerations and embarrassments of Bican, with which he assembled his team. Those who have to make up our representative teams are almost regularly in his situation lately. Pilát's team, in my opinion, had its advantages in the physical fitness of all players, endurance, combativeness and the indisputable advantage of all the perfect coordination. Bican's team has several individuals who are its pillars and can perhaps match some of the players from Pilát's team, but as a whole they do not reach their performance in individual places, which, however, can be replaced by others, equally good, after a short time. So the 1922 team would have most of the advantages in the match.
Gustav Krist: Václav Pilát chooses his old comrades. He had it easy. Of course, he also remembered Kaliba, and certainly, that is, Klapka as well. Bican has it harder. I could follow him like this: Horák — Kocourek, Zástěra — Hendrych, Bartonec (Nožíř), Vycpálek — Říha, Humpál, Bican, Kopecký, Rulc. In my opinion, that would be a proposal for a real 1942 team for Bican. In that case, these guys could even play in a draw! Why Humpál? He is the most suitable inside right for Bican's W system, just like Vlasta Kopecký, and he is also a good shooter. Even Pavelka from Prostějov would have prerequisites here.
Jiří Pichler: In my opinion, the team of 1922 would win, with better cohesion of the ranks and a better occupation of the center of the advance.
Dr. Vladimir Šíba: My opinion is that the team of 1942 would win if Bican and Říha played as they played together in national team matches. My main idea is the match Bohemia-Moravia in Olomouc, when the Moravians were great.
Josef Čapek: Undoubtedly, many goals would have been scored, but the oldies would have scored more with regard to the defense of the young. With all due respect to the performance of Zástěra and Kocourek, I think that they would not have been enough for Pilát's attack. So the team from 1922 would have won by at least 2 up to 3 goals in a ratio of, say, 6:4 or 7:4. And at the same time, I still can't help feeling that the attack of the young should not score even so many goals, until the defense and half-back line from 1922 caught up with the system "all on Bican".
Miroslav Pospíšil: In the conversation between Vašek Pilát & Bican, Bican expressed that he would have scored a few goals for the team, as built by Pilát, himself, and especially a few of the dozens.
» This statement does not concern me, but only Hojer, because Karel Steiner can no longer respond to it, but I doubt that Bican has considered these few words well. First of all, he would have to consider under what rules this match could be held, whether under the old rules, when the offside rule applied with two defenders, or under the current one with one defender.
» I know that Bican is an individual in his own right, but I have seen him play many times and his style would not have worked at all against the defense of the time. Either he would have been placed in an offside position, or both defenders could have paid attention to him.
» And the defenders of that time knew something. They knew how to be heavy just as they knew how to sprint very well, perhaps with the exception of Karl Steiner, who made up for this lack by building himself up.
» What we recorded against players like Träg and Franz from Germany, Uridil from Vienna, Wieser, Toldi from Pest, Pache from Switzerland, Samitier from Spain and Alcantara and they were all sharp as razors, shooters, fast, tough, fearless, in short it was a flowering of attackers. And none of them have ever given us multiple goals.
» And the tens? Back then, however, a ten was dictated for something that was really the fault of the defender and not like now, when most penalty kicks are actually the fault of the attackers themselves.
» We weren't raw back then, we played hard, but not aggressively, like some defenders play today. Back then, the "back" took risks like a striker, and often more than this one.
» The lineup didn't work out for him either. Of the players, perhaps only two, at most three including him, could be compared to the players of that time. Perhaps only Ríha, but not the one of today, but four years ago and Bican himself, the others would certainly not be able to measure up to the players of that time. Not even Kopecký, despite the fact that he is really a player, but his body fund bothers him.
» I would like one thing for Bican, if he could play in Pilátov's team on one or the other clutch, then he would excel far above today's average.
» But my opinion is definitely that both the backup and the defense at the time would not have allowed the team built by Bican even a chance of success and that this team would have scored at least as many goals as Pepik Capek wrote, and if they had scored one, they would have had to it must be a coincidence.
Dr. Ing. Jan Tille: I believe that Pilát's team from 1922 would have won over Bican's from 1942 already because the composition of today's team is definitely flawed in two places, namely the left wing and the centre half-back. Otherwise, I support my statement as follows: 1. The goalkeepers are both excellent. 2. The Steiner-Hojer defenders are better, especially in terms of athleticism. 3. The half-back line of the 1922 team are far better than the 1942 team (here I see the main and decisive difference). 4. The forwards of the 1942 team are perhaps more "technical", the 1922 attack more reliable, the difference in performance would probably not be large. Overall, the superiority of the team from 1922 can be stated, especially with regard to the half-back line.
Dr. IngC. Jaroslav Ženatý: Bican would be as good an association captain as he is a footballer. His team would win by a decisive goal ratio. The conflict of opinion between two generations always comes out the same: The young believe unwaveringly in themselves, the old look at them from a different angle — yes, when we were kicking... I justify my belief in the greater skill of today's team: The performance of all sports has risen beyond the last 20 years incredibly. It would be absurd to claim that football, which concentrates the greatest interest of the young and which builds on the magnificent legacy of the old, does not show at least an even rise. Such a claim would contradict basic sociological laws of development.
František Cejnar: Even though I said that Pilát's team would win by a margin, I am not saying that the level of our football would somehow drop. On the contrary. From a technical point of view, our football is individually at a higher level than before. However, among our leading players, there are individuals who only excel in technique and, unfortunately, they also excel at tricks that did not exist before (sneaky fouls). Also, the effort to stay in the team as long as possible prevents the healthy strain of strength at a decisive moment, so today you no longer see the former enthusiasm and club love, as before. From these individuals — even technically advanced ones — it is then impossible to assemble a team that, as a whole, would be able to stand out and play as well as Pilát's team did. Pilát's team was a machine — completely indiscernible, this must especially be said about the famous reserve — which, with a healthy enthusiasm, true love for the club and the greatest effort of the player's abilities, managed to compensate for some technical shortcomings and thus was almost invincible. In short: Pilát with his machine team (as a whole) would definitely defeat Bican with his possibly even technically superior individuals.
Jan Plaček: I would like to point out that I am deliberately neglecting the fact that in 1922 football was played under a different offside rule, therefore a different system than the one used today.
» The old ones in their 1922 performance (better in 1920) against Bican's team in their performance today would win by at least two wickets. The superiority of Pilátov's team is already evident in his lineup. This is basically the same team that played an unforgettable match against the Norwegian national team, the conqueror of England, at the Olympic Games in Antwerp, with a result of 4:0. This team composition therefore corresponds to reality and its performance has been fully demonstrated.
» Bican judged the included players too individually during the composition of his team, while overlooking that the peak performance of the players nominated by him is out of date and was not even proven at the places of their inclusion.
» From the point of view of expediency and tactics of the game, consistency in technique and penetration, Pilátáv's attack represented the most perfect attacking game in the last twenty years. However, I consider the composition of the half-back ranks to be decisive for the outcome of the match. I am convinced that the wing half-backs of the 1922 line-up would have held the wingers of Bican's line-up relatively easily, but I doubt that Henrych and Ludl would have succeeded; I also believe that even Káďa would be successful in facing Bican's indisputably high individuality as a player. So there is the entire team of 1922 as a whole, against which I consider Bican's lineup from today to be just an improvisation.