The 1948 London Olympics was India's first major international tournament, where a predominately barefooted Indian team (containing Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims) lost 2–1 to France, failing to convert two penalties.
The Indian team was greeted and appreciated by the crowd for their sporting manner. "The French had been given a run for their money – and that, too, by the barefooted Indians!", the British media expressed.
At a press conference, shortly after, the Indians were asked why they played barefooted. The ever witty then Indian captain Talimeren Ao said, "Well, you see, we play football in India, whereas you play BOOTBALL!"
The question was not about affording shoes - it was a matter of Indian players finding it comfortable playing without shoes. Nevertheless the weather in British conditions was cooler and wetter than what the players were used to back home.
The decision of wearing shoes had to made and the Indians finally settled on wearing shoes if the conditions were wet (rainy) and if they had to play on soft grounds and when the conditions were dry, most players opted to play without shoes and instead wore bandages.
Indian footballers’ bravery and brilliance in bare feet at the 1948 Olympics earned them no less a fan than Princess Margaret, the younger sister of Queen Elizabeth II.
So much so that King George VI invited the team to Buckingham Palace.
Encouraged by the accolades and the positive reception to India's football, the AIFF decided to extend the tour with some friendlies across Europe. Over the next several weeks the team would play some matches that would only enhance its growing reputation.
In the Netherlands India lost 1–2 against Sparta Rotterdam but stunned Ajax Amsterdam featuring the legendary Rinus Michels (a striker) by 5–1, two days later.
Back in England and Wales, it put together a string of victories over several teams including @themikesfc.
In 1950, India managed to qualify for the 1950 FIFA World Cup finals, which was scheduled to take place in Brazil; where it was drawn with Sweden, Italy, and Paraguay.
This was not due to any success on the pitch, but due to the fact that all their opponents during the qualifying round, withdrew from the pre-tournament qualifiers.
However, India themselves withdrew from the World Cup finals before the tournament was to begin. The All India Football Federation gave various reasons for the team's withdrawal, including travel costs, lack of practice time, and valuing the Olympics above the World Cup...
Many have repeated the myth that India withdrew from the World Cup due to FIFA imposing a rule banning players from playing barefoot. In fact, FIFA offered to pay the travel expenses of the Indian team hence India withdrawing due to travel costs or being banned is incorrect.
More importantly, India rated Olympics as bigger than World Cup since it was just the fourth edition back in 1950. Many countries adopted a similar attitude and only 13 nations made it to Brazil in 1950.
Ultimately India did not deem it fit to send a team halfway around the world via ship for a sub-par tournament. Since then, India has not come close to qualifying for another World Cup.
The Indians lined up in a 2-3-5 formation. They were renowned for their fleet-footed possession based game, lightness on their feet and courage... even bare-footed, they did not shirk even the heaviest of challenges...
Look at the names as well, a real diverse unit!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
➡️ Scaloni springs another surprise with Di Maria down the left!
➡️ Enzo proving what a top DLP/CDM talent is meant to do ... pockets Griezmann and controls the build up phase
➡️ Why Kounde had a mare..
A stunning tactical decision to bring back Di Maria into the fold and then stick him up against Kounde rather than Theo. On paper Kounde should be a 'defensive' right back but he's someone who we have described as a 'right-centre-back'...
These types of defenders prefer marking space and wing-forwards who try to score goals using movement off ball.
Di Maria is more of a traditional wide man and kept engaging Kounde in 1 v 1's closer to the flank... he struggled to keep him quiet and Dembele didn't help out well.
➡️ Scaloni go 3-5-2/4-3-3/4-4-2?
➡️ Target Theo or protect against Mbappe?
➡️ Can Alvarez hurt Varane or will Kounde/Konate help
➡️ Paredes could help Enzo against Griezmann...
The formation is any ones guess, Scaloni has not repeated his formation or lineup since the start of the tournament. He is the Tinkerman of the World Cup but more often than not, he gets the big calls right...
Can Tchouameni mark Messi?
Tchouameni took Bellingham out of the game in their titanic battle in the quarter finals but patrolling the area Messi operates in is a different level of tactical understanding.
In 1978, hockey and football World Cups were held in Argentina. The hockey event was held first. Throughout the Hockey World Cup, a wonderful Pakistan team managed by Abdul Waheed Khan displayed a breathtaking attacking game which captivated crowds and connoisseurs alike.
During their victorious campaign, the Green-shirts created many records. They became the first team to land the World Cup without losing (or even drawing) a single match. Pakistan’s goal difference of 31 goals (35 for and four against) is till date a World Cup record.
Beside major decisions going against one, what type of bad refereeing display impacts a team the most? I'll elaborate in thread 1) Overly lenient on fouls 2) Fouls called when clean tackles 3) Overly cheap yellows for an aggressive team 4) No yellows for opponent v a clean team
3-IMO quickdraw Mcgraw refs dishing out yellows for next to nothing for aggressive teams = doesn't happen so often anymore but this would probs be the worst, even refs in the champs league are more lenient than before. Argentina v Netherlands was a rare 1 off but for both teams.
Personally I feel teams that don't get given fouls when they are tend to respond with more sloppy ball control and worse dribbling cos wanna over-burst past opponent with revenge+start throwing themselves on the floor to give the ref a chance to even it out/justice-rarely get it.
➡️ Croatia to dominate possession but Argentina wont mind
➡️ Litmus test for Gvardiol
➡️ How do Argentina deal with Croatia wide threat? 3-5-2 or 4-4-2?
➡️ Croatia's Aerial Threat
@Effmatch Croatia’s slow style of play may suit Argentina as the latter will look to play on the break. Croatia don’t have rapid players, so they’ll look to build up slowly to allow their players to get into dangerous positions. Argentina are likely to forgo indulging a possession battle.
@Effmatch Argentina struggled with Saudi Arabia's intensity in the opening game. A slow game would favour the Argentinians, who they themselves do not possess much pace in the side. Expect Fernandez and De Paul to hold their shape, blocking the supply lines to Kramaric.