A World Cup Very Different from Today
The format of the competition was radically different from the one we know today. Only 16 national teams took part, and there was no group stage: everything was decided through knockout matches from the very first game. One bad day meant going home immediately.
It was also the first World Cup with a qualifying phase. In Uruguay 1930, many European teams had refused to travel because of the length and cost of the transatlantic journey. Four years later, the opposite happened: Uruguay decided not to defend their title in retaliation for the absence of several European teams from the previous edition.
Uruguay’s absence further opened the debate around the rivalry between European and South American football, a tension that would shape much of World Cup history.
British Isolation
One of the most curious aspects of football at the time was the absence of the British national teams. England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland did not take part in the World Cup because the British associations had left FIFA years earlier.
The British still considered themselves the “inventors” of football and looked with a certain sense of superiority upon the international tournament organised by FIFA. They believed that the best football in the world was still being played in the British Isles and saw no need to compete in order to prove it.
Paradoxically, while the United Kingdom remained isolated, continental football was evolving at great speed. Central European teams were developing sophisticated tactical systems, while South America continued to produce technically extraordinary players.
The Rise of Central European Football
Before South America came to dominate the global football imagination through Brazil and Argentina, there was another great tactical power: Central Europe. In the 1930s, national teams such as Austria, Hungary and Czechoslovakia amazed the continent.
Austria arrived at the World Cup with the legendary “Wunderteam”, an elegant and technical side managed by Hugo Meisl. Its great star was Matthias Sindelar, known as “the Mozart of football”. Slim, creative and brilliant, Sindelar represented a refined and attacking style that would greatly influence later generations.
Czechoslovakia, meanwhile, had a very solid and disciplined team. Its great figure was Oldřich Nejedlý, the tournament’s top scorer.
Central European football introduced tactical concepts that were advanced for the time: quick circulation of the ball, rational occupation of space and coordinated collective movement. Compared with the more physical British game and the South American dribble, it offered a fascinating mixture of technique and strategy.
South America and Footballing Pride
Although reigning world champions Uruguay did not attend, South America was still represented by important national teams such as Argentina and Brazil. However, both arrived weakened.
In Argentina, there was conflict between amateurism and professionalism. Many of the best players had moved to European clubs, especially Italian ones. Brazil, still far from the power it would become in later decades, also did not present a particularly competitive squad.
Even so, the South American style continued to fascinate Europe. Individual technique, dribbling and improvisation contrasted with Europe’s growing tactical discipline. This cultural clash of footballing styles greatly enriched the tournament.
Vittorio Pozzo’s Italy
The host nation was managed by Vittorio Pozzo, one of the most influential coaches in history. Pozzo designed a tactical system that was extremely modern for its time, based on defensive order, positional intelligence and quick transitions.
Italy used the so-called “Metodo”, a tactical evolution derived from the famous 2-3-5 pyramid. The team combined collective discipline with technically outstanding players.
It also included several “oriundi”: South American footballers of Italian descent who had been naturalised to strengthen the team. Among them were Luis Monti and Raimundo Orsi. This policy generated controversy, but it greatly strengthened the Italian national side.
The team’s great star was Giuseppe Meazza, one of the finest players of the decade. Elegant, technical and decisive, Meazza became a symbol of Italian football. Decades later, Milan’s stadium would bear his name.
A Tournament Full of Controversy
Italy advanced to the final surrounded by suspicions over refereeing decisions. The most controversial match was probably the semi-final against Austria. The Austrians complained of refereeing that was extremely permissive towards Italy’s physical play, as well as several questionable decisions.
The quarter-final against Spain was also controversial. The first match ended in a draw after a brutal battle full of blows and violent tackles. Spanish goalkeeper Ricardo Zamora was injured and could not play the replay the following day.
At the time, penalty shoot-outs did not exist to settle knockout ties. If a match remained level after extra time, an entirely new match was played. Italy eventually won the replay in an extremely tense atmosphere.
Over the years, numerous theories have emerged about political pressure on referees and opponents. Some stories probably belong more to myth than fact, but the political context makes it impossible to completely separate sport from power.
The Final Against Czechoslovakia
The final was played in Rome in front of more than 50,000 spectators, with Mussolini present in the stands. The opponents were a formidable Czechoslovakian side, who took the lead through Puč.
For a few minutes, the Fascist regime saw its great propaganda display in danger. However, Italy reacted quickly. Orsi equalised with an extraordinary curling shot and, in extra time, Schiavio scored the decisive goal.
Italy thus won its first World Cup, defeating Czechoslovakia 2–1.
The celebrations were enormous. The regime immediately used the victory as proof of Italy’s supposed national vigour. Images of the players giving the Fascist salute travelled around the world.
The Best Footballers of the World Cup
Although Italy won the tournament, several international stars left an indelible mark.
Giuseppe Meazza
The Italian leader symbolised the footballing sophistication of the period. He was creative, elegant and tremendously intelligent tactically.
Oldřich Nejedlý
The tournament’s top scorer, he was decisive in Czechoslovakia’s run.
Matthias Sindelar
Although he did not win the World Cup, many consider him to have been the most talented player of the tournament. His figure acquired legendary status years later because of his opposition to Nazism after the annexation of Austria.
Ricardo Zamora
The Spanish goalkeeper was already an international celebrity. His performance against Italy, despite his injuries, further strengthened his legend.
FIFA also mentions the English “Zig-Zag” model as one of the balls used in the tournament.
You can see the photograph of Giuseppe Meazza holding one of those British balls.
In my opinion, there was a third British 12-panel ball, made by Globe, used in the Switzerland vs Netherlands round-of-16 match.
The kit was also very different from today. Shirts were made of thick cotton, with long sleeves and lace-up closures. The boots, made from hard leather with wooden or metal studs, looked more like work boots.
There were no substitutions, cards, or significant medical assistance, which made matches far more physical and violent than they are today.
Remember that matches were also played without squad numbers.
Don’t miss the third match of the blog:
The 1938 World Cup in France…