Five Facts You May Not Know About The 1930 World Cup - Part Five

Twitter: @WC1930blogger

1. Two of the Peruvian players, Julio Lores and Jorge Sarmiento Koochoi, were of Chinese ethnicity, known as the Tusanes. Their descendents were part of the 100,000 Chinese culies who arrived in Peru between 1849 and 1874 to work on the estancias. Some would integrate by marrying local women. 

2. There were five pairs of brothers from three foreign delegations that arrived in Uruguay in 1930. Mexico contained three sets of siblings: the Garza Gutierrez bothers, Rafael and Francisco; Felipe and Manual Rosas Sanchez; and Isidoro Sota Garcia, the goalkeeper who was the younger brother of Ernesto Sota Garcia, head of the delegation. Lucien and Jean Laurent came from France while Juan and Mario Evaristo both played for Argentina in the World Cup Final.

3. Frenchman Alexis Thepot is the first goalkeeper in World Cup history to save a penalty. He stopped Carlos Vidal's spot kick in the 35th minute of the first half. He was unable to prevent his team losing 1-0 to Chile (19 July).

4. Angel Bossio played in all three of Argentina's group games but missed the semi-final and final due to an injury to the hand. This probably resulted from him punching Arturo Torres after the Chilean gave the keeper a violent kick.

5. After Argentina's defeat to Uruguay in the World Cup Final, there were violent scenes back home in Buenos Aires. According to local media reports, some 150 angry Argentinian fans attacked the Uruguayan consulate on Tucuman al 400, smashing several windows. Police had to intervene resulting in injury to officer Virgilio Marquez. 

1. Dos de los jugadores peruanos, Julio Lores y Jorge Sarmiento Koochoi, eran de etnia china, conocidos como los Tusanes. Sus descendientes formaban parte de las 100.000 culturas chinas que llegaron a Perú entre 1849 y 1874 para trabajar en las estancias. Algunos se integrarían casándose con mujeres locales.

2. Hubo cinco pares de hermanos de tres delegaciones extranjeras que llegaron a Uruguay en 1930. México contenía tres grupos de hermanos: los hermanos Garza Gutiérrez, Rafael y Francisco; Felipe y Manual Rosas Sánchez; e Isidoro Sota García, el portero que era el hermano menor de Ernesto Sota García, jefe de la delegación. Lucien y Jean Laurent vinieron de Francia, mientras que Juan y Mario Evaristo jugaron para Argentina en la final de la Copa del Mundo.

3. El francés Alexis Thepot es el primer portero en la historia de la Copa del Mundo en salvar un penal. Detuvo el puntapié de Carlos Vidal en el minuto 35 de la primera mitad. No pudo evitar que su equipo perdiera 1-0 ante Chile (19 de julio).

4. Angel Bossio jugó en los tres juegos grupales de Argentina, pero se perdió la semifinal y la final debido a una lesión en la mano. Esto probablemente resultó de que golpeó a Arturo Torres después de que el chileno le dio al arquero una patada violenta.

5. Después de la derrota de Argentina ante Uruguay en la final de la Copa del Mundo, hubo escenas violentas en Buenos Aires. Según informes de los medios locales, unos 150 hinchas argentinos enojados atacaron el consulado uruguayo en Tucumán al 400, rompiendo varias ventanas. La policía tuvo que intervenir resultando en lesiones al gendarme Virgilio Márquez.

Five Facts You May Not Know About The 1930 World Cup - Part Three

Twitter: @WC1930blogger

1. The Uruguayan Football Association (AUF) supplied all players with free tobacco, cigars and cigarettes plus free postage for any letters sent home.

2. Brazilian forward Araken Patusca arrived in Montevideo accompanied by his wife. He was dropped after his poor performance after Brazil lost 2-1 to Yugoslavia in their first match (14 July). 

3. Romanian player Nicolae Kovacs (Covaci) was the youngest goalscorer at the 1930 World Cup. He was 18 years and 197 days old when he scored against Peru in their 3-1 victory on 14 July. 

4. Roberto Gayon, scorer of Mexico's third goal versus Argentina (19 July), was born in Costa Rica in 1910. His father was a Mexican diplomat who took the family to the USA in 1911. In 1920, the father was found guilty of violating US neutrality laws for aiding revolutionary forces in Mexico.

5. By express resolution of the General Inspectorate for the Supression of Alcoholism, the sale of all alcoholic beverages was absolutely prohibited within the Centenario for the Final between Uruguay and Argentina. This all followed nationalistic proclamations in the press either side of the Rio de la Plata in the days prior to match.

Match Report - Uruguay vs Argentina (English translation from La Voz)

@WC1930blogger

This is an English translation of the match report of the first ever World Cup final between Uruguay and Argentina played on the 30th July 1930. The hosts, Uruguay, emerged victorious as 4-2 winners after trailing at halftime 2-1. The report has at least one mistake as it lists Uruguay's first goalscorer as Pedro Cea. In fact, the author of the goal was the outside-right, Pablo Dorado.

The article was published in the Spanish newspaper La Voz on the 31st July 1930. The author of the piece is unknown but likely a South American journalist working for the Associated Press cablegram newsagency. You can read the original Spanish language report here.

Readers are welcome to offer their opinions as to the accuracy of the translation that was interpreted using google.

1930 World Cup Final,
Uruguay - Argentina 4:2 pic.twitter.com/bmKAq0enO3

— FootballTime&Nations (@FCTimeNations) June 7, 2018

FOOTBALL

THE URUGUAYAN OLYMPIC CHAMPION IN PARIS AND AMSTERDAM WINS IN MONTEVIDEO THE FIRST CHAMPIONSHIP OF THE WORLD. WIN IN THE FINAL (4-2) AGAINST ARGENTINA.

The teams.- Montevideo 30 (16. evening) .- The national teams of Uruguay and Argentina, which this afternoon will compete in the world soccer championship. They are formed by the following players:

Uruguayan team - Ballesteros: Nasazzi, Mascheroni; Andrade Fernández, Gestido Dorado, Scarone. Anselmo, Cea, Iriarte.

Argentine team.- Botasso: De la Torre, Paternoster; Evaristo (J.). Chividini, Suarez; Peucelle, Varallo, Stabile, Ferreyra. Evaristo (M.).

The Argentine player Monti must have played in his team as a midfielder, but he has refused to play this afternoon, due to his lack of sympathy with the Uruguayan public. To be named to replace Monti [is] the player Zumelzu, but cannot play because of being sick. Then it was decided that Chividini would take the place of Monti in the final match. He still does not know if at the last minute he will be able to convince Monti to occupy the rightful place in the team, because many technicians [coaching staff] and supporters try to convince him to play against the Uruguayans.

The Uruguayan team talks about the possibility that at the last minute Petrone or Castro replace Anselmo as a centre-forward. (Associated Press.)

MONTEVIDEO 30 (9 n.), - The teams have suffered at the last minute the following modifications: the middle Argentine centre Chividini is replaced by Monti, and the Uruguayan centre-forward Anselmo is replaced by Castro.

News of Uruguay's victory in the 1st @FIFAWorldCup Final in Cornwall's Western Daily Press, 31 July 1930. Special trains and aeroplanes assist fans to the capital Montevideo, @Uruguay. Offices and business close and politicians attend the match. #WC1930 #Mundial1930 pic.twitter.com/hUIjPZ47JD

— worldcup1930project (@WC1930blogger) December 31, 2017

The game.-Montevideo 30 (8 night) .- In the final match of the World Championship, played this afternoon between the national teams of the Republic of Argentina and Uruguay, the Uruguayans won by four goals against two.

The first half ended with the score of two to one, favourable to the Argentine team.

The detail. -During the first minutes of play, the Argentines, and especially the defence line, with great nervousness, frequently missing and allowing the dominance of the Uruguayan players, who after twelve minutes of play managed to score the first goal, the work of striker Cea. Putting the game back into play, the fight was balanced, noticing a greater security in the Argentine defence. Evaristo (J.) made an excellent game, stopping advances of the Uruguayan front line and serving numerous balls to his. The Argentine strikers, despite showing lack of rapport, put several times in danger in Uruguayan goal, until in the twenty minutes of play they achieved their first goal through Peucelle. The fight continues balanced; but, at thirty-eight minutes, a beautiful combination made by Varallo and Stabile finished the latter, pointing the second both the Argentine team. The first half ended with the score of two to one in favour of the Argentines.

In the second half, the Argentines hopeful of being able to take revenge of the Amsterdam final, they directed all their efforts to maintain the advantage obtained in the first time: however, the weak performance of some of their players, who tried to make plays individual, removed effectiveness to the team's overall work. In addition, although the extremes performed well, they did not manage to link their game with their other linemates. After the first moments, the Uruguayan players made strong attacks to get their second goal with a superb shot by Dorado. A few minutes later Iriarte scored the third and moments before the meeting was over the centre-forward Castro achieved the fourth goal. (Associated Press.)

30 July 1930, Hector 'El Manco' Castro, who lost his right hand in an electric saw accident, scores URU 4th goal in WC final. #WC1930 pic.twitter.com/rc4V9VATYD

— worldcup1930project (@WC1930blogger) July 30, 2017

30 July 1930, @Uruguay players celebrate their victory over @Argentina in the 1930 World Cup Final. #WC1930 #Mundial1930 pic.twitter.com/hSPjmsrSXa

— worldcup1930project (@WC1930blogger) July 30, 2017

#OnThisDay in 1930 @Uruguay won the first ever #WorldCup, in front of over 68,000 fans at the Estadio Centenario Montevideo pic.twitter.com/1e7ZjmsKoh

— FIFA World Cup (@FIFAWorldCup) July 31, 2017

For that trip! ... Montevideo 30 (10 n.) .- The Italian transatlantic "Duilio", which left Buenos Aires last night driving 1,000 Argentinean fans, who moved to this capital to witness the game, has arrived after the meeting ended, because of the thick fog in the Río de la Plata. For the same reason, they have had to return to Buenos Aires several aeroplanes and boats that made the trip to this capital.

The police authorities have stated that the agents under their command have seized more than 5,000 revolvers and bladed weapons, the property of Argentines who have moved these days to Montevideo to witness the matches of the world championship. (Associated Press.)

#WC1930: People gathered together at #PlazaDeMayo listening to the radio-report of the final between #Argentina and #Uruguay. pic.twitter.com/mHo001dIqZ

— OldFootballPhotos (@OldFootball11) January 3, 2017

The bad to lose - London 31 - Telegraph from Buenos Aires to the ''Daily Herald'' that the news of the victory of the Uruguayan soccer team has given rise to several incidents and tumults, some ladies who looked out onto a balcony on Mayo Avenue The Uruguayan flag was stoned by the populace, and the police had to carry several charges against groups of protesters who stoned the Uruguayan Consulate, breaking almost all the windows of the building, and the agents were forced to cease the guns to restore order. .

The Argentine press protests against the game developed by the Uruguayans, describing it as brutal and accuses of manifest partiality [by] the Belgian referee, Langenus. (Fabra)

Jose Nasazzi’s ‘National Treasure’?

@WC1930blogger

After Argentina scored their second goal against Uruguay in the World Cup Final in the 37th minute to take the lead, the Uruguayan captain, Jose Nasazzi, complained to referee John Langenus that Guillermo Stabile and Manuel Ferreira were offside. When the Belgian official awarded the goal, after consulting with his linesman, Nasazzi ‘continued his protest in the referees dressing room at halftime etching a diagram on the fresh plaster.’

This account can be found in the 1998 publication, A History of the World Cup, Volume 1, The Jules Rimet Years, by authors Ken Knight, John Kobylecky and Serge Van Hoof. They claim that ‘this drawing remained scratched into the wall for years as a ‘’national treasure’’’. Inferred in this last statement is that this drawing is no longer etched in the foundations of this dressing room in the famous Estadio Centenario.

Unfortunately, the authors do not account for their source or sources from which this story is taken, and whether this was a primary document or a secondary one. Assuming they have recounted this accurately, without examining their materials we are unable to determine the credibility of the information from which it came.

It is perhaps appropriate to analyse these statements in two parts because it may provide clues to categorise their sources. So for instance, the first part where Jose Nasazzi follows the referee into his changing quarters and illustrates his protest in the wet plaster, hints strongly that this story came from an eyewitness. In trying to determine who this witness may have been we can assert with confidence that present in that room was the Uruguayan captain, Nasazzi, and the Belgian referee, John Langenus. It is also likely that also present were the two linesmen, Henri Christophe, from Belgium and the Bolivian, Ulises Saucedo. Are any of these four men responsible for promulgating this story? Was this recorded at the time or documented later to another chronicler based on the testimony of someone who was there? What is known is that John Langenus wrote about his experiences in Uruguay in his biography published in the 1940s, to which we will return to shortly.

But all this depends if the story is true. It is possible that some contemporary, who was present at the first World Cup, exaggerated the event or invented the story out of whole cloth for dramatic effect? There is at least one example of this after the commencement of the World Cup Final. The Argentinian newspaper, El Litoral (31 July 1930), reported how a rumour was fed back to the Buenos Aires press corps, that the Argentinian centre-half, Luis Monti, had come to blows with his Uruguayan counterpart and bitter rival, Lorenzo Fernandez, which resulted in the latter's death. But this was easily proven to be false because of the lack of detail where this was supposed to have occurred and that the unknown whereabouts of Fernandez were due to him having departed Montevideo quickly after the final. Some hack had tried to exploit the enmity between the two players to create a sensationalist headline to sell papers.

There are other similar examples. The referee John Langenus recalled that his compatriot, Henri Christophe, was surprised to learn that he had apparently done an interview with a local journalist. The French player, Augustin Chantrel, writing a dispatch for the weekly sports magazine, Match (29 July 1930), noted that the slightest rumour caught by a journalist would end up as a long article.

But all this would only make sense if the claim that this diagram became a national treasure is not true either. And this comes to the second part of the statement. That the authors state that ‘this drawing remained scratched into the wall for years’ suggest that they took the information from a secondary source. And if this ‘treasure’ exists or existed then it should be more commonly known.

It would be reasonable to assume that Nasazzi’s diagram, if the story is true, was his interpretation of where both Stabile and Ferreira were positioned in relation to the Uruguayan defenders the moment the ball was played. In terms of World Cup history, Nasazzi’s etching would be an important part of telling this story. In a sense, it would also be an early form of the way experts and pundits today use modern technology to analyse controversial incidents on the football pitch, replaying an incident and using touch screens and imaginary lines to determine if a player was offside or not.

It is only possible to imagine Nasazzi’s diagram by the descriptions written by reporters of Argentina’s second goal. Photographs do little to help as they only portray the ball hitting the back of the net. It may help to understand that during this period, as per the 1925 offside rule amendment, a player was deemed to be offside if he was positioned in front of the second-last defender. In other words, two defenders were needed between the attacker and the goal, when the ball is played forward, to be onside.

In reviewing some of the contemporary reports regarding the second goal it appears that only the Uruguayan chronicles argue that the goal was offside. This is none more illustrated by the official report Album Primer Campeonato Mundial de Football when Luis Monti ‘placed a high pass forward, and when Nasazzi was about to return it, he slowed down seeing that both Ferreyra and Stabile were behind him, in offside. The Olympic captain raised his hand, but the referee, placed in a bad position, was not able to see the infraction. Stabile and Ferreyra easily received the ball. With no rivals other than Ballesteros, they made a firm advance and Stabile kicked a high shot that beat the goalkeeper. Before acknowledging the goal, the referee asked linesman Mr Christophe, who did not find anything unusual and then pointed out to the middle of the field. Nasazzi protested, while the Argentineans, showing a natural joy, were hugging one another.’

Montevideo’s El Diario also describes Stabile in violation of the offside rule, while the Buenos Aires newspaper, La Nacion (31 July 1930), makes no mention of it and describes the striker slipping between two defenders before placing a ‘strong shot’ past the keeper. There is no description of an Uruguayan protest.

The referee, John Langenus, in his 1943 biography, En sifflant par le monde, notes that ‘the second goal of the Argentines appearing offside to the Uruguayans. Always the same question: the moment of the pass and the and the reception of the ball. A footballer understands this. My linesman Christophe was persuaded, like me, that the contested goal was regular.’ Interestingly, Langenus makes no mention of Jose Nasazzi following him into the dressing room and creating this diagram.

What can we know to be fact? It is clear from Uruguayan sources that the home team protested Stabile’s goal and that this was led by the captain. This at least makes it possible that Nasazzi continued his complaints into the locker room.

And what of the wet plaster? When the tournament began on July 13th, the Estadio Centenario was yet unfinished. Early matches were played at the El Gran Parque Central, home of Club Nacional, and the Estadio Pocitos where Club Penarol played. The Centenario officially opened on July 18th, with the host Uruguay defeating Peru 1-0. Is it possible that the plaster was still wet some twelve days later?

What we do know is that work continued on the new stadium after its inauguration. According to the book Four Weeks In Montevideo, by Hyder Jawad, which is based in part on the diary kept by an Uruguayan fan, named Antonio, who attended nearly all the games, he mentions that work on the stadium was still in operation some three days after Uruguay played Peru. Therefore, it is entirely possible that finishing touches were made to the stadiums interior leading up to the final, thus explaining the wet plaster.

If such an etching had become a ‘national treasure’ it would be reasonable to assume that there would documentation. A search of almost a dozen or so contemporary reports from Argentina and Uruguay yielded no results. However, access to all the periodicals and newspapers from these two countries has not been possible, so it's entirely possible the evidence exists.

In 1980, the Uruguayan newspaper, El Pais, published a magazine titled ‘Libro de Oro, ''Bajo un bosque de banderas...''’, which was a commemorative piece celebrating the 50th anniversary of Uruguay’s World Cup victory and which included interviews with some of surviving members of the Uruguayan squad. There is no mention of this apparent ‘national treasure’.

As the authors of The Jules Rimet Years suggest this diagram can no longer be found on the wall of the referee’s dressing room. So what happened to it? Has it been lost to us? If anybody has any information please get in touch by leaving a comment below or contacting me via twitter.

FIFA Articles Related to 1930 World Cup

In the interest of trying to collect and gather articles and online resources related to the first World Cup in one place for anyone that wants to research the competition in Uruguay in 1930 are links to four articles from FIFA's website. All published in 2016.

Better to travel hopefully than to arrive?

Journey's end for Belgium's beach boys

Centenario Celebrations set the tone

Castro's clincher secures Celeste's crown

The Road to the First World Cup - Part 2 (Joefa's World Cup History) Republished

This is part two of Joefa's Road to the First World Cup and is some 93 minutes long. It is essentially footage of the football matches of the 1928 Olympic football tournament in Amsterdam where Uruguay secured their second gold medal victory. Go check out his youtube channel and subscribe.

Republished after the video disappeared off Youtube.

1930 World Cup Final Uruguay vs Argentina (Match Report in La Voz)

This match report was published in the Spanish newspaper La Voz, on 31st July 1930, on page 7. Below are links to two videos on the FIFA website which contains footage of the final.

http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/videos/y=2009/m=7/video=1930-fifa-world-cup-uruguaytm-1083334.html

http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/videos/y=2007/m=5/video=1930-fifa-world-cup-uruguay-515950.html

French and Swiss press coverage of the World Cup Final 1930

This is not a comprehensive reflection of the entire French press at the time but is significant of the general attitude that Europe had towards the first World Cup. The newspapers only dedicated a few lines about the final with very little detail. As will be shown there was more interest to the events that transpired in Buenos Aires after the final with minor riots and attacks on the Uruguayan Consulate.

The World Cup Final

Le Figaro, 31 July 1930

Le Petit Parisien, 31 July 1930

La Croix, 1 August 1930

The reaction in Buenos Aires

Le Temps (France), 1 August 1930

Le Temps (Switzerland), 2 August 1930.