The four magical days when Uruguay became FIFA Champions of the World. The first team to win three consecutive titles.

A few years ago, while in Montevideo, I bought a book that was made to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the Uruguayan Football Association: “100 Años de Gloria: La Verdadera history del Futbol Uruguayo”/ “100 Years of Glory: The True History of Uruguayan Football”. The book itself has a wonderful collection of inside stories that narrate the history of club and international football played in Uruguay. Furthermore, it had been officially consented to by FIFA itself. This book contains a section that explores Uruguay’s standing as a 4x FIFA World Champion.

The main author of the book (Atilio Garrido) mentions the issue of some international fans forgetting this fact in his closing statement : “…we rescued, with official and convincing documents, something that until 1950 was accepted worldwide and that, little by little, started to fall into disuse. We Uruguayans are a bit at fault for not committing to spreading our feats and victories. Uruguay was the first nation to conquer four times the football World Championship organized by FIFA.” (Pg 269)

This issue has always meant a lot to me, especially when it’s contested by fans who just don’t know better. It shouldn’t be contested because it’s a fact. Two World Championships are not something that you easily let go of. Their importance is amplified by the fact that they are officially FIFA’s first authentic international tournaments played by the best professionals on earth (under the guise of “amateurs”), changing the world of football forever. These were massive tournaments. It’s even better for me because the team that I love the most was at the heart of this innovation.

I have uploaded (so you can verify it in PDF format) the two documents from this book that explore Uruguay’s standing as a four time FIFA World Champion. The first (Document 1.1 and 1.2) recounts the history these tournaments and provides official FIFA citations to support their claims. The second is an Official FIFA document from their 80th Anniversary Book (1984, available in many languages). This document further cements FIFA’s recognition that the 1924 and 1928 Olympic tournaments were and are equivalent to FIFA World Cup titles. I will be providing a brief (point form) summary and translation of each document while using some external sources. Any citation from the “100 Years of Glory” book. will be noted.

Links
1. Document 1.1
2. Document 1.2
3. Official FIFA Document- 80th Anniversary 

No doubts exist, Uruguay are four time World Champions.

The History: Why not 1920 or the tournaments before?:
(From the book): In 1914 Jules Rimet (the third President of FIFA), declared that (quote): “Under the condition that the Olympic Football tournament be organized in agreement with FIFA rules, this competition will be recognized as a FIFA World Championship.”
– There was an attempt to have the first proper intercontinental tournament in 1920, but its authenticity was hurt by the fact that only amateur players could participate. At the time, professional footballers were the best players in the world.
– The 1920 Olympic Football final was never played when the Czechoslovakian team abandoned the field in protest during the first half vs. Belgium.

Page from the Official Book of FIFA made to commemorate their 80th anniversary (1984).

Colombes 1924: FIFA is finally responsible for organizing the entire tournament and finds a loophole

From FIFA.com: “At the 1924 Congress, FIFA agreed to assume responsibility for the organization of the Olympic Football Tournament by ratifying the proposal that “on condition that the Olympic Football Tournament takes place in accordance with the Regulations of FIFA, the latter shall recognize this as a world football championship”. …”The South Americans (Uruguay in 1924) won 3-0 and were celebrated as World Champions in Montevideo.”
Citation: Document from FIFA.com 

– In 1924, the start of FIFA’s Professional Era, FIFA found a “loophole” in the rules in order to finally allow the best teams and professionals to participate. The players could play and technically be considered “amateurs” by the International Olympic Committee so long as their own county’s Football Association compensated them for the months of lost work. The majority of the world’s best teams accepted, giving birth to, at the time, the first authentic FIFA World football Championship ever played by the best players on the planet.

(From the book): “…In the “Official History of FIFA” published on their 80th anniversary in 1984,…On page 59, it is stated that “they (FIFA) elaborated on their founding statutes”, confirming that the 1924 and 1928 Olympic champions were to also be considered joint FIFA World Champions.

The book: 100 Years of Glory

The aftermath of Amsterdam 1928

(From the book): The article mentions that the following revisions to the FIFA Constitution stated that after the 1930 FIFA World Cup in Uruguay, no Olympic title was to be considered a World Championship anymore. This was proposed by FIFA President Jules Rimet himself.
(From the book): Football was not played during the 1932 Los Angeles Olympics because of the birth of the FIFA World Cup. Olympic football champions would no longer be considered FIFA World Champions. Football was allowed to return in the 1936 Olympics but it was to be organized by the IOC and supervised by FIFA.
(From the book): Immediately after the 1950 FIFA World Cup (in Brazil) FIFA held several meetings to revise their constitution. In the 1950 revision, it was stated that they recognized Uruguay as the first nation to ever become four Time FIFA World Champions.

*** 1950 World Cup Final: Between 5:48-5:54, Carlos Sole (Uruguay’s legendary football announcer) states “Uruguay, Champions for the 4th time”. It’s important to understand that this was not thrown in liberally. This was common knowledge because FIFA had made this clear from the outset.

Turns out the stars weren

Note: The Brazilian broadcast of the 1950 World Cup final also claims that Uruguay “have done it for the fourth time”. I know 100% that I have heard this but have been unable to find the link as of yet

So there you have it: Uruguay are four time FIFA World Champions.

I hope you enjoyed this story, and please direct anyone who says “prove it” to this article on La Celeste Blog. :) These stories are the reason I watch football and why I love La Celeste so much. If you ever wondered why the 2012 Olympic tournament is so important to fans of Uruguayan football, I hope this article helped. In a way it was the true birth of the Sky Blue mystique on a worldwide level. Thank you all and we only have a little under a month to go!

Citation: -100 Años de Gloria: La Verdadera Historia del Futbol Uruguayo, El Pais S.A. y Tenfield S.A., Printed in Anselmo L. Morvillo S.A., ARGENTINA.
link

Written by: Alvaro Perez

Fox4 Fox4 0 like
Sam Wren
Member
Sam Wren
July 9, 2012

I have to largely agree with TBF. Reality and fact support Spain as being the best national team in the world. Winning one major competition may be a fluke, but winning three in a row is quite emphatic. I cannot comment on the “future” Spanish National Team because I am not familiar with the younger players coming up.

As for Spain losing badly during two friendlies, Spain has shown itself to be a “big game” team, much in the same way as Uruguay, but they also tend to win the less important games. During the last Euros, Spain was criticized for its play and much was made of the poor (for him) play of Xavi. But in the final, the Xavi of old, the master of the field, was summoned when he was most needed. On the other hand, friendlies, since they do not count for anything except for pride and, maybe, the FIFA rankings, do not elicit the same adrenaline response that a knock-out game of a competition does. Against Portugal they pretty much started their normal starting formation if I remember correctly, but against Argentina it appears that Del Bosque was using some experimental formations with some of the non-starters, especially in the back line. Xavi was not started and Casillas was not in goal (Reina started and Valdez ended). This is the sort of thing that many on this blog have been clamoring for Tabarez to do: use the friendlies to use some of the newer talent such as Polenta, to name one, to see how they perform. We don’t necessarily want to lose friendlies, but I think most of us would be OK with losing if it would serve the more important function of identifying some solid replacements for the aging spine of the NT. Argentina, on the other hand, started with the big guns: Messi, Higuaín and Tevez, as well as their “normal” midfield and defensive line.

On paper Spain is the best, but football is a game that takes place in space and time – not on paper – and is, thus, vulnerable to the capriciousness of daily life: adverse weather, crappy fields, what we Americans call player slumps (aka “poor form”), injury, key players may be ineligible due to red cards or yellow card accumulation, distractions, ad infinitum, so on any given day any team that is superior on paper can lose to a team that is inferior on paper, so I am not saying that Spain will certainly defeat Uruguay if they ever meet on the field. History is full of examples of “inferior” teams defeating “superior teams”.

As for 2014, well, that is too far in the future for me to make any predictions with any degree of confidence. Apart from the Olympics, Tabarez has made no visible attempts to indicate that he has any plans to initiate replacements for the “over the hill gang”. As for Spain, they are in a similar situation with Xavi, Iniesta and Xabi Alonso (who was actually largely uncredited for his key performances in the earlier games of Euro 2012), but if what TBF says is true, they have available replacements for these players – whether or not the Spanish NT has plans in place to identify and incorporate those players I have no idea.

Maldoror55
Member
Maldoror55
July 8, 2012

“uruguay could go and injure one of the two, xavi or iniesta.. send him out, to never play football again :) rum pa pa pum man-down, rihanna would say. save this idea for the world cup, “if it works, it is good”. uruguay are used to play man down, we did vs argentina. believe me it is better to play 10 vs 11 with no duo of iniesta and xavi around (leaving one out, annoys the other too), than playing 11 vs 11 facing both of them at the same time, they are unstoppable. la columna vertebral del equipo.”

I have a better idea.Which will send Iniesta,Xavi,and if it is necessary even Torres and Fabregas totally out of the game.Why not to smear the toe cap and studs of Celeste football boots with curare poison ? Or to carry in Charruas gloves(WC will be in winter time in Brazil 2014)tarantulas or black widows,and while pulling someone jersey in front of the mess in the box,you can simply drop the spider into its shorts.

NicoGF
Admin
July 5, 2012
FourThreeThree
Member
July 9, 2012

BTW, there are no words to the Spanish national anthem. The “central” government of Madrid cannot get agreement from the autonomous regions like Catalunya, Paises Vascos, Galicia etc on the wording, so it continues to have no words.

thebigfeller
Member
July 5, 2012

Er, Nico:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_UEFA_European_Under-21_Football_Championship

The point is they’ve got ANOTHER amazing batch coming through. Spain will be finished without Xavi and Iniesta? You wish. Try to imagine Uruguay without Lugano or Suarez actually winning the whole thing – yet without Puyol or Villa, that’s what Spain did. They don’t pick a striker, yet their striker wins the golden boot anyway. It’s scary.

And surraco: yes, we DO ignore friendlies. BECAUSE THEY’RE JUST FRIENDLIES. Even England beat Spain in a friendly last November – yet are England even on the same planet as Spain? Obviously not.

Member
surraco
July 5, 2012

Oh ok, I didn’t realize that in friendlies teams just allow themselves to be scored on.

I don’t buy that logic. Everyone here is very critical of Uruguay every time they perform badly in a friendly. Spain lost by 3 and 4 goals. Frankly, that’s embarrassing. Again, very few of their players have pace and they don’t create many chances. They are beatable.

NicoGF
Admin
July 5, 2012

tbf. i agree with you on many things, but i think barcelona is stronger than spain. they would beat spain.
okay spain is a bit stronger in defence, sadly, football is about who scores MORE goals than the other. barcelona’s defence being more than pretty okay, and having dani alves and messi & alexis on the offense might be enough :)

you admire spain as much as i admire nacho my friend! and thats scary big, believe me :) the sad thing is you sound serious about it! you talk about the upcoming spain generations as something the world should care about.. not really, spain is just XAVI & INIESTA, just like barcelona. believe me, once one of those retires, or quits playing at this level, they wont be able to impose their wanted style of ball possession. those 2 players alone, could pass together for 4 hours while being marked by a whole team lol.. graphic example. they are “two of a kind” :) neither those players are born every day nor their technique can be taught and learnt pretty straightforward as you seem to suggest.

uruguay could go and injure one of the two, xavi or iniesta.. send him out, to never play football again :) rum pa pa pum man-down, rihanna would say. save this idea for the world cup, “if it works, it is good”. uruguay are used to play man down, we did vs argentina. believe me it is better to play 10 vs 11 with no duo of iniesta and xavi around (leaving one out, annoys the other too), than playing 11 vs 11 facing both of them at the same time, they are unstoppable. la columna vertebral del equipo.

last thing, watch this:

your beloved spain getting their heads handed :) completely outplayed! disco disco good good

spain aint the zohan:

Member
surraco
July 5, 2012

Should we just ignore Portugal beating Spain 4-0 or Argentina beating Spain 4-1 in friendlies? Obviously they have weak spots. Very few of their players have pace. They don’t create many chances. (The Italians had 2 injuries and then resigned halfway through the 2nd half. You think they were tired? Italy had MORE POSSESSION in the first half!) I stand by what I said. A team like Uruguay is used to counter-attacking and not having possession. We wouldn’t lose concentration so easily.

julianbolso
Member
julianbolso
July 3, 2012

I dont understand how uruguay is being compared to quito in 2009, we are a point out of first in qualifying with a game in hand and continue to be the only squad in south america who is yet to lose.

AussieCeleste
Member
AussieCeleste
July 3, 2012

Big feller, go back to Spain v Paraguay. If I recall correctly, around the 60th minute Paraguay obtained and missed a penalty, with players from both sides encroaching into the box.

A minute later, Spain got and scored a penalty, disallowed due to their own encroachment, then missed the retake and weren’t awarded as you say a blatant penalty straight after.

What were the odds on that?

Betting in Asia involves astronomical sums, and players and referees are bought. I was ecstatic when South Korea eliminated Italy in 2002, but I do believe the ref was bought, and he is now a convicted drug smuggler. I do believe certain Ghana players threw their match v Brazil in 2006, and that Nigeria’s Kaita deliberately got himself sent off in 2010.

In any sport underpaid players and officials can be bought, and we can all see that FIFA is an organisation characterised by corruption within its executive.

But Uruguay cannot fix this, and needs to ignore it.

thebigfeller
Member
July 3, 2012

Totally agree about Perez, who is simply too old now, after being a bloody hero 2 years ago. But at this stage, I’m not at all sold on Uruguay somehow being further forward in its development than at the World Cup: I think there are more questions about La Celeste right now than at any point since Quito 2009, questions which may or may not be solved by the Olympics.

But as for “the Spain-Paraguay flurry of penalties being a pretty clear example of spread-betting fixing”… pardon? I take it you’ve gone to the police with this piece of hysterical nonsense? BOTH penalties were the correct calls, albeit the second one was very soft: the ref also got the re-take decision right (though it was a call which happens very rarely in games). Under the laws of the game, though, what he got hopelessly wrong was his failure either to award an absolute, cast iron stonewaller immediately after the re-take was saved – or, indeed, to send off the Paraguayan defender who gave the pen away in the first place, for denial of a clear goalscoring opportunity.

So the ref got a couple right, and a couple wrong. Big deal. Only in South America could this then metamorphose into “the ref was bought by the cheating Spanish!” or, even worse, “this was a pretty clear example of spread-betting fixing”. I mean, seriously – for God’s sake.

AussieCeleste
Member
AussieCeleste
July 3, 2012

Big Feller, I hardlybknow where to start.

Firstly, I have never thought Uruguay could have gone further in 2010: the team was much more limited in its development then.

Secondly, I agree that Uruguay is not a team built to take the initiative, but to get out of the group in 2014 needs only get past an Asian, African and second tier European team.

Thirdly I do believe in match-fixing, but to order by Asian and Russian spread-betting syndicates more than to fix results. I think the Spain-Paraguay flurry of penalties was a pretty clear example of spread-betting fixing. Uruguay can do little about fixing and may as well ignore it.

The reason other big teams struggle to put Uruguay away has been that Arevalo-Rios and Perez have been so effective at breaking up play. Perez has looked poor since the Argentina game, and to be honest I think that many 2014 hopes hang on whether he can be replaced, preferably with a better passer.

thebigfeller
Member
July 2, 2012

Uruguay have reminded me of Italy for donkeys’ years now: I think the two are footballing twins, blood brothers even. But Portugal? Can’t see it, especially in midfield.

I’ve often played the counter-factual game of “if Uruguay had had a stronger side to pick from, and squeezed past Holland, what would’ve happened in the final?” It’s obvious to me that the game would’ve been far more enjoyable to watch – but a far more comfortable win for Spain, because Perez and Arevalo would hardly have gone in there chopping Xavi and Iniesta down at the knees. That isn’t Tabarez’ style, and never will be.

Uruguay could not possibly have lived with the Spanish midfield – so they would’ve fallen, convincingly. It’s that creativity and ability to keep the ball which still separates Uruguay from the very best – and even a straightforward counter-attacking approach, a la the one which got past Argentina a year ago, would hardly suffice against a side this accomplished.

Another thing that’s always missed with Spain is the way the continual 1-0 scoreline is treated as some bizarre proof that, on another day, they might be vulnerable. Except 1-0 only happens in the first place because so many sides simply adopt damage limitation against them – and Spain hammer allcomers 1-0 in a way I don’t think I’ve ever seen from anyone before. Meanwhile, Uruguay’s inability to make the play in the Venezuela or Peru games poses serious questions about La Celeste’s ability to either win the group in 2014, or go far afterwards: meaning, rather like Italy yesterday, the players could well be exhausted by the time they maybe come up against the World Champions.

Finally, on Spain-Paraguay: yes, the assistant made a bad call on a very tough, marginal decision. And? Has this never happened before in the history of the sport, or something? Paraguay then got a penalty – all part of the ref favouring Spain, obviously – which they completely bottled. Then Spain got a pen, which they scored, but the ref ordered to be retaken (all part of the ref favouring Spain, obviously); the retake was missed, and in the aftermath, the ref then failed to award THE CLEAREST PENALTY YOU WILL EVER SEE IN YOUR LIFE. All part of the ref favouring Spain, obviously.

I’m sorry – but was everyone who saw that game completely blind? Or do you only see what you want to see, and ignore everything else?

Maldoror55
Member
Maldoror55
July 2, 2012

“…And when we play at out best I think we have a lot in common with how Portugal played that game…”
Bravo! Thats what I wanted to say.Uruguay reminds me of all European teams, on Portugal.But Uruguay has more top lethal attackers than Portugal,which has only one:Cr7.
Thats why I think,with a good tactics based on Portuguese and Croatian experiences Uruguay could stop Furia.Only needs to incorporate Rolin and Polenta into the team defense.
Well it was obvious that Spanish glorious victory over Italy was more due to Italy’s exhaustion,and Spanish conditional fitness.So Tabarez needs to work on the conditional building up of the team,to be able to stay focused on tasks in the play,with the same strength 120 not only 90 minutes.
There is nothing wrong in pelotassing.I thinki it is a kind of play that suits to Uruguay,especially because it is counterattcking,not ball possessing team.But than they need to perfectuate it.Pelotassing needs to be precise and is the only way of play that can confuse Furia short passing tick-tack style,and can be the answer on their pressing.

AussieCeleste
Member
AussieCeleste
July 2, 2012

Big Feller, since your last post I have analysed Spain’s ten knockout matches in 2008, 2010 and 2012.

After ninety minutes, here are the results:

Three 0-0 draws
Four 1-0 wins
One 2-0 win (French team at Euro 2012, unsettled and mutinous)
One 3-0 win (Russia at Euro 2008)
One 4-0 win (ten man Italy)

That tells me that if they play Uruguay the result is going to be 0-0 or 1-0.

I know that Uruguay has shipped goals to Peru, Venezuela and Bolivia recently, but because they had to force the pace of the game at home. In a World Cup or Copa America they can revert to counter-attacking, and none of those ten teams Spain scored a measly total of 14 goals in had an attack as potent as Suarez and Cavani.

In 2010 Spain were at their peak, yet failed to score more than one goal in any knockout match. Four years older in Brazil they should be considered a target, not a monster.

KangaCeleste
Member
KangaCeleste
July 2, 2012

Bigfeller, i know the confeds cup is nothing more than a bunch of friendlies organized to test the facilities of the world cup host.

But it is a chance to see if our style can cause Spain to not play as well as they can.

For example in the Spain Portugal game I believe Portugal showed that the way they play can unhinge Spain. And when we play at out best I think we have a lot in common with how Portugal played that game.

Quick wingers who widen the field of play, a high pressing midfield with players who keep their intensity for 90mins.

If we beat Spain with a lucky goal and they look much better then thats no good. However even a loss but we put them off and I’ll be happy that when it counts we might have a chance.

Sorry if any typos but the iPhone and train trip don’t mix! :)

Maldoror55
Member
Maldoror55
July 2, 2012

Btw !
Referees helped Spain 2010.against Paraguay.They ruled out the regular goal of Valdez,because of offside,which didnt exist.Yes they favour Spain and Barcelona,it is obvious.Any Spanish player can be sure in himslef,because he knows that when he loses the ball in the play,the only think what he need to do is to fall down on the pitch,and the faul will be whistled.
I dont want to say that they dont deserve the title,they certainly do,but they are favoured by referees.But it is the case with all favourites in the world.In Uruguay national league Penarol,and Nacional are favoured by referees too.

 
 

You need to log in to vote

The blog owner requires users to be logged in to be able to vote for this post.

Alternatively, if you do not have an account yet you can create one here.

  • World Time

  • Writers