Now that Chile and Portugal have got off the mark within 12 months of each other, there aren't too many footballing powers without a major title to their name - Hungary, perhaps, unless the Olympic crown was considered significant at that period. Otherwise, Belgium and Ecuador seem the most notable potless contenders.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Trophyless major football nations
Collapse
X
-
Trophyless major football nations
Yeah, my vote goes to Scotland.
Taking it continent by continent (or rather, confederation by confederation), I'd say Senegal for Africa, Ecuador almost by default for South America (they and Venezuela are the only CONMEBOL nations not to have won the Copa América), India (at least in terms of the length of footballing tradition) for Asia and... well I'm not really sure for North America. I would guess T&T or Jamaica, no?
Obviously some of those countries have won 'lesser' international trophies though. I've just looked for ones who've never won their main continental trophy.
Comment
-
Trophyless major football nations
Sam wrote: Yeah, my vote goes to Scotland.
Taking it continent by continent (or rather, confederation by confederation), I'd say Senegal for Africa, Ecuador almost by default for South America (they and Venezuela are the only CONMEBOL nations not to have won the Copa América), India (at least in terms of the length of footballing tradition) for Asia and... well I'm not really sure for North America. I would guess T&T or Jamaica, no?
Obviously some of those countries have won 'lesser' international trophies though. I've just looked for ones who've never won their main continental trophy.
Both T&T and Jamaica have won the Caribbean Cup, however.
Comment
-
Trophyless major football nations
Their claim rests on their role in growing the game, and being the best team in the world during a period when only a handful of countries played it.
But they have never emerged from the group stages of a major tournament and have only qualified for 8/20 World Cups and 2/15 Euros.
Comment
-
Trophyless major football nations
ursus arctos wrote: Their claim rests on their role in growing the game, and being the best team in the world during a period when only a handful of countries played it.
But they have never emerged from the group stages of a major tournament and have only qualified for 8/20 World Cups and 2/15 Euros.
Comment
-
Trophyless major football nations
Well, you can say that about Hungary as well. Just as you can say that a country like Senegal's footballing history is virtually all post 1980.
It is very difficult to answer the question without first agreeing on what criteria are to be used.
Comment
-
Trophyless major football nations
ursus arctos wrote: Well, you can say that about Hungary as well. Just as you can say that a country like Senegal's footballing history is virtually all post 1980.
It is very difficult to answer the question without first agreeing on what criteria are to be used.
Comment
-
Trophyless major football nations
Hungary, perhaps, unless the Olympic crown was considered significant at that period.
The Dr Gero Cup (although it wasn't called that in the 1930s) was also won by Austria's Wunderteam of 1930-32, who beat Italy, Czechoslovakia and Hungary to win it. Again, a triumph worthy of equivalence to winning a Euros, as Italy and the Czechs went on to contest the World Cup final two years later.
Comment
-
Trophyless major football nations
Thanks for the clarification.
Details on the competition that Rogin mentions
Comment
-
Trophyless major football nations
Not relevant to the thread of course, but brings to mind its club equivalent, of sorts.
Comment
-
Trophyless major football nations
Reed John wrote:Originally posted by ursus arctosTheir claim rests on their role in growing the game, and being the best team in the world during a period when only a handful of countries played it.
But they have never emerged from the group stages of a major tournament and have only qualified for 8/20 World Cups and 2/15 Euros.
Comment
-
Trophyless major football nations
It would be pretty churlish to argue that the Home Internationals weren't a major trophy up until about the 1930s. And Scotland won almost all of those in the 1920s. In fact, the only times they didn't, Wales did.
It became pretty apparent that once the 1930s kicked in, and Austria and Italy were coming over here and giving us a bloody good game and Uruguay and Argentina were bossing the Olympics, that we were no longer the be all and end all of things. But I'd say prior to 1930 at least, the Home Internationals count as a major.
Comment
-
Trophyless major football nations
Scotland's national team had one of the strongest squads in the world as late as the early 1980s. But they missed out on participation in the first few World Cups and the first two European Championships because of their FA's stupidity. They also went off to the 1954 and 1958 World Cups badly prepared for the same reason.
Comment
-
Trophyless major football nations
Scotland also refused to go to Brazil in 1950 - even though they'd qualified - and lost out on qualification to 1966 in England largely because English clubs refused to release their Scottish players for midweek qualifying ties.
The 1966 side, in particular, would have been interesting. Their B side went out in qualifying to Italy, who famously lost to North Korea. Scotland, in those finals, probably would not have done so, and might have ended up playing England in the semi-finals.
Comment
-
Trophyless major football nations
Rogin the Armchair fan wrote: once the 1930s kicked in, ... and Uruguay and Argentina were bossing the Olympics, that we were no longer the be all and end all of things. But I'd say prior to 1930 at least, the Home Internationals count as a major.
So... I mean, the Home Internationals were obviously inferior to the Olympics prior to 1930, and equally obviously rendered largely irrelevant by the birth of the World Cup, although the home nations took a long time to recognise that fact of course. Equally, though, they were obviously a major event in the really early footballing world prior to the first World War, when Scotland and England passed the title between them on an almost unbroken annual basis. I'm sure if we include sub-continental and regional competitions there aren't any major nations without a trophy of some description.
I'm still voting for Scotland as most major (majorest?) football nation without a continental, World Cup or (meaningful era) OFT title, though.
Comment
-
Trophyless major football nations
ursus arctos wrote: Well, you can say that about Hungary as well. Just as you can say that a country like Senegal's footballing history is virtually all post 1980.
It is very difficult to answer the question without first agreeing on what criteria are to be used.
Comment
-
Trophyless major football nations
Sam wrote:Originally posted by Reed JohnOriginally posted by ursus arctosTheir claim rests on their role in growing the game, and being the best team in the world during a period when only a handful of countries played it.
But they have never emerged from the group stages of a major tournament and have only qualified for 8/20 World Cups and 2/15 Euros.
Comment
-
Trophyless major football nations
Rogin the Armchair fan wrote: It would be pretty churlish to argue that the Home Internationals weren't a major trophy up until about the 1930s. And Scotland won almost all of those in the 1920s. In fact, the only times they didn't, Wales did.
It became pretty apparent that once the 1930s kicked in, and Austria and Italy were coming over here and giving us a bloody good game and Uruguay and Argentina were bossing the Olympics, that we were no longer the be all and end all of things. But I'd say prior to 1930 at least, the Home Internationals count as a major.
The problem with the Home Internationals, the Central European International Cup and the even 1960 and 1964 editions of the European Championship is that they excluded countries that might have posed a challenge.
While there is no doubt that the Austrian team of the early '30s would have swept all before them, other winners might have struggled against sides further north-west. Italy, winners in the late '20s lost at home to Germany in 1929. I don't know their record against Spain or France or Finland (then a good side), but there has to be an asterisk next to their name.
And to say that a contest comprising four countries is in any way analogous to a continental tournament, never mind a world cup, is preposterous. It was a regional competition, though its winners might have won international tournaments, had they been able to compete. Having said that, South American football in the 1920s was streets ahead of Europe.
Comment
Comment