Sandro Mazzola

[wera]

shame Hitler didn't finish his work then because that would be world changing

 

[Pimpin]

there is no doubt all elite clubs back then doped, but the extent to which bandiera is going, the extra mile to prove it is what makes me suspicious. As if Inter is the benchmark, or even the trend setter on doping makes me question his motives, i have yet to see an argument on which he takes Inters side, never, even once

 

[Y&h]

No one else matchfixed on that scale in Italian (or European football before La Grande Inter. Our sporting director, Italo Allodi, was Luciano Moggi's mentor. Many referees (notably Georgy Vadas) came forward and claimed they had been offered fortunes by Angelo Moratti and Deszo Solti, a matchfixer in Allodi's books. The referee in the very controversial second leg of the 1965 European cup semifinal vs Liverpool was actually implicated in a matchfixing scandal with Allodi when he was at Juventus. The 1965 European Cup final was also played in the San Siro on an intentionally muddy and waterlogged pitch.

If you mean we could only have won what we won with matchfixing, then you are right. If you're saying that the only way to have been competitive in Europe and Italy was by matchfixing, then you are absolutely wrong.

did i even mention juventus once over the past two pages? for christ sake, stop being so immature.

im sure most people here are well aware of ferruccio mazzolas claims but barely anyone took them seriously/acknowledged the existence of doping in la grande inter. i'm sorry bro, are you offended that i replied to an interview from sandro mazzola that vindicates that fact?

im not well informed enough to judge the record of one club against another, but im pretty fucking confident juventus never cheated with the degree of success of La Grande Inter. and at the very least there isnt any evidence to say juve matchfixed and doped when they were successful in Europe. have fun with that.

and by the way, luciano moggi was the protege of our sporting director in that era, allodi. it was actually under allodi that juventus were first recognized for matchfixing games, so tldr inter's sporting director brought matchfixing to juve. and when did i "discriminate" inter legends? give a clear example. i said they're dirty if they're dirty. allodi, herrera, and angelo moratti had their hands covered in dirt. facchetti and massimo moratti also had their hands covered in dirt. get over it.

I'd like to think of you as a reasonable man who keeps room for hypothetical arguments but I have to say that's a very black and white perspective... and I don't mean those silly Juve jibes some guys throw at you lately.

I have acknowledged the murky periods of the past and even during calciopoli more than once, but I would never base my convictions (let alone an argument) on such extreme standards that don't take into consideration the cultural, political and past personal experiences of Angelo Moratti (and Massimo as a youngster who witnessed them) in the 60s. How can you disregard any possibility that the controversial decision by Umberto Agnelli and his FIGC to favor Juve in the 1961 pitch invasion incident, which ironically was his last year before Giuseppe Pasquale took over, didn't push Angelo off the edge despite playing fair and by the book for years? Keep in mind that we had Allodi and Herrera with us during that game and 2-3 years before the actual Grande Inter period was figured out in 1963.

The 1960-1961 incident alone contradicts the "no one else did it" argument which makes me baffled on how you would advocate Juve's innocence (or lack of responsibility) with such ease even though they drew first blood. That's the undeniable truth; they basically pulled us to the dark side. If there's an argument I'd like to explore more it'd be the amount of influence Herrera could have had on Angelo to peruse such alleged off the pitch tactics. What I mean is that everyone acknowledges the man's strong personality in the locker room, so what if it was extended to the boardroom? The same goes to Allodi's possible justifications for his president but I guess now with most of the inner circle people gone; everything we say is mere speculation.

As for Brian Glanville's books and articles, leaving his bias for English football aside, the man knows how to write sensational and juicy stories about that period. Even when I look at the links you offered above, it's good that Facchetti called him out on his support for Arsenal and the timing of our game with them before that story was published. If I’m not mistaken, he did again when we played Liverpool in the Champions League.

I'm amazed that Glanville ignored how Bill Shankly’s Liverpool had a zero European titles stigma in the 60s or the fact that they were overachievers in their first ever participation in Europe in 1965. Granted, they reached the semifinal but the game was bound to have controversial calls when it is on such a stage and especially when you’re playing with an experienced side like ours, unless you’re adopting Mourinho’s frantic referee and off the pitch excuses lately. That's football, I'm sure in the next 20 years a journalist will release his investigations about the favors Barcelona received in Europe and will cite that infamous Chelsea game as evidence while throwing shades on Messi's medical past.

That being said, the referees dinner case does have some grounds seeing how it’s not an oddity in Italy before 2006. However, I’d like you to stop repeating the two illegal goals lie which was proven wrong by video evidence in our favor according to Stephen F. Kelly's biography book on the late Bill Shankly back in 1996. I wanted to call it a ‘claim’ instead of a ‘lie’ but Glanville’s insistence on repeating it to support his narrative forced my hands.

As for the Dortmund incident, and again based on the Luis Suarez book link you provided, it doesn’t prove anything close to a witness statement let alone a substantial evidence. At one point, it literally says a Yugoslav tourist meet the referee (Tesanic) in the streets of Milano and he told him Inter paid for the trip. Just like that, some unknown tourist with no name or even a gender specification comes out and offers this convenient accusation that suits writer’s endgame? That’s one dumbass referee if you ask me.

and at the very least there isnt any evidence to say juve matchfixed and doped when they were successful in Europe. have fun with that.

Dr. Riccardo Agricola (Juve’s team doctor 1994-1998) was found guilty in the doping charges before they were dropped due to the statute of limitations. If your answer is “Juve didn’t know about him” then that same argument could be said about Herrera’s Inter which obviously doesn’t exonerate the “Machiavellian” culture in calico. If your answer is “Juve weren’t guilty” then rest assured that the case fell apart because the court couldn’t carry out further blood tests in 2004-2005.

Aside from the example you offered about their matchfixing with Allodi, which counts against them and not us regardless of his time at Inter, there’s the case with the comments made by Brian Clough who suggested that the West Germany’s referee accepted gifts from Juve when Derby County lost in the European finale in 1973. Another “evidence” from England after one of their teams lost. A guilt that still stands against Juve if we’re going to accept the ones you listed above as valid reasons to berate our past.

If you mean we could only have won what we won with matchfixing, then you are right. If you're saying that the only way to have been competitive in Europe and Italy was by matchfixing, then you are absolutely wrong.

I’m not a Moratti apologist, you know that, but just like my position on the Benzema case, I can’t take sides or condemn what he did as absolute evil. There will always be unaccounted for reasons and circumstances that influence a person’s decision to act, or in Angelo’s case react, to an injustice. I’m simply pointing out that whatever he did was necessary for him to move on, hence the necessary evil. Obviously, I can’t judge this situation but the extent of what I can do is try and explain what happened from a cause and effect perspective.

I genuinely believe that Angelo Moratti was at a crossroad of either putting up or shutting up when it comes to his ambitions and dreams for Inter. Now, how much of a role did the Juve incident play to persuade him in walking in that unsavory road? Did he only want to even the odds with Juve? Did he want to win at any cost? Unless he comes back from the grave or Massimo sits down and abandons his commitment for the club to reveal his father's past, we will continue speculating about these things until the day we die.

What I suggest for everyone is that we accept the past with its mysteries and the man's undeniable love for Inter.

 

[bandiera]

I'd like to think of you as a reasonable man who keeps room for hypothetical arguments but I have to say that's a very black and white perspective... and I don't mean those silly Juve jibes some guys throw at you lately.

I have acknowledged the murky periods of the past and even during calciopoli more than once, but I would never base my convictions (let alone an argument) on such extreme standards that don't take into consideration the cultural, political and past personal experiences of Angelo Moratti (and Massimo as a youngster who witnessed them) in the 60s. How can you disregard any possibility that the controversial decision by Umberto Agnelli and his FIGC to favor Juve in the 1961 pitch invasion incident, which ironically was his last year before Giuseppe Pasquale took over, didn't push Angelo off the edge despite playing fair and by the book for years? Keep in mind that we had Allodi and Herrera with us during that game and 2-3 years before the actual Grande Inter period was figured out in 1963.

The 1960-1961 incident alone contradicts the "no one else did it" argument which makes me baffled on how you would advocate Juve's innocence (or lack of responsibility) with such ease even though they drew first blood. That's the undeniable truth; they basically pulled us to the dark side. If there's an argument I'd like to explore more it'd be the amount of influence Herrera could have had on Angelo to peruse such alleged off the pitch tactics. What I mean is that everyone acknowledges the man's strong personality in the locker room, so what if it was extended to the boardroom? The same goes to Allodi's possible justifications for his president but I guess now with most of the inner circle people gone; everything we say is mere speculation.

As for Brian Glanville's books and articles, leaving his bias for English football aside, the man knows how to write sensational and juicy stories about that period. Even when I look at the links you offered above, it's good that Facchetti called him out on his support for Arsenal and the timing of our game with them before that story was published. If I’m not mistaken, he did again when we played Liverpool in the Champions League.

I'm amazed that Glanville ignored how Bill Shankly’s Liverpool had a zero European titles stigma in the 60s or the fact that they were overachievers in their first ever participation in Europe in 1965. Granted, they reached the semifinal but the game was bound to have controversial calls when it is on such a stage and especially when you’re playing with an experienced side like ours, unless you’re adopting Mourinho’s frantic referee and off the pitch excuses lately. That's football, I'm sure in the next 20 years a journalist will release his investigations about the favors Barcelona received in Europe and will cite that infamous Chelsea game as evidence while throwing shades on Messi's medical past.

That being said, the referees dinner case does have some grounds seeing how it’s not an oddity in Italy before 2006. However, I’d like you to stop repeating the two illegal goals lie which was proven wrong by video evidence in our favor according to Stephen F. Kelly's biography book on the late Bill Shankly back in 1996. I wanted to call it a ‘claim’ instead of a ‘lie’ but Glanville’s insistence on repeating it to support his narrative forced my hands.

As for the Dortmund incident, and again based on the Luis Suarez book link you provided, it doesn’t prove anything close to a witness statement let alone a substantial evidence. At one point, it literally says a Yugoslav tourist meet the referee (Tesanic) in the streets of Milano and he told him Inter paid for the trip. Just like that, some unknown tourist with no name or even a gender specification comes out and offers this convenient accusation that suits writer’s endgame? That’s one dumbass referee if you ask me.





Dr. Riccardo Agricola (Juve’s team doctor 1994-1998) was found guilty in the doping charges before they were dropped due to the statute of limitations. If your answer is “Juve didn’t know about him” then that same argument could be said about Herrera’s Inter which obviously doesn’t exonerate the “Machiavellian” culture in calico. If your answer is “Juve weren’t guilty” then rest assured that the case fell apart because the court couldn’t carry out further blood tests in 2004-2005.

Aside from the example you offered about their matchfixing with Allodi, which counts against them and not us regardless of his time at Inter, there’s the case with the comments made by Brian Clough who suggested that the West Germany’s referee accepted gifts from Juve when Derby County lost in the European finale in 1973. Another “evidence” from England after one of their teams lost. A guilt that still stands against Juve if we’re going to accept the ones you listed above as valid reasons to berate our past.





I’m not a Moratti apologist, you know that, but just like my position on the Benzema case, I can’t take sides or condemn what he did as absolute evil. There will always be unaccounted for reasons and circumstances that influence a person’s decision to act, or in Angelo’s case react, to an injustice. I’m simply pointing out that whatever he did was necessary for him to move on, hence the necessary evil. Obviously, I can’t judge this situation but the extent of what I can do is try and explain what happened from a cause and effect perspective.

I genuinely believe that Angelo Moratti was at a crossroad of either putting up or shutting up when it comes to his ambitions and dreams for Inter. Now, how much of a role did the Juve incident play to persuade him in walking in that unsavory road? Did he only want to even the odds with Juve? Did he want to win at any cost? Unless he comes back from the grave or Massimo sits down and abandons his commitment for the club to reveal his father's past, we will continue speculating about these things until the day we die.

What I suggest for everyone is that we accept the past with its mysteries and the man's undeniable love for Inter.

y&h, I was very careful about my wording. i never said no one else had their hands dirty, i said no one else cheated as much as we did with the success we had during LGI, or at the very least there's no evidence to say that claim isn't true.

there is no denying what happened in 1960/61. juventus also matchfixed and doped in italy and europe but theres no evidence to say it ever happened at the level or degree of success of LGI. there is no referee testimony that they ever tried to matchfix a european cup semifinal for example.

the second goal vs liverpool is technically legal because there was no contact between peiro and the gk, but at the time gks were always given the call whenever a challenge was made on them especially in england and italy. the first also remains suspicious. the referee's hand is up when he calls the free kick but it comes down just as corso approaches the ball. admittedly, "dubious calls" arent evidence of anything on their own but the alarming context gives the case against inter a lot more credibility. i can see how those calls could be legitimate but i can also see how they could be illegitimate, especially with the context of allodi's history of european matchfixing at juventus, the same referee and allodi tied together in a matchfixing scandal in the 70s, and other referees claiming they had been bribed by angelo moratti and italo allodi. i already acknowledged that glanville is very biased but i dont think thats relevant to whether or not hes saying things that are true, notably his incriminating testimony from vadas. and for the record i didnt bring up the suarez kick vs dortmund because i also felt glanville was making far too big a leap there.

already mentioned the agricola incident before editing the post in a reply to Javier's son about clearcut evidence against juve. zidane also famously claims that he felt he was being given PEDs at juve. however, that still doesnt change what was said which wasn't "theres no evidence to say juventus matchfixed OR doped when they were successful in europe", but that there's no evidence to say they did both of them (cheated as much as we did in one go) with the degree of european success we had in the 60s.




whether or not angelo moratti was driven towards the dark side of calcio as a response to the 1961 derby d'italia incident is irrelevant to whether or not it was wrong. its a football game, not a matter of life and death. grey area over immoral acts arises when you demonize one party out of many guilty parties or when the ends justify the means, that isnt the case here so it should be black and white.

whether or not other teams were doing bad things too and that was the only way to have won is irrelevant. two wrongs don't make a right. how would you feel if frosinone, torino, and carpi matchfixed games with us? so why does it make it any different when inter does it? the reaction theory also isnt plausible because allodi matchfixed everywhere he went. after all, luciano moggi was his protege at napoli. i also dont see how moratti possibly being inspired by herrera or allodi is relevant. he was still 100% responsible, not having the resolve to disagree with herrera is not an excuse. most importantly, this is all speculation - i can also claim that angelo moratti brainwashed herrera and allodi to do everything he said, we have no way of knowing the hierarchy behind the scenes.

i feel a lot of your points sidestep the discussion. i can obviously understand why someone would get involved in matchfixing and doping, and im not saying only inter should be vilified or that we shouldve been punished more than juventus or anything like that. this is calcio. but i wont support the decision to cheat and cheating in sport is never justified.

there is no doubt all elite clubs back then doped, but the extent to which bandiera is going, the extra mile to prove it is what makes me suspicious. As if Inter is the benchmark, or even the trend setter on doping makes me question his motives, i have yet to see an argument on which he takes Inters side, never, even once

pimp, this is a reaction to those that put this club on a pedestal and demonize other clubs for doing what we did. im not saying we cheated as much as juventus throughout our history, im saying we have done many of the same things and yes, there is no evidence that they matchfixed before we did or that they (or any other italian club) cheated at the level or degree of success as LGI. the first case of matchfixing at juventus was under italo allodi in the 70s. ive never taken juventus's side when it comes to whether or not they cheated, so it goes both ways. and ive never said that doping was exclusive to inter, so what you're saying is irrelevant. maybe you should ask yourself whether or not you've ever taken a side against inter?

i obviously talk more about our club's indisrections because this is an inter forum and most people here deny any of them ever happened. if anything, they hypocritically use the same justifications as the juve fans they vilify (not talking about you, y&h).

 

[Y&h]

the second goal vs liverpool is technically legal because there was no contact between peiro and the gk, but at the time gks were always given the call whenever a challenge was made on them especially in england and italy. the first also remains suspicious. the referee's hand is up when he calls the free kick but it comes down just as corso approaches the ball. admittedly, "dubious calls" arent evidence of anything on their own but the alarming context gives the case against inter a lot more credibility. i can see how those calls could be legitimate but i can also see how they could be illegitimate, especially with the context of allodi's history of european matchfixing at juventus, the same referee and allodi tied together in a matchfixing scandal in the 70s, and other referees claiming they had been bribed by angelo moratti and italo allodi. i already acknowledged that glanville is very biased but i dont think thats relevant to whether or not hes saying things that are true, notably his incriminating testimony from vadas. and for the record i didnt bring up the suarez kick vs dortmund because i also felt glanville was making far too big a leap there.

already mentioned the agricola incident before editing the post in a reply to Javier's son about clearcut evidence against juve. zidane also famously claims that he felt he was being given PEDs at juve. however, that still doesnt change what was said which wasn't "theres no evidence to say juventus matchfixed OR doped when they were successful in europe", but that there's no evidence to say they did both of them (cheated as much as we did in one go) with the degree of european success we had in the 60s.

We agree that Glanville exaggerated his claims by playing on the normal pitch events with a justified suspicion in Allodi. Also, the Dortmund referee mistakes argument could be used in the 1997 finale with Juve. Didn't the referee disallow a legal goal for Juve and ignore two clear penalties? Where was he from the injustice done to the Italians there?


As for the Juve matter, I wasn't aware of your posts since I didn't read any of them before my reply, let alone after the edits.

y&h, I was very careful about my wording. i never said no one else had their hands dirty, i said no one else cheated as much as we did with the success we had during LGI, or at the very least there's no evidence to say that claim isn't true.

there is no denying what happened in 1960/61. juventus also matchfixed and doped in italy and europe but theres no evidence to say it ever happened at the level or degree of success of LGI. there is no referee testimony that they ever tried to matchfix a european cup semifinal for example.

whether or not angelo moratti was driven torwards the dark side of calcio as a response to the 1961 derby d'italia incident is irrelevant to whether or not it was wrong. its a football game, not a matter of life and death. grey area over immoral acts arises when you demonize one party out of many guilty parties or when the ends justify the means, that isnt the case here so it should be black and white.

whether or not other teams were doing bad things too and that was the only way to have won is irrelevant. two wrongs don't make a right. how would you feel if frosinone, torino, and carpi matchfixed games with us? so why does it make it any different when inter does it? the reaction theory also isnt plausible because allodi matchfixed everywhere he went. after all, luciano moggi was his protege at napoli. i also dont see how moratti possibly being inspired by herrera or allodi is relevant. he was still 100% responsible, not having the resolve to disagree with herrera is not an excuse. most importantly, this is all speculation - i can also claim that angelo moratti brainwashed herrera and allodi to do everything he said, we have no way of knowing the hierarchy behind the scenes.

i feel a lot of your points sidestep the discussion. i can obviously understand why someone would get involved in matchfixing and doping, and im not saying only inter should be vilified or that we shouldve been punished more than juventus or anything like that. this is calcio. but i wont support the decision to cheat and cheating in sport is never justified.

i obviously talk more about our club's indisrections because this is an inter forum and most people here deny any of them ever happened. if anything, they hypocritically use the same justifications as the juve fans they vilify (not talking about you, y&h).

On the Angelo-Herrera bit: Perhaps but you can't deny Helenio's win at all costs attitude. Didn't he hide information about the death of one of his player's father before a game? Or the heart problem one of his players had before he pushed him too hard in training and resulted in the man's death? Like I said earlier about the inner circle roles and influence; it's all speculation now.

Frankly, I don't know what argument do you want to prove here? JJM's trolling and cheesy attacks shouldn't be taken as serious grounds to start a long and clearly futile discussion. You will always have the blind, delusional, skeptical, and critical supporters in every club, and like you said, the way some of us discuss Inter isn't different from that of the Juve crowd so it shouldn't come off as an unconventional problem that needs addressing or a reality check for some of the guys. I mean look at Shaun, wera, Kazaan and myself and you'll see a group of guys who are willing to sit down and accept the words of Sandro, and his late brother before him, as a dark part of our reality and past. While guys like Devious and others will, understandably, hesitate to soil that perfect image.

Also, side stepping? I had to take the hypothetical road into Angelo's past to make sense of the situation and the possibilities... nothing more, nothing less.

I specifically pointed out that I can't judge/justify Moratti's reasons which was a reply to what I believe was an unfair 'win or be competitive' argument* you sounded unrealistically certain about. The black and white criticism wasn't about Moratti's decisions since we agree his methods were wrong, seeing my choice to call it evil in the first place. My problem is with that strange calibre you're setting with the "cheating to the degree of success of La Grande Inter" which doesn't make any sense or difference if the cheating lasted for 4 years or 4 months or whether it was accompanied with success or not. It was a very specific event in history that you will find little similarities with elsewhere. We shouldn't be splitting hairs about the illegal violations of Herrera's Inter & Lippi's Juve.


*Dammit! I just saw your edited version... which I agree with! :fffuuu:

:yuno: stop editing?!

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Buon compleanno, signore Mazzola.

 

[JJM]

One of the best Inter players ever
LEGEND!
Watched his highlights on youtube
Special player for us and Italy

 

[JJM]

In his interview today he says he prefers Icardi to Higuain even though it's a close call.
He compared Pioli to Herrera in the sense that Pioli came and started to work on the "head" first then the "legs" and it shows already
He thinks that the break will do us good to recharge the batteries and that he is confident we can make CL with performance like against Lazio if we continue to play like that.

 

[Shaun]

Higuain is a better player than Mauro currently. However, if you were to back one player to finish one chance in a game it would be Icardi. Especially if it was an important game.

 

[JJM]

Valentino Mazzola ties the shoe of his son Sandro in 1949.
Photo: Archivio Storico Comune di Torino

 

[Pimpin]

 

[Il Drago]

Celtic’s greatest day was end of an era for Sandro Mazzola and Inter

GLORY, beauty and tragedy. The Mazzola name is synonymous with all three in Italy, a surname so rooted in Italian football folklore that it assumes almost mythical status.

The glory is reflected in the 17 major honours accumulated by Valentino and his two sons Sandro and Ferruccio. Beauty was displayed in the effortless grace with which the Mazzola family played, particularly Valentino and Sandro, gliding through challenges and scoring goals for fun over more than three decades.

Then there is the tragedy. Sandro Mazzola was only six when his father was taken from him in one of Italian football’s darkest days, the Superga air disaster that wiped out arguably the finest club side the country has produced, the all-conquering "Grande Torino" of the 1940s captained by Valentino.

With his father’s legacy towering over him, Sandro would have been forgiven for turning his back on the game altogether and pursuing a career away from the limelight after a youth spent at countless commemorations and memorial services.

But you can’t cheat fate. Sandro joined Internazionale as a teenager and never looked back. During a 17-year spell at San Siro, Mazzola escaped his father’s shadow to carve his own glorious path; one that could challenge, or even surpass, the achievements of Valentino.

He became a linchpin of Helenio Herrera’s "Grande Inter" of the 1960s, helping them win back-to-back European Cups in 1964 and 1965 as well as four Serie A titles and two Intercontinental Cups, triumphs that were achieved using Herrera’s trailblazing interpretation of the "catenaccio" or "door bolt" system.

The importance and greatness of that side is not downplayed by Mazzola, now 72 and working as a pundit on Italian television.

“During those years we were definitely the best,” he said. “After there were others, but I think that was the best Italian team ever because we knew how to win in Europe, in Italy, across the world.”

Comparisons with Celtic’s much-heralded Lisbon Lions are not hard to draw. Inter are still struggling to recreate their 1960s glory days in Europe, when a team of homegrown talent conquered challengers from all over the continent.

For every Billy McNeill, there was Armando Picchi. For Tommy Gemmell, you had Giacinto Facchetti. And for Jimmy Johnstone? Well, there was Sandro Mazzola.

Although the Nerazzurri couldn’t match Celtic in boasting that every player in their side was born within 30 miles of the club’s stadium, Inter’s starting XI in Lisbon 50 years ago consisted entirely of Italians.

But according to Mazzola, that night in Portugal changed everything. As Celtic celebrated the most glorious moment of their history, the result tolled the death knell not only for the Grande Inter, but for Herrera’s entire philosophy.

“This match represented the end of a cycle,” he said. “After the defeat we had to start over again. In the meantime, football was changing and consequently we had to adapt as well.

“They surprised us. We had already won cups; we were convinced we could win and instead we found ourselves up against a very strong side. Unfortunately I don’t remember the names, but they had wide players in defence and midfield who were exceptional.”

Inter’s two previous European Cup successes in the years leading up to Lisbon had seen them conquer some of football’s most legendary teams.

In 1964, Mazzola scored twice as they recorded a 3-1 win in the final against a Real Madrid side featuring the likes of Alfredo Di Stefano and Ferenc Puskas.

A year later they defended that title, knocking out Rangers on the way to a 1-0 final victory against Eusebio’s Benfica.

Inter were Europe’s dominant club side at the time, so what happened that night at the Estadio Nacional against Jock Stein’s men?

“Celtic approached the game differently,” Mazzola said. “We usually came up against teams that thought a lot about defending, given our quality. But Celtic thought about attacking and did it very well, with really great wingers. That surprised us a lot.”

Mazzola remembers Herrera, the mastermind behind the Grande Inter, teaching his players to "train your head first, then your legs".

His groundbreaking training methods and interpretation of the catenaccio system - using four man-marking defenders and a sweeper to pick up loose balls - have earned him a place in the history of the game’s tactical development.

Despite that, Mazzola regrets that the Argentine’s preparation for the game and warnings of the danger the Scots would pose fell on deaf ears.

“Herrera had already gone to watch Celtic,” Mazzola explained. “He described every player to us, we thought that as usual he was just doing that because he didn’t want us to underestimate the match, but we got it wrong because they were really strong.

“We were really sad after the game as we understood that we had come to the end of an era. We were also angry with the manager because he had watched them play and hadn’t told us they were so good. He did that because he didn’t want to alarm us and he understood that we were coming to the end of our cycle.”

Mazzola had got Inter off to the perfect start, scoring from the penalty spot after only seven minutes to put the Italians in a commanding position.

However, he admitted that taking the lead so early on allowed the Inter players to relax, not believing their opponents capable of turning things around against one of the game’s greatest defensive units.

“That was the biggest mistake we made,” he said. “We were convinced that goal had won the match and that they wouldn’t be able to come back. But instead they showed character, willpower, a lot of running and managed to make a great comeback in the match.

“Maybe we underestimated them as well. We were coming off several good seasons and we thought we were better. But in football you can’t just think you’re stronger, you need to prove it on the pitch.”

One man in particular stood out for Mazzola that night; the great Tommy Gemmell, who sadly died in March.

The full-back’s attacking prowess left a lasting mark on his Italian counterpart, who remembers his surprise at the threat coming from the back as Gemmell scored a superb equalising goal that pushed Celtic towards their triumph.

He said: “I liked their left-back [Gemmell] a lot, he was very good. He was always involved in the attacking moves, he was really impressive. He knew how to defend and attack.”

Lisbon marked a watershed moment in many ways from an Inter perspective. In Mazzola’s words, it marked the end of an era - the death of catenaccio and the Grande Inter.

The Nerazzurri would have to wait another 33 years for their next European triumph, when Jose Mourinho led them to Champions League glory in 2010.

Celtic continue their wait to repeat the feat of Stein’s side, but Mazzola believes the Lions helped Italians sit up and realise that Scotland was more than just an obscure football backwater.

“It made people discover Scottish football, which wasn’t very well known in Italy,” he said. “From that moment we started to watch it and understand that it was a good type of football.”

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/15299389.Celtic___s_greatest_day_was_end_of_an_era_for_Sandro_Mazzola_and_Inter/

 

[JJM]

Inter's legend, Mazzola:

"Juve? (Juventus' loss in the final) I have celebrated and enjoyed it all night."

GRANDE SANDRO !!!:star::heart::star:

 

[Devious]

He brought down the house on arguably one of the strongest sides in football history

Grande Mazzola!

 

[JJM]

maybe a ICARDI-MARTINEZ-MR.X can do the same soon enough...dreams dreams dreams

 

[Devious]

Back when he looked like Trevor from GTAV.

I'd kill to have that kit.

 

[brehme1989]

I have that kit. Wouldn't advise anyone to wear it and walk, let alone run.

 

[Besnik]

Il Cuchu has wear this kit after the CL triumph in 2010. I like it so much, would love to have one though.

 

[Devious]

HBD legend!

 

[RickyMaravilla'sRightFoot]

https://www.fcinternews.it/news/mazzola-al-veleno-conte-non-mi-convince-si-nasce-juventini-come-si-nasce-interisti-e-difficile-cambiare-320001
Mazzola calling out Conte for being born a juventino and saying he doesn't convince him