Having completed my short analysis of Woolwich Arsenal’s league results in the last article, I began to wonder what Tottenham’s results were like over the same period. No particular reason – I just thought it would be interesting.

In fact it turned out to be more than interesting. Here’s the chart. After [...]]]> By Tony Attwood

Having completed my short analysis of Woolwich Arsenal’s league results in the last article, I began to wonder what Tottenham’s results were like over the same period.  No particular reason – I just thought it would be interesting.

In fact it turned out to be more than interesting.  Here’s the chart.  After the year (which marks the second year in each season so 1894 is 1893/4) the next three columns are Woolwich Arsenal, recording the league they were in, the number of games played and the position.   After that the same for Tottenham.

The final column shows which of the two clubs was in the higher position – a bit nerdy I know, but well…

However what suddenly struck me was this. Tottenham make this huge fuss about 1919, when having come bottom of the first division in 1915 they were relegated to the second division.  Arsenal simultaneously came up, having come 5th in the second division – something that was as a result of the chairmen voting on which clubs should be part of the new enlarged first division.   (If you have read my little piece on the events of 1919 you will also know there was the issue of match fixing that needed to be dealt with – there’s a link at the bottom).

Anyway, let us consider Tottenham’s position in getting out of the Southern League.  Tottenham won the Southern League once, in 1900, but in 1908 when they were promoted, they came 8th.

Now let’s just ponder this.  In 1908 Tottenham came 8th and went up.  In 1915 Woolwich Arsenal came 5th and went up.  Tottenham make a lot of fuss about Woolwich Arsenal going up, and yet, somehow, the sadness and regret of Tottenham fans at having gone up so unfairly having just come 8th in the Southern League in 1908 has escaped me.

Certainly Tottenham could not claim to have been endless champions of the Southern League.  They won it once.  That was it.  So what machinations went on to get Tottenham promoted that year?

Was it bribery and corruption?   That might seem a little extreme to allege but then it is exactly what Tottenham have been alleging since 1919, despite the fact that the evidence is all there that there were calls for the match fixing clubs (Liverpool and Manchester United) to be thrown out of the league, thus making not just four places but six places available in the first division in 1919.

What similar event allowed Tottenham to rise from the Southern League to the Football League after coming a miserly seventh?

I think we should be told!  For whatever the reasons, maybe the same ones applied in 1919 when Arsenal went up having come 5th.

Of course we could go further.  In 1895/1896 Tottenham were neither in the First nor Second Division of the Southern League.  Yet the following season they jumped over the second division into the first.   How come?  It all looks a bit dark and misty.

Special article on the promotion to Division I in 1919

Woolwich Arsenal, the complete league record

Is Arsenal really a franchised club?

Just how big was Woolwich Arsenal FC?

Today if an Arsenal supporter ever does think of Preston North End, it might be in the knowledge that they were the first Invincibles – unbeaten in the very first season of league football. With the [...]]]> Today’s Sponsor: “Making the Arsenal” – the most original book on Arsenal FC ever.
.

Today if an Arsenal supporter ever does think of Preston North End, it might be in the knowledge that they were the first Invincibles – unbeaten in the very first season of league football.   With the black and white 19th century pictures of the club there is a nostalgic almost romantic image of the period.

And yet nothing could be further from the truth, because Preston not only brought invincibility to the league, they were also the centre of corruption and rule-breaking.  Indeed when Woolwich Arsenal came to play their last game of the 1909/1910 season 100 years ago this week, Preston would have been seen by supporters as the most corrupt club the country had yet seen.

Because Preston North End were the first champions of the football league, it is sometimes assumed that they are a much older club than Arsenal, but their early years were taken up with cricket and rugby.

It was not until 1880 – just six years before Arsenal – that PNE took up football.

What distinguished PNE from the off was the fact that they were taken over by a man who realised that money could buy success in football – a sort of 19th century Abramovich – William Sudell, who had the idea of buying in and then paying (illegally) the top players of the day.

While all the other early clubs sought players locally, Sudell turned to Scotland for his team.  In this regard he was at one with Woolwich Arsenal (although Arsenal had a natural reason to use Scottish talent,  since most of the workforce in the Woolwich factories came from Scotland.)

But in the case  of Preston, these were players who came to Preston in order to be paid for playing.  And since that was illegal initially they needed their payments hidden.  So the men were given make believe jobs in Preston at  rates of pay way over the odds for the day.  Indeed some men were said to have several jobs, which, had they actually done them, would have left no time for football.

Of course everyone knew what Preston were up to but officialdom turned a blind eye to it – for although no one else had ever dreamed of corruption that Preston instituted on such a scale, others were engaged in the same sort of activity.

But still there were complaints.  Endless complaints.  The best documented came in In 1884 when Upton Park FC complained that PNE played professionals in a cup match, and PNE were immediately thrown out.

However the strength of PNE in football was so great that they were able to hold the FA to ransom by suggesting that the top teams in the FA Cup would all pull out and play their own competition if PNE were not allowed back in the following year – with no questions asked.  The FA gave in.

It is noticeable however that when Arsenal turned pro a few years later, the FA forebad all teams from playing them.  PNE clearly had the money to see that things happened their way.  Woolwich Arsenal were seen as newcomers, and could therefore be picked off.

PNE were in the first Football League and won the Cup and the league that year – without losing a match.  But since most of the time they were up against teams that were paying much lower pay packets without the “working bonus”, it is not surprising.

Perhaps the obvious comparison would be Chelsea under Abramovich in 2010 playing in the Conference.

But just as Manchester United and Liverpool have bankrupted themselves trying to keep up with Chelsea, and Manchester City soon came along to copy Chelsea approach, so other teams took up the PNE approach in the late 19th century.  Those teams like Arsenal who stuck to the maximum wage because they employed regular working men and were not financed by big business (Arsenal were in fact financed by Mr Leavey, a gents outfitter) found it impossible to cope.

But crooks do sometimes get found out and in 1893 Sudell was kicked out of the club, after being found guilty of embezzling cash from his company – money which was used to pay for PNE’s high rollers.  He got three years inside, and upon release left the country in disgrace.

By 1894 with PNE’s money gone, the impact of their corrupt system was  there for all to see and that year they were left having to win the last game of the season to stay in the first division.  The big name players went to the clubs that were now copying the PNE method of breaking the rules  – Everton, Liverpool, Manchester United, Wolverhampton and the like.

PNE went down in 1901, and had to wait until 1904 to come back, but the crowds had gone, and in both the 1908/9 and 1909/10 season only 8,000 turned up at Deepdale to see Woolwich Arsenal.

Woolwich Arsenal played their final game of the 1909/1910 season on April 23rd against Preston North End.  Details will follow on the 100th anniversary of that game.

—————————

Other early corruption stories

Arsenal play the champions and the rest of the league cry “foul”

Tottenham Hotspur: the dark history

Chelsea: the dark origins

Arsenal’s fixed promotion. Read the full story.

• Read the book which tells the whole story of 1910: Making the Arsenal

• Back to the full index page

Played early monday evening, in front of a crowd of just 8000. And certain sectors of the footballing establishment went beserk.

If you have read the report of the game from two days before when Woolwich Arsenal drew with low-lying Bury, you’ll know that it left the table looking [...]]]> Woolwich Arsenal 1, Aston Villa 0.

Played early monday evening, in front of a crowd of just 8000.   And certain sectors of the footballing establishment went beserk.

If you have read the report of the game from two days before when Woolwich Arsenal drew with low-lying Bury, you’ll know that it left the table looking like this…

• Bury………………..… Played 34 Points 29
• Middlesbrough.…… Played 34 Points 28
• Woolwich Arsenal….Played 35 Points 28
• Tottenham Hotspur..Played 34 Points 27
• Bristol City……..……Played 34 Points 27
• —————————————————————-
• Chelsea…….………Played 35 Points 27
• Bolton Wanderers…Played 35 Points 22

You will also know that Aston Villa had just walked away with the league.  The top of the league looked like this at the start of the match against Woolwich Arsenal…

• Aston Villa………… Played 34 Points 49
• Blackburn Rovers… Played 34 Points 41
• Liverpool………….. Played 34 Points 41

So with just four games to go for Villa, they had walked away with the league.  The journey to Woolwich was known (as I have mentioned before) as the “day out in Hell” because of the difficulties involved in the journey (train to London, tube across the city, and then a long and very infrequent tram ride out into the Kent countryside.)

It was that last part of the journey which everyone hated, and it was an evening kick off which meant trying to find accommodation for the players in the small Kent towns of Plumstead (where the ground was) and Woolwich (which was basically a military town by the Thames).

So Villa gave their first team the day off and sent down the reserves to get some practice.

Woolwich Arsenal has their regular team out – except that back for only his second game was CE McGibbon – the hero of the hour in the match against Chelsea on March 28th, when he scored the only goal.

There’s more about McGibbon in a separate article already on this site, but so far his record was played one, scored one, won one.

And in the late afternoon rain of 11th April 1910 against the league champions (or least their reserves) he did it again.  Woolwich Arsenal 1 Aston Villa 0, goal scored by McGibbon.

And the table now looked like this…

• Preston North End…. Played 35 Points 30
• Woolwich Arsenal…….Played 36 Points 30
• Bury……….………… Played 34 Points 29
• Middlesbrough……… Played 34 Points 28
• Tottenham Hotspur…..Played 34 Points 27
• Bristol City……………Played 34 Points 27
• —————————————————————-
• Chelsea…….………Played 35 Points 27
• Bolton Wanderers……Played 35 Points 22

That’s why everyone at the foot of the table was so annoyed with Villa.  That result took Woolwich Arsenal right out of the mire – and they got it playing a reserve team.

Woolwich Arsenal had two games left again…

Tottenham Hotspur and Preston North End.  Technically Woolwich Arsenal could still go down, but it seemed unlikely that everyone below them would win their remaining games, and Woolwich Arsenal would lose.

The game against Tottenham would be the great decider on April 16.  A draw there would probably be enough to ensure safety – unless everyone else pulled multiple rabbits out of hats.

You can read the history of 1910 from the perspective of a Fleet Street journalist in Making the Arsenal

The everyday story of Arsenal today is on Untold Arsenal

How an underhand strategy and a desire to rewrite history has transformed how people think about football in London.

To begin, somewhere near the start, and take you into an interesting world of politics and sport unlike anything you’d see today in football, poker online or any professional sport…

In [...]]]> Tottenham Hotspur: the dark history

How an underhand strategy and a desire to rewrite history has transformed how people think about football in London.

To begin, somewhere near the start, and take you into an interesting world of politics and sport unlike anything you’d see today in football, poker online or any professional sport…

In 1882, the Hotspur Football Club was formed by a group of school boys attending a Bible class at All Hallows Church.

Tottenham’s aim early on, like so many clubs was to join a league and win it, and so they were interested in the attempt by Woolwich Arsenal to form a Southern League to rival the northern based Football League in 1892.

Indeed there was no reason why they should not apply to join the league – along with 21 other clubs, which they did.  But Tottenham had the ignominy of being the only club not to get any votes.

Which suggests either that between 1882 and 1892 Tottenham had remained totally obscure, or else they had managed to annoy the rest of football in the south so much that everyone hated them.

Which was it?

I’ll pull all this together in a moment and give an answer, but we may note to start with that whatever the reason, Tottenham’s longer term development was not hindered for they went professional at the end of 1895 and joined the Southern League.

In 1900, Tottenham won the Southern League title and in 1901 the FA Cup, but despite the fact that other London teams such as Chelsea and Clapton Orient were in the Football League, and Woolwich Arsenal from Kent were also there, Tottenham did not get admitted to the Football League until 1908, when they came in and won the second division.

So again we have an interesting situation.  Tottenham, with great success, ruling the Southern League, winning the FA Cup no less (and lets not be churlish, this was years before Arsenal even managed to get to the semi finals,) could not get out of the Southern League and into the Football League.   Again, why?  Even Clapton Orient got in, when they didn’t.

Here’s another drop of history and it is this which starts to give us the idea.

Tottenham were relegated in 1919 when Arsenal were promoted.  Tottenham argued that although they had ended up bottom in 1915 (the previous year of the league) the league was being extended by two clubs and precedent would mean that they should stay up with the top two in division 2 being promoted.  This plea was rejected.

Again, the League did Tottenham no favours.  Again, why was this?

So to summarise our question…

Why did Tottenham get zero votes when they tried to join the Southern League in 1892, why did it take so long for them to join the Football League despite some early success and why did they get kicked out of the first division in 1919?  What had everyone got against them?

I think the answer is to do with attitude, style and approach.  In essence the rest of football really didn’t like Tottenham very much because of their behaviour.

Let’s go back to the very name Hotspur.   Tottenham found a playing area near Northumberland Park, an area which by repute was owned by the family of Sir Henry Percy, alias Hotspur, made famous by Shakespeare in Henry IV.  (And remember we are talking 15th century history here – not present day stuff).

The name Hotspur was a powerful name – it was a name that had come to symbolise British strength and determination, plus flamboyance, risk taking and the like.  (Actually history paints a different reality, but this is how the word “Hotspur” was seen in the late 19th century).

But London already had a Hotspur club that laid claim to an inheritance of Sir Henry Percy – London Hotspur.   The Percy family lived at Syon Park, which is south of the river, and that is where London Hotspur played.

What Tottenham were doing in adopting this name was several things.  Firstly they were trying to find a romantic link through the Northumberland Park region to the hero Harry Hotspur.  Second they were trying to take the name of the club London Hotspur, who themselves were getting a reputation.  Third they were trying to give themselves instant fame, an instant reputation.

It would be rather like a club newly formed at the time of the death of Winston Churchill calling itself Tottenham Churchill.  Popularist but ultimately a bit of a cheek.

The Duke of Northumberland’s family, who are the descendants of Harry Hotspur had not direct claim over the name “Hotspur” but they would undoubtedly have been concerned to see a general use of the name here there and everyone.  One club, London Hotspur, playing by their ancestral home, perhaps with permission to use the name, might be one thing.  But suddenly another one turning up, would be something else.  How many more “Hotspurs” would arise?

One can imagine them getting irate, and writing a letter.  Legend has it that a letter was indeed received at Tottenham, which caused them to change their name from Hotspur FC to Tottenham Hotspur, although the legend now says it was a wrongly delivered letter – intended for London Hotspur.

I believe this to be highly unlikely, for the simple reason to the club which was to become Tottenham Hotspur was not in London at the time – and in fact was not in London for a very long time to come.

The chances of a letter for London Hotspur, from Syon Park, south of the river, ending up with a team not even in London is too remote to give credence to.

Tottenham (which incidentally was where I grew up as a child, living in Devonshire Hill Lane which runs parallel to White Hart Lane) was part of Middlesex from 1850 to 1965.   True, it was part of the London postal area (London N17) and the Met Police District, but in terms of administration and local government it was in Middlesex, not London.

In 1934 the urban district was incorporated as a municipal borough (still part of Middlesex) and it was only when this was abolished in 1965 following the London Government Act in 1963 and it became part of the London Borough of Haringey.

These facts were discovered by readers of the Woolwich Arsenal site “Making the Arsenal” and I am very grateful to them for the discussion which brought this to light.

So Tottenham Hotspur were formed, but they were already known as a club that pushed its luck, usurping the name “Hotspur” from another club, already using that name.  That explains why they started getting rejected from early ballots for entry into leagues.

But then Tottenham made matters much worse for themselves.  In 1905 when Chelsea was created out of nothing (see the special feature article on this topic) they (Chelsea) applied for a place in the Southern League.   And Tottenham Hotspur objected on the grounds that London already had too many clubs!

Now that was cheek and a half.  Tottenham had no right to speak on London, because it was clearly in Middlesex, not London.   Woolwich Arsenal (in Kent) made no such objection.   It was widely seen as the uppity Middlesex club sticking its nose into things again.

However Tottenham made so much fuss that Chelsea was rejected by the Southern League, with support from clubs like Brentford, and Croydon Common.  So Chelsea applied for a place in the Football League and got in.

But the Football League would not forget Tottenham’s negative and arrogant behaviour in trying to speak for London, so from then on , no matter that they had won the cup, they were kept out of the League.

Eventually they did get in, but then they jumped back on the bandwagon in 1913 when Woolwich Arsenal moved to Highbury.  Again they led the arguments again, and forgetting their previous PR disasters they used the “London clubs” argument.  Henry Norris, a master at this sort of tactic, pointed out that this might well be a matter for London clubs, but not a matter for clubs from “other counties.”

“Maybe Lancashire and Yorkshire have an opinion,” he said, “and certainly if we listen to the opinion of Middlesex, we must listen to Yorkshire and Lancashire.”

Norris made the point that if the Football League were to be a national league, then the capital – the real LONDON – not the adjacent counties – needed football teams, and at that moment it only had Chelsea.  Adding Arsenal to the list would at least give London two – as Middlesex had two (Orient and Tottenham).

This is why Tottenham, the Middlesex club, had no friends in 1919 when Arsenal applied for a place in the first division to represent LONDON.   Tottenham claimed that by coming bottom in 1915 they should have stayed in the 1st division when it was expanded.  But on what grounds?

Their only grounds were the fact that they were NEAR LONDON.

That was it – and indeed when Tottenham Hotspur make references to Woolwich Arsenal, we should always remember, they endlessly tried to manipulate London football from without – and that is why the Football League lost patience with them, and told them to shut up.

Woolwich Arsenal could become Arsenal, and Arsenal could have their place in the 1st division.

——-

This is one of several special features on the history of Arsenal.  Others are to be found on the Making the Arsenal web site.  You can also read the history of Arsenal in 1910 in the book Making the Arsenal

All three were having a tough time of it, and the only things that were keeping all three from being relegated were

a) In those days, only two clubs went [...]]]> 100 years ago London had three Division I clubs – Woolwich Arsenal (who were actually in a small town in Kent), Chelsea and Tottenham Hotspur.

All three were having a tough time of it, and the only things that were keeping all three from being relegated were

a) In those days, only two clubs went down

b) Bad as the London teams were, Bolton was worse.

So Chelsea v Arsenal on Easter Monday 1910 was a big one. When the three London teams played each other the crowds were always much bigger than for other games, and when relegation was an option, this added to the tension.

Chelsea’s position in the league was one of the most disgraceful that there could be, for they were one of only three teams (Bradford City and Thames were the only other two I know of) who were simply given a place in the league for political reasons.   When Chelsea fans try and point the finger at Arsenal over the promotion in 1919 they not only ignore the facts of the 1919 situation (the match fixing etc) they also like to “forget” their own origins.

In 1904 the Mears brothers bought the freehold of Stamford Bridge Athletics Ground as a speculative venture when the previous owner died.  Their aim was to get Henry Norris at Fulham to move his club to the ground.   Norris however was always more interested in intrigue than straight opportunities, and when he announced in 1904 that Fulham was leaving Craven Cottage, it was a ploy to get the rent on his ground (owned by the Church Commissioners) reduced.

When Fulham did a new deal with the church for a lower rent on the Cottage the Mears brothers they did a deal with Great Western Railway who wanted it as a coal dump but then renaged on that and decided they could make more money out of the football club.   (There is a story, almost certainly untrue, about a dog causing the change of mind, but there’s no real evidence of anything quite so bizarre.  Money was almost certainly the key).

So Chelsea Football Club were founded on 10 March 1905 and they applied to play in the Southern League.  Tottenham objected – which was bizarre in the extreme, and shows the oddity of Tottenham’s approach at the time.  There was no reason why the existence of Chelsea in the Southern League could help Tottenham, and the objection was well noted when Arsenal moved to Highbury in 1913.   “Tottenham object to everything” was the call, and the club’s reaction in 1913 was treated with derision.  Tottenham in fact, shot themselves in both feet.

Stuck with a ground and no league to play in Chelsea applied for a place in the Football League, and got in.  One might wonder how and why the League was so willing.  Certainly the League wanted to extend its influence and ensure that the Southern League became weaker – so having more London clubs in was helpful.   Certainly Chelsea had a big (although very badly built) ground.  And certainly the League was a highly corrupt organisation – even then.

On 29 May 1905, having no players, no history, no supporters, no nothing save a ground, they got a place in the league.

Stamford Bridge, September 1905.  The club is just a few weeks old.

Despite a lack of real success, the crowds would turn up, and the first Chelsea Arsenal match got 55,000 in the ground.

But there was never any thought of Chelsea winning anything, any more than there was of Woolwich Arsenal winning something, and Chelsea against Woolwich Arsenal on Easter Monday 1910 was nothing but a relegation match.

—————

The book “Making the Arsenal” covers the history in 1910, including the role of Archie Leitch who was the architect for the stand at Woolwich Arsenal, Chelsea and Fulham.   There’s quite a bit of detail in the book about the state of the Chelsea ground in 1910, and for the game against Arsenal sections of the terracing were roped off because of problems.  You can read more in the book, which takes the form of a diary of a football journalist.

(c) Tony Attwood 2010

So this obviously is the moment to take a peek at the history of the infamous Reds and one of their misadventures.

On 2nd [...]]]>

Apart from focusing on football one hundred years ago, this site looks back on the major events in history surrounding clubs we are about to play in the present day.

So this obviously is the moment to take a peek at the history of the infamous Reds and one of their misadventures.

On 2nd April, 1915, (Good Friday) Manchester IOU, who at the time were known as Manchester United, took on the club now known as Liverpool Reds (at least that is what one of their owners seems to want to call them) and beat them 2-0.

There was a bit of surprise in this because Liverpool were solidly mid-table at the time and Manchester United were heading for division 2.

What really put the pigeon among the cats (as it were) is that almost immediately the bookies (who in those days more or less ran football, such was the interest in gambling) said that they had taken a great deal of money on the 7-1 odds offered on a 2-0 United victory.

Bookies of course never like to pay out so they said the match had been fixed.  Apart from the range of bets their other evidence was that

• Liverpool missed a penalty.
• As a result of the result Manchester did not go down.

So the bookies refused to pay up and offered a reward for anyone who could unmask the conspirators.  The Chronicle took up the challenge and eventually blamed corrupt players on both sides of fixing the match both to get some money and to get Manchester out of relegation.

What with the First World War going on there was no need for a rush job, since football ended for the duration in April 1915.  But the League held an enquiry and came up with the result in December of that year that “a considerable amount of money changed hands by betting on the match and… some of the players profited thereby.”

They went after three Man U players – which was odd because only one of the three – Enoch West – played in the game,  along with five Liverpool players, and banned them all for life.

But then they added a caveat.  By this time the War was over a year old and so the League said that if the men joined the army they would not be punished.

All the men signed up (conscription started in January 1916 so those of military age were forced to go anyway, so there was no merit in the escape clause) but Enoch West continued to contest the sentence.  He did not have his ban lifted until he was 59 years old.

However the case did not end there (although most histories leave it at that).

There were a number of anomalies.  First, how was it possible to fix a match with an exact score with only one person on the Manchester team being involved?  To be sure of the score, surely you needed more than one person playing for Manchester to be playing in the team.

Second, the punishment which was commuted just as the men would have been called up anyway, was bizarre – it was akin to letting everyone off.

Third, neither club received any punishment at all – which was also bizarre given that Manchester United benefited greatly by not being relegated – Chelsea and Tottenham going down.

There the matter rested until the summer of 1919 when the authorities prepared to start up football game.   They were of course aware of the continuing rumbles of discontent – Enoch West was still fighting them and running a libel case against them, while Chelsea and Tottenham were claiming that at least Manchester United should be thrown out of the League, and that Liverpool should be demoted.

In a style of management that can be still recognised today, the League tried to cover up the mess by announcing that the First Division was going to be enlarged by two clubs and that therefore Chelsea and Tottenham could apply for re-election to Division I.

But they had reckoned without Henry Norris at Arsenal. Norris said that if this were allowed to pass then the message would go out that match fixing at a club level was acceptable, and that the worse that would ever happen to any club would be that its players would be kicked out – at least until another war came along.

Norris demanded that both clubs should be kicked out of the league.   This met with uproar from the norther clubs who dominated the league, at which point Norris announced that he was ready to start a Midland and Southern Football League which would be untainted with the whiff of match fixing.  What’s more he would make public the serious deficiencies in the League’s case.

Eventually the League agreed to talk with Norris, and they offered him a deal.  The League would deliver the election of Arsenal to the First Division if he let go of his claims that Liverpool and Manchester United be expelled.  Norris agreed, and so the match fixing teams stayed in the First Division along with Chelsea, but Arsenal were promoted to the top league, along with the two clubs who ended up first and second before the war in the Second Division.

So as we welcome Liverpool, we should recognise them as one of the two great match fixing outfits.  We might also recognise that this year is the 20th anniversary of them last winning the league and much more sadly and infinitely more seriously the 25th anniversary of Heysel Stadium Disaster when their fans attacked and were responsible for the death of numerous Italian fans.

(c) Tony Attwood 2010

“Making the Arsenal” – the story of Arsenal in 1910 – more details here.

I must admit I thought that the old Tiny Totts [...]]]> There was a rather strange comment on our sister site Untold Arsenal this week in which an Aston Villa fan said that Arsenal supporters have no right to comment on Villa  when in fact Arsenal had bribed their way into the first division in 1919.

I must admit I thought that the old Tiny Totts propaganda on that topic had been put to bed a long time ago and that supporters didn’t just repeat the old line.  But it seems not.

So although the prime business of this site is Arsenal 100 years ago I’ll deviate a little and give some background into Arsenal’s last ever promotion to the First Division, in 1919.

In the final pre-war season, the First and Second Divisions of the Football League were made up of 20 clubs each, as they had been since the last upgrade at the end of the 1904/5 season.

Everyone wanted more games so it was agreed to increase each division by two clubs, thus creating four more games per club.   (There was no third division at this time – that came quite a bit later).

The first thing the League did was look back to the summer of 1905 – the last upgrade.  At the AGM in that year the bottom two teams of the first division (Bury and Notts County) did not go down, and the top two of the second division (Liverpool and Bolton) went up.

That left Division II with 16 clubs so four more were needed.  However Doncaster Rovers who came bottom of Division II were not re-elected by the other clubs, and so five new clubs were elected – including Chelsea who were given a place even though they had no club, no team, no supporters and had never even played a match in the Southern League – the normal feeder league.

This approach of manipulating promotions was well established and went on most years with teams being de-selected, and others being brought in, not because of outstanding playing merit (there was no Chelsea and they had never played a game) but because of football politics.

The five new clubs were Chelsea, Hull, Leeds, the Orient, and Stockport.  Two London and three from the north – with the London clubs refusing to allow anything less than two of their number through.

This regional argument was always there, because the League had been formed exclusively as a northern and midlands activity.  Arsenal were the first southern team into the League in 1893.

Because new admissions to the League were voted on by the clubs, and because the clubs from the north and midlands had a continual majority, they constantly tried to keep the southern clubs out, claiming that London teams should play in the Southern League.

They had voted Woolwich Arsenal in because of the earlier notion of making the league a National League, but quickly went off the idea, and named their annual trip to Kent as “the weekend in Hell”.

In fact the only other southern teams to get into the League was Luton Town in 1897 and Bristol City in 1901.  And this despite the fact that London was the biggest city in the world at the time.

To show how biased this was, consider Tottenham.  Tottenham actually won the FA Cup in the Southern League – but still couldn’t get into the Football League, and while as Arsenal fans we might enjoy that fact, when we set our feelings aside we must admit that it was outrageous block voting by the north and midlands at work as usual.

So at the time of the 1905 expansion the clubs in London made it clear they had had enough, and two more London teams joined the ranks to avoid a split.  But bad feeling remained, and by the time of the 1919 AGM and the proposal to increase the number of teams per league to 22, everyone knew there was going to be another dog fight.

In the last pre-war season, Tottenham and Chelsea were in the bottom two relegation spots in Division I.  Derby and Preston were first and second (the promotion spots) in Division II.

Tottenham and Chelsea were ready to argue that as in 1905 they should stay up, despite ending in the relegation zone, but the northern clubs didn’t want to help London’s clubs, and would have been much happier without any London clubs in the First Division (which would have been the case if those two had gone down).

But this time there was another factor: match fixing, primarily involving Manchester United and Liverpool.  They fixed an end of season match so Man U won and so ended up with one more point that Chelsea and so avoided relegation.

So Chelsea put up a new argument which said Manchester United and Liverpool should be thrown out of the League.

This caused panic, not just because they were big clubs, but because it would mean that the League would have to admit in public that matches had been fixed.  (Everyone knew this – match fixing was wholesale, but until then had been swept under the carpet).

When the feeling of the meeting was clearly “no” to this step Henry Norris moved in, as chairman of Arsenal.  He reminded the meeting of how the London teams had done their bit for professional sport, and how Woolwich Arsenal had defied the FA in becoming the first professional team in the south.

When this approach brought snears from Manchester United and Liverpool, the southern clubs, and those in the rest of the league who had suffered at the hands of the match fixing cartel started to build a bloc and it began to look as if instead of building into an even stronger league of 44 clubs, the league would split in two – with the midlands clubs looking to join forces with the London teams to make a league of their own.

If the League as a whole would not hear of the match fixing clubs being punished then it had only one compromise to offer – a “rearrangement” of the promotion and relegation issues for the expansion of the league.

They needed two more clubs for Division I and three more for Division II (Glossop North End choosing not to continue in the League).

First they re-elected Chelsea back into the First Division, on the grounds that if Liverpool and Man U had not been bent, they would have stayed up anyway.  Tottenham who came bottom were relegated as they had no claim to a place because of any match fixing and still had few friends in the League.

There was also universal acceptance that the top two from Division II should go up – Deby and Preston, and this was agreed.  This left Division I a team short.

This is when Norris made his play.   He pointed out that although quite rightly Chelsea had not suffered because of the match fixing, the two clubs involved were still not being punished, and he would not accept this.  If he left the meeting with them still in the first division, he argued, he would use his extensive political power (he had been knighted at the end of the war, and elected to parliament) to force government action against the corrupt Football League who “encouraged” gambling and corruption.

With the northern clubs absolutely refusing to budge, the League hierarchy then did a secret deal.  Arsenal would be voted into the final place in the first division and one new London club would get into to Division II (West Ham).   Coventry, Gateshead, Rotherman and Stoke made up the numbers.

So it was done.  The argument of course is, should the southern clubs have broken away and exposed the League as the corrupt outfit it was, and has been for much of its life?  Possibly, but Norris had invested his fortune in building Highbury, and clearly was not going to throw that away.

The evil of the match fixing remained, and Man U and Liverpool went unpunished, knowing they could do what they liked with impunity.  If Tony Blair had been alive and interested he would have said that a line should be drawn under the events and we should move on.  It was that sort of deal.

More on Arsenal’s history here.

(c) Tony Attwood 2010.

But it made me think it might be worth a meander around the time that this site deals with, [...]]]> On UNTOLD ARSENAL after the Chelsea game I wrote a piece in which I suggested that some matches in the English Premier League are fixed.  It is a debate that continues on that site.

But it made me think it might be worth a meander around the time that this site deals with, in terms of the same topic.

Corruption has been part of English football since day one. In 1884 for example the original invincibles of Preston North End  were thrown out of the FA Cup for paying their players (the Cup rules clearly said it was a competition for amateurs).   But the scene for the future was set – because a whole range of other northern clubs that paid players were allowed to continue unmolested and unchallenged, and a year later they changed the rules.  Matters got worse for Preston as their chief exec was sent to prison for stealing from his employers to pay the players.

That set of events might be of no significance when we think of the endless scandals among teams in the leagues ever since, except for one thing.

The other clubs all protested that as they paid players they would all be thrown out of the Cup and there would be no Cup.  The FA changed the rules.  From now on, the punishment would be against individuals not clubs.

There was only one more action against a club.   Tapping up of the Ashley Cole type was illegal from the start and in 1899 West Ham were clobbered for this type of activity.  But that was it.

Bribery has been there from the early days too and Hillman, the goalkeeper of Burnley was the first player to be found guilty by the league in 1900 – but there was no action against the club on whose behalf the bribe was offered.

Then there are clubs going bust and then re-emerging a moment later under a new name.  Step forward Newton Heath in 1902 who became Manchester United – as far as I can tell the first club to go bust and come back from the dead, although the two major players in the deal were then suspended by the FA for making illegal payments to players.

So it went on season after season – in 1905 Villa complained that Man City tried to bribe them so that they could win the league.  Villa refused, and won.  But here a nasty trend for the future was set.   The FA found the Man City captain guilty and suspended him – BUT NOTHING WAS DONE TO THE CLUB.

This then became the basis for the future. Get the player, leave the club alone.  Even Man City refused to help the player, who then went public.  That was in the days when journalists were prepared to out the cheating clubs – largely because they were not under the wings of the clubs.

Eventually the FA did investigate City under a different matter (the old favourite of paying players over the odds) and they then suspended 17 players for two years, and fined Man City £250.   The manager was banned for life.

Middlesbrough were always in the middle of rumours.  The FA looked at them and found a chairman who put some of the gate money in his pocket.  That one was swept aside.  A gentleman does not do such things.

By 1910 football, corruption and politics were mixed up totally.  If you have looked at my novel MAKING THE ARSENAL which is set in 1910 you’ll know the three topics move hand in hand and vote fixing arises as an issue in the early part of the plot.

I have been unfair to Henry Norris (the owner of Fulham and Arsenal) in accusing him of this as there is no real evidence of it at all on his behalf – but it helps the story along.  However it is not so far fetched as the Unionist (that is Conservative) candidate for Middlesbrough tried to help his election campaign along by fixing a match against Sunderland as well as certain nasty political activities.   More suspensions of the individuals concerned – no action against the clubs.

Henry Norris turned up on the other side of the fence in fact by arguing that the FA and League should change its policy and stop punishing individuals and instead throw match fixing clubs out of the league.  He particularly wanted Manchester United and Liverpool thrown out because of their match fixing in 1914/15 season.    In the end Norris backed down when the league agreed to extend the first division and accept Arsenal into the league.

The league were embarrassed by this affair and regarded Norris as the enemy thereafter, because of his continual view that clubs, not people, should be punished.   Eventually the FA managed to find Norris guilty of the “crime” of personally benefiting from the sale of the club bus to the tune of £125, and they expelled him from football for life, and so took their revenge.   They conveniently forgot that Norris had put £10,000 of his own money into building Highbury.

Middlebrough were shown to be corrupt again in the 1950s when the Sunday People published a series of articles exposing their habit of exceeding the maximum wage of players by giving them non-existent jobs.

The League were outraged and so did what they always do: they went after the individual, demanding to know from the author of the revelations (a Middlesboro player) which clubs had been breaking the rules.  He refused to reveal his sources, so they banned him for life.

It was only after Leicester City went into liquidation (I think that was 2003, but correct me if wrong) that the League finally, finally, got the idea that maybe a club should be punished – although still not for corruption.  This punishment was for going bust.

And so the sorry tale continues – clubs are not punished for their crimes – only the people – and usually the little people, not the man.

Tony Attwood 2009

]]> http://www.blog.woolwicharsenal.co.uk/2009/11/30/a-history-of-corruption-in-english-football/feed/ 2 http://www.blog.woolwicharsenal.co.uk/2009/11/21/untold-arsenal-raided-by-police-ireland-guilty-platini-arrested/ http://www.blog.woolwicharsenal.co.uk/2009/11/21/untold-arsenal-raided-by-police-ireland-guilty-platini-arrested/#comments Sat, 21 Nov 2009 10:50:29 +0000 Tony Attwood http://www.blog.woolwicharsenal.co.uk/?p=139 Sky News seem to have missed it, and it is not featuring on any of the blogs that I can see but the biggest match fixing scandal since 1914/15 is about to hit football.

Let’s do the history first, since this is primarily a history site – but I will move onto the current situation [...]]]> Sky News seem to have missed it, and it is not featuring on any of the blogs that I can see but the biggest match fixing scandal since 1914/15 is about to hit football.

Let’s do the history first, since this is primarily a history site – but I will move onto the current situation is a moment.   League football continued in 1914/15 despite the war, largely because the club owners wanted their money and the propaganda said the war would be short lived and of no significance.  After all during the last war (the Boer War 1899/1902) life had continued so why not now?

Match fixing up to then was endemic with game after game being arranged in return for cash, but the 14/15 season was the worst of the lot with the two gians of the north west, Manchester United and Liverpool being the big players in this.

Of course they are also very good at manipulating history and so ever since then with the connivance of journalists they have hidden the truth of the match fixing (into which there was a full enquiry) and focused on the fact that in 1919 Arsenal were promoted from the second division.  They leave out the bit that says that Arsenal went up as part of a deal in which Arsenal agreed to drop their demands that Liverpool and Manchester be removed from the league for their match fixing.

Anyway, it has never really gone away, and now it is back big time.  Rumblings have been going on for months, and I have mentioned them a few times on UNTOLD ARSENAL.

But now the bigger picture is nearly out.  200 games across nine countries have been found to be fixed including some European Cup matches.  The Germans, who for some reason tend to dig into these things far more than the sleaze infested English yesterday announced that this was the start.  Informally I have been told that the total runs into thousands.

There have been 17 arrests so far that I have seen reported, and the attention thus far is focused on Switzerland, Germany, Austria and (yes of course, it has to be,) Britain.   A million quid’s worth of property has been picked up.  They are starting to get ready to arrest the players too.

The problem the authorities has is that the match fixing seems to go right to the top – that is to the authorities.  We know that a couple of years ago the whole Italian league was riddled with the friendly attitude towards refs that four clubs showed, but in Britain they said, “oh it doesn’t happen here”.  Try saying that to a Scottish supporter.

As usual the British journalists slip back into nonsense and blame “organised criminal gangs” as if that is a meaningful phrase.  What is the alternative?  “Disorganised unconnected grounds of fairies?”  Icebergs and tips were mentioned several times.

Here’s one from the Guardian today.  “Uefa officials are believed to be shocked.”   And this from an organisation that suddenly, three weeks before the draw for the World Cup play offs changed the rules so as to give the bigger clubs the chance to get through.  An organisation that went through its own bribery scandal involving its marketing company a few years ago.  An organisation that willingly works underneath FIFA whose time in court has revealed them to be liars at the top level.  And what have FIFA done this week?  Banned Iraq from playing internationals.

Of course UEFA will now blame every one to try and ensure the police don’t investigate them.   In March Uefa announced a crackdown on corruption and Platini has made the fight against corruption a key priority of his presidency.  That was before he fixed the draw for the world cup play offs.

My headline above isn’t true – but it could be – that’s my point.  UNTOLD ARSENAL predicted Arsenal would win their first match 7-1, and was just one goal out.   Of the 19 games we have predicted the results of we have got 15 right and 4 wrong.  The bookies don’t like it, and Platini will see it as a perfect way to deflect opinion from his own back

If FIFA want to start somewhere they could have a look at the penalty that Ireland got against Georgia – as Roy Keane pointed out.  If ever there was a country that looked to have paid the ref, it was in that match.

We have to face it – football is bent.  And as long as the bent officials who are running the sport continue in place, aided and abetted by the self-serving sports journalists of England who always claim that it is those funny nasty foreigners who are to blame, so it will continue.

There’s more Arsenal history – and some of it is a lot less heavy – at www.emiratesstadium.info – or you can buy Making the Arsenal direct from us of via Amazon when they get their stock situation sorted.

(c) Tony Attwood 2009