The History of Arsenal » Football news

How did we used to get the half time scores?

Tony Attwood — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:38:11 +0000

By Tony Attwood

It is, of course, so easy today. If you want to know a score you can see it on TV at any time, both through teletext on the BBC and through Sky Sports News.

If you are at the match at the Ems you can wait until half time or full time, and the scores will come up on the screens. Matches played before ours are shown on the screens around the stadium.

But, it was not always thus.

I have been trying to put a picture together of just how we used to get the scores in the past. I have not as yet found any article that specifically covers the subject, so thought it might be a good one for the series in the club programme – but I need the facts. And I am hoping you might help.

Here’s what I recall so far:

1960s to 1980s: Supporters used to take their radios (known then as “transistors”) to games. “Trannies” had made radios much smaller than before and I can remember many having the sets held to the ear to catch scores on the Light Programme, and then later Radio 2, and then Radio 5.

Highbury – before the all seater stadium: We had two sets of A to Z lettering – one in the north east corner and one in the south west. Each letter represented a match, and which match was which was written in the programme. Towards the end of half time someone would creep through the tunnel behind the letters and insert the numbers for the scores. There were groans and cheers according to the results as they went up.

I think that for one of the celebrations (75 years at Highbury maybe) the process was re-introduced and people could apply for the right to insert the numbers for a game or two.

Sports Report. This goes back as far as my memory of football – a 5pm programme on the Light Programme, with the results read out with deep solemnity and then reports on a few of the games (rarely Arsenal I seem to recall). Football was just one of the many sports covered. I am not sure when second half commentary of matches was added, but that was just one match, and it was very much the second half only. I think commentary all the way through a game came in the 1980s. Because of the size of radios in the days of battery operated sets, it was never an option to take one to a game until the 1960s. Radio 5 still uses the same theme tune.

“All the half times; 3.30 winners”. I certainly remember leaving Highbury to the shouts of the newspaper vendors who sold the Saturday Edition of the Evening Standard, which they claimed had all the half times and the race results for the 3.30pm races – although I have no idea where. I’m not sure when the Standard finished publishing a saturday edition, but when they did it was a prime source of information.

The report edition would come out by about 6.30 and then be rushed across London in Standard vans, with the drivers chucking the copies out to the news vendors and shops – no one actually got out of the cab to deliver them for time was of the essence.

The reports included some detail of the first half, but the second half was nothing more than three lines telling you who scored. A picture, if there was one, would be from early in the match. (This in itself is an interesting Highbury memory. The photographer would take the picture, and then remove the plate and give it to a runner who would walk around the pitch and (I believe) get on his motorbike and drive off to the newspaper with it.)

Highbury – before the A to Z codes. I am told (but it was before my time) that people walked around the ground with a board showing the half times. True or not – anyone know?

The Manor Ground. I had always assumed that people got the results in the 19th and early 20th century from the newspapers a day or two later – but it seems not. Research by Mark Andrews has uncovered the fact that telegrams were sent from Woolwich Arsenal away games to a pub outside the ground, and the score was read out – not just at half time and the end, but during the game itself.

I have looked a copies of the Times from the era and they carried results from the start of the league days, but little more. They also always put the winning club first in the early days, and then followed the score by the venue (as in Woolwich Arsenal 12 Loughborough 0 (at Woolwich).

So that’s about it so far. Please do help me fill in the gaps.

Why I do hope you will buy a programme at the Emirates this season

Tony Attwood — Mon, 15 Aug 2011 07:26:38 +0000

By Tony Attwood

Well, not to put a final point on it, I would love you to buy a programme at the ground this season, because, well, you know…

The programme will feature a series this season called…

“Arsenal Uncovered”

written by… well….. me.

The idea is that each article covers one bit of Arsenal’s history that is generally unknown and contains some quirky bits of our club’s past that aren’t in the history books.

It is not a series that moves step by step through history, starting in 1886, but rather it jumps around here and there, from the modern day back to the 19th century – although given that most of what has happened in the 21st century is so completely and utterly well recorded and mulled over I doubt I will find much in the very recent past to write about.

I have written five pieces already, and of course it is up to the editor of the programme to decide which ones to use, and the order, but to give you a taster, here’s what he has got so far….

George Eastham – the Arsenal player who transformed player contract regulations in England.

Our greatest victory and our greatest defeat were both to the same club. But hardly anyone saw the games. Why not?

If we counted wartime league football in the stats our top scorer list would look completely different. What happened to Arsenal in the second world war?

When the Arsenal manager gave all the players performance enhancing drugs something rather strange happened.

Arsenal’s most famous defeat was against Walsall in the FA Cup. But what happened to the players after the match?

I am now working on a story for the next article about Arsenal’s use of substitutes, and how we used subs in the most unexpected ways early on.

If you can think of any topic that would fit into this series I would love to hear from you and will try and use the story. If you know the details so much the better. But if you don’t I’d still like to hear your idea, so that Andy (who is of course working like mad to check the details and come with the information needed) and I can use the story.

I really do hope you enjoy the series, and that you feel it might be worth using this channel to influence what goes into the Arsenal Uncovered series.

If you prefer to write to me directly, rather than using the form below, it is Tony.Attwood@aisa.org

Woolwich Arsenal in the FA Cup: playing at the final stadium 1908/09

Tony Attwood — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 08:02:11 +0000

1908/09

1st round. Jan 16th. Croydon Common (away). Drew 1-1 Crowd 20,000

The Arsenal handbook that I am using as a guide to these matches has this game played at “Crystal Palace by arrangement,” which is a rather interesting comment.

Where there is now the National Sports Centre there once was the home of the FA Cup final (1895 to 1914). In 1905, in a move virtually identical to the creation of Chelsea FC, the owners of the ground decided they wanted a club to go on their ground and so formed Crystal Palace. The military took over in 1915, and Palace (the club) moved to Selhurst Park. The biggest attendance ever for an English match was at the ground: the 1913 Cup final, Aston Villa v Sunderland – 121,919.

England played Scotland five times at the ground between 1897 and 1909, and here’s one other match which is listed, which I include for Walter:

4 March 1911 – England Amateurs 4-0 Belgium

Now back to the Arsenal game at Crystal Palace. Croydon Common was formed in 1897 and became a professional side in 1907 entering the Southern League. It appears that none other than Henry Norris was the man who took them into professionalism, although I can’t find records to show if he owned the club, or was merely there in an advisory capacity. (Norris could sometimes play with words – as when he as chair of Fulham took over Woolwich Arsenal but claimed he was acting personally, and not on behalf of Fulham. What was the difference?)

If you have peered at the suggestions in “Making the Arsenal” you’ll know that Croydon Common then had some problems with their original stand which was burnt down – which was part of the reason they moved to “The Nest” (Croydon were nicknamed the Robins, hence the nickname of the ground, but officially it was “Croydon Common Athletic Ground”) in Selhurst. It was this ground that became the home of Crystal Palace, from 1918 to 1924. So when this cup match with Arsenal was due to be played Croydon Common were using The Nest (at Crystal Palace) as their ground.

So what exactly does the entry in the yearbook of 1963/4 mean – given that Croydon played “at Crystal Palace”? The answer is that this was a big south London derby match, and because the crowd was expected to be large they played not at the Nest, but at the actual Crystal Palace – the ground that housed the Cup Finals. They didn’t fill the ground but they got 20,000. And, the scorer was our old pal Fitchie (see recent correspondence on this site).

The point made in “Making the Arsenal” is that have structural damage at two grounds was a bit of a coincidence – the roof of the main stand was taken out in a gale at the Nest not long after the club moved in. As the book reveals, Mr Norris had all sorts of issues with stands in the early days – including quite a tedious enquiry as to whether the correct permissions had been obtained on the stand at Craven Cottage.

What’s more Norris used Archie Leitch as the architect and clerk of works. These days that might sound rather a good idea, as Leitch is now revered as a football architect , but in the early 20th century Mr Leitch’s name was mostly associated with disaster – especially at Ibrox where it was suggested and not refuted that he had been remiss in checking the details of the materials used in building the vast stadium. Indeed in 1905 Leitch was involved in working on both the Fulham updates, and the building of the Chelsea ground at the same time – something that must have stretched his ability to keep tabs on the builders to the limits, and it appears that Chelsea’s ground suffered as a result.

In fact there is no evidence that anything was amiss in the Croydon Common stands – just an unfortunate coincidence perhaps.

1st round. Jan 20th. Croydon Common (home). Won 2-0 Crowd 15,000

Croydon Common’s exploits in taking a club destined to end up 6th in the first division to a replay would have raised their profile no end. They were a young club, who spent their years bouncing up and down between the first and second division of the Southern League. They first entered the league in 1907, went up in 1909 and 1914, and finished bottom each time in the following season. In 1917 they were wound up and were the only club not to return to playing football after the first world war. There is no evidence why this was so, but we might assume that Norris had his hands full with Highbury, and didn’t need a little Southern League club as well.

2nd round. Feb 6th. Millwall (home). Drew 1-1 Crowd 32,000

Millwall were also a Southern League club and did not join the football League until 1920. They were in fact also, like Croydon, local rivals – hence the huge crowd, for this derby game. Millwall were having a mid-table season – but it is interesting to note just who was in the Southern League at the time. The top of the table that year read…

Northampton Town
Swindon Town
Southampton
Portsmouth
Bristol Rovers
Exeter City
New Brompton
Reading
Luton Town
Plymouth
Millwall
Southend United
Leyton
Watford
QPR
Crystal Palace
West Ham United
Brighton and Hove Albion
Norwich City
Coventry City
Brentford

If we also take a look at the second division that year we can see why a club like Croydon Common might win the league but then struggle

Croydon Common
Hastings and St Leonards
Depot Battalion Royal Engineers
2nd Grenadier Guards
South Farnborough Athletic
Salisbury City
Chesham Town

And less you think I have just quoted the top of the league, that was it – seven clubs, none of whom is a big name today, compared with 21 clubs all of whom (give or take a name change) are still with us. The gap between the two divisions must have been enormous, and it is clear that the second division was for minor clubs, with the number of clubs in the league changing each year.

2nd round. Feb 10th. Millwall (away). Lost 0-1 Crowd 16,285

Financially Arsenal had done well out of the cup, with four games all getting decent crowds. But they had struggled twice against Southern League opposition – although Millwall were excused entry to the Cup, like Arsenal, until the first round proper.

Millwall had beaten Luton in the first round, but in the third were knocked out by Nottingham Forest. In the fourth round Forest lost to Derby, who in turn lost to Bristol City in the semi finals. Manchester United beat Bristol City in the final, once more at Crystal Palace, in front of 71,000.

So financially this would have been a good season for Arsenal – with the league success taking up the crowds in the league. And this struggle with local Southern League clubs could have just been a blip. Except…

ESPN up their anti-Arsenal propaganda, but add a few more quotes

Tony Attwood — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 13:05:18 +0000

ESPN up their anti-Arsenal propaganda

By Tony Attwood

ESPN’s distaste for Arsenal was chronicled on Untold Arsenal last year when the station got the rights to show Everton v Arsenal. They packed the studio and gantry with Everton supporters and then, as Arsenal sauntered to their 1-6 victory, spent much of the match showing pictures of long time Everton supporters and saying it was a shame that Everton hadn’t won for their sake. In an era of biased commentary the match stands out as a landmark of lopsidedness.

But now they have gone much, much further with an article (link at the end) in which they supposedly look at the history of Arsenal and Tottenham.

They do the usual knocking by saying, for example, that Arsenal was the first “franchise” football club without bothering either to consider the definition of a “franchise” (was Bolton a franchise when it moved out of town) or the history other clubs that moved. Indeed they didn’t have to look far: Millwall left north London, crossed the river and ended up in Bermondsey about three years before Arsenal moved.

Later, spSpeaking of the decision to enlarge the football league at the end of the first world war they say,

“Tradition dictated the bottom two clubs from the previous season – Chelsea and Tottenham – would be handed a reprieve, and that the top two clubs in the Second Division – Derby and Preston – would be promoted.” I don’t agree that this is the case at all, and they present no evidence. The fact is that ups and downs at the time of league expansion, and at the time of clubs moving out of the league and being replaced by others, was by chairman’s vote. The league had only been expanded a couple of times before since the second division was invented, and so even if there was a tradition, it was a tradition built on two occurrences – not much of a tradition.

Looking at the detail of the relegation/promotion issue they say, “Certainly Chelsea were in a strong position, as the club had only fallen into the relegation zone in 1914-15 due to a notorious match-fixing scandal involving Manchester United and Liverpool. As events transpired, they retained their place without a vote being taken by the Football League at the crucial meeting because, as reports at the time stated, “the manner in which they lost their position before war interfered with the game is generally regarded as unsatisfactory.”

That’s interesting because that’s not a quote I have seen, but as with a lot of stuff in this piece, there is no source.

They continue…

“Based partially on their longer service in the Football League (Arsenal were the first southern side to join in 1893), Norris argued that the Gunners were more deserving of a place than Tottenham, let alone Barnsley and Wolves who had both finished above them in the final Second Division season before the war. Following Arsenal’s lead, Nottingham Forest, Birmingham and Hull all submitted their own applications, and with the promoted Derby and Preston ushered into the top flight, a seven-way tussle was underway for the final place in the expanded 22-team division.

“The Daily Express recorded the anticipation felt ahead of the meeting in Manchester on March 10, 1919: “London was never more intimately concerned with Football League deliberations than on this occasion… There is an understanding that Chelsea will be voted into the First Division, and when the present scheme was first mooted it was regarded as a matter of course that they would be accompanied by Tottenham Hotspur, but The Arsenal considered that they had a superior claim and issued an appeal to the clubs to vote for them in preference to the Spurs … there is a strong body of opinion that considers Tottenham Hotspur ought to remain in the First Division.

“It was almost certain that the place would go to a side from the capital – after all, an unnamed northern official told the Daily Mirror, “our boys like a visit to London once or twice a year … they get a show at the theatres and see something of the great city. The directors also enjoy a visit to the big smoke” – but momentum swung decisively in Arsenal’s favour when League chairman and Liverpool owner John McKenna, a close friend of Norris, urged clubs to vote in favour of the Gunners as they had joined the League some 15 years before Tottenham.”

It is unfortunate that the writer unlinks the two stories (match fixing by Liverpool and Arsenal’s promotion) at this point. There were four places up for grabs in the First Division. Two from the expansion, and two from the bottom two teams who would have been relegated had their been no expansion.

What Norris appears to have argued is that Tottenham deliberately supported the expansion of the league in 1919 so that their automatic relegation for having come bottom should be annulled. This, it was argued, was as bad as the match fixing of Liverpool and Man U. In effect, he said, there are six places up for grabs – the two new places from expansion, the two relegation slots and the two places for Liverpool and Man U who should be expelled or relegated for match fixing.

Since Arsenal had ended up 5th they were in the frame for one of those six spots. But the League (and obviously Man U and Liverpool) did not want match fixing on the agenda, and this is where the argument took place.

In this analysis therefore, there was no argument about Arsenal or Tottenham – it was an argument about six places in the first division. The Tottenham argument was that here was a club who had clearly come bottom in 1915, and who had helped develop the notion of expansion in 1919 in order to avoid their just due.

There’s another point that ESPN, following the official Tottenham line, ignore, and that is that Tottenham had previous – they had got promotion out of the Southern League after coming seventh, as we discussed a day or two back. Quite how they did that, while the clubs above them did not get promotion, we don’t yet know. But running that simple fact by the league chairmen would have further reduced any argument about rightfulness to nothing – everyone would have laughed at Tottenham’s audacity to ignore their own past when it suited.

Back to ESPN

“When the votes were counted, Arsenal had won the support of 18 clubs, Tottenham 8, Barnsley 5, Wolves 5, Forest 3, Birmingham 2 and Hull 1. Despite finishing fifth in the Second Division in the final season before the Football League was suspended, it was Arsenal who would occupy a place in the top flight, and not their neighbours Tottenham.”

Now that is interesting – Birmingham who had come sixth in division II were in the voting, and Hull who had come 7th were there too. ESPN skate over this – but if Arsenal’s claim from coming 5th was so odd, what about these two? Why were they there, taking up votes that might have been up for grabs from others?

ESPN concludes…

“Arsenal had completed one of the most brazen coups in the history of football, overseen by Norris and supported by McKenna, and resentment quickly grew as they enjoyed the trappings of top-flight football while Spurs were sent down a division.

“As the Daily Mirror reported: “The fact that Tottenham Hotspur, the cup winners of 1901, lose status is deplored by some but, on the other hand, Arsenal’s unswerving loyalty to the league over a long period of years fully merited recognition.”

Thank you Daily Mirror – and indeed that is a strong point. Arsenal took professionalism south, and it was their work that ultimately unified north and south into one league. But ESPN still make it sound as if Tottenham were singled out – rather than noting the fact that they had come bottom of the league in 1915.

By avoiding the two negatives about Tottenham’s case ESPN continue the ludicrous story that somehow these highly individual club chairmen would have just gone along with a bit of Arsenal/Liverpool persuasion.

But this is ludicrous. How could Arsenal and Liverpool ever done such a thing?

Of course they didn’t. The vote went for Arsenal because…

Liverpool and Man U were continuously anxious to avoid any debate about their match fixing activities, and so were lobbying on Arsenal’s behalf, for Arsenal in the first division would mean that Arsenal were not going to continue their protests.

Tottenham’s claim was laughed out of court because they themselves had fixed a promotion from the Southern League some years before.

Tottenham had been active since coming bottom in 1915 on expanding the league as a way of avoiding relegation.

Income from games was shared between home and away clubs, and Arsenal were getting ever bigger crowds in the second division. The clubs in the first division wanted a share of the money.

http://www.espn.co.uk/football/sport/story/57322.html

Making the Arsenal – the story of Norris and Arsenal

Arsenal on Twitter @UntoldArsenal

Untold Arsenal on Facebook here

Tottenham fans prepare to celebrate major anniversary at Arsenal this week

Tony Attwood — Thu, 18 Nov 2010 08:17:18 +0000

Arsenal on Twitter @UntoldArsenal

Untold Arsenal on Facebook here

By Tony Attwood

This is a momentous season for Tottenham Hotspur and as we approach the home game with our nearest rivals, and as such it is only right that we should give space to the celebrations that will now follow.

For this is a big one. Indeed one could say it is The Big One. It is, as you might have guessed, fifty years since Tottenham Hotspur won the league.

This is the time when Sky, the BBC and the rest will drag out those pictures and recite the name of the team, hoping that by mere repetition of names they will somehow tell us that this period, 50 years ago, was of significance and importance, rather than a minor interruption to the normal course of events. Brown, Baker, Henry (they will say) Blanchflower, Norman Mackay, Jones, White, Smith, Allen, Dyson. Well there you are, I’ve said it for them.

In 1960/1 Tottenham H. won the Football League Division I, as it was then called. It was the first time they had won it since 1950/1, and was in fact the last time they won the league. They have in fact, in all the years of trying won it twice. 1908 to 2011. 103 years in the Football League. Two first division titles. Once every 51.5 years. Hence the wild celebrations that are planned this season.

Arsenal too will join in, for we are not churlish on such matters, and I am sure the Ems will swell this weekend with the chirpy little ditty:

You won the league (you won the league) in black and white (in black and white)

And so forth.

It is hoped that hymn sheets with these lyrics on will be made available to supporters of the Tinies so that they too can be part of the show (otherwise they might have difficulties with the words).

Part of the celebration for Tottenham is not just that it is now 50 years since they won the league, but also that win in 1961 was a poor season for Arsenal (we came 11th out of 22). Tottenham also won the FA Cup that year, so we must give them their due. Winning the double is important, and should be celebrated each time the club does it.

Unfortunately for Tottenham they have only done it once. (But let’s not be unfair. They have won the league twice. The last time in 1961, 50 years ago. Sorry I think I have already said that.)

In 1961 Tottenham were hotly pursued in the First Division by Sheffield W, Wolverhampton W, Burnley, Everton, and Leicester – all big names from the top level of football. Newcastle U and Preston NE were relegated.

Ipswich and Sheffield U came up from division II, while Portsmouth and Lincoln went down to the third. Bury won the third division, Peterborough the fourth (where incidentally Crystal Palace came second).

By this era, fifty years ago, Tottenham H had registered 28 seasons in the first division and 15 in the second (compared with 45 in the first for Arsenal and 13 in the second).

Arsenal by this time had knocked up a total of 1958 points in the first division while Tottenham languished on 1139.

In fact I can just about remember Tottenham winning the league 50 years ago, and somewhere in my collection is a copy of the programme of the final game of the season. Our neighbour (a kindly but sadly Tot supporting gent in the flat downstairs in N17 where we lived) went to the final game at WHL and gave me the programme with suitable droll comments on it. (I went to WHL too – a match at Wood Green Town, who actually did play in White Hart Lane, unlike Tottenham, who only pretend to.)

The feeling at the time was, I think, that Arsenal were on the slide and Tottenham on the up. This was particularly because Tottenham had for once had two decent years in a row and Arsenal two bad years. In 1959/60 Tottenham were third and Arsenal 13th in the first division, and with Arsenal hardly improving and Tottenham winning the league in 1961, that seemed to secure the matter.

For Tottenham the 60s was a good decade by their modest standards – after their double they got another couple of FA Cups and a Cup Winners Cup. But no more league titles. Not one. Not a sausage. Nothing. Zero.

And long term it was a hopelessly false dawn for Tottenham, for by the end of the decade Arsenal had won the Fairs Cup (well 69/70 to be correct) and had then gone on to emulate Tottenham with a double. And not even our only double. Just the first in a series.

Just to complete the picture of Tottenham’s wonder years from their first league championship to their second, and the tail end with the cups, in 1950/1 the top of the league was

1: Tottenham H
2: Manchester U
3: Blackpool
4: Newcastle U
5: Arsenal

Down at the bottom we had Sheffield Wednesday and Everton relegated, with Chelsea just missing relegation on goal average. Preston NE and Manchester C came up from the second division (Cardiff City just missed out), Nottingham F came up from the Third Division South, and Rotherham U from the Third Division North. Crystal Palace came bottom of the Third South, but survived re-election. New Brighton in the Third North however were not so lucky. They were ejected from the league and were replaced by Workington Town.

Rather annoyingly for them Tottenham’s first attempt at a “golden era” didn’t last. By 1953 Arsenal were champions again, with Tottenham down in 10th.

We’ve covered many other issues about Tottenham here in the last year - some might say too many, so after this weekend’s game I’ll give them a bit of a break. But in case you are interested there are a couple of links at the end on the other Tot related pieces on this site.

But here’s a new bit of info. Tottenham have had many nicknames over the years, some of which are now considered unacceptable, some rather dull. But of all of these I rather like calling them the Tiny Totts. This name comes from PG Wodehouse, who in some of his novels refers to events at The Mammouth Publishing Company, owned and run by Lord Tilbury, and situated in Tilbury House, Tilbury Street (off Fleet Street). Tiny Tots, was its children’s weekly; it also published a series of salacious gossip mags plus British Pluck Library, which included the tales Gridley Quayle, Investigator, written by Ashe Marson.

I can just imagine Lord Tilbury as chairman of Tottenham Hotspur FC publishing the British Pluck Library. Somehow it all seems to fit.

—————–

Did Tottenham bribe their way into the Football League?

Tottenham Hotspur: the dark history. In 1892 Arsenal attempted to start a new Southern League, and Tottenham applied. But when the votes for members were cast they got none (other than the one they cast for themselves.) Why? A look at Tottenham until 1919.

How Tottenham has taken over Arsenal’s history How Woolwich Arsenal and Tottenham H became rivals

Arsenal’s fixed promotion. The story of 1919 told by Tottenham H is that Arsenal bought their way into the first division – but it is a story designed to hide the corruption of others, corruption that the League really didn’t want exposed. Parts of this story are told in the top two articles above, but this is the complete detailed report.

Tottenham and Arsenal, the inter war years

How Tottenham grew to hate Arsenal – the 50s to the 80s

From the 80s to the present day

Royal, Woolwich, The Arsenal, Arsenal – when, what, where, who?

Tony Attwood — Thu, 14 Oct 2010 12:00:40 +0000

When exactly did Royal Arsenal become Woolwich Arsenal?

By Andy Kelly

There is some confusion as to when Royal Arsenal changed its name to Woolwich Arsenal. Most club histories say that the name changed when the club adopted professionalism in 1891 whereas some say that the name changed when it became a limited liability company in 1893. It doesn’t help matters that the Football League still referred to the club as Royal Arsenal until about 1896.

The actual date of the name change is May 1893 when the club became a limited liability company.

The earliest documented story that states that the name changed in 1891 is the Arsenal handbook for 1930-31. Here is the offending page:

This has been taken as gospel and never been questioned.

Here is the evidence to show the name change in 1893:

Below is a programme for the Royal Arsenal v Gainsborough Trinity game on 3 September 1892. This is an official club publication that shows a list of matches for Royal Arsenal Football Club for the 1892-93 season. If the club changed its name to Woolwich Arsenal in 1891 why would they still be calling themselves Royal Arsenal in 1892?

To show that it isn’t a one-off quirk, Peter Mason’s website includes another programme from later the same season.
http://www.footballprogs.com/arsenalhistory.htm

The Woolwich Gazette published an article on the subject on 5 May 1893

I can’t get the quality of the article up high enough for it to make much sense on this web site, but taking its evidence into account and the other information we have the dates that the club changed its name are:

Royal Arsenal Football Club to Woolwich Arsenal Football And Athletic Company Limited

The name was changed when the club became a limited liability company in May 1893. As a limited liability company, it wasn’t allowed to use the word “Royal” in its name, hence the change.

Woolwich Arsenal Football And Athletic Company Limited to The Arsenal Football And Athletic Company Limited

The club spent most of its first year at Highbury with the name Woolwich Arsenal. The name was changed between 20 and 23 April 1914. The difference is shown in the matchday programmes – but unfortunately I don’t have copies of these programmes.

The handbook at the start of the 1914-15 season shows the new name

The Arsenal Football And Athletic Company Limited to The Arsenal Football Club Limited

This happened some time between the start of the 1914-15 season (see the handbook above) and 26 October 1914 (the programme for the Football League v The Southern League at Highbury shows the new name. My guess is that the change happened around 9 October 1914 when there was a new share issue.)

The Arsenal Football Club Limited to Arsenal Football Club Limited

This happened mid-season in November 1919. See Peter Mason’s website for the two programmes that show the transition. Tony debunked the story that Herbert Chapman had something to do with this in the previous article.

London FC

During the 1930s the club considered chaging its name to London FC. This idea was short lived as it was thought that the club may be considered arrogant. I don’t have the date of when this happened but it is in the Islington Gazette.

I would like to offer my thanks to Peter Mason for providing dates from programmes.

The proof: Herbert Chapman did not change the name of Arsenal FC

Do we really win more games when Cesc and Van Persie play?

Arsenal sign Romelu Lukaku

The Philosophy of Wenger: the approach to transfers

Woolwich Arsenal from the start. Entering the league in 1893

Tony Attwood — Tue, 21 Sep 2010 12:31:56 +0000

By Tony Attwood

This is the start of a new series on the Woolwich Arsenal site. The weekly review of 100 years ago will continue, but we are also going to run a series from the very start of Arsenal in the league – 1893-4.

At the end of the 1892/3 season there had been the confusion which was commonplace at the time in football, and which is not always easy to understand. (Tottenham fans might like to note this when offering their simplistic version of what happened in 1919).

The bottom three of the first division (Notts County, Accrington and Manchester United (who finished bottom) along with the top three of division 2 (Birmingham, Sheffield United and Darwen) played test matches to decide which teams would be in the first division and which in the second.

Each team played one game only, on 22 April 1893:

Small Heath 1, Newton Heath 1

Darwen 3, Notts County 2

Sheffield United 1, Accrington Stanley 0

Replay: (27 April) Newton Heath 5 Small Heath 2

Darwen and Sheffield United were elected to Division I, while Newton Heath (aka Manchester United) remained in the First Division.

So far so good. Then the losers had to be dealt with. Small Heath (Birmingham City) and Notts County continued in the Division II, but Accrington Stanley (either in a fit of peak or through fear of diminished income in the second division) resigned. Darwen and Sheffield United were promoted.

In an unprecedented move the eight clubs that had finished outside of the top four in the second division had to stand for re-election. All were re-elected except Bootle who had finished eighth – who were in severe financial difficulty, and opted to leave the league (or were edged out in the vote – the records are not clear).

That meant two places were spare (Accrington and Bootle).

At the same time the league was extended from 12 clubs – not as one would expect to 16 clubs (as the first division had within it) but instead to 15 (for reasons that escape me at this time, but if you know, please do tell).

Woolwich Arsenal had been professional for two years, but without a league to play in, because of threats made by the London FA against anyone who would play them, and so had been playing friendlies against league clubs. They were elected along with Liverpool (who had split away from Everton in an argument over the tenancy agreement of the ground), Middlesbrough Ironopolis (not related to the current club), Newcastle U and Rotherham U.

The very first league match played by Woolwich Arsenal was against Newcastle United on September 2 1893. It was a 2-2 draw.

Arsenal’s team was

1: CA Williams
2: J Powell
3: WW Jeffrey
4: D Devine
5: R Buist
6: D Howat
7: D Gemmell
8: J Henderson
9: W Shaw
10: A Elliott
11: C Rooth

I will be dealing with some of these players in as much detail as I can find, and covering this first season, in forthcoming articles. I am also trying to find out more about the test match procedures, on which I only have limited information.

The reason that Tottenham are our bitterest rivals is not at all because the grounds are so close.

How our injuries compares with other clubs

The Arsenal team to play the Tinies in the Little Cup

Retrospective: Read the most detailed review of how Tottenham fix their finances

Arsenal v Blackburn, 1926. The goalkeeper plays at full back as 10 first teamers are injured

Tony Attwood — Mon, 13 Sep 2010 07:26:15 +0000

By Tony Attwood

Paul Matz, of Arsenal Independent Supporters Association has kindly answered my request for a photocopy of the oldest Arsenal programme that could be found in his collection. It is Arsenal v Blackburn on Saturday November 13th, 1920

The programme is numbered Volume IX Number 16 and costs two pence (that is 2d, which is under 1p in modern currency).

It’s a four page affair containing the normal editorial bits by Gunners Mate (George Allison who went on to become our manager, and who had started writing the column in 1910. There’s more about him as a journalist in “Making the Arsenal“). There’s also a piece by Dr “Pat” of Highbury, and “Random Jottings” by the chairman of the Middlesex FA. The back page has the teams laid out in the classic formation of 2-3-5. There’s also an advert for the Finsbury Park Empire (a music hall) – a piece of advertising that continued into the 1950s.

Unfortunately the quality of the programme and the smallness of the print prohibits putting up a meaningful scan but here’s a couple of snippets.

First, the banner at the top says

Arsenal Football Club Ltd

Colours – red shirts, white knickers

Directors – Colonel Sir Henry Norris M.P., D.L (Chairman)

Lt-Col C D Crisp OBE, Messrs, W Hall, J W Humble, G W Peachey OBE.

Manager Leslie Knighton

Secretary Mr H J Peters

The fascinations with this are everywhere – we played in “knickers” not shorts, and the man whom I refer to as Henry Norris in “Making the Arsenal” and on these pages when writing about 1910, was by now Colonel Sir Henry Norris MP DL.

Norris (I’ll stay with the Norris rather than the Sir Henry for the moment) got his knighthood and his army rank as a result of running a recruitment office in Fulham during the first world war, before general conscription was introduced. He was, by 1910, already Unionist Mayor of Fulham, (the Unionists became the Conservatives) and at that time angling for a seat in Parliament. I am not sure what the DL stands for – maybe someone can help me.

But there is also, sitting alongside him on the board that ran the club, Jack Humble, the socialist who (it is said) walked from Durham to Greenwich looking for work, and who along with two others founded Woolwich Arsenal FC. Quite how he could work alongside Norris I have no idea, but he did, and only left the club when Norris did in the “club coach sale” scandal.

I won’t rewrite the whole of the front page of the programme, but I do want to publish one section from page one.

There are three headlines on the page, “Well done” which congratulates everyone on Blackburn* away the previous saturday, “A great night” which talks about an event when the players went to meet the MP for Islington for a “merry party”. And finally, “The Injured”. Here’s what that one says.

——————-

Illness and injuries are still playing havoc with our fighting force as you know. Hutchings and Graham were not able to play against Blackburn Rovers. I am not certain if Rutherford will be fit to turn out today but we hope so. Voysey, Cownley, Butler, North, Jewett, Hopkins, Dunn and Walden have also been out of action and Dunn, whose sprained wrist prevents him keeping goal, has been keeping fit by playing at full-back. He had a trial run in this position in a friendly match with Reading a fortnight ago and acquitted himself so well that he was in the team at full back against Clapton Orient** at Highbury last Saturday. This game was considerably marred by the fog but it was possible to finish it and our juniors came out of their shell to the extent of winning by 6 goals to 2.

—————–

So maybe nothing changes.

Interestingly the programme doesn’t contain a list of fixtures, nor any league table. The Arsenal team for the day was listed as

Williamson

Shaw, Hutchins

Baker. Buckley. McKinnon

Smith, White, Pagnam, Blyth, Dr Jas A Peterson

The official record shows that it was a 2-0 win to Arsenal with 40,000 present. McKinnon and Buckley scored. White and Pagnam scored.

Arsenal went on to end up 9th in the first division. Leslie Knighton remained as manager until 1925 when Herbert Chapman arrived.

* The programme writes a whole column about the game against Blackburn which was the previous weekend, pointing out that Arsenal were unlucky not to have a penalty, and criticising the press reviews of the match of being inaccurate. That game ended 2-2

** This would have been a reserve game in the London Combination

Arsenal in the present day is covered by Untold Arsenal

The season starts… 100 years ago

Tony Attwood — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 11:46:05 +0000

By Tony Attwood

No transfer window, no internationals interrupting the week by week flow of the games, no European competitions, no “25″ registered players, no safety certificates for the grounds, no alcohol restrictions, no pub licensing procedures, no smoking bans….

It makes you wonder sometimes what there was 100 years ago.

For Woolwich Arsenal there was a new season having just scraped survival in the first division, and a new owner (although he wasn’t seen around the ground very much at all during the close season, focussing his work and support on Fulham), and the unnerving knowledge that in two years time the club could move to a ground share with Fulham FC.

Henry Norris may not have been looming in the foreground (although reports have it that he did make it to this first game of the season), but he was certainly there in the background.

One little change came with the programme now being edited by the journalist “Gunners Mate” also known as George Allison, who of course became Arsenal’s manager in 1934, winning the league in his first season in charge. More on him, and what he was doing writing the Arsenal programme, in a later article.

So the first match was Arsenal v Manchester United and we lost 2-1 in front of 15,000. Rippon scored the only goal. Not a bad crowd for a weekday. I speculated in the article before last about the kick off time – and even if it did kick off after work finished at the armament factories there would have been precious little time to get into the game after work – so that was not a bad turn out.

Our record against Man U was not good - we had up to this point lost seven and won five. Man U had already won the league once (in 1907/8) and were the FA Cup winners in 1909.

Perhaps the most notable fact was the Rippon scored on his debut. At that moment it must have looked good for the young man, but it didn’t work out.

There’s full details of the team for that game here

So, not the most exciting of starts. Next up was Bury away on September 3rd.

Background article Willis Rippon – full details
Give Arsenal your support through Arsenal Independent Supporters Assn
Today’s news: Untold Arsenal
If you are supporting Arsenal from outside the UK you need Arsenal Worldwide
Don’t miss “What makes a good supporter”

Arsenal prepare for the new season – 100 years ago!

Tony Attwood — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 19:14:23 +0000

100 years ago…

Woolwich Arsenal resume league football – 1 September 1910

By Tony Attwood

In the 19th century league football started on the first saturday in September. Not exactly the start of autumn but away from the “summer month” of August, which was given over to cricket.

In fact cricket had the four months of May to August exclusively to itself. However at the end of the 1904/5 season the first and second divisions were both extended from 18 to 20 clubs, thus taking the number of games up from 34 to 38 per season.

To cope with the extra four games, while not impinging on the reserved months of May to August, the Football League hit on the notion of playing one of the extra games on 1 September – unless that day should be a Sunday – a rule which lasted from 1905/6 until 1914/15 – the final season prior to the cessation of football for the duration of the war.

When football resumed in 1919 the message to cricket was clear – the calendar is not yours – although this was out of necessity rather than any else, as the league extended once more by two clubs, leaving the teams now playing 42 games a season.

For Arsenal’s first post-war season theyl kicked off events with a home game against Newcastle on 30 August (losing 0-1 at home in front of 40,000 spectators). The final game of the season was a home game against Bradford (often known as Bradford Park Avenue) on 1 May, in front of 30,000.

But back at the start of the 1910/11 season the rule was, play the first game on the first day of September. And this meant of course that the league programme kicked off with a midweek fixture.

There had already been experiments with floodlit football – the floodlights being rather ineffective gas lamps – but these were not sanctioned by the Football League, and so the mid-week games had to be arranged at a time whereby the game could finish in daylight.

A quick look at a sunrise and sunset chart will show sunset in London on 1 September as being 1948 BST. However we must remember that British Summer Time did not come into play until Summer Time Act of 1916, and so 1 September 1910 had a sunset at 1848. In effect this meant that unless the weather was exceptionally overcast one could play football perfectly well until 1915 or 7.15pm without floodlights.

I have not been able to find a programme for this match (or any 1st September game) but I would guess that the match would have been scheduled on this working day of Thursday 1st September at no earlier than 5pm – which would have given a conclusion at 6.35pm. Clearly there were no substitutes at the time, and virtually no “injury time” played, and I am told half time was generally nothing more than five minutes. On such a basis a 5.30pm kick off was possible, and if there was not too much objection to the gathering gloom 5.45pm would have been just about ok for the ref to see what’s what, although the spectators behind the goals would have lost some of the closing action.

So, without any proof, but with a bit of deduction, I’d go for a 5.45pm kick off, just about allowing working men time to get out of the factories and into the ground.

For 1 September 1910, the game was Woolwich Arsenal v Manchester United.

The previous season had ended on 23 April with Arsenal losing 1-3 at home to Preston in front of 10,000 spectators. But by then the panic was over as Arsenal had secured their place in the first division for another year, and in fact ended up 18th out of 20th, on 31 points. Chelsea (29 points) and Bolton (24 points) were relegated.

Coming up into the first division were Manchester City and Oldham Athletic. At the foot of the league Grimsby Town were ejected, and replaced by Huddersfield Town.

This last point may seem irrelevant to the history of Arsenal – but actually it wasn’t. If you have read the articles here on the promotion of Arsenal in 1919 you will know that Tottenham, who came bottom of the first division in the final pre-war seasonwere relegated. This rather unsurprising event was handled by a vote of all the league clubs – something that happened at the end of each season for the clubs at the bottom of division two, and when the league itself was extended.

My point is that in 1909/10 Grimsby were not de-selected from the league because they came bottom – in fact they didn’t. They ended up 19th out of 20. Birmingham City finished bottom of the second division.

But Birmingham were re-elected, and Grimsby not. No one made any of the special-pleading fuss that Tottenham made in 1919, because votes by all the clubs were normal. Indeed exactly the same thing had happened the year before when Chesterfield (who ended up 19th) were ejected from the league, and Blackpool who were 20th, stayed in the league.

Clubs voted for or against each other because of the distance, the facilities, their perceived “goodwill” and “fairness”, and even the provision of drinks in the directors’ bar after the game.

So, 100 years ago, preparations were underway for Woolwich Arsenal’s 18th season in the League, and their seventh in the first division following the club’s most bizarre and worrying summer ever….

First, Woolwich Arsenal had gone into liquidation.

Second, Henry Norris the Unionist Mayor Fulham, who owned Fulham FC of division two, and Croydon Common of the Southern League had bought out Woolwich Arsenal.

Third, Norris had then tried to merge Fulham and Arsenal, and when that failed tried to move Woolwich Arsenal to Fulham. Both moves failed.

Fourth, Norris finally had to have four attempts at issuing shares in a new Woolwich Arsenal FC (which notably did not carry the name “Woolwich”) before he was able to stabilise the club and have them ready for the new season. He had given the previous owners a guarantee that the club would continue in Kent for two more years. After that what would happen was anyone’s guess.

Thursday 1 September 1910. In fact for many people it was quite amazing that there was a Woolwich Arsenal Football Club at all.

The story of Woolwich Arsenal 100 years ago, will continue on this site, along with our other special features:

Memories of your first time at seeing Arsenal
Untangling the mis-told stories of Arsenal’s past.

Another feature for which we will be looking for contributions will be launched shortly.

Untold Arsenal, not exactly the place for facts, but still, you can’t have it all.

Arsenal Worldwide, a completely different experience

Making the Arsenal, the full story of Arsenal in 1910, and quite possibly the greatest book on Arsenal ever written

Your first time with Arsenal, live - we want your story.