The Football League

Part 17 of the History of Football

1886/87

Considering football had been widely known and seen in Lancashire and the West Midlands for not much more than ten years, the ascendancy of the clubs in those parts by 1886 was quite remarkable. They were ten years or so behind the South to begin with, yet quickly caught up and by now were playing more successfully, organising more thoroughly, and had some of the loudest and most powerful voices in the debates of The Football Association. These clubs were domination the game, setting the fashions, forcing the changes both in the way the game was played and the way it was administered.

For the provincials of Lancashire and Staffordshire took football seriously, very seriously indeed. In the South, it was a game, but the North made it almost a way of life. In London, one played football for enjoyment; in Bolton the remark was heard, "We haven't come here for fun; we've come to play football". It may be strange to reflect that many of the officials, backers, and supporters of the clubs in Lancashire and the Midlands had never even played football themselves, not having had the opportunity until they were too old to take it. But they knew it all - or thought they did, and they were confident enough to express their views in an open and forthright manner in front of men like Major Marindin and Mr. Alcock who were old hands at the game even before the foundation of The Football Association. Though they lacked the best in football education, though their failure to appreciate the nice distinctions of the customs and usages of the game could leave their opponents in debate speechless with despair, they were not stupid men. They took to the pastime, picked out what they liked from it and sought to reshape it to heir likes and fancies. And because they were clever, confident, powerful, and successful, they had to be listened to.

They had a lot to say. Some of it contributed wonderfully to the enrichment of football and to its administration. Much of it could be steered into useful channels, but some of it brought lasting harm to the sport. However, as fully paid up members of the Association, they had at least a titular right to assert, to deny, to persuade, and to vote, as any other member. Whatever one may think of the parrot-cry "One man, one vote", where it applies it must be upheld.

On the field of play, the modern line-up was two fullbacks, three halfbacks, and five forwards. The old idea of two halfbacks and six forwards was still to be seen now and again, but the formation was dying out.

In the old days, a forward always reckoned the quickest and surest way to goal was straight down the middle, and he dribbled and jinked, and barged his way through the opposition. The new style was to spread the opposing defence by playing along the wings, a smart run along the touch-line where the defence was thinnest, then "middling" the ball in the goalmouth. It took the football world a long time to provide an adequate defence to this sort of attack. As the "winger" raced past his man, beating him more often than not, by sheer speed along, many an old spectator was moved to lament Dribbling is a lost art, nobody knows how to dribble the ball any more".

Whether that complaint was justified or not, some of the best players were very tricky in their footwork, inspiring some of the less skilful to follow their example. The controlled half-volley was coming into fashion, the player (especially if he was a wing-man), taking a longish pass, and chipping it delicately over the head of an adversary. This was a gentle use of the half-volley, not the thunderous clout so long practised by the fullbacks. And another little trick, this time one from the old-timers, was being resurrected - the screw shot which curled the ball in its flight. But now there was an added refinement, making it a ground shot, or "daisy-cutter".

Using the rules of the game to best advantage was quite the thing in the provinces, even if it meant "bending the rules" occasionally. A man in an offside position must not interfere with the play or with an opponent, but as the laws said nothing about "pretending" to interfere, this was thought to be alright. So a man offside would "feint" as if intending to play the ball, whilst a colleague secured it. And some referees allowed it, though it was clearly illegal. Because, of course, some referees suffered from the same inadequate knowledge of football as the players.

And is the position any better today? Attend any branch meeting of the Referees' Association and you will find men who have failed to grasp the meaning of "offside" and who have not understood the "advantage clause".

1887-88

"Every year it is becoming more and more difficult for football clubs of any standing to meet heir friendly engagements and even arrange friendly matches. The consequence is that at the last moment, through cup-tie interference, clubs are compelled to take on teams who will not attract the public. I beg to tender the following suggestion as a means of getting over the difficulty is that ten or twelve of the most prominent clubs in England combine to arrange home-and-home fixtures each season, the said fixtures to be arranged at a friendly conference about the same time as the International Conference. This combination might be known as the Association Football Union, and could be managed by representative from each club. Of course, this is in no way to interfere with the National Association; even the suggested matches might be played under cup-tie rules. However, this is a detail. My object in writing to you at present is merely to draw your attention to the subject, and to suggest a friendly conference to discuass the matter more fully. I would take it as a favour if you would kindly think the matter over, and make whatever suggestions you deem necessary. I am only writing to the following - Blackburn Rovers, Bolton Wanderers, Preston North End, West Bromwich Albion, and Aston Villa, and would like to hear what other clubs you would suggest.

"I am, yours very truly, William Mc Gregor (Aston Villa F.C.)
"P.S. - How would Friday, 23rd March, 1888, suit for the friendly conference at Anderton's Hotel, London?"

Mr McGregor spent almost the whole of the month of March 1888 trying to gain support for his idea. In their replies, Bolton Wanderers put forward the names of Accrington, Burnley, Halliwell, Wolverhampton, Wanderers, Old Carthusians, and Stoke to be added to the list of invitations; Notts County suggested the inclusion of Mitchelle St. Georges; Blackburn Rovers wanted Accrinton and Burnley.

After time had elapsed for "second thoughts", it was seen that West Bromwich Albion, Wolverhampton Wanderers, Stoke and Derby County were in favour of supporting Mr. McGregor. Nottingham Forest, as an amateur club, was not interested. The Wednesday F.C. was afraid such a combination of clubs would not be tolerated by The Football Association, therefore it would not subscribe. At a meeting held at Andeton's Hotel, Fleet Street, London, attended by Aston Villa, Wolverhampton Wanderers, Stoke, West Bromwich Albion, Derby County, Notts County, Burnley and Blackburn Rovers, it was resolved that the combination be formed and that Preston North End, Bolton Wanderers, Accrington and Everton be invited to join. There was some discussion about a title for the new venture; the term "League" had unfortunate connotation with the troublesome Irish Land League of the time, and "Union" smacked rather of the other football game. But eventually it was decided to call it The Football League. Mr. H. Lockett (Stoke F.C.) was appointed secretary pro tem and another meeting was called for 17th April at Manchester. All this took place on 23rd March 1888.

At Manchester meeting The Football League was called into being. It was stated that numerous applications for membership had been received, but the acceptance had to be limited as there were only 22 vacant dates on which matches could be played, and the League did not propose to institute a bigger programme than it could safely accommodate. So twelve clubs were enrolled comprising those which had attended the London meeting plus Preston North End, Everton, Bolton Wanderers and Accrington.

The F.A. Cup campaign held its usual crop of surprise, the biggest being reserved for the final itself. West Bromwich Albion sent a strong and confident side to Kennington Oval but it was not expected that Preston North End (rejoicing in the title of "The Invincible") would be beaten. Yet the Staffordshire men won on merit.

In an earlier round, at Birmingham, Preston North End met Aston Villa in a game which suffered badly from crowd interference. The police force had to be used to restore and keep order. The rival captains agreed that under the circumstances the game could not count as a cup-tie, but the crowd was kept in ignorance of the decision for fear of further trouble. When news of the affair was relayed to the Cup Committee, that body said neither the captains nor the referee had any authority to set aside a cup-tie, and the result must stand.

Then there was the incident at the Queen's Club, Kensington, where the Swifts met Crewe Alexandra on 17th December. Before the start of the game, one of the Alexandra officials secretly measured the goalposts, using a two-foot rule he happened to have with him. He discovered one of the posts was more than an inch too short. He kept the knowledge to himself until after the game when it was seen that the Swifts had won. Then this bright boy entered a protest on behalf of the Crewe club. The Cup committee, though viewing this antic with unconcealed distaste, had no alternative but to order another match, but at the same time it reprimanded Crewe Alexandra for not having made its point before play commenced. It was then ruled that, in future, such protests must be made before the kick-off, and not after the result of the game is known.

Since then, many football writers have referred to the instruction as "The Two-Foot Rule", whereas it should be accurately described as The Two-Foot-Rule Rule.