In the continuing debate about the future of professional cricket in England, there is an iconoclastic strand that would see the end of the “First Class” system — a big “no” to the elitist, closed shop of the MCC and the Counties.
One repeated theme has been the need for an “FA Cup of cricket”, open to all teams, whether (old-style) County or club or, presumably, franchise.
As if the model of professional football is somehow more equitable than the (admittedly flawed) First Class cricket and County system we have in England and Wales.
So it was very interesting to read Richard Sander’s Beastly Fury: The Strange Birth of English Football, to find out a bit more about the early years of the professional game in England.
And it might appear that a little caution would be advisable!
What follows won’t be a detailed review of Beastly Fury…, just a look at a few items that caught my attention.
But the book is highly recommended if you are at all interested in English football, professional sport, and the influence of commercial ownership on players, spectators, and the sport itself.
Amateurs vs. Professionals
Control of the “people’s game” was wrested from the private school Old Boys clubs, who created the Football Association and the FA Cup competition, not by the (professional) players but by the new clubs founded in working class towns, by factory owners and brewers who saw the commercial opportunity offered by large working class crowds.
The professional takeover of the game was never really about local pride, or the glory (or not for very long, anyway).
It was about exploiting the working man’s newly won leisure time following the general introduction of the Saturday half-holiday (and, perhaps more pertinently, their disposable income),
New local clubs will grow the game locally
The “Invincibles” of Preston North End, who went unbeaten through the 1888-9 season to win both Football League and FA Cup, were not a team of Lancastrians, freed from the mills and factories to play football for money.
The majority of that all-conquering team were recruited from the amateur clubs around Edinburgh. The Scottish clubs played a more scientific “passing game” than the Old Boys teams in England, who still relied on kick and rush tactics, and hacking, and bullying the ball down the field.
Early opposition to the professionalisation of the game was driven by “amateur” disdain for the working man, and a desire of the Scottish clubs to retain their own top players (but not to have to pay them!).
Manchester City fall foul of financial fair play regulations
No, not a reference to the current, Emirati-funded, manifestation of the Sky Blues, but to an earlier version of Manchester City, guilty of making secret payments to players.
In 1906, Manchester City were punished by committees of their peers, fearful of a moneyed takeover of “their” game.
Will the big clubs with the most money try to monopolise the best players?
Of course they will!
Who, in the 21st Century, would stand up to the franchises?
The players will be the winners
In 1948, 60 years after the foundation of the “working man’s” Football League,
“…[Stanley] Matthews and Tom Finney [probably the two greatest players of the era] were still plying their trade in front of vast crowds for just £12 a week.”
Richard Sanders, Beastly Fury: The Strange Birth of English Football
Strangely congruent with this story – the “strike” by the Mexican team before the final match of Copa ’71, the (unofficial) Women’s World Cup in Mexico, in 1971.
Unofficial, as FIFA refused to recognise the event, restricting access to grounds owned by men’s football clubs (a spectacular own goal!).
And, in a purely commercial event, organised by Mexican media companies, played in massive stadia that they owned, promoted across their multiple media channels, the players received accommodation, transportation in decrepit buses…and no pay.
The professional game does not exist for the benefit of the professional players!
Do see the inspiring Copa 71 documentary film, if you can.
Conclusions
From Richard Sanders’ concluding paragraphs.
In the years before and after the First World War,
“…the tyrannical power of club chairmen became firmly established [and] proved a stultifyingly conservative force.”
Richard Sanders, Beastly Fury: The Strange Birth of English Football
For “club chairmen” read “franchise holders”.
Too cynical?
Cricket wouldn’t be like that in the 21st Century?
Good luck with that.
The Teesra 