Qatar - Fantasy or Reality?

So it’s decided then.  Just as some of us thought common sense would prevail when the meeting FIFA had to discuss the 2022 World Cup venue of Qatar, would end with a different host being chosen.  In the end ‘the only possible option’ was to move the competition to winter rather than the summer when it would be impossible to play football in that heat.

To almost everyone except the FIFA committee, the Qataris themselves, and as it appears, Phil Neville, the choice of Qatar as host for decision virtually unfathomable.  It appears to be shrouded in such mystery and skulduggery it’s almost impossible to imagine the voting process was anything other than flawed or compromised.

There is a case for having the World Cup in one of the hottest places on earth.  The World Cup hasn’t been held in that part of the world before, but is that a good enough reason to hold it there?  After all, the Winter Olympics haven’t been held in London before, but there’s a good reason for that, it’s a climate-based reason in the same way Qatar is hardly suitable for the World Cup.  Qatar is mainly desert and during June-July the average daytime temperature can be more than 50 degrees centigrade.

Qatar doesn’t have the stadium infrastructure for a major tournament, but this seems to matter little to FIFA who constantly force countries to build stadia used only for their tournament, left to crumble once the self-appointed suits have returned to their luxury in Switzerland.  With a land-mass smaller than East Timor, Bahamas or the Falkland Islands, and a population lower than Albania or Lithuania, Qatar is hardly an advert for a burgeoning football economy.  But it has ‘the blessing’ of the Arab world, and above all, it has the finances to win favour with the powers that be.

In addition to this there are other reasons not to hold such a prestigious competition, arguably the largest sporting event in the world, in a country which seems so discriminatory.  Qatar bans consumption of alcohol in public areas.  It is consumed legally in hotel bars and clubs as long as you have a passport and permit to be in the club.  But Qataris are not allowed in these places, and the organisers have said they would allow alcohol but only in designated fan areas so you will have the prospect of tourists being allowed drink while the locals look on in envy.  That of course assumes locals will be allowed anywhere near one of the greatest sporting events in the world.  Qatar also declares homosexuality illegal.  This matter was dealt with pathetically by Sepp Blatter who, when questioned, said “they’ll just have to refrain from sexual activities during the tournament”.  As you can imagine this didn’t go down too well, but then Blatter is a past master when it comes to inappropriateness.

To cap it all, the stadiums are being built by using migrant labour, mainly from Nepal, who will be lucky to still be alive to see the fruits of their labours.  They’re poorly treated and the statistics are startling.  In 2014 Nepalese migrants died at a rate of one every two days.  If you included stats for Indians, Bangladeshis and Sri Lankans then they would probably be nearer more than one a day.

Now we had similar concerns over the Olympics in Beijing and there’s an argument for a global event providing a influencing more equality in the aftermath of the event being held in a particular country.  But Qatar isn’t the only country in that region with a dubious reputation when it comes to human rights.  In addition to all this, there is the suggestion Qatar is an important funder of Islamic State, and if the previous examples aren’t enough to deny them the honour of hosting the tournament, then this last one surely is.

But Qatar has the blessing of the whole of the Arab world, apparently, although initially there were concerns over Israel as arab countries do not recognise it.  But Qatar said they would let Israel take part if they qualified.  They’re desperate for this, you must at least give them that.

So is it the duty of sporting authorities to alter the politics of a host nation?  FIFA will hardly want a debate on morals as their own are highly suspect and they must surely not want to open themselves up too much for fear behind every door is more than one skeleton.  Just look at the investigation into the voting process for the 2022 tournament, and it is clear there is much to hide.

Australia would’ve been a better venue, in my opinion.  The stadiums are already there and will continue to be used after the tournament, plus there is a flourishing football industry there.  They have never had the World Cup in that area before, with Japan and Korea 2002 tournament being the closest.  The population and the government were for the bid, but ultimately Australia didn’t have enough money to convince the executive they were a worthy option.

FIFA just seem to be pushing their weight around, demanding the football world complies.  But this is where they could come unstuck.  FIFA has behaved just any dictatorship over the past 20 years.  It has treated ‘the people’ (the football federations and clubs) as if they’re stupid and will do anything FIFA decrees.  Blatter’s courting of less dominant federations has indeed extended the sport to a wider audience but he has struggled to keep the major nations on board.  This latest ‘do as we say’ could have repercussions.  FIFA’s reaction to consternation over Qatar is extremely revealing of an organisation which believes its power is infinite.  But here is where the potential problems lie.  Football has become richer and richer, yet although its reach has become broader there is still a lot of power centred in Europe.  Blatter has tried hard to spread the power and influence but UEFA with its Champions League and its Premier League, La Liga and Serie A

Of course what now becomes interesting is how the European leagues deal with the new winter World Cup.  Keen to avoid clashing with the Winter Olympics and Ramadhan, FIFA has finally decided to move the tournament to December rather than the usual June schedule.  Why it’s taken them this long remains a mystery as all the sensible advice pointed to needing to re-schedule it if Qatar was the best option.  But how will this fare across Europe?  In England the Premier League needs to decide whether to have a gap just four months into the season, or continue with clubs filling line-ups as best they can.  That could get tricky when you’re supposed to name a squad of twenty-five and many of them will be off to the Middle East.  If they do decide to carry on, what happens if some clubs have players who are injured but only for the first week or so?  Surely they will have an unfair advantage?  Remember the fuss over Diafra Sakho when West Ham pulled him out of the African Cup of Nations, citing injury as the reason, only to subsequently play him in league matches.

In Europe some clubs are already making noises about how they have to re-jig their calendars to allow for FIFA’s international fixtures and they show little sign of reducing, despite the new Nations League.  One of the biggest barriers Europe and other major footballing nations face is the accusation that denying a country such as Qatar the option of hosting a vast competition, smacks of the colonialism and dominance which probably held the sport back until Joao Havelange’s appointment in the early 1970’s.

As I said, I believe there are better options, whether Australia or even USA.  My reasons for rejecting Qatar are both football and politically related.  FIFA may still have to deal with the fall-out of their next host nation annexing one of the countries competing to qualify, and all the other negatives which no doubt will be highlighted in three years’ time.  If they manage to bat those off, they’re likely to be nothing compared to the noise which undoubtedly will erupt when all the focus is on Qatar.

Whether Blatter will still be running the show by then, remains to be seen, and we may well find he falls victim to the similar arrogance and infallibility as many other dictators in history have believed they have a right to possess.

The Lesser Spotted English Goalkeeper

England has a rich history of quality goalkeepers and some have even been considered as the best in the world.  Gordon Banks, Peter Shilton, Ray Clemence, David Seaman have all graced football pitches around the world and been lauded and admired from afar.  But there is a crisis in the position where English football has traditionally had a wealth of options.

In any football team there are four positions which are crucial to its success and they are generally regarded as the spine of the team, goalkeeper, central defence, central midfield and striker.  As I discussed in my article ‘Why International Football Matters’, the prevalence of foreign players in the Premier League is reducing the choice available to the England manager, but what is even more alarming is Premier League clubs desire to choose foreign players in these key positions.  None is more evident or more pronounced than in goal.  There is only room for 1 per side, so the national manager will only have a maximum 20 to choose from of players playing top level football.  Football is particularly unusual in this regard in that it’s unlikely another player within the first 11 will swap places with the goalkeeper, meaning you can’t just train a player into a new position like you can for other parts of the pitch.

This dearth of English goalkeeping talent has been steadily getting worse over the past 25 years.  Back in 1986-87 of the 22 first choice keepers only 4 were unavailable for the England team.  Bruce Grobbelaar (Zimbabwe), Neville Southall (Wales), Martin Thomas (Wales), Bryan Gunn (Scotland).  When the Premier League began there were 7 first team goalkeepers who were unavailable for the national side.  Southall (Wales), Gunn (Scotland), Neil Sullivan (Scotland), Mark Crossley (Wales), Tony Roberts (Wales), Alan Kelly (Ireland) and Peter Schmeichel (Denmark). Fast forward to this season and of the Premier League club’s first choice goalkeeper so far, just 3 are qualified to play for England. 

The furore surrounding Joe Hart’s performance in the recent Champions League defeat for Manchester City has even seen calls from some quarters for him to be replaced at the club.  If that was the case this would leave us with just John Ruddy at Norwich and David Stockdale at Fulham.  With all respect to both clubs they are unlikely to be competing in Europe next season and may even find a decent cup run beyond their reach, which begs the question of the quality of competition these two promising keepers are experiencing.  There is also the fact that of those two only Ruddy has seen any on-field action for the national side when he came on to replace JackButland in a friendly against Italy in August 2012.

When you think back to 1986 and 1992 and consider the competition which Peter Shilton had to fight in staying England’s number 1 you get an impression of how little there is for Hart to worry about in being England’s main choice for many years to come.  In 1986 Shilton was up against Nigel Spink, who won a European Cup winners medal with Aston Villa, Phil Parkes, who won the FA Cup with West Ham and was one of the best keepers QPR have ever had, John Lukic (Arsenal), Tony Godden (Chelsea and formerly West Brom), Chris Turner (Man Utd, formerly Sunderland), Tony Coton (Watford and Birmingham), Steve Ogrizovic (Coventry).  These were all fine goalkeepers and you could argue if Shilton or Clemence hadn’t been around they would’ve had more opportunities at international level than they got.  Add to that list the names of Martin Hodge (Sheffield Wednesday), Dave Beasant (Wimbledon), Bob Bolder (Charlton) and David Seaman (QPR), you realise the talent pool for English goalkeepers was pretty full.

When we look at 1992, Spink and Ogrizovic are still there for the same clubs and Lukic (Leeds), Seaman (Arsenal), Beasant (Chelsea) and Coton (Man City) are still playing but with different clubs in the top division.  But these names were then joined by players such as Ian Walker (Tottenham), Kevin Pressman (Sheffield Wednesday), Tim Flowers (Southampton), David James (Liverpool), Nigel Martyn (Crystal Palace).  Only Pressman out of that list never made it to the full national team although he won an U21 cap and England ‘B’ honours.

Now it is not uncommon for other countries to choose their goalkeepers from a list of players who play in other leagues.  However, with so few English players playing outside their own country this is not something England can easily boast.  Celtic’s Fraser Forster would seem to be the only option currently playing outside the English league, but at least he is getting Champions League experience and his performance against Barcelona last November would suggest he should give Hart a decent run for his money.  Outside of Hart, Ruddy and Forster you are now looking at the likes of Jack Butland who has played at every level for his country and was signed by Stoke City in January but has yet to play for the club and is currently playing Championship football on loan at Barnsley.  Robert Green, who may always be remembered for his mistake during the fateful World Cup campaign in 2010, is also currently saving Championship strikers’ shots with QPR after a move to the club which has probably put paid to his international career.

Of the other candidates for the job, Scott Carson is playing for Wigan in the Championship and Ben Foster is struggling to get into the first team at West Brom.  Now don’t misunderstand me I am not saying that playing Championship level football should preclude you from representing your country but there cannot be many countries who have reached the latter stages of a world competition with their first choice goalkeeper not playing top division football anywhere in the world.  As the goalkeeping position is considered to be so crucial, can you risk such an inexperienced player, where you may be able to dispense such a player elsewhere on the pitch?

Is it time to give Ruddy and Stockdale more of a run in the national side?  What if Manchester City decide they need to upgrade Hart in order to win the trophies they desire?  Where else would he go?  It would be a further nail in the coffin of the remarkable English goalkeeping heritage if the first choice for the national side was playing reserve team football, and surely English football would’ve reached a new low if their number one choice played in front of more people in places such as Moldova, Albania and Bosnia than he did at club level.

In many other sports, teams have often been guilty of hanging onto stars too long and neglecting the importance of planning for their eventual retirement, but in English football can this accusation really be labelled at its treatment of the goalkeeper?  After Clemence retired in 1984 Peter Shilton was the number one choice, almost unopposed, up to his own retirement after Italia ’90.  His replacement was Chris Woods, who first came to prominence when as an 18-year old he was Man of the Match in the 1978 League Cup Final standing in for Shilton at Nottingham Forest.  By 1990 he was winning trophies with Rangers.  Soon he was under pressure from David Seaman although it was Nigel Martyn who got the reserve goalkeeper place at Euro ’92.  By 1996 Seaman was England’s first choice and remained so up to World Cup 2002.  But he was accompanied by players such as Martyn, David James, Ian Walker, Richard Wright and Tim Flowers.  Seaman played his last game for England in 2002 and then it was the turn of David James, who himself had waited 10 years for his time in the spotlight.  James was then succeeded by Paul Robinson who was now at Tottenham after making an impact at Leeds United.  It was at this point things started to unravel for the English keeper.

At the time the cupboard seemed just as well stocked as before with emerging talents such as Chris Kirkland and Scott Carson coming to the fore.  It was Carson who replaced Kirkland at Liverpool in January 2005 but the arrival of Pepe Reina in July 2005 signalled the end for him at Anfield.  This is where English keepers needed to negotiate loan deals to try and maintain first team football and still be in the reckoning for England selection.  During the fateful Euro 2008 qualifying campaign England’s keepers made the headlines for howlers during crucial matches against Croatia, Paul Robinson in Maksimir and Carson at Wembley.  By the time Fabio Capello took over he reverted to David James with Robert Green emerging as a possible successor.  Green’s own mistake in the opening game of World Cup 2010 lead to Capello losing confidence in him and James was again called upon.  Hart has taken over ever since and looks as accomplished as many keepers down the years but mistakes for goalkeepers these days tend to be focussed on like never before.  Ben Foster emerged as another good candidate but he has taken ‘indefinite leave’ of being available for selection by his country and as he is struggling to force a first team spot at West Brom, would seem unwilling to fulfil his international potential.

As I have just said, mistakes by goalkeepers seem to be highlighted so much more these days.  The recent focus on Hart ignores mistakes made by other players on the pitch.  In stark contrast to the riches bestowed upon strikers, goalkeepers only need to make one mistake for their whole presence to come under scrutiny.  If performance-related pay was the norm for footballers there seems little doubt goalkeepers could be amongst the highest earners in the team.  What gets forgotten when a keeper doesn’t quite save a shot in the way the beer-swilling, pie-eating, armchair fan thinks he should, is that further back during the move a defender was out of position or a midfielder pulled out of a challenge he should’ve made.  But it is the keeper who gets it in the neck.  Go back through the archives and you’ll find mistakes made by Clemence, Shilton and Seaman, but I guess that was back in a time when the pursuit of perfection in football was less prevalent.

So where are the opportunities for English goalkeepers?  In the most recent Euro U21 tournament, Jack Butland was joined in the squad by Declan Rudd (Preston) and Jason Steele (Middlesbro’).  Whether any of these go on to become the number one for their country remains to be seen, but one thing seems certain is both Rudd and Steele may need to up the standard of the football they’re playing.  Norwich would seem to hold the key to the England keeper as Ruddy is pushing to replace Hart at international level and Declan Rudd is on contract at Norwich, but currently loaned out at Preston.  Ironically, Rudd’s first appearance for Norwich came when he replaced Fraser Forster, who himself was on loan at the club, in 2009.  But that could have something to do with the fact the Norwich manager at the time was Bryan Gunn, who was Norwich’s first choice keeper in both 1986 and 1992.

Why International Football Matters

I was listening to a discussion recently about whether Gareth Bale’s football career would not be complete as he is unlikely to appear in a World Cup Finals.  Comparisons were made with George Best who seemed to achieve everything in the game except appear in a World Cup.  But football is different these days, especially in Europe.  Around the world, international football matters, but in Europe the Champions League has taken more attention.  Nowhere is this more evident than in England.

The England nation team is followed by supporters of clubs outside the Premier League, as many fans of Premier League clubs will point to wanting to see their club win something more than they want their country to.  For me, I was brought up with international football being the pinnacle, even though I’ve seen my club win the European Cup 5 times, there’s still something dramatic about nation against nation.  But why should we bother with international football?

If UEFA doesn’t take it seriously they are in danger of losing a qualifying place to Africa or Asia.  This would make it harder for many nations to qualify for tournaments and make it really tough for their Federations to sell the concept of international football.  But there are still countries in Europe for whom international football is important and England is often a nation they long to beat.  Look around this current qualifying campaign and you see the progress made by countries such as Armenia, Cyprus and Bosnia.  But the English indifference to their national side is synonymous with the inertia towards the starving of English talent at the domestic club level. 

England is known around the world as ‘the Mother Country’.  Its football federation is the only one which doesn’t use its location in the title.  It’s always the French FA or the Brazilian FA or the Scottish FA but there is only one FA.  England invented the game and took it to the world.  If you just give up on international football you are giving up on all that tradition and legacy.  It consigns all the famous events of England’s history to the dustbin.  Many players’ finest moments have come in an England shirt and these players have become world renowned as a result.  If England had many exciting players playing for different clubs then maybe people would get excited in the prospect of them playing together.  But casting off international football as not worth bothering with, is unlikely to encourage the next generation.

Other countries believe in international football and you are seeing a surge of countries previously considered minnows before.  There are even players who could qualify to play for England who decide to play for another country they also qualify for.  Is that because there is more pride in playing for your country elsewhere?

International football is the purest form of competition.  If you haven’t got a left-footed player to play at left-back then you have to select someone who can do the job.  You cannot just spend a load of money and get someone in.  It’s the best that you’ve got against the best that we’ve got.  Money does not influence what you are watching, apart from the money each country is willing to invest in its football.  Brazil has been one of the best footballing nations for many years, yet it’s only recently the country can be considered to have any sort of wealth to speak of.  The problem with a money-driven system is that success is only available to a few.  If the only thing you have to attract players to your country is wages, then your football has no soul.  Those players only remain as long as the wages can be sustained.  You need local players.  It’s the most effective way of building wealth at a club as you pay little to obtain a home-grown player yet can sell them on for millions.  Home-grown players understand the environment, the local community and the style of football played in that country.  Showcasing your own talent demonstrates the health and vibrancy of your industry.  In England we have many clubs owned by foreigners and staffed by foreigners and we just look on and marvel at the product we’ve created.  Basically, we’re paying a lot of hard earned money to watch a load of outsiders do something we’re not very good at.  Unless we’re prepared to address that then we’ll never be any good at it.  Is that what people really want?

There are many countries who have admired English football for years.  During the ‘70’s and early 80’s Scandinavian countries were considered minnows, but with more and more English football shown there, many youngsters were motivated to take up football and that’s resulted in the talent you so often find in Sweden, Denmark and Norway.  African and Asian nations are rising in stature and they have grown up with the Premier League and are therefore creating their own talent.  So where is the English talent?

The traditional pool of talent footballers come from is the less wealthy/educated part of society, but  if they don’t see any route into football then what is there for them?  You only have to look at Scottish society to find the answer – drugs.

Success at international level can be shared by more supporters than club football can.  These days it is common for fans to watch the game in pubs and clubs around the country and share the highs and lows, whereas club matches will often be watched by people not interested in the fortunes of either side on show.  You only have to look at the success of sports such as cricket and cycling to see what international success does for activity at home.  After England won the Rugby World Cup there was a surge of interest in the game, whereas club success in the Champions League doesn’t get as many people out kicking a ball around.

Club football, when compared to international, mirrors much of society today in that if you haven’t got a decent midfield player just go out and buy one.  Whereas for players to represent their country it takes time to develop and nurture talent.  All these rich owners who have come into English football haven’t necessarily improved English football as such, they’ve just made it easier for their clubs to buy players from abroad.  Manchester City are reported to have invested into the local community in a bid to produce home-grown talent, but then if you’re a young English player one of the two clubs you’re likely to avoid, if you want your career to develop, is City.

Considering the aspect of Academies, many of the top clubs in England have them but they are stocked with young foreign talent.  The future of English football is not bright.  You’d only have to watch the youth tournaments this summer to discover that.  There are few players knocking on the door, and more and more supporters just dismissing it is making it worse.  It’s all very well for unfit unhealthy supporters in the stands and on sofas not wanting players to have an international career but, as mentioned earlier, if you don’t develop your domestic game and home-grown talent, what happens to the people who would ordinarily have gone into football?  What will fathers now tell their sons when they watch football and the son says “Dad, I’d like to be as good as Aguero, or Coutinho or Hazard”

“Sorry son, you were born in the wrong country.  You’ve got no chance in England, why not try another sport”

We have a fantastic successful product in the Premier League but we’re developing into a country which cannot produce any of its own talent.  Coming from a country with a rich heritage of international football it’s a sad state of affairs.  It’s too late to try and find scapegoats and people to pin the blame on, as all that does is delay finding and implementing a solution, we need to change things and it will have to start at grass roots level.  There should be a pride in where you’re from, plenty of other nations have it but why aren’t we learning from them?

Without a good national side any future tournament we might host will just be an excuse to see the players our clubs weren’t able to buy.  English league football has some of the finest talent around, but not the best, they go elsewhere and then come to England once their career heads towards a close.  This has been the case ever since the Premier League was launched.  Players such as Bergkamp, Zola, Ravanelli all came to England after making it elsewhere but now you’re starting to see some players using England as a way of showcasing their talent before a big move to another country.

Germany went through a similar problem around the turn of the century.  The German national teams for Euro 2000 and World Cup 2002 were some of the poorest I have ever witnessed from that country, despite reaching the Final in 2002.  But gradually they turned things around, and have some of the most talented players around.  But is there the will and desire to change things in England?  Perhaps there are too many in the FA who are comfortable with their jobs and reluctant to change?  We have a football industry where few English players are rated very highly and the same can be said for English coaches.

If you want to understand the thrill and buzz of a successful nation team just think back to the Olympics in London and the feeling which went around the country with all that success.  That is what it could be like with a successful England national football team.  How successful would the Olympics have been with no chance of British medals?  It would still have been well supported but you’re just watching the best from everywhere else.  Many sports have reported an upsurge in interest since the Olympics, simply as a result of the coverage and success of home-grown athletes.  Cycling has been around the years and there have been 100 Tour de France, but it’s taken the success of people like Chris Hoy, Jason Queally and Bradley Wiggins to get people onto a bike.  If you see people from your country doing it, you’re more likely to want to give it a go.  These people are like you, come from the same area as you, and they could even be you, so you’re more compelled to give it a go and experience the thrill yourself.

So who is rubbishing international football?  Is it just the supporters of clubs who compete in Champions League?  As only 8 English clubs have ever competed in that tournament since it was changed from the European Cup then there are many clubs’ supporters who are missing out.  If it is only supporters of Premier League clubs who don’t want international football then you’re still forgetting about 72 other league clubs.  But then that is what has happened since the Premier League came into being.  There is a lot of money in English football, yet there are more and more clubs going to the wall.  Just ask the supporters of clubs like Coventry and Luton who both competed in the First Division the year before the Premier League was launched, whether they feel the money in football has benefited their club.

Of course it doesn’t help when club managers don’t support international football either.  It has never ceased to amaze me that some managers will continually buy talent from Africa and yet seemed surprised when these players want to play for their countries during the African Cup of Nations.

If we give up on international football then the inevitable consequence is that the richest European clubs will break away from their respective federations and form a European League.  “So what?”, you might say.  Well, this is likely to lead to a league formed on a similar basis to NFL where it’s a closed shop without promotion/relegation and only contested between 10-12 of the biggest clubs.  If the club you support happens to be in that bracket then congratulations, but for the rest of the football watching world they can only look on and dream.  That means even fewer opportunities for English footballers and the danger of reduced gates at clubs not in this elite league.  One of the attractions for foreign players and owners in English football is the big crowds.  Once they go, will the money go with them as players may not want to play in half-filled grounds and owners may not want to invest in clubs nobody wants to watch.  The other side-effect of all this is that for a club like Manchester United you may be watching top European sides every week, yet the costs of travelling to away games will have gone up.  This could also push ticket prices up for people clambering to get a view for home games too.

Where there is a move to “buy British” in so many other industries it seems odd this hasn’t filtered through to football.  Is it because footballers seem less engaging than at any time in the game’s history?  The gap between supporter and player is as large as it’s ever been and perhaps that’s one of the problems.

I’ve heard it said recently that “international football is boring anyway”, but that masks the fact that 75% of Champions League matches are boring.  It’s rarely worth watching matches until you reach the knockout stage.  So is that the problem with international football that many of the qualifying games are almost meaningless.  There are clearly too many countries in UEFA and matches against Moldova, San Marino or Faroe Islands just don’t stimulate the public.  If the groups only consisted of 5 teams then at least 6 out of your 8 matches are going to be critically important.

One factor where England seems to be different to many other nations is that the whole team is picked from home-based players.  There are hardly any English players abroad.  Why is that?  Is it because their wages are too high?  Is it because they are just not rated by other countries?  I believe it’s time we re-evaluated what we English football actually is at present, because to me it just seems to be a rich man’s playground and is doing little good for the future of English players.

It should remain the greatest honour to be chosen to represent your country.  To be considered one of the best players in the country in your position, to pull on the national shirt worn with such pride and honour by many of the biggest names in football.  We have to support international football because if we don’t then the richest clubs will just take over and their only concern is for their own bank balance, not for the development of the game at home. 

The First World Cup

When was the First World Cup played?  1930?  No, 1909.

Who were the first winners of the World Cup?

Uruguay?  No.  Brazil? No.  Italy? No.  Not even the Germans could claim to have won that title.

The first winners of World Cup were a team of part-time players representing England.

West Auckland F.C.

The idea for the tournament was dreamt up by a chap named Sir Thomas Lipton creator of the Lipton tea brand.  Born in Glasgow, Lipton was a keen yachtsman and regularly competed in the America’s Cup.  In 1905 he donated a trophy for the Copa Lipton, a competition between Uruguay and Argentina, on the condition both teams were made up of only native players.  The tournament was contested annually between 1905 and 1929 and has been played infrequently since, with the last meeting in 1992.

In 1909 Lipton was awarded the Grand Order of the Crown of Italy and responded by presenting a trophy for an international football tournament.  Back then football was an emerging sport and it was decided the countries to take part would be Germany, Switzerland, Great Britain with Italy hosting the tournament. The FA refused to be associated with it and declined the offer to send a team.  Lipton was desperate for Britain to be represented and sought about finding a replacement.

There are many theories as to how an amateur colliery team from Durham were chosen but the most credible seems to be that an employee of Lipton’s happened to be a referee in the Northern League and is thought to have been instrumental in asking West Auckland to take part.  Many of the players pawned their possessions to raise enough money to get the team to Italy.

One of the more amusing stories surrounding their inclusion was that Lipton wanted to send Woolwich Arsenal to Italy and sent an instruction to his secretary to “contact W.A.”.  However, at the time Woolwich Arsenal were not the famous club they later became, having only just been promoted from the Second Division and so this story would seem to be purely apocryphal. 

The four teams to compete in the inaugural tournament were

ITALY: Torino XI (made up of players from Juventus and Torino)

GERMANY:  Stuttgarter Sportfreunde

SWITZERLAND: FC Winterthur

GREAT BRITAIN: West Auckland.

The competition kicked off on 11^th April 1909 and West Auckland shocked the Germans by beating Stuttgart, 2-0.  Then the hosts were knocked out as Winterthur beat Torino XI, 2-1.  To avoid the disappointment of travelling all that way just for one match, a match for Third Place was arranged.  Torino XI beat Stuttgart, 2-1.

So to the Final, played on 12^th April 1909 between West Auckland and FC Winterthur.  The Swiss side had won the League twice in the previous three seasons and were expected to win comfortably.  But West Auckland was awarded a penalty after just 6 minutes and their captain, Bob Jones coolly converted it.  Barely two minutes later Jock Jones made it 2-0 and the miners were able to control the game to make that the final score.

West Auckland: Jimmy Dickinson, Rob Gill, Jack Greenwell, Bob Jones, Tom Gill, Charlie “Dirty” Hogg, Ben Whittingham, Douglas Crawford, Bob Guthrie, Alf “Tot” Gubbins, Jock Jones, David “Ticer” Thomas, Tucker Gill

West Auckland, an amateur team from Durham, had become the unlikely winners of ‘the first World Cup’.

They were invited to defend the trophy two years later which again was held in Italy.  Germany didn’t send a team this time so Italy was represented by both Juventus and Torino with FC Zurich representing Switzerland.  West Auckland was up against the Swiss side in their first match and they won 2-0.  Juventus beat Torino in the other game so the Final would be between West Auckland and Juventus.  Torino beat Zurich to claim third place.

Held on 17^th April 1911 in Turin, the Final was a particularly one-sided affair.  West Auckland contained only three players who had won the trophy two years previously, and they went onto to help the club lift the trophy again.  Unbelievably, they trounced Juventus, 6-1.  Goals from Bob Moor (2), Fred Dun (2), Andy Appleby and Joe Rewcastle gave them a famous victory. 

West Auckland: J. Robinson, Tom Wilson, Charlie Cassidy, Andy “Chips” Appleby, Michael Alderson, Bob “Drol” Moore, Fred Dunn, Joe Rewcastle, Bob Jones, Bob Guthrie, Charlie “Dirty” Hogg, T Riley, John Warick

Sir Thomas Lipton had stipulated if a winning team won the trophy in consecutive tournaments they would be entitled to keep it,  and so West Auckland FC had etched their name in the football history books as the first outright winners of the ‘World Cup’, and duly kept the trophy.

Unfortunately, for an amateur club the whole escapade cost them and their celebrations were cut short by the desperate need to raise some money.  Westaucklandtownfc.co.uk explains what happened next;

As their only asset was the trophy, an arrangement was made with Mrs. Lancaster, the Landlady of the "Wheatsheaf Hotel" which served as headquarters for the club. The arrangement involved a loan of £40 by Mrs. Lancaster to the club, with the trophy as security which she could retain until the money was repaid. It remained in her possession for almost 50 years when, in 1960, Officials of the club managed to track down Mrs. Lancaster, who was alive and living in Liverpool. She obviously had all her faculties as she drove a hard bargain before handing over the trophy in return for £100. Upon it's return the trophy was put on display in the "Eden Arms" public house, which was the home of Club Secretary, Mr. Syd Douthwaite. It remained on show, and it was only when the Jules Rimmet Trophy was stolen in 1966 that Mr. Douthwaite began to lock it away.

The trophy then moved to West Auckland Workingmen’s Club whereupon it was stolen in January 1994.  It has never been recovered but a perfectly acceptable replica was made and sponsored by Unilever, who own the Liptons name, and is back in pride of place in the Workingmen’s Club.

In 1982, Tyne Tees Television made a film about the story called ‘The World Cup: A Captain’s Tale’ with Dennis Waterman playing the part of Bob Jones.  It also starred Nigel Hawthorne, Richard Griffiths, Ken Hutchison and Tim Healy.