Talk:1919–20 Football League

Arsenal's promotion to First Division

Although I reverted this edit regarding Arsenal's controversial promotion to the First Division (the edit seemed to introduce more issues than it solved), there may nevertheless be a counter-argument that we are missing. Please could anyone who has access to relevant source material take a look. Thanks. --Jameboy (talk) 17:49, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

The following points should be taken into account when reviewing this ballot:

Arsenal were the first southern club to join the Football League, so were pioneers in giving the competition geographical credibility. This had clearly won them both friends and respect.

After winning promotion for the 1904-05 season, they had performed well in Division One, achieving 5 top ten finishes in their 9 seasons and only once finishing below 14th. (Even then, in winding up 18th, they were just 2 points behind 13th.)

In 1910-11 and 1911-12 they had ended up 10th each time, only plummeting to a miserable 20th (and last) place in the season in which they knew they were due to make the move from south of the Thames (in Woolwich) to Highbury in north London. This was an unprecedented move and was bound to cause upheaval.

They began playing at their new stadium at the start of the 1913-14 season.

Though only at the time featuring one stand, the new ground was a highly ambitious project (it would host its first full international by 1920) and the club was supported by the money of businessmen Henry Norris and William Hall. The club was seen to be aiming high and this was good not only for themselves but for the development of the professional game as a whole.

In their 2 seasons back in Division 2, they missed out on promotion on goal average and then finished 5th. Taken across the 2 seasons, no club performed better than them without being promoted (though Barnsley accrued the same total points.)

On the expansion of Division One, clearly Division 2's top two would always be included, so that left the fate of the bottom two in the pre-war Division One.

It seems extraordinary that anyone should just assume that the 2 teams in the 1914-15 relegation places should as good as automatically be spared, but it is apparently this argument which has led to the frequently repeated, totally unsubstantiated, allegations of bribery against Norris.

Chelsea were always likely to be looked on favourably due to the dubious nature of their late fall into the relegation positions. (Perhaps, given the circumstances, it is more remarkable that the proven match-fixers Manchester United were spared.) Tottenham, as the bottom club, were always vulnerable. The vote went for Arsenal, against Spurs and the fur has flown ever since.

Despite there being no account of who was bribed, for how much or with what accompanying persuasion, Norris is frequently portrayed as a criminal who wantonly broke the law to achieve the objectives he had set for his club.

Clearly, the regard in which the club was held at the time is conjecture (on much the same level as the allegations against Norris), but the financial position of the club, the geographical move, the development of the new stadium and the league performance (of all clubs mentioned) are matters of record, found elsewhere (with accompanying relevant references) on Wikipedia

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.231.133 (talk) 00:31, 28 March 2019 (UTC)