THE HALF DECENT FOOTBALL MAGAZINE

Embed from Getty Images

The idea that modern footballers misbehave more often than their predecessors is a myth, as Steve Field explained in WSC 170, April 2001

8 January ~ Think of an example of boisterous, drunken or oafish behaviour on the part of a highly paid football personality. It might be Peter Beagrie’s Great Escape re-enactment in a hotel foyer, Brian Law’s hijack of a West Midlands Travel singledecker, Stan Collymore doing just about anything. The alleged misdemeanour could be sexual (Pleat, Shilton), financial (Macari, Venables), addiction-related or violent (too many to mention). Whatever, you can be sure of one thing. Within hours of the story breaking, pundits will be queuing up to proclaim that such a thing would never have happened in The Old Days.

The subtext is so comfortably nostalgic you could take it to bed as a hot-water bottle. Footballers in years gone by, you see, knew how to conduct themselves. They didn't drink, smoke, take illegal substances, fornicate or swear. Not for them nightclub brawls, fast cars and loose women. They lived in cosy lodgings, went to bed early, married comely girls from their home town and washed their Ford Popular on a Sunday morning while chatting to ordinary, suburban neighbours. In unshakeable legend, This Happy Breed meets Chariots of Fire.

Sadly, acceptance of this particular fairytale is dependent on our subscribing to a number of subsidiary and progressively less believable truths. Human nature, we’re told, has become more uncontrolled, less dignified since whatever cut-off point you wish to impose between now and your chosen golden age. Virile young men, under certain circumstances, are capable of being responsible and restrained under the influence of drink. To be poor is to be serene and disciplined. To be told what to do by society, the church or by a football manager one step removed from an army colonel is invariably to do it, in the certain knowledge it’s for your own good. And so on.

ArchiveBanner

Partly the problem is one of primary sources. Doubtless, for example, tabloids have always exposed footballers’ misdeeds, much as they still do – the Sunday scandalsheet is by no means a new phenomenon – but who’s still reading the News of the World from the 1930s, or remembering the content? Hence the illusion of a blameless past. The same is true of books. Football books until very recently were either authorised biographies or aimed at children. There was no third possibility. Who had any interest in telling the full, unsavoury truth? Not the players, not the authors, not the clubs. Readers 50 years from now, limiting themselves to Shoot! and ghostwriting, will doubtless come away with a similarly sanitised impression of the game as we know it. Won’t make it any more accurate, though.

The activities of yesterday’s players acquire a false sheen of innocence when viewed through the dark glass of nostalgia. This, for instance, is Eddie Hapgood, England captain in the 1920s and 1930s, in the appropriately named Football Ambassador. “When we were off duty on our tours abroad, we were always looking for excitement. We found it alright in Rome when we hired open, horse-drawn cabs, bribed the drivers, then two of the lads whipped up the horses. We went rattling through the streets. When the horses were exhausted and the drivers nearly frantic with fear, we got well clear of the scene before the carabinieri arrived.” Adams, Shearer and Sheringham racing stolen cars around a foreign capital? Just youthful high spirits, Your Honour.

There’s more, of course, lurking between the lines of many a dusty tome, if you’re prepared to hunt for it and to accept that role-models of the past – Finney, Matthews, Moore, Bobby Charlton – are about as representative as Lineker is today. Fighting and drinking, backhanders, gambling, drugs, bribery, wife-beating and adultery – the gamut of shabby adult behaviour, just the same as now, only far more taken for granted, far less remarkable.

The more you delve, the more you find yesterday’s footballers weren’t better men, rather that their public simply didn’t expect them to be any less human than the people who watched them. If higher wages have taken footballers further from us, and increased our expectations of them, that’s a fault of our age. It certainly isn’t an excuse for rewriting history. Steve Field

This article first appeared in WSC 170, April 2001. Subscribers get free access to the complete WSC digital archive – you can find out more details here

Related articles

The simple joy of Michael Hardcastle’s morally sound and well-illustrated books
From tales of £1 transfers to the difficulties of ambitions, friendships and rivalries, Hardcastle’s writing remains unfussy and heart-...
When Oldham's amazing cup runs led to a grudge match with Manchester United
Embed from Getty Images // A 1990 FA Cup semi-final was the first staging of a derby against Manchester United in Dan Turner's lifetime and a 3-3...
From the archive: When Tranmere Rovers were the Merseyside club on the up
Embed from Getty Images // Despite three play-off semi-final defeats on the trot, the early 1990s were heady times for Merseyside’s third...