History is a funny thing. You can make it. You can re-write it. I've got a degree in it. More importantly and in the context of this blog post, there's a phrase or should I say concept that is often banded around in the football world. That being the concept of a football team having 'History'.
Firstly I'm going to explain this concept for anyone that may not be as au fait (what the hell are you doing reading a blog on football it you're not?). In the last 20 years football has been transformed from a sport in which a few teams were dominant but outsiders stood a chance if they worked hard and luck went their way; to a game dominated by teams that are able to spend more money on a single player than some of the other competitors in their division spend assembling whole squads. With the increasing influence that money has has on the game there has been an influx of billionaire 'Sugar Daddys' purchasing average football clubs such as Chelsea, Manchester City & Paris Saint Germain and turning them into superpowers with the waive of a chequebook. As a result of this, naturally, there are a lot of jealous football fans and these football fans begrudge the likes of Chelsea stating that one of the main reasons for their dislike of them being that they don't have any 'History'. 'History' is essentially the footballing equivalent of 'Old Money', the concept of a team having the right to be successful because they have in the past and that newly successful teams have less right to 'mix it with the big boys', so to speak.
Personally I am not a fan of the concept of 'History' aka the footballing equivalent of the divine right of kings. There are a number of reasons for this, the first being that it's such a vague concept. A good 'History' is very hard to quantify, well nobody ever has quantified it for me. Do you consider a team that has won 10 trophies in the past to have 'History' or is it 15 or even 20? When looking at volume of trophies won shouldn't you also take into consideration how prestigious or difficult it was to win each one? For example you cannot equate a League Title won to a Zenith Data Systems Trophy (remember that one on Midweek Sports Special? Anyone who does, give yourself a pat on the back), a Southern League Title (West Ham won one of those once, and you don't hear me bleating on about it*) or even more relevant to modern day football a Littlewoods/Rumbelows/Coca Cola/Carling/Captital One Cup. I don't care what anyone says, not even two Rumbelows Cups equate to a League Title in my books!
*I may not bleat on about it but if I hear any more crap about teams not having 'History' I'm gonna write to West Ham suggesting we should have a star on our badge for our Southern League Title.
 |
| If your team won a trophy in this 'get up' you can say they have 'History' |
Additionally, how long ago does a trophy have to have been won to be counted as 'History'? There are professional footballers who won't be old enough to vividly remember Chelsea's 1997 FA Cup victory, the trophy that is seen to have kicked off their period of relative domestic success. Yet Chelsea are the first team name on the lips of all critical wannabe 'Footballing Historians'. That trophy was won 16 years ago, how far back do I have to go? I feel a bit sorry for Chelsea (only a tiny bit), I bet Liverpool and Manchester United fans didn't have Sunderland and Aston Villa fans coming to them in the 1980's and 1990's saying that they had no 'History', that their success was worth nothing because when their teams were dominant you couldn't barge the goalkeeper over the line once he'd caught the ball (the protection that keepers get nowadays eh) and that their players never had to spend 5 days down a coal mine then recover to wallop the opposition on a Saturday afternoon. Or did Sunderland and Villa fans (in case you're unsure as to why I'm picking Sunderland and Villa; they both can be argued to have 'History' in my eyes, especially when you go back to the earlier part of the 20th century) get stick off of fans of The Wanderers and Blackburn Rovers where does it end? Where does it end??
Another thing that really irks me regarding the concept of 'History' are the common misconceptions that people have with regards to teams that have 'History'. A typical example, and I swear I'm not picking on them, they spring to mind because I come across them all the time, is when I hear Sp*rs fans say that Manchester City have no 'History'. Now I'm not saying that Man City have 'History' but up until 3 years ago both Sp*rs and Man City had won the same number of league titles (that's 2 for those of you who didn't know, can't believe you didn't know that). I've then heard Sp*rs fans in the same breath, suggest that they have 'History' or have had periods where they dominated English football (and if you think I'm lying I'll 'out' said Sp*rs fans). Firstly I'd just like to make one thing clear, Tottenham Hotspur have NEVER had a period where they have dominated English football. Yes they were a strong side in the 60's and they have won the FA cup on a number of occasions (7 or 8, I can't remember off the top of my head and I can't be bothered to look it up) but they have not dominated English football. Secondly in my books 2 league titles is pretty comparable to 2 league titles. YES Sp*rs have won a hell of a lot more FA Cups but then anyone can win the FA Cup. Names are drawn out of a hat for Christ's sake, you could have the easiest draw in the world and get to the final, then the luck could be on your side on that one day. That's exactly what happened to Wigan this year and they got relegated. I mean West Ham have won the FA Cup 3 times! Speaking of West Ham, I've even had people suggest to me that we have 'History'. We DO NOT have history! That's right. I said it, I don't care that West Ham are my team I'm being honest, fans need to sit and read a football history book before they start chucking the H-bomb about.
Finally let me set the record straight for all of you out there, well anyone that's still interested in Travis Newton's Whistle Stop Guide to English footballing history, most of you will have probably stopped reading by now. I must explain before I start naming names, in my eyes winning the League Title is the ultimate prize in football and is a true barometer of a teams strength as they will have, by winning it, proved that they are the best team in the land over a period of around 40 games; playing everyone else of a similar standard home and away over a 10 month period. No domestic cup competition can compare to the League Championship however the FA Cup is a prestigious competition which, it can be argued, is generally taken seriously by all teams big or small (except for that time when Man Utd went off to the World Club Cup and got schooled by Romario and Edmundo). The Littlewoods/Rumbelows/Coca Cola/Carling/Capital One Cup on the other hand is right down on the pecking order, anybody claiming to have 'History' who has mainly (or only) enjoyed success in that tournament needs a serious talking to and will receive one if I ever find out about them. Now that I've set your expectations I'd like to declare that the following teams have 'History' and therefore their fans are allowed to sing the song that goes, "And if you know your history! Well it's enough to make your heart go! Woah! Woah! Woah! Woah...!" Anyone else is banned from doing so in my presence.
Liverpool
God I hate Liverpool, their fans are so smug and they are the biggest users of the H-bomb. Unfortunately you cannot argue with their claim to 'History'. They've even won the Littlewoods/Rumbelows/Coca Cola/Carling/Capital One Cup more times than anyone else.
Manchester United
The, self proclaimed, benchmark of English footballing dominance (in my eyes Liverpool are still more successful even at 20 titles to 18). It's testament to their success that I don't like them but can't actually think of a reason other than pure jealousy.
Arsenal
Kings of Southern England, nobody south of the Watford Gap comes anywhere near to these guys in terms of success. Anyone who suggests otherwise has either been smoking crack or is bad at addition, end of.
Everton
One that often slips under the radar of even the most learned football fan. I'm often accused of favouring them due to the ties I've had with them in the past. For those of you with lives and friends and that made it this far down (I'm not sure why you'd still be reading if you have a life), they have 9 League Titles, 5 FA Cups and a European Cup Winners Cup. They also are second in the list of teams with the longest run in the top flight AND even more importantly they sing, "And if you know your history..." THAT! My friends, is what you call 'History'.
Aston Villa
These guys can't be over looked in my eyes. Yes they've not had the most enjoyable last 15 years thanks to the likes of David O'Leary and Alex McLeish; but you cannot argue with 7 League Championships, 7 FA Cups, 5 Littlewoods/Rumbelows/Coca Cola/Carling/Capital One Cups and even a European Cup. And that European Cup was won in my lifetime (and I'm young guys, so that was pretty recent). Villa dominated the 1890's and I suspect (begrudgingly) that they were the inspiration behind West Ham's colours (although we traditionally have white socks), seen as we were formed in 1895. Imagine having so much 'History' that other teams copy your kit eh... Cough! Sunderland!
Other notable mentions are the likes of Sunderland and Blackburn Rovers. Although I'd argue that these teams like Newcastle, Tottenham, Chelsea, Man City, Sheff Weds and Sheff Utd have enjoyed some success but cannot sing the history song or claim to have 'History'.
And that, my readers, is a history of English Domestic Football according to me. You may disagree. You may think I have too much time on my hands. You may not care! You may only sing, "And if you know your history..." if you support Liverpool, Manchester United, Arsenal, Everton or Aston Villa (or maybe The Wanderers).
PS The Confederations Cup start this weekend!!!!
