The Dark Days of Middlesbrough Football Club.
Illegal Players, Arranged Games, Illegal payments, Bribes to the Opposition, Winding-
North Eastern Daily Gazette, Monday, November 13 1905
[Following a humiliating defeat against Liverpool….]
The directors do not feel inclined to increase their responsibilities until they hear the verdict of the Association in regard to the charges against them, so that there appears very little prospect of better men being found in the near future.
-
What the Football Association are about to keep the club’s supporters in suspense for such a time passes my comprehension. It is cruel in the extreme It is stated in defence of the Association that the matter would have been ended long ago could the Association have got the information they desired. On the other hand, the club’s management state that they have given all the help they can in order to bring about a finding on the charges.
-
Unless something is done, and that quickly, the Borough will sink to such depths,
from which there will be no escape from relegation to the Second Division. The team
is due at Bramall-
-
North Eastern Daily Gazette, Friday, November 17 1905
THE MIDDLESBRO’ F.C.
CHARGES TO BE FURTHER INQUIRED INTO THIS EVENING.
This evening a further sitting of the Football association Commission appointed to inquire into the allegation against the Middlesbrough Club’s management and players takes place at Manchester. Messrs Mattison, Dobinson, and Pickard, directors, and Williamson and Cassidy, players left Middlesbrough this morning in order to appear before the commission. It is hoped that the decision of the commission will be made known of next week at the meeting of the Consultative Committee.
North Eastern Daily Gazette, Saturday, November 18, 1905
THE MIDDLESBRO’ F.C.
The inquiry into the management of the Middlesbrough Football Club by a special commission of the Football Association composed of Messrs Clegg, Crump, and Woolfall, was continued last night, at the Grand Hotel, Manchester. A number of witnesses were called, but proceedings were conducted in private, and no decision was given to Press representatives. The secretary of the Football Association (Mr F.J. Wall) was present and a report of the meeting will be submitted to the Consultative Committee of the Football Association
North Eastern Daily Gazette, November 28 1905
BOROUGH F.C.
-
ELEVEN DIRECTORS SUSPENDED
-
From January 1st, 1906
Until May 1st. 1908
-
CLUB FINED £250.
-
Directors’ Admissions.
-
£400 PAID TO PLAYERS AS BONUSES
-
FICTITIOUS ACCOUNTS
-
The report of the special Commission appointed to inquire into the affairs of
the Middlesbrough Club, submitted to yesterday’s meeting of the Consultative Committee
of the Football Association was as follows:-
It was reported to the Association that the club’s auditor had informed a committee
of shareholders appointed by the general meeting of the club, held in June last,
that there had been irregular payments to players, and that the delay in issuing
the balance-
The Commission appointed to deal with the matter met with considerable difficulty not only from the directors of the club, but also from the engineer of the works carried out on the club’s ground, and whose accounts were involved in the alleged irregularities.
It was not until after the Commission had suspended the club and required the directors to institute proceedings against its engineer that certain documents were produced, and even up to the close of the inquiry other documents which the Commission persistently pressed for have not been disclosed, but which, having regard to the admissions made to the Commission at its sitting on the 17th November, had become immaterial.
The directors made very strenuous efforts to prevent their irregularities from being discovered.
On the 1st of May, 1904, they entered into a contract with their then secretary
(Mr J. Robson. Now manager Crystal Palace Club) in which he inserted the following
clause:-
Provided always, and it is hereby specially declared and agreed by and between the parties hereto that no suspension of or other dealing with the said John Thomas Robson by the Football Association, or other football authorities, shall cause the said salary or any part thereof, to cease to be payable, if the said John Thomas Robson is acting in any matter which is the cause of such suspension with the consent or knowledge of the board of directors of the company or by those placed by the board in authority over him.
It was admitted by the directors who attended before the Commission on the 17th.
November (they speaking on behalf of themselves and their co-
The Committee recommended that Directors R.W. Williams (chairman). Geo Pickard
(vice-
The Middlesbrough Club to pay a fine of £250.
That E. Gettins, late a player for the club, be fined £10 for making untrue statements as to moneys received by him from the club.
The fines to be paid before 1st January 1906.
The suspension of the directors does not come as a surprise to the club’s supporters. Developments will be awaited by the thousands of loyal supporters of the club with considerable interest. The Borough is passing through a grave crisis, but there is no reason to be despondent. Surely there are sportsmen of good financial standing in the town who will fill the breach caused by the suspensions Very considerable relief will be felt at the fact that the club has not been suspended. It is expected that the directors will agree upon their course of action at their usual weekly meeting this evening. An extraordinary general meeting of the shareholders will have to be called to consider the situation, and decide as to the future of the club.
-
WHAT THE CRITICS SAY ?
Mr. J.J. Bentley, President of the League, writing in the “Daily Mail,” says:
-
-
AN UNPLEASANT TRUTH
Last year we had Manchester City, Glossop, and Sunderland each fined £250, directors were also suspended, and Manchester City suspended as a club from playing at home for a specified period, says “Looker On” in the Sheffield Telegraph. After that came the Meredith sensation when the famous Welshman was suspended for a full season, and now comes this latest declaration. Middlesbrough has passed through various fortunes since it reached the first class. Three years ago it made a profit of £1,450, two years ago the profit swelled into one of over £3,000, but last year’s purchase of players ran away with no less than £2,470, and the year closed with a substantial adverse balance of £1,600. And now, with gates consistently less than in either of the last two seasons, and with the position of the club decidedly precarious in the League, comes this last straw. It cannot be said that Middlesbrough’s punishment comes as a surprise, for the delay suggested something particularly serious. Still, the weight of the award will startle everyone, and show us once again that, if breeches of the rules are to be made, they can only be made with eyes wide open to the certainty of drastic punishment. By no other method can the game as a whole be kept clean. That is an unpleasant truth, but it is a truth none the less.
-
NOT TOO SEVERE
I do not think it necessary to comment upon the matter in any way, writes “Veteran” in the “Daily Dispatch.” Football clubs must be taught that after themselves making rules they must keep them, and the punishment cannot be regarded as too severe. It is probable that the directors would have got off lighter if they had not placed so many obstacles in the way of the Commission.
-
North Eastern Daily Gazette, December 2 1905 .
FOOTBALL FERMENT.
-
GRAVE CHARGE AGAINST THE SHEFFIELD UNITED CLUB
-
BY A BOROUGH DIRECTOR.
-
On Thursday morning reference was made in our columns, says the “Sheffield Daily
Telegraph” to a grave and extraordinary charge which has been levelled against the
directors of the Sheffield United Club by a member of the board of the Middlesbrough
Football Club. This was to the effect that the Sheffield United directors had been
guilty of similar offences to those which had led to such drastic punishment to Middlesbrough.
In our reference to the matter we stated that the United directors were to be commended
for the prompt manner in which they were taking steps for the safe-
It is no “trumpery affair” this, but a distinct and serious slur on the fair fame and reputation of a club which has had a long and very honourable association with sport, and the gravity of the matter is fully recognised by every member of the directorate. Sheffield’s reputation in sport is high and unsullied, and, in the present instance, there is not the slightest reason to believe that that splendid repute will suffer. However, whilst that is so, such charges cannot be allowed to rest unchallenged, and thus action by the Sheffield United Club has been called for.
How far the matter has gone may be gathered from the fact tat, as we stated on Thursday morning, the incident was mentioned at last Monday’s meeting of the Consultative Committee of the Football Association in town, and, as a matter of fact, this arose through accusations which were made by Mr Mattison, one of the Middlesbrough directors, when he appeared before the Commission of the Football Association in Manchester a fortnight ago. The last item on the Consultative Committee’s agenda for last Monday’s meeting found the Chairman, Lord Kinnaird also being present, report that before the Commission Mr Mattison had definitely stated that Sheffield United and other clubs had also acted in violation of the Association rules, and, at last Monday’s meeting, Mr Wall, secretary to the association, was instructed to write to Mr Mattison asking for substantiation or withdrawal of the charges. He has not done either, nor has he replied to a similar letter which was sent from Sheffield on Wednesday night, after the meeting of the United directors, in which Mr Mattison was asked to unreservedly withdraw.
What was the upshot of the matter will be cannot now be said, though it is certain
that the Sheffield United directors will not rest under the present slur, but will
do everything which lies in their power to compel a retraction of the charges which
were made, not only at Bramall-
We received the following letter last night from the secretary of the Sheffield
United Cricket and Football Club bearing on the whole matter:-
Sheffield, December 1, 1906.
Sir,-
Yours truly, J.NICHOLSON, Secretary.
-
PROVE OR WITHDRAW.
Football-
In the interest of all concerned it is better to give the facts, which have been somewhat contorted in the Press. Especially is it due to Mr J.C. Clegg that the whole affair should be made public, for statements have been made which are misleading, and although at Monday’s meeting it was deemed advisable to keep quiet the few details there is no reason why they should not now be known. They are very simple. One of the Middlesbrough directors declared to Mr Clegg that although the Middlesbrough club was guilty of infringing the rules, so were other clubs. Mr Clegg thereupon asked which clubs, and the reply came “Sheffield United.”
Now Mr Clegg is a director of Sheffield United, and if not chairman is, I believe, chairman of the Finance Committee, and naturally felt that such a statement if substantiated, would affect his position as chairman of the council and also of the commission which investigated the Middlesbrough case. He, therefore, asked the Consultative Committee to demand proof from the Middlesbrough director responsible for the assertion, and that has been done. Sheffield United are also, I understand, taking action, and so far as I can see it remains for the Middlesbrough director to either prove or withdraw the statement he made. There the matter may be allowed to remain for the present.
-
North Eastern Daily Gazette, December 8, 1905.
Middlesbrough F.C. It having been brought to the attention of the Association that the directors proposed, before the commencement of their suspension, to appoint their successors, the club was informed that the only reason why the suspension did not come into force at once was to give an opportunity to the shareholders to appoint new directors without any interference with the ordinary working arrangements of the club, and that these conditions must be observed.
-
South Durham and Cleveland Mercury, Friday 8th. December 1905.
‘BOROUGH’S FUTURE.
-
HINTS TO SHAREHOLDERS FOR NEXT WEEK’S MEETING.
-
By Harry Walker
The verdict in the Middlesbrough case has been productive -
-
Ridiculous Rumours.
During the past week there have been many ridiculous rumours flying around as
to the intentions of the retiring directors regarding the future, and I am glad to
be assured that they have no foundation in fact. It is a pity, therefore, that certain
of their own number should have been to some extent responsible for their circulation.
It has been widely rumoured that certain players were to be immediately placed on
the transfer list with a view to the directors easing their liability at the bank,
and further, that some of them contemplated resigning before their period of suspension
commenced, leaving the remainder to co-
-
Shareholders, Note!
It is also satisfactory to know that they do not intend to work the proxy business.
Now I have never been one to condemn the proxy system as having nothing but evil
in it, remembering always that the proxies often represent men who came forward at
a period in the club’s history when their financial aid was of considerable value.
But there is a common feeling that on many occasions the system has been abused.
However, I understand the policy to be election by popular choice. This ought to
satisfy most people. The one thing for the shareholders to keep before them is the
well-
-
North Eastern Daily Gazette, December 11, 1905.
THE BOROUGH FC
-
ITS CRITICAL POSITION AND THE WAY OUT
-
MR MATTISON’S MOTTO
-
“The Borough is alive and likely to live.”
This week is full of possibilities for the Borough. Firstly we have the shareholders’ meeting on Thursday, and then on Saturday we have the meeting with Woolwich at Plumstead. Should success attend both these meetings there will be such joy in the Borough camp as has not been known since the day when it became certain that the club would be promoted to the first League, If every shareholder will go to Thursday’s meeting with one idea paramount, and that to do his level best to aid the club to surmount the difficult position that exists he will never have cause to regret his decision. The past must be forgotten, and every nerve strained in order to ensure success for the future. I do trust everyone concerned will work in harmony, and that a board of directors of not more than eight will be chosen as will satisfy all interested in the club’s welfare.
-
Mr Alfred Mattison writes:-
-
As the football world knows, eleven of the Middlesbrough directors (myself included) will after the 1st of January, 1906, cease to have a word in football management for the next three seasons, and we must leave the club we have worked hard for (whether well or badly, the future will say) to others to manage, and it is in justification of our actions in the past and the duty of our successors that I pen this letter.
-
We (the directors) have been found guilty of paying our players too much-
-
Who is the shareholder or shareholders who gave the information to the F.A. which has, and still may, jeopardise the very existence of the club? I would ask. Are such men actuated by an honest desire to further the best interests of our club or are they place seekers, whose only desire is to oust the present board so that they themselves may take our place? Public men are always open to criticism, but that criticism should be above the belt, and I earnestly warn the shareholders of the Middlesbrough club next Thursday to beware of this class of men.
-
I have written these words after many weary months of anxious time, after the
many hard and unkind words that have been said of us, in and out of the Press, without
one word of sympathy to us who, whatever our faults may be, have kept “the game going.”
I would now like to speak of the future. “The Boro is Alive and Likely to Live” -
==============================================================
North Eastern Daily Gazette, December 12, 1905.
MR MATTISON’S PLEA
FOR THE LEGALISATION OF BONUSES TO PLAYERS.
The following letter from Mr Alf Mattison, of Middlesbrough, appears in to-
“Was there ever in this world a more thankless heart-
“If you get beaten your ‘gates’ fall off, your name is maligned in every public place, your club’s expenses increase owing to your efforts to improve your team, you are called upon to finance your club by advancing money, and visions of the Second League, and the workhouse haunt your dreams.
“If, on the other hand, you encourage your players by paying them a bonus when they win, or secure the services of a good man, by giving him something down, you are hauled up before the Football association, and made to feel as though you had been picking pockets.
“Within the last two years the F.A. has attacked three League clubs, and on each occasion has found them guilty of such charges as they cared to prove. It is well known to everyone in the inner working of the football world that not only one club but many are from time to time guilty of breaches of the F.A. rules in their relations with their players.
“To those who have had to do with the signing-
SUGGESTED REMEDY
I hold that it is the rule and the manner in which it is administered that are at
fault. Let the F.A. grapple with the question as a whole, and not deal with isolated
cases in the manner they do, punishing the “found-
“The solution in my judgement, lies in the adoption of the following proposals:-
1. The legalisation of bonuses’
2. The payment of any agreed sum to a transferred player being allowed.
3. A limit being fixed to the amount of transfer to be paid for any player to the club.
4. The prohibition of transfer of any player more than once in three seasons, exception being made only in extreme cases, and then only after the special consideration of the F.A.
“Why should an association that was formed to make and regulate the laws of the game interfere in money matters between club and player?
“In conclusion, may I refer to the adverse criticism I have undergone from the pens of many writers, who lay down the old adage that ‘two blacks do not make a white’! My statement to the F.A. that other clubs were ‘equally guilty’ as Middlesbrough was made in mitigation of the sentence about to be imposed on the club to which I belong, and not with any intention to injure any club, player, or official.
“If I can prove to the hilt that which is common knowledge in the football world I will do so, despite the fact that every mouth is closed like that of a live oyster. But I must first receive an assurance from the F.A. that the information I supply will result in the revision of the rules, in the removal or mitigation of past suspensions, and not be used for the purposes of punishing anyone.”
========================================================
North Eastern Daily Gazette, December 15, 1905.
THE MIDDLESBRO’ F.C.
-
ENTHUSIASTIC AND HARMONIOUS
MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS.
-
N E W B O A R D E L E C T E D.
-
The most enthusiastic and harmonious meeting of shareholders ever held in the
annals of the Middlesbrough Football and Athletic Company, Ltd., was that which took
place in the Oddfellows Hall, Middlesbrough, on Thursday. The meeting had been summoned
for the purpose of receiving the resignation of the eleven directors who have been
suspended from January 1st by the Football Association and appointing their successors.
The Chairman of the Board (Mr R.W. Williams) presided over a large attendance. There
were on the platform Mr A.Mackie (manager), Colonel T.G. Poole, Messrs G. Pickard,
A. Barritt, C. Dobinson, D. Mullen, J. Crombie, T.W. Allen, T.H. Fletcher, A. McCallum,
and Dr. Steel (directors), and Mr A. Borrie (solicitor). Mr Alf Mattison (director)
sat in the body of the hall. -
MR W. H. JONES MOVED
That they proceed to elect only eight new directors in place of the eleven who had
retired -
THE INCOMING BOARD
they would have to take up the responsibilities of the club, but he was not prepared to say what those responsibilities were. Mr W.H. Jones: “I take it that the liabilities of the board up to December 31st is not upon the shoulders of the new directors.” Mr Jones proceeded to inquire if it was not a fact that the debentures holders could take possession at any time if they thought the club was not being carried on right. Could they not, he asked, put in a manager at any time they liked. In reply, the Chairman said he did not think there was any likelihood of that. The agreement with the debenture holders was that they could take over the affairs of the club if they thought fit. The £1,000 which became due on the debentures last year had not been paid, but those successful in the draw had allowed the payment to stand over. Mr Jones: “That is only a verbal understanding. You have nothing in writing.” In reply to a further question by Mr Hunt the Chairman said the retiring directors could not compel the new Board to take over their responsibilities at the bank. The whole matter, however, was
IN A NUTSHELL.
The present directors were responsible to December 31st, and if the “pro.” notes
were not met on that date then the retiring directors were responsible to the bank
and the Middlesbrough F.C. was responsible to the retiring directors because it was
a debt on the club. Replying to Mr Hunt who asked what would be the feeling of the
retiring directors to the new Board the chairman said that speaking personally his
feeling would be to do everything possible to assist the new directors in furthering
the club’s interests. They did not want to see the game go down and if they could
do anything to promote football in Middlesbrough and district they were quite prepared
to do it. The retiring Board had been the black sheep, but they were not ashamed
of what they had done. It had not been for their own interests, but for the interests
of the club and the game generally, and he could assure them that the new directors
would have the good wishes of himself and his colleagues. (Applause.) If the new
directors, he said, wanted any information or an insight into the working of the
club he and his colleagues would be pleased to help them. -
HAD GOOD HOPES
that before long the whole of the £2,200 would be wiped off. He urged that it would
be a shame to ignore the claims of the retiring directors, and added that he did
not see why the club should not get out of its difficulties. -
THE NEW BOARD
-
THEIR VERY BEST THANKS,
and he only hoped that their successors would endeavour to do their duty as impartially
as the board had done in the past. (Applause.) -
North Eastern Daily Gazette, January 1, 1906.
Today new management take up the reins of office.
North Eastern Daily Gazette, January 2, 1906.
An indication of the enthusiasm of the Borough supporters is provided by the figures which the N.E.R. booking clerk has kindly provided me with. 1,492 people travelled from Middlesbrough to Sunderland by excursion, 300 at pleasure party rates, and 50 at ordinary rates.
North Eastern Daily Gazette, January 4, 1906.
A cheque for £250 has been drawn by the directors of Middlesbrough Football Club and forwarded to London, to meet the fine imposed by the Football Association for infringement of rules.
-
North Eastern Daily Gazette, January 5, 1906.
SPORT AND PLAY
[ BY OLD BIRD ]
Time to light-
-
The new Board of Middlesbrough F.C. directors had a very long sitting at their first meeting last night, when many matters affecting the future welfare of the club were discussed. An unmistakable desire to improve the position of affairs was demonstrated, everyone being most enthusiastic. Everything possible is going to be done to lift the club out of its awkward predicament.
All reserved seat ticket holders may have their own seats booked if application is made by Wednesday night, for the Middlesbrough v. Bolton Wanderers Cup tie.
Lieut.Col. T.G. Poole has been elected chairman of the Middlesbrough F.C. board
of directors, and Mr J.R. Smiles vice-
I understand Councillor Mattison, as a debenture holder, has applied for a complimentary ticket to admit him to the Middlesbrough F.C. matches. His application has been referred to the Football Association, which body it will be remembered refused to permit Sunderland extending such a privilege to the suspended directors of that club.
1905, Allegations of illegal payments paid by Middlesbrough to its own players.
