Monday, September 26 – 1910
Following upon the disappointments which have been experienced at Anfield-road, the Liverpool team completed their first month’s programme with a decidedly creditable victory at Hyde-road, and thus accomplished much towards restoring the confidence of their many supporters.
That they deserved their success was beyond cavil, for although there was a suggestion during the earlier proceedings of the game of the City securing an easy victory, the close observer could not fail to note that there was among the Liverpool players an undercurrent of superiority prevalent that time would ultimately develop.
It must be borne in mind that the “Reds” were, in the first half, facing a breeze, the vagaries of which prevented them indulging in anything like concerted action. This lent a spice of unevenness to the game, and though to all appearances the forwards were quite unsuccessful, the situation was saved by the rearguard, who rose gallantly to the occasion and bore the brunt of the work, the value of which could not be overestimated.
But when matters settled down, there was a levelling up that brought the play of the Liverpool team to a fairly good standard. The attack found their feet, so to speak, during the last quarter of an hour of the first half, and from this point they rarely relaxed their grip upon the game. Moreover, they did the one thing necessary, namely, drove home their advantage, and having secured he lead, they took no risk, and held it to the finish.
The game, though devoid of many of the nicer points of play, was most exhilarating to the average follower. Both sides were out to give of their best, and there could be no disputing the fact that they kept themselves thoroughly extended, for there was scarcely a dull moment during the whole of the proceedings.
From a Liverpool point of view much interest was centred in the inclusion of Gilligan as a partner to Macdonald. Some time had elapsed ere the ex-Bristolian adapted himself to the methods of the pair on either side of him, but he eventually tumbled into the groove, and made amends for lack of speed by bringing his experience into play.
On many occasions he covered Parkinson and harassed the opposing defence to some purpose, and as he signalled his first appearance in the League team by opening the scoring, he may be said to have made a very creditable debut.
Longworth, in his second trial with the seniors, gave much satisfaction, and moreover his display was suggestive of development with further experience in League warfare. His style was of the robust type, and coupled with a good idea of tackling and interception, his kicking was powerful and generally well directed. He got along well with Chorlton, and one of the smartest bits of work that he accomplished was in the last minute of the game, when he flashed across the goal mouth and prevented the City outside right from obtaining an equalising point. Altogether the new hands gave a promising display, and are worthy of further trials.
There were no bright particular stars on Saturday, still, on the whole, the Liverpool team are to be congratulated upon their very capable work, and no doubt they would have liked, being in such happy vein, to have tackled those foemen who had previously tarnished their home record. As the pivot of attack, Parkinson was always prominent, in spite of being well shadowed by Wilkinson, and at times there was some clever wing play by Goddard and Macdonald, though the latter would have benefited his side to greater extent by getting quicker off the mark. Reference has been made to the part played by Gilligan.
On the other side of Parkinson, Brough quite came up to expectations. He provided his centre and Goddard with many opportunities, and his bustling methods at times served a very useful purpose.
Half-back play left but a minimum of room for adverse criticism, though at the same time none of the trio quite touched his top form.
The backs, under heavy pressure, showed good resource, and in this respect compared more favourably with the home rearguard. Beeby did all that could be expected, while his vis-à-vis also performed well, and had no chance with the two shots that beat him.
The City halves worked strenuously and well, but the light forwards in front of them were not seen to advantage, while their marksmanship, especially in the earlier stages, left much to be desired. Dorsett was an outstanding exception, and this clever young player was the most efficient forward of the day.
The details of play need but be briefly commented upon. With the wind behind them, the City forwards, ably supported by the halves, were most aggressive, but were lacking in the essential finishing touch. Still they plodded along, and after play had been in progress twenty minutes, Conlin eluded his opponents, and racing well down put in a fine cross shot to Dorsett, who, bounding in, pounced upon the ball and left Beeby helpless.
Following this, Goddard missed the easiest of openings, though on a further return Gilligan clinched a movement intimated by Peake, by thoroughly beating Lyall. The Liverpool forwards took the game in hand after the resumption, and Macdonald driving against the upright met the return and handed the ball into the net.
The infringement came under the notice of the referee, but a second success followed after twenty-five minutes’ play, as the result of a capital centre by Macdonald and a smart pass to Parkinson, who with a rising shot defeated the keeper.
In the concluding stages the City made a great effort to equalise, and Dorsett shot against the crossbar, but there was no further scoring, and Liverpool won by the odd goal of three
(Evening Express, 26-09-1910)