Liverpool v Tottenham 4-1 (League match: November 2, 1912)

November 2, 1912
Match: Football League, First Division, at Anfield, kick-off: 15:00.
Liverpool – Tottenham Hotspur 4-1 (2-0).
Attendance: 20,000.
Referee: Mr. T. Kirkham (Burslem); linesmen: Messrs. T.H. Heald and L. Nuttall.
Liverpool (2-3-5): Kenneth Campbell, Ephraim Longworth, Robert Crawford, Harry Lowe, Ernest Peake, Bob Ferguson, Arthur Goddard, Arthur Metcalf, Jack Parkinson, Tom Miller, Donald Mackinlay.
‘Spurs (2-3-5): Tommy Lunn, Tom Collins, Fred Webster, Teddy Lightfoot, Charlie Rance, Findlay Weir, Wally Tattersall, Billy Minter, Jimmy Cantrell, Bobby Steel, Bert Middlemiss.
The goals: 1-0 Mackinlay (3 min.), 2-0 Goddard (40 min.), 3-0 Parkinson (64 min.), 3-1 Minter (71 min.), 4-1 Parkinson (89 min.).

The merits of Liverpool.
Liverpool stand in great favour with their supporters just now, and they deserve to, for following on the splendid display they gave against the League champions a fortnight ago, they gave another sterling exhibition against Tottenham Hotspur at Anfield, and gained an equally meritorious victory by a precisely similar score. They were altogether too much for the Metropolitians, and the improvement which has been shown as w hole is most gratifying an encouraging.

There is more life, more dash, more skill, and more penetrative power in the vanguard, and the introduction of Mackinlay at outside left has been attended with the most gratifying results. Especially was this so in the match with the ‘Spurs, for, not only was he directly responsible for the first goal, which undoubtedly had a marked effect on the play of the team as a whole, but he was very largely concerned in two of the others.

Mackinlay’s clever display.
The game had not been in progress more than a minute when Mackinlay had the ball in the net, this being his first success of the season in League games. Then again, it was from one of his many fine centres that Goddard beat Lunn for the second time, and gave the home men the most encouraging advantage of a two goals lead at the interval. So far the ‘Spurs had done very little to rouse the fears of the homes supporters. They showed some pretty footwork, but their passing was overdone, and they were anything but deadly in front of goal.

But they were seen to better advantage after the interval. They manoeuvred very skilfully, and with great vigour, but there was still the same defect when they reached the firing zone. They could not finish their attacks, and as the ball was driven well down the field from one of their many advances, Parkinson raced clear of all opposition and scored a brilliant goal. Even this reverse, however, did not take the heart out of the Metropolitans. They still kept invading the Liverpool territory, and at length their efforts were rewarded, for Middlemiss got the ball across the face of the goal and Minter forced it into the net.

This success acted as a tonic to the team, and they came again, with the result that Cantrell narrowly missed scoring, but once more Liverpool took up the running. Mackinlay swung across another centre, and Parkinson put on a fourth goal. It was not until this point that the ‘Spurs admitted themselves a beaten team. They had made a desperate fight, but it was against a superior team on the day’s play.

The strength of the forwards.
Liverpool finished very strongly. In fact they played well all through, and were quite deserving of the splendid victory they secured. The forwards were in particularly good form, and were the part of the team, Mackinlay in particular being conspicuous all the way through. His centres were fine, and no one on the side played a better part in the success. Goddard on the opposite extreme also showed to great advantage, and the inside trio worked zealously, cleverly, and with a capital understanding. They were quick on the ball, and seized their opportunities with avidity.

From the intermediate line they received all the support they could expect, the half-backs being fully entitled to their share of the credit for the victory, and none more so than Peake, who tackled splendidly and fed his forwards with excellent judgment. The backs, however, were hardly so reliable as usual, for which the absence of Robert Pursell was no doubt responsible, for Crawford was not a great success in the position of left full-back. Longworth, too, seemed to be affected by the change, but for all that neither defender made any serious mistakes, and Campbell had a comparatively easy time in goal.

The ‘Spurs weakness.
The ‘Spurs played a better game than their position in the League table had led people to expect, but their outstanding weakness was the inability of their forwards to finish their work. They executed some delightful movements, their passing at times being very pretty to watch, while they shoed commendable dash and determination. But it all went for nothing. They could not crown their efforts, and this is where they will have to improve before they can expect to make any headway.

The half-backs were very good. Weir, Rance, and Lightfoot facing a different task with skill and fortitude, and Collins and Webster defended well, whilst Lunn did all that could be expected of him in goal. He made several very fine saves, and was not due to any defeat on his part that Liverpool win by such a margin. The Anfielders were the better team, but nowhere was their superiority more pronounced than in the penetrative powers of their forwards.
(The Athletic News, 04-11-1912)

Jack Parkinson.
Jack Parkinson

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.