January 5, 1924
Match: Football League, First Division, at Upton Park, kick-off: 14:30.
West Ham United – Liverpool 1-0 (1-0).
Referee: Mr. A.H. Kingscott (New Sawley).
West Ham United (2-3-5): Tommy Hampson, Billy Henderson, Jack Young, George Carter, George Kay, Albert Cadwell, Wilf Edwards, Billy Brown, Billy Williams, Billy Moore, Jimmy Ruffell.
Liverpool (2-3-5): Elisha Scott, Ephraim Longworth, Tommy Lucas, Tom Bromilow, Walter Wadsworth, Dick Forshaw, William Lacey, Danny Shone, Jimmy Walsh, Harry Chambers, Fred Hopkin.
The goal: 1-0 Moore (38 min.).
Moore’s goal give West Ham victory.
Without ever touching their best form, West Ham defeated Liverpool by the only goal of a quiet but nevertheless interesting game. Perhaps the one point which decided the issue may have been of the fortunate order, but apart from this victory went to the better balanced and more harmonious eleven.
With seven minutes of the first half still remaining Williams contrived an opening for Moore, and the inside left promptly shot for goal. The ball which appeared to be beating Scott, all the way, struck the inside of the post and trickled into the net.
From then until the finish the Irish international was more highly tried than Hampson, and on one occasion, following clever inter-passing by the home left wing, Moore’s finishing effort rebounding from the keeper’s legs for a deciding luck clearance.
Liverpool’s weak places.
Save for occasional centres by Lacey which dropped into Hampson’s hands, and two fast ground shots from Shone, the champions never suggested a score. That the Liverpool forwards were so comparatively ineffective can be attributed to causes, the thoughtful intervention of the home middle men, and the feeble work of their own half-backs. Throughout, Wadsworth and his immediate confreres, gave a very moderate display.
In the first place the quick passing of the West Ham vanguard often had them guessing, while their efforts at purveying lacked both accuracy and thought. Too often did they urge the ball high into the air when a ground pass could have been made with equal ease. Thus, though the Liverpool forward line revealed skill and dash at frequent intervals they were so indifferently served that long before the finish all hope of defeating Hampson appeared to have been abandoned.
Shone, the most persistent and also the most successful member of the champions’ attack, was the one exception. He certainly never gave up trying; and whenever the opportunity afforded sent Lacey away with well-judged forward passes. Chambers, too, gave glimpses of his undoubted skill, especially in sending a moving ball towards an unmarked colleague, but Hopkin and Lacey had a very lean afternoon, the offside tactics of Young and Henderson proving too much for them.
Walsh well held.
Walsh, so successful the previous week, failed to shake off the attention of the clever and tenacious Kay, with the result that not one shot of real power emanated from him. On the other hand, the young West Ham leader created a variable impression. Like most debutants he was at times much too eager, which, of course, upset he harmony of the line, yet he showed skill in bringing the ball under control, and his passes, if not always accurate, were marked by intelligence.
Once again Brown played very poorly, Edwards suffering in consequence. Despite inadequate support, however, the home outside right quite held his own in many duels with Forshaw and Lucas, and later on with Longworth (the Liverpool full-backs inter-changing positions in the closing half.)
But the motive power of the home attack was supplied by the left wing confederacy, Moore and Ruffell, the inside left especially, being in a happy mood. Time and again after the interval they outwitting the Liverpool defenders without achieving complete success, due to more often than not to a final pass going astray.
Scott showed all his old skill in the visiting goal, but Longworth and Lucas, who opened in confined fashion, did not maintain their early excellence, and miskicks were of frequent occurrence. Doubtless the fact that the men in front of these could not cope with the home attack may have had much to do with their unexpected lapses. Certainly they were not the cool and resourceful defenders I saw last season.
A word of praise must be given to the West am half-backs, all three men playing an important part in the victory. Their clever anticipating foiled many promising movements on the part of the visitors, and when in possession they always endeavoured to make use of the ball.
Caldwell was especially successful during the closing half, and Ruffell and Moore owed much to his studious prompting. Hampson had not a great deal to do, and Henderson and Young also enjoyed a comparatively peaceful afternoon, being seldom hustled by the Liverpool forwards.
(Athletic News: January 7, 1924)