nottsblue wrote:johnny crossan wrote:nottsblue wrote:johnny crossan wrote:The east coast was always a barren place and now more so in terms of top flight football as well. The barcodes had better hang in there otherwise there'll be none at all for the first time since 1890.
Is that true that there's always been a north east representative in the top flight since 1890? Surprised at that to be honest
Not just the north-east - all of the east coast. Sunderland joined the top flight a couple of years after the league was formed and stayed there, being joined by the likes of the Newcastle, Grimsby, Boro. Hull, Ipswich & Norwich later on.
http://www.myfootballfacts.com/Football ... 14-15.html
Thanks for that JC. Very interesting reading the old tables. One thing that leaps out is how much home advantage played back then. I guess the travelling was much more arduous back then and in particular Sunderland had a phenomenal home record in part I guess due to the distance a lot of the teams in the division had to travel to get there.
Noticeable too how very few Southern teams there were back then
Those tables certainly were interesting and I really enjoyed perusing them, so thanks for posting JC.
One slightly amusing aspect, between the years 1900 to 1915, was looking at the teams who were relegated and comparing them with their current standing in the PL :- Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal and Spurs all suffered this 'fate' in this period of time.
City, however, couldn't be outdone in that Department and we were relegated twice.......typical.
Talking of Sunderland, a little later than this though, in the inter-war period, I seem to recall that they were regarded as being quite wealthy, so much so that I think they were dubbed, at one point, the 'Bank of England Club', although I don't know what the basis of this was.