Did Rodney Marsh Cost City the League Championship in 1972?

[gordo eddie]

This story was told to me by Mike doyle .
Colin bell won the ball on the edge of the box and passed to Rodney ,then Belly set off on a run ,Rodney went back into the penalty box and beat two players ,the crowd were raving about him ,meanwhile Belly is at the halfway line ,Rodney then beat another two players ,flicked the ball on to his knee then onto his head and headed it back to Joe corrigan ,the whole of maine road were on there feet ,Colin Bell is in the opposition,s penalty area waiting for the pass .
Yes Rodney cost us the title.

 

[squirtyflower]

I have no doubt whatsoever that he cost us the title

The partnership of Davies and Lee up front was phenomenal and why Lee had scored so many goals
Marsh upset the balance of a winning team

 

[portisheadblue]

I remember some aspects of football life back then .... in those days the transfer deadline was mid-March .... after that time newly signed players could not play in matches affecting promotion or relegation ... we were top of the league with nine games left to play .... Big Mal was convinced that most of our English players would be picked for the World Cup (as it turned out far fewer than expected made it) ... also in those days re-arranged fixtures could extend beyond the end of the season .... however, either by City decision or by FA diktat, we had to play those nine games at the rate of one every three days.

So did Rodney cost us the League? Well
1 ... he didn't pick the team
2 ... he didn't demand to play every game
3 ... hi din't arrange the fixtures
4 .... we suffered a "loss of form" (or composure) and didn't have the time to sort it out between matches
5 ... plus any other factor you care to throw in

There is no "I" in team ....it wasn't Rodney that cost us the League at all (in my humble opinion) .... it was there for Man City to win it and it was Man City that lost it ... if we had won it nobody would have said "it was Rodney that won it" would they ....!!!!!!

There is no criticism of anyone implied in the above - it's just the sort of thing that makes football (and other sports) so compelling.

Good Luck tonight - I'll be watching on TV as I don't travel (to football) these days.

Cheers

Edit 1 .....As the post below says There was no WC in 72 !!!! Makes it even more confusing as to why City played all those games in such a sort time Sorry about he Emory apse on my behalf.

Edit 2 ..... It was a two leg Euro 72 q-final against West Germany ( we lost) followed by the Home Championship ... On squad picked for all matches.

 

[cibaman]

IBig Mal was convinced that most of our English players would be picked for the World Cup (as it turned out far fewer than expected made it) ...

In 1972?

 

[lancs blue]

I remember some aspects of football life back then .... in those days the transfer deadline was mid-March .... after that time newly signed players could not play in matches affecting promotion or relegation ... we were top of the league with nine games left to play .... Big Mal was convinced that most of our English players would be picked for the World Cup (as it turned out far fewer than expected made it) ... also in those days re-arranged fixtures could extend beyond the end of the season .... however, either by City decision or by FA diktat, we had to play those nine games at the rate of one every three days.

So did Rodney cost us the League? Well
1 ... he didn't pick the team
2 ... he didn't demand to play every game
3 ... hi din't arrange the fixtures
4 .... we suffered a "loss of form" (or composure) and didn't have the time to sort it out between matches
5 ... plus any other factor you care to throw in

There is no "I" in team ....it wasn't Rodney that cost us the League at all (in my humble opinion) .... it was there for Man City to win it and it was Man City that lost it ... if we had won it nobody would have said "it was Rodney that won it" would they ....!!!!!!

There is no criticism of anyone implied in the above - it's just the sort of thing that makes football (and other sports) so compelling.

Good Luck tonight - I'll be watching on TV as I don't travel (to football) these days.

Cheers

Agreed, Marsh's signing was just one of a number of factors that conspired to cost us the title that season. It wasn't Marsh defending when we conceded 2 sloppy goals to Stoke on the day that Banks had an absolute blinder in goal. IIRC Marsh scored 4 goals in those 9 games and set up a couple of others so he was hardly a passenger.

 

[BlueTony]

I think he did but to be fair, I'm largely going on what my Dad told me. Whilst I was at his debut game, I was a little too young to analyse the effect.

For younger members of bluemoon, a reasonable and more recent analogy would be when Keegan introduced Faustino Asprilla to the Newcastle team in the 95-96 'I'd luv it' season.

Rags pipped them to the title that year when the Geordie's season collapsed.

Asprilla was very skillfull but a sort of slow, bendy, round the houses sort of player. Newcastle, like City in the early 70's played a fast paced pass and move game.

I believe Marsh had on City, the same effect that Asprilla had on Newcastle with a similar outcome.

I remember thinking the same thing at the time. Barcodes were set up nicely to win the league but Keegan brought Asprilla in and it completely upset the balance of the team. Similar to the Marsh effect in 1972.

The difference between the two was that Asprilla was brought in to given them extra firepower for champs league in the following season. With Marsh, the story I heard was that Allison got tired of rags tormenting City about Best. We were near the top for most of that season and Utd were crap, destined (eventually) for Div 2. However they still had Best, and it hit a sore point with our manager. Marsh was the other flair player at the time , but as others have said he was very unfit and his playing style didn't suit. Once you buy a marquee player like that they are hard to drop. I used to sing his name on the Kippax, but, truth be told, he had about one good game in four.

Just like best then! I remember my dad telling me, at about the same time, that 3 out of every 4 weeks you could have gone to the stretford end and asked who wants a game? and they would have performed better than him

 

[denislawsbackheel]

without a shadow of a doubt Marsh cost us the league.
Our lightning fast break footballing style was destroyed by that self indulgent southern twat poncing about when he got the ball.

You might be a miserable fooker but you do make me laugh!
;-)

This is also the view of Summerbee, Bell and Lee.

 

[petrusha]

Not quite old enough to remember Rod - I went to my first City game two months after he played his last. But there's no doubt he was very popular with the fans. I remember Swales saying many years later that the biggest dissent from the crowd he ever experienced wasn't any of the protests in the eighties or nineties, but when he decided to let Marsh go.

Equally, though, it's hard for someone like me who didn't see him play not to suspect that he was ultimately a failed signing. I think I'm right that, when we bought him, the only bigger fee in English football had been paid for Alan Ball. And ultimately, we won nothing during Marsh's time at the club. We were in pole position for the title when he arrived, but missed out and didn't contend for the championship again until the season after the one in which he left. We reached one cup final in his time at the club, which we lost, but then went all the way in a cup as soon as he was through the door.

I'm not saying that it was entirely, or even largely, down to him (although some of his detractors, the one and only Mike Doyle among them together with my dad, have claimed that it was). However, it does seem to me that it was a slightly ill-fated signing which never quite led to the success Allison hoped.

I note that someone says above that he was bought partly as a crowd puller, with Allison hoping to give City a charismatic counter to the allure of George Best. Even on that score, things didn't quite turn out as planned.

Crowds were down in 1972/3 (his first full campaign) in comparison with the previous season. Thereafter, they stayed below 1971/2 levels until they shot up in the 1976/7 and 1977/8, after Marsh had gone. The lesson seems to be that an attractive, winning City side - as opposed to a single flamboyant crowd-pleaser - was what it took to pull in the punters in big numbers.

PS - Just playing devil's advocate a bit here, really. There must be a fair few posters who were big admirers of Rodney, so please put the case for him! :)

 

[bluemanc]

Rod himself says yes & though he's probaly right mitigating circumstances do exist.
We lost Corrigan for 7 of the last 8 games, had that not happened we would have won the League.

Its fair to say that Corrigan in 1972 wasnt the same Corrigan that we came to know and love. I cant remember any City fans at the time suggesting that his loss cost us the league.

It's fair to say that what i said is true & it's also fair to say you have no idea who took his place and how much worse he was than Joe.

 

[mancunial]

my favorite moment of rodney was seeing him take the piss out of three united players on the touchline at maine road the day we won 4 nil i think, he just juggled it, think it was crerand sadler and foulkes,no way could they get that ball off him, i will always have great memories of rodney, no way will i ever think that he cost us the championship that year, great player, entertainer extraordinaire, i mean we could say that own goal cost us the championship a few years later, it was over a full season, only got great memories of rodney and always will have.