BTH said:
I'll start by declaring an interest. I've known Gary for many years and we've got together on a few little bits and bobs here and there in that time. I've never been for a pint with him though, but I think it's fair to say that we are on friendly terms.
I won't be buying the Joe Mercer book. This is because I got the original version many years ago. Even now I can recall reading it and being stunned by the attention to detail Gary gave to his subject and many of the photographs are incredible. In terms of City-related biographies it has not been surpassed and, having seen some of the embarrassments that former players have added their names to in recent years, I know it will be a long time, if ever, before it will be.
If you haven't read it before I can guarantee that you'll be delighted reading it when it is published. You'll have to trust me on that.
P.S. Good luck with the new book, Gary. I think you owe me a pint!
As always, thanks for the comments. I think it shows that I loved writing this book more than any other and, over the last few months, I've been updating it to make it better than the first edition. Obviously, anyone who got the original should look at the new version, but as only 2,000 copies were produced first time around then I guess there are plenty of people who never had chance to get that version.
Your comments are great and in tune with the reviews it got when it first came out. It is the only book of mine to be reviewed by the Telegraph (by ex-England manager Graeme Taylor) and in various other nationals. It caused a bit of controversy as well (we were stopped from launching it at City because someone thought Peter Swales might object), and then a rival publisher complained when we were entered in the WIlliam Hill Sports Book Of The Year. The book came out on 8th December 1993 and in those days you had to enter your book for the award before 1st December. Another rule was that books could only be entered for the year they were published in.
So my publisher (Polar) tried to get the book entered in the 1993 awards. They were told they couldn't because it was now the 8th December and they should have entered it earlier (by sending a proof copy). My publisher argued that this wasn't possible because on 1st December there was still a possibility the book might be delayed into 1994 - there were issues printing the book.
One of the award judges at the time told my publisher that we could enter it for 1994 (in fact my publisher was told that the book really needed to be entered and we were given a very positive feel) and he told us that the rule was to be changed to allow books to be entered for awards between entry dates, not calendar years. That's how it now works (I think it's November to November).
Polar entered the book for the 1994 award and everything looked very positive. Then during the summer of 1994 we were told that there had been a complaint from another publisher because the book had not been published in 1994. The rule change had necessitated the 1994 award to cover the 1st Jan 1994 (because some books published in Dec 1993 had been entered in the 1993 award because they had proof copies some time in advance) to the cut off date in Nov/Dec, and 1995's award would run from the cut off date in Nov/Dec to the following year's cut off date.
So in the end we were never allowed to enter the book in the Sports Book Of The Year Award. Three of the judges knew my publisher well, and another had interviewed me for his radio 5 show in London (all were very positive), but in the end the book could never be judged.
Polar never bothered entering my later books.
Ah well.
BTH - I guess I do owe you a pint. If I ever get paid any royalties from Empire and At Heart (neither of which have ever paid me a penny for the books I wrote for them!) then I'll get you a pint.
