Soon after I started watching Fulham, Frank Osborne took over as manager. He had previously been a player and then a director at the club so he was a familiar face. A fan once stopped him in the street to complain about the team's performance in the weekend's match. Without a word Frank fished in his pocket and handed the man the cost of admission to the terraces.
A similar instinct must have spurred Tony Khan to issue a swift apology for the team's dismal home display against Aston Villa. As co-owner he was certainly entitled to do so. He did not single out any individual though the defenders may have been discomfited to learn that he had tried to sign four different centre-backs.
Scott Parker, whilst admitting his team's defensive frailty, had a different perception: "I thought we played very, very well and dominated for large parts."
Not everyone would agree with that but anyway the Carabao Cup match, staged in Brentford's new stadium three days later, gave the players an opportunity to justify the manager's faith. Again, they failed to convince. Although Neeskens Kebano almost scored with an early free kick it was no surprise when the home side took the lead, Marcus Forss exploiting the visitors' weakness with a 26th minute goal.
After the interval Parker sent on Ademola Lookman his loan signing from RB Leipzig. The newcomer teed up Kebano and then Stefan Johansen, but no goals resulted. In response Said Benrahma scored twice in fifteen minutes, humiliating the team that had deprived Brentford of a place in the Premier League. The BMW may have been broken up but Benrahma is still ticking over.
Three days later Fulham travelled to Wolverhampton and gave a better performance, especially in defence. For almost an hour they looked capable of saving a point – goalkeeper Alphonse Areola was in great form - but crumbled in the 56th minute when Wolves launched a sustained assault. Though the attempts of Leander Dendoncker and Raul Jimenez were blocked Pedro Neto finally put the ball in the net.
Lockman came on as substitute and once again provided some decent opportunities but Kebano, Abou Kamara and Aleks Mitrovic were still below par. There were only two efforts on target, neither of them meaningful. Overall Scott Parker could legitimately cite some positives (and he could point to Villa's trouncing of Liverpool) but the international break is here and Fulham have yet to gain a point in the Premier League. Still it is good to be noticed – just. In its eight-paragraph report of the Wolves-Fulham match, Metro devoted one sentence (of seventeen words) to the Whites.
You may recall that in my blog of the 15th July I was asking for help to identify the Douglas who appears in the earliest known Fulham line-up (St Andrew's 1883). Sadly, his identity remains a mystery. One of the less likely candidates was Francis Archibald Douglas of 62 Cromwell Road. Thanks to our excellent local libraries I have been able to read his nephew's book 'The Sporting Queensberrys'.
Of course there is no mention of Fulham St Andrew's nor of Francis Douglas's sporting ability but it was worth a try. Surprisingly Francis 's brother, the languid Lord Alfred Douglas, was a good cross-country runner.
The book's author does not share the upper-class disdain for football, which was regarded as muckerish (coarse or vulgar) because of its professional nature. Indeed, he praises the self-control of West Ham fans at the 1923 FA Cup Final. However, his family is famous for its long association with boxing.
As this is Black History Month it is worth noting this particular Marquess's respect for fighters like Joe Louis and the iconic Jack Johnson. He writes at length about Johnson's achievements, including his courageous defeat of Jim Jeffries in a stadium full of racists, some of them armed. Unfortunately, the effect is marred by a crass joke about the train journey back to New York.
The writer fought in the First World War and suffered both injuries and infections including Spotted Fever, which sounds horrendous.
'Although I had a few weeks in that isolation ward,' he writes, 'the memory of that dread experience will be with me always. Such nurses as were obliged to enter the ward wore what appeared to me to be gags – the lower part of their faces covered with what was of course an antiseptic dressing.'
A century later most of us are wearing them.
The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and unless specifically stated are not necessarily those of Hammersmith & Fulham Council.
Want to read more news stories like this? Subscribe to our weekly e-news bulletin.
