Fairly certain Keith Edwards played as a 10 (seem to remember Big Billy playing no.9 next to him), I also thought Mally Lord was no. 7 tbh but could be wrong. Horton was no. 4, and Garry Parker no. 8, Poncho Pearson was 9
Oh really? This is the club who thought Waggy's nickname was Wiggo! On the other hand you're probably being ironic and I'm being a bit dim, not unheard of...
I'm old enough to remember the backs of City match programmes with the team line-up supposedly about to kick off playing 2 - 3 - 5. A back four had been the usual thing for many years already though.
In the mid 60s, Hull City players wore the traditional 1 to 11 numbers signifying a notional 2-3-5, but played 4-2-4. Houghton at number 10 was more of a midfielder but still managed to score 22 goals in the 1965-66 season.
Cliff Britton and Terry Neill can't have been much cop not to be able to get a team with that forward line into the first division.
The problem wasn't the forwards, it was the defence. In the 65-66 promotion year, the team scored 109 league goals (100 by the five forwards) but conceded 62. It was a cavalier kind of football; the philosophy was almost ''if they score three we'll score four.'' This worked fine for the Third Division but not so well in the Second Division. The defence wasn't strengthened sufficiently to meet the demands of the higher standard of football.
Yes and that shows Britton and Neill clearly weren't up to it. It shouldn't have been so hard to get that team up.
It's easy to make bold claims 50 years after the event. If things were that simple, we would all be football managers other than in fantasyland on our computers. Harold Needler didn't make similar funds available after 1966. His initial investment bought a new gym, a floodlighting system and building a forward line around Chris Chilton. Britton's hand was in all this. The same kind of money was never available again. Although I do admit I was no fan ofTerry Neill.
