1/6/2021 Deanship: a topic to forget | la diaria | Uruguay

the daily

Illustration: Diego Bonilla

Deanery: a topic to forget

The dispute over which is the oldest football team in Uruguay has a different
answer if compared with international cases and if legal logic is put aside, says
Pierre Arrighi, a regular contributor to our pages, football historian (his books
are 1924 First FIFA World Cup, The Olympic Games were never amateurs
and the upcoming 34 lies of Jules Rimet) and —be careful— a fan of a big
team.
Let's clarify one point from the start: I'm from Nacional. Or rather, I was a big fan of Nacional when I was
a child and teenager. Later, with time and my distance from the country during the dark years, my
sentimental relationship with the club faded a little to be replaced by the typical nomadism of today's fan,
who ties him to the team where his star plays, be it Forlán, Suárez, Cavani, Recoba or whatever.

https://ladiaria.com.uy/lento/articulo/2017/12/decanato-un-tema-para-olvidar/ 1/9
1/6/2021 Deanship: a topic to forget | la diaria | Uruguay

From afar, but perhaps up close too, those of our generation were always, when the time came, absolute
fans of the Celeste and its players. We didn't like it when “the other big team” won the Libertadores. But if
we were from Nacional, we wanted the elegant Rocha in the national team's midfield and Cubilla dribbling
in the corner. And if we were from Peñarol, we did not dislike the presence of Ubiñas or Manicera. What
we were was finally condensed by that devil of the pitch, “one of the last exponents of the genius
characteristic of the football that Uruguay once had” (as Carlos Solé recounted in the 1971 Libertadores
final), Luis Cubilla, who wore all the shirts and shone in all of them.

I was a Nacional fan not because everyone in my house was a Nacional fan or because I had a white
footballer or groundsman on some branch of my tree. My French father was not interested in Creole
football. And even less so to my Uruguayan mother. I was a Nacional fan because my older brother was a
Peñarol fan and because our trio of siblings had the cursed habit of always looking for a way to separate
ourselves. So Jean-Michel was from Peñarol, Paul, the lawyer, from Cerro, and I, from Nacional. My idols
back then were Manicera, Roberto Sosa, Luis Artime, Urruzmendi, Cincunegui, Domingo Pérez, Celio and
Prieto. Then, when they started burning the potatoes, all this was erased from my memory and I only
regained the tricolor track indirectly, on its other side, when in 1998 Zinédine Zidane won the World Cup. I
then returned to football, to its themes, its debates and its questions, with affection and appreciation.

The subject of the deanery came to me in spaced drops, like summer rain, and when the jar overflowed, it
caught me by surprise. I was aware of a controversy that had arisen at some point among experts, but with
the idea that it was an intellectual diversion without consequences and without any major interest. I began
to realise the seriousness of the matter when I had the misfortune of attending one of the most horrible
matches I have ever seen in my life: Nacional against Atlético de Madrid, at the Centenario Stadium, on 4
August 2013.

The stadium was packed and I remember that behind me a guy was insulting Cristian Rodríguez every time
he touched the ball, and that when I told him that you shouldn't talk like that about a Celeste player, my
cousin stopped me: "Shut up or they'll break your face." My discomfort was aggravated when at half-time,
instead of the usual commercials, a representative of my team, microphone in hand, began his exalted
diatribe, hammering home that we were the oldest, the oldest, the only, the club of the country, of the
people and of the nation. I must confess to my friends here that something in the way they treated me - the
fan that I was at that moment - as if I were a sheep, reminded me of the dictatorship. And it didn't take me
long to associate the guy in the back with the brainwasher in the front. They were two sides of the same
coin: fanaticism.

I remember perfectly well that in my time the subject of the deanery did not exist. The books and
magazines on the history of national football, that mythical literature that crossed the names of Franklin
Morales, Dionisio Vera, Carlos Manini Ríos, César Gallardo, Eduardo Gutiérrez, Carlos Martínez Moreno
and so many others, attest to this. And I understand that researcher Luciano Álvarez is completely right
when he says that it is a ridiculous topic. What importance can there be in the chance and involuntary fact
of having been born a little earlier or a little later? And in the football of our lands, created by the English,
organized by them and spread by them through their clubs and industries, what more pride should “my
club”, Nacional, feel than that of having emerged just after, at the time of the creolization?

On the other hand, as another nationalophile and specialist of the early days of our football, Juan Carlos
Luzuriaga, reminds me, the deans of our football are neither Nacional nor Peñarol, but Montevideo Cricket,

https://ladiaria.com.uy/lento/articulo/2017/12/decanato-un-tema-para-olvidar/ 2/9
1/6/2021 Deanship: a topic to forget | la diaria | Uruguay

whose footballers played the first match in Uruguay in 1878 against English sailors.

The fact is that one day I thought it appropriate to delve deeper into the subject and I read and listened to
everything I could: the articles and books, the reports by Dr. Enrique Tarigo, the responses by Luciano
Álvarez, the arguments by Navascués and Lincoln Maiztegui, and the counterarguments that both today
and yesterday the Peñarol fans used to express that their team had been born in 1891 as CURCC. I did it
little by little, reluctantly and with suffering, because the more I delved into it, the more I tried to
understand the nitpicks being handled, the more I was overcome by the feeling that, like Don Quixote, my
brain was drying up. What, I thought, are these legal arguments, typical of the bias of the lawyer, that are
not supported by any FIFA text, that suddenly question secular uses, and that, above all, do not lead to the
common truth but to two irreducible, artificially fabricated positions, whose criterion of truth is dictated by
the fact of belonging to one club or another, doing in football?

Time passed again, until that cloying site called Pinterest sent me “a photo that might interest me”: the
Nacional shirt with the word “dean” written on the lapel. This is what made me decide to put my stone in
the shoe of some people's reflection and to declare now that our club historians commit, in my opinion,
three serious errors.

The first error is a methodological one. It consists of applying to football matters the criteria of common
law used by lawyers in courts, where the general law of society and a country prevails. As an aggravating
factor, they claim that these criteria, which occur to them today and are strictly national, are valid for
problems that arose a century ago and for an object called "football", which is inseparably global.

They forgot what Uruguayan leaders of the past knew very well: that there are specific laws in football
matters, which are based either on the customs and practices of the world of football or on international
decisions adopted by FIFA, the governing body created in 1904.
They forgot that in order to judge a process and to analyse the evolution of clubs (a key theme in the
history of football between 1860 and 1920) one must first look at what football itself decided in this regard,
how world football resolved the cases that arose in different countries.

I heard one of the polemicists say that it is not the continuity of history that is being questioned, but rather
the legal continuity. But what jurisdiction are you talking about? Not in football, as far as I know, because
I, who am perfectly familiar with FIFA's decisions since the Paris Congress in 1904, have not seen
anywhere the slightest reference to the issue of the continuity of a club, before or after 1913. And this is
fortunate, because rules of that nature would be denying the freedom of those interested to do so, which is
part of the freedom of association.

Therefore, I see that yes, both the historical continuity of football and the legal continuity of football are
being questioned. And I conclude this point by proposing that, if the legal-football concepts that some in
Uruguay are inventing are so pertinent, they should be raised to the Uruguayan Football Association (AUF)
so that it can present them at the FIFA congress, requesting that they be approved with retroactive effect
applicable to all clubs in the world since the birth of Sheffield in 1858, and that not only Peñarol but all the
teams in different parts of the world that dared to perpetuate themselves should pay the consequences!

https://ladiaria.com.uy/lento/articulo/2017/12/decanato-un-tema-para-olvidar/ 3/9
1/6/2021 Deanship: a topic to forget | la diaria | Uruguay

The second mistake of our historians is irresponsibility. The lawyer, as everyone knows, defends his client
even if he knows he is guilty. Its objective is to generate “conviction” in the judges, that is, a belief,
defending, whatever the cost, an interest. However, a football official cannot proceed in this way, because
his objective cannot be to play with fire and set the stands on fire.

I know that fanaticism fills the stadiums, sells tickets and shirts, and feeds the coffers. But I also know that
it kills the greatness of football, generates violence, diminishes sportsmanship, accompanies and fuels the
technical decline that is seen on the field, and also, it gives the entire world an image that does not favor us.

The third error is more than anything a symptom, a manifestation of narrowing. No one will dispute that
Peñarol is a team of British origin and that in 1913 it was the most British of the country's football clubs.
We cannot proceed, then, as some historians in my group do, who when they want to exalt the national,
insist on calling Peñarol an English club, but when it comes to the deanery, they forget it.

Peñarol was not just a British club: it was a direct product of the British global economy, of British
industry, of its technology, of its coaches. It was one of the suction cups on one of the little arms of the
English octopus. And it was, in its beginnings, an “industrial club” like many others, of similar genesis, in
England. So, if the Peñarol of its early days, the CURCC —that is, the Central Uruguay Railway Cricket
Club—, was a totally British product, it makes no sense at all to analyze its history in the light of narrowly
Uruguayan interpretations.

We must open up and look at the issue as we did before, in the light of global history, that is, in the light of
the history of English football, its particularities and its uses, its criteria and its solutions, which in those
times were the uses and solutions of world football.

It is clear that I am not going to go over again and with the same uselessness as always the details of what
was decreed by such assembly, the terms that such leaders established in a circular, or the declarations and
certificates that others produced in the midst of such or such circumstance, not even

https://ladiaria.com.uy/lento/articulo/2017/12/decanato-un-tema-para-olvidar/ 4/9
1/6/2021 Deanship: a topic to forget | la diaria | Uruguay

the continuity of the championship and the players, whose evident reality seems to have lost all effect.
Above these legalistic artifices, fundamental concepts govern, the essence of the sports club, which cannot
be broken: the freedom to associate (association football) and, therefore, the freedom to give that
association the course it needs to perpetuate itself, which implies the freedom to define itself as a rupture or
as continuity throughout the different changes imposed by reality.

Illustration: Diego Bonilla

That is why I am interested in explaining what happened in a similar period, in similar industrial contexts,
in dozens of twin processes, when clubs of industrial origin such as CURCC, driven by their strong football
development, became independent sports clubs. What happened then? What did football do and what did it
say?

These changes from industrial club to sports club were of great banality: the rule in much of England
between 1870 and 1915, and the perpetuation of the rule in the elastic frontiers of the Empire. In order to
escape the insurmountable contradiction between industrial recruitment and the purchase of a star,
industrial clubs were forced to leave the corporate framework, which inevitably led them to change their
name, if not the colour of their shirt, their legal status, their management, their location and their pitch.
Here are some examples.

Manchester United. The club was founded in 1878 under the name Newton Heath Lancashire and
Yorkshire Railway Football Club. Their shirt is green and yellow, divided into two halves or striped
vertically, in the same way as the CURCC shirts. It is the railway team of the Lancashire and Yorkshire
line. The club is strengthening and wants to enter the league. His request was accepted in 1892. It then
changed its statutes, obtained the support of the beer industry, and after a critical period, changed its
headquarters, players, name and colours. It was renamed Manchester United, a name that was not in the air

https://ladiaria.com.uy/lento/articulo/2017/12/decanato-un-tema-para-olvidar/ 5/9
1/6/2021 Deanship: a topic to forget | la diaria | Uruguay

during the railway period, and adopted the colours red and white, abandoning all reference to the past. No
one questions the primacy of this process of self-determination and self-definition, decided by those men.
Because they say it and accept it, and because football has always accepted it, Manchester United, the red
and white team, is in all footballing aspects (historical and legal) the same as the gold-green railway
corporate club founded in 1878.

Arsenal FC. The compelling and emblematic case of Arsenal is also very similar to that of Peñarol but,
again, “worse”. This famous team had four names: Dial Square FC, Royal Arsenal and Woolwich Arsenal
before the current name. The club was founded in 1886 as an organisation of workers at the Woolwich
arms factory, Royal Arsenal, located in east London. It was renamed Royal Arsenal shortly afterwards and
in 1891 its legal status changed, becoming a public limited company under the name Woolwich Arsenal.
The change allows him access to the league. After a crisis that relegated it to the second division, the club
left the Woolwich neighbourhood and moved to Highbury, in its new stadium called Arsenal Stadium. It
then abandoned its previous name and adopted the definitive name that we know today. No one questions
the historical continuity of the club despite the change of name, neighborhood and, several times, legal
status. The cannon on Arsenal's crest exemplifies the club's self-determined continuity, just as the stripes
on the black and gold team exemplify its historical link with the locomotives.

West Ham United. This team, of industrial origin, was founded in 1895 as a group of workers from
the local metallurgical industry, founded by the boss and the foreman of the company, under the name of
Thames Ironworks. During the first few years, all players were employees of the company. The club won
local tournaments immediately and adopted a professional legal status in 1898, entering the second division
of the south. The original shirt, dark blue, became light blue in 1897, and maroon with light blue trim, as it
is today, in 1899. The interesting thing about this story is that the club, sponsored in its early years by
industry, experienced growing internal conflicts linked to its operation and financing, of a nature similar to
those experienced by the CURCC from 1907 onwards. But then something “much worse” happened, as
Thames Ironworks FC was literally dissolved. The rebirth of the same club is recognised as the subsequent
foundation of West Ham United FC on 5 July 1900, legally independent of the company but linked to its
local metallurgical origins, as evidenced by the crest with the hammers.
No one questions the continuity of West Ham and the Ironworks, and the birth of the current club is
recognised in 1895.

West Bromwich Albion. This case cannot leave us indifferent. It is an old club commonly known
as Albion, which at its inception, created by the workers of the George Salter Spring Works in 1878, was
called West Bromwich Strollers and which adopted a new name in 1880. Albion was the district of West
Bromwich where the players worked. In 1881 the club joined the Birmingham Association and in 1883 it
joined the Football Association, allowing it to compete in the FA Cup. What is striking in this case is not
only the change in status that allowed it access to the professional leagues but the complete uncertainty as
to the identity of its colours: red and blue quarters in 1880-1881, yellow and white the following year,
chocolate and blue shortly after, red and blue halves in 1885, light blue and white stripes in 1885-1886,
navy blue stripes only after the First World War.

Manchester City FC. A different but fundamentally similar case is that of Manchester City. This
was originally a parish club founded under the name St Mark's in 1880 in the West Gorton neighbourhood
of Manchester. In 1887 the district changed and, consequently, its name, adopting the name Ardwick AFC.
In 1892, it participated in the founding of the second division league and in 1894 it was legally and

https://ladiaria.com.uy/lento/articulo/2017/12/decanato-un-tema-para-olvidar/ 6/9
1/6/2021 Deanship: a topic to forget | la diaria | Uruguay

financially reorganized as a limited company, establishing the name Manchester City. He then adopted the
light blue and white uniform that he is known for today. There are still doubts as to the club's initial
colours. The photographs show dark T-shirts. The chronicles and pamphlets of the time indicate that the
team initially wore a black shirt with a white cross and later a red and black jersey.

We could go on to list a long list of examples which, to a greater or lesser extent, from different contexts
(industrial, religious or academic), led to teams and clubs experiencing fundamental changes in structure,
legal status, name and colour, and which illustrate the fact that, in these successive rebirths, the new
founders and the authorities of the competent leagues immediately reaffirmed the link with the previous
state, benefiting from the unchanged positioning in their divisions and from the recognition of the other
teams as to their first origin: Preston North End, Everton, Bolton Wanderers, Fulham, Sunderland,
Wolverhampton, Wanderers, Plymouth, Stoke City, etc. But it is not the purpose of this article to annoy the
reader so much. Let us simply say, to complete and culminate this demonstration, that without going any
further, our Argentine brothers also have, logically, their industrial and British cases such as that of
Peñarol, which do not generate controversy.

Western Railway. He was born on July 28, 1904 in the Caballito neighborhood, and no one denies it. It
was founded by 96 employees of the Buenos Aires Western Railway Company, mostly English, following
a process identical to that which had occurred with the CURCC. The team had the full support of the
company's management and was led by company manager David Simpson. The club was then called Club
Atlético del Ferrocarril Oeste de Buenos Aires. Like Peñarol in 1913, it became independent from the
company in 1930, then changing its legal status and name, becoming Club Ferrocarril Oeste. It is
interesting to highlight the changes in the colours of the shirt. White with red diagonal until 1907, maroon
with light blue sleeves until 1912, and the current green from that date onwards. Why these changes? Not
because of identity problems, but because of practical problems. The team's successive promotions brought
it into conflict with other previously established clubs that had similar attire.

Rosario Central. This club, which is a photocopy of the Uruguayan Peñarol with the change from
black to blue, followed a process very similar to that of the CURCC, except that it was much more
extensive, with successive progressive legal changes, until the complete end of the relationship with "the
company" nationalized by Perón in 1948. The company we are talking about is the Ferrocarril Central
Argentino, which was actually called Central Argentine Railway and was as British as the one that
sheltered the black and golds from the Peñarol neighborhood. It was in 1889 that the Central Argentine
Railway was founded.

Club (CARC). The club's peculiarity was its strictly "industrial" character: only company employees could
play. The British management provided the pitch and even a disused carriage that served as headquarters
and also as a box. The names of the first team players give an idea of their initial structure: M Barton,
Postell and Camp, J Muskett, J Barton and King, Mac Lean, T Muskett, Green, McIntock and Hooper. In
1903, a profound change occurred as a result of the merger between the Buenos Aires and Central
Argentino railway lines. Amidst intense debate, it was agreed to allow people from outside the company to
join. The club also changed its name to Club Atlético Rosario Central. The ties with the company were
relaxed in successive arrangements until the final separation due to the disappearance of the original parent
company. This process, which has been little studied, would merit further study by our specialists, who will
be able to access the archives of this glorious club more easily than I can.

https://ladiaria.com.uy/lento/articulo/2017/12/decanato-un-tema-para-olvidar/ 7/9
1/6/2021 Deanship: a topic to forget | la diaria | Uruguay

Other entities in the neighbouring country would allow, if some still consider it necessary, to finish off the
case we are dealing with, and not only among the first division teams but also in the lower divisions.

A list, then, by way of conclusions:

■ In Uruguayan football, neither Peñarol nor Nacional are the deans. The issue was artificially
fabricated as a narrowing of history by certain thinkers who, in good or bad faith, believed they
were thereby defending the interests of our football, but they led their intellectual course
towards an impasse.

■ The continuity of CURCC and Peñarol should not be questioned. And that is simply because it
is a banal and free fact of world football at that time, characteristic of the development of
English industrial clubs, which abounded in England and in the areas of economic penetration
of their capitals.

■ Questioning that continuity would mean questioning the continuity of teams like Rosario
Central, Manchester United and Arsenal FC. And in terms of rules, it would mean introducing
legal criteria that FIFA never established, because it was never asked or interested in
questioning the good faith of the clubs, their freedom to associate and to self-determine their
own identity.

■ I note that the continuity of CURCC and Peñarol is not a recent invention of the black and gold
leaders and that, therefore, it does not emanate from a diabolical calculation. I also note that my
club, Nacional, would be honored by erasing this issue from its action, recognizing the peculiar
genesis of a sister club (my brother's), a little older. I note, finally, that, from its Creole point of
view and knowing that, by the implacable law of geography, foreign clubs are the oldest in the
entire world, Nacional should happily accept the fact of not being one.

■ I also know that “they are going to fall on me.” So long live football!

Gigantes is a monthly printed publication aimed at children and adolescents.

Find out more and subscribe.

Learn more about Giants

https://ladiaria.com.uy/lento/articulo/2017/12/decanato-un-tema-para-olvidar/ 8/9