Chapman leaves Huddersfield and replaces Knighton at Arsenal

By Tony Attwood

This is part 19 of the series Herbert Chapman at the Arsenal produced to commemorate the 100th anniversary of Chapman joining Arsenal in the summer of 1925.   The articles published so far are…

• 1: Taking over from failure
• 2: Approaching a 100th anniversary at Arsenal of mega-importance.
• 3: The Arsenal that Knighton left behind
• 4: Knighton is removed
• 5:  A  new manager
• 6: What happened to Chapman at Leeds?
• 7: Success at Huddersfield, and concern at Arsenal
• 8. Why did Chapman leave successful Huddersfield
• 9: Arsenal wait for the right moment
• 10: Why Knighton had to go
• 11: Chapman – the man who moved from club to club
• 12: “What made him such an amazing manager
• 13: The Man of Revolutions in a period of no rights
• 14: Chapman reforms Leeds City and is banned from football for life
• 15: The making of Huddersfield Town
• 16: What went wrong at Leeds?
• 17: Chapman banned from football for life, but football goes on
• 18: Chapman wins the league at Huddersfield

As Herbert Chapman’s Huddersfield Town rose to the top of the First Division in the mid-1920s, so Arsenal sank down the same league, which raises a question which is very rarely considered in discussions of Arsenal’s history, of how Arsenal managed to persuade the manager who was currently having such success with Huiddersfield (winning the first three trophies the club had ever won) to move to London.

Indeed, Herbert Chapman became manager of Huddersfield Town on 31 March 1921, and we can follow the trajectory of the two clubs season by season thereafter.  In these seasons the 21st and 22nd club were relegated to the League Division II (the “Second Division”) to be replaced by the top two from that league.  There were no play-offs for the third placed club.

And just to recapitulate Arsenal’s situation, they were now firmly established as a north London club in the first division, having been elected to the expanded first division in 1919/20 – an interesting moment because it was just one season later that Huddersfield were promoted to the top division for the first time.

Thus in 1921/22 for the first time the two clubs at which Chapman won trophies played each other in the top division. By the end of that season Huddersfield led the way by two points and three places.  Both teams conceded more goals than they scored.

1921/22

In the following season (1922/23), Chapman’s second with Huddersfield, both teams with for the first time, n the top division, and both improved their positions, Huddersfield rising 11 places to an unprecedented third, and Arsenal also rising, in their case by six places.  The gap between them was now 11 points, rather than the two places of the previous season.

1922/23

In the next season, 1923/24, however, the clubs were clearly travelling in opposite directions.  Huddersfield won the League for the first time, with Herbert Chapman in charge and Arsenal avoided relegation to the second tier, by one point.  Chelsea, the other London team in the top tier, were one of the two clubs relegated with 32 points.

1924/5 was Chapman’s last season at Huddersfield Town and also of course, Knighton’s last season at Arsenal.  Arsenal kept their points total the same as the season before but dropped one place to 20th, although comfortably above Nottingham Forest and Preston North End each of whom went down to the second divison.

Quite clearly, Arsenal were in trouble – not only being just one place above the relegation positions, but also not improving in any significant way over the disastrous season previously.  Indeed after two seasons of only just avoiding the drop, there was clearly a need for something to be done.  Meanwhile, Huddersfield Town under Chapman were sweeping all before them, maintaining their points record but improving their goal scoring while conceding fewer.  And this for a team that had never had any success before Chapman came along.

Indeed, looking at these figures it is self-evident that Arsenal needed a different approach from that which their manager (Leslie Knighton) was offering, while Huddersfield quite simply needed more of the same.  They had risen from the second division just a couple of seasons before, won the FA Cup for the first time, and now were winning the league twice in a row (and indeed as it turned out, ultimately three times in a row).

If we can summarise the approach of the two managers of the clubs, the inevitable conclusion is that Chapman at Huddersfield was changing not just the club’s tactics but the club’s entire approach to football.  For when introducing new players he was bringing in players who could play to his evolving tactical approaches rather than the traditional left back or right winger.  

Knighton on the other hand, seems to have undertaken very little in terms of tactical change.  His approach was simply to try and buy (or promote from the reserves) a better player for individual positions.  Thus, with Arsenal not scoring enough goals, he looked for a new centre forward.  With the wingers being beaten to the ball by the opposition full backs, he went out and bought new wingers.  That was it.

In short, for Knighton the tactics were self-evident and always stayed the same.  Everyone played 2-3-5, and he saw no reason to meddle with that.  For Chapman, on the other hand, tactics were changeable, and changes could bring significant advantages.   Therefore he purchased players to fit into his evolving model of how the game might be played.

As we look back at this period, leading up to Sir Henry Norris’ decision to sack Knighton and bring in Chapman, all the evidence we have points to the view that Sir Henry wanted a manager who had acted as Chapman was doing at Huddersfield.  A manager, in short, who could evolve new tactical methods to overcome defences while keeping their own goals conceded tally down.  And beyond that a manager who paid attention to every detail in terms of the way the club operated, not just to win things, but in terms of attracting the crowds.  So yes, Chapman needed a club and a chairman who would spend money on the players he wanted.  And contrary to the way in which Knighton described events at the time in his autobiography players, Northampton’s first-ever transfer fees were paid out during Chapman’s time at that club, and as a result, he brought in the players who transformed the club and resulted finally in their winning the Southern League in 1909.

However, Chapman left no autobiography, but Knighton did.  And those who constantly seek to find fault with Arsenal would love what Knighton wrote in his book.   By this I mean the sort of people who found it worthwhile to contact the BBC (as they did when I was the guest on a Radio 5 programme earlier this year (2025) discussing the singing of “North London Forever” at Arsenal matches, complaining that Arsenal should not adopt that song as they are a south London club.)

For Knighton’s autobiography is a book of excuses, explaining how he could have done so much more if only he had had money to spend on new players.   But the reality of the Knighton seasons at Arsenal was quite different.   For Knighton did bring in a constant stream of new players, but faced two problems.  One was that he did not change tactics (while other clubs were starting to do so) and so always bought in a player to replace a man who was being sold or had been injured. 

The other was that virtually none of these changes had a positive impact, despite costing the club money.  That was what Sir Henry Norris got fed up with, and why not only was Knighton sacked, but also he was unable to find another 1st or even 2nd division club to take him on as manager in 1925.   He went instead to Bournemouth and Boscombe Athletic FC, and lasted three seasons, during which time the club came 8th, 7th and 14th.  Yet despite this decline in his final season at the club his autobiography speaks of a “steadily improving team”, at a club in which “happiness abounds”.

In fact the autobiography on page 107 paints a picture of great happiness and contentment at the club and a reluctance on the part of Knighton to leave, but (according to him) Birmingham City offered him a job so he left.

Birmingham had just finished 11th in division one.  The following season., the first under Knighton, they dropped to 15th.

In contrast, at each club Chapman managed, the club did not slip downward but was transformed.  And that transformation was not just in the results, but in the whole essence of the club, from the training regime to the on-field tactics, and it was an approach that brought sensational results.   Sir Henry Norris wanted Chapman, and there was nothing in either legal or football legislation that could stop him from suggesting to Chapman that he should take up the job – even when he was still in employment at Huddersfield.

Indeed it is not impossible to imagine that Chapman and Sir Henry actually discussed the matter, perhaps by letter, perhaps at a private meeting, during Chapman’s final season at Huddersfield, so that by the time the 1924/25 season had finished each knew where the other stood on all matters, including of course the bringing in of new players.  It is also quite possible that the advertisement for a new manager was merely the next stage in an agreed process which had started with Knighton being sacked (which was hardly a surprise given the failures of the club in the league over the last few seasons) and ended with Chapman being appointed.