Liverpool have had to contend with something unprecedented this season.

After the tragic loss of Diogo Jota last summer, the 25/26 season has proved to be a difficult one for the Reds.

Despite storming to the title in Arne Slot’s debut season, Liverpool’s form has been marred by inconsistency, stemming largely from the grief of losing a club legend.

No modern side has ever had to defend a title following the death of one of their active players.

However, 127 years ago, Liverpool faced a similar circumstance.

When George Allan passed away midway through the 1899-1900 season, Anfield was in mourning.

However, his legacy lives on through the relentless spirit of Liverpool Football Club.

The Rise of Liverpool Football Club

Liverpool wasted no time in getting to the First Division.

Just two years after being founded in 1892, the Reds found themselves playing top-flight football for the very first time.

However, the excitement didn’t last very long on Merseyside. In a division stacked with far more established sides, Liverpool were humbled in their maiden First Division season, finishing plum last.

With the club left licking its wounds, managers John McKenna and William Barclay turned to Scotland to secure the services of a striker who would fire them back into the First Division at the first time of asking.

George Allan – One of Liverpool’s first great strikers

Plucked from Leith Athletic for £100, George Allan immediately endeared himself to the Anfield crowd.

Described as a light-hearted character, scoring goals was a far more serious matter for Allan. “Feared by goalkeepers”, Allan’s 28 goals in just 26 games that season helped the Reds’ return to the promised land.

“Dod”, as he became known, then replicated his fine form in the highest division. The Scot topped Liverpool’s scoring chart as the Reds cemented their place in the top-flight with a 5th placed finish.

Despite being a popular figure, Allan was surprisingly sold to Celtic that summer. Missing his influence, Liverpool dropped to 9th in the 1897-98 season.

Manager Tom Watson eventually saw sense and re-signed him. Whilst the goals dried up, Allan’s return played a vital part in Liverpool’s most successful season to date. The Scot was described as “a pivot” in the side that agonisingly missed out on a first title to Aston Villa in 1898-1899.

Needing a victory at Villa Park on the final day of the season, the Reds eventually succumbed to a demoralising 5-0 loss. Still, not bad for a club that was only seven years old at that point.

‘Like a thunderclap’ – George Allan tragedy strikes Anfield

However, the Villa thrashing would turn out to be Allan’s last appearance for the Reds. Just as Liverpool were setting their sights on their first title, tragedy struck for Tom Watson’s men.

Allan fell ill during pre-season training and missed the beginning of the campaign. Without the Scot, Liverpool opened their season with eight straight defeats- a club record to this day.

Though Allan was expected to return, he died of tuberculosis on October 17th 1899, at the age of just 24.

The news was a difficult take for the Anfield faithful.

“Poor George Allan is dead”, wrote the Lancashire Evening Post.

“The news came like a thunderclap upon his numerous Liverpool friends, and it is difficult even yet to believe that the big, fine fellow is no more. Consumption [a contemporary term for tuberculosis] claimed him as her victim, the poor fellow breathing his last at Elie, in Fifeshire.

“We who knew him a friend feel his loss very deeply, and all true lovers of sport will mourn one of the finest fellows who ever toed the leather. He has answered his last earthly roll-call, and the football world has been shorn of one of its grandest ornaments.”

As if things weren’t bad enough for Liverpool, just two months after Allan’s death, former player Harry Bradshaw, sold to Spurs just a year prior, passed away on Christmas Day.

How did the media react to the tragedy?

In the age of social media, where everyone can plaster their opinions all over the internet, and papers have to compete for eyeballs even more, the tragedy of Diogo Jota’s death has often been reduced to a mere soundbite.

Therefore, it is interesting to trawl through the archives and see how those in the press reacted to Allan’s untimely passing at the time.

At first, tributes remained inseparable from the impact Allan’s absence had on his teammates.

“How much his absence has had to do with the remarkable failures of his side so far will never be known”, wrote the Sheffield Daily Telegraph.

“But for my own part I am inclined to think that, with him in the centre, there would have been a far different record against the club’s name in the table than there is today. . .as Liverpool have missed him already, I believe they have not fully realised the extent of their loss.”

Meanwhile, another article in the Lancashire Evening Post thought Allan’s death would be “looked upon by Liverpudlians as another of those misfortunes of which the Anfield road team seems to be just now the peculiar victims.”

Tone deaf press on display

However, if you thought the media have been tone deaf with Liverpool this season, wait until you see the other half of the Lancashire Evening Post’s article.

In the same breath that cried “Poor George Allan”, the paper mocked the Liverpool results that preceded his death. Their tribute was effectively a footnote to a four-paragraph crucifixion of the Reds’ performances, which quipped that the name “Liverpool” had become “synonymous with defeat”, and that fans were already thinking of the “wooden spoon”.

In fact, the comments were not far off some of the sh*te you might find on Twitter today.

“Liverpool possess one of the very best-paid organisations in the League and naturally expect value from their players, and value they should get.

“The men are capable of better things, and it behoves them to show once that our faith in their abilities is not utterly misplaced. Pull yourselves together, my lads, and show the football world that the 8-0 business is all a wrong freak of fortune. In fact, you have the ability, I know. Let the world know!”

How did Liverpool respond to Allan’s death?

These are the comments written before Allan’s death.

Just four days after Allan’s passing, Liverpool played Notts County at home. The match report in the Liverpool Mercury was far from flattering.

“It would be a difficult task indeed to find anything in the first half of Saturday’s game sufficiently gratifying to rouse enthusiasm from the most biased supporters of the Liverpool club.”

“During this period, the home team displayed wretched form, there being neither combination, skill, nor determination in their movements, and the exhibition was just about on a par with what might be expected from a team that could not boast of a single point to its credit.”

The maddest thing is, Liverpool came back from 1-0 down to win 3-1 with a terrific second-half display.

Yet, the press still weren’t impressed by a club who were fresh from Allan’s funeral the day before, failing to even mention the Scotsman’s passing once in their review. Poor George indeed.

“Why they could not show in the first half some of the form displayed in the later portion of the contest is a mystery”, they wrote.

Sound familiar? Just like most of us this season, they were baffled at the Jekyll and Hyde performance from Liverpool.

Liverpool’s relentless spirit

Despite their poor start to the season, Liverpool’s form improved in the second half of the campaign.

The Reds eventually dragged themselves into a respectable 10th position, after finishing the season with four straight victories.

But even more remarkable is the fact that Liverpool went on to secure the first of its twenty league titles the next season.

Won in the shadow of George Allan’s death, the 1901 title was the first sign that, at Anfield, the end of the storm is always followed by a golden sky.

(Featured Image via LiverpoolFC.com)