Do Newcastle United deserve this reputation?

“There is no trusting appearances,” Richard Brinsley Sheridan wrote in The School For Scandal (1777).

The Anglo-Irish playwright’s words rang a bell after Saturday’s FA Cup match against Bournemouth, as did the better-known proverb “appearances are deceptive”.

Here’s another proverb: “First impressions are the most lasting.”

Appearances, impressions, reputations; they are all related to each other. Sometimes they are reliable, often they are not.
Shakespeare, of course, had something to say on the subject. “Reputation is an idle and most false imposition, oft got without merit and lost without deserving,” the Bard wrote in Othello.

Goodness knows whether Sheridan or Shakespeare was a football fan but their sentiments can certainly be applied to the beautiful game.

Soon after Eddie Howe and his principal sidekick, Jason Tindall, took the reins at St James’ Park, their team acquired a reputation. Newcastle United were accused of being over-physical, masters of the dark arts and anti-football as they battled against relegation.

They rattled a few cages, not least that of the serial runner-up Mikel Arteta. Other managers were happy to echo the Spaniard’s words in a chorus of disapproval that the media recycled ad nauseum.

I was sickened by this widespread promotion of Arteta’s hypocritical and biased opinions. Did even he believe what he said? Probably not. From where I was watching, his behaviour smacked of a transparently pathetic attempt to influence referees and the wider public, often to distract from his and his team’s failings.

While Arsenal racked up a record number of red cards, much as they had done under Arsene Wenger, they were trying every trick in the book to gain an advantage over the Mags. Perhaps I should have taken it all as a compliment; we were suddenly being viewed as realistic rivals to the established order, suddenly being taken seriously after 15 years or so as a soft touch.

Our supreme leader responded superbly, as he usually does, to the provocation: “We’re not here to be popular and get other teams to like us. We’re here to compete,” Howe told the press three years ago.

Amen to that. By then, of course, we had a reputation. And a reputation, that “idle and most false imposition”, in Shakespeare’s words, tends to stick.

The question is whether we deserve ours. Predictably, I would say we do not, while adding that other teams are far more willing to bend the rules to breaking point and beyond.

One way to judge a club’s approach is to check the number of free kicks they concede. No opinions, no lazy labels, just facts.

Last Saturday’s opponents have proved difficult ever since Howe became our chief coach. They have an enviable reputation for playing in a high-energy, aggressive, front-foot style. They are known for regaining possession in their opponents’ half, for breaking at speed and for dragging the opposition into unfamiliar positions. The media have labelled it “organised chaos”.

Andoni Iraola, their well-regarded coach, claims he learnt a lot while playing under Marcelo Bielsa at Athletic Bilbao. A year ago Iraola said: “It is true that we like, and we perform better, in high-tempo games. We need to run a lot. We don’t need so much control, not in every single play, but I think we have the legs, we have the willingness, to go up and down.”
Anyone watching the FA Cup tie would nod in agreement.

What I noticed, if only through the medium of BBC Radio Newcastle, was the number of free-kicks Bournemouth conceded ie the number of times they fouled our players to halt momentum, break up the play and sometimes to prevent promising attacks.

They committed 21 fouls, Newcastle committed seven. They were given five yellow cards to our one. In my book, those facts are just as relevant as theories of organised chaos. Bournemouth know what they are doing, though the mass media apparently do not.

Was the St James’ Park marathon an outlier? Are they being unfairly accused?

Counsel for the prosecution would point to the total number of fouls they have committed this season, a season in which referees have been more lenient and in which VAR officials have been less reluctant to intervene.

In 23 matches (Premier League, League Cup and FA Cup) Bournemouth have committed 304 fouls, about 13.2 on average. Their opponents have fouled Bournemouth players 252 times, an average of almost exactly 11. The match on Saturday was exceptional because the foul count was so disproportionate: three offences by Bournemouth to every foul by Newcastle.

What of the Magpies over this season, in which they have already played 31 matches (Premier League, Champions League, League Cup and FA Cup)?

We have committed 307 fouls, about 9.8 a game on average. Our opponents have fouled us 343 times, just over 11 on average.

Who, pray, are the over-physical and cynical team here? Who are more sinned against than sinning?

Looking exclusively at the 21 rounds of Premier League games completed, Wolves top the name-and-shame stats with 296 offences, which is hardly a surprise when they are rock bottom of the table with seven points. Next are cuddly little Bournemouth with 270 and the much-admired Brighton with 258. Is it a coincidence that these two South Coast outfits often thwart the Magpies? Anyone expecting a feast of free-flowing football at the Amex next Monday is likely to be sorely disappointed when the Seagulls face the Cherries.

The next five clubs in the fouls table are Chelsea (241) Fulham (233) Spurs (229) West Ham (228) and Nottingham Forest (also 228). They are followed by Brentford (221) Man Utd (218) Everton (216) Leeds (213) Burnley (211) and Newcastle, those famous proponents of the dark arts, on 210.

Good golly, Miss Molly, we have committed a grand total only one higher than those paragons of virtue known as Woolwich Arsenal, before they reinvented themselves more than once.

It’s all pretty tight for the title of cleanest team, with Sunderland and Aston Villa tied in fifth (207), just below Crystal Palace (206) and the joint leaders Man City and Liverpool on 203.

How about yellow cards, I hear you ask. The six clubs with the most bookings are the same six as in the fouls table, though not in the same order. Brighton (55) Spurs (53) and Bournemouth (51) are followed by Chelsea (47) Fulham (45) and Wolves (44). Brentford are joint seventh with the Mackems on 41, which seems to me a truer reflection of their tactics in the Wear-Tyne derby last month.

The three clubs with the fewest bookings are Arsenal (29) Newcastle (28) and Man Utd (27).

Many members of the Toon Army believe we have lost some of our intensity, some of our “let’s win ugly” mentality. It’s a moot point and I would never accuse the team of failing to give 100%.

Dan Burn had this to say in early November, after a disappointing defeat at West Ham: “It comes down to mentality. We were well known a few years ago for s…housery and we have come away from that. We were ugly and bullied teams but as you progress as a team you bring in better quality players and play better football. But I think there’s always a place for that in the game, look at Arsenal!”

Call it organised chaos, call it whatever you like. It’s not easy to overcome. Perhaps it’s the missing ingredient we need to inject into our play, starting tomorrow with the first leg of the League Cup semi-final against Man City.

To hell with reputations. As that massive Wor Flags banner says: “GET INTO THEM”.