Something I realised from the last episode.

So, just before his altercation with Rupert, George refuses to send a player to injure Jamie Tartt. At the time, I thought this was just a nice character detail- the man might be egotistical, sexist and reactionary, but he cares about football and has lines he won’t cross.

But something I didn’t notice- after Rupert knocks him down in front of his team, he stands up, shouts encouragement to his team, talking about them showing “hearts of lions.” Even Ted gives him a nod of respect at his refusal to let this shit get to him. He knows he’s getting fired after this match, he’s got no reason to be loyal to Rupert, but dammit, he’s got a responsibility to his boys and he’s going to encourage them the best he can.

And you know what? It works. Whereas previously in the game Jamie was able to run tingsround West Ham, in the final plays the commentators say he is “completely boxed in.” Sure, Richmonds teamwork and tactics ultimately prevail, but not because Jamie was able to run riot. And if it weren’t for their goal being ruled offside, they’d have won or at least drawn. George was right. Rupert was wrong. The West Ham team didn’t need to break Jamies legs to win. They just needed to show…well, hearts of Lions.

I know it’s a small detail to write an essay about, but I just really liked how it undermined the theme of the series.