Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

l'angelo mysterioso

A sport born of rebellion?

163 posts in this topic

Regardless of their middle class backgrounds and educations which were obviously quiet different to the majority of players at the clubs they ran, they carried out an act of rebellion.

They didn't, the whole thing was a monumental cock-up. The clubs resigned from the Lancashire and Yorkshire unions, not because of broken time but the resigned over their wishes to have competitions and leagues. The yoks and Lancs Unions were dead against such forms of fixtures and wanted nothing to do with it.

 

The clubs thought they could resign from the county unions and remain in the RFU and then take charge of their own affairs, they hadn't realised that to be in the RFU you had to belong to a county union.

 

The real motive behind the split was fixture arrangements and not money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They didn't, the whole thing was a monumental cock-up. The clubs resigned from the Lancashire and Yorkshire unions, not because of broken time but the resigned over their wishes to have competitions and leagues. The yoks and Lancs Unions were dead against such forms of fixtures and wanted nothing to do with it.

 

The clubs thought they could resign from the county unions and remain in the RFU and then take charge of their own affairs, they hadn't realised that to be in the RFU you had to belong to a county union.

 

The real motive behind the split was fixture arrangements and not money.

 

I think you're right in that the consquences of the clubs' actions hadn't been thought through, but I imagine you're not suggesting that fixture arrangements was the sole reason for the split? There were many factors, including most importantly money. MOney for the clubs not the players. Resigning was an act of rebellion, the results of which went much further much more quickly than could've been foreseen by anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought it wasn't compensation for the time they were plaing on a Saturday but more for work they missed from picking up injuries while playing, ie the time they were broken for.  It was this making sure people weren't without cash because of a rugby injury that was the issue as the RFU deemed it to be professionalism for any money to end up in the pockets of the players.

 I dont think so

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Athletic News

 

I think you're right in that the consquences of the clubs' actions hadn't been thought through, but I imagine you're not suggesting that fixture arrangements was the sole reason for the split? There were many factors, including most importantly money. MOney for the clubs not the players. Resigning was an act of rebellion, the results of which went much further much more quickly than could've been foreseen by anyone.

 

I would recommend getting your hands on a copy of "The Rugby League Myth" by Mike Latham and Tom Mather.

 

My own research dug up this quote from Athletic News at the time.

 

 “The great mistake of all was to resign membership of the Yorkshire Union and attempt to shelter themselves under the wing of the parent body. Those who advised the step may now be astonished to find that membership of the English Union entails acknowledgement of the county union’s authority”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This firm is still (or was up until a few years ago) producing medals that are presented in the game.

they became Grattans as well

they also made the first challenge cup.

Joe Fattorini was a wealthy man.

 

th people who founded Hull FC were former public schoolboys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Athletic News

 

 

I would recommend getting your hands on a copy of "The Rugby League Myth" by Mike Latham and Tom Mather.

 

My own research dug up this quote from Athletic News at the time.

 

 “The great mistake of all was to resign membership of the Yorkshire Union and attempt to shelter themselves under the wing of the parent body. Those who advised the step may now be astonished to find that membership of the English Union entails acknowledgement of the county union’s authority”

 

I've read it, and I agreed with your point. They were still rebelling at the time, although they failed to understand the consequences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not sure they were trying to overturn the old order, more that they were leaving one "club" and starting another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read it, and I agreed with your point. They were still rebelling at the time, although they failed to understand the consequences.

But they weren't rebelling, they were trying to control their destiny and remain with the RFU. They thought that their actions would give them control of their fixtures within the auspices of the RFU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But they weren't rebelling, they were trying to control their destiny and remain with the RFU. They thought that their actions would give them control of their fixtures within the auspices of the RFU.

 

Well, they were ceratinly rebelling against the authority of their county unions.

 

If you mean they didn't want to break away, then of course that's true.

 

Controlling their fixtures=having more power=having more money. Yeah?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, but they weren't landed gentry either.

 

No, the gentry had their own sports, as opposed to the football codes which were regarded as "games" by many of the landed classes. Huntin', shootin' and fishin'-now they are/were proper sports  ;) but that's another thread....................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the gentry had their own sports, as opposed to the football codes which were regarded as "games" by many of the landed classes. Huntin', shootin' and fishin'-now they are/were proper sports  ;) but that's another thread....................

Yes, but their southern equivalent would have included a sprinkling of titles and estates. They were far from being socialists or manual workers but they weren't exactly establishment figures either. No knighthoods for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, they were ceratinly rebelling against the authority of their county unions.

 

If you mean they didn't want to break away, then of course that's true.

 

Controlling their fixtures=having more power=having more money. Yeah?

 

At the end of the day they didn't want to leave the RFU or overthrow it, now that would be a rebellion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clubs actually spent less on broken time payments in the 1895-96 season than they did in previous seasons under 'amatuer' rules. Leeds being one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end of the day they didn't want to leave the RFU or overthrow it, now that would be a rebellion.

 

But they wanted out of their local union. They wanted more big games against local rivals. They wanted Cup comps. They wanted the receipts from big crowds. They wanted interferring busybodys from the RFU to keep their noses out.

 

So they did something about it. Misguided maybe, unintentional for sure, altruistic hardly. But they rebelled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but their southern equivalent would have included a sprinkling of titles and estates. They were far from being socialists or manual workers but they weren't exactly establishment figures either. No knighthoods for them.

But they were men of wealth and influence Henry Hirst Waller was privately educated and would have had the contacts and influene that that entails, Jack Smith was a magistrate and county alderman and was awarded an honorary degree from Liverpool University, not something thrown at celebs at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This firm is still (or was up until a few years ago) producing medals that are presented in the game.

http://www.fattorini.co.uk/FA_Cup.aspx

and the F.A. Cup

 

Antonio Fattorini Played Northern Union Rugby for Manningham aswell , they later provided medals & Trophies for the Burgeoning Football Association game when the club switched to Football as Bradford City.

 

Re rebellion ,In France Yes , in England No  - only in the eyes of Twickenham , more neccessity , and they wanted to pay there star players alot more than broken time payments , that was a last ditch attempt by the northern clubs to compromise before even that was stamped on .Tony Collins recent book was a really good read for the reasoning facts on the split.

 

 http://www.scratchingshedpublishing.com/products-page/rugby-league/1895-all-that-inside-rugby-leagues-hidden-history/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clubs actually spent less on broken time payments in the 1895-96 season than they did in previous seasons under 'amatuer' rules. Leeds being one.

A club's biggest expense at the time was travel costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But they were men of wealth and influence Henry Hirst Waller was privately educated and would have had the contacts and influene that that entails, Jack Smith was a magistrate and county alderman and was awarded an honorary degree from Liverpool University, not something thrown at celebs at the time.

They were men of influence and wealth among their own kind. None of it meant much to the gentry. A mere magistrate with an honours degree was hardly fit company especially if their money had been made in trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were men of influence and wealth among their own kind. None of it meant much to the gentry. A mere magistrate with an honours degree was hardly fit company especially if their money had been made in trade.

I don't really get the point you are arguing about.

 

Hull F.C was formed by former pupils of Rugby, St.Peters and Cheltenham public schools

York was founded by former pupils of St.Peters private boarding school

The Earl of Derby was a Patron of St.Helens and Sir Joseph Beecham was a vice president.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It don't really get the point you are arguing about.

I was mostly disagreeing with Angie when your list of directors caught my eye.

 

The point I'm making is that there were class differences between those running the game in the north and those in the south. The northerners were by-and-large self-made-men (or their father / grandfather was) making their money in industry. Naturally they were significant men in their communities. 

 

But the southerners were often gentry who were the real establishment (Angelo uses the term to describe the northerners). None of them would have been seen dead inside a factory.

 

There was a class angle to the "rebellion". It just wasn't a particularly socialist one. The northerners thought that they could make the southerners respect them and accept their ways; the southerners were not interested in the nouveaux riches or the hoi polloi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was mostly disagreeing with Angie when your list of directors caught my eye.

 

The point I'm making is that there were class differences between those running the game in the north and those in the south. The northerners were by-and-large self-made-men (or their father / grandfather was) making their money in industry. Naturally they were significant men in their communities. 

 

But the southerners were often gentry who were the real establishment (Angelo uses the term to describe the northerners). None of them would have been seen dead inside a factory.

 

There was a class angle to the "rebellion". It just wasn't a particularly socialist one. The northerners thought that they could make the southerners respect them and accept their ways; the southerners were not interested in the nouveaux riches or the hoi polloi.

 

From my reading of Collins, etc. I think it's hard to make much of the class angle when it comes to analysing the motivations behind 1895. NU club management may not be exactly the same class/breed as their southern counterparts, but had far more in common with them than their own players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was mostly disagreeing with Angie when your list of directors caught my eye.

 

The point I'm making is that there were class differences between those running the game in the north and those in the south. The northerners were by-and-large self-made-men (or their father / grandfather was) making their money in industry. Naturally they were significant men in their communities. 

 

But the southerners were often gentry who were the real establishment (Angelo uses the term to describe the northerners). None of them would have been seen dead inside a factory.

 

There was a class angle to the "rebellion". It just wasn't a particularly socialist one. The northerners thought that they could make the southerners respect them and accept their ways; the southerners were not interested in the nouveaux riches or the hoi polloi.

I agree with you to a point, but see the edit to the post you quoted.

 

A lot of the clubs were formed by the same if not similar people to those forming clubs in the South, the difference was that the Northern Clubs tended to be 'open' whereas the Southern clubs tended to be 'closed'.

 

The open clubs would have anyone as a member, even the working class, whereas the closed clubs tended towards a restricted membership where to be a member you either had to be at or be a former pupul of a certain school.

 

It was the openess of the Northern clubs that caused a lot of friction, closed clubs often refused to play games against open clubs in the early years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty of closed clubs up north too, Pontefract RUFC as an example (as Old Pomfretians) was only for old boys of The King's Grammar School until the late 1960s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my reading of Collins, etc. I think it's hard to make much of the class angle when it comes to analysing the motivations behind 1895. NU club management may not be exactly the same class/breed as their southern counterparts, but had far more in common with them than their own players.

They did but I'm not sure that their southern counterparts saw it that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty of closed clubs up north too, Pontefract RUFC as an example (as Old Pomfretians) was only for old boys of The King's Grammar School until the late 1960s

That is why I used the word 'tended'.

 

Liverpool and Manchester clubs refused to play Hull because Hull was open.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - June 2017

League Express - Mon 17th July 2017