Neil_Ormston

Hi everyone The RL Record Keepers' Club has now released their data relating to the summer era. Over 16,000 matches featuring 9,000 players are now available on their website. A direct link to the stats section is here: https://stats.rugbyleaguerecords.com/ The site also features the results of all full internationals, with full line-ups & scorers for England, Wales, Scotland, Ireland, Great Britain, France and Other Nationalities, with Australia & New Zealand to follow shortly, and all other teams before the World Cup later this year. Enjoy Neil & the RKC

The summer era stats are now freely available on the RKC website. Direct link here: https://stats.rugbyleaguerecords.com/

Toulouse are doing a 16 page programme (journal du match) given out for free at or around the ground. Leeds also do a digital programme for free-I don’t think they advertise the link, but it gets sent to season ticket holders, and anyone with the link can access the web page that hosts it (it’s the same platform that Wire are using).

At 13:00 on 2 April 2022 the Rugby League Record Keepers’ Club (RKC) will release a comprehensive record of the British game covering the entire summer era. In addition, full match and player details for the national teams of England, Wales, Scotland, Ireland, Great Britain and France will also be freely available to the public on their website www.rugbyleaguerecords.com. More details of the specific information included in the release will be made available prior to the launch, with further updates provided at www.rugbyleaguerecords.com, on the club’s Facebook page (search Rugby League Record Keepers’ Club) and Twitter account (@RL_RKC), or for any other queries contact neil.ormston@gmail.com.

At 13:00 on 2 April 2022 the Rugby League Record Keepers’ Club (RKC) will release a comprehensive record of the British game covering the entire summer era. In addition, full match and player details for the national teams of England, Wales, Scotland, Ireland, Great Britain and France will also be freely available to the public on their website www.rugbyleaguerecords.com. More details of the specific information included in the release will be made available prior to the launch, with further updates provided at www.rugbyleaguerecords.com, on the club’s Facebook page (search Rugby League Record Keepers’ Club) and Twitter account (@RL_RKC), or for any other queries contact neil.ormston@gmail.com.

Wakey are doing a monthly printed mag ‘The Trin’ again, available for £2.

I'm delighted with Wire's offering, and IMHO this is the perfect operating model, striking a compromise between cost management, availability, and crucially making a hard copy available to collectors. I've no idea if my constant badgering of them on this over the past 12 months worked or not, and TBH I don't care, as the end decision is one I can completely agree with! I'm not commercially naive or idealistic enough to think that it's 'right' in the modern day to print off hundreds of these, and be left with the wastage of what's unsold (or worse for the collector perhaps - missing out on one if they don't do enough! As happened to me at Leeds, where the guy in front of me got the last one at half-time, though I've been able to call in a favour to track one down since!). So I think this is the perfect solution: content available to read on the day / at the game, and for 'the kids' on your phone; subscription for the season available for home collectors; away collectors can still pick up a copy too. Long may it continue! Please support with clicks and more importantly purchases It means I'll be stopping The Unofficial Programme, which thankfully only lasted one season! But I am contributing to the official one this year (p23 of the latest edition), though anyone that knows me won't be surprised to hear I struggled with my 300 word count limit, so I'm hoping a sponsor drops out soon so I can negotiate a double page spread

This season the RL Record Keepers' Club will be making our first batch of data freely available to the public. We've been working hard behind the scenes for nearly two years now, initially on the summer era, and now have full details of nearly 15,000 matches ready to share. The final piece of the jigsaw is being worked on: keeping the information live and up-to-date each week, so that fans will have the full information on the British careers of all current players at their fingertips. All work is undertaken voluntarily, and we want a volunteer to 'own' each club - ideally one they follow closely, but if we can't find one, we'll get people to 'adopt a club'. This is where we need your help! We still have a number of clubs with no dedicated expert, so if you follow one of these teams, we'd love to hear from you: Barrow, Batley, Bradford, London Broncos, Newcastle, Workington, York, Cornwall, London Skolars, Midlands and Rochdale. Equally, if you would like to offer to help pick one of these up, please ping a reply here, drop me a DM or mail me at neil.ormston@gmail.com. Inputting data will only take 5-10 minutes each game, and is very intuitive - full training / support is available, and you'll be able to join our community of RL stats loving folk. So if that's your thing, please reach out. We're be running the data 'behind closed doors for the first few months to make sure that everything runs smoothly, but keep an eye on our site at www.rugbyleaguerecords.com for when we go live. This also has more information on the RKC, and you can sign up on the site too. Thanks for reading. Neil

I agree completely that when it comes to these matters, they are indeed subjective. I just found it incredibly hard to read your earlier response without it feeling like an exercise in reverse engineering. There are valid points in what you say, such that if certain circumstances were different, continuity would be suggested - but they're not. Your 'facts and figures' line made me chuckle. The irony as I see it, is that I'm putting forward a case based on the evidence available, incomplete as it is, whereas by your own admission you were "trying to keep [the] who, when, where out of it as much as possible" - surely not something any historian worth his salt would do? This is compounded by the decision to ignore the specific points / questions raised and walk away from the discussion (and worth noting that these points tend to focus on the behaviours of these involved, rather than 'facts and figures'!) Again, just my opinion of course, but it look like considering the information available (some of it relatively new) threatens the fixed position you've taken. I'm not saying you're obliged to change your view of course (!), but I do think it's a shame, whether you respect me or not, that for the benefit of others you won't address some of the key points that seem to undermine your argument. It could even persuade others in the '1879 camp' to reconsider their view; certainly I'd be prepared to do so if faced with a compelling argument or new information. The floor is yours if you want it...

A shame Padge, but as you wish. I rather expected such a reply. Rather than simply swallowing the club's 'official' line on this, the evidence is there for people to make their own judgement, and I hope that people do. For anyone interested in further reading, I'd advise a good look around the Early Wigan Rugby site I mentioned above (https://www.earlywiganrugby.co.uk/) which makes it all very accessible. I'd be surprised if anyone having reviewed this / done their own research concluded other than 1879 being Wigan's formation date, but I'd be interested in others' views, especially if there was new information available. It's important these things are discussed and debated.

Thanks Padge. I read your perspective with interest, and I must say, some puzzlement. I think it's a rather novel and possibly convenient approach to judge whether one entity constitutes the continuation of another by essentially trying to ignore the facts of the situation, and gloss over the available evidence. Other than allowing for broad generalisations, and therefore a conclusion that fits with a pre-determined narrative, I'm not sure of the merits of such an approach. That said, I'll comment on a few points in particular that I think undermine your conclusion... What makes you say that? Is there any suggestion of anything that might constitute a 'club' remained from the original entity? Whilst I agree to a point with your comment that a club "isn’t a tangible thing that has clearly defined parameters", there are obviously tangible aspects of any club, and I'm struggling to see what of these remained from the first WFC. Certainly there is no suggestion that any assets the club may have had were passed to Wasps, neither does there seem much, if any, continuity of members (the playing members constituting the majority at the time it would seem) or committeemen. It would be rather odd if an entity which saw itself as the continuation of an earlier club didn't even adopt the most obvious tangible aspects, such as name and colours, from the outset. The gap of nearly two years between games has to be taken into account. At the demise of the initial club there would still have been ample time to arrange things for the following season, yet nothing was put in place for 1878/79. It seems it took the enthusiasm of a new group of players / organisers to make the necessary arrangements to start a new club; there certainly didn't seem that appetite from those involved in the original outfit, who were conspicuous by their absence when Wasps were formed, which is understandable given the struggles of the earlier team - this isn't a slight, as the here today-gone tomorrow nature of clubs at this time is something anyone looking at this period will recognise. I think this is a simple mis-reading of history. In the vast majority of instances the first clubs formed in a particular town / city took the name of their locale. Swinton Hornets & Liverpool Wanderers adopted their monikers simply because Swinton FC & Liverpool FC already existed; Hornets were formed from a merger of three clubs, including the original Rochdale FC who were again the first football club in the town. This makes the adoption of Wasps all the more interesting, as Wigan FC was an available name; indeed, it only took 12 months before they dropped the Wasps. The parallels to Warrington here are strong, where Warrington Zingari , faced with almost identical circumstances to Wasps, saw fit to adopt an alternative name to draw a distinction from the original Warrington FC, only to drop Zingari after a season and secure the vacant town team name. All this suggests that the guys involved with Wasps didn't see themselves as a continuation of the earlier club. This isn't the approach the Record Keepers' Club has taken in judging continuity in the post-1895 era; rather we have considered the varied tangible and intangible factors of what constitutes a club, including, but not limited to name, location (ground/town), members / players / fans, committee / management / ownership, colours / branding, league membership, etc. Each case is unique and must be judged on its merits. It seems that the main premise of your argument is that in the absence of a club, any club being formed in the Wigan area (as you define) would be a continuation of the earlier incarnation. This seems a rather odd interpretation of continuity: one might say "The King is dead; long live the King". By any objective judgement of the evidence available it would seem that Wigan Wasps, founded 1879, were a new club from which the current Warriors came. Maybe most importantly, this seems to be a point on which all notable historians of Wigan RLFC agree.

Your maths is correct, and that statement it true. However, that Wigan club merged / was taken over by Upholland a few years later, then disbanded in 1877. The current Wigan club was formed as Wigan Wasps in 1879, changing their name to Wigan Football Club the following season. I understand that the club are aware of this, but are persisting with claiming this is their 150th year. It is not. To Waynebennetswinger's point above, I have been in touch with the club, but they have so far failed to respond. I'm sure most people aren't really bothered, but to me, it's a matter of important historical accuracy, and quite disrespectful that the most illustrious club in our sport has such disregard for their own heritage. Still, nice shirts

I like the new Wigan shirts, and think the ability to buy without the main sponsors logo is great (whatever the circumstances behind it). However, for the avoidance of doubt, and to ensure that everyone's aware that they are re-writing history by celebrating it early, 2022 is NOT Wigan's 150th year.

Cheers Padge, look forward to it. No need for anything OTT, I just thought from earlier comments you'd looked into this in order to arrive at your conclusion. In terms of factors indicating Wasps were a new club, of the top of my head I'd note: Two year break in play following cessation of operation by the original (1872) Wigan club* New name New colours New governance structure (no connection with the cricket club seen previously) Specific formation meeting(s) stemming from advertisements pertaining to a "new club" New committee Lack of continuity of players (I think only one played for the earlier club?) *I've ignored discussion on whether the 1876-77 team could be considered a continuation of the original club, post-merger with Upholland, as whilst it's interesting in itself, it's a moot point to the main question of 1872 or 1879 given the apparent lack of ambiguity noted above. Other than the use of Dicconson Arms as HQ & Folly Field for games, I'm not sure what points to any hint of continuity, but would appreciate your perspective.

Yes, I'm aware of the fact that a club consists of many things, a fact I had to address when drawing up criteria to consider continuity questions at a number of clubs as part of the Record Keepers' Club work I lead. Indeed, I discussed this criteria and its practical application to a number of cases with Tony as he was part of the sub-committee I formed to rule on these matters. I could have discussed Wigan when I was with him for the Forty20 Live recording last night, but am actually on a call with him and IRL at 8 tomorrow, so if I get chance I'll ask him then. All of that said, I still think there are factual inaccuracies in what you said earlier that "Towards the end of 1878/79 season they failed to finish their last few games due to the number of injuries. In September 1879 some of the players and officials decided to carry on with the new season". Certainly this is a contradiction to the excellent work Marc Selby's done on the website I shared. Of course, by definition these matters are subjective, principally because of the numerous factors constituting a club. That said, I actually think Wigan 1872 or 1879 is a pretty clear cut case, and on the 'spectrum of continuity' (something I've talked about at length elsewhere) isn't even in the ambiguous category. What are the factors that you are judging as evidence of continuity here? I'd be happy to list the factors indicating Wasps are a new entity if needed, but it would be great to hear what sits behind your earlier suggestion of continuity.