Harry Sunderland

[Tommygilf]

56 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

I asked before and I'm not sure it's been answered: why is the award named after Harry Sunderland?

Nobody on here defending it has actually said, despite me asking repeatedly, apparently it was decided to name it the year after he died in 1964-5 and it stuck around as far as I can tell.

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

I asked before and I'm not sure it's been answered: why is the award named after Harry Sunderland?

 

32 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Nobody on here defending it has actually said, despite me asking repeatedly, apparently it was decided to name it the year after he died in 1964-5 and it stuck around as far as I can tell.

In 55 years if we ask the same about Steve Prescott on the Man of Steel - will that hold up to scrutiny?

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

 

In 55 years if we ask the same about Steve Prescott on the Man of Steel - will that hold up to scrutiny?

Exactly. I think that's the key point here beyond any racism (true or not), it just seems a pretty odd choice for motm in a super league grand final.

[Dave T]

Just now, Tommygilf said:

Exactly. I think that's the key point here beyond any racism (true or not), it just seems a pretty odd choice for motm in a super league grand final.

It's where I go back to MY idea of refreshing periodically. Steve Prescott for example may be a great choice for a period of time, he has been an inspiration for many current players and fans and having his name on thee trophy for a decade would be a nice tribute, and his name would be down in the record books on this. 

But further down the line and as time moves on, having his name against the Player of the Year award for SL becomes more questionable, he was a decent top level player, but some absolute RL legends wont get this honour. 

[Tommygilf]

Just now, Dave T said:

It's where I go back to MY idea of refreshing periodically. Steve Prescott for example may be a great choice for a period of time, he has been an inspiration for many current players and fans and having his name on thee trophy for a decade would be a nice tribute, and his name would be down in the record books on this. 

But further down the line and as time moves on, having his name against the Player of the Year award for SL becomes more questionable, he was a decent top level player, but some absolute RL legends wont get this honour. 

Haha are you getting the copyright on the IP now?

I totally agree though the awards can lose meaning without context and logic.

[DavidM]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

It's where I go back to MY idea of refreshing periodically

Yes I wouldn’t disagree with that . Not connected to the issues discussed here , but just to honour more worthy people who’ve done great things since 

[DavidM]

PS I don’t more worthy as in more deserving , but as in others of distinction 

[DavidM]

16 hours ago, Oxford said:

Moove you need to read around and not be so touchy old son.

 

I think a look into a special permanent BAME exhibit at the George would be a good move as well, with a section on Fijians, Maoris etc etc.

I never thought Harry Sunderland was a Colston or Robert E Lee figure by the way but if true it's something that must be considered and discussed even on this forum.

Cec Thompson is a name of great distinction in this regard who deserves a mention . A truly amazing and inspirational story , and one as relevant today as then . A great figure in the game and a great man 

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

12 hours ago, John Drake said:

Please keep this on topic and Rugby League related.

Political soap boxes are not appropriate to this section of the forum.

Thanks for your cooperation.

Thanks John

I often have complete breaks from news/politics as it stresses me out

I come to the RL forum to escape! 

[Tommygilf]

3 minutes ago, DavidM said:

Cec Thompson is a name of great distinction in this regard who deserves a mention . A truly amazing and inspirational story , and one as relevant today as then . A great figure in the game and a great man 

Founded student rugby league in one of my favourite pubs too.

[Lowdesert]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

 

In 55 years if we ask the same about Steve Prescott on the Man of Steel - will that hold up to scrutiny?

Probably, if you knew the bloke and the efforts he made.

[wiganermike]

2 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Nobody on here defending it has actually said, despite me asking repeatedly, apparently it was decided to name it the year after he died in 1964-5 and it stuck around as far as I can tell.

Taken from an article on the RFL website, some information on Harry Sunderland's contribution to the sport for context as to why it was decided to honour him.

How Harry Sunderland earned his reputation in Rugby League

Born in Queensland, Australia, Harry Sunderland's (pictured in the suit on the left) first job was as a journalist at the fantastically named Toowoomba Chronicle

From 1913-1922 he worked as Queensland Rugby League secretary and his administration skills are credited with the growth of Rugby League in Queensland despite the First World War

In 1925, he returned to the QRL and managed the Kangaroo tours of England in 1929-30, 1933-34 and 1937-38

He returned to England with Wigan in 1938 to take up the role of Secretary/Manager at Central Park. His salary of £400 a year with added bonus (£3 for a win, £2 for a draw)

After leaving Wigan during the Second World War, he returned to journalism where he worked for the Daily Mail and the BBC as a Rugby League commentator.

From the same article

The Harry Sunderland medal is also awarded to the best Australian player in each home Ashes series.

 

He is honoured both here and in Australia for those achievements/duties. Why was the m.o.m in the Championship (later Premiership, now Grand) Final specifically chosen to bear his name as an honour? Perhaps as the Lance Todd Trophy had been awarded to honour an important figure since 1946 and that was also a m.o.m award at a major final.

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, wiganermike said:

Taken from an article on the RFL website, some information on Harry Sunderland's contribution to the sport for context as to why it was decided to honour him.

How Harry Sunderland earned his reputation in Rugby League

Born in Queensland, Australia, Harry Sunderland's (pictured in the suit on the left) first job was as a journalist at the fantastically named Toowoomba Chronicle

From 1913-1922 he worked as Queensland Rugby League secretary and his administration skills are credited with the growth of Rugby League in Queensland despite the First World War

In 1925, he returned to the QRL and managed the Kangaroo tours of England in 1929-30, 1933-34 and 1937-38

He returned to England with Wigan in 1938 to take up the role of Secretary/Manager at Central Park. His salary of £400 a year with added bonus (£3 for a win, £2 for a draw)

After leaving Wigan during the Second World War, he returned to journalism where he worked for the Daily Mail and the BBC as a Rugby League commentator.

From the same article

The Harry Sunderland medal is also awarded to the best Australian player in each home Ashes series.

 

He is honoured both here and in Australia for those achievements/duties. Why was the m.o.m in the Championship (later Premiership, now Grand) Final specifically chosen to bear his name as an honour? Perhaps as the Lance Todd Trophy had been awarded to honour an important figure since 1946 and that was also a m.o.m award at a major final.

Do you see those achievements as really warranting the MOTM award for the Super League grand final?

As far as I can tell he was a Queensland RL great who coached Wigan for a year or so and became a journalist. The award was named after him the season of his death in 1964-5 just for context.

By contrast I understand the medal being named after him for the Ashes series given his standing in those 3 tours he managed. Just like how England and NZ play for the Baskerville Shield for example.

[Damien]

3 minutes ago, wiganermike said:

Taken from an article on the RFL website, some information on Harry Sunderland's contribution to the sport for context as to why it was decided to honour him.

How Harry Sunderland earned his reputation in Rugby League

Born in Queensland, Australia, Harry Sunderland's (pictured in the suit on the left) first job was as a journalist at the fantastically named Toowoomba Chronicle

From 1913-1922 he worked as Queensland Rugby League secretary and his administration skills are credited with the growth of Rugby League in Queensland despite the First World War

In 1925, he returned to the QRL and managed the Kangaroo tours of England in 1929-30, 1933-34 and 1937-38

He returned to England with Wigan in 1938 to take up the role of Secretary/Manager at Central Park. His salary of £400 a year with added bonus (£3 for a win, £2 for a draw)

After leaving Wigan during the Second World War, he returned to journalism where he worked for the Daily Mail and the BBC as a Rugby League commentator.

From the same article

The Harry Sunderland medal is also awarded to the best Australian player in each home Ashes series.

 

He is honoured both here and in Australia for those achievements/duties. Why was the m.o.m in the Championship (later Premiership, now Grand) Final specifically chosen to bear his name as an honour? Perhaps as the Lance Todd Trophy had been awarded to honour an important figure since 1946 and that was also a m.o.m award at a major final.

The most notable aspects in that are services to Australian Rugby League. I see little why he should have the man of the match award in the Grand Final named after him above many of the greats of the British game.

[Damien]

To be honest that is so underwhelming I am unsure why some would be so vehemently opposed to a name change if there are better candidates who have done more in the British game, which I am sure there are. 

[Dave T]

16 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

Probably, if you knew the bloke and the efforts he made.

Maybe, I'm not convinced we choose things like this out of thousands and thousands of players over history at emotional times. But if these things were less permanent it would be easier to recognise people for more diverse reasons. 

[Tommygilf]

2 minutes ago, Damien said:

To be honest that is so underwhelming I am unsure why some would be so vehemently opposed to a name change if there are better candidates who have done more in the British game, which I am sure there are. 

I know. Ironic thing is, of the tours he managed, GB won every single one! 

[Dave T]

If we had a blank canvas and decided to put 3 legends names against these three awards, I wonder how many would sit down today and land on Harry Sunderland, Lance Todd and Steve Prescott? 

I'm sure all are worthy and we're good and popular decisions when they were made, but I dont see a problem with regularly reviewing to see if they are still the ones we want. The problem with having that on an ad hoc basis though would be it could be hurtful to friends and family of these men. 

[wiganermike]

Just now, Tommygilf said:

Do you see those achievements as really warranting the MOTM award for the Super League grand final?

As far as I can tell he was a Queensland RL great who coached Wigan for a year or so and became a journalist. The award was named after him the season of his death in 1964-5 just for context.

By contrast I understand the medal being named after him for the Ashes series given his standing in those 3 tours he managed. Just like how England and NZ play for the Baskerville Shield for example.

To be honest Tommy I don't see the connection between Harry Sunderland and the Championship deciding final and its m.o.m either. I was just providing some information as to why he was considered by the RFL to be worthy of honouring as it had been asked for so I looked it up to provide some context for him being honoured. Likewise I see more logic to his name being attached to the medal awarded to the Aussie player. As I posted I suspect that having decided to honour him and looking for a way to do so the RFL already had an instance of a man being honoured for his contribution to RL on both sides of the globe in Todd and with that being attached to the m.o.m in a major final that they went with the same approach and attached Sunderland's name to the Championship Final m.o.m.

As I posted before in relation to the Lance Todd Trophy should the achievements of someone more connected to that match be wished to be honoured such as a coach/player that had won it multiple times or under difficult circumstance then by all means it could be decided to name it in their honour instead. However it would need to be for a reason of close connection to the award, the reasons for which could be explained and publicised ahead of the change. The original name could then be attributed to something else and given we will have a RL museum an exhibit could be created about the man being replaced (history of the award for example). I just don't consider that passage of time since their death is a valid reason to remove/change a name being honoured.

[Damien]

7 minutes ago, Dave T said:

If we had a blank canvas and decided to put 3 legends names against these three awards, I wonder how many would sit down today and land on Harry Sunderland, Lance Todd and Steve Prescott? 

I'm sure all are worthy and we're good and popular decisions when they were made, but I dont see a problem with regularly reviewing to see if they are still the ones we want. The problem with having that on an ad hoc basis though would be it could be hurtful to friends and family of these men. 

I think if the process was that an award would could only be named after someone for 10 years then I don't see how it would be hurtful to anyone. Everyone then knows it is temporary.

[wiganermike]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

If we had a blank canvas and decided to put 3 legends names against these three awards, I wonder how many would sit down today and land on Harry Sunderland, Lance Todd and Steve Prescott? 

I'm sure all are worthy and we're good and popular decisions when they were made, but I dont see a problem with regularly reviewing to see if they are still the ones we want. The problem with having that on an ad hoc basis though would be it could be hurtful to friends and family of these men. 

The last sentence is the salient one in my opinion, the removal of the name from association with the award carries connotations when it has not been previously stated that it will eventually change and we are talking of a 55 year association (Sunderland) and 74 years (Todd). The idea of a rotating 10 year tenure is not without merit but I would suggest would be better applied to awards not already attached to a name chosen for honouring. It is similar to the system we use for bank notes. By using such a scheme on an award not already attached to a name we get the opportunity to honour a greater number of people without either creating endless awards or causing hurt to the family/descendants of those already honoured by suddenly removing their name somewhat arbitrarily.

[Lowdesert]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

If we had a blank canvas and decided to put 3 legends names against these three awards, I wonder how many would sit down today and land on Harry Sunderland, Lance Todd and Steve Prescott? 

I'm sure all are worthy and we're good and popular decisions when they were made, but I dont see a problem with regularly reviewing to see if they are still the ones we want. The problem with having that on an ad hoc basis though would be it could be hurtful to friends and family of these men. 

I think the main reason Steve Prescotts name was given to that Trophy was not just that he was a very good player but that he never gave up in his fight to beat cancer, raised terrific amounts of money for his own foundation and other trusts and continued in that vain until his death.  

Even at the end,  (3 weeks before his death I think) he went under the surgeons knife 5 times, for pioneering surgery aimed at helping others.  Many others would be waiting for the hammer to fall.  Not him.

I cant think of a single reason why someone showing such grit and determination to never to give in would not be welcomed as the name on such a trophy as Man of Steel.

 

[Dave T]

24 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

I think the main reason Steve Prescotts name was given to that Trophy was not just that he was a very good player but that he never gave up in his fight to beat cancer, raised terrific amounts of money for his own foundation and other trusts and continued in that vain until his death.  

Even at the end,  (3 weeks before his death I think) he went under the surgeons knife 5 times, for pioneering surgery aimed at helping others.  Many others would be waiting for the hammer to fall.  Not him.

I cant think of a single reason why someone showing such grit and determination to never to give in would not be welcomed as the name on such a trophy as Man of Steel.

 

I've tried to be sensitive in this thread to this, and I agree with every word you have written above. I just question whether this is the award to honour that, I think a community, charity, hero of the year award is maybe more fitting. 

But I accept that all of this is just opinion as there are no hard and fast rules around why a name is attached to an award. 

My personal preference is to have a person with specific links to the award if possible, but I accept that is my personal view. 

Edit. I see Steve Prescott's biggest show of strength, character, bravery and humanity off the pitch, and feel an off-field award honours him more appropriately. 

[Dave T]

26 minutes ago, wiganermike said:

The last sentence is the salient one in my opinion, the removal of the name from association with the award carries connotations when it has not been previously stated that it will eventually change and we are talking of a 55 year association (Sunderland) and 74 years (Todd). The idea of a rotating 10 year tenure is not without merit but I would suggest would be better applied to awards not already attached to a name chosen for honouring. It is similar to the system we use for bank notes. By using such a scheme on an award not already attached to a name we get the opportunity to honour a greater number of people without either creating endless awards or causing hurt to the family/descendants of those already honoured by suddenly removing their name somewhat arbitrarily.

Yes, it is a challenge, and I think if we did ever go down that route we would need to be considerate and engage with family members, and permanent records/tribute would need to be made to anyone who had the honour of being named, even if for 5 or 10 years. 

A problem with new awards is that these three are by far the biggest profile in the UK game. 

[Lapsed Leeds Fan]

Revisiting the Geoffrey Moorhouse book on the back of this the back of this topic it’s clear to me that there would probably be no Australian game without Harry Sunderland. He was instrumental in pushing League in Australia during the First World War when Union was weaker. The ethical debate about whether this was the correct thing to do during a time of war is another matter, but shouldn’t detract from his instrumental role in establishing the game here. Without Sunderland there would likely be no game in Australia. No game in Australia probably means we wouldn’t have a game over here or anywhere else.

If he is not seen as enough of a contemporary figure for a MOM award then fair enough, but to belittle his achievements within the game is ironic, seeing as many on this board are constantly bemoaning the throwing away of history and heritage within our sport when it suits. By all means criticise Sunderland for his possible racism (and I need to see more than an uncited source to make my own mind up about this), but don’t gloss over his contribution to the game. If you feel a more appropriate name for the MOM award is needed then fine, but in my opinion figures from our game’s past are the bedrock of our heritage and shouldn’t be thrown away on a whim.