The story of the great split. A great article

[Tommygilf]

9 hours ago, John Drake said:

The Forbidden Game by Mike Rylance is still in print and available from our good selves via the link below. 

https://shop.totalrl.com/product/the-forbidden-game-the-untold-story-of-french-rugby-league/

Excellent book indeed!

[Padge]

22 hours ago, Padge said:

I'll come back to that later as you can't do short answer, but it was about power and control and the games direction more than money.

Right then, coming back to this.

The senior clubs, as they were known, in Lancashire and Yorkshire were attracting large crowds, particularly for cup games. The RFU was not in favour of teams playing for trophies as they thought that this encouraged professionalism. However as the individual county unions had the power to allow or disallow these competitions the RFU was not in a position to ban them directly. 

The Senior Lancashire clubs seeing the threat from soccer in the South of Lancashire decided they would operate a league format, this required that the clubs had control of fixtures. They did operate briefly but squabbling amongst the clubs and pressure from the county union saw the project abandoned.

Having see what Lancashire had tried Yorkshire decided to give it a go, which they did. Then the story gets very familiar. The Yorkshire Senior clubs had in effect created a super league and they wanted control of who was allowed in. A major row broke out when the Senior clubs refused to promote the winners of the second division as they didn't see that this club being promoted would benefit them. The Yorkshire union insisted that promotion and relegation  happened, however the Senior clubs were having none of it.

This row escalated to the point that the Senior Yorkshire clubs resigned from the Yorkshire Union.

Similarly a battle for control was happening in Lancashire though the Lancashire clubs did not resign from the Lancashire Union.

The RFU saw this as an attack on their power to control the game and wanted shut of the troublesome Northern clubs. The Senior Northern clubs of Lancashire and Yorkshire put forward proposals to the RFU that would give them their own Union seperate from the Counties, the RFU rejected the proposals and the rest is well known.

At the formation of the Northern Union, apart from broken time payments being allowed, the rules on professionalism were far stricter than the RFU's

 

 

[Neil_Ormston]

10 hours ago, Padge said:

Right then, coming back to this.

The senior clubs, as they were known, in Lancashire and Yorkshire were attracting large crowds, particularly for cup games. The RFU was not in favour of teams playing for trophies as they thought that this encouraged professionalism. However as the individual county unions had the power to allow or disallow these competitions the RFU was not in a position to ban them directly. 

The Senior Lancashire clubs seeing the threat from soccer in the South of Lancashire decided they would operate a league format, this required that the clubs had control of fixtures. They did operate briefly but squabbling amongst the clubs and pressure from the county union saw the project abandoned.

Having see what Lancashire had tried Yorkshire decided to give it a go, which they did. Then the story gets very familiar. The Yorkshire Senior clubs had in effect created a super league and they wanted control of who was allowed in. A major row broke out when the Senior clubs refused to promote the winners of the second division as they didn't see that this club being promoted would benefit them. The Yorkshire union insisted that promotion and relegation  happened, however the Senior clubs were having none of it.

This row escalated to the point that the Senior Yorkshire clubs resigned from the Yorkshire Union.

Similarly a battle for control was happening in Lancashire though the Lancashire clubs did not resign from the Lancashire Union.

The RFU saw this as an attack on their power to control the game and wanted shut of the troublesome Northern clubs. The Senior Northern clubs of Lancashire and Yorkshire put forward proposals to the RFU that would give them their own Union seperate from the Counties, the RFU rejected the proposals and the rest is well known.

At the formation of the Northern Union, apart from broken time payments being allowed, the rules on professionalism were far stricter than the RFU's

 

 

Cheers Padge.  I'm aware of this school of thought, though not intimately familiar with the detail on the Yorkshire side of things: is there any contemporary evidence that cites the resignation of the YSC clubs from the YRU as being due to resistance for promotion / relegation?  IIRC Wakefield had finished bottom, and the compromise was a test match with the 2nd tier winners (which I think was already well established in Lancashire, and indeed continued post-1895)?

I see you're from the right side of the Pennines too: do you share my view that there's a very Yorkshire bias to the RL perspective of the split?  It's mainly driven by the weight of esteemed historians from t'other side of the hill it seems, but I do think there's a tendency to overlook the importance of the suspension of Leigh, Salford & Wigan for professionalism - this was tantamount to constructive dismissal from the RFU (LRU), and it was unsustainable for the senior clubs to continue to operate under the rules governing professionalism, even if they were guilty of using them for the own petty squabbles & in-fighting!

For me the fundamental flaw in these 'bottom-up' theories on the split, such as the "competitive organisation" one you advocate, or the "commercial necessity" one put forward by Dewhirst, is that is ignores the 'top-down' influence of attitudes of the RFU (and YRU / LRU - especially the LRU, and the old-boy clubs of Liverpool & Manchester).  On grounds of expediency, just as they later did with Wales, as is hinted at above, the Unions could have worked towards keeping the senior clubs on-board, but the weight of evidence seems to suggest that it was the Unions that were the main aggressors in the battle with the clubs, with the new professionalism laws set to be invoked for the 1895/6 season the final straw.

I'm not disputing that there was a huge desire for self-determination from the senior clubs in Lancashire and Yorkshire (for their own gain), nor that a desire to make payments for broken time for the good of the working man was the reason for the split.  But it seems to me that whilst there was a range of factors that contributed for both individual clubs and regions, the over-riding cause of the split was the RFU's attitude towards working class clubs, and their fear of where their game would head if they were not cut-off soon enough.

I also think you're mis-reading the NU attitude towards professionalism - your implication is that they were more draconian, which is clearly not the case.  Whilst the rules of what constituted professionalism were seemingly tighter and more defined, this was in part for the protection of the clubs & players, to ensure a fair process (unlike under the RFU, where judgement was necessary to apply the rules as the situation required!); but more importantly, the sanctions for transgressing were much, much less severe - a couple of points docked from the league table, a nominal fine, or the inability to play a player in a given game for not meeting the working requirements were nothing compared to the suspensions of players, ground and entire clubs that continued participation under the RFU promised, with the 'presumption of guilt clause' that was set to be introduced.  The suggestion that broken time was the thin end of the professionalism wedge was ultimately proven true, and it's unlikely that those advocating it on formation of the NU didn't themselves see this as a step towards professionalism which of course followed very soon after (indeed this was required given the threat of soccer you mentioned yourself).

I do think it's telling that the NU chose to cite that the new body was being formed "on the principle of payment for bona-fida broken time only"; the wording seems to have been particularly chosen to take aim at the RFU and what was their symbol of opposition to the senior northern clubs, namely the professionalism rules.

[Padge]

13 hours ago, Neil_Ormston said:

Cheers Padge.  I'm aware of this school of thought, though not intimately familiar with the detail on the Yorkshire side of things: is there any contemporary evidence that cites the resignation of the YSC clubs from the YRU as being due to resistance for promotion / relegation?  IIRC Wakefield had finished bottom, and the compromise was a test match with the 2nd tier winners (which I think was already well established in Lancashire, and indeed continued post-1895)?

I see you're from the right side of the Pennines too: do you share my view that there's a very Yorkshire bias to the RL perspective of the split?  It's mainly driven by the weight of esteemed historians from t'other side of the hill it seems, but I do think there's a tendency to overlook the importance of the suspension of Leigh, Salford & Wigan for professionalism - this was tantamount to constructive dismissal from the RFU (LRU), and it was unsustainable for the senior clubs to continue to operate under the rules governing professionalism, even if they were guilty of using them for the own petty squabbles & in-fighting!

For me the fundamental flaw in these 'bottom-up' theories on the split, such as the "competitive organisation" one you advocate, or the "commercial necessity" one put forward by Dewhirst, is that is ignores the 'top-down' influence of attitudes of the RFU (and YRU / LRU - especially the LRU, and the old-boy clubs of Liverpool & Manchester).  On grounds of expediency, just as they later did with Wales, as is hinted at above, the Unions could have worked towards keeping the senior clubs on-board, but the weight of evidence seems to suggest that it was the Unions that were the main aggressors in the battle with the clubs, with the new professionalism laws set to be invoked for the 1895/6 season the final straw.

I'm not disputing that there was a huge desire for self-determination from the senior clubs in Lancashire and Yorkshire (for their own gain), nor that a desire to make payments for broken time for the good of the working man was the reason for the split.  But it seems to me that whilst there was a range of factors that contributed for both individual clubs and regions, the over-riding cause of the split was the RFU's attitude towards working class clubs, and their fear of where their game would head if they were not cut-off soon enough.

I also think you're mis-reading the NU attitude towards professionalism - your implication is that they were more draconian, which is clearly not the case.  Whilst the rules of what constituted professionalism were seemingly tighter and more defined, this was in part for the protection of the clubs & players, to ensure a fair process (unlike under the RFU, where judgement was necessary to apply the rules as the situation required!); but more importantly, the sanctions for transgressing were much, much less severe - a couple of points docked from the league table, a nominal fine, or the inability to play a player in a given game for not meeting the working requirements were nothing compared to the suspensions of players, ground and entire clubs that continued participation under the RFU promised, with the 'presumption of guilt clause' that was set to be introduced.  The suggestion that broken time was the thin end of the professionalism wedge was ultimately proven true, and it's unlikely that those advocating it on formation of the NU didn't themselves see this as a step towards professionalism which of course followed very soon after (indeed this was required given the threat of soccer you mentioned yourself).

I do think it's telling that the NU chose to cite that the new body was being formed "on the principle of payment for bona-fida broken time only"; the wording seems to have been particularly chosen to take aim at the RFU and what was their symbol of opposition to the senior northern clubs, namely the professionalism rules.

The resignation of the Yorkshire senior clubs was reported by "Old Ebor", pseudonym of Alfred Pullin a very well respected sports journalist who wrote for the Yorkshire Post, Yorkshire Evening Post and Athletics News at the time.

Lancashire had the bigger problem with professionalism due to the take off of soccer in the South of the county. Clubs had seen rugby all but wiped out in the South East of the county with clubs turning to the professional ranks of soccer and these clubs tempting the best players to their ranks. At this time the difference in skill sets for the two games were not as marked as they are now. The pressure to pay players in Lancashire was more a matter of survival than a desire to win the league/cup and in fact Lancashire abandoned their league competition.

In Yorkshire, where the Yorkshire Cup had been come a huge competition, There was less of a threat to the Senior Clubs as Soccer took a hold in the South of the county but in the North rugby totally dominated and this is where the Senior Clubs were based.

The RFU saw Yorkshire has the big threat, at one point the YRFU had taken control of RFU's executive by having a lot more members on board than all the other county's put together.

On both sides of the Pennines the Senior Clubs wanted to have control of their fixtures and their competitions and both sides wanted broken time payments to be legal to stop the creeping professionalism of underhand payments.

The Northern Unions rules on professionalism barred the unemployed from playing, a far stricter rule than the RFU had in place, if the RFU had that rule then most 'gentlemen' players in the South would have been unable to play.

 

[Padge]

Now I have better access to my library and notes I can add this to my previous post above.

There were two crucial meetings in Yorkshire on the 8th and 15th of July 1895.

At the first meeting the Senior Clubs who were refusing to promote Morley to the Seniors competition as winners of the seconds competition had all their autonomous powers stripped from them  effectively removing the power to control their own affairs. This meant Yorkshire Rugby Union could force the clubs to accept Morley and force a play-off game between Wakefield and Hull for who was relegated.

At a meeting of the clubs on the 15th July the twelve Senior Clubs resigned from The Yorkshire Rugby Union as a response to the stripping of the powers that had been delegated to them.

The clubs thought that they would then become members of the English Rugby Union and could apply to them for permission to arrange fixtures between themselves.

At a Yorkshire Rugby Union committee meeting on July 29th 1895 the resignations of Leeds, Hunslet, Bradford, Brighouse, Batley, Dewsbury, Huddersfield, Halifax, Hull, Liversedge, Manningham and Wakefield were accepted by the YRFU.

[Chris22]

On the subject, the Independent had a lengthy online feature this weekend which is well worth a read.

https://edition.independent.co.uk/editions/uk.co.independent.issue.290820/data/9685406/index.html

[Padge]

Just as an aside, at the meeting I talked about earlier, where the twelve rebel clubs resignations were accepted, Skelmanthorpe, Ackworth and Knaresborough were accepted as members of of YRFU subject to their grounds being inspected and found to be of an adequate standard.

125 years ago clubs were subject to meeting entry criteria, nowt's new.

[Wiltshire Warrior Dragon]

My thanks to Padge and Neil for their informative contributions to this thread in recent days, which I have greatly enjoyed reading.

I suspect there may also have been a potent mix of envy and alarm at RFU HQ about the on-field, tactical superiority being developed in the north in the early days of organised rugby.  In the first eight seasons of the RFU's county championship, Yorkshire won it no fewer than seven times and the one time they didn't, the victors were Lancashire!

[Charlie RL]

3 hours ago, Chris22 said:

On the subject, the Independent had a lengthy online feature this weekend which is well worth a read.

https://edition.independent.co.uk/editions/uk.co.independent.issue.290820/data/9685406/index.html

That is a long read. 

Thanks, it was behind a paywall last Saturday. 

[Bostik Bailey]

On 29/08/2020 at 12:17, Stan Doffarf said:

You're right of course, but after all this time I don't believe there is enough interest in the true version for any newspaper to put that amount of effort into telling it. I feel interest lapsed a good deal when yawnion went 'honest' (or at least partly) in 1995.

What I would love to see is a properly researched documentary (probably Channel 4, the Beeb would never do it) telling the full detailed story. Thing is, apart from fanatics like us, would anybody watch it?

I agree Netflix did one about the first association football professional, I think the rugby code offers far more of a story.

[Neil_Ormston]

4 hours ago, Chris22 said:

On the subject, the Independent had a lengthy online feature this weekend which is well worth a read.

https://edition.independent.co.uk/editions/uk.co.independent.issue.290820/data/9685406/index.html

Cheers Chris.  Good article, that pretty much aligns with what I said.  Crucially: “In many ways the Northern Union was forced into existence by the stubbornness of the RFU rather than being the rebellion it is often portrayed as.”

[Neil_Ormston]

10 hours ago, Padge said:

The resignation of the Yorkshire senior clubs was reported by "Old Ebor", pseudonym of Alfred Pullin a very well respected sports journalist who wrote for the Yorkshire Post, Yorkshire Evening Post and Athletics News at the time.

Lancashire had the bigger problem with professionalism due to the take off of soccer in the South of the county. Clubs had seen rugby all but wiped out in the South East of the county with clubs turning to the professional ranks of soccer and these clubs tempting the best players to their ranks. At this time the difference in skill sets for the two games were not as marked as they are now. The pressure to pay players in Lancashire was more a matter of survival than a desire to win the league/cup and in fact Lancashire abandoned their league competition.

In Yorkshire, where the Yorkshire Cup had been come a huge competition, There was less of a threat to the Senior Clubs as Soccer took a hold in the South of the county but in the North rugby totally dominated and this is where the Senior Clubs were based.

The RFU saw Yorkshire has the big threat, at one point the YRFU had taken control of RFU's executive by having a lot more members on board than all the other county's put together.

On both sides of the Pennines the Senior Clubs wanted to have control of their fixtures and their competitions and both sides wanted broken time payments to be legal to stop the creeping professionalism of underhand payments.

The Northern Unions rules on professionalism barred the unemployed from playing, a far stricter rule than the RFU had in place, if the RFU had that rule then most 'gentlemen' players in the South would have been unable to play.

 

Thanks Padge, and for the timeline on the Yorkshire meetings / resignations.  I’m sure you’ve seen Collins’ views on this theory already, so I won’t repeat them here.

I do think it’s a little naive to think that the breakaway clubs believed broken time would stop the march to professionalism, rather than being a staging post along the way; indeed, why would the Lancashire clubs want this in the face of a professional soccer code as you pointed out?  That said I’m not sure how imminently threatened the senior clubs felt by soccer in 1895, or how great its impact had been on rugby in Lancashire by this point.

One point of clarity: what do you mean by the comment about Lancashire abandoning their league competition?  This certainly wasn’t the case at the time of the breakaway, as this continued in 1895/6.  Or do you mean the earlier league formed in 1889/90?  This wasn’t a Lancashire-wide comp though, which was the real reason it struggled to become established: in the absence of the big East Lancs clubs, the quality was too diluted, and Warrington for example declined to play in the second season, as they could secure more attractive fixtures outside the confines of the league.

[Tommygilf]

5 hours ago, Chris22 said:

On the subject, the Independent had a lengthy online feature this weekend which is well worth a read.

https://edition.independent.co.uk/editions/uk.co.independent.issue.290820/data/9685406/index.html

That's an excellent article.

[Padge]

11 hours ago, Neil_Ormston said:

Thanks Padge, and for the timeline on the Yorkshire meetings / resignations.  I’m sure you’ve seen Collins’ views on this theory already, so I won’t repeat them here.

I know Tony fairly well and have met him a few times and we have discussed the subject face to face over a drink, so yes I am very familiar with his take on it.

Quote

I do think it’s a little naive to think that the breakaway clubs believed broken time would stop the march to professionalism, rather than being a staging post along the way; indeed, why would the Lancashire clubs want this in the face of a professional soccer code as you pointed out?  That said I’m not sure how imminently threatened the senior clubs felt by soccer in 1895, or how great its impact had been on rugby in Lancashire by this point.

The point of broken time was it was being open about what was going on and was genuinely a way of compensating players for some of the loss of work time. The level of payment was restricted and didn't always cover the amount of money lost. If broken time payments had been legal there would be less pressure to operate a brown envelope system of payments. That isn't to say they would not have happened but it would probably have put the cubs in a stronger position to resist them. 

Once the breakaway happened the move to professionalism did become inevitable because the players  then had more power and the clubs couldn't hide behind the RFU's strict stance.

What was a bigger concern at the time was inducements to change clubs either in cash or in the form of a job.

Quote

One point of clarity: what do you mean by the comment about Lancashire abandoning their league competition?  This certainly wasn’t the case at the time of the breakaway, as this continued in 1895/6.  Or do you mean the earlier league formed in 1889/90?  This wasn’t a Lancashire-wide comp though, which was the real reason it struggled to become established: in the absence of the big East Lancs clubs, the quality was too diluted, and Warrington for example declined to play in the second season, as they could secure more attractive fixtures outside the confines of the league.

I was referring to the early attempt at a Seniors league in Lancashire, and I did state it collapsed because of the squabbling amongst the clubs. That said however it encouraged the Yorkshire clubs to give it a go and again friction set in which ultimately led to the 12 clubs mentioned resigning membership of the YRFU. 

In Lancashire there were various league and cup competitions springing up all the time, The South West Lancs League and Cup the South East League, The Lancashire Seniors League, there were also junior competitions. Unlike the Yorkshire Union the Lancashire Union was more fragmented and made up of various Unions, East Lancs, West Lancs, North Lancs and Border Towns being some. The East Lancs Union even split itself into four divisions North, North East, South and South West, keeping track of all these factions and their various competitions can be hard work

West Lancs adopted the proposition to form a league at a meeting on 4th June 1889. It contained 8 clubs, Wigan, Tyldesley, Leigh, St.Helens,  Warrington, Aspull, Widnes and Walkden and was short lived.

The Lancashire Rugby Union sanctioned a league in 1892, this contained 10 clubs, Broughton, Broughton Rangers, Oldham, Rochdale, St.Helens Recs, Salford, Swinton, Tyldesley, Warrington and Wigan.

[Neil_Ormston]

23 hours ago, Padge said:

I was referring to the early attempt at a Seniors league in Lancashire, and I did state it collapsed because of the squabbling amongst the clubs. That said however it encouraged the Yorkshire clubs to give it a go and again friction set in which ultimately led to the 12 clubs mentioned resigning membership of the YRFU. 

In Lancashire there were various league and cup competitions springing up all the time, The South West Lancs League and Cup the South East League, The Lancashire Seniors League, there were also junior competitions. Unlike the Yorkshire Union the Lancashire Union was more fragmented and made up of various Unions, East Lancs, West Lancs, North Lancs and Border Towns being some. The East Lancs Union even split itself into four divisions North, North East, South and South West, keeping track of all these factions and their various competitions can be hard work

West Lancs adopted the proposition to form a league at a meeting on 4th June 1889. It contained 8 clubs, Wigan, Tyldesley, Leigh, St.Helens,  Warrington, Aspull, Widnes and Walkden and was short lived.

The Lancashire Rugby Union sanctioned a league in 1892, this contained 10 clubs, Broughton, Broughton Rangers, Oldham, Rochdale, St.Helens Recs, Salford, Swinton, Tyldesley, Warrington and Wigan.

I’m obviously biased, but think that Lancashire offers an even more interesting study into the dynamics and politics of rugby pre-split than Yorkshire.  The influence of the ‘old-boy’ clubs in Liverpool and Manchester, make it more a microcosm of the national issues.  It was these clubs that created the fragmentation you referred to, as they wouldn’t sanction a county wide comp, which is specifically why the West Lancs Union was formed (though obviously they could only arrange a comp for West Lancs).  I believe the West Lancs Union are responsible for what was the first ever “rugby league”, back in 1889.  Although it’s complicated, it’s possible to pick through all this, and I’ve covered most of this in my own research already.

My work with the Record Keepers’ Club is now occupying all the time allocated to the ‘rugby’ part of my life though, so I’ve not had chance to thoroughly cover everything as I would wish, and this won’t change anytime soon.  That’s just a pre-cursor for a lazy request really: if you can share any info on the still-born Lancs League (I presume this was c. 1890-2?) it would be appreciated.  IIRC, both the Lancs First Class and YSC started at the same time in 1892.

It’s a crying shame no-one has released a Lancashire view of the split.  If it’s not been done by the time I’ve got the RKC fully published online, I’ll probably do it myself, but I’m hoping you might get in there first Padge: you’ve a window of about a decade I reckon, so no rush

[Padge]

55 minutes ago, Neil_Ormston said:

I’m obviously biased, but think that Lancashire offers an even more interesting study into the dynamics and politics of rugby pre-split than Yorkshire.  The influence of the ‘old-boy’ clubs in Liverpool and Manchester, make it more a microcosm of the national issues.  It was these clubs that created the fragmentation you referred to, as they wouldn’t sanction a county wide comp, which is specifically why the West Lancs Union was formed (though obviously they could only arrange a comp for West Lancs).  I believe the West Lancs Union are responsible for what was the first ever “rugby league”, back in 1889.  Although it’s complicated, it’s possible to pick through all this, and I’ve covered most of this in my own research already.

My work with the Record Keepers’ Club is now occupying all the time allocated to the ‘rugby’ part of my life though, so I’ve not had chance to thoroughly cover everything as I would wish, and this won’t change anytime soon.  That’s just a pre-cursor for a lazy request really: if you can share any info on the still-born Lancs League (I presume this was c. 1890-2?) it would be appreciated.  IIRC, both the Lancs First Class and YSC started at the same time in 1892.

It’s a crying shame no-one has released a Lancashire view of the split.  If it’s not been done by the time I’ve got the RKC fully published online, I’ll probably do it myself, but I’m hoping you might get in there first Padge: you’ve a window of about a decade I reckon, so no rush

This is something I am still digging into, you get the feeling that there was a lot of tension in Lancashire, between clubs, regions, unions and even the counties. There is a rugby history thread on here, when I piece more together I will put on an update on their when I have more on it. I have posted a few things on there showing that the term rugby league was being used before the split.

[Neil_Ormston]

28 minutes ago, Padge said:

This is something I am still digging into, you get the feeling that there was a lot of tension in Lancashire, between clubs, regions, unions and even the counties. There is a rugby history thread on here, when I piece more together I will put on an update on their when I have more on it. I have posted a few things on there showing that the term rugby league was being used before the split.

Thanks Padge.  Too right re. the tensions: the conclusion of the 1889/90 West Lancs League is a farce, and of course the suspensions in the 1894/5 First Class Comp were all due to intra-club claims and counter-claims.

It’s a while since I’ve looked at the history thread, so when I’m having an evening ‘off’, I’ll have a good read through.

[Trojan]

On 31/08/2020 at 17:15, Padge said:

Now I have better access to my library and notes I can add this to my previous post above.

There were two crucial meetings in Yorkshire on the 8th and 15th of July 1895.

At the first meeting the Senior Clubs who were refusing to promote Morley to the Seniors competition as winners of the seconds competition had all their autonomous powers stripped from them  effectively removing the power to control their own affairs. This meant Yorkshire Rugby Union could force the clubs to accept Morley and force a play-off game between Wakefield and Hull for who was relegated.

At a meeting of the clubs on the 15th July the twelve Senior Clubs resigned from The Yorkshire Rugby Union as a response to the stripping of the powers that had been delegated to them.

The clubs thought that they would then become members of the English Rugby Union and could apply to them for permission to arrange fixtures between themselves.

At a Yorkshire Rugby Union committee meeting on July 29th 1895 the resignations of Leeds, Hunslet, Bradford, Brighouse, Batley, Dewsbury, Huddersfield, Halifax, Hull, Liversedge, Manningham and Wakefield were accepted by the YRFU.

As a Morley lad I can say that according to local legend, Morley were invited to the meeting at Huddersfield but missed the train, due to spending too long in the Miners' Arms en route to the station.

I know little of the history in Lancashire, but the Yorkshire clubs were under pressure from soccer, most of the pro local soccer clubs date their origins from around this time. Indeed Maningham, first winners of the NRU Championship became Bradford City.

Whatever the reasons for the split, the result was that the possibility of playing their chosen sport at the highest level was restored to the working men of Yorkshire and Lancashire.  From my own youth the two Fox brothers, Neil and Don, both miners, were able to display their superb skills internationally.

[Padge]

1 minute ago, Trojan said:

As a Morley lad I can say that according to local legend, Morley were invited to the meeting at Huddersfield but missed the train, due to spending too long in the Miners' Arms en route to the station.

I know little of the history in Lancashire, but the Yorkshire clubs were under pressure from soccer, most of the pro local soccer clubs date their origins from around this time. Indeed Maningham, first winners of the NRU Championship became Bradford City.

Whatever the reasons for the split, the result was that the possibility of playing their chosen sport at the highest level was restored to the working men of Yorkshire and Lancashire.  From my own youth the two Fox brothers, Neil and Don, both miners, were able to display their superb skills internationally.

From all my readings, and believe my I have read a lot, the pressures in Yorkshire was nowhere near as great as those in South Lancashire, at one point reports where that in the South East soccer had all but been wiped out, then within a few years after a concerted effort to re-establish the game soccer had turned the tables and large swathes of South East Lancashire had ousted rugby completely. The clubs in South West Lancashire were determined it wasn't going to happen to them.

The different way the two County Unions were organised I think was a big contributing factor in the state of affairs.