Rugby What Ifs?

[SouthBedfordshireFan]

I am currently binge-listening to Rugby Reloaded by Professor Collins and a number of episodes discuss the origins of the variants of football and its spread around the world.

It brings me ask a few questions:

At one point the rugby variant was more popular than association football however the lack of national competition arguably allowed association football to takeover in that regard

Do you think that had a nationwide league or an FA Cup equivalent been established that rugby would have split or maintained its status as the most popular variant of football in the country?

Or that rugby would be a much bigger sport internationally than it currently is?

American football, Canadian football, Aussie Rules (fumbleball) to a certain degree have a common ancestor in rugby but made some alterations especially with regards to the scrum and so did rugby league.

Do you think had the schism not taken place that rugby would have had the changes that rugby league eventually made?

Association football also had a professionalism debate. 

Had the FA stuck with amateurism do you think the game would have diverged like rugby league did and would association football be as popular as it is internationally today?

 

 

 

[The 4 of Us]

Welsh clubs staying in the Northern Union would have seen a very different outcome. 

[SouthBedfordshireFan]

10 minutes ago, The 4 of Us said:

Welsh clubs staying in the Northern Union would have seen a very different outcome. 

That too. Imagine how much more popular rugby league would have been if that was the case?

 

[Sports Prophet]

It’s all conjecture. It is fun to fanaticise what might have been, because reality happens because reality does.

I don’t necessarily think Rugby would be much different internationally than what it is today. Soccer is a basic sport which can be played socially by any class, in mixed genders, without a referee, with minimal equipment. 

Rugby took until the 1960s to develop its own simple version of the game in touch rugby, but by then soccer was well and truly established as a global game. 

I wonder if touch rugby had been widely available in the 19th and 20th centuries, perhaps we would see Rugby with a wider international footprint. 

Personally, I still see touch rugby as RL’s best vehicle to grow the footprint of the game into new international markets.

[sam4731]

8 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

It’s all conjecture. It is fun to fanaticise what might have been, because reality happens because reality does.

I don’t necessarily think Rugby would be much different internationally than what it is today. Soccer is a basic sport which can be played socially by any class, in mixed genders, without a referee, with minimal equipment. 

Rugby took until the 1960s to develop its own simple version of the game in touch rugby, but by then soccer was well and truly established as a global game. 

I wonder if touch rugby had been widely available in the 19th and 20th centuries, perhaps we would see Rugby with a wider international footprint. 

Personally, I still see touch rugby as RL’s best vehicle to grow the footprint of the game into new international markets.

This. The focus for football throughout its existence is that anyone can pick up a ball throw some jumpers down and play.

Football was actually very reluctant to bring in technology to the game for this very reason as they have always wanted the game to be exactly the same from the Premier league down the the mid West counties division 6 East.

One of the reasons that the sport is so popular is that you could be playingin North Korea or South Korea, Israel or Palestine, Russia or Ukraine and you'd always be playing with the same rules.

We can't even coordinate rules between just 2 professional competitions. 

[The Art of Hand and Foot]

I read somewhere, not sure where, that a French player/coach/official, not sure if league or the other code, was asked if the split hadn't happened what would Rugby look like today? And he answered Rugby League. His premise was that the game would have naturally evolved as there wouldn't be as much resistance to change.

[EggFace]

14 hours ago, SouthBedfordshireFan said:

I am currently binge-listening to Rugby Reloaded by Professor Collins and a number of episodes discuss the origins of the variants of football and its spread around the world.

It brings me ask a few questions:

At one point the rugby variant was more popular than association football however the lack of national competition arguably allowed association football to takeover in that regard

Do you think that had a nationwide league or an FA Cup equivalent been established that rugby would have split or maintained its status as the most popular variant of football in the country?

Or that rugby would be a much bigger sport internationally than it currently is?

American football, Canadian football, Aussie Rules (fumbleball) to a certain degree have a common ancestor in rugby but made some alterations especially with regards to the scrum and so did rugby league.

Do you think had the schism not taken place that rugby would have had the changes that rugby league eventually made?

Association football also had a professionalism debate. 

Had the FA stuck with amateurism do you think the game would have diverged like rugby league did and would association football be as popular as it is internationally today?

 

 

 

I love Tony Collins books and podcasts as well as Australia's Sean Fagan and the what if's do my head in and oftern wonder if the split had happend 10 years earlier then I wonder GAA founder Micheal Cusack who had played or was of a fan of Rugby would of went with Northern Union rules.

Said it before put we ended up with too many styles of Football and my fear for some will or have been over taken by Soccer and thats why I always harp on about a united code of Rugby alongside the push for Touch and Tag,

[Damien]

1 hour ago, The Art of Hand and Foot said:

I read somewhere, not sure where, that a French player/coach/official, not sure if league or the other code, was asked if the split hadn't happened what would Rugby look like today? And he answered Rugby League. His premise was that the game would have naturally evolved as there wouldn't be as much resistance to change.

I always day this. It would have evolved into what Rugby League now is for exactly the same reasons.