union vs. league

Question
What are the social divides that cause disputes between union and league?  

Answer
Mr Bridgewood,

There are historical divides between the primary forms of rugby football.  The roots of the divide are based in professionalism (ecomonics), which at the latter part of the nineteenth century were more class based.

While doing research, I came across the following article on the start of rugby league football.  The article goes into depth the class differences between the two sports.  It is so well written that I am providing it in its entirety.  At the end of the article, I have added some of my own thoughts.


"The "Rugby" Game
by Sean Fagan

The origins of rugby league in Great Britain go back long before the creation in 1895 of the Northern Union.  To understand the history of the game itself, requires an appreciation of the common "rugby" ancestor shared by both the two rugby codes.

In 1800's, formalities were introduced to football rules in the seven major public schools of England.  Six of the seven schools were largely playing the same game (including Eton, Harrow and Winchester) - while the seventh, Rugby School (founded in 1567) at Warwickshire, was playing a markedly different version of football.

The other schools moved ahead refining their rules and eventually their game became known as "association football" - soccer.  How the Rugby School's game developed differently is lost in history and the true story is unlikely to ever be known.

The Rugby Football Union's (RFU) much revered tale of how in 1823 the young Rugby School student, William Webb Ellis, "in a fine disregard for the rules" picked up the ball and ran with it in a defining moment in sports history is now accepted by sports historians as being fanciful and a gross distortion of what is known.

There is no doubt that Ellis was a student at Rugby School from 1816 to 1825, but he was never mentioned by anyone as having done the actual deed ascribed to him.  The first reference to Ellis appeared in a Rugby School magazine in 1875 (four years after Ellis' death) by an Old Rugbeian, M. Bloxham, who was endeavoring to refute claims that rugby was an ancient game.

Bloxham's story has always been in doubt because of the time that had passed since Ellis supposedly ran with the ball.  Bloxham himself was not there and no living person could corroborate his version of events.  In addition, examination of existing records and documented recollections does not show that the Rugby game dramatically changed after one event (i.e. Ellis or anyone else deciding to run with the ball).

Handling the ball was permitted in football in the early 1800's when players were allowed to take a mark and then a free kick, long before Ellis arrived at Rugby.  In fact, most of the public schools allowed forms of handling the ball right up until the formation of the Football Association in the 1860's.  The Association even considered whether to allow its continuation, before eventually deciding to outlaw it.  The reverse picture that the RFU has painted that the rugby game was born from soccer the moment Ellis picked up the ball and ran with it is clearly, even with very little examination, false.

What is known is that at Rugby School by the 1830's running with the ball was in common use, the goal posts had been extended to 18 feet high (with a cross-bar at 10 feet above the ground) and there were forms of scrummaging and line-outs.  The inclusion of the crossbar was accompanied by a rule that a goal could only be scored by the ball passing over the bar from a place kick or drop kick.  Apparently, this was done to make scoring easier from further out and to avoid the horde of defenders standing in the goal mouth.

Players who were able to "touch-down" the ball behind the opponents goal line were awarded a "try-at-goal" - the player would make a mark on the goal line and then walk back onto the field of play to a point where a place kick at the goal was possible (a conversion).  There was also an "off-your-side" rule used to keep the teams apart and passing the ball forward was not allowed.  The rules were first seriously agreed upon and documented when former Rugby students and clubs wanted to commence formal competitions outside of the Rugby School in 1862.  Many of the clubs that formed around this period would later become rugby league clubs.

From 1875 when games finished without any goals being scored, the team which had the most "tries-at-goal" was awarded the win.  From 1886, three "tries" equaled one goal in points, before the balance finally moved to giving more value to the scoring of tries.  By 1893 the scoring was much closer to what we know today - a try was worth three points, a converted try five points, three for a penalty goal and four for a field goal.  However, the rugby game was still very brutal and raw with 71 deaths recorded in English rugby from 1890 to 1893 alone.

The RFU had been formed in 1871 by representatives of 21 clubs - all of which were located in southern England and most were within London.  By the early 1890's, rugby was widespread and well over half the RFU's clubs were in northern England.  The working classes of the north of England and South Wales were particularly taken with rugby over soccer.  However, divisions in the "rugby" game were about to see the birth of two new sports - rugby league and rugby union.

As with rugby clubs right across England, the majority of the clubs of the North were created and operated by men of the ruling classes.  However, as the majority of the population in Yorkshire and Lancashire was working class, the clubs, teams and crowds quickly displayed a cross-class nature.  Hull FC was formed in 1865 by a young gentleman who had been at Rugby School and immediately took on members who were plumbers and glaziers.  An ever rarer example was Leeds Athletic, which was started by working men on their own initiative.  It began with an advertisement in a local newspaper placed by a rail clerk.

Other clubs had religious affiliations at the start which are now long forgotten, but others such as Wakefield Trinity were marked by this for the rest of their existence.  Wakefield was formed in 1873 as a sporting arm of the Holy Trinity Church Young Men's Society.

In Lancashire, rugby was started at Rochdale in 1867 by a magistrate and numerous business owners and self-employed men.  Within a year, they were all playing alongside new members when working class men were allowed to join as well.  This club was the forerunner of the Rochdale Hornets who arrived in 1871 with an open door approach to membership.  At Rochdale they were also able to insist on gate money as they played on an enclosed field.  This became an increasing tendency in the North.  Some clubs though, like Wigan, did not have an enclosed field and had to rely on crowd donations from collection boxes.

There was general acknowledgement that the rugby teams of Yorkshire and Lancashire were the strongest in England and had been so since the 1870's.  These counties were the first (in 1870) to rise above club level rugby and introduce representative games (Yorkshire v Lancashire) - these games were held before the southerners had even formed their collective RFU.

When a county championship "was at last permitted" in 1889, Yorkshire won the initial title and then eventually won seven of the first eight years.  The only year they lost it was to Lancashire!

The rugby playing working class men though were at a distinct disadvantage to their gentlemen counterparts.  Players who were miners and factory workers were not permitted to leave work on Saturdays (match days) until 1pm, while the self-employed and gentry had no such restriction.  The working man might have been able to play in a home game without much difficulty, but an away match was out of the question.  If he was a miner, as many were, even turning out in a home game was a major achievement.

Miners were only paid for time that they were actually hewing coal.  Travelling to and from the surface was in the employee's time, no matter how far down the mine it was.  This resulted in enthusiastic rugby players having to forgo pay to play rugby.  It also meant that they were subsequently first in line for retrenchment if the mining industry fell on hard times.

Players though were paid by clubs on an expediency basis across Britain and this was largely ignored by the RFU.  While clubs in the South of England were poaching players (via payments) to bolster their ranks, clubs in the North were paying working class players to ensure they could take the field.  This was critical in the North, as the working classes were the majority of the community.  Without payment to working class players, even if just for lost time ("broken-time"), the clubs would not have been able to have their best players on the field - which would affect their on-field results and crowds.

However, this situation changed when the RFU, encouraged by "gentlemen" rugby clubs, determined that such flouting of the amateur rules was to stop.  They had seen what had happened to soccer when the FA prevented a Northern split in 1884 by allowing professionalism - the game and the clubs quickly became dominated by the working class.  The RFU was determined they would not follow the same path.

Clubs in Yorkshire were of particular concern for the RFU by their "open rugby" approach to club membership.  They allowed anyone to join, even though they were financed or owned by the middle and ruling classes.  Many other clubs, mostly in the South, followed the wishes of the RFU (and themselves) by staunchly remaining gentlemen's clubs to the exclusion of all others.

The RFU took the view that paying players money for turning out in a rugby team, for whatever reason, was not acceptable.  The RFU heralded that any club or player involved in professional payments needed to be sought out and punished.  There were even those who had become zealots for the cause of amateur rugby who investigated and reported any inference of a breach they could find.

Yet the RFU and many of its clubs were still openly paying players and sometimes even other clubs.  The 20-man British team (all Northerners bar one) that toured Australia in 1888 were all paid, including captain Andrew Stoddart who received over 200 pounds - yet his public profile paralyzed the RFU from acting.  The tour itself was operated by two entrepreneurs looking to turn a profit, yet it was sanctioned by the RFU.

In 1887 the Blackheath club was paid 4 pounds a player by Bradford to secure a game.  While a "gentlemen" was permitted to claim legitimate expenses, working class players were told "if they can't afford to play, they should go without the game".

From the early 1890's this clash of the classes began to tear at the fabric of the structure of the RFU and its relationship with the Northern players and thus their clubs.  "Amateurism" was the term given to the RFU's drive to ensure the working class did not gain control of the game.

The resulting suspensions and expulsions for those involved in the "professional" payments meant the Northern clubs stopped paying their players.  The clubs and their middle-class owners had no desire to leave the RFU and they were for a time brought under control.  Nevertheless, with matches being cancelled and their best players regularly missing, the Northern clubs sought a compromise and put forward a proposal to allow payments solely for "broken-time".  Although, this was far from unanimous in many clubs and much in fighting occurred.

The RFU stood firm and declared that paying for "broken-time" would only encourage more time to be spent playing rugby and would lead to "professional" full-time rugby players.

The reality then facing the Northern clubs was that to remain in the RFU and adhere to amateurism rules would require them to continue without working class players.  In the counties of Yorkshire and Lancashire, such an act would have meant the end of the existence of the clubs and the game.  The owners of the clubs had little option other than to fight - they were also the owners of local industries and being a part of denying the masses access to their favored game would not have proved prudent.

In 1895 the movement for the creation of a Northern Rugby Union outside of the control of the RFU had a reached a crescendo.  In one final effort to reign in the rising upheaval the RFU broadened it's definition of "professionalism" to include playing on a ground where gate money was taken and/or any game to be played with less than 15 men-a-side.  The RFU knew that some of the northern clubs had been contemplating reducing the number of players in teams to less than 15 to improve the crowd appeal - in fact the RFU had even considered the option itself in 1892.

As a result in August 1895 the clubs in the working class counties of Yorkshire and Lancashire jumped before they were pushed.  Nevertheless, this was not a mere loss of 22 clubs from the RFU.  In 1890 there were about 240 rugby clubs in the two counties, however by 1900 this had reduced to less than 25 clubs.  In 1904 the Northern Union had more clubs affiliated to it than the RFU.  By such time the Northern clubs were in the hands of milder middle-class owners such as shopkeepers and small business owners.  The industrial owners of the textile factories and mines had long gone from the Northern clubs and the class separation was complete.

Thus the Great Divide of 1895 produced two new sports from the shared "rugby" parent - not the minor loss of an unimportant appendage as the RFU has forever since portrayed it.  The split would also ensure that RU would forever polarize itself as a middle-class game and live its "amateur" lie for a further hundred years.

On 29 August 1895 twenty-one clubs met at the George Hotel in Huddersfield and formed the Northern Rugby Union (later to become known as Rugby League).  The clubs and their year of foundation were:

Batley 1880, Bradford 1863, Brighouse Rangers 1878, Broughton Rangers 1877, Dewsbury 1875, Halifax 1873, Huddersfield 1864, Hull 1865, Hunslet 1883, Leeds 1890, Leigh 1877, Liversedge 1877, Manningham 1876, Oldham 1876, Rochdale Hornets 1871, St Helens 1874, Tyldesley 1879, Wakefield Trinity 1873, Warrington 1875, Widnes 1873, Wigan 1879.

Dewsbury withdrew a few days later and were replaced by Runcorn (1876).  Stockport was also accepted by telephone at the meeting at the George.  The inaugural competition which the 22 founding clubs played for was called the Northern Rugby Football League (NRL).  In a very ambitious competition, each team had to play every other on a home and away basis.  In the days of slow transportation a journey across the two adjoining counties was a long day indeed, with teams often not arriving home until midnight.  Intra-county games also counted for points for the awarding of county champions in the Yorkshire and Lancashire Cups.

The administrators acted over the coming years and changed the rules of the game (abolishing lineouts, reduced teams to 13-a-side and introducing the play-the-ball being the main variations) to improve the attractiveness of the spectacle and therefore paying crowds.  Rugby League had begun."

Shephard's comments:

As can be seen from the preceding article, economics (which often determines class status), caused the rift in the Rugby League and Rugby Union.  In addition to the professionalism issue, economics contributed to the differences in the way games developed.  

A majority of the Union players were middle class or higher player.  A gentleman (self employed or gentry) could afford to take time off from work and since much of his work was cerebral in nature, physical injury would rarely have an impact on his livelihood. Injury on the pitch did not automatically mean a loss of income.  

If you were a miner though, an injury was an significant economic experience.  Every contact made on the pitch is an opportunity for injury.  Rugby Union has maintained and evolved many of the areas of contact in rugby like the scrum, ruck, and maul.  Rugby League chose to minimize the opportunities for contact and stress fluidity of movement.  This is especially true in the scrum that is a central feature of the Union game and not so in the League game.

Today both rugby union and rugby league are professional.  In the United States, however, rugby professionalism has not reach the same level as it has in other sports in the USA, or rugby in other countries..  USA Rugby's highest level of rugby union is the 搒emi-professional?Premier Division.  

As you start going away from the upper tier rugby which is now dominated by business pratices and commercial interests, the old concept of rugby being a gentlemen's sport where hard play and sportsmanship play a significant role is still very part of the rugby culture.  

This is because the sport is very much amateur with a lucky few clubs having paid coaches and administrators.  In the US, until the recent explosive growth of youth rugby, rugby was often a sport learned while in college, or through the military where it was considered an 搊fficer's?sport.  

The demographics of the rugby player in the US shows him to generally having a college degree and making substantially more than the median income.  With many rugby players being white collar professionals, the sport still has an 搖p scale?image.  This is most visible in advertising where rugby is usually featured for 搖p-scale products?  I will admit the two best commercials that involve rugby were the Coke commercial where rugby was being played with watermelons, and the Nike commercial where the pitch was spray painted on the snow.

Since Rugby league is not common in the USA, I have not seen any significant class difference between it and Union.  I have seen in England the significant difference in the class perception of rugby union and soccer.  It is in the amount of space dedicated to each sport in its daily and weekly newspapers.  In papers where the reader demographics tend to be 搘orking class?significant space is given to soccer and very little given to rugby union.  In papers deemed to more 搖pscale? the amount of coverage appears reversed.  I do not know if this can be interpolated to rugby league.

Even today, there are still perceptions in the 揷lass differences?between Rugby Union and Rugby League.

Deane Shephard
Stuttgart RFC