Tier 2 & 3 Rugby Forum

Future powers from Tier 3

Poll

Algeria
9
26%
Zimbabwe
8
23%
Poland
5
14%
Colombia
8
23%
Other (name below)
5
14%
 
Total votes : 35
User avatar
Posts: 2048
Joined: Tue, 15 Apr 2014, 18:36
National Flag:
RomaniaRomania

Re: Future powers from Tier 3

Postby iul » Thu, 05 Jul 2018, 12:24

Figaro wrote:
Working Class Rugger wrote:
Tobar wrote:
It's a pity that in some places rugby has this negative association with elitism. Even in England, you will find people who don't like it because of this.


Yup, it's a shame. When I was first told by an English person that rugby was an upper class sport I was surprised. My experience as an American (at least where I was from) was that most of the guys were more working class guys. I grew up in NYC suburbs in NJ and my first club was all New Jerseyans who did not commute - this basically gave off the impression of more working class suburban folk. They were also the kind of guys who liked to run around and hit people which helped give off this vibe a bit. Now I live and play in NYC and the upper class style is shoved in your face from all the English who play here.


Has a lot to do with the game being tightly linked to the private school system in places like the England, Scotland and Ireland. Same here. But that's not my experience. I started playing in a more working class club and we had a whole range of people in the club.


Fixed.

In Wales, Rugby has always been a working class sport, and is strongly associated with the Valleys which are pretty much the poorest part of Western Europe. In the earliest internationals it was claimed that the Welsh had an "unfair" advantage - as most of their players were coal miners they were physically a lot stronger and tougher than the English public school* types they were playing against.

(*in the UK this term means the opposite of what it means in the US)

Over in England the class divide in Rugby was pretty much synonymous with the division of the Rugby codes. The (much wealthier) southern clubs wanted the game to remain amateur whilst the northern ones wanted to go professional to pay their (working class) players. The result even twenty years later is that Union is largely absent from the North of England (Newcastle and Sale are only relatively recently big players) and vice versa for League in the south of England.

Why Wales followed the South of England instead of the north (to which it was and is far more similar demographically speaking) isn't clear.

They did have a pro mungoball league in Wales pre WW1 but the northern mungoes wouldn't play them and the league collapsed. :thumbup:

Posts: 4168
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: Future powers from Tier 3

Postby thatrugbyguy » Thu, 05 Jul 2018, 12:33

It always struck me as odd that rugby never took off in India given the British controlled it for so long. Cricket and rugby mange to develop in South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe, and even Kenya and Canada, all nations that had British presence at one stage in their history, yet in India, which was such a prized colony for Britain, rugby somehow didn't take off whilst cricket did.

Posts: 683
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Future powers from Tier 3

Postby Tobar » Thu, 05 Jul 2018, 12:56

I’ve wondered the same. I understand that rugby has always been a more upper class sport but isn’t cricket also more upper in England too? I may be completely wrong about that though.

You’d think that with 1B+ people that it would at least run off on enough people to make them higher Tier 3 but nope.

Posts: 4168
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: Future powers from Tier 3

Postby thatrugbyguy » Thu, 05 Jul 2018, 13:42

Both were at the time considered upper class sports in Britain and the Commonwealth. But yeah, India never taking to rugby whilst just about every other major British colony did is one of real mysteries of sports history. If they had developed alongside the other colonies there’s no doubt in my mind India would have been a tier one nation also, maybe even Pakistan as well. Very odd that it didn’t happen.

Posts: 1797
Joined: Sun, 20 Apr 2014, 16:57
Location: Leicester
National Flag:
Great BritainGreat Britain

Re: Future powers from Tier 3

Postby sk 88 » Thu, 05 Jul 2018, 14:19

Figaro wrote:
Working Class Rugger wrote:
Tobar wrote:
It's a pity that in some places rugby has this negative association with elitism. Even in England, you will find people who don't like it because of this.


Yup, it's a shame. When I was first told by an English person that rugby was an upper class sport I was surprised. My experience as an American (at least where I was from) was that most of the guys were more working class guys. I grew up in NYC suburbs in NJ and my first club was all New Jerseyans who did not commute - this basically gave off the impression of more working class suburban folk. They were also the kind of guys who liked to run around and hit people which helped give off this vibe a bit. Now I live and play in NYC and the upper class style is shoved in your face from all the English who play here.


Has a lot to do with the game being tightly linked to the private school system in places like the England, Scotland and Ireland. Same here. But that's not my experience. I started playing in a more working class club and we had a whole range of people in the club.


Fixed.

In Wales, Rugby has always been a working class sport, and is strongly associated with the Valleys which are pretty much the poorest part of Western Europe. In the earliest internationals it was claimed that the Welsh had an "unfair" advantage - as most of their players were coal miners they were physically a lot stronger and tougher than the English public school* types they were playing against.

(*in the UK this term means the opposite of what it means in the US)

Over in England the class divide in Rugby was pretty much synonymous with the division of the Rugby codes. The (much wealthier) southern clubs wanted the game to remain amateur whilst the northern ones wanted to go professional to pay their (working class) players. The result even twenty years later is that Union is largely absent from the North of England (Newcastle and Sale are only relatively recently big players) and vice versa for League in the south of England.

Why Wales followed the South of England instead of the north (to which it was and is far more similar demographically speaking) isn't clear.



As I understand it sort of, but not quite.

Some of the northern clubs were quite wealthy because they could draw a crowd, especially "town clubs" like Leeds as opposed to neighbourhood sides, this obviously lead to inducements for players to join them, even if such inducements were only the chance to play in front of bigger crowds, or move to a better career like becoming a publican rather than a miner. This annoyed the smaller northern clubs who lost their players and their matches. They then cracked down on inducements and used their greater number to win votes in the Yorkshire and Lanacashire unions to stop them running cups and league competitions to try and kill off the crowds (i.e. they realised payments would only stop if the money went away).

Leeds, Hull et al were all run by ex-public school boys like Cardiff, Newport, Coventry or Leicester were. And as with all those clubs the playing base was fairly broad on all sides too.

Then the London clubs were fairly strict amateurs as they were in football and were strongly against paying players for anything at all. Outside London there was not actually much rugby in the rest of the south east and what there was was very public school orientated.

The north was the only place with strong competitions principally because the north is much more densely populated than the midlands or Wales, so there were a large enough number of teams to run a league in a reasonable area, but also because they started a bit earlier so what nascent competitions there were elsewhere hadn't developed to the same extent yet.

The northern clubs broke away to run their own competitions and also openly pay their players. The RFU realised they shit the bed by being too hard on them, so rowed back on some of their ideas to keep Wales & the midlands in the fold. The professional maximum wage was actually fairly similar to the maximum expenses allowed in English rugby union and there were controls on "fake" jobs in the northern union that there weren't in the rest of the country (c.f. the number of pubs ran by players on behalf of club committee men, or in companies ran by club committee men in both unions).

Even with that there was almost another breakaway in 1908 involving the midlands, south west and Wales. Coventry even went over to league for a season and then came back to union. I think Ebbw Vale did the same thing?

This held until the war and then after that the crowds weren't the same, the committee men not as up for a scrap and the RFU's hardline against those that left was compared to their pretty flexible approach to those that had stayed in the tent and pissed out. So it all sort of went away.

The league split was rugby's worst, and those that forced them out knew it and stopped short of forcing the issue again.

Posts: 4198
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Future powers from Tier 3

Postby victorsra » Thu, 05 Jul 2018, 18:16

Tobar wrote:
It's a pity that in some places rugby has this negative association with elitism. Even in England, you will find people who don't like it because of this.


Yup, it's a shame. When I was first told by a British person that rugby was an upper class sport I was surprised. My experience as an American (at least where I was from) was that most of the guys were more working class guys. I grew up in NYC suburbs in NJ and my first club was all New Jerseyans who did not commute - this basically gave off the impression of more working class suburban folk. They were also the kind of guys who liked to run around and hit people which helped give off this vibe a bit. Now I live and play in NYC and the upper class style is shoved in your face from all the Brits who play here.


Aren't clubs like NYAC and Old Blue in NY or Olympic in SF upper class clubs?
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 897
Joined: Tue, 27 May 2014, 20:40
Location: Europe
National Flag:
Great BritainGreat Britain

Re: Future powers from Tier 3

Postby Thomas » Thu, 05 Jul 2018, 19:44

I checked through the records and there was a breakaway Welsh League in 1908 and 1909 Ebbw Vale was the top team.

Posts: 683
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Future powers from Tier 3

Postby Tobar » Mon, 09 Jul 2018, 17:49

victorsra wrote:
Tobar wrote:
It's a pity that in some places rugby has this negative association with elitism. Even in England, you will find people who don't like it because of this.


Yup, it's a shame. When I was first told by a British person that rugby was an upper class sport I was surprised. My experience as an American (at least where I was from) was that most of the guys were more working class guys. I grew up in NYC suburbs in NJ and my first club was all New Jerseyans who did not commute - this basically gave off the impression of more working class suburban folk. They were also the kind of guys who liked to run around and hit people which helped give off this vibe a bit. Now I live and play in NYC and the upper class style is shoved in your face from all the Brits who play here.


Aren't clubs like NYAC and Old Blue in NY or Olympic in SF upper class clubs?


I suppose. They're D1 in expensive markets so anyone who plays for them takes rugby seriously and in order to afford living here they have to have good jobs. Many of them get connections from the old boys in the club and end up working in finance or commercial real estate. They're definitely not a ragtag group of guys who have issue throwing together some cash for field space or a van to take them to games. I will say thought that since they practice and play far up in the Bronx they tend to get some players from up there (and the Bronx isn't necessarily the wealthiest borough).

Though not everyone who plays for the club are necessarily upper class. Sometimes they are guys who take the game very seriously and with business connections end up with decent jobs to support the rugby life. My club is a bit less serious and has a decent amount of English players who came over here for work - many in finance - and wanted to keep playing rugby. They bring a lot of the schoolboy rugby kind of mentality. I wouldn't necessarily say that they are all "upper class" but I'm pretty sure they mostly come from the stereotypical English schoolboy rugby background. This is more along the lines of what I was referring to but I guess this is just splitting hairs here.

Posts: 1227
Joined: Thu, 23 Feb 2017, 01:37
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Future powers from Tier 3

Postby TheStroBro » Wed, 11 Jul 2018, 00:29

Tobar wrote:I suppose. They're D1 in expensive markets so anyone who plays for them takes rugby seriously and in order to afford living here they have to have good jobs. Many of them get connections from the old boys in the club and end up working in finance or commercial real estate. They're definitely not a ragtag group of guys who have issue throwing together some cash for field space or a van to take them to games. I will say thought that since they practice and play far up in the Bronx they tend to get some players from up there (and the Bronx isn't necessarily the wealthiest borough).

Though not everyone who plays for the club are necessarily upper class. Sometimes they are guys who take the game very seriously and with business connections end up with decent jobs to support the rugby life. My club is a bit less serious and has a decent amount of English players who came over here for work - many in finance - and wanted to keep playing rugby. They bring a lot of the schoolboy rugby kind of mentality. I wouldn't necessarily say that they are all "upper class" but I'm pretty sure they mostly come from the stereotypical English schoolboy rugby background. This is more along the lines of what I was referring to but I guess this is just splitting hairs here.


Not the players specifically, but the clubs themselves. NYAC and Olympic are extensions of athletic clubs that are very upperclass. However, Olympic doesn't recruit like NYAC does, and NYAC recruits renowned athletes from all over the world to put on their winged food. Old Blue is definitely an upper crusty club as well. Yet, Olympic doesn't have it's own pitch, they play at SFGG.

Previous

Return to Rugby Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: beber, Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], sanitycheck and 16 guests