Subject: AH Challenge: Rugby Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 21:33:17 -0400 From: daniel patrick duffy Organization: private Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if Watched a rugby game this afternoon on Fox Sports Network between the British Lions and the Australian Wallabyes. Nothing went right for the Aussies and the Lions crushed them. A couple of late tries by the Aussies made the score seem a lot closer than the game actually was. I played rugby when I was in the USAF back in the 80s for the Wright-Patterson AFB Jets. I found it to be a much better (and more demanding) game than American football, which I have also played. Anyways, I've started watching rugby again and had forgotten how much fun it was. So here's the chalenge, how do we make rugby America's favorite sport instead of NFL football? POD would be between 1900 to 1920 in the factory and coal towns of Ohio and PA when the NFL got started. How to keep American footbal more like rugby. OT questions: I've been away from the sport for awhile. Who is the premier rugby team today? The Lions? Springboks? All-Blacks? And how long before the American Eagles are considered to be in the same class with these teams? Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Rugby Date: 09 Jul 2001 02:12:18 GMT From: dfowler955@aol.com (DFowler955) Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 >daniel patrick duffy theduffys@fuse.net wrote: >So here's the chalenge, how do we make rugby America's favorite sport >instead of NFL football? POD would be between 1900 to 1920 in the >factory and coal towns of Ohio and PA when the NFL got started. How to >keep American footbal more like rugby. Being from the home of the Pro Football Hall of FAme (a name which I'm sure makes non-American shiver :-), I can offer a few ideas. First, the NFL was founded in 1920 by numerous people here in Canton, Ohio. We had high school football for a long time before that, though. So, you have the right area and time. Here is what I suggest. In 1905 or 1906, there were numerous deaths in high school/college football, because it *was* so run-oriented, a lot closer to rugby than what we see today. Since these were still young kids, the outcry reached the President, and he threatened to ban it - don't know how truthful he was, this *was* rough and tumble TR saying it. Anyhoo, how about this. In 1902, an inventor creates the first helmet with padding; primitive beast, but it does protect the head a little. Most people don't want to wear it - they dont' want to seem like wimps, but he gives a sample to TR, anyway. Well, he's feeling a bit more daring than usual because of this "padding, and so he goes out horseback riding one day. His horse throws him, but he suffers only a mild concussion! Suddenly, everyone wnts to wear Teddy Helmets. Including some college and high school athletes. The numbers of deaths aren't so high. So, rules never get changed making head injuries less likely, since there is no national outcry about them. Now, we need two more things. We need some famous athletes like Jim Thorpe and Red Grange to jump to a pro rugby league. And, we need someone to found this league. Could Halas and Co. found it in this ATL? Possibly? Can we find the athletes? Maybe. But, I think fan acceptance needs to start with the elimination of that outcry in the 1905-1906 time period first. Then, the butterflies can start from there. __________ Jesus, who was God come down in the flesh as man, was sinless, yet suffered & died for our sins & rose again so we may go to Heaven. Repenting of our sins & asking Him into our hearts as Savior is all you need to know you'll go to Heaven. Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Rugby Date: 09 Jul 2001 12:15:39 GMT From: coyu@aol.com (Coyu) Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 "dfowler955@aol.com" wrote: > First, the NFL was founded in 1920 by numerous people here in Canton, >Ohio. We had high school football for a long time before that, though. So, >you have the right area and time. Here is what I suggest. Um. Actually, American football has been around since the 1860s. Much closer to rugby then, and played mainly at the colleges. In 1880 the scrimmage was invented, and the gridiron pattern, which essentially was the first serious rupture with rugby. In 1892, the Harvard team invented the play called 'the flying wedge', which is pretty much exactly what it sounds like, except they linked hands as well. The original blitzkrieg. > In 1905 or 1906, there were numerous deaths in high school/college >football, because it *was* so run-oriented, a lot closer to rugby than what >we see today. Since these were still young kids, the outcry reached the >President, and he threatened to ban it - don't know how truthful he was, this >*was* rough and tumble TR saying it. Well, there were nearly two hundred serious injuries -- paralysis, fractures requiring resections, that sort of thing -- and eighteen deaths, mainly of the elite and well-educated. Not 'young kids' either. > Suddenly, everyone wnts to wear Teddy Helmets. Including some college >and high school athletes. The numbers of deaths aren't so high. So, rules never >get changed making head injuries less likely, since there is no national >outcry about them. It's not the helmets. From the available evidence, American football was more violent than any football variant played today, and at a time when medical science was still half a foot in the Dark Ages. In 1906, most of the most violent things were banned from play -- slugging, hurdling, interlocking interference -- like the aforementioned 'flying wedge', though there were other plays like that as well -- and their countertactics, like mass turtleback attacking, which was repeatedly hitting the first man in the flying wedge until he dropped. 1906 also institutionalized the forward pass, making the rift complete. Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Rugby Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 11:45:11 -0600 From: Keith Morrison Organization: Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 , 2 Coyu wrote: > > "dfowler955@aol.com" wrote: > > > First, the NFL was founded in 1920 by numerous people here in Canton, > >Ohio. We had high school football for a long time before that, though. So, > >you have the right area and time. Here is what I suggest. > > Um. Actually, American football has been around since the 1860s. > Much closer to rugby then, and played mainly at the colleges. > In 1880 the scrimmage was invented, and the gridiron pattern, > which essentially was the first serious rupture with rugby. Actually, the origin of football (the North American variety) is pretty well known. "Football" in the US was still pretty much soccer until 1874 when Harvard invited McGill down for a game. The Americans found out that the Canadians were actually playing rugby (which, given the close ties that were still there between the UK and Canada, it's not surprising that it reached Canada first), so they compromised and played half the games in the American style and half in the Canadian style. Also of note was that McGill could only field 11 players where Harvard had 15, so the Americans agrees to go with 11 men on the field. They played two games, the first that Harvard won 3-0, the second a draw with no goals. The American players and spectators liked the Canadian version of the game so much that they immediately started playing with the "McGill Rules", which were quickly picked up by the universities along the East Coast. Walter Camp, then at Yale, played in the first Harvard-Yale game using McGill Rules, and it was he who came up with things like the scrimmage line, the gridiron and downs, the quarterback and such. -- Keith Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Rugby Date: 09 Jul 2001 20:38:19 GMT From: coyu@aol.com (Coyu) Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 Keith Morrison wrote: >> Um. Actually, American football has been around since the 1860s. >> Much closer to rugby then, and played mainly at the colleges. >> In 1880 the scrimmage was invented, and the gridiron pattern, >> which essentially was the first serious rupture with rugby. > >Actually, the origin of football (the North American variety) is pretty >well known. "Football" in the US was still pretty much soccer until 1874 >when Harvard invited McGill down for a game. The Americans found out that >the Canadians were actually playing rugby (which, given the close ties >that were still there between the UK and Canada, it's not surprising that >it reached Canada first), so they compromised and played half the games >in the American style and half in the Canadian style. Also of note was >that McGill could only field 11 players where Harvard had 15, so the >Americans agrees to go with 11 men on the field. Mm. Except for the fact that Harvard had already allowed running with the ball since 1871, three years before the McGill match, this is all correct. Harvard football was derived from a hybrid form of rugby and soccer called 'the Boston Game', and was only played intramurally, since the other Ivy League schools played by a variant of association rules (no carrying the ball, no gouging, etc.). The McGill match added another ingredient to the mix, but it did not create it. Btw, McGill seems to have been the only college, um, willing enough to play by Harvard rules up to that point. Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Rugby Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 17:28:45 -0600 From: Keith Morrison Organization: Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 , 2 Coyu wrote: > >Actually, the origin of football (the North American variety) is pretty > >well known. "Football" in the US was still pretty much soccer until 1874 > >when Harvard invited McGill down for a game. The Americans found out that > >the Canadians were actually playing rugby (which, given the close ties > >that were still there between the UK and Canada, it's not surprising that > >it reached Canada first), so they compromised and played half the games > >in the American style and half in the Canadian style. Also of note was > >that McGill could only field 11 players where Harvard had 15, so the > >Americans agrees to go with 11 men on the field. > > Mm. Except for the fact that Harvard had already allowed running > with the ball since 1871, three years before the McGill match, this > is all correct. > > Harvard football was derived from a hybrid form of rugby and soccer > called 'the Boston Game', and was only played intramurally, since > the other Ivy League schools played by a variant of association rules > (no carrying the ball, no gouging, etc.). The McGill match added > another ingredient to the mix, but it did not create it. It added tackling, touchdowns and field goals. The tackling was perhaps the most important addition because I'd imagine that the game would get pretty boring otherwise. More like ultimate frisbee than football. -- Keith Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Rugby Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 14:32:20 GMT From: chris@vbfg.freeserve.co.uk (Chris Russell) Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 , 2 On 09 Jul 2001 02:12:18 GMT, dfowler955@aol.com (DFowler955) wrote: >>daniel patrick duffy theduffys@fuse.net >wrote: >>So here's the chalenge, how do we make rugby America's favorite sport >>instead of NFL football? POD would be between 1900 to 1920 in the >>factory and coal towns of Ohio and PA when the NFL got started. How to >>keep American footbal more like rugby. > Now, we need two more things. We need some famous athletes like Jim >Thorpe and Red Grange to jump to a pro rugby league. And, we need someone to >found this league. Professional Rugby League in the US, I like it: http://www.amnrl.com/ For a POD that makes Rugby fairly wide spread in the US I'd look to the split between the Northern Union and the RFU in 1895. The Aussies and some Kiwis followed suit in 1908 and set off immediately on a tour of the UK. I'd have them stop off on the West Coast (IIRC they did play some games somewhere in North America - I believe Canada though), play some exhibition games across the country and then sail the Atlantic from NY. It doesn't get you Rugby Union but are you sure you want it anyway? ;^) Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Rugby Date: 9 Jul 2001 02:10:08 -0700 From: just_a_ride@hotmail.com (Nick Barlow) Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 daniel patrick duffy wrote in message news:<3B4909DD.714BBAA6@fuse.net>... > Watched a rugby game this afternoon on Fox Sports Network between the > British Lions and the Australian Wallabyes. Nothing went right for the > Aussies and the Lions crushed them. A couple of late tries by the > Aussies made the score seem a lot closer than the game actually was. Either you're in an AH, or they were showing the game from last week, going by that description! > > I played rugby when I was in the USAF back in the 80s for the > Wright-Patterson AFB Jets. I found it to be a much better (and more > demanding) game than American football, which I have also played. > Anyways, I've started watching rugby again and had forgotten how much > fun it was. > > So here's the chalenge, how do we make rugby America's favorite sport > instead of NFL football? POD would be between 1900 to 1920 in the > factory and coal towns of Ohio and PA when the NFL got started. How to > keep American footbal more like rugby. Maybe one way would be to introduce a touring team to the US during that period - either Australia, one of the British teams, or perhaps a proto-Lions team - if they turn up looking for games with american 'football' sides, some rules standardisation between the US and the rest of the world would probably happen. Maybe introduce some links between the industrial/coal-mining areas of Ohio and the similar regions of South Wales (one of the rugby strongholds) after WW1? However, one of the problems Rugby would have in the US is that until 1995 the 15-a-side game (Rugby Union) was officially an amateur game, with clubs and players being banned for giving or receiving payments for playing (of course, this rule was more strictly enforced in some places than others). This was part of the reason for the split between the clubs in the north and south of England, with the predominantly working-class northern clubs breaking away to form the professional Northern Union, from which emerged the 13-a-side variant known as Rugby League. League made various changes from Union in order to make the game more attractive to paying crowds - the reduction to thirteen players, the six-tackle rule (similar to the four downs in American Football), a more open style of play etc It might be more likely then, for the US to link with Rugby League (still possible with the above scenarion, but have the links with Northern England rather than South Wales) or for a nascent US Rugby organisation to be forced to join the League sides as the RFU (Rugby Football Union) tries to make them amateur like the rest of their sides. This could make the devlopment of international rugby throughout the century quite interesting. In OTL, the major forces in Rugby League are Northern England, Southern France and Queensland and New South Wales in Australia. If the US takes it on, does it become the dominant form, with only a few purists clinging to the Union form? Also, if the US was to have an 'international' sport as one of it's major national sports, how might this change US society? There's no equivalent of the soccer or rugby World Cups in any of the major US sports (Football, Baseball, Ice Hockey, Basketball) so how would facing regular international sporting challenges from Britain, France and Australia (at least) affect the US? One final point on Rugby League - in France, it was the dominant form of the game pre-WW2 but it was banned by the Vichy regime because many of the clubs, with their roots in the working class, had links to the Communists and the Resistance. Given this link between a sport and Communism, might Rugby have come under the eye of HUAC in the 50s? > > OT questions: I've been away from the sport for awhile. Who is the > premier rugby team today? The Lions? Springboks? All-Blacks? (Being English, my biases may show here...) Australia are the current world champions having won the World Cup in 1999 (previous winners were South Africa in 1995, Australia in 1991 and New Zealand in 1987). The Lions aren't a 'proper' team, acting as a representative team for the best players from the England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland teams for a tour to one of the Southern Hemisphere nations every year (usually during the southern winter/northern summer). England are generally regarded as the best of the northern hemisphere teams, currently leading the Six Nations (the four British Isles teams, plus France and Italy), with the decider to come in September (postponed from March because of foot and mouth disease) when they face Ireland. They're the current favourites for the 2003 World Cup 9alongside Australia), anyway. > And how > long before the American Eagles are considered to be in the same class > with these teams? A long time, unless something dramatic happens to US rugby over the next few years. They're having enough problems keeping up with the second-tier rugby nations (Canada, Fiji, Italy, Japan etc), let alone matching the big boys. Nick Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Rugby Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 17:42:16 +1200 From: Gareth Wilson Organization: University of Canterbury Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 , 2 Nick Barlow wrote: > daniel patrick duffy wrote in message news:<3B4909DD.714BBAA6@fuse.net>... > > > And how > > long before the American Eagles are considered to be in the same class > > with these teams? > > A long time, unless something dramatic happens to US rugby over the > next few years. Keith Quinn, the New Zealander rugby commentator, once calculated that the Eagles would beat the All Blacks in the year 2060, if their improvement was constant. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Gareth Wilson Christchurch New Zealand ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Rugby Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 22:48:58 +0100 From: David Cantrell Organization: This space intentionally left blank Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 , 2 On 9 Jul 2001 02:10:08 -0700, just_a_ride@hotmail.com (Nick Barlow) said: >daniel patrick duffy wrote in message news:<3B4909DD.714BBAA6@fuse.net>... > >> And how >> long before the American Eagles are considered to be in the same class >> with these teams? > >A long time, unless something dramatic happens to US rugby over the >next few years. That 'something dramatic' would have to be something like being selected to host a world cup - although it doesn't seem to have helped much with Association Football in the US like what it was meant to. Putting all the ambulance-chasing lawyers out of your misery would help too. -- David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Rugby Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 20:15:11 +0100 From: "Karl Stringer" Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 , 2 Nick Barlow wrote in message news:b4034320.0107090110.12392f81@posting.google.com... > > Watched a rugby game this afternoon on Fox Sports Network between the > > British Lions and the Australian Wallabyes. Nothing went right for the > > Aussies and the Lions crushed them. A couple of late tries by the > > Aussies made the score seem a lot closer than the game actually was. > > Either you're in an AH, or they were showing the game from last week, > going by that description! Sure, he lives in the same TL in which the first Test ended in a draw (notice, I didn't say that it was one where England won as that would be stretching believability too far). > Also, if the US was to have an 'international' sport as one of it's > major national sports, how might this change US society? There's no > equivalent of the soccer or rugby World Cups in any of the major US > sports (Football, Baseball, Ice Hockey, Basketball) so how would > facing regular international sporting challenges from Britain, France > and Australia (at least) affect the US? ??? Hockey and basketball _do_ have World Championships. Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Rugby Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 20:23:44 GMT From: "Allan Mac Donald" Organization: MPowered-Subscriber Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 , 2 , 3 -- -- Predator posing as a housepet 1977-present "Karl Stringer" wrote in message news:9id1pc$kbc$1@news5.svr.pol.co.uk... > Nick Barlow wrote in message > news:b4034320.0107090110.12392f81@posting.google.com... > > > > Watched a rugby game this afternoon on Fox Sports Network between the > > > British Lions and the Australian Wallabyes. Nothing went right for the > > > Aussies and the Lions crushed them. A couple of late tries by the > > > Aussies made the score seem a lot closer than the game actually was. > > > > Either you're in an AH, or they were showing the game from last week, > > going by that description! > > > Sure, he lives in the same TL in which the first Test ended in a draw > (notice, I didn't say that it was one where England won as that would be > stretching believability too far). > > > > > > > Also, if the US was to have an 'international' sport as one of it's > > major national sports, how might this change US society? There's no > > equivalent of the soccer or rugby World Cups in any of the major US > > sports (Football, Baseball, Ice Hockey, Basketball) so how would > > facing regular international sporting challenges from Britain, France > > and Australia (at least) affect the US? > > ??? > > Hockey and basketball _do_ have World Championships. Well baseball dont count. Only two countrys ever won the world series. And with hockey only one country should ever win the cup. Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Rugby Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 07:30:17 GMT From: "Brent McKee" Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 Allan Mac Donald wrote in message news:kpo27.35$AN4.32595@sapphire.mtt.net... > > > -- > -- > Predator posing as a housepet 1977-present > "Karl Stringer" wrote in message > news:9id1pc$kbc$1@news5.svr.pol.co.uk... > > Nick Barlow wrote in message > > news:b4034320.0107090110.12392f81@posting.google.com... > > > > > Also, if the US was to have an 'international' sport as one of it's > > > major national sports, how might this change US society? There's no > > > equivalent of the soccer or rugby World Cups in any of the major US > > > sports (Football, Baseball, Ice Hockey, Basketball) so how would > > > facing regular international sporting challenges from Britain, France > > > and Australia (at least) affect the US? > > > > ??? > > > > Hockey and basketball _do_ have World Championships. > > Well baseball dont count. Only two countrys ever won the world series. And > with hockey only one country should ever win the cup. Allan, read what was written -- Hockey and BASKETball, not BASEball. Of course where you live you're probably a Red Sox fan, so you probably have some difficulty with the concept of winning ;-). -- Brent McKee To reply by email, please remove the capital letters (S and N) from the email address "If we cease to judge this world, we may find ourselves, very quickly, in one which is infinitely worse." - Margaret Atwood Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Rugby Date: 09 Jul 2001 10:39:59 GMT From: sc0t18nd@aol.compere (Ian MacAninch) Organization: AOL, http://www.aol.co.uk Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 Daniel Patrick Duffy wrote: >So here's the chalenge, how do we make rugby America's favorite sport >instead of NFL football? POD would be between 1900 to 1920 in the >factory and coal towns of Ohio and PA when the NFL got started. How to >keep American footbal more like rugby. > Just a bit of trivia. The US are still the reigning Olymoic champions in rugby for your info. Can't recall when it was last played tho'. Ian MacAninch Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Rugby Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 22:50:28 +0100 From: David Cantrell Organization: This space intentionally left blank Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 , 2 On 09 Jul 2001 10:39:59 GMT, sc0t18nd@aol.compere (Ian MacAninch) said: >Just a bit of trivia. The US are still the reigning Olymoic champions in rugby >for your info. Can't recall when it was last played tho'. 1924. -- David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david