How Australian league was built on flimsy foundations - yet we love telling others how much they suck
PAPER-THIN eligibility, confected teams, selection biases, under-performing stars, union players running around with little idea, dodgy schedules, conveniently forgotten facts, and jumping in bed with ‘the enemy’.
This is the foundation which the world’s most successful professional rugby league competition – and nation – was built upon.
And I’m here to say why that’s completely okay.
As somebody who was rather fond of history class in high school, I’m often left to wonder what real value that particular subject has given me in adulthood.
Of course, the classic argument is that history helps us avoid the mistakes of the past, like electing belligerent leaders who instigate class warfare based on closed-thinking ideologies.
Hmm... how’s that working out for the world again?
Anyhow, the other value I believe history lessons provide is the ability to point out how ludicrous and hypocritical some ‘traditionalist rugby league fans’ are when it comes to certain topics.
Namely, international expansion of the sport and the growth of rugby league for females.
To some ‘traditionalists’, they will never accept that rugby league is expanding or legitimised in numerous areas unless it meets some very stringent criteria.
That is to say, they expect players somehow imbued with knowledge of the game since the womb to spring forth in new lands, grow a domestic competition of 10-plus teams, play every week, not recruit anybody from rugby union, have zero heritage-qualified players, know every Dally M winner, and succeed at every post.
I’m not kidding. That’s generally the list of pre-requisites which sceptical Aussies harbour, or otherwise they see fit to tear down and dismiss the legitimacy of overseas or female teams.
Now, prepare to have your mind blown.
Imagine if, next week, I went to South Africa, rounded up a team of disgruntled rugby union players, paid them some money, crossed the border into Botswana and played the two nations against each other under rugby union rules.
Then, I decided I would steal Botswana’s best player, add him to South Africa’s squad, play a game against Zambia – again under rugby union rules – keep travelling north, then months later after numerous stops we’d play Cameroon in a curious 13-man hybrid of the game they developed.
Would you say I had just given birth to rugby league in Botswana?
That’s the long bow we Australians draw when we talk about how New Zealand’s touring ‘All Golds’ of 1907 laid the basis of our nation’s emergence as a rugby league powerhouse.
Let’s examine some of the facts of how rugby league began in Australia:
We were the fourth nation to take up the sport, trailing England, Wales and New Zealand.
We relied on a nation of less than one million people (New Zealand’s population in 1907) to send over a touring team of rugby union mercenaries/rebels to help instigate momentum.
All three games between the ‘All Golds’ and New South Wales in 1907 were played under rugby union rules. New Zealand won the series 3-0.
New South Wales’ best player, Dally Messenger, literally jumped ship to join the ‘All Golds’, sail across the world, and play for them against various British teams
Along the way, the ‘All Golds’ stopped in Melbourne for a scheduled game, but it was cancelled.
Even though Dally Messenger was born, raised and resided in Australia, he is listed in New Zealand’s first officially recognised rugby league Test team, which faced Wales on New Years’ Day 1908.
When the ‘All Golds’ returned via Australia in April of 1908, they then set about playing Australia in three Tests, finally conducted under rugby league rules.
In the very first Test, Australia’s star Dally Messenger missed 12 attempts at goal from 14 attempts.
New Zealand won the first two Tests, and indeed, Australia’s win in the third Test was to be its only victory in its first eight recognised internationals.
When Australia’s first Test was played, the vast majority of the Kangaroos team were ex-union players aged in their late 20s, most of whom had played a handful of league games at most.
The NSWRL commenced on April 20, 1908, meaning that players from that competition had just two club games before representing their country.
The first Test was a double-header that also featured club teams South Sydney and Cumberland. Not only is it remarkable a club game would be held on the same field and day as an international, but Cumberland was also a late entry into the NSWRL competition, not playing in Round 1.
What is now the QRL club competition did not start until 1909, meaning the three Queenslanders in the first Test squad – Micky Dore, Bob Tubman and Doug McLean – had played zero club rugby league games before selection.
The powers-that-be at the time focussed on representative football before club football because they thought it would best secure the financial future of the competition and capture the minds of fans.
When the historic 1908 NSWRL Grand Final was held - the first in Australia - players from both teams were missing because Australia had chosen to travel overseas at the same time
Tom McCabe, a subsequent Australian representative in 1908-09, was born in Widnes, UK and came to Australia either two years or a few months before rugby league began here (depending on what reports you believe). After touring with the Kangaroos, he chose to stay in England and play for Oldham. He certainly wouldn’t have qualified for Australia under modern eligibility rules.
McCabe played a huge part in growing rugby league, by teaching Australians his experiences from the English competition. He also wrote for newspapers, where he curiously referred to himself in the third person. “McCabe rendered recitations in good style” was one of his reports on his own singing prowess at a team function.
One of McCabe’s columns revealed that in 1908 there was a “conference” in Melbourne between rugby league and Australian rules officials about a “proposed amalgamation”.
When Brisbane’s club competition began in 1909 – the forerunner to what is now the Intrust Super Cup – there were just four teams, the same number of teams as for the first NRL Women’s competition. The Intrust Super Cup presently has 14 semi-professional clubs and is looking to expand.
Despite the percentage of Indigenous Australians in 1908 being almost equal to the percentage of our current population, their representation in rugby league teams full-stop was limited, let alone in State and national teams. Does this indicate the ‘best of the best’ were chosen by the game’s forefathers?
Now, I dare say our modern day ‘traditionalists’ (which can also be variously described as perfectionists, obsessives, ideologues, or pessimists) would abide by very few, if any, of these circumstance.
Where is the fairness, the authenticity, the consistency and the demonstrated development pathway of how Australian rugby league came to be in the early 1900s?
To the naysayers, if growth of a sport does not fit into neatly labelled little boxes, it is useless and deserves derision.
Personally, I’m fine with most of the above dot points (Indigenous representation being a clear exception).
The journey to formation was messy, desperate, far from cohesive.
But that’s how things evolve when you step outside your boundaries and try to build something new.
The lessons of the past demonstrate how great success can be achieved over time from the flimsiest of foundations (and how quickly people forget).
What is now the NRL, what is Australia’s complete dominance of the sport for the last 50 years, is effectively the by-product of numerous questionable actions let slide in its early years.
Yet, when a ‘traditional’ rugby league fan sees the game finding its feet in Albania, Argentina or India (maybe even Botswana), it’s completely unacceptable to afford any flexibility.
To them, when you discuss how an NRLW competition should look, they want to compare it to how the NRL looks 110 years on, not how it looked in its second year in 1909.
History is all about providing perspective.