Talk:British Army Rugby League

Discussion
I'm trying to understand the phrase ....British Armed Forces due to the strength of rugby union. Now I know that the British Army is not as powerful is once was .... but does it really retreat when faced with the "strength of the Rugby Union"? If the source says this, then is this what is intended? Victuallers (talk) 20:43, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Basically it was because the RFU had a lot of political power back then in the armed forces (old boys club likely) so they maintained the old rugby union law that said that anyone who played rugby league was banned from playing union. There probably is a better way to word it.  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 20:50, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I understand that power .... but is it not related to military types being professional? I find it difficult to believe that the army banned soldiers from playing rugby league ... would they be put on a charge? .... or was it it that they only allowed one type of rugby and they officially chose the RFU? Why would the army care if its players were banned from playing the other rugby? I'm trying to sort this out for DYK and I could wave it through on AGF but I'm having difficulty in understanding for our army gets bossed about by a sporting organisation. Victuallers (talk) 20:59, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * It probably wasn't a direct order, it was probably just the old boys in the General Staff deciding to morally uphold Union's stance against the rebel code. I found another source for there being a ban here.  The C of E  God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 21:05, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Go on then, although I think the league are enjoying "a ban" ending as it is more newsworthy than now being included on the official list of sports. As you say it wasn't an order. I'll have new look at the hook. I think Ive improved the reading of the article as someone who agnostic about Rugby. Victuallers (talk) 22:03, 30 March 2021 (UTC)