User talk:Brendan Fitzgerald

This is my first attempt at doing anything on Wikipedia, so I have restricted myself to a topic I know well - rugby union.

I am hoping to work out how to set up a dialogue with Gordy, but I am not going to spend hours on it!

Cheers. ;-)

Rugby union history
I'll take it point by point.
 * 1) Broken-time payments were not restricted to Northern clubs. Clubs all over the world have done it and continued to do it up to 1995. Clubs in the North tended to be the ones punished for doing it but other clubs were doing the same. Gloucester were one of the few clubs in the South who were inevestigated (and found guilty). The text should not imply that only Northern clubs were "guilty".
 * 2) It is true that the majority of clubs in Lancashire and Yorkshire did defect, in fact 90%+ is a more probable figure. There are only a handful of clubs who predate 1895 in the North playing union whist about half the original 22 Northern Union clubs are still going. There are a few who claim a pre-1895 date as I believe that Bradford and Bingley do but they were often claiming continuity from a club that joined the Northern Union i.e. the Bradford rugby club.
 * 3) Claiming a mix of different classes playing union across Britain and Ireland on your personal experiences is what is called "original research". In order to claim that you would need to reference it appropriately. It might be true of certain parts of the country but I think that it is extremely unlikely to be true of other parts. Rugby union is only a mass sport in very limited areas, it was particularly elitist in Scotland for example where the club game was dominated by "former pupil teams" and you did need to have attended that particular school to play for the team for decades after 1895.GordyB 09:26, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Source - By 1900 the number of union teams in the two counties had fallen from 240 to 25,  —Preceding unsigned comment added by GordyB (talk • contribs) 11:44, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Gordy. Thanks for the response. Indeed broken time payments have not been restricted to Northern clubs over the years, but it was the issue of broken time payments that caused the schism and the Northern clubs to break away. The expression "broken time payments" is the one that is most commonly used when referring to the split. I think we are arguing at cross-purposes on this. I simply wanted to clarify that the Northern clubs split on this issue. If you wish to clarify that others elsewhere in the country at that time fell back into line with the RFU, then by all means say so. But just saying that others paid boot money, which went on right through to 1995, clouds the issue.

You are undoubtedly correct when saying that 90% of clubs in Lancashire and Yorkshire had split to join the Leagueys. However, when discussing the North, I include Cheshire, Cumberland, Westmoreland, Northumberland, and Durham. There are plenty of RFC clubs in the wider North. So again, perhaps we are at cross purposes.
 * Cheshire clubs were involved in the Northern Union. Cheshire today is not a league area but back then it was. The North East and Cumbria etc didn't have very many rugby clubs then. For some unknown reason Northern rugby basically meant Yorks, Lancs and Cheshire back then because other areas were solidly behind soccer.GordyB 17:55, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I am sorry, but you are being sweeping in your generalisations again. Just from brief review, a few clubs I know of in Cheshire are:  Birkenhead Park RFC - 1871, Broughton Park Football Club - 1882, Sale Football Club - 1861.  In the North East:  Northern Football Club (Newcastle Upon Tyne) - 1875, Gosforth RFC - 1877, Ryton RFC (Durham) - 1880, Hartlepool RFC - 1893, Alnwick RFC - 1880, to name a few.  I have not tried searching for details on others in Cumbria, but I am sure they are around. Brendan Fitzgerald 06:18, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I would refer you Rugby and All That by Martin Johnson page 31. The number of rugby clubs in England in 1893:481 and falling to 244 rugby union clubs shortly after 1895. The Northern Union clubs were not merely a majority (and an overwhelming one at that) in the North, they weren't far off being in the majority of all rugby clubs in England.GordyB 12:22, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

As for the class thing, it is part of the ethos of rugby union that players in the majority of clubs are from all walks of life. Your deletion of my edit on the grounds that it is wrong is also, presumably, on your personal experience. You are correct that several of the leading Scots clubs were "former pupil" clubs. I would dispute whether or not this is elitist. There are many "former pupil" clubs elsewhere in the UK and around the world. Some have relaxed the rule and allowed others to join, because of lack of numbers. Others have stuck to the principle, simply because the club is what it says it is - for former pupils. Is Yorkshire County Cricket Club elitist because it refuses to allow non-Yorkshire born people to play? I would say not. By far the majority of clubs in England, Wales and Ireland draw people from all walks of life, in keeping with the ethos of the code. It is undoubtedly true that clubs like Godalming and Guildford RFC in Surrey, where I trained for one season, have a majority of members who are relatively well off and could probably be classed as middle class. But I can assure you that they have working class members. Your dismissal of my comment smacks of class prejudice and I would ask you to consider a less aggressive view. Also you suggest that I should provide a reference for my contention that people from all walks of life play rugby, but you offer no reference yourself to support your own sweeping generalisation that it is dominated by the middle classes. Cheers. Brendan Fitzgerald 12:42, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Look at the starting XV for England, how many of them went to fee-paying schools? Most of them. I can give you a list if you like.
 * Yorkshire County Cricket Club haven't had a Yorkshire-only policy since around 1992.
 * As for class prejudice, I didn't say which class I belong to.GordyB 17:55, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I used the reference to Yorkshire CC to illustrate that sticking to a former pupils only policy is purist, not elitist. Many of the clubs that I mentioned above in the North East had memberships founded in the mines, the shipyards and the steelworks.  There are many works clubs throughout the country, which are clearly populated by the workers - the likes of Capenhurst, Shell Stanlow and Shell Carrington rugby clubs in Cheshire.  Also Billingham rugby club in the North East attached to a chemical works. There are many others.  As I said, your dismissal of my comment and your continuing insistance that rugby is dominated by middle class elitism smacks of class prejudice.  I never made any comment about which class you belong to.  Whichever it is, you are displaying class prejudice in your observations.  It may well be that England's current team is dominated by ex-pupils from fee paying schools.  This is probably more due to the collapse of organised sport in state schools than anything else.  In recent years, England have had brick-layers, farmers and an undertaker amongst their players.  Also, why ignore the Welsh?  Many of their clubs are founded in the mining villages (or ex-mining villages, as they are now) and the steel works.  Your view is narrow and unsupportable. My comment that rugby clubs have members from all walks of life is valid and defendable.  It is exactly the ethos of rugby.  Many, many clubs the world over demonstrate it and your attempts to deny it based on unsupported generalisations, whilst at the same time demanding supporting references from me, just illustrate the class prejudice which you seem determined to reflect in the article.  Cheers. Brendan Fitzgerald 06:18, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You don't even know me well enough to say that I didn't go to a private school myself so cut out the ad hominems. If you read my user page you would know that I come from Harrogate, not a town known for its Victorian terraces.
 * 2/3 rds of England internationals went to private schools, but only a small percentage of the UK population did. There obviously is a relationship between social class and participation in rugby union whether you like it or not. Stating that this or that club may have been slightly different from the norm is one thing but impling that rugby union has historically been an inclusive sport is another. It's not even particularly inclusive in 2007 let alone in the early part of the 20th century.
 * If you want to include data on social class and rugby union then Rugby union in England is the correct article to do it in and it would need to be referenced appropriately. In case you haven't noticed the rugby union article does not make any statement on the social class of those playing rugby union so I am hardly desperate to label the sport.
 * As for Yorkshire County Cricket Club, they were often (and still are) accused of not being an inclusive organisation. It cost them Botham whose family were from Yorkshire and lives in Yorkshire, it would have cost them Michael Vaughan (born in Burnley) had they not changed their policy. Unfortunately rugby union in many areas in England has not, there is still a lot of snobbery within the sport particularly when it comes to players being selected for representational honours.GordyB 12:22, 30 September 2007 (UTC)