Old Rules

[siv]

Interesting thought experiment.

What constitutes a sport?

The rules
The organisation that runs it
A direct line of rules evolving

Hmm

The group that keeps saying RL is not a sport

 

[Matt_CBY]

The group that keeps saying RL is not a sport

What group is that?

Incan understand the logic sometimes.

 

[Ride the Lion to Zion]

Nope

England did not allow replacements

While NSWRL did

In which case, the 1914 test series must have been played under Pommy rules.

We were reduced to 10 men in the third test and still won.

Australia 6 Northern Union 14.

 

[T-Boon]

Interesting thought experiment.

What constitutes a sport?

The rules
The organisation that runs it
A direct line of rules evolving

Hmm

You going to flesh this out a bit? It got me thinking… which hurts.

 

[Ride the Lion to Zion]

From memory, I seem to recall that the non-offending team got the loose head; a feed/loose head quinella gave you an advantage, albeit scrums were very much a lottery.

The contested 8-man Union scrum is prone to collapse inwardly. The contested 6-man League scrum, shorn of the stabilizing effect of flankers, is prone to skew outwardly.

Splitting head and feed meant the scrum-half was aiming for the hooker furthest away. Which, at least in theory, made the structure more cohesive. Once the non-offending team received both head and feed, there ceased to be any incentive for the offending team to pack correctly.

 

[siv]

In which case, the 1914 test series must have been played under Pommy rules.

We were reduced to 10 men in the third test and still won.

Australia 6 Northern Union 14.

Yes that went on for a while

 

[siv]

What group is that?

Incan understand the logic sometimes.

GAISF the Sports Accord

 

[Matt_CBY]

You going to flesh this out a bit? It got me thinking… which hurts.

Just thinking going through it quickly…


What makes a sport a specific sport separate from other sports?



There are many different angles you can approach this question with.



I guess the simplest way is to take what most people might say is the answer and break that down.



I think most people would say the rules/laws of a game determine if a particular game is a separate sport from another game. After-all there are obvious differences between Rugby Union’s laws to Rugby League’s laws and of course extremely different to Association Football and/or Melbourne Rules Football.



But if you were to argue that Rules or Laws are what makes a sports different to others, where do we draw the line?



As we know the Rules/Laws of the NRL, the RFL & the ‘International Laws’ are all different. (let alone international matches being played by different Laws/Rules as other international matches).



So if Rules/Laws alone determine the answer, are the NRL, Super League and International Rugby League three different sports? (Most people would say of course not!)



That’s without bringing up old rules/laws of a particular sport. We all know the current day game is vastly different to how the game was in the 1990’s and even more so from how the game was played in 1970’s & 1980’s which was vastly different again to how the game was played in the 1950’s & 1960’s which was vastly different to the era before it. But if Rugby League today and Rugby League in 1908 is the same sport (which I believe calling it a different sport is disrespectful) and Rugby League played under NRL or RFL or IRL Laws/Rules is the same sport. How many Laws/Rules have to remain consistent for it be the same sport?



Rugby League & Rugby Union share a lot of the same rules and especially share the way points are scored (Tries, Goals, Field Goals), should these games played under different Laws/Rules be classified as the same sport?



So perhaps it’s not the rules at all. Perhaps it’s the objective of the game? In Rugby League the objective in its purest form is to score more points than your opposition by moving a ball down the field and into the oppositions scoring area while preventing your opposition from completing the same objective. So many other sports share that same objective though.



One way of clearing all of the above up is to state that a sport is separate from other sports when the organisation or group of organisations (National Federations of a particular sport linked to that sports International Federation) are different to other sports federations. i.e The NRL is the sport of Rugby League because it’s the official National Governing body for Rugby League in Australia through its membership of the International Rugby League which differs from the ARU which is a member of a different International federation.



This explains why Field Hockey and Ice Hockey are different sports, why American Football and Canadian Football are different sports and so on.



But where does that leave Rebel sporting organisations. If a Rebel sporting organisation is using the exact same rules as an official sporting organisation I would say that most people would argue the Rebel organisation is playing the same sport as the official sporting organisations are. I.e the 1997 ARL & Super League seasons.



But where does that leave Rugby League? Which started as a Rebel Rugby competition with its first recorded matches played under Rugby Union Rules/Laws on both side of the world. Similar with American and Canadian football whose Laws/Rules evolved directly from Rugby Laws/Rules as well.



Is all of Rugby League, American Football and Canadian Football just Rebel Rugby competitions, and therefore the sport of Rugby, which Laws/Rules developed in isolation from one another?



I believe most people who answer ‘No’ & that they are all separate sports from each other.



The only conclusion that makes any sense is that a sport is separate from other sports when the majority comes to an agreed understanding that a sport is different to other sports.

 

[Wb1234]

In which case, the 1914 test series must have been played under Pommy rules.

We were reduced to 10 men in the third test and still won.

Australia 6 Northern Union 14.

Rorkes drift ?

Edit

What was the Rorke's Drift Test? | Love Rugby League

England will wear a special jersey when they face Australia in Melbourne this Sunday, commemorating a test match from a century ago. But just what was the Rorke’s ...

www.loverugbyleague.com

 

[T-Boon]

Just thinking going through it quickly…


What makes a sport a specific sport separate from other sports?



There are many different angles you can approach this question with.



I guess the simplest way is to take what most people might say is the answer and break that down.



I think most people would say the rules/laws of a game determine if a particular game is a separate sport from another game. After-all there are obvious differences between Rugby Union’s laws to Rugby League’s laws and of course extremely different to Association Football and/or Melbourne Rules Football.



But if you were to argue that Rules or Laws are what makes a sports different to others, where do we draw the line?



As we know the Rules/Laws of the NRL, the RFL & the ‘International Laws’ are all different. (let alone international matches being played by different Laws/Rules as other international matches).



So if Rules/Laws alone determine the answer, are the NRL, Super League and International Rugby League three different sports? (Most people would say of course not!)



That’s without bringing up old rules/laws of a particular sport. We all know the current day game is vastly different to how the game was in the 1990’s and even more so from how the game was played in 1970’s & 1980’s which was vastly different again to how the game was played in the 1950’s & 1960’s which was vastly different to the era before it. But if Rugby League today and Rugby League in 1908 is the same sport (which I believe calling it a different sport is disrespectful) and Rugby League played under NRL or RFL or IRL Laws/Rules is the same sport. How many Laws/Rules have to remain consistent for it be the same sport?



Rugby League & Rugby Union share a lot of the same rules and especially share the way points are scored (Tries, Goals, Field Goals), should these games played under different Laws/Rules be classified as the same sport?



So perhaps it’s not the rules at all. Perhaps it’s the objective of the game? In Rugby League the objective in its purest form is to score more points than your opposition by moving a ball down the field and into the oppositions scoring area while preventing your opposition from completing the same objective. So many other sports share that same objective though.



One way of clearing all of the above up is to state that a sport is separate from other sports when the organisation or group of organisations (National Federations of a particular sport linked to that sports International Federation) are different to other sports federations. i.e The NRL is the sport of Rugby League because it’s the official National Governing body for Rugby League in Australia through its membership of the International Rugby League which differs from the ARU which is a member of a different International federation.



This explains why Field Hockey and Ice Hockey are different sports, why American Football and Canadian Football are different sports and so on.



But where does that leave Rebel sporting organisations. If a Rebel sporting organisation is using the exact same rules as an official sporting organisation I would say that most people would argue the Rebel organisation is playing the same sport as the official sporting organisations are. I.e the 1997 ARL & Super League seasons.



But where does that leave Rugby League? Which started as a Rebel Rugby competition with its first recorded matches played under Rugby Union Rules/Laws on both side of the world. Similar with American and Canadian football whose Laws/Rules evolved directly from Rugby Laws/Rules as well.



Is all of Rugby League, American Football and Canadian Football just Rebel Rugby competitions, and therefore the sport of Rugby, which Laws/Rules developed in isolation from one another?



I believe most people who answer ‘No’ & that they are all separate sports from each other.



The only conclusion that makes any sense is that a sport is separate from other sports when the majority comes to an agreed understanding that a sport is different to other sports.

Before I read that and think about it can you confirm yes/no whether it was Chat GTP?

 

[Matt_CBY]

Before I read that and think about it can you confirm yes/no whether it was Chat GTP?

It’s not from Chat GTP. I typed it up in my notes before copying and pasting it onto here.

 

[Ride the Lion to Zion]

Rorkes drift ?

Edit

What was the Rorke's Drift Test? | Love Rugby League

England will wear a special jersey when they face Australia in Melbourne this Sunday, commemorating a test match from a century ago. But just what was the Rorke’s ...

www.loverugbyleague.com

That's the one.

Lessons from RL history -

Australian self-interest and dirty tricks are almost as old as NSWRL.

 

[Wb1234]

That's the one.

Lessons from RL history -

Australian self-interest and dirty tricks are almost as old as NSWRL.

Kangaroos were dirty at a denied late try by langlands or gasnier would’ve won the series for the kangaroos in the 1960s and were livid at the touchie for cheating at station rd swinton

 

[Ride the Lion to Zion]

Kangaroos were dirty at a denied late try by langlands or gasnier would’ve won the series for the kangaroos in the 1960s and were livid at the touchie for cheating at station rd swinton

All lies.

Especially the last bit.

 

[Wb1234]

All lies.

Especially the last bit.

The 10 Greatest Rugby League Test Matches • Rugby League Opinions

There have been some great rugby league test matches over the years, but these ones were something else.

rugbyleagueopinions.com

Number 7 is another example

 

[Matt_CBY]

What’s so funny T-boon?

 

[Ride the Lion to Zion]

The 10 Greatest Rugby League Test Matches • Rugby League Opinions

There have been some great rugby league test matches over the years, but these ones were something else.

rugbyleagueopinions.com

Number 7 is another example

We prefer the 2014 Rorke's Drift anniversary game. Clip of the late drama in Melbourne was posted again on TRL just last week.

Commemorative jerseys, Ryan Hall, downward pressure, the Suttons.

 

[Nutz]

I liked the old rule that if the ball on the ground had hair on it you kicked it and if it didn't you picked it up and ran with it.

 

[Wb1234]

We prefer the 2014 Rorke's Drift anniversary game. Clip of the late drama in Melbourne was posted again on TRL just last week.

Commemorative jerseys, Ryan Hall, downward pressure, the Suttons.

England v Toa Samoa

England versus Samoa match centre includes live scores and updates. Includes official live player and team stats. Run metres, fantasy points scoring.

www.nrl.com

Penalties england 6 Samoa 1
Six agains England 4 Samoa 0

 

[siv]

Just thinking going through it quickly…


What makes a sport a specific sport separate from other sports?



There are many different angles you can approach this question with.



I guess the simplest way is to take what most people might say is the answer and break that down.



I think most people would say the rules/laws of a game determine if a particular game is a separate sport from another game. After-all there are obvious differences between Rugby Union’s laws to Rugby League’s laws and of course extremely different to Association Football and/or Melbourne Rules Football.



But if you were to argue that Rules or Laws are what makes a sports different to others, where do we draw the line?



As we know the Rules/Laws of the NRL, the RFL & the ‘International Laws’ are all different. (let alone international matches being played by different Laws/Rules as other international matches).



So if Rules/Laws alone determine the answer, are the NRL, Super League and International Rugby League three different sports? (Most people would say of course not!)



That’s without bringing up old rules/laws of a particular sport. We all know the current day game is vastly different to how the game was in the 1990’s and even more so from how the game was played in 1970’s & 1980’s which was vastly different again to how the game was played in the 1950’s & 1960’s which was vastly different to the era before it. But if Rugby League today and Rugby League in 1908 is the same sport (which I believe calling it a different sport is disrespectful) and Rugby League played under NRL or RFL or IRL Laws/Rules is the same sport. How many Laws/Rules have to remain consistent for it be the same sport?



Rugby League & Rugby Union share a lot of the same rules and especially share the way points are scored (Tries, Goals, Field Goals), should these games played under different Laws/Rules be classified as the same sport?



So perhaps it’s not the rules at all. Perhaps it’s the objective of the game? In Rugby League the objective in its purest form is to score more points than your opposition by moving a ball down the field and into the oppositions scoring area while preventing your opposition from completing the same objective. So many other sports share that same objective though.



One way of clearing all of the above up is to state that a sport is separate from other sports when the organisation or group of organisations (National Federations of a particular sport linked to that sports International Federation) are different to other sports federations. i.e The NRL is the sport of Rugby League because it’s the official National Governing body for Rugby League in Australia through its membership of the International Rugby League which differs from the ARU which is a member of a different International federation.



This explains why Field Hockey and Ice Hockey are different sports, why American Football and Canadian Football are different sports and so on.



But where does that leave Rebel sporting organisations. If a Rebel sporting organisation is using the exact same rules as an official sporting organisation I would say that most people would argue the Rebel organisation is playing the same sport as the official sporting organisations are. I.e the 1997 ARL & Super League seasons.



But where does that leave Rugby League? Which started as a Rebel Rugby competition with its first recorded matches played under Rugby Union Rules/Laws on both side of the world. Similar with American and Canadian football whose Laws/Rules evolved directly from Rugby Laws/Rules as well.



Is all of Rugby League, American Football and Canadian Football just Rebel Rugby competitions, and therefore the sport of Rugby, which Laws/Rules developed in isolation from one another?



I believe most people who answer ‘No’ & that they are all separate sports from each other.



The only conclusion that makes any sense is that a sport is separate from other sports when the majority comes to an agreed understanding that a sport is different to other sports.

I think the rules GAISF use

We must be playing in 40 countries

Observer countries don't count