This item of interest came my way recently...extract from Hansard - Aust Federal parliament 28 April 1960:
Seems to be suggesting RL was pushed to some degree by Aust govt, and was preferred over soccer and AR as the latter two were more a game to be watched, and the Papuans were more likely to play RL due to its physical nature. Or he could be saying RL (as played in PNG) was not worth watching!
http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo...st;page=3;query=rugby;rec=14;resCount=Default
Mr. CLAY.In addressing my question to the Acting Minister for Territories, I ask him not to be influenced by reports from Papua that Rugby league is too rough a game to be used as a substitute for tribal warfare in the Territory. I ask him also to remember that spectator participation, which occurs in both soccer and Australian rules games, would defeat the very purpose for which Rugby league has been adopted in the Territory, thereby resulting in a resumption of tribal warfare with disastrous results to the peace and good order of the realm.
Seems to be suggesting RL was pushed to some degree by Aust govt, and was preferred over soccer and AR as the latter two were more a game to be watched, and the Papuans were more likely to play RL due to its physical nature. Or he could be saying RL (as played in PNG) was not worth watching!