The Call For Men:
Rugby League & World War One

Sean Fagan of RL1908.com

"The sporting Australians saw the campaign as a point-to-point, with Damascus the post."
T. E. Lawrence, ("Lawrence of Arabia"), October 1918

Rugby league in the early 1910s was comprised of men with divergent views and backgrounds. They, like the rest of the Australian community, grappled with the issues of the coming "Great War" and decided whether to participate or not.

Some were Irish Catholics who opposed anything to do with serving England. Most were working-class Labor party members who didn't support the values of the Liberal government.

Others were married, had young families and weren't prepared to leave them behind with minimal financial support.

A cursory look at Sydney newspapers of the period shows there were many who were not supportive of sending men to fight in a war "for old Europe".

The headlines not only included news from the war-front, but also of labour strikes and many struggles between those who supported
action, those opposed the war and those that
were indifferent.

Newspapers record views of writers and public leaders who saw the conflict as nothing more than a "trade war", wasting human lives to give one side the economic power over the other. Many businessmen and companies also benefited financially from the war, especially as Australia provided so much food (primarily wheat), clothing and mineral resources to Britain.

Despite declining living standards, the Australian government clamped-down on any increase in the basic-wage, claiming during the war was not an appropriate time for working men to be seeking rises. As the war dragged-on, working men saw their colleagues vacant positions filled by non-skilled labour - labour organisations saw that as business owners attempting to use the war to break-down hard won conditions for the workers.

Australia was a very young nation - the war caused a great internal conflict. The definition of what a true or patriotic Australian actually was became the subject of much conjecture during the war and after. In two referendums held during the war a majority of Australians voted to reject introducing conscription (beyond "home service") and a military draft.

There was clearly not unanimous support amongst the Australain public for demanding men be sent against their will to fight in a war on the far side of the globe for Britain.

Amidst this background, the NSWRL decided to suspend all international and inter-state football to ensure that the game was not offering a financial incentive for men not to enlist. The League opted to continue with club competitions - prior to the advent of Leagues Clubs in the 1950s, club football in Sydney was not a big "earner" for footballers (hence why so many in League's first decades opted to sign with an English or NSW country rugby league club for serious money).

Many critics of rugby league deride the decision to play on through WW1, and completely ignore that rep football was suspended. The critics cite the NSWRL's decision to continue with the Sydney club premiership as the prime example of League being a game based on greed, that grew at the expense of the sacrifice of others, and was un-Australian and unpatriotic. In comparison, rugby union players enlisted en masse.

Despite the assertions of the Rugby News (above), there was never a draft or conscription in Australia - there was military training and "home service", which many men of all classes were absented from for all sorts of reasons (and which would not have saved them from a draft to serve overseas had it been implemented).

The NSWRL, and the code itself, continues to be criticised today for choosing to play on with club football - it is claimed that rugby league gained the ascendancy (players, grounds and crowds) over rugby union because of its selfish actions.

The suggestion made is that they were keeping fit men from enlisting and it was very "poor form" to be enjoying sport while others were fighting and dying for England and the British Empire.

The inference is, that if not for the war, rugby league would never have dominated over rugby union in NSW and Queensland.

The NSW rugby union was already in decline well before WW1 began in August 1914. In 1911 The Referee, Sydney's major sports newspaper, pronounced that interest in Australian rules had surpassed that of rugby union in the "pecking order" of the city's football code allegiances.

The NSWRU was faced with a dire financial situation in 1910, brought on by its attempt to outbid rugby league's benefits. It banked on large crowds at Test matches, that didn't eventuate. In 1911 the Sydney Cricket Ground and Sports Ground both began hosting rugby league matches (long before WW1).

The NSWRU retreated into a fully amateur sport in 1910 to ensure its survival. The 1914 rugby union Tests against New Zealand were held at the Sports Ground, so dramatic had the fall-off in public interest in rugby union become.

Rugby league called off all representative matches (after 1915), but kept playing the premiership competition through the war. There was no upsurge in the code's popularity, and no financial lure for men to play rugby league instead of enlisting. The absence of rugby union matches, an attraction already long out of public favour in Sydney, was of no significance at all.

Indeed, the available figures indicate a gradual decline in League attendance averages as the war progressed. The NSWRL did not get access to grounds it didn't already have use of before the war, and lost valuable income from the absence of inter-state matches, and most importantly, tours by teams from New Zealand and Great Britian.

Many hold out the suspension of the Sydney rugby union competition as a noble decision that others ought to have followed to allow full participation of Australia's young men in the war effort. In reality, the rugby union authorities never made such a decision at all. The rugby union competition was suspended because the majority of its players (and many officials) enlisted as soon as the recruitment offices opened in August 1914. They didn't wait to see if the NSWRU was continuing with its 1915 competition before deciding to enlist.

Rugby union writer Spiros Zavos (commenting here in 2008) said: "My personal view is that the RL authorities were right to continue their grade competitions. The rugby union authorities were carried away with ultra-British jingoism with their decision to close down their men's cmpetitions, and to encourage rugby players to volunteer."

What is revealing is that many more Australian men tried to enlist in August 1914 than the 20,000 that Britain had asked for. As a result, many men were rejected.

Initially, the war was seen as a "great adventure" and once Britain exercised her might, it would all be over. With the Australian Imperial Force (AIF) not seeing any action until April 25, 1915, in the early part of the war the military picked and choosed who was acceptable. Men who didn't get in were often refused on flimsy medical grounds that covered over greater concerns about social status and character.

Throughtout the war (and afterwards), the AIF prided itself for being comprised entirely of volunteers who would fight willinging for "the greater cause". The armies of their allies and the Germans were a mix of volunteers and conscripts. Many attribute the unwavering fighting spirit of the AIF to the fact that every man had volunteered. The presence of unwilling conscripts, it was claimed, would make the AIF's job more difficult and affect morale.

Amidst this, almost every Sydney first grade rugby union player was accepted. A remarkable strike-rate that can only point to the social make-up of Sydney rugby union in the "post-split" era. [Compare this with the Boer War (1899-1902) where over 16,000 Australians volunteered, yet the enlistment of rugby footballers was so minimal that the conflict barely rated a mention by the NSWRU or QRU.]

The enlistment of rugby union players was so quick and extensive, that by 1915 a Sydney newspaper reported: "According to figures prepared by Mr W. W. Hill, secretary of the New South Wales Rugby Union, 197 out of 220 regular first grade players are on active service, or 90 percent."

The Daily Telegraph (England) stated that by the end of the war: "It has been estimated that 5,000 Australian rugby players ultimately went on active war service between 1914 and 1918. This figure represents about 98 percent of the playing numbers in the game, outside of the schools, in 1914."

If rugby league had never eventuated, and rugby union in Sydney had remained a cross-class game, the number of enlistments of Sydney first grade RU players would never have got close to 90 percent - there is a strong likelihood some form of NSWRU club football would have continued throughout the war (as happened in New Zealand rugby union).

The seeds of Australian rugby union's decimation after WW1 were laid in the split of 1907-10. The split resulted in rugby union becoming a game for the middle and upper social classes. Australian rugby union (in its view) had purged itself of the evil of professionals and the undesirable elements when they left to join the new rugby league.

What remained were the "pure" rugby men who played by the amateur rules and followed the ideals of the great English public schools and universities.** As men of the British Empire of course they would heed the call to support England. Many saw the war as a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity - and if they didn't join quickly it could be over before they enlisted. Concerns about what fate would befall rugby union in their absence didn't enter their minds - there was a greater call to answer.

The purported similarity between the actions and values of war and rugby union (and other sports) was used to great effect during World War One. Images courtesy of Frederic Humbert www.Rugby-Pioneers.com

As one rugby union writer put it at the start of the Great War: "Especially does the game breed pluck [courage], more so than any other form of sport the average British [Empire] schoolboy can indulge in."

Similar events occurred in Melbourne during the war, where the professional VFL competition continued, while the equivalent amateur league initially cut down its 1915 season five weeks early, and was then forced to close down due to a lack of footballers.

In New Zealand, club rugby union continued in 1915. To divert growing criticism, the following year the NZRU had to resort to imposing an age limit to stop men of "eligible military age" from continuing to play. [The New Zealand situation provides a useful comparison -as rugby league in that country had not gained any ascendancy before WW1, rugby union remained a cross-class sport. Unlike in Australia, New Zealand rugby union contained divergent views on enlistment, and ultimately imposed restrictions to encourage men to join the military.]

In the United States, professional baseball continued despite players being drafted or sent to work in essential industries. As with rugby league in Australia, attendances at baseball matches fell during the war [American football was not a major sport until the 1920s]. In Canada, professional hockey continued. Astoundingly, rather than just shoring-up its position, the sport witnessed the formation of the National Hockey League in late 1917.

The war had a greater effect on professional sport in England (obviously). Both the "Football League" (soccer) and rugby league played on through the 1914/15 season, however, the loss of players to the war and reduced crowds forced top-level competitions to be suspended. Both sports though recognised that full cessation could spell the end of their viability. They each introduced county/regional competitions "to use every effort to keep the game going". It was well recognised by administrators that a war-time suspension of their sport could easily descend into permanent dissipation.

In most Western countries, governments were averse to imposing laws that would cause major sports to close down - they didn't want to be blamed by the public for the damage that could result to the sport. Instead, politicians turned to the newspapers and speeches as they sought to influence the public mood.

Even if the NSWRL, having already closed down representative football, had suspended its club premiership competition, it doesn't follow that everyone would have immediately joined the AIF.

Boxing promoter (and former Test rugby union footballer) Snowy Baker, was placed under immense pressure to suspend his Sydney Stadium tournaments so the spectators would enlist. Baker finally relented - but when he instead began hosting vaudeville-style shows, the same large audiences came along anyway. The point was made, if a sport was taken away, the public would merely find another form of entertainment and not suddenly decide to enlist.

Similarly, working men who played a spectator sport, would not simply enlist because their sport was closed down. The Sydney Sportsman reported in 1915 that if the NSWRL suspended competitions, there were two other syndicates ready to step-in and form a rival Rugby League.

In simple terms, it is readily apparent that rugby union saw their sport was something more than just the game, something that served a wider purpose - it was about preparing young men for later life (including a war). For working men, rugby league was a game and a means to supplement an income. For the greater public, rugby league was one of many forms of entertainment available to it - what the footballers got out of it for later life mattered little to the crowd. [Which may partly explain why the sometimes poor off-field behaviour of professional footballers does nothing to diminish the support of their sports' fans.]

It is arguable whether rugby league further consolidated its position after WW1 (particularly in Queensland where the QRU disbanded), but the "advantage" it got came from the damage caused to rugby union itself by its own ethos (as noble as it was). Suspending club rugby league competitions would not stop some other professional sport or entertainment filling the void during the war and afterwards. Nor would it suddenly make players and supporters of military age want to enlist.

This criticism against rugby league that continues today, smacks of a "superior attitude" that argues "because rugby union was disadvantaged, rugby league should have followed the same path for the greater good of all". Factors such as choice and democracy seem to be irrelevant. The two codes held different purposes that represented the divergent views within Australian society - having rugby league stop was not going to change people's beliefs and actions.

Of course, there were many rugby league players and officials who did enlist, irrespective of the premiership continuing. It is also known that rugby league had sufficient support amongst the Australian forces that teams were formed to play the game in Egypt and France.

Some League men though paid the ultimate price when they were killed in action, including Ted Larkin, the NSWRL's secretary, and seven Sydney first graders.

The NSWRL made concerted efforts to contribute to the war effort. A number of matches were held to raise funds and to provide opportunity for Army recruiters to deliver their call to arms to the men in the crowd.

Since 1914 the War had seen Australia contribute over 200,000 men from a population of only 4 million people. By 1917 many injured men were returning home, and recruitment numbers were dwindling as the realities of war became clearer to young Australians.

Beyond suspending representative football, and thus removing the only real source of professional income from football, the League itself made no direct effort to persuade anyone to enlist. But, acknowledging the pressure from the government and its critics, the NSWRL afforded the military all the opportunities for recruitment drives it needed.

The full story of sport and WW1 has never been completely studied. From the pressure boxing hero Les Darcy suffered, to why rugby union players enlisted en masse, to the political campaign against sports that continued, to what young men of ninety years ago thought going to war actually was - much is yet to be told. Comparisons with what happened in football codes in Melbourne, New Zealand and other countries need to be made.

Similarly, attitudes in the (earlier) Boer War and (later) WW2 should also be examined for comparison. The Boer War had no effect on rugby union competitions and representative tours. During WW2 both the NSWRL and NSWRU continued with their club competitions, despite Australia coming under direct attack by the Japanese, and an invasion being a distinct possibility.

What is clear is that rugby union players and officials made their own decision to enlist in WW1. No one can deride them for that honourable choice - but its effect was to dismantle rugby union's infrastructure.

Rather than producing criticisms based solely upon prejudices and a simplistic comparison with amateur rugby union, the true standing of rugby league and the NSWRL in WW1 can be measured against other professional sports in the USA and Canada, the VFL in Melbourne, the mood of the Australian community, and the actions taken by governments.

T. E. Lawrence quote is in reference to the "Australian Light-Horse Brigade". The Australians liberated Damascus from the Turks in October 1918, much to Lawrence's chagrin. The quote is from Chapter 19 of his book, "Seven Pillars of Wisdom".

The decision of the NSWRL to continue competitions through WW1 is cited by many RU supporters as the reason rugby league gained the ascendancy in NSW and Queensland. Pioneers of Rugby League proved that the 'code war' was over by 1910 when the NSWRU retreated into pure amateurism to ensure its survival.

** The support and ethos displayed by the rugby union community for English public schools ideals and Britain needs to be seen within its Australian context. It was not the equivalent of attitudes in Britain. For example, see this article re WW1 and The Aussie Way of Discipline.