Australian Football, rugby - foundations and codification

[RedV3x]

"Rugby was not a game for us, we wanted a winter pastime but men could be harmed if thrown on the ground so we thought differently."

Yes, tackling and rugby rules were out, but we still don't know exactly what was in.
It was possible to take possession of the ball unless it was on the ground.

 

[TWLS]

I remember reading about the little kick.
Around the late 1800s, pre-VFL, there must have been a time when a kick didn't have to travel any distance to be called a mark, so there was a period where players would do tiny kicks to each other and claim the mark.
It got so bad, one article of the period said that some marks were paid with the ball barely touching the boot of the original kicker.

Yes the above is what I came across in the match reports.
A general question -
At the initial 1859 Rules Meeting held at the pub it is said copies of various rule sets were on the table.
A look at Wiki on the rule sets in 1859 produced the following references, however the person/s who wrote that Wiki did some homework/guesswork it appears and we have advantage at this time of only focussing on what was likely available in Melbourne in 1859. On that point some members of the meeting had been in England prior to 1859 and likely brought copies back.
1839 - Cambridge - Very early basic
1843- Eton -Dribbling
1845 - Rugby -Carrying the ball.
1847 -Harrow - Dribbling
1848 - Cambridge Uni -Dribbling
1858 -Sheffield Football Club -Dribbling.
1859 - The meeting in Melbourne
------------------------------------------------------
So from the above who are the likely Starters for 1859 and the rules above were also in a constant state of flux/updates
We do not know if Wills brought back additional current notes on Rugby and the other rule sets- Likely that he did.

 

[Gigantor]

Yes the above is what I came across in the match reports.
A general question -
At the initial 1859 Rules Meeting held at the pub it is said copies of various rule sets were on the table.
A look at Wiki on the rule sets in 1859 produced the following references, however the person/s who wrote that Wiki did some homework/guesswork it appears and we have advantage at this time of only focussing on what was likely available in Melbourne in 1859. On that point some members of the meeting had been in England prior to 1859 and likely brought copies back.
1839 - Cambridge - Very early basic
1843- Eton -Dribbling
1845 - Rugby -Carrying the ball.
1847 -Harrow - Dribbling
1848 - Cambridge Uni -Dribbling
1858 -Sheffield Football Club -Dribbling.
1859 - The meeting in Melbourne
------------------------------------------------------
So from the above who are the likely Starters for 1859 and the rules above were also in a constant state of flux/updates
We do not know if Wills brought back additional current notes on Rugby and the other rule sets- Likely that he did.

They clearly knew at least one other game of football.
But further to that, they, and, those who would play in 1858-59 knew forms of folk football.
They agreed 10 very basic rules in 1859, some are relatively unique, others are from pre-existing games.

 

[RedV3x]

1839 - Cambridge - Very early basic
1843- Eton -Dribbling
1845 - Rugby -Carrying the ball.
1847 -Harrow - Dribbling
1848 - Cambridge Uni -Dribbling
1858 -Sheffield Football Club -Dribbling.
1859 - The meeting in Melbourne

This tells us almost nothing. The first ten colonial rules don't line up with anything.

 

[RedV3x]

They agreed 10 very basic rules in 1859, some are relatively unique, others are from pre-existing games.

Only these laws give any insight to the playing of the game.

III. A Goal must be kicked fairly between the posts, without touching either of them, or a portion of the person of any player on either side.

VI. Any player catching the ball "directly" from the foot may call "mark". He then has a free kick; no player from the opposite side being allowed to come "inside" the spot marked.
VII. Tripping and pushing are both allowed (but no hacking) when any player is in rapid motion or in possession of the ball, except in the case provided for in Rule 6.
VIII. The ball may be taken in hand "only" when caught from the foot, or on the hop. In "no case" shall it be "lifted" from the ground.

X. The ball, while in play, may under no circumstances be thrown.

III. Kicking the ball between two posts is almost UNIVERSAL. Not being touched could be unique and could have implications.
VI. The "fair catch" was also almost universal.
VII. Tripping, pushing and hacking are common but holding and tackling aren't specifically mentioned though outlawed by implication.
VIII.Reasonably common but no mention as to what you could do when you gained possession of the ball.
X. This is a clear rule against rugby but no specific mention of offside is made.

Conclusion
1. From the rules there is no indication as to how the game should be played .i.e. the design of the game is unknown.
2. The committee didn't accept any set of established rules.
3. Everything is open to conjecture especially Gaelic Football and Marngrook since there were no written rules at the time.

 

[TWLS]

This tells us almost nothing. The first ten colonial rules don't line up with anything.

Well we dont know what the copies of rules were on the table - They would have read them and made decisions possibly - So everybody thinks they ignored them - Does not make sense. Wills was exposed to RUGBY as it was and what did the other guys play who had been in England. Did they only play tiddleywinks.
I will not have it that they ignored the rule sets on the table.
The above info clearly shows the majority of poms prefered to kick the ball along the ground and dare I say it did not like full body contact.

 

[RedV3x]

Well we dont know what the copies of rules were on the table .

Well, somebody else actually posted to the contrary.

They would have read them and made decisions possibly

They would have most probably been referenced and discussed.

So everybody thinks they ignored them .

There is reference to Tom Will's suggestions being ignored.

Wills was exposed to RUGBY.

And the rules of rugby are clearly rejected.

I will not have it that they ignored the rule sets on the table.

Well you have to deal with the facts and the facts are clearly recorded in the first 10 rules of colonial football.
The first 10 rules of colonial football tell us little about the design of the new game and the influences on the game.

 

[TWLS]

Well, somebody else actually posted to the contrary.



They would have most probably been referenced and discussed.



There is reference to Tom Will's suggestions being ignored.



And the rules of rugby are clearly rejected.



Well you have to deal with the facts and the facts are clearly recorded in the first 10 rules of colonial football.
The first 10 rules of colonial football tell us little about the design of the new game and the influences on the game.

Well I prefer this extract which makes sense considering some at the meeting played foot-ball while they were there.
"Young men attempted variations of what they knew from their time in English schools, saw its strengths and weaknesses and constantly refined what was to become soon enough a game of our own." The 1859 rules meeting was the first known written result of those experiences and they came up with something that worked which was a new way of moving the ball down the ground as it turned out.
The Geelong Rule set was very similar to the Melbourne one so the thinking was the same down there.
The 2018 Grand Final was won by a team that played in the last few minutes the method that Tom Wills evoked in the 1860`s. Kick and Mark etc etc - He would have been very proud.
There would have been other meetings, private discussions before the May 1859 meeting- Just because they are not recorded does not mean they did not happen.

 

[RedV3x]

The 1859 rules meeting was the first known written result of those experiences and they came up with something that worked which was a new way of moving the ball down the ground as it turned out.

Is that your statement or a quotation ?

 

[Fire]

So we agree Rugby being played in non English speaking places in nothing to do with the British empire.
Lets not forget that Australian football is a result of plagiarism of 3 sports. Rugby,Gaelic football played on a cricket oval.
2 very English and 1 very Irish. Forget the myth that the local denizens were playing Australia football when the first fleet arrived, it just that a myth

I believe there's no Gaelic ties at all right?

My understanding was that Willis had only played rugby and cricket.

 

[RedV3x]

I believe there's no Gaelic ties at all right?

There were a lot of Irish people in the goldfields and living in Melbourne at the time.
It has been recorded that Irish Football was played at the time.
Football was originally developed by teachers and teachers would have drawn upon their knowledge
so it it is quite conceivable that Irish Football did influence the colonial game.

My understanding was that Willis had only played rugby and cricket.

It is recorded that that some aborigines said that they played Marngrook with Tom Wills
so it it is quite conceivable that Marngrook did influence the colonial game.
Tom Wills was only part of a team that came up with the original rules of football in Australia.
What we know for sure is that they didn't want rugby rules and this is borne out in the original rules
which opposed the idea of rugby and a statement saying they didn't want rugby rules.

 

[NoobPie]

I believe there's no Gaelic ties at all right?

My understanding was that Willis had only played rugby and cricket.

Aussie in exile is just a sad League troll with a debilitating jealous fixation with our National game. If you are religious, pray for him, but otherwise no point engaging him expecting sane, unfevered discourse

 

[BringBackTorps]

1. The Age M. Gleeson 25.7.21

Carlton FC will soon be putting a vote to its members, to change its Constitution- to formally acknowledge "...the contribution of the First Nations People to the formation of the game (of 1858 & 1859 Melbourne Rules. My emphasis, & words in brackets)".

Blues extend voting rights, recognise game’s Indigenous origins
The Carlton Football Club will recognise women and Indigenous people in its constitution, and allow AFL members who support the Blues to vote in club elections.

www.theage.com.au



This not a new development.
The AFL officially recognised, previously, an aboriginal influence in the Melbourne Rules of 1858 & 1859:-

. the comments of T. Hosch, AFL Social Inclusion Manager, who said on 14.6.19 re the Melbourne Rules of 1858 & 1859

"...is a game born from the ancient traditions of our country...Marngrook, a HIGH MARKING game played in Victoria's western districts (& in Melbourne [including Collingwood Dights Falls until 1860] & other parts of Victoria), pre-european settlement, UNDOUBTEDLY influenced what we now understand as the modern AFL football code. We... recognise the Aboriginal ORIGINS of the game in this statement...The sharing of oral history by Aboriginal elders has changed the understanding of Marngrook within the AFL industry (My emphases, & words in brackets)".

. Since at least the early 1990's, the AFL's long-time Official Historian, C. Hutchinson, had the belief there was, probably, an aboriginal influence on Melbourne Rules- via T. Wills' regular playing with Aboriginal children (as the only white child in the Moyston frontier area of western Vic.).

In 1998, as the AFL's official historian, C. Hutchinson co-authored & opened the monument/descriptive gazebo at Moyston. This monument's encription recognised T. Wills & Marngrook's seminal early contributions to Melbourne Rules.

http://monumentaustralia.org.au/themes/people/sport/display/32785-thomas-wentworth-wills-/photo/1

. In 2015, in his address in Canberra to the prestigious National Press Club, AFL CEO G. McLachlan reinforced the aboriginal/Marngrook involvement in the game's creation when he said

"As Australia's only indigenous game, with STRONG (my emphasis) links to the Aboriginal pastime known as Marngrook, we have been fortunate enough to have indigenous culture and indigenous Australians help SHAPE (my emphasis) our game".

The AFL considers the primacy the 1858 & 1859 rules gave to marking was due to the influences of marngrook on the young T. Wills.








2. FIRST EVER RECORD, IN 5000 YEARS OF WRITTEN HUMAN HISTORY, OF A NON-ABORIGINAL PERSON JUMPING HIGH IN THE AIR TO CATCH A BALL IN A CONTESTED FOOTBALL MATCH, IN ANY FORM OF FOOTBALL, ANYWHERE?

Dr G. de Moore states that, in the mid 19th century, names of individual boys from the Rugby School were rarely mentioned in Bell's Life In London newspaper, re Rugby School football match descriptions- but in an 1850's Rugby School match, Bell's Life wrote, paraphrasing "Young Tom Wills jumped high in the air for the ball, like fish leaping out of the sea".

The AFL readily accepts, from the contemporary records, that:-

. founders T. Wills, J. Thompson, W. Hammersley, & T. Smith brought into their early meetings the football Rules of Rugby, Harrow, Eaton, & Winchester Schools only.

. these British schools are the antecedents of Melbourne Rules.

. Melbourne Rules was a unique game from 1858 (where marking was strongly promoted- without the legal prescription to have both feet, simultaneously, on the ground; & goals could be kicked from a mark & free kick, with no offside rule- thus promoting "despicable goal-sneaking").

 

[TWLS]

1. The Age M. Gleeson 25.7.21

Carlton FC will soon be putting a vote to its members, to change its Constitution- to formally acknowledge "...the contribution of the First Nations People to the formation of the game (of 1858 & 1859 Melbourne Rules. My emphasis, & words in brackets)".

Blues extend voting rights, recognise game’s Indigenous origins
The Carlton Football Club will recognise women and Indigenous people in its constitution, and allow AFL members who support the Blues to vote in club elections.

www.theage.com.au



This not a new development.
The AFL officially recognised, previously, an aboriginal influence in the Melbourne Rules of 1858 & 1859:-

. the comments of T. Hosch, AFL National Community Development Manager, who said on 14.6.19 re the Melbourne Rules of 1858 & 1859

"...is a game born from the ancient traditions of our country...Marngrook, a high marking game played in Victoria's western districts (& in Melbourne's etc general districts- my words), pre-european settlement, UNDOUBTEDLY (my emphasis) influenced what we now understand as the modern AFL football code. We... recognise the Aboriginal origins of the game in this statement...The sharing of oral history by Aboriginal elders has changed the understanding of Marngrook within the AFL industry".

. Since at least the early 1990's, the AFL's former Official Historian, C. Hutchinson, had the belief there was, probably, an aboriginal influence on Melbourne Rules.

In 1998, as the AFL's official historian, C. Hutchinson co-authored & opened the monument/descriptive gazebo at Moyston- where T. Wills spent his childhood. This monument recognised T. Wills & Marngrook's seminal early contributions to Melbourne Rules

http://monumentaustralia.org.au/themes/people/sport/display/32785-thomas-wentworth-wills-/photo/1

. In 2015, in his address in Canberra to the prestigious National Press Club, AFL CEO G. McLachlan reinforced the aboriginal/Marngrook involvement in the game's creation when he said

"As Australia's only indigenous game, with STRONG (my emphasis) links to the Aboriginal pastime known as Marngrook, we have been fortunate enough to have indigenous culture and indigenous Australians help SHAPE (my emphasis) our game".

The AFL considers the primacy the 1858 & 1859 rules gave to marking were due to the influences of marngrook on the young T. Wills.








2. FIRST EVER RECORD, IN 5000 YEARS OF WRITTEN HUMAN HISTORY, OF A NON-ABORIGINAL PERSON JUMPING HIGH IN THE AIR TO CATCH A BALL IN A CONTESTED FOOTBALL MATCH, IN ANY FORM OF FOOTBALL, ANYWHERE?

Dr G. de Moore states that, in the mid 19th century, names of individual boys from the Rugby School were rarely mentioned in Bell's Life In London newspaper, re Rugby School football match descriptions- but in an 1850's Rugby School match, Bell's Life wrote, paraphrasing "Young Tom Wills jumped high in the air for the ball, like fish leaping out of the sea".

The AFL readily accepts, from the contemporary records, that founders T. Wills, J. Thompson, W. Hammersley, & T. Smith brought into their early meetings the Rules of Rugby, Harrow, Eaton, & Winchester Schools only; & that these British schools are the antecedents of Melbourne Rules- but, also, that Melbourne Rules was a unique game from 1858 (where marking was strongly promoted, & goals could be kicked from a mark & free kick, with no offside rule).

Well done BBT for confirming the actual rule sets that were ON THE TABLE at the 1859 meeting in the pub. I had come across that info years ago.
However there may have been other meetings in 1858 and 1859 besides Geelong we just dont know. It appears that 1858 was a bit chaotic rules wise. It looks like they were trying to sort out things as they went along.

 

[RedV3x]

It appears that 1858 was a bit chaotic rules wise. It looks like they were trying to sort out things as they went along.

Considering:
1. The stated objective was actually to form a football club (and hence a league).
2. That there were numerous examples already known and in place to be used as a template.
3. That they experimented for a year before forming a rules committee.
The actual first 10 rules were completely underwhelming.
All we know about the game from the rules is that you could "mark" the ball with ensuing privileges, could pick up the ball on the hop and you couldn't throw the ball or tackle. It makes no mention of what you could do except kick and catch.

 

[weewilly]

Harrison was not at the 1859 hotel meeting in Melbourne that set up the first written Rule Set. I was surprised when I found that out. Harrison was later called the father of football - My response to that bull toss- I am in the Wills camp in which I donated funds to refurbish his grave a while back.
Wills was the prime mover in 1859 and is never recognised as such. There would be no game today without him.

The problem for Wills was he committed suicide in his 40s which was a no no at the time and Harrison lived to into his 90s and could make up what ever he wanted about the founding of Australian Football as there were very few people around in the 1920s that were at the beginning of the code in 1859 to dispute his claims.

 

[TWLS]

The problem for Wills was he committed suicide in his 40s which was a no no at the time and Harrison lived to into his 90s and could make up what ever he wanted about the founding of Australian Football as there were very few people around in the 1920s that were at the beginning of the code in 1859 to dispute his claims.

Yes ur right about the suicide thing - His grave was in shocking condition and have no idea where his rellies were.
I am not totally against Harrison he did good things and tried really hard to get the International part of the game established after, which I have an interest in.

 

[The_Wookie]

. the comments of T. Hosch, AFL Social Inclusion Manager, who said on 14.6.19 re the Melbourne Rules of 1858 & 1859

The Melbourne Rules of 1858 and 1859 were not specifically the subject at hand and its erroneous to suggest so.

The AFL considers the primacy the 1858 & 1859 rules gave to marking was due to the influences of marngrook on the young T. Wills.

Show me a quote for that anywhere. Anywhere at all. Marking wasnt a unknown feature of other rule sets in England at the time either.

The AFL readily accepts, from the contemporary records, that:-

. founders T. Wills, J. Thompson, W. Hammersley, & T. Smith brought into their early meetings the football Rules of Rugby, Harrow, Eaton, & Winchester Schools only.

Wills apparently wasnt at the 1859 meeting where the rules were almost completely redrawn, or the 1860 ones where the game was really coming into its own.

 

[BringBackTorps]

The Melbourne Rules of 1858 and 1859 were not specifically the subject at hand and its erroneous to suggest so.

No.

T. Hosch said in 2019, in my quote you are referencing, re the birth of Melbourne Rules/AF, that AF is "... a game born from the ancient traditions of our country".
Melbourne Rules was born in the games of 1858 & 1859.

(Unless one accepts that Wills' public comments that, after returning to Melbourne in December 1856, he later tried to get a football code going in 1857, with meetings & scratch matches etc. in 1857.
Dr G. de Moore referred to Wills 1870's public comments that he tried to get football games happening in 1857- & de Moore states that when it came to dates at least, Wills was very reliable. The usually punctilious W. Hammersley, Wills' bitter enemy, also wrote publicly that Wills tried to get football games going in 1857. There is no other proof of these 1857 attempts/scratch games- but it is noted that no contemporary replied in the "Letters" section of newspapers etc., refuting Wills' (&/or Hammersley's) public claim he attempted/ started football scratch games in 1857).

Show me a quote for that anywhere. Anywhere at all. Marking wasnt a unknown feature of other rule sets in England at the time either.

T. Hosch said also, in her same sentence I quoted above "... Marngrook, a high marking game...".
Hosch, on the Origins issue, was speaking with the imprimatur of the AFL, & its advisors on Origins' historical matters, re the importance & primacy of marking in Marngrook & Melbourne Rules.

As D. Thompson (in his 2013 book, & late 2017 published research) & other historians have noted, Melbourne Rules was a unique game from 1858 onwards.
It gave primacy to marking (allowable anywhere on the ground) & a free kick (ball couldn't be picked up from the ground- except for the first bounce), goals could be kicked from marks, & there was no offside rule (which encouraged goal sneaking- despicable in Britain- by players sneaking forward of their team mates, to loiter in front of the goal).

D. Thompson has provided the most exhaustive analysis of any historians in the early rules & game styles of Melbourne Rules & British games; & how it differed from British games; & he has expanded widely on the primacy of marking in Melbourne Rules, unlike relevant British games
eg in the 1850's, in Rugby, one had to have both feet on the ground whilst catching the ball, to be allowed a mark (also, R. Grow).

Research - Origin of Australian Football's Gaelic Origin Myth [+Marngrook]

I read with interest this new article by Roy Hay and his continual claim that Australian football is in no way related to Marngrook, it appears he goes out of his way to try and dispel any connection, but then claims this article is not about that when quite clearly it is. What i would ask is...

www.bigfooty.com

I have quoted Thompson etc. very widely in the other Thread, on the Origins. No one denies that some other games gave a free kick, in some situations, when someone caught the untouched ball from a kick.

Research - Origin of Australian Football's Gaelic Origin Myth [+Marngrook]

I read with interest this new article by Roy Hay and his continual claim that Australian football is in no way related to Marngrook, it appears he goes out of his way to try and dispel any connection, but then claims this article is not about that when quite clearly it is. What i would ask is...

www.bigfooty.com

Wills apparently wasnt at the 1859 meeting where the rules were almost completely redrawn, or the 1860 ones where the game was really coming into its own

I am not sure what point you are trying to make.

For the earliest surviving Melbourne Rules, which note all the rule makers who were present, Wills' name is written at the top of those listed..this is not a coincidence.

Whilst it is correct that Wills wasn't present at a few of the early Rules' meetings, he was, undoubtedly (because of his sporting prowess as the best cricketer & footballer in Victoria/best football tactician, the best cricketer & rugby kicker at the Rugby School, the force of his personality, & the first energising figure to "create a game of our own") the main driving force in the early creation & evolution of Melbourne Rules.

Furthermore, it is wrong to imply that, in the earliest years, simply because Wills may have missed a few early meetings, he did not have influence on the earliest Rule makers. His influence, given his widely accepted sporting status & celebrity, was omnipresent- possibly regarded as omniscient & omnipotent by some!
Dr G de Moore has stated that there are c. 30 reasons why Wills should be considered the first originator & driving force of Melbourne Rules.

 

[The_Wookie]

For the earliest surviving Melbourne Rules, which note all the rule makers who were present, Wills' name is written at the top of those listed..this is not a coincidence.

We also know that at the meetings Wills was a proponent of rugby rules, which were rejected.

Whilst it is correct that Wills wasn't present at a few of the early Rules' meetings, he was, undoubtedly (because of his sporting prowess as the best cricketer & footballer in Victoria/best football tactician, the best cricketer & rugby kicker at the Rugby School, the force of his personality, & the first energising figure to "create a game of our own") the main driving force in the early creation & evolution of Melbourne Rules.

the other dudes just along for the ride i guess.

Furthermore, it is wrong to imply that, in the earliest years, simply because Wills may have missed a few early meetings, he did not have influence on the earliest Rule makers. His influence, given his widely accepted sporting status & celebrity, was omnipresent- possibly regarded as omniscient & omnipotent by some!
Dr G de Moore has stated that there are c. 30 reasons why Wills should be considered the first originator & driving force of Melbourne Rules.

Its also known that much of what Wills suggested at the rules meetings was rejected by others at the meeting, and that after the first Rule set, Wills had little to no influence, particularly after 1860 when the game was basically redesigned.

 

[BringBackTorps]

We also know that at the meetings Wills was a proponent [some only- he never wanted rugby, per se] of rugby rules, which were rejected.


the other dudes just along for the ride i guess.


Its also known that much of what Wills suggested at the rules meetings was rejected by others at the meeting, and that after the first Rule set, Wills had little to no influence, particularly after 1860 [No] when the game was basically redesigned.

The early Melbourne Rules of 1858 & 1859 were, generally, an amalgam of the school football code rules of Rugby, Harrow, Eton, & Winchester.
(Contemporary records cite copies of these schools' written rules only were brought in, & discussed, by the creators of Melbourne Rules).
The game they created from 1858 onwards, however, was a unique game.

Whilst Wills did wish that some aspects of Rugby School Rules be incorporated into Melbourne Rules, he never wanted the game of rugby to be adopted in Melbourne- which he considered too dangerous & "not suitable" on the harder Melbourne grounds, he wanted "a game of our own"; & he argued that Melbourne Rules should be a safer game, cf Rugby rules.

As per my reasons mentioned above (including Dr G. de Moore stating there are about 30 reasons why Wills should be considered the most important figure, & the main driving force, for the creation of Melbourne Rules), J. Thompson (who greatly desired a dribbling, very limited handling & very limited contact, soccer-style game; & strongly opposed Wills only wanting an oval ball), W. Hammersley, & T. Smith were clearly subordinate (re the creation of Melbourne Rules) to Wills in the early days.
The latter 3 persons, however, did play a very important role in promoting Melbourne Rules.

Wills was also the dominant figure in 1858 (which your comments did not mention, nor the 1857 claims), although these 1858 written Rules have not survived.
We, however, know from newspaper reports etc that in 1858, players were kicking the ball from their hands, players were marking the ball & had a free kick, & goals were kicked from marks- & there was no offside rule.

Even after 1860, whilst Wills may not have attended the formal meetings to discuss/change Melbourne Rules, he was still undoubtedly, in an informal sense, a major/probably the major influence on Melbourne Rules in the 1860's (not including the time spent in central Qld.). He was the footballing & cricketing star of this era, & had great celebrity.

From the earliest 1858 matches, & 1859 (perhaps 1857, but no record exists of alleged Wills'-inspired matches), Melbourne Rules was a kicking & catching game, with no offside Rule.

Wills arrived at Rugby School in August 1850, Rugby football season there started in October (when Wills was 15 y.o.!).

Why do you think Wills was the best kicker at Rugby school (even though he had much less experience playing Rugby there- thus having very limited opportunity to master the complex skill of kicking the Rugby ball accurately, cf the great no. of other students)?
And why was he the best kicker in Melbourne Rules?

Generally speaking, do you think it takes a lot of practice & skill to be best amongst one's peers at kicking an oval-shaped ball?




Historian David Thompson has written, in much more detail cf other historians, about these early matches' Rules & game styles; & the very different Rules & game styles, then, in British schools.
This is an Abstract of his most recent 2017 publication covering this 1850' & 1860's period. Have you read it; & his first book?

Volume 34 "No access Sporting Traditions Other Journal Article01 November 2017
Marngrook and Aussie rules: The continuum of football in Australia
Authors: David Thompson

ABSTRACT

PDF/EPUB
Export Citations
Add to Favourite
Tools
Share

Abstract
Football was a popular game for many Indigenous Australians, which was an expression of athleticism that also served a ceremonial, reconciling purpose.

Aboriginal football was watched by colonists on pastoral stations and in the main settlements. Marngrook, an Indigenous football game of Melbourne, [& throughout Victoria, including where Wills lived as a child, & where he played extensively with Aboriginal children, & spoke their language fluently- my words] placed an emphasis on catching the ball and jumping for a catch - early Australian football similarly emphasised catching.

Tom Wills, one of the founders of Australian football (Australian Rules), watched Indigenous football. There has been evidence of a connection between marngrook and Australian football for decades, even since the nineteenth century".

 

[TWLS]

The early Melbourne Rules of 1858 & 1859 were, generally, an amalgam of the school football code rules of Rugby, Harrow, Eton, & Winchester.
(Contemporary records cite copies of these schools' written rules only were brought in, & discussed, by the creators of Melbourne Rules).
The game they created from 1858 onwards, however, was a unique game.

Whilst Wills did wish that some aspects of Rugby School Rules be incorporated into Melbourne Rules, he never wanted the game of rugby to be adopted in Melbourne- which he considered too dangerous & "not suitable" on the harder Melbourne grounds, he wanted "a game of our own"; & he argued that Melbourne Rules should be a safer game, cf Rugby rules.

As per my reasons mentioned above (including Dr G. de Moore stating there are about 30 reasons why Wills should be considered the most important figure, & the main driving force, for the creation of Melbourne Rules), J. Thompson (who greatly desired a dribbling, very limited handling & very limited contact, soccer-style game; & strongly opposed Wills only wanting an oval ball), W. Hammersley, & T. Smith were clearly subordinate (re the creation of Melbourne Rules) to Wills in the early days.
The latter 3 persons, however, did play a very important role in promoting Melbourne Rules.

Wills was also the dominant figure in 1858 (which your comments did not mention, nor the 1857 claims), although these 1858 written Rules have not survived.
We, however, know from newspaper reports etc that in 1858, players were kicking the ball from their hands, players were marking the ball & had a free kick, & goals were kicked from marks- & there was no offside rule.

Even after 1860, whilst Wills may not have attended the formal meetings to discuss/change Melbourne Rules, he was still undoubtedly, in an informal sense, a major/probably the major influence on Melbourne Rules in the 1860's (not including the time spent in central Qld.). He was the footballing & cricketing star of this era, & had great celebrity.

From the earliest 1858 matches, & 1859 (perhaps 1857, but no record exists of alleged Wills'-inspired matches), Melbourne Rules was a kicking & catching game, with no offside Rule.

Wills arrived at Rugby School in August 1850, Rugby football season there started in October (when Wills was 15 y.o.!).

Why do you think Wills was the best kicker at Rugby school (even though he had much less experience playing Rugby there- thus having very limited opportunity to master the complex skill of kicking the Rugby ball accurately, cf the great no. of other students)?
And why was he the best kicker in Melbourne Rules?

Generally speaking, do you think it takes a lot of practice & skill to be best amongst one's peers at kicking an oval-shaped ball?




Historian David Thompson has written, in much more detail cf other historians, about these early matches' Rules & game styles; & the very different Rules & game styles, then, in British schools.
This is an Abstract of his most recent 2017 publication covering this 1850' & 1860's period. Have you read it; & his first book?

Volume 34 "No access Sporting Traditions Other Journal Article01 November 2017
Marngrook and Aussie rules: The continuum of football in Australia
Authors: David Thompson

ABSTRACT

PDF/EPUB
Export Citations
Add to Favourite
Tools
Share

Abstract
Football was a popular game for many Indigenous Australians, which was an expression of athleticism that also served a ceremonial, reconciling purpose.

Aboriginal football was watched by colonists on pastoral stations and in the main settlements. Marngrook, an Indigenous football game of Melbourne, [& throughout Victoria, including where Wills lived as a child, & where he played extensively with Aboriginal children, & spoke their language fluently- my words] placed an emphasis on catching the ball and jumping for a catch - early Australian football similarly emphasised catching.

Tom Wills, one of the founders of Australian football (Australian Rules), watched Indigenous football. There has been evidence of a connection between marngrook and Australian football for decades, even since the nineteenth century".

Some nit picking here about the original balls used - From memory when I actually researched (20yrs ago) the balls were round and later oval. This is Melbourne in 1859 so whatever was available was used and there are illustrations showing round balls being used. The early oval Rugby balls were basically not very good because of the more kicking involved and much much later Mr Sherrin and others filled the need.
A time machine would be handy

 

[Gigantor]

Some nit picking here about the original balls used - From memory when I actually researched (20yrs ago) the balls were round and later oval. This is Melbourne in 1859 so whatever was available was used and there are illustrations showing round balls being used. The early oval Rugby balls were basically not very good because of the more kicking involved and much much later Mr Sherrin and others filled the need.
A time machine would be handy

Pretty much.
They played in whatever space they could find, with whatever ball they could find.
Anytime anyone tries to make a big deal out of the shape of the field or the shape of the ball circa 1860, you can pretty much dismiss them as amateurs.
It was not unusual for trees to be in the actual field of play, or at the very least, for branches to hang over the field of play.
As for the shape of the ball, it's not as if there were malls and servos selling balls, they were pretty rare, and whatever existed, it would have been misshapen to buggery, and would have had a pretty short shelf life. A so-called round ball would more likely take on the shape of a cheese wheel after a while.

 

[The_Wookie]

The early Melbourne Rules of 1858 & 1859 were, generally, an amalgam of the school football code rules of Rugby, Harrow, Eton, & Winchester.

(Contemporary records cite these schools' written rules only were brought in, & discussed, by the creators of Melbourne Rules).
The game they created from 1858 onwards, however, was a unique game.

Yes. It uniquely combined elements in existence in other sports. Including Sheffield rules.

Whilst Wills did wish that some aspects of Rugby School Rules be incorporated into Melbourne Rules, he never wanted the game of rugby to be adopted in Melbourne- which he considered too dangerous & "not suitable" on the harder Melbourne grounds, he wanted "a game of our own"; & he argued that Melbourne Rules should be a safer game, cf Rugby rules.

This goes against the recollections of others at the meeting who very specifically said that Wills put forward rugby rules. Every account ive ever seen has always said that it was the others at the meetings who declined Wills suggestions.

As per my reasons mentioned above (including Dr G. de Moore stating there are about 30 reasons why Wills should be considered the most important figure, & the main driving force, for the creation of Melbourne Rules), J. Thompson (who greatly desired a dribbling, very limited handling & very limited contact, soccer-style game; & strongly opposed Wills only wanting an oval ball), W. Hammersley, & T. Smith were clearly subordinate (re the creation of Melbourne Rules) to Wills in the early days.

Dr G De Moore wrote Wills Biography and has something of a vested interested in pushing the Wills supremacy.

The latter 3 persons, however, did play a very important role in promoting Melbourne Rules.

Ive seen quotes and articles that claim Hammersley in particular is shafted by the Wills and Harrison proponents.

Wills was also the dominant figure in 1858 (which your comments did not mention, nor the 1857 claims), although these 1858 written Rules have not survived.

There may not even be 1858 rules, ive seen at least one article today that says thats a misrecollection and the 1859 rules were definitely the first written code for Australian football.

We, however, know from newspaper reports etc that in 1858, players were kicking the ball from their hands, players were marking the ball & had a free kick, & goals were kicked from marks- & there was no offside rule.

Not one of these characteristics is unique in and of themselves to australian football in the 1850s

Even after 1860, whilst Wills may not have attended the formal meetings to discuss/change Melbourne Rules, he was still undoubtedly, in an informal sense, a major/probably the major influence on Melbourne Rules in the 1860's (not including the time spent in central Qld.). He was the footballing & cricketing star of this era, & had great celebrity.

IF he wasnt in the rules meetings - and he wasnt - then thats not particularly relevant any more. Hes certainly less of an influence than people actually at the meetings - and by 1866 the game was vastly different to the original base rules.

Wills arrived at Rugby School in August 1850, Rugby football season there started in October (when Wills was 15 y.o.!)
Why do you think Wills was the best kicker at Rugby school (even though he had much less experience playing Rugby there/having very limited opportunity to master the complex skill of kicking the Rugby ball accurately, cf the great no. of other students)?

Is this an actual fact? Ive never seen this mentioned anywhere. That he was captain of the first team sure.

And why was he the best kicker in Melbourne Rules?

Is this an actual fact? Flanagan mentions it in one of his articles and then cites his skill with the oval ball as being the reason - this despite an oval ball not generally being in use in Victoria at the time - they werent even standard for rugby.

Generally speaking, do you think it takes a lot of practice & skill to be best amongst one's peers at kicking an oval-shaped ball?

Depends on the person. And whether he actually kicked an oval shaped ball.

Historian David Thompson has written, in more detail cf other historians, about these early matches' Rules & game styles; & the very different Rules & game styles, then, in British schools.

And as with most historians, the lack of any actual evidence is replaced by a psuedo history where assumption takes priority over any actual evidence or known fact, in order to push whatever agenda is happening at the time. The AFL as late as 2008 didnt believe Marngrook was more than a nice co-incidence, that changed with Adam Goodes and the push for more indigenous recognition - a very worthy goal to be sure.

Flanagan notes that Wills fell out with both Thompson and Hammersley, and they being journalists, failed to give Wills enough credit. Others have written that Harrison, a cousin of Wills, neglected both as he postured himself the father of the game.

Thats Wills grew up in a certain geographical place, is a known fact. That he MAY have witnessed Margrook being played is less certain. That he went to Rugby School is known. That he MAY have discussed it when creating Melbourne Rules is possible, despite no one else ever mentioning it, and he himself not bothering to note it anywhere.

 

[weewilly]

The rules had changed a fair bit by the time the Victorian Football Association was established on 17 May 1877.

New rules for the 1877 VFA season
BY AUSTRALASIAN
With the decision in 1877 to form an association also came a revised set of rules.
These rules, and associated definitions, were reproduced in the Australasian.

The following alterations in the rules regulating the game of football were suggested at a preliminary meeting of the honorary secretaries of the senior clubs, held at Oliver's Cafe, on Monday evening last.

LAWS OF THE GAME

1. The distance between the goals should not be more than 200 yards, and the width of playing space to be measured equally on each side of the line drawn through the centre of the goals not more than 150 yards. The goal posts shall be seven yards apart, of unlimited height. The ball to be used shall be No. 2 size (26 inches in circumference).

2. The captains of each side shall toss for choice of goal. The side losing the toss or goal has the kick off from the centre point between the goals. When half the time arranged for play has expired, the sides shall change ends, and the ball be thrown in the air by the field umpire in the centre of the ground.

3. A goal must be kicked by one of the side playing for goal between the posts, without touching either of them (flags excepted), or any player after being kicked. Should any of the spectators standing between the goal post interfere with or stop the progress of the ball going through, a goal shall be scored.

4. Two posts, to be called the "kick off posts", shall be erected at a distance of 20 yards on each side of the goal posts in a straight line with them.

5. In case the ball is kicked behind goal by one of the opposite side within the kick-off posts, any one of the side behind whose goal it is kicked may bring it 10 yards in front of any portion of the space between the kick-off posts, and shall kick it towards the opposite goal. Should the ball pitch out of bounds, it shall be taken back and kicked off again.

6. In case the ball is kicked behind by one of the side whose goal it is, the ball shall simply be thrown in at the place it crossed the goal line, as if it had gone out of bounds, save as provided for in rule 10.

7. Any player catching the ball directly from the foot or leg on or below the knee, off another player, may call "mark". He then has a free kick from any spot in a line with his mark and the centre of his opponents' goal posts, no player being allowed to come inside the spot marked, or within five yards in any other direction. No mark shall be allowed unless the ball is kicked at least six yards.

8. The ball may be taken in hand at any time, but not carried farther than is necessary for a kick, unless the player strikes it against the ground every five or six yards. In the event of a player with the ball in hand trying to pass an adversary, and being held by him, he must at once drop the ball.

9. Tripping, hacking, rabbitting, and slinging are prohibited; pushing with the hands or body is allowed only when a player is in rapid motion within five or six yards of the ball. Holding is only allowed while a player has the ball in hand, except in cases provided for in rules 5 and 7.

10. When the ball goes out of bounds (the same being indicated by a row of posts) it shall be brought back to the spot where it crossed the boundary line, and thrown in by the umpire at right angles with that line, but shall not be playable until after it touch the ground within bounds.

11. The ball while in play may, under no circumstances, be thrown or handed to a player.

12. In case of infringement of any of the above rules, any player of the opposite side may claim a free kick from the place where the breach of the rule was made, the player nearest the place of infringement being the only one entitled to the kick.

13. Before the commencement of a match, each side shall appoint an umpire, and they shall be the sole judges of goals and of cases of the ball going behind goal. A field umpire shall also be appointed, who shall decide in all other matters, and may appeal to the goal umpire.

14. The field umpire on being appealed to may either award a "free kick”, call "play on", or stop the play and throw the ball in the air (from scrimmages and other sources), and stop all attempts at scrimmages.

Any club belonging to the association may have the privilege of appealing against a field umpire's decision, providing a written protest is sent in to the association within three days after the match, accompanied with £1. 1s. The association's decision to be final.

15. No one wearing projecting nails, iron plates, or gutta percha on any part of his boots or shoes shall be allowed to play in a match.

16. No player shall play with more than one club during one season. For the purposes of this rule, schools shall not be considered clubs. In the event of a club dis- banding its members may be at liberty to play with any other club, with the consent of the association.

DEFINITIONS

1. A drop kick, or drop, is made by letting the ball drop from your hands on to the ground, and kicking it the very instant it rises.

2. A place kick, or place, is kicking the ball after it has been placed on the ground.

3. A punt consists in letting the ball fall from your hands, and kicking it before it touches the ground.

4. A scrimmage commences when the ball is on the ground and all who have closed around on their respective sides begin kicking at it.

5. Rabbiting is one player stooping down so as to cause another to fall, by placing his body below the other's hips.

6. Slinging is the act of catching a player round the neck or body, and throwing him to the ground.

It was also suggested that an association, to be called the Victorian Football Association, should be formed, to have the entire control and management of all inter-colonial football matches. It was proposed that the association should consist of delegates from all senior clubs which would acknowledge certain necessary conditions. The whole of the suggestions as well as the proposed alterations in the rules, will be submitted to a meeting of delegates from all the senior clubs, to be held on the 17th inst.

Footnotes
Title: VICTORIAN FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION.