_History of Football in the Public Schools._
It is vastly to the credit of cricket and of football that they should
have survived the Puritan deluge and the decay of the athletic spirit
at the end of the last century, and not have been laid in limbo
together with stoolball, cambuc, and other games wherein the hearts of
our forefathers rejoiced. The survival indicates an exceeding fitness.
Still the storm of Puritanical hatred had been enough to kill even
hardier plants than these, unless there had been some quiet haunts in
which they existed unnoticed and unmolested. As to the pastimes of the
’prentice boys they perished; but in the quiet privacy of the country
and in the almost monastic seclusion of some of our ancient public
schools they continued to exist.
For some reason or other, the foundation of Laurence Sheriff, at Rugby,
was the locality in which, what we now call the Rugby game, but which,
for reasons above mentioned, appears in reality to have been the
pristine form of the game, was preserved. Now, since of every effect
there is a cause, and since of this particular effect history supplies
no cause that we are aware of, it becomes necessary to have recourse
to conjecture; and since conjecture, to be probable, must proceed upon
some sound basis, it seems to follow, that in order to discover why the
game, distinguished by an absence of rules, survived in Rugby School,
an inquiry should be made whether the conditions of football at Rugby
were not different from what they were elsewhere. The answer to this
question, once formulated, is manifest. The conditions of football
were different at Rugby from those which prevailed at other schools;
or rather, to put the matter in language paradoxical in appearance but
literally correct, the conditions of the game were normal at Rugby and
abnormal everywhere else. In fact, the original form of football,--for
it is the simplest,--is of such a nature that it can hardly be played
except in a wide open space. Such a space existed at Rugby from the
beginning, but not at the other great public schools. The Eton boys
had originally no other place to disport themselves in than the
comparatively small inner field nearest the College buildings. The
ancient Meads of the Winchester College are small in dimensions. At
the Charterhouse they had originally no other playground than the
cloisters; and though at Westminster the scholars were better provided
for, yet they were confined to “Green.” Now, in small spaces of this
kind it is obvious that the continual playing of football throughout
the winter months must, almost of necessity, have resulted in the ruin
of the playground for other purposes. For football is essentially a
game for the many, and not for the few, and by its very nature involves
the tearing up of turf and the ruin of greenswards. Therefore it was
natural that in each particular school the rules of the game should
be settled by the capacities of the playground; and, as these were
infinitely various in character, so were the games various.
It is proposed to examine the games of the various schools in somewhat
close detail, on the ground, in the first place, that they are
interesting in themselves, and, in the second, that in some of them
at least are to be traced, more or less distinctly, the germs of the
Association game.
The most peculiar of all games of football is that which is practised
at Winchester, and which, in defiance of latter-day opinions, still
continues to flourish in almost its pristine form. Of the peculiar
rules in vogue at Winchester College, it cannot be written that they
are in any way concerned with the principles of the Association game.
On the contrary, they differ altogether from those of any other game.
But the Winchester rules have the literary merit of peculiarity, and
this practical virtue, that they have produced many of the first
Association players of the present and past days. Therefore, although
no one is recommended to submit himself to them if he can avoid it,
which he will not be able to do if he goes to the ancient school as
a pupil, they are rules worthy of some notice. The ground upon which
the Winchester boys play, is about 80 yards long and about 25 yards
wide. Thus, in the College Meads, which are more or less square,
with an irregular excrescence upon the side nearest the College, it
was possible for four games to be played simultaneously, while the
central portion was reserved for the more sacred and elaborate game of
cricket. Inasmuch, however, as there was some natural difficulty in
keeping the ball within the prescribed limits for even a reasonable
time, the ancient custom was first to mark out the ground with
stakes and ropes, and then, outside the ropes, to place a line of
shivering fags. In time humanity and genius combined discovered that
hurdles served the purpose quite as well as small boys, and did
not take cold; and in later days the hurdles themselves have given
place to tarred nets, spread out upon an iron framework some ten
feet in height. The ropes still remain and are placed about a yard
from the netting; and further, seeing that the ball, while it is
“under ropes,” is in a certain spurious kind of way in play, these
same ropes exert a serious influence upon the game. This commences
with a “hot,” which is formed in the following fashion: In “sixes,”
that is to say matches with six players on each side, there are two
backs on each side, who are called “behinds,” and four forwards, who
go by the name of “ups.” Of the forwards one is “over the ball” and
takes the centre place, and two back him up with their knees behind
his and their arms interlaced round his body. All three keep their
heads down, and the fourth, with his back and shoulders, propels
the centre man. In a six game, notwithstanding the closeness of the
phalanx thus formed, the duration of a “hot” is not usually long; but
in fifteens, where the mass of players is far greater and the same
principle is observed in the formation of the “hot,” ten minutes or
more may be occupied in this performance. When it is added that the
performance is deliberately repeated every time the ball is kicked
over the netting, and that there is no other penalty than a “hot” for
any infringement of the rules, it may be imagined that “hots” occupy
the greater part of the hour which is devoted to a match. The ball,
however, is not kicked out as often as might be supposed probable,
for one of the most stringent rules of the game is, that it may not
be kicked higher than five feet, which is supposed to be the average
height of a man’s shoulder, unless, at the time when it is kicked, it
is either bounding or rolling at a distinctly fast pace; nor may it be
kicked up unless the last person to touch it was an opponent, for, in
the contrary case, it is a “made flier,” which is dreadful. This is a
rule which causes almost as many hots by being infringed as it saves
by preventing the behinds, who alone do much in the way of kicking,
from driving the ball over the netting. Still it is a necessary rule,
for the goal consists of the whole twenty-five yards or thereabouts,
that is to say, of the whole width of the arena, and but for the rule
concerning “kicking up,” there would be no end to the number of goals
obtained. It should be mentioned, however, that if a ball, before
passing over the goal line, or, as it is called, “Worms,” is touched
ever so slightly by any member of what Strutt would call the defending
party, no goal is scored. The distinguishing features of the game,
apart from those already mentioned, are, in the first place, that no
dribbling is permitted under any circumstances; and in the second
place, that the “off-side” rule is stricter than in any other game. It
is not legitimate for two players on the same side to touch the ball
in succession, unless it rolls behind the first kicker; nor may one
player “back up his partner’s kick” by charging the adversary, unless,
at the time when his partner kicked, he was behind the ball, or, since
that time, has returned to the place from which the ball was kicked. It
should be added, that the ball, which is several ounces heavier than
an Association ball, is round. When caught upon a full volley kicked
by one of the opposite side, it is “punted” and not “dropped;” but if
the person catching it is charged, then he who charges is said to be
“running him” and may “collar” him as at the Rugby game, and the holder
of the ball may run until his adversaries cease to “run him,” but then
he must halt and take his punt.
Enough has now been said to give to the general public an idea of the
Winchester game. To a Wykehamist, all that has been written is, as he
would say, the vilest “Tugs,” or news twice told; to interest him, it
would be necessary to enter into an elaborate discussion of the vexed
question contained in the words “Under Ropes Play.” But to the outside
world this vast problem will be sufficiently explained by the bare
statement that when, towards the end of the allotted time, the heavier
side discovers that it is one goal or so ahead, it is a very simple
matter to keep the ball under ropes, in the midst of a surging and
tumultuous crowd, until the hour ends.
The characteristics of the Winchester game are, that it requires great
pace and dash in the players, and teaches men to kick with great
accuracy. It is, however, so manly and straightforward a game that it
leaves little room for skill or subtlety. Moreover, it is noticeable
for this, that while it has been the training-ground of many excellent
players, it has also brought into prominence men who never could have
excelled under any other conditions. These are the “under-ropes”
players, whose system is that of the ox--heavy, obstinate, and slow.
Corresponding in a certain measure to the Winchester game, is the Eton
game of football at the Wall. That is to say, its character and rules
are the result of the locality in which it is played. This is a sturdy
game, and a manly, but singularly inappropriately termed football.
The ball indeed and the feet are both present; but the ball is of
microscopic size, the number of the players is considerable, and the
limits of the ground are exceedingly narrow. Such is the compactness of
the mass of players and the hardness of the wall alongside which the
game takes place, that the ball is encased in a double covering, lest
it should be burst; and the players are enveloped in a kind of armour
of proof. If it were not for this precaution, minor excrescences, such
as ears and the like, would be rubbed off as completely as jagged knobs
are removed from a stick by sandpaper and spoke-shave; skin, too,
would, at the end of the game, be conspicuous by its absence from the
players nearest the wall.
Into the niceties of this game it is not proposed to enter; for
though an excellent pastime, it cannot be described as football, and
is simply a question of shoving. There used, however, to exist at
Winchester College a practice not dissimilar. On Saturday evenings in
the Christmas term, commonly called “short-half,” it was customary
for the College boys to assemble in 7th chamber for the purpose of
singing; after the singing was over, the prefects assembled, eighteen
in number, in the doorway, which was exceeding cramped; opposite them
the juniors, fifty-two in number, ranged themselves, and what was
called a “down-hot” took place. Juniors tried to force their way out,
the prefects tried to keep them in, and there was no mercy for him who
fell. With the single exception that in a “down-hot” the formality of
“delivering a ball in the midst,” as Strutt has it, was dispensed with,
there were many features of similarity between it and the wall game.
Lovers of football might well wish that, as in life they were similar,
so in death they might not be divided. The “down-hot,” together with
the College singing, has long gone the way of all flesh, and has been
swept into the dustbin of the past by the broom of the reformer. It
were a matter not much to be regretted that the wall game should also
perish.
The Eton field game, on the other hand, is a very fine game of
football, and has been found to be an excellent training-ground for
Association. Both in the forward and backward divisions old Etonians
have been prominent; and nothing but the fact that personal references
are contrary to our principles prevents an enumeration of well-known
names. The same deference to principle has prevented the naming of
Wykehamists who have been heroes in international contests, and will
prohibit the mention of the names of the great players of Harrow, of
Westminster, of Rugby, and of Charterhouse.
The distinguishing points of the field game are pace, and, if the word
may be used without offence, honesty. The ball, as in the wall game,
is very small, being about the size of a toy football such as one buys
for children. It is also exceedingly light, and will travel at a great
pace; the result is, that from the moment when they begin to play Eton
boys volley without hesitation, and when they reach man’s estate, can
volley the Association ball incomparably better than the generality of
men trained elsewhere. On the other hand, it is not, in our opinion, a
good ball for men to play with. The full strength of a muscular leg,
scientifically applied, drives the ball so far that there are periods
at which either the game degenerates into an interchange of volleys
between the backs (“behinds”), or the ball is occasionally kicked far
beyond the reach of any player.
It now becomes necessary to explain the use of the word “honesty” a
few lines above. There is no game, except perhaps the Winchester game,
in which the rules of “off-side” are so strict; and to “corner” or to
“sneak,” that is to say, to play “off-side,” or to hang about with the
intention of so doing, are serious offences thoroughly foreign to
the principle of the game. Perhaps it is not too much to say, that in
proportion to the strictness with which the off-side rule is formulated
and observed is the normal pace of any game. Certain it is, that of all
games the Winchester, Eton, and Rugby games are the fastest, and that
in them the off-side rule is most stringent. The “bully” with which
the Eton game begins, is very like a “scrimmage” or a “hot”; but there
is this essential difference between the Eton game and the Winchester,
that it permits and encourages dribbling; it differs from all games
except the Association game in prohibiting the use of the hands; and
from the Association game in particular, in the prohibition of forward
passing. It should be mentioned that goals are not frequently obtained
at this game, for the goal posts are both narrow and low; but there are
minor points, called “rouges,” which may be obtained, and which may
score the victory.
A rouge is an intricate business; and it must be prefaced that the
subjoined account is not written by an Etonian, who alone is familiar
with the almost Eleusinian mystery, but is merely the result of
something like a dozen experiences of the pleasant Eton game which
used to be played in the Merton College cricket ground at Oxford. The
proceedings appeared to be these:--One side, which may be called A,
having succeeded in driving the ball into the neighbourhood of the line
running through B’s goal from side to side of the ground, proceeded
slowly to urge the ball along the line in the direction of the goal. In
this performance they were carefully watched by their opponents, who
did not interfere to prevent them unless one of the side A happened
to lose command of the ball for a moment, for, if the ball was driven
behind the line after last touching one of the side B, a rouge was
scored to the credit of A. A rouge, besides being a point in itself,
was capable of being turned into a goal; for when the ball had been
driven behind, a peculiar and exceedingly compact scrimmage was formed
close to the goal itself; one of the defending party holding the ball
between his knees and sitting on the knee of a person behind him, who
himself placed his foot upon the ball. These two principal defenders
were themselves backed up by subordinates behind; and approach to them
was rendered difficult by the arranging of a double line of players.
Up the lane thus formed the opposing party, headed by their strongest
and heaviest man, charged in column, at a heavy trot, and a tremendous
struggle ensued.
The accuracy of this account of a rouge is not vouched for; but it
has at least this merit, that it is a faithful representation of the
impression produced upon the mind of one not nurtured at Eton, by a few
experiences of a most pleasant game.
The Harrow game, though nice enough in the playing, is neither fish,
flesh, fowl, nor good red herring. It is played with a peculiarly
awkward-looking oval ball, over which Harrow boys attain a complete
mastery, but which completely gets the better of other players. Upon _à
priori_ grounds one would say that it was the most primitive form of
ball, and originally represented nothing but a bladder with the rudest
form of covering that could be put together out of three pieces of
leather. The features of the game are the punting and the dribbling,
and the fact that the goal has no limit in the way of height. _A solo
usque ad cœlum_, in fact, is a maxim more applicable to the Harrow
goal than, as may be seen from a recent decision in the matter of
overhead wires, to territorial possession. The next most noticeable
characteristic will be suggested immediately by the words “three
yards.” Any player may catch the ball on the full volley from a kick
by one of the other side, or from a kick by one of his own side,
if, at the time when the kick is made, he is nearer to his own goal
than to that of the adversary. Having caught it he calls out “Three
yards,” making his mark in the ground with his heel, and if he does
this in time, he is allowed a free kick at the adversaries’ goal, no
one being allowed to come within the distance named, for the purpose of
interfering with his kick.
There are other games of football practised at various schools, which,
in a work of more pretentious size, would deserve detailed description,
besides those of Westminster and Charterhouse. There is, for instance,
the Shrewsbury game, noted for its name of “dowling,” supposed to be
connected with δοῦλος, “a slave,” which carries in itself the notion
of compulsory football. But space does not permit us to enter into
the merits of this game; and the omission may be justified partly
on the ground that it was a game of a mixed kind, and partly on the
ground that it has now fallen into disuse, and has given place to the
Association game.
Between the game as played in the cloisters at the Charterhouse, and
that played on “Green” at Westminster School there would not appear to
be any essential similarity. The rules of both games were absolutely
determined by their environment and the circumstances under which they
were played. In a certain sense, both were similar. Both were played
in a confined space, though, of course, the space in “Green” was less
confined than that of the cloisters; and from this cause it follows
that both Westminster and Charterhouse boys developed an astounding
capacity for dribbling through dense masses of boys. Both games again
were played at odd times and in ordinary clothes; and though both were
rough and boisterous enough in all conscience, they clearly were not
so injurious to clothes as the Rugby game, in which it was allowed to
seize and hurl an opponent. The worst that can follow from a charge
in which the hands are not employed, is downfall into mud which a
clothes-brush will remove more or less completely from the injured
garment; but from being collared, there may ensue results in the shape
of torn clothes. Hence it came that the boys educated at these schools,
in the first place, prohibited “collaring” and all use of the hands and
arms, and, in the second place, became extremely clever at dribbling
and at charging with the shoulders. While this subject is uppermost, it
may not be amiss to enter very slightly into the question of roughness.
The Rugby game unquestionably appears far rougher to the spectator
than the Association. But, in fact, it is a very doubtful matter which
is the more dangerous. It must be remembered that it is not the fall to
the ground which is most perilous to life and limb. Seldom, indeed, is
it that anything more serious than a collar-bone is broken by a fall to
the ground. From the concussion of two bodies, on the contrary, ribs
and arms are apt to suffer, and in proportion to the preponderance
of kicking is the danger of broken legs. These are of comparatively
rare occurrence, except as the results of crossed shins; and the more
rational conclusion is, that the rules from which the Association game
took its origin were originally formulated, or rather grew naturally,
from a regard for clothes rather than limbs.
In another chapter the formulation of the Association Rules will be
discussed; for the present, it will be enough to say that they owe
their origin mostly to Westminster and Charterhouse. Indeed, it is not
too much to say of the games of football at present in vogue, that they
are due almost entirely to the desire of men at the Universities and
elsewhere for a continuance of their old school exercises, and that
their connection with the ancient games is accidental rather than real,
remote rather than near.
Of the history of the other form of the game, in which running with the
ball is encouraged, but little need be said; for from Rugby School, and
from Rugby School alone, what is now known as the Rugby Union game is
derived.
If the view we have taken in the foregoing pages be correct, while the
running and collaring game was the original national sport of England,
the dribbling game owes its origin to schools in which the playgrounds
were limited in size, and where various considerations rendered the
rough horseplay which characterized football in the ancient times
impracticable. In the beginning of this chapter we have pointed out
that the size of the Close at Rugby rendered it possible for the
boys of that school to play the original game without fear of being
hurled when collared against stone walls, or iron railings, or upon
surfaces of gravel. Hence we should naturally expect to find, in the
game practised at this school, an absence of any restriction in the
way in which the ball was to be taken towards the adversaries’ goal,
and an equal absence of any restriction in the means of collaring or
stopping one of the attacking party in his course, and with no limits
to the field of play except those which necessity demanded. It is the
very style of game which is known to have been in vogue at Rugby
fifty years ago. We need scarcely refer to the well-known description
of the football match in “Tom Brown’s Schooldays at Rugby,” as that
description is hardly likely to be unknown to any of our readers; but
if any take the trouble to reperuse it after reading these pages, they
can scarcely fail to notice how little the Rugby game described there
differs from a Rugby Union “Big-side” at the present day. Indeed, until
within the last few years the Rugby School game suffered no alteration;
but lately the tripping, hacking, and indiscriminate charging have been
abandoned, no doubt more in respect to the feelings of the numerous
fifteens who visit the school to play matches, than from any assumed
effeminacy of the hard-shinned Rugbeians. At the present day we believe
the Rugby School fifteens, at any rate in their foreign matches,
conform to the Rugby Union Code.
No doubt there were many other schools at which a game which allowed
running with the ball was practised; but at no other public school than
Rugby, as far as we are aware, did the collaring, hacking, and tripping
game take root. We can hardly help thinking, when we recollect with
what rapturous delight football was regarded at Rugby, that the real
cause which kept Rugby football in the background in other schools,
was the sublunary consideration of clothes. In ancient times a suit
of clothes was an expensive item of expenditure for a young gentleman,
while the beef and mutton that he ate cost but a few pence the pound;
and so in every sport the question of how the clothes would stand it
had to be considered. Had Carlyle been still alive, we might have
provided him with materials for another chapter of _Sartor Resartus_.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
CONCLUSION.
_The Modern Revival of Football._
A very useful rule forbids an historian to deal with the matters of
his own day; and in obedience to this rule we have decided not to
discuss the developments, changes, and general progress of modern
football since the institution of the governing bodies of the two
games--Association and Rugby Union--placed each of them upon a firm
basis as a national sport. The only task, therefore, left to us before
we conclude our welcome labours, is to sketch in outline the steps
which led to the re-establishment of football in its old position as
the chief of the winter sports of England.
Between thirty and forty years ago began the first movement in England
of the great athletic revival, which, after gradually spreading until
it covered the whole of the United Kingdom, is still rolling like a
wave over the colonies and all foreign countries where the English
tongue is spoken. It will not be too much for us to say, that the
great athletic movement, which is still too near for us to be able
to calculate its full effects with certainty, has worked a greater
revolution in English character and habits than any movement, religious
or secular, which has passed over the country since the time of the
Puritans. Of that great athletic movement the history has yet to be
written; but it would hardly be wise to attempt to touch it in the
present work. Suffice it to say, that the physical causes of the desire
for hard exercise which has seized upon men are apparent enough. In
modern times, when nearly all the world is given up to the feverish
bustle and worry of money-making, the body of a young and lusty man,
by a natural reaction, craves for a muscular exercise, which may
give a relief to the nerves and the brain. For the performance of
this function it is admitted that there is no game in the world like
football. The student at the University, and the young man who is tied
to his office-stool throughout all the daylight hours of the winter
months, with the solitary boon of a Saturday’s half-holiday, alike find
that an hour’s hustle at football sends them home, more tired perhaps,
but happier, calmer, and wiser men.
It is no doubt in some sense owing to the promptings of this
feeling that we find, about thirty years ago, football-playing being
revived fitfully at the Universities, and matches beginning to be
played between teams of men in London and the provinces, and with
still greater frequency as years went by. In 1857 the Sheffield Club
(Association) was founded, and in 1858 the great metropolitan Rugby
Union Club, Blackheath, was established, chiefly by some old pupils of
Blackheath School. About 1861 or 1862 a large number of clubs playing
the dribbling game sprang up in the neighbourhood of Sheffield, which
has since remained a most flourishing local centre for that game; while
in London two of the first clubs who started the dribbling game were
the Crystal Palace, in 1861, and the Barnes Club, in 1862. Indeed, at
this time the number and organization of the dribbling clubs, both in
London and the provinces, was superior to those of the advocates of
the running and tackling game. As far as we are aware, the Blackheath
Club was the only regularly organized club in the metropolis until the
great rival club at Richmond came into existence, in 1862. It is in
1863 that the history of football organization really commences. In
the autumn of that year a conference met for the purpose of attempting
to reduce to a uniform code the various conflicting rules which were
adopted by the different clubs. It was the intention of the promoters
of the meeting to unite all those who played football under any rules
into a united body; and the rules agreed upon at the first meeting
were a fair and liberal attempt to bring about what can hardly be
considered anything but an impossible task, viz., a fusion of Rugby
Union and Association rules. Indeed, the original rules, framed by the
promoters of the parent Association, included running with the ball
under certain restrictions, as well as hacking and tripping. In the
meantime, however, another conference of members of the public schools
had been arranging rules at Cambridge, where the dribbling game had
been played on Parker’s Piece as early as 1855. Eventually, a meeting
was arranged between delegates of the Cambridge and London conferences;
and between them a set of rules was agreed to which excluded all
running with the ball, and all tackling, hacking, or tripping. Thus
started in 1863 the Football Association; and, save that in 1867 the
strict off-side rule, which was at first insisted upon, was expunged
for the present modified rule, which gives rise to so many disputes,
there have been few substantial alterations in the rules up to the
present day, though many changes in the manner of playing. After this
alteration the players from Westminster and Charterhouse Schools joined
the Association ranks; and in 1870 the sixteen clubs which formed the
Sheffield Association abandoned their own rules in favour of those of
the Association, which has from that day exercised paramount authority
over all the dribbling clubs of the kingdom. At the present moment
the popularity of the Association game, especially in the provinces,
is enormous; and if the old governing body can stand firm amidst the
troubles which are arising at the present day upon the vexed question
of professionalism, its career of prosperity should be a long one.
To return, however, to the history of the running and tackling form
of the sport--the “Rugby game,” as it was called even in 1862. When
the Association code forbade running with the ball, the Blackheath
and Richmond Clubs, and the few other less important and scarcely
permanent teams who played the running rules, naturally held aloof
from the Associated clubs. In the meantime the number of permanent
clubs who played Rugby rules began to multiply greatly. In 1863 the
Civil Service Club, under these rules, was formed, and about the same
time the Harlequins. In 1865 Ravenscourt Park was founded; in 1866
the Flamingoes in London, and several provincial clubs, including
Liverpool; and between this time and 1870 the clubs playing the older
game sprang up in large numbers all over the kingdom. Although there
was a general similarity in all the rules played by the various clubs
who admitted running and tackling into their game, the difficulty of
arranging little disputes and differences of practice used to be very
great, as all old players who had their day before the foundation of
the Rugby Union in 1871 can testify. Disputes of any consequence were
avoided by the universal adoption of the rule that every club played
its own rules in home matches. It was evident, however, that a system
like this could not last amidst the rapid spread of the game through
the country, and in the autumn of 1870 negotiations commenced between
members of the Blackheath and Richmond Clubs, which ended, in January,
1871, in the foundation of the Rugby Union. It is pleasing to note that
the two governing bodies of football have never come into collision
since their respective foundations. We venture to express a hope that
the footballers of either game will ever continue to look upon skill in
the other and rival game with admiration, and not with envy.
TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES:
Italicized or underlined text is surrounded by underscores: _italics_.
Obvious typographical errors have been corrected.
Inconsistencies in hyphenation have been standardized.
Archaic or variant spelling has been retained.