Talk:Rugby union in Scotland

Rugby union Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rugby union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of rugby union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rugby unionWikipedia:WikiProject Rugby unionTemplate:WikiProject Rugby unionrugby union articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Scotland High‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

History[edit]

Because some of these games were described as "futeball", soccer enthusiasts have co-opted them as evidence of a continuity from the Scottish game... however, rugby has just as much claim to them.

I don't think what followers of Association football claim is particularly relevant here (although it would be in the main "Ba game" article). The sports are being mentioned as being similar to rugby, the opinion of an entirely different sport isn't particularly relevant. "Rugby has just as much claim" is also rather POV.GordyB (talk) 20:36, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This should be mentioned. Histories of Scottish football always do this, and it should be pointed out that they are ancestors of rugby and soccer, not just the one. In fact, it may be no coincidence that Jedburgh is so keen on rugby because of the pre-existing ball game there. --MacRusgail (talk) 22:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that this can be re-written, as it stands it is very POV but I'll rewrite it. As for rugby league, I think this passage could do with a make over. The article states that there are no areas where rugby league has a strong presence (unlike in England). To my knowledge, rugby league was not played at all in Scotland (barring the odd Great Britain game) until very recently. What is true that a fair number of Scots did switch codes and play rugby league in England (though nothing like as many Welsh or English players), Alain Tait is the most notable (World Cup winning captain of Great Britain).GordyB (talk) 10:17, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[1] According to the RFU, 14 Scots switched codes. I would have thought that it would have been more.GordyB (talk) 10:35, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gordy, I added the note about RL, basically because it has never been particularly strong here, unlike the north of England. There certainly have been notable Scottish RL players, but even so, not that many. I wouldn't say 14 is that many, considering the numbers of union players involved. I have tried to fill up this cat -> Category:Scottish_rugby_league_players. I think Dave Valentine is probably the most notable I know of. I was thinking Gavin Hastings - but I was confusing Gridiron with RL!!! Rugby's dynamic is often related to the dynamic between the two codes, but in Scotland, like Ireland, it is heavily loaded to one side, unlike in England, or a lesser extent Wales or NZ. Andy Craig is an example of someone who went the other way. --MacRusgail (talk) 01:34, 17 February 2008 (UTC) p.s. About the soccer stuff, I suppose it is something, I personally find annoying, but the record should be set straight - "football" up til about 150 years ago usually meant something little like soccer, just as in the Republic, USA, Canada, Australia or even NZ today. p.p.s. I hope the Sevens mention will be retained. Obviously it's not 15 a side, but probably Scotland's biggest contribution to union.[reply]

It is usually a wise move to attribute 'footbal origins' to both codes and not to claim one over the other. Even the early codifed games (rugby and association) of the 1860s had some similarities. In Association football if the ball went wide of the goals the ball could be touched down, no goalkeepers were noted and all players could use limited use of hands while the original offside rule was similar to rugby. Queen's Park, the first known Association team in Scotland played 20 a side in their first ever game, the early number used in the rugby game. The games were certainly different but were far closer then than they are today so 'soccer' can indeed claim to have been a rough game compared with what it has become today. The points about the folk games at Jedburgh and Kirkwall do portray a handling game but both games were actually originally 'football' contests, albeit rough forms of street football. The Kirkwall game changed about 1850 to a handling game because of the ever growing numbers involved which made a kicking game impossible. The bladders were being burst because of the large numbers pressing into the ball and so about this time it was filled in. The present version of the Kirkwall game therefore dates from 1850 though it has been played for years before this date as a kicking game. Similarly the Jedburgh game appears to have changed in the early 1800s from a wild kicking game to the hand ba' of today. It is not clear why this happened but we know that the game (like many others) was under pressure to be banned (it was even reprieved on one occasion at the Court of Session in 1704). With damage to life and limb (as well as property) through wild and reckless kicking (add in the drunken participants and the roudy nature of the games to complete the scene) the move to the rugby style maul (although still clearly dangerous) may have been attempted to stop more violent outcomes of the kicking style of play. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.130.145.156 (talk) 16:30, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Scottish Rugby team logo.jpg[edit]

The image Image:Scottish Rugby team logo.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --04:48, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]