When CFL Commissioner Stewart Johnston announced sweeping rule changes to the Canadian game last month, one modification that probably alarmed traditionalists the most was the change to the size of the CFL football field. In 2027, the field will shrink from 110 yards in length to 100 yards between the goal lines.
I can certainly sympathize with the “Save the 55” crowd. After all, we humans tend not to like change. Especially when it comes to changing something we cherish. But upon further review, it appears that 100-yard football fields are not new to Canadian football.
From the Rules of the Rugby Union Game of Football adopted by the Canadian Rugby Football Union, 14 September 1880
In fact, early Canadian football was played on 100 yard long fields. In 1880, the very first rule in the new Canadian Rugby Football Union rule book stated that “The Grounds shall be, as near as possible, 100 yards long by 50 yards broad.” Of course, it’s important to remember that the game around this time was more like rugby football than the gridiron game we are accustomed to today. But still, that’s a small field.
100 yard long field being adopted by the CRFU in November 1885. (Montreal Star, 14 November 1884)
100 yard long fields continued to be the norm for several years. While the 1884 CRFU Laws of the Game stated that the field of play should not exceed 110 yards in length, in 1885, the CRFU clarified that the field should be 100 yards long by 65 yards wide. It appears the 110 yard by 65 yard standard was finally widely adopted by the 1890s. That is the size of the field mentioned in the rules when the new Canadian Rugby Union was formed in 1891.
The 110 x 65 field we are accustomed to (taken from the Canadian Rugby Football Union Constitution and Laws of the Game published in 1884).
So, what’s the point of this discussion? Well, nothing really except to reiterate that Canadian football is not static. The rules and regulations of the game have been evolving since the beginning. And in the case of the 100 yard long field coming in 2027, it can be equally argued that rather than moving the CFL closer to the American game, we are instead taking Canadian football back to its early years.
Sources: Rules of the Rugby Union Game of Football adopted by the Canadian Rugby Football Union, 14 September 1880 Canadian Rugby Football Union Constitution and Laws of the Game, 1 July 1884 The Montreal Star, 14 November 1885
On August 29, 1917, newspapers on both sides of the Atlantic reported that Earl Grey had died at the age of 65. How well do you know the man who donated the trophy that bears his name, that symbol of Canadian football supremacy?
Born Albert Henry George Grey in 1851 in London, England, he became the 4th Earl Grey upon the death of his uncle. He was a lawyer by profession and a former politician, serving as an MP in the British Parliament. He also briefly served as the administrator for Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe).
In 1904, King Edward VII appointed Earl Grey as the Governor General of Canada. In those days, the vice regal not only represented the monarch in Canada but also acted as a representative for the British government. As such, the appointees were always a member of the British peerage and sometimes even a member of the Royal Family.
News of Earl Grey’s death as reported in the Ottawa Citizen on August 29, 1917.
By most accounts, Earl Grey was an immensely popular Governor General. He travelled the country intensively and was active in many areas of Canadian politics. Earl Grey was a strong supporter of national unity (he was largely responsible for the success of Quebec’s tercentenary celebrations!) and advocated for greater social justice for Canadians. Two of his other interests failed to gain traction, that being electoral reform and transforming the British Empire into an Imperial Federation.
Earl Grey’s death as reported in the Montreal Star on August 29, 1917.
Earl Grey’s death as reported in the Newcastle Journal (UK) on August 30, 1917.
Earl Grey’s tenure as Governor General ended in 1911, and he returned to England. Earl Grey died at his family home in Howick, England on August 29, 1917. He was remembered fondly by the press in both Canada and the United Kingdom as well as in countries around the world. He was survived by his wife Alice and three adult children.
One particular quote (attributed to Sir Hamar Greenwood) nicely sums up Earl Grey and his impact on and connection to Canada: “Earl Grey came to Canada an Englishman and returned to England as a keen Canadian.”
In reading the many newspaper articles about Earl Grey’s death you will notice a glaring omission. Most of them make little to no reference to the Grey Cup or to Grey’s support for Canadian football. At first glance, this appears rather odd. But it’s important to remember the times. At the time of Earl Grey’s death, Canada was in the midst of the First World War. Meaningful football hadn’t been played in Canada since 1914. There had only been six previous Grey Cup games, so the tradition hadn’t yet taken hold. In some ways, the Grey Cup was largely forgotten during the war years. Finally, the game was resurrected in 1920, setting up Earl Grey’s greatest legacy to Canada: the Grey Cup.
On December 19, 1891, football representatives from Ontario and Quebec met at the old Windsor Hotel in Montreal to launch (or more accurately relaunch) the Canadian Rugby Union. The new CRU replaced the unsuccessful Canadian Rugby Football Union that was actually formed a decade earlier.
The idea behind a new Canadian Rugby Union was for a properly run organization to oversee a common set of rules and hold a national championship game. From the onset, only teams in the Ontario and Quebec rugby football unions participated. This isn’t surprising considering much of western Canada was sparsely populated at the time. Interestingly, the Montreal Gazette mentions the potential future inclusion of clubs from the Maritimes. It seems the elusive Atlantic Canada team has been sought after much longer than we thought.
The Gazette published an article full of praise of the new entity and those involved in creating it. According to the article, the whole thing – rules, regulations, an executive team, and a constitution – were drawn up and adopted in less then five hours. Efficient.
Article in the Montreal Gazette summarizing the formation of the new Canadian Rugby Union (21 December 1891)
At the time, Canadian football was much closer to the game of rugby than to the gridiron game we enjoy today. The article discusses the idea of the new CRU joining the English union. I’m not sure if they’re talking about the England-based Rugby Football Union or the relatively new International Rugby Football Board which the RFU had itself just joined. The more favourable proposal was to encourage a rugby side from England to come to Canada to play games against the CRU. The CRU representatives also agreed to reward members of the championship team with badges and souvenirs. Can’t argue against that.
Over time, the Canadian Rugby Union would welcome leagues from the western provinces. The Grey Cup would become the CRU’s national championship in 1909. Canadian rugby slowly evolved into a unique brand of Canadian football with the adoption of changes such as the Burnside rules and the forward pass. The game became professional following the Second World War. And the Canadian Football League formed and seceded from the CRU in 1958.
After all this, the Canadian Rugby Union still remained the governing body of amateur football in Canada. In the 1960s the CRU was rebranded as the Canadian Amateur Football Association. Around the same time, a new organization called the Rugby Union of Canada was formed as the governing body of rugby union football in Canada. Alas, the final separation of rugby and Canadian football was complete. Each sport would now use its own nomenclature.
The original CRU/CAFA still plays a pivotal role in Canadian football. Today, it is known as Football Canada. It is still the national governing body of amateur Canadian football and is also responsible for the Canadian national teams that compete in international gridiron competitions.
Announcement in the Hamilton Spectator on December 19, 1891 about the Montreal meeting to launch the new Canadian Rugby Union.
An observer today would simply shrug his shoulders after reading the contents. “What’s the big deal?” he would ask. But around the turn of the 20th century the Burnside Rules would revolutionize Canadian football. Named after Thrift Burnside, who captained the University of Toronto varsity football team, the so-called Burnside Rules helped transform Canadian football from a rugby-style game to the modern gridiron game we recognize today.
Proponents of the Burnside Rules promoted the idea that they made the game more open, more exciting, and easier to follow. Opponents argued they changed the very essence of Canadian football and risked the Americanization of the game. In hindsight, both sides were probably right.
So, what the heck were the Burnside Rules anyway? And how did they change the game of Canadian football so much? Let’s take a quick look.
Perhaps the biggest difference in Mr. Burnside’s rules compared to traditional Canadian rugby at the time was the introduction of the downs system. The team with possession would now have three chances (or downs) to advance the ball ten yards. The other significant difference was adoption of the snap-back formation. Instead of a rugby scrum where players heeled the ball backwards, the offence would now line up along a fixed line of scrimmage and have the centre player on the line “snap back” the ball. Both the downs system and the snap-back formation were already being used in American football at the time.
Other rule changes included the reduction of the number of players from fifteen to twelve, scrimmaging instead of throw-ins from the sideline, and capping the number of players on the line of scrimmage at six. They also made some minor kicking and scoring adjustments.
A Fine Exposition of New Rugby
The first use the Burnside Rules was the first game of the Toronto city championship between the University of Toronto and the Toronto Argonauts on November 15, 1902. The rules received rave reviews from the Toronto Star, which hailed the game a “fine exposition of new rugby.”
Praising the Burnside Rules that were used in the Varsity-Argonauts game. (“Fine Exposition of New Rugby.” Toronto Star, 17 November 1902, p. 10.)
Still, the Burnside Rules were considered so radical by purists that their adoption divided clubs and unions and threatened to wreak havoc on Canadian football. On December 13, 1902, the Ontario Rugby Football Union formally adopted the Burnside Rules for the 1903 season. The Canadian Rugby Union and its other unions refused to adopt them initially. This led to the three CRU unions in Ontario and Quebec to play by three different sets of rules.
Article in the Toronto Star explaining the Burnside Rules after being adopted by the ORFU. (“Adoption of the Burnside Rules.” Toronto Star, 15 December 1902, p. 10.)
By the way, the Quebec Rugby Football Union probably had the most radical rule of all. While it didn’t adopt the snap-back formation it did implement its own version of a downs system. Basically, teams had to gain at least five yards on their third down, regardless of yards gained on the previous first or second down.
Comparing the three sets of rules in Canadian football for 1903 (Toronto Star, 22 December 1902, p. 9.)
Ottawa Opposed the Burnside Rules
The Ottawa Rough Riders lead the opposition to the ORFU’s adoption of the Burnside Rules. A column appearing in the Ottawa Citizen made abundantly clear Ottawa’s stance on the new rules and took to personally attacking Thrift Burnside. Such was the passion and divisiveness surrounding these sweeping changes.
A column in the Ottawa Citizen critical of Thrift Burnside and his rules. (Ottawa Citizen, 16 December 1902, p. 6.)
After unsuccessfully trying to convince the CRU to adopt the Burnside Rules, the ORFU opted to switch back to CRU rugby-style football in 1906. But in the years ahead, the down system and snap-back formation were eventually adopted across the country.
By the 1920s Canadian football had evolved and started to resemble the game we play and watch today. The Burnside Rules played a pivotal role in this evolution. By incorporating popular aspects of American football into the traditional Canadian game, the ORFU’s early adoption of the Burnside Rules helped shape the future of Canadian football.
More praise of the Burnside Rules by the Toronto Star. (Toronto Star, 17 November 1902, p. 10.)
Quintessentially Canadian. Quirky. A reward for failure. Embarrassing. All of these have been used to describe a scoring play unique to Canadian football: the rouge.
The rouge (or a single) is a one-point score awarded to the team who kicks the ball into their opponent’s end zone and when the ball is not returned or kicked back out of the end zone by the opposing team. This can be as a result of a kickoff, punt, or missed field goal.
If the opposing team doesn’t get the ball out of their end zone or if the ball passes the dead ball line at the back of the end zone, a single point is scored for the kicking team.
From time to time a debate ensues over whether to keep or get rid of the rouge. Most CFL and Canadian football fans argue it’s an integral part of the Canadian game both strategically and culturally. But, others say its inclusion rewards failure (because a point is often scored on a missed field goal) or, worse, makes the CFL look unprofessional or gimmicky.
Regardless, the debate over the rouge is nothing new. Below is an article that appeared in the Toronto Star in 1912 about abolishing the rouge in Canadian football. Remember, back then Canadian football was often referred to as rugby.
The main argument in this article seems to be that getting rid of the rouge would encourage more touchdowns and drop kicks – and that teams would no longer be able to take advantage of strong winds to score single points.
Source: The Toronto Star, 19 November 1912, page 13. (newspapers.com)
