Dear Thal:
Why do you consider a waste of time looking for information? In my opinion, it's kind of fundamental thing. Anyway, if you don't care about this, it's up to you. Again, anyway, I cant' understand your point, because there is no hole between Classical and Romantic.
The label "classical" refering to the Viennese Classical Style was not a common sense until the 1830's, when the aesthetics of Romanticism were firmly planted. By the way, classical is retrospective: a composer never thought that he was composing "classical" music, due to modesty at least. Mozart, by the way, was considered romantic by many in the early 19th century.
Field, that is our matter here, is a romantic composer. Why consider him something else?
Best!
P.S.: Please, notice that I don't want neither to change your point of view, nor to say you're wrong: just want to understand your thoughts about this period. Nothing personal at all.