"American Rugby"?

[Poul]

I can see we're just going around in circles with this discussion. All I can say is, "Get involved with growing the sport of rugby league in Canada or the United States". If, by getting involved you can garner enough support to change the name of rugby league to American Rugby, then have at it. If you are involved already, great. If not, get out of your armchair and make a difference. Because re-branding rugby league will not grow the sport, but getting others involved and enthused about rugby league will.

Obviously we can't get a consensus on this issue. I guess that's the beauty (and frustration ](*,)) of open debate ;-)

Whilst I'm not directly involved with Rugby League in the USA or Canada, I do definitely want to see it prosper in both nations. I have previously made donations of coaching books and statistics gatherers to the AMNRL, and also an online coaching program to Jamaica.

I would like to see Americans making the decisions about the development of Rugby League in their country, and not have "foreigners", including armchair pundits like myself telling them what to do.
I have merely put forward a suggestion which the Americans can either take up and run with, or reject it.
BUT, let THEM make the decision.
With all due respect to some other posters, and for reasons already pointed out ad nauseum, the terms Rugby League or Rugby XIII, or Major League Rugby,just wont fly in the American market.
PCRL, I disagree with your assertion above, and that is why I would like to see the Americans put this hypothesis to the test. Out of curiosity, how do you feel that Rugby League would be best promoted and titled in Canada?
In the USA, I still feel that the game would be best served by renaming it
American Rugby.

 

[PacificCoastRL]

Poul, I feel that rugby league would best be promoted and titled in Canada by doing exactly what Canada Rugby League is doing. For starters the name hasn't been changed, it is rugby league. Rugby League resurfaced a little over a year ago in Canada and has gone from two teams in Ontario last year to four teams this year. Additionally there will be a competition in British Columbia in 2012 and I have heard rumblings on this forum of a rugby league competition beginning on the East Coast next year as well. Less than one month ago Canada hosted the United States in the second leg of the Colonial Cup. The game was broadcast on the CBC television network. CBC is Canada's national network and is seen on every television set in Canada. There was no name change, there has just been hard work and enthusiasm to get the game in front of as many people as possible. Lastly - Canada Rugby League owns the rights to two ESL games per week broadcast on Setanta Sports in Canada and also produces a weekly rugby league show that highlights rugby league in Canada while showing highlights from the ESL and NRL. Again, Canada Rugby League has not tried to change the name of the game - What is, is - and they have put in the hard yards to make it work. Simple. To borrow from the Americans and their passion for baseball - build it and they will come.

 

[NRL-TGG]

Poul, I feel that rugby league would best be promoted and titled in Canada by doing exactly what Canada Rugby League is doing. For starters the name hasn't been changed, it is rugby league. Rugby League resurfaced a little over a year ago in Canada and has gone from two teams in Ontario last year to four teams this year. Additionally there will be a competition in British Columbia in 2012 and I have heard rumblings on this forum of a rugby league competition beginning on the East Coast next year as well. Less than one month ago Canada hosted the United States in the second leg of the Colonial Cup. The game was broadcast on the CBC television network. CBC is Canada's national network and is seen on every television set in Canada. There was no name change, there has just been hard work and enthusiasm to get the game in front of as many people as possible. Lastly - Canada Rugby League owns the rights to two ESL games per week broadcast on Setanta Sports in Canada and also produces a weekly rugby league show that highlights rugby league in Canada while showing highlights from the ESL and NRL. Again, Canada Rugby League has not tried to change the name of the game - What is, is - and they have put in the hard yards to make it work. Simple. To borrow from the Americans and their passion for baseball - build it and they will come.

Yeah, that makes sense.

Hopefully the USA and Canada can feed off each other.

The biggest issue is the USA is the two different domestic competitions. That needs to be sorted out or (and i hate the thought of this idea) the USARL need to start their own international team and look to go from there.

Another option and I am favouring this atm, is to have the AMNRL and the USARL to play representative fixtures against each other in an origin like series and then have those games decide who makes the USA national team. But the AMNRL need to let some things go and allow the USARL players to play for their country.

I think the AMNRL are trying hurt the best USARL players and teams in the hope to pull them back to their own competition but it seems to be hurting themselves more then anything. The USARL seems to be making all the right moves.

And just quickly on Canada, it is amazing what they have done in such a short space of time.

 

[Poul]

PCRL, I didn't get to see the Wolverines v Tomahawks match, and I assume you did.
I think it is fantastic that this game was telecast on CBC.
Who was/were the commentator/s for the telecast?
Were they Canadians?
Were they knowledgeable about the game?
Did they use Rugby League terminology?
Did they use English or Australasian nomenclature?

I think it is great that Rugby League may be able to develop under this name in Canada, but I still reckon that it may be a different matter in the USA, where I still feel it would be best renamed ..... American Rugby.

 

[NRL-TGG]

I watched the CBC match as well,

I'm not sure about the names of the commentators, but to me at least one of the two sounded canadian if not both.

They were knowledgeable about the game particularly the one that came up with the spinach analogy. "momentum is like Rugby League spinach, once you get it you get stronger and stronger."

The terminology they used was mixed between Rugby League and Gridiron. Pretty sure I heard the use of touchdowns, tries, end zones, tackles and downs used.

 

[spooky]

Both commentators were Canadian. One was a regular sports commentator on the CBC (whose name escapes me) and the other was Eric Perez, Chairman of the CRL.

As far as I know the CRL have no plans to move away from the name Rugby League.

 

[jasonstevenswedgie]

Yeah, that makes sense.

Hopefully the USA and Canada can feed off each other.

The biggest issue is the USA is the two different domestic competitions. That needs to be sorted out or (and i hate the thought of this idea) the USARL need to start their own international team and look to go from there.

Another option and I am favouring this atm, is to have the AMNRL and the USARL to play representative fixtures against each other in an origin like series and then have those games decide who makes the USA national team. But the AMNRL need to let some things go and allow the USARL players to play for their country.

I think the AMNRL are trying hurt the best USARL players and teams in the hope to pull them back to their own competition but it seems to be hurting themselves more then anything. The USARL seems to be making all the right moves.

And just quickly on Canada, it is amazing what they have done in such a short space of time.

I actually see the two comps as a positive at the moment, they will drive the other to try harder which is a win for the sport of rugby league

 

[deal.with.it]

Dude! American Rugby isn't going to work. The word rugby is the problem for many Americans. Putting the name of their nation in front of it won't work. If there is a true problem getting the sport into main stream, then make a name like 'Arena Football'. That way they know it is a type of football, which it is, but i different brand. So why don't you think of a name to go with football.

 

[Poul]

I'll keep all my posts about the renaming of Rugby League to American Rugby confined to this thread. :shock:

For those posters who think that there is no need to change the name of the game in the USA, how do you propose that Rugby League increase its profile in the USA, and to avoid confusion with union?

As I pointed out in another thread, union has had over a century in the USA, yet barely causes a ripple in the consciouness of Americans. Should Rugby League follow the same path? :roll:

Looks like I'll have to put my money where my mouth is, and sponsor a poll to see if there is support to have the name of Rugby League changed to
American Rugby. :crazy:

 

[spooky]

The more I thnk about it, the more I like Rugby Football (or American Rugby Football if you want). Selling it as an American football/rugby hybrid could be the way to go. It would make it more comprehensble to Americans as they can see the common themes between RL and AF but it's also clearly recognisable as a form of rugby.

 

[theblob]

I quite like DINGB@T's earlier suggestion of 6-down Rugby. Any American who is familiar with rugby union will be able to guess what it is like, and what makes it fundamentally different to union, before even setting eyes on the game.

 

[Knownothing]

Poul,


Continuing our discussion from the other thread - you asked the rhetorical question "what has RU done wrong in the US?"


I am certainly not an expert in American sporting history. However, a couple of points. RU was an amateur sport for many years - there was no particular incentive to popularise the sport, so perhaps that is one reason that it did not stray far from its college roots until fairly recently. I honestly doubt that the perceived lack of success had anything to do with its "Englishness". It is more likely to have been perceived as a sport for the spoilt sons of rich fathers.

We all know that the big American sports do not cater for the kids who do not make the elite level. There is very little - if any - organised football, baseball, basketball competitions for young men older than college age. That is where the potential market is, I would have thought.


Again, I would stress, I would bet that there are lots of young men who would love to play competitive sport after they leave college (or should I say, when they reach the age that means they are no longer in consideration for a professional career in one of the big sports).


Provide the sport, publicise it, and I am sure they will come. Spinner Howland has shown what can be done at the local level, hasn't he? The team, and the competition that the team plays in, is more important than the name of the game.

 

[NRL-TGG]

I actually see the two comps as a positive at the moment, they will drive the other to try harder which is a win for the sport of rugby league

I mean't internationally,

Domestically you are correct.

 

[billy2]

I quite like DINGB@T's earlier suggestion of 6-down Rugby. Any American who is familiar with rugby union will be able to guess what it is like, and what makes it fundamentally different to union, before even setting eyes on the game.

It does work, and it's very American.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

I don't like the idea of renaming the sport American Rugby, but I think calling the competition that would be a good idea. That would give the Americans the impression that it's more of an American thing without going to the extent of trying to make it out to be something it's not. A term like "6-Down Rugby makes more sense and wouldn't alienate Canadians either.
Changing terminology to use terms that are more familiar to the American market (touchdowns etc) makes perfect sense.
As for rule changes, dumb idea. The rules have to be the same or almost the same as everywhere else so that they can compete internationally. Forward passes and stoppages? Good luck ever having a competitive international team with that. However this doesn't mean that you can modify certain areas such as playing the game in quarters to cope with the heat as they don't alter the fundamentals of the game.

 

[NRL-TGG]

I don't like the idea of renaming the sport American Rugby, but I think calling the competition that would be a good idea. That would give the Americans the impression that it's more of an American thing without going to the extent of trying to make it out to be something it's not. A term like "6-Down Rugby makes more sense and wouldn't alienate Canadians either.
Changing terminology to use terms that are more familiar to the American market (touchdowns etc) makes perfect sense.
As for rule changes, dumb idea. The rules have to be the same or almost the same as everywhere else so that they can compete internationally. Forward passes and stoppages? Good luck ever having a competitive international team with that. However this doesn't mean that you can modify certain areas such as playing the game in quarters to cope with the heat as they don't alter the fundamentals of the game.

top post.

 

[Poul]

(**** longish post :blahb: )

It looks like I've upset a few other posters here and in the two other threads by Matty and Lawrence, by banging on about changing the name of Rugby League in the US to American Rugby.

I unreservedly apologise to Matty and Lawrence if they felt that I was trying to hijack their threads. That was never my intention.
I am a passionate Internationalist, and in particular would love to see the game flourish in the USA.

Yes, I am an "armchair" fan (like most here probably are), but as I have pointed out, I have contributed materially, albeit in a small way to the development of Rugby League in North America.

I have not resorted to personal insults (yet :sarcasm, and am merely trying to stimulate debate on this issue. The fact that there has been almost 100 replies to this thread indicates that this is a topic worthy of informed discussion.

I feel we haven't heard the opinions of enough Americans on this and other issues related to the development of the game in their country.
To this end, I would like to propose the formulation of a survey of Americans to gauge their knowledge of and attitude towards Rugby League, and how they might see the game fitting into the American sporting landscape.

After having viewed a short clip of a USARL game, the surveyee could be asked a number of questions, obviously including "What should the game be called", then given a number of alternatives, e.g., Rugby, Rugby Union, Rugby League, American Rugby, Other -----

I am prepared to sponsor such a survey, but I don't want to be accused of soliciting answers by asking "loaded" questions, so I would invite all members here to propose their own questions (and possible answers), which they can post here, and then I will forward these to the USARL, so they can edit them into a workable survey.

Let the brainstorming begin :crazy:

 

[Big Picture]

I don't like the idea of renaming the sport American Rugby, but I think calling the competition that would be a good idea. That would give the Americans the impression that it's more of an American thing without going to the extent of trying to make it out to be something it's not. A term like "6-Down Rugby makes more sense and wouldn't alienate Canadians either.
Changing terminology to use terms that are more familiar to the American market (touchdowns etc) makes perfect sense.
As for rule changes, dumb idea. The rules have to be the same or almost the same as everywhere else so that they can compete internationally. Forward passes and stoppages? Good luck ever having a competitive international team with that. However this doesn't mean that you can modify certain areas such as playing the game in quarters to cope with the heat as they don't alter the fundamentals of the game.

As I said in the NY Times thread, the profile of RU in North America is extremely low. The views of American and Canadian sports fans toward "rugby" can be summed up as follows: a tiny minority of aficionados appreciate it, the rest either know nothing about it and/or regard it as an inferior sport we gave up decades ago.

For this reason, maintaining distance from RU is very important for RL on this continent, the people we want to attract are American football fans and just about all of them think of "rugby" as some quaint and inferior sport. I'd be inclined use a name like International Football to highlight the parallels to that game and reach out to that audience.

As for stoppages, the CBC telecast with its' multiple commercial breaks during the play (four breaks in each half, each comprising 3 or 4 30-second commercials) showed that the non-stop running of games clearly does not mesh well with how TV coverage of sports works on this continent. Other than big soccer games on specialty sports channels, commercials during natural breaks in the action are a fact of life when games are shown on TV here. Every mainstream sport has them, it's only oddball foreign games that don't. We don't want people who encounter RL to think of it as an oddball foreign game.

 

[spooky]

Every mainstream sport has them, it's only oddball foreign games that don't. We don't want people who encounter RL to think of it as an oddball foreign game.

You're kidding me right? Everyone that I've introduced to RL loves the fact that the game is fast and non-stop. Like it or not soccer is now a mainstream sport in Canada. It is certainly not considered an oddball foreign game. The lack of stoppages are not even questioned. I don't think you're giving sports fans much credit here. It's not the fans that have a problem with the lack of stoppages and as has already been discussed, there are ways of slotting in commercials during natural stoppages in the game (after a try, water breaks etc).

 

[Big Picture]

You're kidding me right? Everyone that I've introduced to RL loves the fact that the game is fast and non-stop. Like it or not soccer is now a mainstream sport in Canada. It is certainly not considered an oddball foreign game. The lack of stoppages are not even questioned. I don't think you're giving sports fans much credit here. It's not the fans that have a problem with the lack of stoppages and as has already been discussed, there are ways of slotting in commercials during natural stoppages in the game (after a try, water breaks etc).

No I'm not kidding at all. When you say everyone you've introduced to the game are you talking about players or fans? As for soccer, among the guys I work with the only soccer fans are immigrants or children of immigrants, none of the others like it at all. Even those who play it here as kids don't bother watching it much as adults, they typically move on to hockey, football, etc. Soccer's accepted as a recreational game for kids but not much more.

Any future pro RL in North America would need a TV contract to provide income. TV in North America is financed by commercials and as the CBC telecast clearly demonstrates, limiting them to half-time won't allow enough to be shown. If the natural breaks are long enough to fit the commercials in before play resumes then I agree they can be worked into those breaks. For the viewers to miss any of the action for commercials is very amateurish. In fact the natural breaks in the game are precisely the times to fit them in, they just have to last 1-1/2 to 2 minutes for that to work which means stopping the clock for that long at those times so the viewers don't miss any of the action.

I'm talking about enabling RL to appeal to the majority of sports fans here, rather than the minority (who are all immigrants or their kids) who'll sit and watch soccer.