Its time for a name change

[griff]

I don't think you'll get in trouble for saying that a big obstacle to international rugby league is the vested interests of the current power brokers. Most of the people here would agree with you 100%.

Fortunately you are unlikely to get the job of World Rugby League Supremo, because getting rid of the term rugby would be a collosally bad idea. It isn't about living in the past, as heaps of people currently call RL rugby and many people in non-RL areas like the US or Victoria also refer to RL as rugby.

 

[Copa]

Griff,

I will get into trouble for saying this. But the most significant obstacle to the expansion of rugby league internationally is actually the power brokers of the game, who control the purse strings, and could not care less about anything other than their own immediate jobs, careers, and incomes.

However, if I were suddenly appointed to the job of World Rugby League Supremo, with lots of money, and lots of staff, I would look around for a different name. A name that says, hey, this is not boring old rugby union, this is a different, better sport.

People who are fixated on the name "rugby" are living in the past, are not comfortable with the present, and are afraid of the future.

Leave the name to the rah rahs, the leather patch brigade, the Vichy French sympathisers, etc etc etc.

That's right.. it's not boring old rugby union... it's rugby (league)

 

[taipan]

As I have pointed out elsewhere, Taipan, it is very very easy to get a fast growth rate from a zero base. For example, by some measures rugby league is growing by 20% per annum in the USA. The problem is that rugby union is growing by far more every year in real terms than the whole of the rugby league establishment in the States.



Initial interest and long term support are different things. But there is a huge population in London, including a lot of expatriate Aussies at any time, and a lot of people who grew up in other parts of England, including the north, so it would be hard to imagine that one league franchise could not exist there. If it cannot, then the future outlook for your sport is dire indeed.



Taipan, I did not start this thread. As I have said many times before, I could not care less what your game calls itself. However, if it wants to promote itself internationally into rugby union areas, it would probably do better to differentiate itself. It is a different game now.

On the other hand, the international promotion of rugby league is a pretty amateurish affair, isn't it? So perhaps the money boys of the game don't really care much about what its called. Footy? League? Who cares as long as the ratings in New South Wales and Queensland are good.



Where did I say anything about "rights", thickhead? Taipan, keep setting up straw men, and keep knocking them down, if it makes you feel better. But, on the other hand, I am happy to have a debate with you about what I said if you want to. And are able to.

Who said its easy to get a very fast growth rate from a zero base,nothing is guaranteed.London had a zero base really!, you again come in with zero input.A team like Hemel Hempstead has been in London area for years.

One more time for the dummies" From the RFL offical audit" the rugby Football league revealed that between 2002 and 2004 participation rates ,had grown from a total of 32,175 individuals to 62,463 in 2004 a 94% increase since 2002.The figure now stands at 126,004.

London and Wales are cited by the RFL as the greatest growth areas.London with just their schools development 168 school teams played in the champion schools this year ,and with primary schools added ,somewhere in the region of 300 schools now play League-linked into clubs.The, capital has a total of 101 club teams across all age groups.

In mid 2003 active sports funding was secured for 4 full time DOs>For the 2nd year in a row, the rugby league programme has the highest participation figures out of the 10 "Active sports" played in London".


Initial interest ?over a few years ,you fell over on that one .The rugby league is tapping into expats(good idea) ,union supporters (proving already successful) and locals of a non rugby league background.I could discuss the growth in Wales over the last 3 years,time does not permit ATM.

You made a claim in another post,you dont deride grassroots rugby league growth LOL.This is exactly what you are trying to do here,you are losing it buddy.

USA ? your point,another one from left field ,where BTW the players involved in both rugby union and rugby league ,and the public which has a knowledge ,refer to both as rugby.


The so called pros running the IRB,thought so much about the P.Islands over the years,they brought a new meaning to the word neglect.Check your own backyard first rooster, the chickens are running wild.

Its a bit hard getting through to someone who is one scrum short of a penalty ,however the game of rugby league is growing in rugby union areas,England,Ireland,Wales,marketed as rugby league.In bleeding Pommy land the home of union. Its not marketed as league,or game of 13 or super duper league.
Rights what are you on about,I am refuting your argument if you dare call it that,that the name rugby is currently used and has been for decades.The subject matter was time for a name change.I am simply stating FFS, that the name has not impeded its growth,albeit not up to your requirements,and supporters have had to approach govt to have the name reinstated viz a viz France.

Ill shut up shop now for ,the surgery is closing, by stating: After England won the 2003WC ,it was felt by ESL clubs,that the impetus created by the win would had a bad impact on rugby league.Quite the contrary many clubs have stated, having the name rugby as part of rugby league ,has in fact resulted in a boom in junior growth throughout the country. QED.

If down the road while I am still breathing,they change the name,I will accept it.Just as I accepted money openly going into union player's pockets.
I dont want to market the game as rugby,rugby league as is ,as has been will do me nicely,and I happen to believe union should market its game as rugby union,not rugby.After all its game has changed in nature and now being pro over the years.Sheesh its not hard.:roll:

 

[Mr_Ugly]

I was not debating technical correctness, but simply making the point that the Pepsi company in choosing to call its product Pepsi-Cola was starting from a position of commonality with Coca-Cola. They could have opted for a totally different name, but they apparently wanted to minimise the difference with the original brand.



Yes, it should. But I don't think it would do much to persuade people who think that any sport with the name "rugby" in its title should resemble rugby union.

Woods ... lighten up mate! I was just stirring sh*t. I didn't expect you to take it seriously enough to bother refuting it (I've really got to start using those little smiley face jobs a bit more ).

Fair dinkum ... you must be in full fire up mode every time you log on here.

 

[brendothejet]

Several things:

1. The name will never change.
2. The only places i can see any validity for a name change arguement are places where the game is new. Also I like how the French call it rugby 13. That clears it up pretty quick smart.
3. The best post ever about names is that one from the Japanese website. Lol.
4. A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet...and league by any other name would still be far more entertaining than union.

Rugby Union: The Game they play in laundromats.

 

[dimitri]

Rugby Union: The Game they play in laundromats.

hahahahahahahhahahahaha

 

[Copa]

http://www.smh.com.au/news/Sport/No-rush-for-rugby-decision-Barrett/2006/01/28/1138319487084.htmlhttp://www.theage.com.au/news/Sport/No-rush-for-rugby-decision-Barrett/2006/01/28/1138319487084.html

No rush for rugby decision: Barrett
January 28, 2006 - 7:50PM

St George Illawarra captain Trent Barrett says he won't be rushing into any decision to join an English rugby league club.

The Dragons have granted permission to the NSW and Australian five-eighth to hold talks with Super League clubs after Wigan expressed an interest in securing his signature over Christmas.

 

[screeny]

The only places i can see any validity for a name change arguement are places where the game is new. Also I like how the French call it rugby 13. That clears it up pretty quick smart.

Totally disagree with you here. Rugby 13 makes us sound as though we're an offshoot of the mother sport, rugby, like five-a-side football is a truncated version of 11-a-side football.

I think the French are doing the sport a disservice by hanging onto that name, whihc was in itself forced upon us by the Vichy govt banning the sport calling itself rugby league.

 

[taipan]

Totally disagree with you here. Rugby 13 makes us sound as though we're an offshoot of the mother sport, rugby, like five-a-side football is a truncated version of 11-a-side football.

I think the French are doing the sport a disservice by hanging onto that name, whihc was in itself forced upon us by the Vichy govt banning the sport calling itself rugby league.

screeeny shush dont mention the war,some unionites get a little squirmish.;-)

 

[screeny]

screeeny shush dont mention the war,some unionites get a little squirmish.;-)

I do think that the Vichy affair tends to get thrown up by leaguies at the drop of a hat, sometimes when it's inappropriate, or when the people don't have that full of an understanding of what happened, but in this case it's appropriate as banning the name rugby league was a direct result of the attitude towards the sport taken by the Vichy govt and subsequently the peace time French govts.

When you talk to people, non-rugby people, about the two codes, they've all heard of rugby (All Blacks etc etc) and when you explain RL as 'a 13-a-side version' it weakens us a tad, IMO.

 

[taipan]

I do think that the Vichy affair tends to get thrown up by leaguies at the drop of a hat, sometimes when it's inappropriate, or when the people don't have that full of an understanding of what happened, but in this case it's appropriate as banning the name rugby league was a direct result of the attitude towards the sport taken by the Vichy govt and subsequently the peace time French govts.

When you talk to people, non-rugby people, about the two codes, they've all heard of rugby (All Blacks etc etc) and when you explain RL as 'a 13-a-side version' it weakens us a tad, IMO.

Agree,and all the more reason to retain and market the game as rugby league ,as is done successfully in London and Wales for example.The French had fought for years to get the name reinstated ,rather than be called "game of X111. Their efforts should not be wasted.

 

[joshreading]

I actually agree with woods - the analogy of the Cola wars DOES apply. The reality is that while we are called RUGBY League we will simply be seen as a RUGBY Code - a 'sub code' as such. We get lumped in with it all the time and most of the time it is actually damaging to our game not positive.

Many people outside of our game think of Rugby league in the same way as they think of Rugby 7's, just a sub entity of Rugby (union)

People are always going to disagree over this issue because they see it as a pride issue, a 'we have fought for this for 107 years thing', well that is the cry of insanity. To simply stick with something because that is the way it has always been is stupid and leads to extinction.

Rugby League needs to formally be called 'Rugby League Football' (and that means in the long term I think the RFL needs to change its name) then in areas like australia it can be called 'League Football' and in areas that benefit from the name Rugby (such as development areas in other countries) where the name enables them to get players and even clubs on side it can keep Rugby in the name but still emphasise the League football element.

The reality is that ANY product that gives a similar product to another MUST distinguish itself otherwise the competing product gains out of it. And despite argument that we were around at the same time as union - we have the right to the name etc. etc. etc. Rugby League DID split from the central governing body of Rugby at the time. We did decide to play different rules, some won't believe this but logically Rugby (union) has more right to the name than Rugby League. (just think Super League - who had the real right to the name of the game Rugby League - ARL or Super League?)

 

[Calixte]

I actually agree with woods - the analogy of the Cola wars DOES apply. The reality is that while we are called RUGBY League we will simply be seen as a RUGBY Code - a 'sub code' as such. We get lumped in with it all the time and most of the time it is actually damaging to our game not positive.

Many people outside of our game think of Rugby league in the same way as they think of Rugby 7's, just a sub entity of Rugby (union)

People are always going to disagree over this issue because they see it as a pride issue, a 'we have fought for this for 107 years thing', well that is the cry of insanity. To simply stick with something because that is the way it has always been is stupid and leads to extinction.

Rugby League needs to formally be called 'Rugby League Football' (and that means in the long term I think the RFL needs to change its name) then in areas like australia it can be called 'League Football' and in areas that benefit from the name Rugby (such as development areas in other countries) where the name enables them to get players and even clubs on side it can keep Rugby in the name but still emphasise the League football element.

The reality is that ANY product that gives a similar product to another MUST distinguish itself otherwise the competing product gains out of it. And despite argument that we were around at the same time as union - we have the right to the name etc. etc. etc. Rugby League DID split from the central governing body of Rugby at the time. We did decide to play different rules, some won't believe this but logically Rugby (union) has more right to the name than Rugby League. (just think Super League - who had the real right to the name of the game Rugby League - ARL or Super League?)

There are some valid points here but the fact is more clubs left the RFU to join the Northern Union than remained behind.

This is the real basis for the argument that we have as much right to the name as they do. The creation of the fiction of William Webb Ellis around 1895 was deliberately aimed at creating the opposite impression by the RFU.

 

[brendothejet]

Totally disagree with you here. Rugby 13 makes us sound as though we're an offshoot of the mother sport, rugby, like five-a-side football is a truncated version of 11-a-side football.

I think the French are doing the sport a disservice by hanging onto that name, whihc was in itself forced upon us by the Vichy govt banning the sport calling itself rugby league.

Yeah good call. My wrong.