Pretty jealous of Union right now

[expansionist]

I agree, what appropriation? You might want to answer the question this time instead of asking another one.

Yeah thanks for the animosity - I was genuinely interested to see if it was a serious question..

Im a bit surprised you would ask actually..

Union dont event bother using the word union any more, everything they do is about ownership of the word 'rugby'. They are a switched on organisation, with good management and a long term vision - and that most certainly includes ownership of that term and building their brand as rugby.

Weve seen them pressing legal rights to the word internationally, renaming their governing body, their world cup etc..

Even in most media in southern hemisphere particularly - union is referred to as rugby, RL is referred to as league.

You can completely understand why theyre doing it too... but as a RL devotee i dont like it. For mine It makes it one step more difficult for RL to attract new fans with no prior exposure to either game.

 

[Caped Crusader]

I'm not disagreeing with you, just pointing out that football is football (or soccer if you are American) everywhere except Italy.

Its soccer in Australia and NZ too mate. Football is either Rugby League (Qld, NSW, ACT) or AFL (Vic, SA, WA, NT)

Only wankers call soccer "football" in Australia or New Zealand

 

[Matua]

Yeah thanks for the animosity - I was genuinely interested to see if it was a serious question..

Im a bit surprised you would ask actually..

Union dont event bother using the word union any more, everything they do is about ownership of the word 'rugby'. They are a switched on organisation, with good management and a long term vision - and that most certainly includes ownership of that term and building their brand as rugby.

Weve seen them pressing legal rights to the word internationally, renaming their governing body, their world cup etc..

Even in most media in southern hemisphere particularly - union is referred to as rugby, RL is referred to as league.

You can completely understand why theyre doing it too... but as a RL devotee i dont like it. For mine It makes it one step more difficult for RL to attract new fans with no prior exposure to either game.

That doesn't mean they're appropriating the word rugby, for rugby to be appropriated the sport would have never used the name. It was always called rugby, rugby football originally, and the English governing body called itself the Rugby Football Union - which is how the name union came into usage (in some places more than others) to differentiate from league after the split.

The governing body you mention has never included the word union in its name. It was originally called the International Rugby Football Board, then the International Rugby Board, then World Rugby.

Regarding the Southern Hemisphere, Australia uses Union quite often but South Africa and NZ have always just used rugby.

The animosity was only due to the fact you didn't answer the other poster's question.

 

[expansionist]

That doesn't mean they're appropriating the word rugby, for rugby to be appropriated the sport would have never used the name. It was always called rugby, rugby football originally, and the English governing body called itself the Rugby Football Union - which is how the name union came into usage (in some places more than others) to differentiate from league after the split.

The governing body you mention has never included the word union in its name. It was originally called the International Rugby Football Board, then the International Rugby Board, then World Rugby.

Regarding the Southern Hemisphere, Australia uses Union quite often but South Africa and NZ have always just used rugby.

The animosity was only due to the fact you didn't answer the other poster's question.

If the definition of appropriation is to take something without someones permission - then yes I consider it appropriation.

They are owning that word, and have forced RL away from using it?

 

[Matua]

If the definition of appropriation is to take something without someones permission - then yes I consider it appropriation.

They are owning that word, and have forced RL away from using it?

They didn't take the word without permission, it was the name of the game since it's inception, they didn't have to ask anyone's permission.

Rugby League isn't banned from using the word rugby - the competition we're all discussing on this forum is called the National Rugby League.

 

[BODISGOD]

Yeah thanks for the animosity - I was genuinely interested to see if it was a serious question..

Im a bit surprised you would ask actually..

Union dont event bother using the word union any more, everything they do is about ownership of the word 'rugby'. They are a switched on organisation, with good management and a long term vision - and that most certainly includes ownership of that term and building their brand as rugby.

Weve seen them pressing legal rights to the word internationally, renaming their governing body, their world cup etc..

Even in most media in southern hemisphere particularly - union is referred to as rugby, RL is referred to as league.

You can completely understand why theyre doing it too... but as a RL devotee i dont like it. For mine It makes it one step more difficult for RL to attract new fans with no prior exposure to either game.

If the definition of appropriation is to take something without someones permission - then yes I consider it appropriation.

They are owning that word, and have forced RL away from using it?

There's nothing to stop rugby league from using the word rugby. It's the same with football, rugby could have kept calling themselves that - but it would have been marketing suicide.

Rugby Union has every right to call themselves rugby. Which code split off again? Not that I'm saying that rugby league shouldn't get to use rugby, but why exactly should rugby union not be allowed to call themselves rugby?

The point about rugby league and having the name 'rugby' in there is that it's a point of confusion for people abroad. It's more of a marketing thing.

 

[expansionist]

They didn't take the word without permission, it was the name of the game since it's inception, they didn't have to ask anyone's permission.

Rugby League isn't banned from using the word rugby - the competition we're all discussing on this forum is called the National Rugby League.

This thread is 'being jealous of union' in the international forum, we are not discussing the NRL?

As Ive said, I am jealous of the fact that union has an aligned strategy to grow their game, including the Olympic presence which was the basis of this thread.

Part of that for me includes their use of the word rugby to imply rugby union . Well done by them - its a valid marketing ploy to own the market via the term - that was the crux of their 'legal' case against Sol Mokdad - that 'they' were rugby, rugby is their game and so rugby league - if at all - is a subset of them.

Im not saying they cant use it, but for mine I am jealous of the way they basically now own that word (in ANZ) and how we have let it go. As discussed above this contributes to the tricky situation we have when we then want to build our game - and either rely on trickle down from union or strike out alone.

There are 2 types of rugby - in Australia we are extremely rare in the globe that we even know that... the vast majority of the world would have no idea there are 2 types of rugby. Its a situation that weve created for ourselves but then again weve never had a body that is resourced and responsible for growing the game globally.