Rugby Union & USA?????

[dimitri]

i can certainly see where they get that image from

 

[CanadianSteve]

Sports illustrated is the most influential sports magazine in the US. A couple of years ago they had a small item about "rugby player" John Hopoate being suspended for putting his finger in ...etc. No distinction between league and union.

In 1999 (I think) when 2 NFL teams played in Sydney along with an NRL game and an AFL game on 3 consecutive days, SI sent a writer to do an article on the 3 games. He compared the 2 Aussie games favourably to the NFL exhibition game, but never once explained anything abpout league being a different code from union.

Readers in both cases would have the impression that there is just 1 sport of rugby.

 

[Mango]

I would think any country that has as many celebrities as it's role models as the USA could easily be swayed to rugby. The President played at UNI, the Pope for POLAND, Richard Burton & Richard Harris in Wales, the KIWI come Aussie come gladiator at Sydney High etc etc.

 

[CanadianSteve]

I wonder what the effect would be if they played the RUWC in the US. Americans love a big event, and the 94 soccer WC was a big success there. It also gave the sport a boost in the US, and now they have a very respectable, competitve men's team. On the other hand they already had a good base of youth soccer to build on ( it has outnumbered Little league baseball). I don't know if it would be a good move for the IRB to try the WC in the US, or if the US is as ready for it as they were for the soccer WC, but it would be interesting to see it tried.

 

[Shimmy]

I don't know where a lot of you guys are getting your information from, but I've lived in the US and RU is very much a well respected sport. It's played quite a lot at University but of course as there's no real money in it most of the good players go to Gridiron.

Gridiron though is a dying sport. In fact it's not a sport any more but just hype. The super bowl is just a day long advertisement and most people know this and even fans are getting fed up with it. The participation levels are dropping quite significantly in high schools due to the high cost of all the equipment. Some schools have droped it all together and are playing RU instead.

Rugby drunkeness? Can you give me a sport were the participants don't socialise after a match or game?

As for Celebrities, Robin Williams is a huge fan of the All Blacks and Lomu and even flew to see them play at the last world cup. Any chance of him visiting Oz?

 

[Dean Moriarty]

the KIWI come Aussie come gladiator at Sydney High etc etc.

LMFAO!

Are you trying to claim Russell Crowe as a union man? His mates down at South Sydney might have something to say about that. :lol:

 

[russ13]

Shimmy wrote:

I don't know where a lot of you guys are getting your information from, but I've lived in the US and RU is very much a well respected sport. It's played quite a lot at University but of course as there's no real money in it most of the good players go to Gridiron.

Gridiron though is a dying sport. ...

Well how about this-"Making the Rugby World-race, Gender, Commerce' (1999) a book edited by TL Chandler & J Naught. On pages 55-57 Chandler has an article entitled "Rugby in the US." Here is a bit of a quote:

...it is perhaps not without interest that, in almost all American college rugby and much American club rugby during this period, beer was (and in many cases still is) brought to the pitch and dispensed before during and after the games and was strictly for the boys...

(motives for playing) that they liked contact sports but were neither quick enough or fast enough to be successful at football. Other joined to make up the numbers...




Also don't fall for that crap of thinking there are more RU players in the USA than the population of NZ. I see this on some RU sites from NZ. There are 19 million soccer players in the US (including 3 million senior players.) There is between 30000 & 40000 RU players in the US. Get it ,19 million soccer players & 30000 or 40000 RU players. NZ has a population of about 4 million.

See here:
http://www.grcnet.20m.com/custom2.html
Extract
"
To illustrate this point, of the top five places in figure 1, only one, New Zealand, was a top five playing nation in the IBM World Rankings for September 2000 (Planet Rugby). Therefore Figure 1 is dominated to a certain extent by small countries where Rugby finds itself very popular, while Italy and the USA are top 20 playing nations with over 30,000 players each but have large populations which water down these figures to 6.35 and 1.13 players per 10,000 inhabitants respectively. "

[/b]

 

[zulu]

If union is such a world game then why are Namibia and Uruguay plus the other two shocking teams (with virtual non-existent playing numbers,) good enough to be in this world cup?

 

[Auckland4ever]

Well how about this-"Making the Rugby World-race, Gender, Commerce' (1999) a book edited by TL Chandler & J Naught. On pages 55-57 Chandler has an article entitled "Rugby in the US." Here is a bit of a quote:

...it is perhaps not without interest that, in almost all American college rugby and much American club rugby during this period, beer was (and in many cases still is) brought to the pitch and dispensed before during and after the games and was strictly for the boys...

(motives for playing) that they liked contact sports but were neither quick enough or fast enough to be successful at football. Other joined to make up the numbers...


[/b]

No offence, but who really cares? Its just a generalisation anyway. Union in the US is tiny, that doesnt mean there arent people there who take it seriously. As far as the stats go, again, who really cares? Noone here is trying to suggest there are 4million players in the states. Ive never even heard that one before. Nor is anyone trying to say that union is "such a world game".

 

[russ13]

A4E-no one here suggested that there are 4 million plus RU players in the US but as I said, I have seen this figure on other sites.

 

[Auckland4ever]

A4E-no one here suggested that there are 4 million plus RU players in the US but as I said, I have seen this figure on other sites.

Fair enough, mate. Stats make me cranky, is all. I get so sick of them, no matter who is trotting them out, for whatever sport & for whatever reason.

 

[Shimmy]

Well how about this-"Making the Rugby World-race, Gender, Commerce' (1999) a book edited by TL Chandler & J Naught. On pages 55-57 Chandler has an article entitled "Rugby in the US." Here is a bit of a quote:

...it is perhaps not without interest that, in almost all American college rugby and much American club rugby during this period, beer was (and in many cases still is) brought to the pitch and dispensed before during and after the games and was strictly for the boys...

(motives for playing) that they liked contact sports but were neither quick enough or fast enough to be successful at football. Other joined to make up the numbers...

What the heck is that all about? You read a couple of paragraphs from a book, take it as fact and then generalise upon it? You're pathetic!

Also don't fall for that crap of thinking there are more RU players in the USA than the population of NZ. I see this on some RU sites from NZ. There are 19 million soccer players in the US (including 3 million senior players.) There is between 30000 & 40000 RU players in the US. Get it ,19 million soccer players & 30000 or 40000 RU players. NZ has a population of about 4 million.

See here:
http://www.grcnet.20m.com/custom2.html
Extract
"
To illustrate this point, of the top five places in figure 1, only one, New Zealand, was a top five playing nation in the IBM World Rankings for September 2000 (Planet Rugby). Therefore Figure 1 is dominated to a certain extent by small countries where Rugby finds itself very popular, while Italy and the USA are top 20 playing nations with over 30,000 players each but have large populations which water down these figures to 6.35 and 1.13 players per 10,000 inhabitants respectively. "

[/b]

Why do you have to get your information from obscure secondary sources such as the one above? If you want acurate infomation, why not try the IRB website http://www.irb.com/intouch/member_unions/unions_usa.cfm

There are 20482 senior players in the USA apparently.

Anyway where did the heck you did you get the idea I had such an overblown impression of rugby playing numbers in the US. There's no such indication of this in my post. I was only pointing out that due to the cost of playing Gridiron, some high schools are turning to rugby. Some others however are playing nothing at all.

Rugby (Rugby Union as Australians call it) as got a heck of a long way to go before it could even be called popular in the US, if it happens at all; the current US team will return without hardly any recognition at all. However you must understand the mindset of Americans and international sport. Americans do not follow or sometimes even acknowledge international competitions with the Olympics being the acception (the soccer world cup as raised a little interest since they held it but still largely followed by expats). The basketball world cup was held there last year in an obsure little venue (I forget the exact place) and they sent a team of unknown college players. I don't think they even made the quarter finals and the venue was mostly empty. Americans don't give a shit about this sort of thing. They only care about the Super Bowl, major league baseball etc.

 

[russ13]

Shimmy wrote:

What the heck is that all about? You read a couple of paragraphs from a book, take it as fact and then generalise upon it? You're pathetic!

I can not very well quote the who book. You wanted to know where I got some information from-there it was.

So the senior playing nUmbers in the US are closer to 20000 & not 60000 80000 or 200000. Did I not suggest this?


Btw I don't think the references I gave were obscure. Leave a note on his feedback comments page-In all I think it is not a bad read.
http://www.grcnet.20m.com/custom2.html

 

[Mango]

The general opinion of the leaguies is that Rugby with somewhere between 20 - 60,000 players in the USA is a joke....what then is league with somewhere between 1-5 teams...a non entity in most peoples objective analysis but on this site objectivity is frowned upon.

 

[iggy plop]

The general opinion of the leaguies is that Rugby with somewhere between 20 - 60,000 players in the USA is a joke....what then is league with somewhere between 1-5 teams...a non entity in most peoples objective analysis but on this site objectivity is frowned upon.

Not only in the united states is union playing numbers a joke, there are plenty of other countries with low numbers as well including a couple in the quarter finals.

Not that great for a such a prestigious world game. League doesn't try to be a world game and if it does, it is quickly shot down in flames.

Even the current world cup holders in the sport only have about 120,000 registered male players which is a distant third in terms football codes in this country.

The Wallabies are down a level on the Kangaroos, primarily because they choose from a much smaller pool.

You'd find the Kangaroos much more even with the poms and kiwis if they had the playing numbers of rugby union in this country. We'd definitely be playing Tests against the French again too as our standard would be poorer.

An Aussie AFL team would be at level even higher than the kangaroos simply because of the bigger talent pool. It's just a shame they have nobody to play.

 

[bayrep]

The general opinion of the leaguies is that Rugby with somewhere between 20 - 60,000 players in the USA is a joke....what then is league with somewhere between 1-5 teams...a non entity in most peoples objective analysis but on this site objectivity is frowned upon.

Not only in the united states is union playing numbers a joke, there are plenty of other countries with low numbers as well including a couple in the quarter finals.

Not that great for a such a prestigious world game. League doesn't try to be a world game and if it does, it is quickly shot down in flames.

Even the current world cup holders in the sport only have about 120,000 registered male players which is a distant third in terms football codes in this country.

The Wallabies are down a level on the Kangaroos, primarily because they choose from a much smaller pool.

You'd find the Kangaroos much more even with the poms and kiwis if they had the playing numbers of rugby union in this country. We'd definitely be playing Tests against the French again too as our standard would be poorer.

An Aussie AFL team would be at level even higher than the kangaroos simply because of the bigger talent pool. It's just a shame they have nobody to play.

I wonder how league would stack up with their playing numbers ? Especially at the 2000 RLWC ? I wonder how many numbers would have been playing in Lebanon, Wales, Russia, Samoa. Very quick to jump down unions throat but are not quick to display leagues faults.

 

[zulu]

No I think it's more the other way around matey. League copped a hammering for it's world cup first, now it's time to return serve.

With good reason too.

 

[dimitri]

No I think it's more the other way around matey. League copped a hammering for it's world cup first, now it's time to return serve.

With good reason too.

i totally agree


;-) ;-) ;-)

 

[Shimmy]

Here's an interesting article about the history of rugby in the US:

http://www.pacificcoastrugby.com/template.php?sid=10

 

[Shimmy]

the KIWI come Aussie come gladiator at Sydney High etc etc.

LMFAO!

Are you trying to claim Russell Crowe as a union man? His mates down at South Sydney might have something to say about that. :lol:

Well he'll be definately supporting the All Blacks in the world cup though. This is from an ABC radio inteview:

LB: {laughing} I’ll play the result of that in just a second. Something I’ve always wanted to ask you, you count Shane Warne as a mate of yours, your cousins are the famous cricket playing Crowe brothers, so when New Zealand play Australia in test cricket who are you barracking for?

Russell: Well, that’s very difficult because for me my interest in cricket started in Australia. Because I got to Australia when I was four. But obviously when Martin and Jeff started playing for the national team that was when I kind of had to really see it as a family business, you know. So I still keep an eye on the New Zealand team and I like to follow their fortunes. But, for me my formative years were spent here, I bought my first cricket ball in Australia so, you know very deeply interested in fortunes of the Australian cricket team. However, it just depends on the sport. Like rugby league for me is all about living in South Sydney when we first got over to Australia and the red and green and all that, you know. Even though, now that I live in another place, outside of Sydney, I support the local team here as well because I think rugby league is tribal. But when it comes to rugby union , I had very little interest in union most of the time I was in Australia. I started playing union towards the end of it because I was at Sydney Boys High and really enjoyed it. But when I got back to New Zealand it was when rugby union became a serious passion because suddenly I was playing with a group of guys who’d grown up playing it, so the forwards knew what to do, so I’d get very clean ball and look like a superstar. So for me, my passion for union came about when we moved back to New Zealand when I was 14. So, I’m more interested in following what the All Blacks are doing when it comes to that sport. So for me it just changes sport to sport. You know, when it comes to soccer, for example, I follow {??} in Italy. {laughs}

LB: So the upcoming World Cup, you’ll be with the All Blacks.

Russell: Correct.

LB: {sounding not very happy!! LOL} Ok, moving right along.

Both laugh

LB: Can I ask about the movie work you’ve got ahead of you...

Russell: I’ll be with the All Blacks and whoever beats England.

LB: Good answer. Can I you ask just quickly about the movie work ahead of you. What caught my eye was the fact that you were being reunited with Gladiator director Ridley Scott in that film called Tripoli.

I also heard that he paid 10,000 (dollars?, pounds?) to watch the NZ vs Wales live via broadband internet when he couldn't get to a pub. Normally world cup matches are delayed by 24 hours on the internet. I guess the IRB are quite reasonable when it comes to huge wads of cash...