What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The real World Game

Messages
789
With all the debates about which game is better at an international level (league or union), I thought it would be good to put it all in perspective.

The real global game
Simon Hill
(from www.theworldgame.com.au)

Rejoice! Dear football friends...for the end is nigh. The end, that is, of those who mistakenly think that anything but football (okay, and the Olympics!) can bond the world together in a shared sporting experience.

Forgive me for evangelising, but it's the Rugby World Cup that has renewed my faith in football being the only game that is truly global.

In trying to justify itself in world terms, the Rugby 'World' Cup has only opened itself to ridicule. Hopelessly one-sided games in the first phase, which make the Oceania qualifying section look like a gruelling schedule are bad enough, but it's the television coverage that has really gone beyond the pale.

Some of the shows devoted to the RWC have been truly depressing. From the deeply ingrained prejudices (Here come the 'poms'...BOOOO!!!) to the complete lack of overseas perspective.

If RWC is so global, then where are the human interest stories showing people from Uruguay, Georgia, Namibia etc...spending thousands on travelling to Australia to support 'their' team, or crowding around television sets to cheer on 'their' idols?

The one-eyed myopia is not confined to mere nationalism. It extends to homophobia too. Check out a quote from one esteemed Rugby commentator who allegedly said on a Sydney radio station that Rugby was the World Game 'minus the poofs'.

Only last week on national television, we were treated to a feature as to whether Sydney's city-centre portrayal of the twenty competing flags was appropriate, because the flowers depicting the standards were made up of pansies. Laugh? I nearly started. Oh, and all that in the city that 'is the gay and lesbian capital of Australia' - just in case you didn't get the jape.

I have news for those who thought this was a hilarious interlude...the world doesn't take too kindly to prejudice, and (shock horror!) the gay and lesbian community might just like rugby too. I know these people think they spend all day knitting and painting their nails, but trust me, it's a possibility.

As for the 'poms' (yawn) - well, apparently they make up a large proportion of the supposed 40,000 overseas influx - so perhaps they, or more importantly, their team, could just be treated with a modicum of respect, given the contribution they are making to the Australian economy in this 'world' extravaganza? A forlorn hope. Hey, but it's 'only the English'. So that's okay then.

Am I taking it all too seriously? Well, possibly. After all, sport is supposed to be fun. But the whole point surely is that sport is meant to be fun for all...not just the chosen few?

Those who seek to promote Rugby as a global game must surely realise that to truly become a world sport, it has to encompass all creeds, all colours, all choices.

Football, fortunately has done that. There are no geographical barriers, no race barriers, no sex barriers, and no orientation barriers. Yes, problems persist in terms of hooliganism (the only defence left to many in the mainstream Australian media), and yes, the game is far from perfect, but in basic terms, all you need is friends, and a ball.

World Cup 2002 provided the very best that sport can offer. Previously unheralded nations progressed further than expected - the prime examples being South Korea, Turkey and Senegal.

Germany against Saudi Arabia apart, it also offered very few mismatches on the field. But more than that, it was truly a melting pot of all nationalities, both on the field and off it.

It also offered (if viewing figures are any guide) a window on the world for all Australians. Over 3 million viewed the opening World Cup game in Korea. Compare that to the 2.5million that watched the opening match at Rugby World Cup...a competition in which Australia not only participates, but also has a very good chance of winning. The Socceroos didn't even compete in Japan and Korea.

I shall enjoy this competition for what it is...a sporting tournament made up of determined, dedicated athletes...and good luck to all of them...they've worked hard for their day in the spotlight.

But please, do NOT try to pretend that this is a 'World' Cup in anything but name. Rugby fans - enjoy your shindig.

Football fans, revel in the irony of the slogan 'World in Union' - minus the 'poms and the poofs' of course.
 

screeny

Bench
Messages
3,984
Human interest. I remember some of the posters on this very forum suggesting that the human interest angle forms the core message of 2008 RLWC advertising campaign i.e. bloke from PNG walking for days to see a game, the bloke flying from USA to Oz to wathc a game then heading straight back etc.

This was, and still is, a brilliant suggestion and should definitely form the central strategy for RLWC marketing as its so emotive and really depicts the deep passions for the code.
 

In-goal

Bench
Messages
3,523
this is why i think we should call our WC not that but the Huddersfield cup or the 1895 cup, something that RL fans can appreciate and the whole world can accept.

How does this sound "Welcome to the RLIF (Rugby League International Federation) Huddersfield cup of 2008" or Nations cup
 

t-ba

Post Whore
Messages
57,624
Name it after the George ;-) .

Atleast our foundation story is rooted in truth unlike the false Webb Ellis Story...
 

screeny

Bench
Messages
3,984
Oh for god's sake, name it the RLWC and be done with it!

As long as the tournament serves the code's purposes - makes money, spreads the gospel, improves playing standards, generates enthusiasm to RL playing nations and encourages new ones to take up the sport, not necessarily in that order - then it doesn't matter what journos say about it.

Let's face it, rah rah journos will bag it off whatever happens.
 

griff

Bench
Messages
3,322
Months ago when we were talking about how to market the RLWC we sort of came to the view that we should name the trophy the Paul Barriere Trophy, after the former head of the FFR XIII and the guy who founded the World Cup in 1954 after years of trying.

Naming it after an old French guy emphasises the long history of the world cup and how international the tournament is.

This would completely destroy the perception that the RLWC is a recent joke comp and RL is only played in Australia and the north of England.
 

***MH***

Bench
Messages
3,974
it could be worse... it could be major league baseballs World Series where scores of teams spanning only two countries compete.
 

griff

Bench
Messages
3,322
The Rugby League World Cup needs to be called the World Cup, otherwise you are throwing away 50 years of tradition and a heap of public and media interest.

But the actual trophy should have a name - like the Rugby World Cup has the Webb Ellis Trophy and the Soccer World Cup has the Jules Rimet Trophy.
 

ruggabugga

Juniors
Messages
88
What a load of horse manure....If the RUGBY WORLD CUP lacks credibility then the league world cup will be an out and out joke. League came from Rugby, it is played in only a fraction of the countries that RUGBY is played in and in most of them it is a minority sport compared to Rugby which in many of those countries is a minority sport. League is barking up the wrong tree by attacking RUGBY. If league is to become a truly international game it must do so by promoting LEAGUE (SCRAP THE NAME RUGBY)

let Rugby promote RUGBY and LEAGUE promote LEAGUE. The majority of people on this board say League is the superior product then why let the promotion of the SUPERIOR PRODUCT be confused with the inferior product. Or don't we have the balls to try.
 

screeny

Bench
Messages
3,984
We have the name rugby league now and changing would be an admission of weakness in my opinion. It would take a PR coup the sizeof which I'm not sure RL is capable of pulling off to change names AND convince the public it's because we don't want to be tarnished with the shit that is RU.

Personally, too many of league's stalwart warriors over the past 100-years would be betrayed if we gave up on the name now, too. It's difficult but I'm for keeping the name and letting the public choose.

RU's slowly changing into RL as it knows its product is crud by comparison. This is the only long term chance RU has.
 

alexisUK

Juniors
Messages
37
Aye. I've had more than just a few conversations with people when I've said I enjoy rugby and they've looked at me a bit blankly, then I've mentioned it's RL and they've said, 'Ahhh, rugby league, now you're talking!'
I wonder how many people have been put off our game because they've seen kick and clap and assumed that God's Rugby was the same thing. Ahh, God's Rugby... could be devisive, but it has a certain ring to it!
 
Messages
3,590
screeny said:
We have the name rugby league now and changing would be an admission of weakness in my opinion. It would take a PR coup the sizeof which I'm not sure RL is capable of pulling off to change names AND convince the public it's because we don't want to be tarnished with the sh*t that is RU.

Personally, too many of league's stalwart warriors over the past 100-years would be betrayed if we gave up on the name now, too. It's difficult but I'm for keeping the name and letting the public choose.

RU's slowly changing into RL as it knows its product is crud by comparison. This is the only long term chance RU has.

Rugby Union is still rugby union and will be a million years more. Rugby League is still rugby league and will be a million years more .
Rugby Union has improved 100% than what it was 50 years ago . You guys can tell me what percentage league has improve since 50 years ago ?
The only thing I could think off is Warriors , London , Brisbane and Melbourne + Origins .
 

screeny

Bench
Messages
3,984
Tell me Warrior, which code has the more running, passing and tackling in it? League or union?
 

alexisUK

Juniors
Messages
37
Polynesian Warrior said:
Rugby Union is still rugby union and will be a million years more. Rugby League is still rugby league and will be a million years mor.
Rugby Union has improved 100% than what it was 50 years ago . You guys can tell me what percentage league has improve since 50 years ago ?
I reckon Rugby League has improved by 327% give or take one or two.
 

taipan

Referee
Messages
22,443
ruggabugga said:
What a load of horse manure....If the RUGBY WORLD CUP lacks credibility then the league world cup will be an out and out joke. League came from Rugby, it is played in only a fraction of the countries that RUGBY is played in and in most of them it is a minority sport compared to Rugby which in many of those countries is a minority sport. League is barking up the wrong tree by attacking RUGBY. If league is to become a truly international game it must do so by promoting LEAGUE (SCRAP THE NAME RUGBY)

let Rugby promote RUGBY and LEAGUE promote LEAGUE. The majority of people on this board say League is the superior product then why let the promotion of the SUPERIOR PRODUCT be confused with the inferior product. Or don't we have the balls to try.

Please please,it is rugby union and rugby league.The WC should have been correctly named the RUWC.Check the dictionaries,rugby is a game played with an oval ball ithat can be kicked, carried and passed ,union is one form of rugby with 15 players and league with 13 players.
Rugby league has got it correct by naming their world cup the RLWC the union has not and that is fact.I mean even the press cant decide whether to headline it rugby,union,or rugby union.Sort yourselves out fellas :lol:
The bloody theme song of the world cup is the"World in Union",OK then include the word correctly in the name of the tournament, or are the organisers trying to save money on printing by adding the word union. ;-)
 

taipan

Referee
Messages
22,443
Polynesian Warrior said:
screeny said:
We have the name rugby league now and changing would be an admission of weakness in my opinion. It would take a PR coup the sizeof which I'm not sure RL is capable of pulling off to change names AND convince the public it's because we don't want to be tarnished with the sh*t that is RU.

Personally, too many of league's stalwart warriors over the past 100-years would be betrayed if we gave up on the name now, too. It's difficult but I'm for keeping the name and letting the public choose.

RU's slowly changing into RL as it knows its product is crud by comparison. This is the only long term chance RU has.

Rugby Union is still rugby union and will be a million years more. Rugby League is still rugby league and will be a million years more .


Rugby Union has improved 100% than what it was 50 years ago . You guys can tell me what percentage league has improve since 50 years ago ?
The only thing I could think off is Warriors , London , Brisbane and Melbourne + Origins .


Lets see hmmm Russia,Serbia,Lebanon,New Caledonia,soon to be Georgia
,and the West Indies,an increase to 10 teams in the US,a much improved French national team,the growth of rugby league in Wales in particular,Ireland with 12 teams in conferences,a lesser growth in Scotland in junior levels,a 60% increase in the number of players in UK in the past few years.BTW rugby union 100 years ago in Oz was larger than league,it sure as hell aint now.The NRL competition now 15 teams,(rest assured 16 teams will be announced next year) compared to 8 teams decades ago. Do your sums PW there is plenty of percentage increase both locally and internationally in rugby league,like a true union man you might find these facts a little distrubing.
 

Latest posts

Top