Jump to content


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Culture, image and Rugby League


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
192 replies to this topic

#161 C H Calthrop

C H Calthrop
  • Coach
  • 205 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 01:27 PM

To C H Calthrop, when I was a kid you were very fortunate if you got to play any Rugby League as there not many local clubs to mention (like there are today) and there was not a team at school to join (although they did Rugby Union in small doses).

 

Things have changed for example. Another example of that is ... In the 1970s no men I knew would got to a disco and have a dance because you had to act like a hard-nut and just stand at the side with a cigarette in your hand. Nowadays, it perfectly acceptable for lads to have a dance and one of the best ways to have fun. In fact, if you don't dance then you'll be outcast and not be able to fit in with the social crowd.

 

Its a different world socially now - the hard-nuts are all dying out along with the cave-men. Rugby is evolving too to attract a different social class and needs to be able to accomodate everyone as much as possible to enable the game to keep growing.

Edited highlights to I was a 70's stereotype but i saw the light does not an argument make.

 

I dare say the "dance" scene is changing every couple of years but one thing that never changes is that men go to clubs because women are in them. The essential truth.  And people follow RL because it is a full blood full contact sport played by professional, skillful athletes. The discussion around RL like the frippery of your club scene may change but the essential truth does not. There has to be a level of understanding and maturity that goes along with this sort of sport and extends to everyone involved including all types of fans. RL is a tough big boys game played with lots of testosterone. Understanding should stop and is finish with  red and yellow cards. Politically correct social mores about quality and character have no place as an addendum.

 

I would have taken your point more seriously apart from the insulting way you dismiss people while at the same time stating "accommodate everyone".. 



#162 C H Calthrop

C H Calthrop
  • Coach
  • 205 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 01:43 PM

I don't have to prove anything. It's you that has to do that.

You said that 'nobody sincerely believed…' how do you know this?

Rugby League is played and enjoyed by all sorts of people. people are 'chidden' until they are 18. Women also play the game.

The game originated in English Public schools, and gradually evolved.

Burden of proof is on you. RL is a game made in 1895 it is now 2014. What can substantiate an honest belief that something has been destroyed by acts the like of Sinfields in this 119 year history? 

I said no one honestly believes this. Honesty would come with some factual foundation. No just a feeling something may be true. And if someone does have an honest belief then bring it forth and examine it for accuracy and relevance.

RL originated as a response to RU politics,falling gates and interest down to the quality of RU and competition from Soccer clubs. Thousands of players and 10,000's of fans flocking to Association. 

Linking the origins of Rugby football is about as accurate as you quoting sincerely rather than honestly.

The changes to the rules by Northern Rugby Football Union were not down to accommodating children.



#163 davidhubball

davidhubball
  • Coach
  • 128 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 01:47 PM

Nowdays, you won't pull very much in a night-club if you can't dance - lol.

 

Anyway, why should the game just accomodate someone who just have your views? Don't you think you are acting rather selfishly? Its a great game so why can't you let more people experience it?

 

Try this example: I myself am only 1 year old in the game and I love it - if my kid hadn't of taken it up then I woud never have got an experience of this fantastic game. Trust me, it was something I would have loved to have tried when I was younger but just wasn't privedged enough. I always been a football fan and there was nothing to replace it - now I've found just what I was looking for before I'm dead.


Edited by davidhubball, 18 July 2014 - 02:03 PM.


#164 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,119 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 02:05 PM

Burden of proof is on you. RL is a game made in 1895 it is now 2014. What can substantiate an honest belief that something has been destroyed by acts the like of Sinfields in this 119 year history?
I said no one honestly believes this. Honesty would come with some factual foundation. No just a feeling something may be true. And if someone does have an honest belief then bring it forth and examine it for accuracy and relevance.
RL originated as a response to RU politics,falling gates and interest down to the quality of RU and competition from Soccer clubs. Thousands of players and 10,000's of fans flocking to Association.
Linking the origins of Rugby football is about as accurate as you quoting sincerely rather than honestly.
The changes to the rules by Northern Rugby Football Union were not down to accommodating children.

the game wasn't made in 1895, the governing body was made in 1895, the game was rugby union as played in the public schools of the country. It evolved gradually from 1895

you said no one honestly believed 'this'. You can't possible know that. I never said the changes made to the rules of NU/RL were to do with accommodating children. There were other reasons for that.
Rugby Union Football which is what rugby league started out as and remained like for some time was in fact a game for children: the children who attended the nation's public schools. Isn't 'sincerity' honest? How can you know that no one can honestly or indeed sincerely believe 'this thing' you are on about?

This 'thing' seems to relate to blows to the head. Here's what I honestly and belt and braces style, and at the risk of being a Hughie Green tribute act, sincerely believe to be the case with due deference to the nature of the thread

Are blows to the head inevitable? Yes. This is a high speed collision invasion sport.

Do we take them seriously enough? Debatable. I would say not(honestly and sincerely)

Are deliberate blows to the head taken seriously enough? Well not if there are people around who find them acceptable and 'part and parcel of the game' .

Are blows to the head an important feature of the game's culture and image? There are those who think it is and should be. There are those who think it is and shouldn't be. I'm one of those people. You can do lots of tough things in rugby league without deliberately attacking people's heads. One's brain matters a lot, and trauma to it might not be manifested for many years. It can often also be cumulative. Deliberately attacking the head needs to be removed from the culture of the sport. Accidental blows to the head are taken much more seriously than they were , but arguably not seriously enough,

Edited by l'angelo mysterioso, 18 July 2014 - 03:10 PM.

WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#165 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,119 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 02:07 PM

Nowdays, you won't pull very much in a night-club if you can't dance - lol.

 

Anyway, why should the game just accomodate someone who just have your views? Don't you think you are acting rather selfishly? Its a great game so why can't you let more people experience it?

 

Try this example: I myself am only 1 year old in the game and I love it - if my kid hadn't of taken it up then I woud never have got an experience of this fantastic game. Trust me, it was something I would have loved to have tried when I was younger but just wasn't privedged enough. I always been a football fan and there was nothing to replace it - now I've found just what I was looking for before I'm dead.

good for you mate

Rugby League is a tough sport at any level and in any form. That's because it is a high intensity collision invasion sport. 


WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#166 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,086 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 02:26 PM

I can honestly say that I have heard minimal swearing or offensive chanting while attending RL games. When I used to take the kids the last thing on my mind was trouble or someone swearing their head off. (Apart from me and the kids obviously)
In fact I wouldn't even say it was an issue for RL.


NB I aren't saying there has never been an incident, just my experience.

No I don't care if you're if you're into different bands

No cause for so much hatred, I'm just a different man

Pull off that cover, I will too, and learn to understand

With music deep inside we'll make world unity our plan

 

7 Seconds -Walk Together, Rock Together


#167 D Collins

D Collins
  • Players
  • 15 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 02:46 PM

But given the sheer number of football games that occur, the moments of genuine breathtaking skill is pretty low I reckon.
As I said, I have seen moves on the RL pitch that have genuinely had me scratching my head as to how they did it....a bit like when Cruyff did that trick of sidestepping/backpassing that he did in the 74 WC.
Equally I saw some brilliant goals when Bradford City were down in the dumps in the 70's. Different skills but skills all the same.


Hmm..well there are different degrees of skill...breathtaking moments are seen on a regular basis from the very best players...Luis Suarez for the whole of last season for example. Wasn't a game I watched that he didn't do something ridiculous with the ball.

Then there's the method of scoring...a goal in football is the most visually pleasing in sport, and gets by far most views online. Running with the ball tucked in your arm and then crossing a line the width of the field...how many vids are there on YouTube of this? Not many. Any those that are on there don't get many views...and It's not because it's a much easier method of scoring, it's because it's visually much less aesthetic pleasing. A quality goal in football gets uploaded and quickly accumulates a huge number of hits. My point again is that if Rugby (either code) had more moments of skill the interest in the sport would increase.

I've read threads on here where RL folk talk about how the sport can grow....and it's this that I am referring to. It's action on the field that really is the be all end all. Its this that generates interest. The image of football is far far worse than RL...primadonna players, huge wages and egos, cheating....biting...but people who watch don't care about all of this. It's trivial..infact if anything more scandal is only a good thing (bad publicity is good publicity). Luis Suarez bites someone and it makes headline news all over the world...and u have the likes of Mike Tyson, Holyfield...and Bruce Springsteen chiming in on it. It just makes the story bigger..and this is a celebrity world we are living in. Rugby league players come across as down to earth, approachable, there doesnt appear to be much (if any) cheating..the lack of foreign influence helps on this score.

The issue of class is an interesting one....like Rugby league, football is rooted in the working classes, but unlike football, Rugby league has retained its working class identity to this day (largely because money hasnt exploded as it has in football). Now this may be a handicap...as more middle class folk may not be able to identify with it...similar to working classes and Union. That there are two codes is the biggest handicap of all...theres an obvious division...us and them. I dont think that can be bridged...unless the two codes combine and become one again (unlikely obviously). If say football had another code and was played in the south....it would find the same problem.,,but instead it has unity.

The biggest sports in the world are not collision based...football, basketball, golf, tennis, boxing...while motor racing, cycling and athletics are global. Each variation of a collision based games are played in their own pockets...American football in America, Aussie Rules in Australia, while the two Rugby codes are almost entirely played within the British commonwealth (save southwest France)...they aren't as appealing for most people. I dont know if there is simply a glass ceiling for Rugby league...there may well be...certainly it appears that way in England due to the obvious division in north and south.

#168 davidhubball

davidhubball
  • Coach
  • 128 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 02:46 PM

To Jonoco

Please examine this pecking order to see the affect of verbal abuse can have if not controlled :-

RFL > Clubs > Fans > affects Players > Kevin Sinfield lashes out and now we have a mess.

So if the fans are being abusive then the Club must take action. If the Club doesn't take action, then the RFL must take action against the Club.

So how can you say its not an RFL issue? Its up to the RFLs job to ensure we keep control of verbal abuse from the Club level downwards.

 

Its a like the adverts influencing you on TV - watch and listen to the adverts enough times then that affects the masses e.g.you end up buying Pepsi Max instead of Coca Cola - your programmed to think that you get more pleasure from one or the other. Same with Kevin Sinfield, over the years, he must be filled with so much hate towards the opposition, passed on by the fans, that he now has to regret that mistake for the rest of his life. So is it his fault or the fans who influenced him? or the Clubs fault for not influencing against verbal abuse enough? or the RFLs fault for not ensuring the Clubs are controlling verbal abuse? or purely the players own fault?

 

So in this pecking order, I would say that we all share the blame, would you? -

RFL > Clubs > Fans > affects Players > Kevin Sinfield lashes out and now we have a mess

 

Now when you buy Pepsi your not sure why but you believe it tastes the best. As you know, companies spends millions on advertising because they know the power it has over you even subconsciously.

 

So who should take the blame? Its a hard-one. If we are influenced by outside forces as much as companies believe in advertising then Kevin Sinfield cannot be held to blame at all. He was in affecttively programmed by the fans to react like he did to what seemed like a something would seem fairly minor to anyone else.

 

But my main argument is that its not so clear cut who is to blame. Fans need to be consistantly re-educated how to treat players on both sides and not to dish out any abuse - full-stop.


Edited by davidhubball, 18 July 2014 - 03:09 PM.


#169 C H Calthrop

C H Calthrop
  • Coach
  • 205 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 03:01 PM

Nowdays, you won't pull very much in a night-club if you can't dance - lol.

 

Anyway, why should the game just accomodate someone who just have your views? Don't you think you are acting rather selfishly? Its a great game so why can't you let more people experience it?

 

Try this example: I myself am only 1 year old in the game and I love it - if my kid hadn't of taken it up then I woud never have got an experience of this fantastic game. Trust me, it was something I would have loved to have tried when I was younger but just wasn't privedged enough. I always been a football fan and there was nothing to replace it - now I've found just what I was looking for before I'm dead.

If you are only pulling because of your ability to perform the motions to Agadoo they you are seriously picking the wrong battles to fight.

 

No one loses with my appreciation. No one is demonised or challenged via politically correct moral inventions. The game does not get dumbed down with my viiews. Grown men don't have to pretend that testosterone doesn't exist and if it does it's a terrible thing. if I went to a Soccer match and said this game has too little contact, not enough stoppages, not enough kicking the ball into the crowd and there are no scrums quite rightly I would be directed to RU. If someone is screaming "think of the children" over a headbutt frankly i'm inclined to think they'd be better served being directed elsewhere too. Especially when dismissals and subsequent disciplinary processes seem not to be enough of a response. And my opinion stops no one from doing anything. i've read today opinions contrary to mine that want Simfield to lose captaincy of the club over this.

 

Well good for you extending your sporting appreciation, nothing I have said would lead to anything otherwise.  And it's not a privilege to play RL. You need 2 things; to be living within reasonable distance of a club with access to 25 other interested parties and tough enough to get up after being tackled. That last one being the real criteria. Fast skillful, instinctive, strong all count for nothing if you can't get back up. Tough sport requires an appreciation of what it takes to play not revulsion of said criteria when limits are understandably pressed at the highest level and toughness is still in the air.



#170 davidhubball

davidhubball
  • Coach
  • 128 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 03:18 PM

Clearly you are looking for a reaction when you gave the Agadoo example as I nearly lost all respect for you - my reaction is here...

In the last paragraph you wrote, you did partly redeemed yourself whe you expressed what qualities you need to play rugby. These are not the qualities of what it takes to be a fan though which I think are the main crux of rugby culture/image which is also important.


Edited by davidhubball, 18 July 2014 - 03:21 PM.


#171 C H Calthrop

C H Calthrop
  • Coach
  • 205 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 03:23 PM

the game wasn't made in 1895, the governing body was made in 1895, the game was rugby union as played in the public schools of the country. It evolved gradually from 1895

 

you said no one honestly believed 'this'. You can't possible know that. I never said the changes made to the rules of NU/RL were to do with accommodating children. There were other reasons for that.

Rugby Union Football which is what rugby league started out as and remained like for some time was in fact a game for children: the children who attended the nation's public schools. Isn't 'sincerity' honest? How can you know that no one can honestly or indeed sincerely believe 'this thing' you are on about?

There were immediate rule changes in 1895. The game was not the same. That is a fact not a belief. Namely the peeling away from the scrum of the half from a new position on side of his own forwards. In 1895 NRFU played game different enough to be called different.  

 

Next sentence I think you are still contributing to saying nothing.

 

Rugby Union Football was founded in a restaurant in Pall Mall in 1871. They in fact (another fact) in 1871 removed the more violent element of the original school sport to make it better for adults. 

Details rather than inaccuracies do matter in these things.



#172 C H Calthrop

C H Calthrop
  • Coach
  • 205 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 03:49 PM

Clearly you are looking for a reaction when you gave the Agadoo example as I nearly lost all respect for you - my reaction is here...

In the last paragraph you wrote, you did partly redeemed yourself whe you expressed what qualities you need to play rugby. These are not the qualities of what it takes to be a fan though which I think are the main crux of rugby culture/image which is also important.

The main crux of RL's culture/image problem is the century of having itself corralled and defined to the wider public of these islands by Rugby Union as something with 3 heads. People react like that  has no legacy. The reason you think playing RL is a privilege is because generation after generation of contact playing sportsmen were not free to try it without repercussions. RU still wallows in the gains of that sort of approach. Namely preserving their own game and demonising RL maintained geographic distribution and the lions share of attention via a century where amateur internationals defined "Rugby" in the wider public conversation. 

 

No you don't need to be tough to be a fan that is because there is no reason to be. Unlike being a player. We don't judge these two sets of people the same. I'm not fined if I don't turn up for a match.

 

Your attempts to appear sophisticated by devaluing Agadoo is clearly a facade.   

 

 



#173 Bob8

Bob8
  • Coach
  • 9,498 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 03:58 PM

Edited highlights to I was a 70's stereotype but i saw the light does not an argument make.

 

I dare say the "dance" scene is changing every couple of years but one thing that never changes is that men go to clubs because women are in them. The essential truth.  And people follow RL because it is a full blood full contact sport played by professional, skillful athletes. The discussion around RL like the frippery of your club scene may change but the essential truth does not. There has to be a level of understanding and maturity that goes along with this sort of sport and extends to everyone involved including all types of fans. RL is a tough big boys game played with lots of testosterone. Understanding should stop and is finish with  red and yellow cards. Politically correct social mores about quality and character have no place as an addendum.

 

I would have taken your point more seriously apart from the insulting way you dismiss people while at the same time stating "accommodate everyone".. 

I bet you don't play the game.


"You clearly have never met Bob8 then, he's like a veritable Bryan Ferry of RL." - Johnoco 19 Jul 2014

”I am all for expansion but not to start and string the teams all over the place” – stewpot01 – 11 July 2014

"2013 is on course to be one of the most disastrous in its history." - Creditwhereitsdews - 2nd January 2013


#174 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,119 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 04:21 PM

There were immediate rule changes in 1895. The game was not the same. That is a fact not a belief. Namely the peeling away from the scrum of the half from a new position on side of his own forwards. In 1895 NRFU played game different enough to be called different.

Next sentence I think you are still contributing to saying nothing.

Rugby Union Football was founded in a restaurant in Pall Mall in 1871. They in fact (another fact) in 1871 removed the more violent element of the original school sport to make it better for adults.
Details rather than inaccuracies do matter in these things.

The rule change you mention had no bearing on the physicality of the game, which was in any case essentially rugby union
Hacking was a feature of all forms of football
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#175 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,188 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 04:57 PM

I agree that "it's a real man's game" is outdated nonsense. The heavy industry that turned out teak-tough forwards that never took a step back has gone. Attitudes towards industrial accidents are also very different.

 

That's not to say that the players of today are soft, they certainly aren't, with all the gym work they now do, they are almost stronger than ever before and have to take harder hits than any previous generation. What is different is that I don't think too many players would "play on" with a broken arm / leg / eye socket these days - and quite right too. No game is worth getting crippled.

 

The game is tough enough when played by the rules. Fighting isn't in the rules and never has been. We don't need it. People who want to watch punches being thrown should be directed towards boxing.



#176 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,119 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 05:10 PM

I agree that "it's a real man's game" is outdated nonsense. The heavy industry that turned out teak-tough forwards that never took a step back has gone. Attitudes towards industrial accidents are also very different.

That's not to say that the players of today are soft, they certainly aren't, with all the gym work they now do, they are almost stronger than ever before and have to take harder hits than any previous generation. What is different is that I don't think too many players would "play on" with a broken arm / leg / eye socket these days - and quite right too. No game is worth getting crippled.

The game is tough enough when played by the rules. Fighting isn't in the rules and never has been. We don't need it. People who want to watch punches being thrown should be directed towards boxing.

Exactly
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#177 C H Calthrop

C H Calthrop
  • Coach
  • 205 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 05:21 PM

I bet you don't play the game.

Betting is always a mugs game.



#178 C H Calthrop

C H Calthrop
  • Coach
  • 205 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 05:33 PM

The rule change you mention had no bearing on the physicality of the game, which was in any case essentially rugby union
Hacking was a feature of all forms of football

So what! You do seem intent on pointing out things that were never in question. So what if it had no bearing on the physicality of the game. Just the efficiency of the scrum and spectacle of the play directly after its execution. Essentially RU apart from the changes.

"Hacking was a feature of all forms of Football".  Prior to the establishment of Rugby Union Football, Association Football and RL Football. 



#179 C H Calthrop

C H Calthrop
  • Coach
  • 205 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 05:40 PM

To Jonoco

Please examine this pecking order to see the affect of verbal abuse can have if not controlled :-

RFL > Clubs > Fans > affects Players > Kevin Sinfield lashes out and now we have a mess.

So if the fans are being abusive then the Club must take action. If the Club doesn't take action, then the RFL must take action against the Club.

So how can you say its not an RFL issue? Its up to the RFLs job to ensure we keep control of verbal abuse from the Club level downwards.

 

Its a like the adverts influencing you on TV - watch and listen to the adverts enough times then that affects the masses e.g.you end up buying Pepsi Max instead of Coca Cola - your programmed to think that you get more pleasure from one or the other. Same with Kevin Sinfield, over the years, he must be filled with so much hate towards the opposition, passed on by the fans, that he now has to regret that mistake for the rest of his life. So is it his fault or the fans who influenced him? or the Clubs fault for not influencing against verbal abuse enough? or the RFLs fault for not ensuring the Clubs are controlling verbal abuse? or purely the players own fault?

 

So in this pecking order, I would say that we all share the blame, would you? -

RFL > Clubs > Fans > affects Players > Kevin Sinfield lashes out and now we have a mess

 

Now when you buy Pepsi your not sure why but you believe it tastes the best. As you know, companies spends millions on advertising because they know the power it has over you even subconsciously.

 

So who should take the blame? Its a hard-one. If we are influenced by outside forces as much as companies believe in advertising then Kevin Sinfield cannot be held to blame at all. He was in affecttively programmed by the fans to react like he did to what seemed like a something would seem fairly minor to anyone else.

 

But my main argument is that its not so clear cut who is to blame. Fans need to be consistantly re-educated how to treat players on both sides and not to dish out any abuse - full-stop.

The last reference to "Re-education" I can call to mind is in Nineteen Eighty Four. 



#180 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,119 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 05:41 PM

So what! You do seem intent on pointing out things that were never in question. So what if it had no bearing on the physicality of the game. Just the efficiency of the scrum and spectacle of the play directly after its execution. Essentially RU apart from the changes.
"Hacking was a feature of all forms of Football". Prior to the establishment of Rugby Union Football, Association Football and RL Football.

You are right
You've got me

I agree with all you say
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users