Jump to content
SL17

A new name for Rugby League. (Merged threads)

Recommended Posts

I have always though the 'League' part of the name did us a disservice as league is used across almost every sport to describe the competition and so for me it doesn't differentiate us.

There is no doubt that Rugby Union has stolen the name 'Rugby' by ensuring they use that name exclusively and we therefore have to append League every time in order to make the point of which sport we are talking about (not here of course).

The main and most obvious example of is the 'Rugby World Cup' which we should never allowed to happen as a sport but we did.

What I would like us to do is go on the counter attack and keep the word Rugby but describe it as superior.  I am not saying these are the right names but I hope you get the point:

Because we have spent over a 100 years longer evolving the game beyond Rugby Union

Rugby 2.0

Rugby Evolution

Rugby Revolution

Because it is the highest form of Rugby

Apex Rugby

Meridian Rugby

Rugby Ultra

 

as I say, these are not the right names but it is the direction I would take.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nothing wrong with SUPER LEAGUE 13 no need for any other fancy names.

Edited by my missus

Through the fish-eyed lens of tear stained eyes
I can barely define the shape of this moment in time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and SUPER LEAGUE 13 CHAMPIONSHIP

 


Through the fish-eyed lens of tear stained eyes
I can barely define the shape of this moment in time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, my missus said:

nothing wrong with SUPER LEAGUE 13 no need for any other fancy names.

 

4 minutes ago, my missus said:

and SUPER LEAGUE 13 CHAMPIONSHIP

 

  That covers the division/leagues of the professional/semi-professional game BUT doesn't cover all of the sport.

  I had thought of the word FLOURISH after inspiration from Dunbar,above,and retaining the word rugby,and this would still fit the governing body RFL.

  However,on thinking no other sport/game used the word I found some Twitter for a climate themed strategy game.

  As mentioned earlier the name of a public school may no longer be relevant but what should replace it?  Should it be replaced?

  A breakaway,as a result of a meeting in Huddersfield,isn't sufficient for going down that route.

   What about the nature of the sport? Is there sufficient kicking during the 80 minutes to retain the name,football? Certainly those who follow losing sides and watch a number of restarts,conversions,last tackle kick options,penalties,the answer has to be yes.

   I would like to change it.Give a modern name that youngsters at school could discuss in an abbreviated form,if necessary.

   Just need someone to get their heads around it and come up with something.

    


     No reserves,but resilience,persistence and determination are omnipotent.                       

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Angelic Cynic said:

 

  That covers the division/leagues of the professional/semi-professional game BUT doesn't cover all of the sport.

  I had thought of the word FLOURISH after inspiration from Dunbar,above,and retaining the word rugby,and this would still fit the governing body RFL.

  However,on thinking no other sport/game used the word I found some Twitter for a climate themed strategy game.

  As mentioned earlier the name of a public school may no longer be relevant but what should replace it?  Should it be replaced?

  A breakaway,as a result of a meeting in Huddersfield,isn't sufficient for going down that route.

   What about the nature of the sport? Is there sufficient kicking during the 80 minutes to retain the name,football? Certainly those who follow losing sides and watch a number of restarts,conversions,last tackle kick options,penalties,the answer has to be yes.

   I would like to change it.Give a modern name that youngsters at school could discuss in an abbreviated form,if necessary.

   Just need someone to get their heads around it and come up with something.

    

Rugby Grind League sounds good, you’re hired. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Big Picture said:

So if we dump "rugby", what do you suggest that we call the sport then?

There is no prospect of an official name change. Too much water under the bridge, perception of almighty capitulation, unbearable ignominy etc.The focus should be on the colloquial terms. Pragmatism is the watchword, where the preferred term is whichever one, in whichever setting, is most to our advantage. It is fine to refer internally to RL as "Rugby" in PNG. It will be equally fine, in an optimistic scenario, if RL supplants RU in popular consciousness, in Ontario. But in most places RL pioneers face the obstacle that someone else got there first. And not just anyone, people with elite contacts who can use those contacts to control the narrative.

Despite myriad testimonies from those striving to grow the game in new territories that the unaccompanied word "Rugby" hinders them, too many in the heartlands remain thoughtless about their language in an international context. And not just English heartlands. Given that they have the competition with the widest reach, the Aussie penchant for "Rugby" to describe Union is infuriatingly parochial. When a player who played only club League through their formative years, then drifted into Union at secondary school, signs an NRL contract, their first interview will begin with "Coming from a Rugby background, how are you adapting to League?". The NRL journalist must know this is incomprehensible to most of the world, so it betrays the same indifference to global development as the most insular M-62 corridor-dweller.

BTW, why are NRL journos so intent on portraying anyone who has played any RU, in whatever circumstances, as dyed in the wool Union? It must come from the same peculiar place that compels them to preface every mention of New Zealand with the phrase "Rugby-mad".

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Oh great, I did my undergraduate dissertation on him and sovereignty of the people so you could say I'm a bit of a fan and as you say he has enduring insights. Potentially looking at a PhD in the field too.

Totally agree about how RU and RL are perceived. I think we're yet to fully understand whether the internet and social media can help things break out of their places or actually serve to entrench those positions further. There's evidence for both, with the internet being at once the greatest liberator of information but also multiplying a 100 fold the ability to create one's own echo chamber.

Who knows what the future holds.

There`s good reason for RL optimism regarding the internet. As you set out, it is whatever people make it, but at least the potential is there, unlike when the BBC had a controlling grip on perceptions. It would be good to see some research on how those involved in different parts of the world follow the game via the Net, with a view to more effectively joining the dots.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's "football" because it's played on foot, with a ball. As opposed to other historically popular sports such as riding, hunting, racing, Polo that were not on foot. I don't see that needing to be changed, but another descriptor is still needed because there are many types of football, and all of them have another word or two.

I would agree that "rugby" seems generally mean "rugby union" as the default. Whether that is good or bad is the key of the debate. It can be bad, taking away recognition.  But RL also uses the ambiguity to its advantage, such the NZ test in Denver. 

"League" isn't very good, because it's a word that has a specific meaning across most sports, as well as a couple other meanings, eg"out of your league" as an idiom, a unit of measure, etc. Nothing unique,  almost anti-Googleable.

I don't think using 13 is a particularly good idea. Pretty much every field and most court sports have unique numbers of players, the only two that share a number are soccer and American football with 11. It's not that intrinsic to the game, and kind of locks you into one number.

Numbers in pretty much every sport are used to specifically refer to modified versions, as opposed to the main rules. 3-on-3 basketball,  4-on-4 or 3-on-3 hockey/overtime rules, 7s, 9s, 5 on 5 soccer, 7 on 7 football. Etc. 

 

All of that said, I don't have any better ideas. Pushing "rugby football" might be the best angle that isn't a radical change but allows differentiation. It won't get rid of the crossover with RU but might get around some perceptions that people have about "rugby league" .

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I grew up in New Zealand calling Rugby Union and "Rugby" and Rugby League "League:" I can't really think of a better name than just sticking with Rugby League and tolerating any confusions it may cause. Has any other sport renamed itself? I guess in some parts of the world Football is trying to ditch the name Soccer with some success.

Edited by eal
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, TheReaper said:

It's "football" because it's played on foot, with a ball. As opposed to other historically popular sports such as riding, hunting, racing, Polo that were not on foot. I don't see that needing to be changed, but another descriptor is still needed because there are many types of football, and all of them have another word or two.

I would agree that "rugby" seems generally mean "rugby union" as the default. Whether that is good or bad is the key of the debate. It can be bad, taking away recognition.  But RL also uses the ambiguity to its advantage, such the NZ test in Denver. 

"League" isn't very good, because it's a word that has a specific meaning across most sports, as well as a couple other meanings, eg"out of your league" as an idiom, a unit of measure, etc. Nothing unique,  almost anti-Googleable.

I don't think using 13 is a particularly good idea. Pretty much every field and most court sports have unique numbers of players, the only two that share a number are soccer and American football with 11. It's not that intrinsic to the game, and kind of locks you into one number.

Numbers in pretty much every sport are used to specifically refer to modified versions, as opposed to the main rules. 3-on-3 basketball,  4-on-4 or 3-on-3 hockey/overtime rules, 7s, 9s, 5 on 5 soccer, 7 on 7 football. Etc. 

 

All of that said, I don't have any better ideas. Pushing "rugby football" might be the best angle that isn't a radical change but allows differentiation. It won't get rid of the crossover with RU but might get around some perceptions that people have about "rugby league" .

 

No, the reason why it's football is not because it's played on foot, with a ball.  After all baseball, basketball, cricket, handball, hockey, and lacrosse are all played on foot with a ball too.

It's football because it involves playing the ball with the foot to a significant degree, that is the origin and correct meaning of the word.  It's also why gridiron can't legitimately be included among the various types of football in the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

No, the reason why it's football is not because it's played on foot, with a ball.  After all baseball, basketball, cricket, handball, hockey, and lacrosse are all played on foot with a ball too.

It's football because it involves playing the ball with the foot to a significant degree, that is the origin and correct meaning of the word.  It's also why gridiron can't legitimately be included among the various types of football in the world.

Quote

Although the accepted etymology of the word football, or "foot ball", originated in reference to the action of a foot kicking a ball, this may be a false etymology. An alternative explanation has it that the word originally referred to a variety of games in medieval Europe, which were played on foot.[5] These sports were usually played by peasants, as opposed to the horse-riding sports more often enjoyed by aristocrats. In some cases, the word has been applied to games which involved carrying a ball and specifically banned kicking. For example, the English writer William Hone, writing in 1825 or 1826, quotes the social commentator Sir Frederick Morton Eden, regarding a game – which Hone refers to as "Foot-Ball" – played in the parish of Scone, Perthshire:

The game was this: he who at any time got the ball into his hands, run [sic] with it till overtaken by one of the opposite part; and then, if he could shake himself loose from those on the opposite side who seized him, he run on; if not, he threw the ball from him, unless it was wrested from him by the other party, but no person was allowed to kick it.[6] [Emphasis added.]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_(word)

There inconclusive evidence either way, as it's probably a mixture of both. But you can't state that I'm wrong.

Besides, there is no "legitimately" ? a sport is called what people call it, not what non-involved pedantics think it should be called. All the sports that are called football have direct lineage to 19th century (and earlier) games called football in the UK, and so are continued to be called football. Those other sports are not directly descended from games called football in the UK, and so are not called football (rugby's influence on early hockey aside).

image.thumb.png.fc4c0263189acc9a24eda716e3ed9098.png

I hope to eventually play all of them at some point in my life. I'm about halfway, having played soccer, Canadian football, rugby union, and rugby league. Still need to get to Gaelic, Australian, and America. Ironically American football is the toughest one for me to do, all of the rest are played in either Hamilton or Toronto but I'd have to go to Buffalo, and I don't think adult rec leagues are much of a thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, TheReaper said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_(word)

There inconclusive evidence either way, as it's probably a mixture of both. But you can't state that I'm wrong.

Besides, there is no "legitimately" ? a sport is called what people call it, not what non-involved pedantics think it should be called. All the sports that are called football have direct lineage to 19th century (and earlier) games called football in the UK, and so are continued to be called football. Those other sports are not directly descended from games called football in the UK, and so are not called football (rugby's influence on early hockey aside).

image.thumb.png.fc4c0263189acc9a24eda716e3ed9098.png

I hope to eventually play all of them at some point in my life. I'm about halfway, having played soccer, Canadian football, rugby union, and rugby league. Still need to get to Gaelic, Australian, and America. Ironically American football is the toughest one for me to do, all of the rest are played in either Hamilton or Toronto but I'd have to go to Buffalo, and I don't think adult rec leagues are much of a thing.

That graphic clearly supports my point because those original games all involved playing the ball with the foot to a significant degree, so thank you.  Further, unless are willing to concede my point, you'll have to accept that baseball, basketball, cricket, handball, hockey, and lacrosse are also types of football because they are all played on foot with a ball too.  Including them as brands of football would truly be a stupid thing though, it would render the word football meaningless.

You could play both Gaelic football and Australian Rules football in Ontario, both have competitions based in Toronto.  AFL Ontario has clubs based in Hamilton and Guelph if you're closer to either of those cities.  You don't need to worry about going to Buffalo either, the differences between the two forms of gridiron are so minor that they can't legitimately be classed as different sports.

Edited by Big Picture

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't find any other sport that has gone down the change of name route.

Given that we are in the 125th anniversary year - and already changed from Northern Union - I reckon Rugby League is the one to stick with and hope it is used often,and with pride,from now and even more so once the sport gets back up and running.

  • Like 2

     No reserves,but resilience,persistence and determination are omnipotent.                       

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Angelic Cynic said:

I can't find any other sport that has gone down the change of name route.

Given that we are in the 125th anniversary year - and already changed from Northern Union - I reckon Rugby League is the one to stick with and hope it is used often,and with pride,from now and even more so once the sport gets back up and running.

I would agree but get rid of "Super League" ... it doesn't say on the tin what it is.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Play the game in summer, not January and February and call it simply "summer rugby" after all most of us like to complain about summer rugby when the weather is a bit rough ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Angelic Cynic said:

I can't find any other sport that has gone down the change of name route.

Given that we are in the 125th anniversary year - and already changed from Northern Union - I reckon Rugby League is the one to stick with and hope it is used often,and with pride,from now and even more so once the sport gets back up and running.

Get out of here with your common sense and rational thinking. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 17 stone giant said:

"I Can't Believe It's Not Rugby Union" (ICBINRU)

It worked for that margarine stuff.

 

 

The opportunity is there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21/04/2020 at 09:58, Themusician_2 said:

Maybe we should call it footy like the Australians do and call rugby union rugby like the Australians do.

Oh yeah because footy doesn't mean anything over here does it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/04/2020 at 17:53, eal said:

I grew up in New Zealand calling Rugby Union and "Rugby" and Rugby League "League:" I can't really think of a better name than just sticking with Rugby League and tolerating any confusions it may cause. Has any other sport renamed itself? I guess in some parts of the world Football is trying to ditch the name Soccer with some success.

Agreed, but League fans everywhere could be more circumspect to limit those confusions, and more astute in using terms which raise the profile of RL. In NZ surely "Union" should be stressed over "Rugby" if RU is being referred to. It might not matter too much for internal consumption, but to most of the world saying only "Rugby" renders RL invisible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...