Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
The Future is League

USA sports fans in awe of Rugby League hits

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, SL17 said:

As does water polo. If you try selling something that compares to another, doesn’t that become a negative? They then have a fixation in their minds that it’s the same sport.

Educating people to a new sport is a positive. Comparing it to other sports is a negative.

Although I take your opinion on board.

Yes, we are both roughly on the same track ... from different (or similar) directions ! ?

You are considering how those trying to get interested in the sport might get confused if comparing to another; I was just looking at it from the position of those who have absolutely no interest in it at all and just think one type of rugby is the same as the other but just with a different name. (ie The northern teams call it Rugby League and the southern teams call it Rugby Union).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

The nearest sport ever to be close to the rules of rugby league is the CFL (Until around the late 1920/early 30,s) there is some footage on you tube somewhere.

Indeed there is, it's a good illustration of why I say that the distinctive features of RL are all Canadian inventions.

 

5 hours ago, TheReaper said:

The early days of the various codes in Canada is fascinating, I love reading about that history. 

For example the fact that the Balmy Beach Club, in the current Rugby Ontario Marshall Premiership, has won multiple Grey Cups, is really cool.

I hope for the CFL to evolve towards a more flowing type of rugby game, as a way to deal with concussions and now coronavirus survival. Not sure how exactly, but I think there's an opportunity to be more distinct.

In fact the original Balmy Beach club folded in 1957 according to their Wikipedia entry.  The latter-day club is likely an attempt by RU types to hijack a heritage which isn't theirs.

The evolution you hope for in the CFL would realistically require them to reverse their 100 year old practice of importing rules from the US and restore the distinctive Canadian rules which were once central to their game.  The great majority of the brain damage is suffered by the lineman battling it out on the line of scrimmage, and forward passing would be completely ineffective without that for the simple reason that unless the offensive team can protect the passer long enough for a receiver to get open downfield he'll be tackled before he can throw that pass.

Share this post


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

Indeed there is, it's a good illustration of why I say that the distinctive features of RL are all Canadian inventions.

 

In fact the original Balmy Beach club folded in 1957 according to their Wikipedia entry.  The latter-day club is likely an attempt by RU types to hijack a heritage which isn't theirs.

The evolution you hope for in the CFL would realistically require them to reverse their 100 year old practice of importing rules from the US and restore the distinctive Canadian rules which were once central to their game.  The great majority of the brain damage is suffered by the lineman battling it out on the line of scrimmage, and forward passing would be completely ineffective without that for the simple reason that unless the offensive team can protect the passer long enough for a receiver to get open downfield he'll be tackled before he can throw that pass.

It’s the invention of Gridiron not RL. 
 

You may have your dates mixed up or need to learn them.

Edited by SL17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SL17 said:

It’s the invention of Gridiron not RL. 
 

You may have your dates mixed up or need to learn them.

No it's not the invention of gridiron, that happened in the US not in Canada.  It's the invention of a ball-control version of rugby.

I have my dates and knowledge of the games' history down pat thanks.  Canadians invented the first form of play-the-ball back in 1880.  Canadians invented a rule to make teams run kicks out of their goal area (the rouge) even earlier than that.  Canadians got rid of the RU fair catch in the 1890s and replaced it with a 3-yard (later 5-yard) restraining area for offside members of the kicking team.  We also invented the sin-bin rule which was also part of Canadian rugby football before the first Grey Cup.  In short we Canadians got rid of RU's fair catches, throw-ins, rucks and mauls long before RL got around to any of that and our ideas were subsequently adopted in RL.

Now if you can tell me what the other distinctive features of RL which differentiate it from RU might be, I'm all ears.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

No it's not the invention of gridiron, that happened in the US not in Canada.  It's the invention of a ball-control version of rugby.

I have my dates and knowledge of the games' history down pat thanks.  Canadians invented the first form of play-the-ball back in 1880.  Canadians invented a rule to make teams run kicks out of their goal area (the rouge) even earlier than that.  Canadians got rid of the RU fair catch in the 1890s and replaced it with a 3-yard (later 5-yard) restraining area for offside members of the kicking team.  We also invented the sin-bin rule which was also part of Canadian rugby football before the first Grey Cup.  In short we Canadians got rid of RU's fair catches, throw-ins, rucks and mauls long before RL got around to any of that and our ideas were subsequently adopted in RL.

Now if you can tell me what the other distinctive features of RL which differentiate it from RU might be, I'm all ears.

Hey BP i'm convinced you're right.

It would help you to win if you had some film of RL at about the same time and compare the two.

Anyway do you think there's any chance of converting them to play RL?

Suddenly we'd have a whole new Nation in pro' Rugby League.

Now that's development.

Share this post


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

In fact the original Balmy Beach club folded in 1957 according to their Wikipedia entry.  The latter-day club is likely an attempt by RU types to hijack a heritage which isn't theirs.

Not even close, but nice projection. It's a multi-sport club that competes in all kinds of competitions. They've sent rowing crews to the Olympics, won Grey Cups, won national titles in lawn bowling and stuff. They folded their gridiron side in '57 but continued to compete in rugby, which they started in '55. That was very likely an intentional transition, given that ORFU teams stopped challenging for the GC in 1954. They probably kept the football team going for those who wanted to play it and that waned without the previous glory.

It's the same club continuous to this day. You can read most of their championships painted on their wall on Google Maps: https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.6698099,-79.2862,3a,23.6y,328.3h,84.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss0D5AcF6pWSzsBJMIYmY9g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://balmybeachclub.com/sports-sections/

 

21 hours ago, Big Picture said:

The evolution you hope for in the CFL would realistically require them to reverse their 100 year old practice of importing rules from the US and restore the distinctive Canadian rules which were once central to their game.  The great majority of the brain damage is suffered by the lineman battling it out on the line of scrimmage, and forward passing would be completely ineffective without that for the simple reason that unless the offensive team can protect the passer long enough for a receiver to get open downfield he'll be tackled before he can throw that pass.

There's no reason they would need to revert to previous iterations of the rules. The could change completely different things based on how the game is played today and what aspects they want to limit..

I've had some vague ideas bouncing around my head:

Something along the line of bringing back some element of continuous play based on the "hurry up offense" principle, only every down could be restarted by the offense forming the LOS at the spot of a tackle. Perhaps they still whistle that the carrier or receiver is "down" but the next play could begin at will - the defense would need to work back onside each time, limiting body sizes, especially as this would limit substitutions. And this could be attractive to the teams if international travel restrictions mean we lose a large chunk of our American imports. Potential also for a return to two-way players to bring down roster sizes and therefore costs.

I think there's potential to see helmets removed, or a move to softer scrumcap/leatherhead type protection more likely,  to counter the concussion issue. You'd probably need to bring in an attempt-to-wrap rule, while at the same time increasing first down to 15 yards to recognize the loss of stopping power the defense has if they can't fly in as they do now. A lot of effort would need to be put into edication for both players, and the public to understand how no helmets is actually safer.

I'm unsure how to address the LOS in terms of lineman collisions. That, and blocking which is essentially the same issue but in open field, are the parts I don't have enough strategy knowledge about to think of solutions. If I had them I'm be trying to push a more cohesive strategy of rule reform. The biggest hurdle is the fact that millions of people love the game as it is, which is why drastic change won't happen without major impetus (like a worldwide pandemic).

 

Share this post


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

No it's not the invention of gridiron, that happened in the US not in Canada.  It's the invention of a ball-control version of rugby.

I have my dates and knowledge of the games' history down pat thanks.  Canadians invented the first form of play-the-ball back in 1880.  Canadians invented a rule to make teams run kicks out of their goal area (the rouge) even earlier than that.  Canadians got rid of the RU fair catch in the 1890s and replaced it with a 3-yard (later 5-yard) restraining area for offside members of the kicking team.  We also invented the sin-bin rule which was also part of Canadian rugby football before the first Grey Cup.  In short we Canadians got rid of RU's fair catches, throw-ins, rucks and mauls long before RL got around to any of that and our ideas were subsequently adopted in RL.

Now if you can tell me what the other distinctive features of RL which differentiate it from RU might be, I'm all ears.

See I don't think anyone disagrees with any of that.

The problem I have is that I don't think there's any evidence that the Canadian game was the source of those changes to RL. I think it's more likely that RL developed those changes on their own, but I'm not a RL rule historian so could be proved wrong.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, fighting irish said:

Hey BP i'm convinced you're right.

It would help you to win if you had some film of RL at about the same time and compare the two.

Anyway do you think there's any chance of converting them to play RL?

Suddenly we'd have a whole new Nation in pro' Rugby League.

Now that's development.

I suggested that very thing back in 1996 in the wake of the CFL's failed attempt at expansion in to the US in an op-ed which was published in both Toronto's Globe and Mail and the Montreal Gazette.

The CFL was literally on the brink of going under at the time, Commissioner Larry Smith had bailed leaving league Chairman John Tory (the current mayor of Toronto) holding the bag.  Things were so bad that Tory went on TV at halftime during a CBC telecast of a late-season match and practically begged audience members to buy tickets for their playoff matches that year.  Ottawa's original CFL franchise went under that year, and big problems existed in the non-professional levels of the sport too; the year before the Ottawa Sooners almost forfeited their national Junior final the year before because of the cost of going to Regina to play it.

My suggestion was too radically Canadian for them though, it was easier for them to go cap in hand to the NFL for an interest-free loan to stabilize the league and carry on as they had before.  With interest apparently waning again in Toronto and Vancouver perhaps that just postponed the day of reckoning for the game in its current form, but time will tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a very interesting idea.

I know one thing for certain, if someone suggested the opposite (converting RL clubs to CFL) Leigh would spontaneously combust. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fighting irish said:

Its a very interesting idea.

I know one thing for certain, if someone suggested the opposite (converting RL clubs to CFL) Leigh would spontaneously combust. 

It is indeed.  After all RL is to all intents and purposes an improved version of the uniquely Canadian game they once played and the natural answer to their brain damage problem.  Whether the dull and predictable mode of play seen in the game nowadays would work for them is open to question though.

Share this post


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

I suggested that very thing back in 1996 in the wake of the CFL's failed attempt at expansion in to the US in an op-ed which was published in both Toronto's Globe and Mail and the Montreal Gazette.

The CFL was literally on the brink of going under at the time, Commissioner Larry Smith had bailed leaving league Chairman John Tory (the current mayor of Toronto) holding the bag.  Things were so bad that Tory went on TV at halftime during a CBC telecast of a late-season match and practically begged audience members to buy tickets for their playoff matches that year.  Ottawa's original CFL franchise went under that year, and big problems existed in the non-professional levels of the sport too; the year before the Ottawa Sooners almost forfeited their national Junior final the year before because of the cost of going to Regina to play it.

My suggestion was too radically Canadian for them though, it was easier for them to go cap in hand to the NFL for an interest-free loan to stabilize the league and carry on as they had before.  With interest apparently waning again in Toronto and Vancouver perhaps that just postponed the day of reckoning for the game in its current form, but time will tell.

I think thats a bit unfair BP (I follow the CFL and go to a Grey Cup Final every 3/4/5 years on average) Sure Toronto/Vancouver is tough nowadays however we can only dream of the average crowds that Calgary/Edmonton/Blue Bombers/Rough Riders get and in the east Hamilton crowds are way up from a few years ago and Ottawa have surprised me with how good the crowds have been since they returned to the comp.

Big problem in Vancouver is you are being taken over by China and Toronto is going the same way:))) 

 

Paul

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TheReaper said:

The problem I have is that I don't think there's any evidence that the Canadian game was the source of those changes to RL.

Very obviously, Canadian football (Canadian rugby as it was called at the time) had no bearing on the rules or development of rugby league. If it had, you would have seen some dialogue between the different codes, whether that was players, administrators, managers or teams, or even hybrid games. None of that happened. However it did regularly happen between Canadian and American universities and (semi) professional clubs in gridiron whilst here was obviously very different goings on between league and union in the UK.

  • Like 2

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Share this post


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

It is indeed.  After all RL is to all intents and purposes an improved version of the uniquely Canadian game they once played and the natural answer to their brain damage problem.  Whether the dull and predictable mode of play seen in the game nowadays would work for them is open to question though.

You are looking at pots and pans fella.If you can take formulated RL from that clip. You are lost.

A union coach who jointly used gridiron and union to attempt to create a new sport.

Absolutely nothing to do with Rugby League.

Edited by SL17
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

I think thats a bit unfair BP (I follow the CFL and go to a Grey Cup Final every 3/4/5 years on average) Sure Toronto/Vancouver is tough nowadays however we can only dream of the average crowds that Calgary/Edmonton/Blue Bombers/Rough Riders get and in the east Hamilton crowds are way up from a few years ago and Ottawa have surprised me with how good the crowds have been since they returned to the comp.

Big problem in Vancouver is you are being taken over by China and Toronto is going the same way:))) 

 

Paul

The big problem in Vancouver actually is the CFL is seen as very downmarket and blue collar, although it is true that we have many immigrants from Asia that doesn’t mean they don’t enjoy sport, in fact many follow the Canucks and the Whitecaps, plus the Seattle Seahawks has a very large B.C. supporter base from all races. All of those teams just seem way more cooler and glamorous than the BC Lions . If the Lions wanted to improve their crowds they would be better off relocating to the Fraser Valley, which is the home of the Lions support base, however given the cost of real estate in the Lower Mainland it would probably cost over $200 million to build even a modest stadium, and the Lions don’t have a pot to ###### in. It does raise the question however, if Rugby League did want to try to get a foothold in Western Canada then Vancouver is probably one of the worst places to attempt it unless the game went through a major image makeover.

Share this post


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

The big problem in Vancouver actually is the CFL is seen as very downmarket and blue collar, although it is true that we have many immigrants from Asia that doesn’t mean they don’t enjoy sport, in fact many follow the Canucks and the Whitecaps, plus the Seattle Seahawks has a very large B.C. supporter base from all races. All of those teams just seem way more cooler and glamorous than the BC Lions . If the Lions wanted to improve their crowds they would be better off relocating to the Fraser Valley, which is the home of the Lions support base, however given the cost of real estate in the Lower Mainland it would probably cost over $200 million to build even a modest stadium, and the Lions don’t have a pot to ###### in. It does raise the question however, if Rugby League did want to try to get a foothold in Western Canada then Vancouver is probably one of the worst places to attempt it unless the game went through a major image makeover.

Pretty much the same in Toronto. The Argos have a predominantly an older suburban fan base. They do not resinate with the younger professionals who live downtown, who are more likely to watch the Raptors and to a lesser extent TFC. Teams with a more diverse fanbase. 

Share this post


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

Pretty much the same in Toronto. The Argos have a predominantly an older suburban fan base. They do not resinate with the younger professionals who live downtown, who are more likely to watch the Raptors and to a lesser extent TFC. Teams with a more diverse fanbase. 

Yep, the average Lions fan is 55 years old and lives in Abbotsford or Maple Ridge, the polar opposite of the younger professionals who are the only people who can afford to live in Vancouver itself, mind you the average Lions fan plays a mean banjo!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great stuff but part of the problem with these things - as even evidenced by 1 of the comments by a US observer - is that the sport is inevitably referred to as "rugby" by those watching. I think that's problematic as any of these enthusiastic bystanders could be forgiven for following up their initial excitement/amazement with taking in a rugby union game, being naturally disappointed and then dismissing these amazing RL clips as a fluke or whatever. It isn't reasonable for us to expect them to know that they are different sports. Why would they? They just see "rugby" and fair play to them.

I've long said that I think RL could really do with a new name to wholeheartedly distinguish it from union. The other lot don't have need to change theirs and in fact probably benefit from the overlap but as the smaller sport worldwide RL undoubtedly suffers from the duplication. I've lost count of the number of times I've had to explain to work colleagues even here in the North of England (Manchester) that "no, you're talking about rugby union, that's a different sport". I know a renaming would upset many traditionalists but in terms of kicking on worldwide it could be hugely beneficial. At the very least the sport's administrators should consider a dual name that could run concurrently and be used in areas such as North America.

The one flaw to my suggestion is that despite racking my brains for several years I can't think what this new name should be. But that isn't a conclusive rejection of my theory. Get some sharper and more creative brains than me onto it.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DeadShotKeen said:

Great stuff but part of the problem with these things - as even evidenced by 1 of the comments by a US observer - is that the sport is inevitably referred to as "rugby" by those watching. I think that's problematic as any of these enthusiastic bystanders could be forgiven for following up their initial excitement/amazement with taking in a rugby union game, being naturally disappointed and then dismissing these amazing RL clips as a fluke or whatever. It isn't reasonable for us to expect them to know that they are different sports. Why would they? They just see "rugby" and fair play to them.

I've long said that I think RL could really do with a new name to wholeheartedly distinguish it from union. The other lot don't have need to change theirs and in fact probably benefit from the overlap but as the smaller sport worldwide RL undoubtedly suffers from the duplication. I've lost count of the number of times I've had to explain to work colleagues even here in the North of England (Manchester) that "no, you're talking about rugby union, that's a different sport". I know a renaming would upset many traditionalists but in terms of kicking on worldwide it could be hugely beneficial. At the very least the sport's administrators should consider a dual name that could run concurrently and be used in areas such as North America.

The one flaw to my suggestion is that despite racking my brains for several years I can't think what this new name should be. But that isn't a conclusive rejection of my theory. Get some sharper and more creative brains than me onto it.

In casual talk, what do Aussies call rugby league? I know the answer isn't the answer, but they gave up on the idea of calling it rugby years ago.


Learn to listen without distortion and learn to look without imagination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mister Ting said:

In casual talk, what do Aussies call rugby league? I know the answer isn't the answer, but they gave up on the idea of calling it rugby years ago.

It’s called rugbah league in Australia now. Peter V’landys’ new name for it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

It’s called rugbah league in Australia now. Peter V’landys’ new name for it. 

Is he a Kiwi?


Learn to listen without distortion and learn to look without imagination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Don’t think so!

In seriousness, Aussies tend to call it footy. Hegemonic, innit.

In all states too.


Learn to listen without distortion and learn to look without imagination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, DeadShotKeen said:

Great stuff but part of the problem with these things - as even evidenced by 1 of the comments by a US observer - is that the sport is inevitably referred to as "rugby" by those watching. I think that's problematic as any of these enthusiastic bystanders could be forgiven for following up their initial excitement/amazement with taking in a rugby union game, being naturally disappointed and then dismissing these amazing RL clips as a fluke or whatever. It isn't reasonable for us to expect them to know that they are different sports. Why would they? They just see "rugby" and fair play to them.

I've long said that I think RL could really do with a new name to wholeheartedly distinguish it from union. The other lot don't have need to change theirs and in fact probably benefit from the overlap but as the smaller sport worldwide RL undoubtedly suffers from the duplication. I've lost count of the number of times I've had to explain to work colleagues even here in the North of England (Manchester) that "no, you're talking about rugby union, that's a different sport". I know a renaming would upset many traditionalists but in terms of kicking on worldwide it could be hugely beneficial. At the very least the sport's administrators should consider a dual name that could run concurrently and be used in areas such as North America.

The one flaw to my suggestion is that despite racking my brains for several years I can't think what this new name should be. But that isn't a conclusive rejection of my theory. Get some sharper and more creative brains than me onto it.

I doubt a name change will really help at all. Instead of saying 'No this isnt rugby union this is rugby league' post name change you say, 'No this isnt rugby union this is [insert new name]'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, emesssea said:

I doubt a name change will really help at all. Instead of saying 'No this isnt rugby union this is rugby league' post name change you say, 'No this isnt rugby union this is [insert new name]'

Surely the point is post name change no one will mention RU in the same sentence. Just as no one says now, " no it's not Basketball it's Netball " Similar sports different names. Perhaps call it on a similar vein to t20 cricket,  T13 Footy, ( thirteen/thirteen).

  • Like 2

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.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...