Hull KR Un-Retire No 6 Shirt

[Cumbrian Fanatic]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/articles/c4gl2l80z0wo

Not a great fan of retiring shirt numbers on a permanent basis, so nice to see Hull KR are bringing back the number 6 shirt and Lewis is a worthy recipient. Even better that Roger Millwards wife is in agreement

Edited December 13, 2024 by Cumbrian Fanatic

[LeytherRob]

Glad to see they’ve done this, it memorialises players far more when others can share the shirt numbers.

It also settles the debate on whether Lewis is a stand off or scrum half too

[sam4731]

In response Hull have decided to unretire their 1-13 from last year.

[Gooleboy]

36 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

In response Hull have decided to unretire their 1-13 from last year.

Did Hull have any 1 - 13s last season?

[Old Frightful]

I'm also not a fan of a club retiring a numbered shirt, no matter how much of a legend the player it was done for was.

However, I appreciate that Roger Millward was an absolute icon for Hull KR and understand their reasons for doing it after his passing in 2016.

So, I'm frankly astounded that, after only 8 years, they've decided to go back on that decision.

Remarkable.

 

[burnleywelsh]

I don't think it works in UK sports, retiring numbers. I believe it's an American thing (correct me if I'm wrong). In American football as a rule, players are required to wear numbers within ranges based on their position. Therefore, they can 'afford' to lose a number to retirement as there are plenty of numbers per position. 

[sam4731]

I think there are times when retiring a number is a nice gesture, the example that comes to mind is Danny Jones at Keighley, but it has to be very particular circumstances.

[Liverpool Rover]

3 hours ago, burnleywelsh said:

I don't think it works in UK sports, retiring numbers. I believe it's an American thing (correct me if I'm wrong). In American football as a rule, players are required to wear numbers within ranges based on their position. Therefore, they can 'afford' to lose a number to retirement as there are plenty of numbers per position. 

In America it is regarded as a big honour for a player to have their number to be retired. I don't really agree with the number 6 being brought back, especially as it has only been eight years.

[Indigogo]

50 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

I think there are times when retiring a number is a nice gesture, the example that comes to mind is Danny Jones at Keighley, but it has to be very particular circumstances.

Keighley have unretired the number 6 from 2025 onwards

[warriors 95]

Shouldn’t be allowed to happen and instead clubs should erect statues or name stands after club legends instead.

[sam4731]

5 minutes ago, Indigogo said:

Keighley have unretired the number 6 from 2025 onwards

Fair enough but I still think it can be appropriate in some circumstances.

[Anita Bath]

Toronto Maple Leafs have retired 3 numbers on two separate occasions….you dont need to unretire a retired number it seems.

[Dovster]

10 hours ago, Indigogo said:

Keighley have unretired the number 6 from 2025 onwards

Personally I'm Disappointed with that decision.

[Cumbrian Fanatic]

I do get the reasoning for retiring a number as a mark of respect though I'd do it for a stated time period, say a season or two rather than on a permanent basis. 

[Worzel]

I'm not a fan of this decision, at all.

I don't like the idea of retiring numbers, so in a sense this reverses a bad decision initially. But certainly if you're going to retire one then Roger Millward at Hull KR would be the only scenario you can imagine making sense. As a player he was crucial to our greatest-ever period, was demonstrably world class, and as if that wasn't enough then having already done that was also then the coach when we won a ridiculous number of trophies. So to then "unretire" his number just because we happen to have our first half-decent half-back in a while seems weird. Lewis will go on to be a great player no doubt, but hardly any great players go on to have the Hull KR story that Millward did so he hasn't got a chance of eclipsing that has he? 

I appreciate they've got Carol Millward on-board with this, but she should never have been asked in the first place. What sort of position does the question put her in when posed? It's wholly unfair. Roger's family deserved better than that from the club. 

[daz39]

I'm also not a fan of retiring shirts, i think the honour of following such acclaimed players in that particular shirt should be a great honour for those future recipients.

In this case i realise RM's family have endorsed this but i just feel it makes a mockery of the whole 'retiring' thing.

Can you imagine in 20 years time a Leeds lad getting the number 7 shirt, that should be one of the greatest accolades available, i'm sure every club has a similar shirt that can be seen as the ultimate achievement for one of it's players.

[Worzel]

35 minutes ago, daz39 said:

I'm also not a fan of retiring shirts, i think the honour of following such acclaimed players in that particular shirt should be a great honour for those future recipients.

In this case i realise RM's family have endorsed this but i just feel it makes a mockery of the whole 'retiring' thing.

Can you imagine in 20 years time a Leeds lad getting the number 7 shirt, that should be one of the greatest accolades available, i'm sure every club has a similar shirt that can be seen as the ultimate achievement for one of it's players.

Precisely this. You can honour the number by making it something that other players aspire to hold, as the #7 is at Man United for example. Roy Keane refused it because he didn’t think he was worthy. Now that’s a tribute.

But, having retired it, then it needs to stay retired otherwise you’re saying you never really meant it in the first place. Which is awful. 

[gingerjon]

On 15/12/2024 at 04:40, Anita Bath said:

Toronto Maple Leafs have retired 3 numbers on two separate occasions….you dont need to unretire a retired number it seems.

I looked into this. It looks like they had 'honoured' shirts alongside retired ones. Eventually they decided to retire all the honoured ones which meant some got two ceremonies and a few had more than one name per number.

My very own Chicago Cubs have an equivalent where a retired number - 31 - covers two players. The number was retired in 2009 for both Fergie Jenkins (1966-1973) and Greg Maddux (1986-1992, 2004-2006). In 151 years of playing, the Cubs have retired five numbers covering six players - plus the 42 for Jackie Robinson that the league retired.

It only really works in sports and countries where you have genuine squad numbers rather than an effective first team set of numbers and everyone else after those.

That said, if you do it, then it should stay done. A local football team 'retired' the number 6 when the young lad who wore it last was killed in a car accident. Ever since then, they have permission from the league and local FA that their no 6 shirt is number 16 on the field. That goes back about 20 years and is now just how the club does things. They're not going to start having a number 6 again if a really good central defender comes along.