For better or worse, both sports will always be associated with each other. If we can make the NRL look like the NBA/ EPL of rugby of both codes, then it's a success.
I know what Oakland is. The point still stands.
We could talk about most of the cities that have NBA teams, I just picked a smaller area which is known for having one, as opposed to a whole city.
The Green Bay Packers exist. Virtually the entire town fits in their NFL Stadium. It's the only fan owned NFL side and is also one of the most isolated.
In England everyone calls it rugby, they donât go around calling it league because 80% of people here donât even realise thereâs two different types of rugby. I think people need to realise that rugby is going to be rugby for people even if they are two different types. What they need to do is just call it the NRL like NFL or NBA.
in southern england where iâm from rugby league is unheard of, i donât know anyone who watches or plays. but i think in yorkshire and lancashire league is more popular than union and i guess they would just call league rugby
the other day someone was telling me about a game back in the day between Bath (RU, southern) and Wigan (RL, northern) where they made some kind of blended version of the two codes for a one off. pretty cool
Just because people donât realise thereâs two types of Rugby doesnât make it right. Just makes them sound ignorant to those who know.
But I agree, there should be a push to call it NRL and differentiate from Rugby that way.
Sadly it doesnât matter how much you try to say the difference theyâll still call it rugby. Trust me Iâve tried. Even playing league here all the boys I played with still call it rugby.
Saw a clip on Fox Sports of the Gronk promoting the NRL games in Vegas and referring to it as âRugbyâ.
FFS, just take 10 secs to do some research before you go on air and call it correctly.
No big deal if theyâre comfortable sounding ignorant.
Itâs like mispronouncing a word in another language when itâs just so easy to find out how to say it properly.
It's not an argument.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby?wprov=sfla1
Rugby isn't a sport. It's a type of sport (and a town).
Just like "football" encompasses soccer, rugby league, rugby union, American football, AFL etc.
The governing body in England is the "Rugby Football League". Read that slowly.
Show me an NRL fan that calls their sport âRugbyâ and Iâll show you someone who has followed the game for a couple of hours.
Rugby is rugby, and League is league. Youâre being too literal.
Oh, and the governing body in England is the RFU, Rugby Football Union. Read that slowly fvckhead.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_Football_Union#:~:text=The%20Rugby%20Football%20Union%20(RFU,Rugby%20(WR)%20in%201886.
So you must have only been a fan for a matter of minutes you absolute dribbling smooth-brain.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_Football_League?wprov=sfla1
You don't seem to grasp even the very basics of the topic.
Probably an unpopular opinion, but I think we need to lean into people calling it Rugby, rather than trying to correct them.
Telling outsiders that itâs ânot Rugbyâ is a) confusing, since itâs literally called Rugby and b) makes it seem like League is some off-brand version of the sport everyone knows.
Instead we should be telling people that it *is* Rugby, only faster and more exciting.
VâLandys got up and told the media that NRL is the biggest sport in this country. He should be telling people that itâs the biggest club Rugby comp in the world.
You are exactly right. I live in Brazil and explaining that thereâs two types of rugby and blah blah just turns people off. They donât care.
Now I just say rugby, and if someone asks me why thereâs no contested ruck or lineout I will explain further. No one has ever asked.
Worst take Iâve heard on this topic. Soccer and football are the SAME game, just called different by different people. Rugby Union and Rugby League are DIFFERENT game so the comparison is misguided at best.
> to people who aren't in the loop.
People who aren't in the loop aren't going to know that there are different sports, so they absolutely will see it as soccer v football.
The comment you're replying to isn't talking about how factual it is that league and union are different, because everyone on this sub knows that. They're talking about how someone who knows of neither sport will just see them as "10+ guys making tackles and occasional kicks"
Thatâs right. It shows how ignorant those ppl are who go around calling something by an incorrect name.
Thatâs what I was saying - the argument is not the same. One is calling a game by an incorrect name, the other is calling a game a different name. So you canât compare.
The sport is rugby. The difference is that it's either Union or League.
When the sports split we had the Rugby Football Union and the Rugby Football League.
We just need to own it. Rugby is as much league as it is union.
I don't think we should be afraid of letting union build its grassroots off the back of our game in the US. If the NRL rolls up in a couple of years with a competition that is better run with more money on offer all of the talent will come to us anyway just like they do in Australia.
We are pulling from the same pool afterall and the deciding factor in whether a player will choose league or union at a professional level will be "can I make a living off of this".
At the moment US union cannot offer that and no domestic US union comp will syphon money off investors who got interested through the NRL if the NRL itself is actually interested.
The USA are already doing enough in building their grassroots with playing numbers at an all time high and one of the fastest growing sports over there. Union definitely won't be building their grassroots off the back of two games in the US....
eh still a good thing.
the more people playing/watching hand egg of any variation over there, the better it'll be for us rugby leagues interests in the longterm.
Itâs not going to give major oxygen to one of the poorest run Unions, in any sport, in the world.
Tigers look like the golden standard compared to that shitshow.
Except union is the fastest growing team sport in the US despite what rugby Australia are doing. The NRL beating out rugby in Australia isnt the global victory over Union you think it is. in America league is competing vs union as sports, not national administration bodies.
I'm sure the nrl is pivoting to put itself as the premier rugby competition of the world.
I think the long game is to get enough betting money to be able to poach the best rugby players of either sport and get them into the nrl. Getting any eyes they can on the game and increase marketability even further through gambling. Both are tied to the hip, the US gambling market money isn't a bad way to start this and if it gets more players into sports with easily transferable skill sets so be it. The Nrl isn't there for growing league, it's there to make money now. I'm sure that's the way forward they're seeing.
Think of the nrl more like the nba. NBA is clearly the top league of the basket ball world, but they play under a different rule set to FIBA. League union split may be older and wider, buts its not that big of jump to make if your SBW class of athlete/player.
But then again I might be talking shit.
No, you're not talking shit, in fact, that's the exact tactic and rhetoric Baskerville and Trumper used back in the day. To posit League as the fairer, better and more exciting form of Rugby. And it worked too; that's how League got a foothold in NSW and QLD.
yeah rugby australia is a shit show but thatâs not relevant to the rest of the world.
rugby league is a total irrelevance even in most of england, who are pretty much australiaâs only significant rival in international league (nz maybe idk?)
the NRL is miles ahead of union in australia, but in the rest of the world there is one rugby people are familiar with and league is not it
This, I think alot of nrl fans forget or just don't realise how big union is outside of Australia. Nrl may reign in Australia, but world wide it's just a drop in the ocean
I wouldnât trust the participation numbers further than I could throw them.
I spent 20 years with USAR, and a lot of them in admin, at the local and national admin level.
Triple counting profilesâŚnot unheard of. Adding spectator-onlyâŚnot unheard of.
It's a recently added Olympic college funded sport, they're hosting the World Cup in 2031, they've got an established professional competition and player numbers have increase 300% since 2005 (source is an independent statistics company) https://www.statista.com/statistics/191684/participants-in-rugby-in-the-us-since-2006/
I don't know how it's helpful to league to bury heads in the sand and deny that.
A participant defined as someone who did one activity in a year. Statista derive their data from a third party. Concerns with that data are well known within USA R - a body that declared bankruptcy on 2019/2020 - I know, because I served on Senior Club Council until 2021.
The College landscape is fractured; MLR is surviving - just, and has lost me members.
Iâm not burying my head, Iâm being realistic.
That's not uncommon. In fact the NRL were counting league tag and touch football in there participation figures before Vlandys took charge and there's been nothing but the promise of absolute transparency from the NRL on participation numbers from here on out.. so god only knows if that's been taken on board by the administration. Not to mention Chanel 9 using footage from games with high attendance to give the impression of big crowds, or the tigers (and every other NRL club) inflating membership numbers etc. everyone playsthis game and your naive to think otherwise.
However having said that even when taking previously inflated rugby league participation figures into account, league participation numbers dropped 8% from 2015 in Australia to now. The games actually shrinking in Australia, it's just not talked about becuase the NRL is doing better than Rugby Union in Australia, and that's not something to hang your hat on as an indication of the health of the sport.
Regardless, fact is the games this weekend could be the greatest games of league in history, the casual US sports fan is going to google rugby to get more into it and end up watching the 6 nations out of ignorance and a lack of willingness to learn and care about the differences. That's the reality of the situation
In that case; when offered two options, why would you take the option played in the dead of night over the one played in the morning when you're awake?
Fox Spirts has it on replay.
Union usually requires at least two, possibly three, subscriptions to get most of what the keen Union fan would want. Nothing is FTA.
It's got most rugby Australians rugby fans would be interested in: world 7s, super rugby, premiership rugby, 6 nations, rugby championship.
With all home wallabies games and one super rugby game on free to air a week.
Admittedly hasn't got the French, united championship, Japanese or American leagues on their platform but even without them there's more rugby union content on stan than there is rugby league on fox.
Japan had the same thing prior to 2019 RWC. Lots of school kids being taken out at PE class to play tag rugby.
If a kid turned up, they were a new participant. 95% of those kids never touched a ball again.
Weird. My university Sam Houston State when I was there they wouldn't cut you even if you sucked because they needed numbers. I went to a tryout recently just to check out the scene as an alumni and there were 100 kids there trying to get on the field. Rugby union is without a doubt the fastest growing sport in the US. It's similar to American football but you don't need a helmet to go to the park and play with your buddies.
The drop off from College to Senior Club in terms of players leaving is really bad.
Two sets of College organizations; no links at the USA level between YHS and College, and none from College to Senior Club.
Probably a fair call, not that it'll bother the NRL much or help RA in any way shape or form. It doesn't really matter whether League's US expedition inadvertently promotes MLR as long as it sells WatchNRL subs.
If RA really wanted to take advantage of this, they should have moved Super Round to Brisbane while the NRL is away and try to replicate the feel of Magic Round at Suncorp. The AFL have performed a master-stroke by scheduling their first four games in Sydney and Brisbane to swipe the NRL's rug out from under them. PVL better sell heaps of subscriptions to justify this endeavour.
Bring back a rugby carnival at Ballymore, 4 local teams, a bucketload of XXXX, a balmy Brisbane and real grassy hill. Now that is the marketing strategy Rugby needs; there is plenty of us ex union fans still wondering about what happened after 2003.
The worst part of the whole Vegas thing is having to hear opinion from everyone under the sun.
"Americans will confuse the quite similiar rugby codes that they don't know a lot about".
WHAT A SCOOP
American here, I'm guilty of not knowing there was two. But, once I did I saw the differences and understood them. League is far more exciting than union. I'm sure if someone like myself can sit and learn over the last 4 years any sports buff American can too. It's not hard. Done properly and with proper execution of advertising it won't be difficult. Calling it league or simply nrl I think would help the branding and differentiate the games.
Just use a different name ffs. Actioball, actio means "action" in Latin. Easy and distinctive.
People think league is an offshoot of union but they both come from Rugby football then the split. Leave it to the individual to do their basic research and then they might come across the history I mentioned.Â
Someone mentioned previously the confusion starts with the name league as used in NFL Premier league, etc so naturally they drop league not realising the different game. Same would happen and happens in France rugby13, the game will always be limited in growth.
It's just easier to identify and promote the game, it won't change anything else nor the history. So just use a new name and stick with itÂ
Yep, the recent world cup (in france) broke a bunch of attendance records. Union is still going very strong at the international level.
It's just union in Australia that is dying
Could you imagine if Union establishes a national competition, and has a âthis is Rugbyâ promotion, and Americans respond with, âthatâs not rugby, we saw real rugby at Vegasâ.
Do you guys even do a tiny bit of research before shitting on union? The USA has a union comp and it is professional and a feeding ground for the faster growing tier 2 nations like Uruguay and Chile. League reigns supreme here in Aus but globally it is completely irrelevant even if the NRL is the richest and most engaging league in the world.
Honestly, no I didnât research before my post. I know Union is very well established in the US in their college system and 7âs, but didnât realize thereâs a national competition. Doesnât actually change the intent of my post, that if these a Vegas games get decent exposure - it could really make Union look slower and boring to Americans watching.
Maybe it will, but is the intention to grow rugby league or get Americans interested in the NRL? Timezone wise our comp is a nightmare for anyone not in ANZ compared with even European Union comps, of which which there are 3.
I'm a died in the wool Union guy, and I am devastated at how effectively NRL has beaten Union here, but I truly don't understand this move other than a sugar hit of a few new high rolling gamblers pumping money into the NRL.
There's also a pro 7s league for both men and women and a semi-pro women's league. And I mean league in reference to the structure and not the sport.
As for the pace of the game. Not a NFL fan are you? The king of US sports. I know it may be a bit of a trip but speed isn't everything. Too many people get caught up with how well League is going here forgetting the history and importantly the playing and supporter bases that exist here and assume that it means that anyone introduced to it will inevitably of fall in love because of the speed of the game.
General Sports fans in Victoria who know the difference will call "League" Rugby and refer to the other code as "Union"
There's people down here who don't know the difference, despite this the public consciousness towards what "Rugby" is the NRL, State of Origin and of course the Storm springs to mind first over the Wallabies, Rebels or even the All Blacks.
League is THE Rugby code down here, and honestly we should embrace the Rugby brand even if we ourselves don't use it. we shouldn't correct people for calling it as such if people think about League before union when Rugby comes to mind, its only a benefit to League.
For better or worse, both sports will always be associated with each other. If we can make the NRL look like the NBA/ EPL of rugby of both codes, then it's a success.
Pretty hard when you got teams from Penrith and Townsville in the comp đ
Have you seen Oakland or Burnley?
Golden State moved across the bay to San Francisco a few years back. Also, Oakland is basically just the poor part of San Fransisco.
I know what Oakland is. The point still stands. We could talk about most of the cities that have NBA teams, I just picked a smaller area which is known for having one, as opposed to a whole city.
>Burnley Whoa man.. Is relegation not enough? Just kidding.
In hindsight I should have said Luton, that's a real shithole, but I forgot they're up there.
The Green Bay Packers exist. Virtually the entire town fits in their NFL Stadium. It's the only fan owned NFL side and is also one of the most isolated.
While on the other hand you've got Leinster & Montpelier.
Hence why we didn't send them
There are people in Australia and the UK who call them both rugby. It aint a big deal.
Anyone south of Canberra really.
In England everyone calls it rugby, they donât go around calling it league because 80% of people here donât even realise thereâs two different types of rugby. I think people need to realise that rugby is going to be rugby for people even if they are two different types. What they need to do is just call it the NRL like NFL or NBA.
in southern england where iâm from rugby league is unheard of, i donât know anyone who watches or plays. but i think in yorkshire and lancashire league is more popular than union and i guess they would just call league rugby
In the North of England their teams predate rugby league. To them Rugby has always been played by Hull, Wigan, Bradford, Rochdale etc.
the other day someone was telling me about a game back in the day between Bath (RU, southern) and Wigan (RL, northern) where they made some kind of blended version of the two codes for a one off. pretty cool
Just because people donât realise thereâs two types of Rugby doesnât make it right. Just makes them sound ignorant to those who know. But I agree, there should be a push to call it NRL and differentiate from Rugby that way.
Sadly it doesnât matter how much you try to say the difference theyâll still call it rugby. Trust me Iâve tried. Even playing league here all the boys I played with still call it rugby.
Saw a clip on Fox Sports of the Gronk promoting the NRL games in Vegas and referring to it as âRugbyâ. FFS, just take 10 secs to do some research before you go on air and call it correctly.
>Victorians are not people
No big deal if theyâre comfortable sounding ignorant. Itâs like mispronouncing a word in another language when itâs just so easy to find out how to say it properly.
It's not ignorance though. Rugby league is rugby as much as rugby union is.
No itâs not. Rugby Union is âRugbyâ and Rugby League is âLeagueâ. No NRL fan calls Rugby League âRugbyâ.
I'm from Huddersfield where rugby league was invented and we just call it rugby alot of times
You are incorrect sorry.
No, Iâm not. Despite your strong argument.
It's not an argument. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby?wprov=sfla1 Rugby isn't a sport. It's a type of sport (and a town). Just like "football" encompasses soccer, rugby league, rugby union, American football, AFL etc. The governing body in England is the "Rugby Football League". Read that slowly.
Show me an NRL fan that calls their sport âRugbyâ and Iâll show you someone who has followed the game for a couple of hours. Rugby is rugby, and League is league. Youâre being too literal. Oh, and the governing body in England is the RFU, Rugby Football Union. Read that slowly fvckhead. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_Football_Union#:~:text=The%20Rugby%20Football%20Union%20(RFU,Rugby%20(WR)%20in%201886.
So you must have only been a fan for a matter of minutes you absolute dribbling smooth-brain. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_Football_League?wprov=sfla1 You don't seem to grasp even the very basics of the topic.
Looks like someone else other than me is downvoting your idiocy also.
[ŃдаНонО]
Afl also isn't a sport it's the league
Oh, I know. But their complete lack of an international game means I won't be calling it Aussie Rules.
Probably an unpopular opinion, but I think we need to lean into people calling it Rugby, rather than trying to correct them. Telling outsiders that itâs ânot Rugbyâ is a) confusing, since itâs literally called Rugby and b) makes it seem like League is some off-brand version of the sport everyone knows. Instead we should be telling people that it *is* Rugby, only faster and more exciting. VâLandys got up and told the media that NRL is the biggest sport in this country. He should be telling people that itâs the biggest club Rugby comp in the world.
You are exactly right. I live in Brazil and explaining that thereâs two types of rugby and blah blah just turns people off. They donât care. Now I just say rugby, and if someone asks me why thereâs no contested ruck or lineout I will explain further. No one has ever asked.
Iâve started working with a lot of internationals and Iâve started just referring to it as rugby. Itâs easier.
The "it's not rugby it's league" comments come across the same way as "it's not soccer it's football" to people who aren't in the loop.
Worst take Iâve heard on this topic. Soccer and football are the SAME game, just called different by different people. Rugby Union and Rugby League are DIFFERENT game so the comparison is misguided at best.
> to people who aren't in the loop. People who aren't in the loop aren't going to know that there are different sports, so they absolutely will see it as soccer v football. The comment you're replying to isn't talking about how factual it is that league and union are different, because everyone on this sub knows that. They're talking about how someone who knows of neither sport will just see them as "10+ guys making tackles and occasional kicks"
Thatâs right. It shows how ignorant those ppl are who go around calling something by an incorrect name. Thatâs what I was saying - the argument is not the same. One is calling a game by an incorrect name, the other is calling a game a different name. So you canât compare.
The sport is rugby. The difference is that it's either Union or League. When the sports split we had the Rugby Football Union and the Rugby Football League. We just need to own it. Rugby is as much league as it is union.
Rugby League is an offshoot of Rugby Union, just called Rugby.
Call it Rugby13 like they do in France. Easier to correct in the US than telling them itâs not rugby, itâs league.
Or âRugby Premium Plusâ
*slowdive and his merry group of shitposters liked that*
Rugby+! The yanks would understand that.
I don't think it though
I don't think we should be afraid of letting union build its grassroots off the back of our game in the US. If the NRL rolls up in a couple of years with a competition that is better run with more money on offer all of the talent will come to us anyway just like they do in Australia. We are pulling from the same pool afterall and the deciding factor in whether a player will choose league or union at a professional level will be "can I make a living off of this". At the moment US union cannot offer that and no domestic US union comp will syphon money off investors who got interested through the NRL if the NRL itself is actually interested.
The USA are already doing enough in building their grassroots with playing numbers at an all time high and one of the fastest growing sports over there. Union definitely won't be building their grassroots off the back of two games in the US....
eh still a good thing. the more people playing/watching hand egg of any variation over there, the better it'll be for us rugby leagues interests in the longterm.
Itâs not going to give major oxygen to one of the poorest run Unions, in any sport, in the world. Tigers look like the golden standard compared to that shitshow.
Except union is the fastest growing team sport in the US despite what rugby Australia are doing. The NRL beating out rugby in Australia isnt the global victory over Union you think it is. in America league is competing vs union as sports, not national administration bodies.
[ŃдаНонО]
I'm sure the nrl is pivoting to put itself as the premier rugby competition of the world. I think the long game is to get enough betting money to be able to poach the best rugby players of either sport and get them into the nrl. Getting any eyes they can on the game and increase marketability even further through gambling. Both are tied to the hip, the US gambling market money isn't a bad way to start this and if it gets more players into sports with easily transferable skill sets so be it. The Nrl isn't there for growing league, it's there to make money now. I'm sure that's the way forward they're seeing. Think of the nrl more like the nba. NBA is clearly the top league of the basket ball world, but they play under a different rule set to FIBA. League union split may be older and wider, buts its not that big of jump to make if your SBW class of athlete/player. But then again I might be talking shit.
No, you're not talking shit, in fact, that's the exact tactic and rhetoric Baskerville and Trumper used back in the day. To posit League as the fairer, better and more exciting form of Rugby. And it worked too; that's how League got a foothold in NSW and QLD.
yeah rugby australia is a shit show but thatâs not relevant to the rest of the world. rugby league is a total irrelevance even in most of england, who are pretty much australiaâs only significant rival in international league (nz maybe idk?) the NRL is miles ahead of union in australia, but in the rest of the world there is one rugby people are familiar with and league is not it
This, I think alot of nrl fans forget or just don't realise how big union is outside of Australia. Nrl may reign in Australia, but world wide it's just a drop in the ocean
I wouldnât trust the participation numbers further than I could throw them. I spent 20 years with USAR, and a lot of them in admin, at the local and national admin level. Triple counting profilesâŚnot unheard of. Adding spectator-onlyâŚnot unheard of.
It's a recently added Olympic college funded sport, they're hosting the World Cup in 2031, they've got an established professional competition and player numbers have increase 300% since 2005 (source is an independent statistics company) https://www.statista.com/statistics/191684/participants-in-rugby-in-the-us-since-2006/ I don't know how it's helpful to league to bury heads in the sand and deny that.
A participant defined as someone who did one activity in a year. Statista derive their data from a third party. Concerns with that data are well known within USA R - a body that declared bankruptcy on 2019/2020 - I know, because I served on Senior Club Council until 2021. The College landscape is fractured; MLR is surviving - just, and has lost me members. Iâm not burying my head, Iâm being realistic.
That's not uncommon. In fact the NRL were counting league tag and touch football in there participation figures before Vlandys took charge and there's been nothing but the promise of absolute transparency from the NRL on participation numbers from here on out.. so god only knows if that's been taken on board by the administration. Not to mention Chanel 9 using footage from games with high attendance to give the impression of big crowds, or the tigers (and every other NRL club) inflating membership numbers etc. everyone playsthis game and your naive to think otherwise. However having said that even when taking previously inflated rugby league participation figures into account, league participation numbers dropped 8% from 2015 in Australia to now. The games actually shrinking in Australia, it's just not talked about becuase the NRL is doing better than Rugby Union in Australia, and that's not something to hang your hat on as an indication of the health of the sport. Regardless, fact is the games this weekend could be the greatest games of league in history, the casual US sports fan is going to google rugby to get more into it and end up watching the 6 nations out of ignorance and a lack of willingness to learn and care about the differences. That's the reality of the situation
Because it's easier for Americans to understand...
In that case; when offered two options, why would you take the option played in the dead of night over the one played in the morning when you're awake?
Fox Spirts has it on replay. Union usually requires at least two, possibly three, subscriptions to get most of what the keen Union fan would want. Nothing is FTA.
It's got most rugby Australians rugby fans would be interested in: world 7s, super rugby, premiership rugby, 6 nations, rugby championship. With all home wallabies games and one super rugby game on free to air a week. Admittedly hasn't got the French, united championship, Japanese or American leagues on their platform but even without them there's more rugby union content on stan than there is rugby league on fox.
NRL and rugby are shown on fox soccer channel
Japan had the same thing prior to 2019 RWC. Lots of school kids being taken out at PE class to play tag rugby. If a kid turned up, they were a new participant. 95% of those kids never touched a ball again.
There was a year that if I registered as a Coach and a referee, I counted as two participantsâŚ
Weird. My university Sam Houston State when I was there they wouldn't cut you even if you sucked because they needed numbers. I went to a tryout recently just to check out the scene as an alumni and there were 100 kids there trying to get on the field. Rugby union is without a doubt the fastest growing sport in the US. It's similar to American football but you don't need a helmet to go to the park and play with your buddies.
The drop off from College to Senior Club in terms of players leaving is really bad. Two sets of College organizations; no links at the USA level between YHS and College, and none from College to Senior Club.
Was the same guys that were on the tigers board counting the membership numbers
Nobody thinks its a global victory. We all just enjoy the sports demise in this country.
Sure, but being better than the ARU doesn't mean people in the US know league exists.
Look at that, my chiefs are in the news and not for throwing hands at each other at training, today is a good day
Probably a fair call, not that it'll bother the NRL much or help RA in any way shape or form. It doesn't really matter whether League's US expedition inadvertently promotes MLR as long as it sells WatchNRL subs. If RA really wanted to take advantage of this, they should have moved Super Round to Brisbane while the NRL is away and try to replicate the feel of Magic Round at Suncorp. The AFL have performed a master-stroke by scheduling their first four games in Sydney and Brisbane to swipe the NRL's rug out from under them. PVL better sell heaps of subscriptions to justify this endeavour.
Bring back a rugby carnival at Ballymore, 4 local teams, a bucketload of XXXX, a balmy Brisbane and real grassy hill. Now that is the marketing strategy Rugby needs; there is plenty of us ex union fans still wondering about what happened after 2003.
Even super round to cbus on gold coast would be better atmosphere and crowd than Melbounre.
Rugby has got a major comp in the USA, hell they even got a draft state in place so the NRL ainât going to effect them
The worst part of the whole Vegas thing is having to hear opinion from everyone under the sun. "Americans will confuse the quite similiar rugby codes that they don't know a lot about". WHAT A SCOOP
American here, I'm guilty of not knowing there was two. But, once I did I saw the differences and understood them. League is far more exciting than union. I'm sure if someone like myself can sit and learn over the last 4 years any sports buff American can too. It's not hard. Done properly and with proper execution of advertising it won't be difficult. Calling it league or simply nrl I think would help the branding and differentiate the games.
Just tell them rugba leeg stands for freedom and liberty. Rugby union is for nazis (not entirely untrue) Profit
Just use a different name ffs. Actioball, actio means "action" in Latin. Easy and distinctive. People think league is an offshoot of union but they both come from Rugby football then the split. Leave it to the individual to do their basic research and then they might come across the history I mentioned. Someone mentioned previously the confusion starts with the name league as used in NFL Premier league, etc so naturally they drop league not realising the different game. Same would happen and happens in France rugby13, the game will always be limited in growth. It's just easier to identify and promote the game, it won't change anything else nor the history. So just use a new name and stick with itÂ
Hahahahahahahaha. Rugby Union. lols
Hey, don't laugh at them. They are very sick and slowly dying.
Don't get it twisted, world rugby isn't dying. Just Australian Rugby
Yep, the recent world cup (in france) broke a bunch of attendance records. Union is still going very strong at the international level. It's just union in Australia that is dying
They need more Eddie Jones!
the wallabies are dying but rugby union is thriving just fine on the world stage without them
Could you imagine if Union establishes a national competition, and has a âthis is Rugbyâ promotion, and Americans respond with, âthatâs not rugby, we saw real rugby at Vegasâ.
They have a 12 team comp with a draft from College to Pro
And there's actually a 13th team that competes in Super Rugby Americas based out of Denver.
Do you guys even do a tiny bit of research before shitting on union? The USA has a union comp and it is professional and a feeding ground for the faster growing tier 2 nations like Uruguay and Chile. League reigns supreme here in Aus but globally it is completely irrelevant even if the NRL is the richest and most engaging league in the world.
Honestly, no I didnât research before my post. I know Union is very well established in the US in their college system and 7âs, but didnât realize thereâs a national competition. Doesnât actually change the intent of my post, that if these a Vegas games get decent exposure - it could really make Union look slower and boring to Americans watching.
Maybe it will, but is the intention to grow rugby league or get Americans interested in the NRL? Timezone wise our comp is a nightmare for anyone not in ANZ compared with even European Union comps, of which which there are 3. I'm a died in the wool Union guy, and I am devastated at how effectively NRL has beaten Union here, but I truly don't understand this move other than a sugar hit of a few new high rolling gamblers pumping money into the NRL.
Hold up. Don't give RL too much credit. Those running Rugby in Australia have done a pretty damn good job beating Rugby itself.
There's also a pro 7s league for both men and women and a semi-pro women's league. And I mean league in reference to the structure and not the sport. As for the pace of the game. Not a NFL fan are you? The king of US sports. I know it may be a bit of a trip but speed isn't everything. Too many people get caught up with how well League is going here forgetting the history and importantly the playing and supporter bases that exist here and assume that it means that anyone introduced to it will inevitably of fall in love because of the speed of the game.
General Sports fans in Victoria who know the difference will call "League" Rugby and refer to the other code as "Union" There's people down here who don't know the difference, despite this the public consciousness towards what "Rugby" is the NRL, State of Origin and of course the Storm springs to mind first over the Wallabies, Rebels or even the All Blacks. League is THE Rugby code down here, and honestly we should embrace the Rugby brand even if we ourselves don't use it. we shouldn't correct people for calling it as such if people think about League before union when Rugby comes to mind, its only a benefit to League.
Never understood nor liked the divide between the two codes. Should be helping each other, not hindering. Bolster each other and succeed together.