Rugby needs an education campaign
Roar Guru
By rugbyfuture, 2 Jun 2010 rugbyfuture is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- AFL, israel falou, Melbourne Rebels, NRL, Rugby League
It is clear, post-Folau scandal, that in an era where rugby is moving into Melbourne, the Victorian, and South Australian public still have no idea about the differences between League and Rugby.
The reason I say this is because of some of the comments I’ve read, which were in regard to the Folau conversion, and quite blatantly thought of the NRL as from rugby, and the Wallabies as the national side of rugby league.
Of course, this will never happen, but the ARU must regard this is a bad issue for the game, as it turns rugby, which otherwise doesn’t pose as much of a threat to Aussie Rules, into an enemy, and also shows a general lack of knowledge about the game.
This means that rugby is not not gaining the crowds it should, but not having the opportunity to gain these crowds at all.
It is important, whether they are to hate it, not pay attention to it, or enjoy it, that people at least know what the code represents, how it is played, and who represents it. At least then, people will be able to identify what it represents and may be willing to dabble in it.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (198)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (172)
- Brumbies 2012: New coach, new players, new attitude (128)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (61)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (27)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (18)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Clinical Chiefs cost rusty Rebels in Corio (9)
- Six Nations shows rugby is a parochial game at heart (5)
- Goose’s Super Rugby up-and-comer XV for 2012 (29)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Explore:
- AFL, israel falou, Melbourne Rebels, NRL, Rugby League
Mojo Keating said | June 2nd 2010 @ 6:38am | Report comment
Yes, AFL fans deserve to know, like the rest of us, the sort of ratbags that inhabit the rugby union sphere.
James D said | June 2nd 2010 @ 7:25am | Report comment
Haha those ratbags in Sportscraft ads.
Melbournians may not know rugby from league but with the rebels starting up they will soon learn. And even if they dont who cares.
Johnstone said | June 2nd 2010 @ 7:42am | Report comment
100% agree RF. I live in Adelaide, and next to no-one can tell the difference between the two rugby codes. I half expected that when moving here from Brissy, but what I didn’t expect was the number of people who don’t realise they are actually different sports! Unbelievable.
Brissie Kid said | June 2nd 2010 @ 7:51am | Report comment
The Sports Minister Kate Ellis was the most famous example of that.
rugbyfuture said | June 2nd 2010 @ 1:08pm | Report comment
what happened there?
CraigB said | June 2nd 2010 @ 8:10am | Report comment
Let’s not tar everyone with the same brush. I am born and bred in Radelaide and am more than happy to tell you the difference between the 2 codes. The Adelaide Rugby Fraternity is a very small but passionate one. Having said that the ARU has done next to nothing to promote the game since the ’03 WC when we had sell-outs for Aus vs Nam and ARg vs Ire (aprt from the recent 7′s). Why the Aus barbar’s cannot play here is beyond me as its these games that will ‘build the brand’ in non rugby areas.
On a side note, congrats must go to Matt COnnor for playing his 300th game for Woodville on the weekend.
FM said | June 2nd 2010 @ 8:32am | Report comment
the difference between league and rugby? there is no difference, league is a form of rugby. unless of course you’re talking about the difference between rugby league and rugby union?
rugbyfuture said | June 2nd 2010 @ 12:26pm | Report comment
i’ve had this argument before, and stand by my lexicon
FM said | June 2nd 2010 @ 12:36pm | Report comment
there’s no argument to be had. the fact is they’re both rugby, one’s rugby league and the other is rugby union. peace.
JF said | June 2nd 2010 @ 12:48pm | Report comment
No one involved in Rugby Union refers to there game as Rugby Union, No one in Rugby League refers to there game as Rugby. Right or Wrong, this is how it is – accept.
MyGeneration said | June 2nd 2010 @ 1:11pm | Report comment
I grew up playing Rugby Union in a Rugby Union school (no Rugby League available). Nearly everyone called them Union or League, plenty referred to Rugby Union or Rugby League, and no-one made a big deal about there being one, and only one, Rugby (in fact most kids supported teams in both the Sydney Union and League club competitions). The majority of Rugby Union fans I know have no problem calling it Rugby Union or Union, depending on who they are talking to, if only to avoid confusion. On the Guardian sport website, there is a tab for Rugby Union and a tab for Rugby League, just as an example. So the Guardian, for one, refers to the games as Rugby Union and Rugby League. If you ever watch the English Super League, the callers usually use the terms Rugby League or Rugby, rarely League. There’s probably less use of the term Rugby without qualification to refer to League in Australia, but, without doing much investigation, I’d say you’re use of ‘no one’ is demonstrably, anecdotally and historically wrong, in two hemispheres.
JF said | June 2nd 2010 @ 1:59pm | Report comment
Yes, In Nth England they do refer to RL as Rugby, my comments were more in regard to the situation in Australia. The Guardian uses those tabs, but looking at the article titles,
RL – “I’m not the only drugs cheat in rugby league, says Terry Newton”
RU – “Exeter bring Andrew Higgins back into rugby after drug test ban”
So you went to a RU school and nearly everyone would say “Are you going to the Union on the weekend?” or “I have Union training at 4.00.” Coming from a RU school myself, I find this hard to believe. The term Rugby is a generic term for RU, it is not a generic term for RL, as in “Rugby World Cup” or the tabs on this page. RU does not have exclusive rights to the name Rugby, but this is how things have evolved, it is just plain misleading when journos use Rugby to refer to RL.
MyGeneration said | June 2nd 2010 @ 2:18pm | Report comment
Well, we obviously went to different schools, but believe it. Those are exactly the kinds of phrases that were used. Your sweeping comments are based on a small sample size, and easily falsifiable. Journos use terms based on their own reading of things, as you do. If they said Rugby “only” refers to RL they would be as misleading as you saying Rugby “only” refers to RU. This is a Union-slanted site, and the tabs reflect that. The meaning of Rugby without a qualifier is contested. Accept it.
JF said | June 2nd 2010 @ 5:14pm | Report comment
Find me some articles where Rugby League is referenced as Rugby and we’ll see how contested it is.
MyGeneration said | June 3rd 2010 @ 7:21am | Report comment
Well, JF, there’s the current discussion, my previous examples, or this, for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_football
“Rugby football (usually just “rugby”) is either of two current sports, either rugby league or rugby union, or any of a number of sports through history descended from a common form of football developed in different areas of the United Kingdom.”
Interestingly, the discussion page of the wiki article (haven’t had time to read it all) focuses as much on the scope of the term football, as it does on Rugby.
Of course, I don’t know what school wikipedia went to, but I expect you can go and change it if you want. That might be an interesting contest!
sixo_clock said | June 2nd 2010 @ 1:43pm | Report comment
There is a massive difference between the Union and League. One is a team game and the other has been dumbed down to the point it is a gladiatorial contest. Fair dinkum, in one week you could probably assemble a squad of line backers and recievers from the NFL, show them a set of League videos and they would probably win their second game! If anyone is willing to time the ‘team’ moments in a League game I suspect they will find they are not substantial, even at Origin level. I made the point elsewhere that I hope League drops the word ‘Rugby’ from their title and soon. And to cap it off they are turning their back on Israel even when it is likely to hurt their showcase event. There is absolutely no concept of team in League (unless it involves a mobile).
PS: I have a post in the League Blog about Folau – trying to stir them up.
The Link said | June 2nd 2010 @ 2:01pm | Report comment
best to not comment on a game you have no idea about.
they’re both different team games, but team games they both are.
MyGeneration said | June 2nd 2010 @ 2:19pm | Report comment
Stir ‘em up with wilful ignorance – atta boy!
sixo_clock said | June 2nd 2010 @ 5:11pm | Report comment
You may be right, I honestly cannot watch League anymore, I find it boring in its sameness, the gameplan for a entire season could fill one sheet of foolscap with room left over, the fact that the players all pretty much the same size (no 6’11″ monsters need apply), that generally the players appear to be lowbrow rockheads with no doctors nor architects nor town planners. And I used to get season tickets to follow the Tigers once! The Super League War convinced me return to my roots.
However to both of you, do yourselves a favour and use a stopwatch to tally how much time in any League game that concerted effort actually made that moment/play/sequence/score possible. In any set of six there will be 4 hit-ups so they don’t count, then a pass is attempted, it may go through 2 sets of hands and end up with a hit-up. Contrast that with the S14 final where the Bulls blew the Stormers out of the park by operating as a single unit, the sense of collective menace was palpable, every minute of the game had multiple sets of hands/eyes/brains wanting to contribute to the success of whatever was happening.
The only thing that comes close in League if I remember correctly is the Maroons in the Origin series and the Premiership winning Tigers of a few years ago. But this is only for about 5-10 disjointed minutes of the entire match and that is all they need to do to embarrass their opponents. Not sure because I tried again to watch Origin this year and ended up switching to something else after 5 minutes.
MyGeneration said | June 3rd 2010 @ 7:09am | Report comment
Well, looks like you got stirred up, you intellectual giant! I’ll be enjoying both games, thanks. Don’t need a stopwatch, Might need rewinding after endless reiterations of crouch-touch-pause-engage.
JTM said | June 2nd 2010 @ 5:13pm | Report comment
Yeah they are both team games no doubt…but more fun there ain’t, than stirring up those league bastards.
Next time you’re on Youtube look up League’s Biggest Hits or something and tell them all that they are a bunch of big girl’s blouses! My favourite pastime…WARNING to be prepared for serious abuse.
The Link said | June 2nd 2010 @ 5:34pm | Report comment
if its not your cup of tea fine, but there’s something about RL that appeals to Australians. I prefer my footy without a stopwatch thanks.
JF said | June 2nd 2010 @ 9:51am | Report comment
It is pure ignorance for the Victorians to not know the difference, it may not be a part of their culture, but it does not excuse them for such blatent ignorance. Not knowing the difference between Canadian football and American football I can understand, but to not know the difference between two major sports in your own country – how stupid are these people?
Rugby must work hard to differentiate themselves from RL in Melbourne – two completely different sports, two completely different cultures. Playing at the same venue as the Storm with several ex-league players will make it even harder, the Rebels must make differentiating themselves a high priority. They should start by letting every Melbourne journo know that when they write “Rugby” people think they are talking about RU, when talking about RL – “Rugby League” or “League” is what is used. There is nothing worse than seeing some news story with the headline “Rugby players involved in (insert scandal here)” only to find out it is about RL players. This may not be technically correct, but it is how it is, just like when we use the term “Americans” we are talking about people from the USA, but technically it wouldn’t be wrong if we were refering to Mexicans, Argentinians or Canadians.
Brett McKay said | June 2nd 2010 @ 10:05am | Report comment
JF, I happen to agree with the need to differentiate the two in Melbourne, and suggested as the Storm’s salary cap blow-out was exposed that the Rebels could do worse than drop ‘Melbourne’ from their name in favour of ‘Victoria Rebels’.
If people can’t differentiate rugby union and rugby league, how are they going to go with Melbourne Rebels and Melbourne Storm??
JF said | June 2nd 2010 @ 10:13am | Report comment
Yep, agreed. Why did they go with Melbourne anyway, deviating from the provincial convention? As a non-SEQ Queenslander I would be mortified if the Reds became the Brisbane Reds.
Brett McKay said | June 2nd 2010 @ 10:15am | Report comment
JF, I can only assume because – ironically enough – ‘Melbourne Rebels’ was already a known brand. How well known, of course, is a matter for discussion, and unfortunately, as Melbourne Heart found out, it’s probably too late to change now…
el gamba said | June 2nd 2010 @ 10:28am | Report comment
I was thinking about this the other day, “Southern Rebels” may have worked well, play one game every couple of years in Adelaide and away you go..
rugbyfuture said | June 2nd 2010 @ 12:27pm | Report comment
then what will people call the southern districts team in the shute shield? though i agree they could take a couple of games on tour
el gamba said | June 2nd 2010 @ 1:51pm | Report comment
Good point. Wet-back Rebels then?
SamSport said | June 2nd 2010 @ 10:12am | Report comment
But I thought Melbourne was the sporting capital of Australia JF? Surely Melbournians know the difference between two of the country’s major codes?
Redb said | June 2nd 2010 @ 10:21am | Report comment
I know the difference, but if you step back and realise both codes are still minor sports in Melbourne it is actually not a big deal. It is in fact the fault of the National RUGBY League, ala, the Australian FOOTBALL League.
Victorians never played ‘AFL’ as a kid either, they played Australian football or just simply football (footy). Many NSW folk get this wrong as well, but that is the fault of the AFL for marketing the game as ‘AFL’.
Ignorance?, meh! build a bridge.
it certainly doesn’t help when players cross codes so regularly in the rugby codes.
JF said | June 2nd 2010 @ 10:33am | Report comment
Not buying it Red, many Gaelic Footballers cross over to the AFL – do Melbournians think that AFL and Gaelic Football are the same thing? However minor these sports are in Melboune they are still major sports in Australia, not knowing the difference between them is plain stupidity. You might think it is a sign of the magnitude of AFL success and dominance when you here a Victorian say “I didn’t know there were two different rugby codes” – but that person just sounds like the ignorant American who thinks Australia and New Zealand are the same country or that they speak Spanish in Brazil.
Redb said | June 2nd 2010 @ 10:42am | Report comment
probably more laziness than anything else, but by all means get offended if you want.
rugbyfuture said | June 2nd 2010 @ 12:29pm | Report comment
yes, there is a problem there, but it seems we cant stop league refferring to itself as rugby, so more must be done to make people aware of the large difference in cultures between the two codes.
Baz35 said | June 2nd 2010 @ 11:08am | Report comment
I don’t think that everyone who uses “rugby” generically is unaware that the two are different games and don’t know the basic differences. A lot probably just aren’t familiar with union being distinctively being called “rugby”
Most genuine sports fans know the difference
el gamba said | June 2nd 2010 @ 10:03am | Report comment
The problem is the parochialness of AFL supporters in Melbourne. As AFL does not even exist on the international radar (even though they kid themselves that there is NZ and PI team) in general there is a huge us vs them mentality and largely not even a desire to learn anything about any other game. Whilst a Rugby lover and ex-player I am overall a sports lover. I will watch soccer, league, AFL, MMA, Tennis, Cricket and paint drying if nothing else is on. I feel that I have a reasonable understanding of these games and I could probably go on and on about the merits of Rugby over these games – that isn’t the point though, the point is I try to make an informed decision after understanding the concepts.
Living in Melbourne, when I mention that I enjoy Rugby three questions are asked in reasonably quick succession:
- Why do they like putting heads up people’s ass’s?
- Which Rugby do you like, League or Union?
- What’s the difference anyway?
This plainly shows ignorance and and I’d have to ask why you would want brain surgeons like these interested in Rugby anyway. It’s grass roots where these opinions need to be changed and hopefully this will occur with McQueens community approach. It will take a decade or two though.
Or maybe Gary Ablett Jnr for $3 million a year? He’d be rubbish but worth the marketing spend…
rugbyfuture said | June 2nd 2010 @ 12:32pm | Report comment
hahaha! McQueen it seems is great at producing cultural revolution in the rugby ranks, and is certainly a great man and the best choice to lead the culture development for the victorian team (whatever brendan cannon thinks). Though from the questions thats bein asked of you it seems better than i expected as it atleast proposes that they understand there are two.
Rugbywits said | June 2nd 2010 @ 1:25pm | Report comment
Yeah just buy Ablett and make him run out to play a game where he wont be rescued in the tribunal when a Swans player touches him… hehe. Im not really offended though!
Rugby will obviously gain more of a following once the club starts playing some games. It’ll slowly change over time. Im not overly concerned about the state of rugby in Melb. They seemt to turn up to games the Wallabies play there (and actually promote) and once the Rebels get up and win a couple of games Im sure the public will become aware.
Hope the tickets are at good prices for the first couple of years though. That would help a lot.
Grimmace said | June 2nd 2010 @ 10:56am | Report comment
None of this is helped by the insular nature of the Victorian media. I had the misfortune of being in Victoria the weeknd the Reds beat the Bulls, IMO a significant game of rugby. Watching the news the next day on one of the commercial networks, there was no mention of it, or any other sport than AFL. This isn’t an isolated ocurance, I head south of the border reasionably reguarly and the lack of coverage of anything other than AFL during the winter constantly annoys me. Even the English aren’t that bad with soccer.
Whereas, although NSW is dominated by League and Rugby other sports get some coverage. Perhaps this might change one Channel 9 become the free to air Rugby channel.
rugbyfuture said | June 2nd 2010 @ 12:33pm | Report comment
depending on how channel nine cover it, it may confuse southern staters more.
GB said | June 2nd 2010 @ 11:00am | Report comment
Any Australian sports aficionado knows the difference between League and Union. Sports followers who claim they cannot tell the difference are merely highlighting their myopia.
rugbyfuture said | June 2nd 2010 @ 12:33pm | Report comment
but the target isnt sports lovers, its other opportunities, sports dabblers if you will.
Go_the_Wannabe's said | June 2nd 2010 @ 11:08am | Report comment
It all starts in the schools doesn’t it? If they don’t play it in the schools then you have no chance!
How many schools in Melb. play rugby? A couple of private schools?
Change that and you change the awareness.
el gamba said | June 2nd 2010 @ 11:14am | Report comment
You’re right but easier said than done. As a kid in Melbourne you may not have a roof over your head if you come home and tell your Dad you’ve given away AFL for Rugby…
inkosi said | June 2nd 2010 @ 12:14pm | Report comment
You’re right there, my cousins who live in Melbourne have a South African father and as such were brought up on Rugby. They are now both in their 40′s and ardent Collingwood supporters but still go to every Wallaby game in Melb!
Start em young keep em keen…
Go_the_Wannabe's said | June 2nd 2010 @ 1:49pm | Report comment
Well, you have to start somewhere don’t you?……AFL has Auskick, U10′s, U12s etc etc in all states (I think).
What does rugby do in comparison?……..SFA, except for private schools in Sydney and Brisbane.
Or am I wrong? Somebody help me please…….we can’t possibly be that pathetic at promoting the game, can we?
(Or do we save all our pennies for trying to pinch over paid, over rated, under performing leaugies?….IMHO!!!!!)
The Phantom said | June 2nd 2010 @ 2:30pm | Report comment
Many clubs do have juniors playing various forms of Rugby. This year my club has teams in the U7′s, U13′s, U15′s 2nd Grade and 1st Grade competitions. This is done with a lot of hard work by the junior committee & can be much more done by the ARU & Brumbies to assist. When kids compare what offered by the AFL through Auskick and to a lesser extent RL & Soccer we don’t fare so well.
Go_the_Wannabe's said | June 2nd 2010 @ 4:24pm | Report comment
So does anyone know how much is done by the ARU in promoting kids rugby away from Sydney/Brisbane/Canberra? (i.e. in Melb, Adelaide, Darwin and Perth).
That would be the subject of a good article…….comparing the rugby strongholds with the “have nots”.
Help wanted! The truth is out there somewhere……….
DB said | June 2nd 2010 @ 1:00pm | Report comment
Growing up in country Victoria I used to think that RL was the game played at club level and then they played RU at international level. The same game just different bodies.
I was then told one is amatuer and one is professional. But I still didn’t realise they were different games, I would differentiate between the two based on the amount of advertising on the shirts.
Than my dad told me whilst watching RL on the TV that there were indeed two different sports, that the difference as far as he could tell was that RL didn’t have scrums. Well after watching what could only be described as a scrum, my dad conceded he had no idea what the difference was.
My point is that this ignorance it’s not due to being myopic or insular, just due to the fact that the game is foreign and unless you went to an elite private school in Melbourne you were unlikely to know the difference or care that there is indeed a difference so why would you postfix rugby with either League or Union when that type of clarity is not required when referencing the game.
Pete said | June 2nd 2010 @ 1:15pm | Report comment
Soccer and AFL, they’re both called football. Both games kick a ball with your foot, I guess they must be the same game.
BigAl said | June 2nd 2010 @ 3:59pm | Report comment
If you were to watch both games, even to the uninitiated it would be clear they are different games !
. . . this could NOT be said for League v Union.
Pete said | June 2nd 2010 @ 5:45pm | Report comment
you are right there is a point of differentiation, the AFL guys wear tighter shorts
Severian said | June 2nd 2010 @ 9:15pm | Report comment
Any observant person who had never seen either rugby code before could tell that there are big differences between the after watching a few minutes of each game.
You’d have to be blind or not paying attention not to spot the fact that union involves a contest for possession of the ball, but in league they get up and play it unmolested after the tackle.
Union has lineouts, one of the more spectacular sights in world sport, IMO. The defensive lines are much, much closer together in rugby union. Union has players of all shapes and sizes. League players have much less diversity in weight and body types.
The ignorance in question is wilful.
Shaun said | June 2nd 2010 @ 1:21pm | Report comment
I have spent a lot of time living in both Melbourne and Adelaide over the years (originally from rural Queensland) and when I first moved into the south I was amazed at the open hostility that was displayed towards ‘rugby’ (meaning either rugby code). I found this very interesting and did my best to get to the bottom of it. It was amazing how often an attack on ‘rugby’ would be followed up with statements on how ‘tough’ AFL is and how ‘tough’ you have to be to play it.
I could go on for some time about my observations but I suppose in short the biggest issue was an awareness that AFL isn’t as physically confrontational and a sort of inferiority complex seems to have developed from there.
My point in response was always “Who cares?” and why not open up to new codes and fill weekends with even more sport! I know that I love the fact that I can sit back and spend pretty much an entire weekend following all threee codes (much to the chagrin of darling).
Just my observations. Nothing scientific.
rugbyfuture said | June 2nd 2010 @ 1:29pm | Report comment
napolean syndrome by the sounds of it