Made for the USA: Union or League?

Interesting article, i am personally a bit bothered that he would compare the AMNRL to div 2 union. I play for the New Haven Warriors and can tell you that a lot of the guys i play with have played pro overseas? hmm maybe you shold come to the grand final and then write a review?

honestly i think that if given the choice americans will want to go the way of Union. the two codes may have their pros and cons and one may be more suited for the US than the other but ultimately it comes down to one thing. Americans love to compete. The US being the US will want to be on an equal stage as the rest of the world if not better (thats just the way we are i guess, love it or hate it). granted the US team isnt the best of teams but they are still young and working at getting better. but Americans want to compete on the highest stage and union has that edge over league. look what the soccer (football) world cup has done. when it was on Americans actually had an interest in the sport. if the US had good results in Union world cup then it would bring a lot more popularity and hopefully give a spark to a nation with a lot of potential. on a side not, the US needs an American rugby icon to look up too. a face of the sport if you will.

We'll have to pick your brain on the perspective of Aust Footy in the US. But, that's for another tab and another article. I'd invite you to put together an 'observations' piece. Also - document the 'first impressions' of people who've taken up the game.

Steven I would have thought "soccer" has made it already in the US, they have some 40m players, crowds as big as the NFL, Beckham appearing there?

I'll just jump in and say lacrosse in the US is a good model for rugby. There's a semi-pro national comp, a healthy college tradition and regionally intense coverage of the game at key times in the season. Rugby would likely kill for the same coverage and promise of expansion lacrosse has here.

Steve how is the pro Lacrosse league going?

I've played rugby here in the States at the collegiate level, and play Australian Rules for a club now. I don't see either code of rugby OR AFL doing much at the professional level here. The next sport to make it in the U.S. is STILL soccer, followed by lacrosse. Rugby union has the best shot of the two codes, but that's based on tradition - if League had a great marketing blitz, then it could be the more prominent of the two, even when most of the rugby public here is Union. I quit rugby in part because I preferred AFL, saw too many injuries in Union, and was ultimately bored by the game on TV.

Yes - Rugby à XIII (or rugby à treize, as opposed to rugby à XV, but I'll leave it to Millster to confirm). In fact, Rugby à XIII sounds rather nice, almost civilised. As does the opening sentence from the French wikipedia article on League: Le rugby à XIII est une variante du rugby, il s'agit d'un sport d'équipe opposant durant quatre-vingts minutes deux formations de treize joueurs qui utilisent leurs mains et leurs pieds pour se disputer un ballon ovale. I couldn't have put it better myself! If League could be described in such beautiful terms to all Australians, I'm sure it would take off around the country! Although I think Southerners might quibble with "qui utilesent...leurs pieds". Mind you - the "ballon ovale" is remarkably accurate!!

Well Longy, your dissapointed that an American is calling Rugby Union - union Hate to break it to you but in Western Sydney where both League and Union are played Rugby Union is considered the name of the code and either Rugby or Union is accepted short form of the name. What they call it in England doesn't come into it. Same as I wouldn't try and tell a frenchmen he can't call League "13 man game" or whatever the translation is.

I think combining the codes would just allienate sections of the allready small base. You would get some that only want to play Rugby union like they learnt in England, some that would want to play Rugby League like they saw on TV and some prepared to try this new code.

Sideshowbob there are more Australian football clubs in the US than rugby league.

Matt I appreciate your views on aussie rules - it is indeed a long shot. I have heard of teachers introducing it into the PE curriculum, apart from the obvious benefits of running around a paddock and the hand to eye co-ordination thing, the main benefit they have mentioned is that you can have 36 to 40 kids playing all at once (which isn't bad for the teacher going solo with plenty of kids to keep busy at once). But once you move beyond the realm of hobbyists, wild eyed enthusiasts, niche operators, and madmen, there ain't too much that is going to be making a big impact on the big sports in the US any time soon.

hmmm - what was that about not yet entering the realms of a holy war?

Matt get it right - rugby is rugby and rugby league is rugby league. The Union is the governing body of rugby (eg ARFU, RFU). In some cases (in UK and Canada) they play rugby and play in a league (form of competition). Simple! To call rugby - union - is an insult. And if you want to know why pop over to the UK, drive to a town called Rugby and visit a school - yep it's called Rugby School. I am yet to find a town called Union. Just over 100 years ago a bunch of boofheads broke away and formed a league ... a Rugby League. If the RFU had trademarked the word rugby I would not have to post you this message.

With its similarities to Basketball (aerial play), Ice-hockey (physicality, high speed and continuity),American football (all round athleticism) and overall simplicity in playing laws (ie no offsides for example), frankly I could envisage our American friends warm much more to a sport like Australian Football (aka Aussie Rules or Footy). If for no other reason that it is fresh, non-heirarchical, 100% Australian (which has been a popular brand to them in recent times), and it is simply a great game to play and to watch (in stadium or on TV).

I'm sure you all heard the argument that "uniting" the two codes is really creating a third code. Each code would have to give up something to create a whole different sport but made sense. Not to mention you have power clashes between the governing bodies at the world level and in each country where both codes are against each other. Actually, there are tag rugby rules in both codes. Union is trying in America, give them credit, League has them on their USA website but not much here. Saw Union supporters have a tag rugby booth when USA played Canada in Charleston on July 4th. I envision both codes pushing tag rugby all the way up to middle school level, then develop a tackle rugby program starting high school. I have no doubt the younger kids would play tackle rugby sooner on their (like pick-up American football) but no way should schools have to deal the legal issues with having tackle rugby sooner at this point. (Lots of lawsuit-happy parents out there). Maybe, and I'm just throwing it out there...a totally independent entity can come up with a hybrid of both codes and come up with a totally new league, and try it out in America to see how it works? To me, I LIKE League more (nothing against Union), I would try to figure out a way to have meaningful scrums without wasting time and still incorporate most aspects of League. I like this discussion. Not a "holy war" like most code topics are, yet. Dennis www.unitedrugbyleague.com

Matt - my point was in response to someone who said that Americans might be interested in unifying the two rugby codes - but I struggled to see why they would be the least bit interested in such a venture (when they have a home grown game that is big in anyone's language, that could loosely be described as belonging in the rugby family of games).