Why rugby league is burying rugby for entertainment

Jaredsbro>Well rugby league is being played there in South Africa in clubs and provinces,so some are accepting of it.And you are right it will be a generational thing,which I am sure the admin of rl in that country are working toward. And the French have an historical dislike for anyhting coming from British roots.that has not prevented ru from growing in France.

Jaredsbro.Ever since I became involved as a player for a year and a spectator for many,rugby league has always been one to innovate and evolve as a consequence. When the scrums were competitve ,they were a dog's breakfast of collapses and penalties.They eradicated this eyesore,which also was a worry for parents of young kids wanting to take up the game.My wife's friend's son attended Newington and when he was told he was playing ru,his mother insisted he not be in the scrum. There are others of the old school who want to see competitive scrums back,but most including A Beetson who stated the game has evolved and let's get on with it. You are stating you want a forward aginst forwards contest,gee it happens just about every minute of the day in rugby league whether in attack or defence.The forward are involved in open play more often than there ru counterparts.eg Sam Burgess and P Gallen and offloading at will. If rugby league was in decline in this country re participation and Tv viewershipperhaps you would have an argument.the game is booming at those levels. Finally the growth of the game in countries such as Wales,Fiji suggest participants are more than happy to play the open rugby style., with scrums just a way of opening the field up.Growth in other countries suggest the only troubled times ahead is having the resources to assist the tremendous growth now occuring. I asos put a fair amonut of faith in the new ARLC to steer the ship. You to my mind don't spend much time analysing the forwards and their involvement in rugby league and their impact.Suggesting that because the position is specialised in AR and RU,they are doing the selected work.My observations based on the Gallens,Burgess,Thaidays,CreaghSC Smith,Friend etc etc not only do their selected roles but go over and above.their involved far greater. The only time I had fear for the game as a whole was the SL war.The code survived that is also doing quite nicely in NZ,I am excited about the future,despite the growing competition from other codes.A RLWC in 2013 to look forward to. Teams from NZ and other parts of OZ and PNG wanting to be involved.Growith in the USA.Scrums having no effect whatsoever.

I'll say it once more PW,the popularity has to be in the majority of the countries.Tv ratings suport that view,but Tv ratings is not the only thing but a very important part,that is why sponsors get involved. China,India,USA,Brazil,Pakistan,Russia,Egypt,Turkey,Germany all with huge populations.When a code becomes popular there, then you are getting somewhere. This rl fan has no such obsession.I Iook at history and geography and population preferences overseas.Maybe you could do likewise.

Emric - I'd be happy for rugby league to drop "rugby" but it is for the game and its adherents internationally to decide this for themselves - not for rugby union fans to decide it for them. Rough Conduct - Australian rugby league "marketers" can do what they like - nonetheless it is not for them or for popular Australian newspapers to change the sport's name just because it suits them. PW - you will know I am sure that the first World Cup in 1954 was designated as the Rugby World Cup - but true to its nature the game failed to trademark or patent (I'm not sure which) the name until it was done for them by another sport. The likes of James Graham, Sam Burgess and Gareth Ellis grew up knowing that rugby league players play rugby and rugby union players play rugby - but not all rugby players play rugby union and not all rugby players play rugby league... The only time they would say "league" would be in direct contrast to "union" and not "rugby."

I reiterate the Tv ratings and crowds both here and overseas,suggests followers pay little or no heed to scrums.If you want a technical game ru is the one,simple as that.The FTA Tv suggest many don’t want that. crosscoder, your absolutely right tv raings and crowds both here, nz, and overseas pay little attentions scrums, penalties and kicking in rugby union.

crosscoder, i've said it before and im going to say it again, tv ratings is not all and be all of sports global presents. i know league fans have an obsession with tv ratings and crowds figures but not rugby fans. rugby is a global game because over 110 countries have decided to play it, rugby is a global game over 5 million players play the game and more are involved in some capacity. you can have every country in the world watching the superbowl with high tv ratings and it doesnt make american football bigger than rugby league globally.

the reason i find the 5 tackle rule in league good is that it forces the players to try and score in the set, unlike union where you have unlimited tackles you can pick and drive for 20 tackles and then kick.Same in NFL you have 3 tackles to do something before the kick. each to their own i say . As far as popularity being global i believe this peice is about Australia and the 2 sports in this country, so its a non contest .league 1st union 2nd

Yeah but South Africa's a very different beast. It doesn't matter how entertaining Rugby League is, South Africa will never accept it...firstly because they hate all things Australian (they possibly wouldn't know it has British roots if the showpiece event being promoted there is anything to go by ;) ) Secondly because they like to rough and tumble in the old-style too much, and they will spoil back-play (even if its to their disadvantage) until they get their quota of forward-tumbling! And until it can overcome said prejudices it will be able to entertain, but it will never be Rugby Football as the powers that be conceive of it. And any amount of cross-coding notions of peace and prosperity won't rub off on a very calvinistic (if I'm allowed to use that word here) and maybe even (more than NZ and Australia I'd venture) chauvinistic sporting culture. I think the key to Rugby League's success is to appeal to the mothers, much like Soccer has a natural inclination to do. The fathers probably won't come around until two generations later. ;)

Crosscoder it's useless arguing with the likes of pw. They have been taught about union's superiority, its heavenly links, its elitist legitimacy. They can never accept that their sport has had all the assistance in the world to flourish but is still a third rate global sport. They dismiss league as a simple game yet embrace sevens as the new flagbearer of global growth- a game of virtual touch footy. Even then, they have virtually turned these sevens events into booze fests to keep people interested (a union scribe in today's CM admitted the Wellington Sevens is an excuse for a booze up). It's as though the sport knows whatever number of players constitute a union game, it still needs to have periphery events around the games like excessive drinking & networking. Fortunately for their sport, a century or more of elitist school networking they have countless thousands of company executives who are more than willing to throw money at a sport that even after 150 odd years has only 4 or 5 professional competitions that attract semi decent crowds. Along the way, Japan has fallen by the wayside in popularity and only company policy workers must attend games, keeps it afloat.

I have stated what were the reasons,can't be any more explict than that.To state as per your last line that Vichy and the armed Services had nothing( I repeat nothing) to do with it is absolute nonsense. That is like saying neither happened.It like many other aspects played its part in the overall problemThe fact the French govt acknowledged it 2002 ,the british govt did something about it mid 90s ,knocks your argument over the sidelineYou are in fact suggesting to these govts it had no impact whatsoever. You against two govts.Talk about being in denial. When the two govts fianlly recognised the problem,the game grew again,unimpeded.That says something.

Actually I think the very reason you say no code can ever be perfect is the reason why Rugby League may have trouble in times ahead. Obviously I hope they work it out soon so there isn't a loss of the traditional forward (entirely). But the problem with excellence is it often breeds excellence, but it also often breeds a strive for perfection, which will create even greater issues balancing the forward vs back thing. It's all very well for you to say forwards are (and always will be) a necessary part of laying the foundation, but they will then have to be subordinated to the purpose of the backs. I think that's what I'm railing against. I've said I personally want a contested scrum again because it provides forwards with a forwards-only contest for them to perform in. But anything's better than the forwards becoming just the mules of the backs. This is quite an overexaggeration, but it's not too far from the kind of game you've mentioned you were converted from Rugby Union to, isn't it, if you think about it? And I think that's inevitable, and why I believe it is also inevitable that Rugby League cannot have the same legitimacy in its own quarters (like Australian Rules particularly). It may hold a high degree of popularity, I couldn't deny this...but it seems one can hold greater legitimacy if one keeps forwards not subordinated to backs (or vice versa as some have claimed of AR) but as equally involved as possible. Yet Rugby League is going great guns, but it's going to have to work harder (not just more tries I'd venture) to get the same quality of support/ers. Im not sure how to articulate it exactly, because you've already said you think in RL that is the case too. But from where I sit, it seems that in the game the way you talk about it in order for the backs to shine, the forwards must be the ones to get dirty. So they get messy in a sense, but in RU and AR they are the only ones in position basically to turn the ball over at certain times...and this is what keeps them in the mud. Now you can be cynical and say that's a form of subordination too, but I'm more optimistic, it keeps them in the game for mine and it keeps certain people watching the game too.

No! I include everything into why rugby league has taken so long to develop PW .As the saying goings warts and all.And if that includes bad management whcih it certainly does,selfishness by clubs which it certainly does,influence by another code in govt which it certainly did,then i leave nothing out.It's called called history.

PW, the amount of times your seen on a league thread suggests your another rah rah continuing the tradition of loathing & fear of a code you just cannot kill.

Code war article no shock there again the haters of league on this site is growing, add PW to useless code warrior list for rugby union. How about unionists here accept the fact that some people enjoy league sure it doesn't have the international stature of union (I wish) but I enjoy it along with union. It's just the arrogant, superiority complex showed by unionists from the likes of PW, Clipper, Rough Conduct, Crashy, KOG, & Johnno which peeves me off at time who death-ride and belittle rugby league and yet expect us leaguies to respect there sport. Seriously treat the way you want to be treated, you treat my code like crap, I treat it the same way.

I have stated unequivocally that your code is far bigger than rugby league PW internationally.. I have agreed with you that the code is played in over 100 countries. I am envious the code is included in the Olympics and has a huge World cup. When someone refers to global in describing their sport ,they mean all encompassing popular in the overwhelming majority of countries.The only football code at present that falls into that description( and yes it may change in the future) is soccer. If you had just come out and said rugby union dwarfs rugby league in the world,I would have agreed wholeheartedly. You are arguing against yourself,because I have agreed with many of your points ,with the exception of the description global.A big difference being played in over 100 countries,to being extremely popular in over 100 countries. The NZRU report(on RWC 2007) a couple of years ago agrees with me,that they have to get the game popular to many more countries than the 8 dominant ones now. Dont blame me,their reported view reinforces the thrust of my argument. All codes should aspire however long it takes, to become a truly global sport like soccer.

two post from two rugby union haters bregade is proof rugby must be doing something right.

perhaps maybe we should look at the top of both sports. one is the rugby world cup and the other is the rugby league world cup.

All I'm saying is that Rugby League has revolutionised Rugby Football in terms of back-play with the ball and yet they're now starting to struggle to fit forwards into the picture any more. And yet they cannot find a better solution than to leave the husk of the scrum where it supposedly died some time ago. And I believe this is because they need the legitimacy which both Rugby Union and Australian Football have, which is the traditions of forward-style playing, over and for the acquisition of the ball. And so in order to attract this thing which I call legitimacy, they need to maintain enough interest for those who like this traditional forward play. And yet the modern Rugby League is almost an anathema to this...and in some ways the code is struggling these days to not bite the hand of this 'legitimacy' but maintaining the legitimacy the code's accrued with those who don't like (or even hate) the traditional forward-play...who in fact love the hypermodern back-play of the likes of Lockyear, Thurston, Marshall, Slater etc. It is something of a paradox, but it should not excuse them of trying to compete with those other forward-oriented games, unless they cut their losses and allow the game to reach a market-determined outcome: with more pizzazz and less rough and tumble. That might be where we're going, but if that is the case the aim right at the moment (what seems to be to keep as much as possible a true legitimacy about the forwards left in tact) and the contest with those codes which do this rough and tumble better (in my opinion) will be for nothing and basically Rugby League will be merely navel-gazing in its attempt to gain some of the legitmacy it has lost. And as I've said elsewhere it's not that forwards aren't playing the game either...just not the game which surely naturally suits their abilities. Somehow Rugby League's managed to get the legitimacy to pick up the back-play and yet not to drop the forward-play, even though this would be a logical next step.

but you will ignore the main reasons why league fail to develop around the world and it had nothing to do with vichy or the british armed forces.

again crosscoder your mentioning soccer. for the million times for you league fans soccer is the world game and we are not comparing rugby to soccer we are comparing rugby to league and rugby is a global game. im not going to go into details about tv ratings and so on but a game played in over 110 countries and counting has reach its global goal and im sure the olympics will even improve that. yes, 30 countries playing a game is a huge different to a game played in over 110 countries.