The governing body of Australian rugby has had a facelift – at least with its logo and branding – with the Australian Rugby Union now referred to as Rugby Australia.
The famous wallaby logo has made way for a fresh, modern design.
It is sure to take rugby fans a while to get used to the name change and the logo, in much the same way the International Rugby Board was rebranded to World Rugby.
“The organisation will be known as Rugby Australia, or ‘Rugby AU’ for short, with our new corporate logo featuring a contemporary abbreviation of ‘Australia’,” CEO Bill Pulver explained as the new logo was unveiled.
A new high-class performance and corporate facility was also opened at Moore Park in Sydney as part of the rebranding.
The former ARU logo
According to the governing body, the new Rugby AU brand draws on an extensive body of research and reflects the themes and desires identified by the rugby community.
“The message to all Australians is that if they are part of rugby, they are part of much more than a game,” said Pulver.
“The new brand highlights the uniquely inclusive nature of our sport, which can be played by people of any background, all shapes and sizes, and of all levels of physical ability.”
While the wallaby may have been scrapped from the corporate logo, Pulver confirmed the famous team name was going nowhere.
“The wallaby is one of the most recognisable logos in world sport and it remains the symbol of our national men’s and women’s 15 rugby teams, the Wallabies and Buildcorp Wallaroos,” said Pulver.
Reaction to the logo was mixed on our Facebook page.
What do you make of the new branding for the ARU, now known as Rugby Australia?
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
And nobody has ever purchased it because it represents the ARU.
Bakkies
Guest
Doesn't matter you are still purchasing an official licensed product
GIGS20
Guest
Are you serious? I work in design and this "attempt" breaks almost every rule. It's lacking in contrast, it fails to highlight the main point of their product, It looks simplistic, It relies SOLELY on text to deliver the message, it takes time to recognise, it is poorly balanced, it won't translate well to a variety of background colours, It appears to be created using Arial as a font, therefore will be very difficult to defend in trademark/copyright cases, it fails to take into account the heritage of the brand and it has disenfranchised the loyal stakeholders. In contrast, the Commonwealth rebrand was the opposite in a multitude of ways. The logo is simple, recognisable, balanced, has effective contrast, no text, can be placed on multiple background colours, makes use of the existing company colours, has depth, easily defensible in trademark hearings, original, modern minimalistic, distinct and sophisticated. There is simply no comparison between the two in my humble opinion. About the only thing that could be supported in your comment is that they both received a fair amount of public backlash upon launch, I reckon that was undeserved in the CBA case, but it has been right on the money for the new Rugby logo. That and the fact that it will do nothing to cover up the fact that the organisation's board and management are incompetent, dishonest shysters.
GIGS20
Guest
Cods? Fiddle? One hasn't dropped? Seems about right
GIGS20
Guest
I've had a crack at making it more relevant to the actual actions of the organisation. Try these on for size http://twf.com.au/showthread.php?t=39464&page=4&p=443986&viewfull=1#post443986
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Wallabies clothing doesn't contain the ARU logo...
Bakkies
Guest
Who licences the Wallabies merchandise?
Train Without A Station
Guest
No. It does not. It in fact says all matters up to 31 December 2014 would remain the responsibility of the ARU. Would existing debt in 2014 not be a matter up to 31 December 2014?
Bakkies
Guest
IB link is here https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Community_Affairs/Futureofrugbyunion/Submissions
Fionn
Guest
Love that show
piru
Roar Rookie
It almost feels like they think there is a meaning to it all and we're just not getting it. It's horrid, the 7s one came out recently too and it's almost as bad
In brief
Guest
Boring but true..
In brief
Guest
I get you were blindsided on this thread but having read Winney's submission I can assure readers that his bid did in fact assume all debt. Link anyone?
ethan
Guest
Haha, ARU2 are making it too easy for me.
Dave_S
Guest
Agree very strongly. But presumably it has other effects, for eg on the propensity of corporate supporters to invest in co-branding. I suspect that it’s a case where the potential to do good with branding is outweighed by the potential downside. Always felt the same about branding by govt departments - do people really go to Centrelink because of their logo :)
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Like the part where you claim Winney's Rebels bid assumed all debt, even though it says it nowhere in his submission?
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
One thing I do know about sport is that nobody watches it because they like the governing body, or the logo, etc. Makes this whole thing seem more pointless though.
Bakkies
Guest
I am going from what is out already there that you have chosen not to read. I am not going out there to find it for you.
not so super
Guest
boring
Dave_S
Guest
No Fionn it was clearly this guy, a NZ stooge sent to bury Aus rugby once and for all (hmwahahaha) https://youtu.be/MVfxaqktqdQ