The Aussies refer to NRL as "footie" too.

Superleague is a brand that's worked and continues to work. Perhaps Rugby League as a whole can adopt the name rather than just the top tier of the sport.

The Sport becomes Superleague, every team from amateur to top divison champions play Superleague.

Divisions become:
1. Elite Series
2. Championship Series
3. National Series

The winners of each division finish top of that division and receive a real trophy, not a plate. Then the top 6 of each division enter playoffs to try and become 'Elite Series Champions' or 'Championship Series Champions' etc.

The 3 Grand finals could be played on one day, Superleague Grand Finals Day.

Franchise system stays and you must have won one of your divisions respective trophys to apply for promotion every 3 seasons.

Association Egg Ball.

We could corner the whole egg market. The leagues would be sponsored by Egg. Half time eggnog instead of a cup of tea. A good eggzample of an eggstremely marketable concept i feel.

Depends which part of Australia. IIRC, in the AFL strongholds, "football" is AFL, and "league" is RL.


I doubt Super League would work. Again, it would still confuse people. There are other Super Leagues in different sports. It's not the name of a sport, it's the name of a competition.
Not to mention in Australia, it's a bit of a sore subject!

I just wish that when we split (or even later) we had named/renamed it "Professional rugby" which would have made a clear distinction between us and Union. I think that the "professional" term would definitely have created a more positive perception/position for our sport to non-fans if this name had been embedded, because you would normally think of the professional version of something as being the "better" version, especially in sport.

Sport was seen differently back then. Being professional was seen negatively by the middle and upper classes. Highlighting this fact more would have made no difference.

I wish when we split we had replaced the word "rugby" altogether. At the end of the day, "Rugby" is just named after the place it was invented and codified. It was "Rugby rules" football.
We should have been "Northern rules" football really, and just dropped the "Rugby" part altogether. It wasn't necessary to keep. NRFU wasn't helpful at the time. When we changed to RFL decades later, we could have had a completely different name.

I just think the term "rugby" is completely unnecessary and confusing, especially for new fans, and the sooner we come up with a suitable alternative/informal/nickname then we will struggle to garner any serious media attention other than the "lesser cousin" of union.

What has 'Super' got to do with this discussion - that's the name of the league, not the sport

How is "uber mega rugby" one step away from "Super League"?

It's at least five steps away. You'd have to drop two words and introduce three more. Five steps. Five steps that will never happen as well.

All in all, a rather ridiculous comment to make.

Union and league are both rugby, which is more formally a family of sports called rugby football. If union wants to be simply "rugby" then league should take on "rugby football."

I never get why Union clubs have a 'Director of Rugby' Surely it should be 'Director of Football'?

Codes of football usually take their name from where they are from ... so we'd be left with Northern Rules Football, or the set of rules in which they play, so League Rules Football.

If it were to be named after the place from it originated, it would not be called Northern Rules.

The sport would be called "Huddersfield".