Good points.

I fully understand our right to use 'Rugby' in our title, I'm just thinking in terms of building an awareness and identity for our sport. Are we effectively being overshadowed by the larger code through their dropping of the word 'Union', and forever be seen as a smaller version of the 'real thing'?

Grassroots/amateur numbers are getting better as you say. I'm not sure how much is riding off the back of kids brought up playing RU as you mentioned, but they're getting better. But as I said, it's more to do with awareness, brand and identity I feel, everything else can work off that back of that.

I speak about RL to pretty much every new person I meet (I'm a complete bore with it, I love the game), but speak to someone outside of the heartlands about RL and the image RL portrays is that of an old fashioned, insular, northern minority sport that's on TV once a year. Then there's the ones who haven't heard of it, and assume it's Rugby Union.

I'm not saying it definitely needs changing by any means, just wanted to throw the question out there to discuss (putting aside any sentimental attachment if possible) whether it's a hindrance in our sports development.



Thanks for that. A cracking point well made.

A near relentless campaign of the RFL writing to all sports editors at the BBC and national newspapers until they are so desperate for us to leave them alone they comply?

Surely any campaign aimed at the media would have to be worldwide, rather than just by the RFL here in England?

And how about getting Union to use the word 'Union', how could that be done?

Let's go back in time and call it "Northern Union"

It wouldn't be a media campaign. We'd need to sue to IRB in the International Court of Arbitration for Sport or the High Court in London for brand infringement.

While also making it very clear (through a media campaign) that we don't want money or compensation for their trying to screw us for a century, but that we just want the name of our game to have equal parity with theirs.